December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Motorola Secure Phone
by dan＠milliways.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 17 Dec 1995 17:38:49 -0800 you wrote: >At 06:40 PM 12/15/95 EST, you wrote: >> > >I don't know Moto's phone models, but there are some cordless phones, >especially long-range 900MHz ones, that are "secure" because of >spread-spectrum, and others that call themselves "secure" because >they're "digital", so you can't eavesdrop on them just by playing >with a scanner and maybe single-sideband. Sigh. > Well, just to finish the story, I ended up getting the Cincinatti Microwave Escort 9000 (yes, the radar detector people). It's 900 MHz digital spread-spectrum, although it's still unclear how secure their implementation is. I'll call them and see what I can come up with....I realize it's *not* going to give me military-style security. But really all I'm interested in is making it simpler (ie cheaper) for Big Brother to wiretap me than to deal with trying to scan me without court authorization. Dan *************************************************************** #define private public dan(a)milliways.org Worcester Polytechnic Institute and The Restaurant at the End of the Universe ***************************************************************

1 0

GIA_nts
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

12-18-95. NYPaper: "Telecommunications Giants Join Internet Security Quest." The consortium seeks to establish a layer of software and hardware standards that would effectively rest atop the Internet. Their goal is to make the Internet more secure, reliable and easy to use. The consortium started meeting last summer, and had seven core members: AT&T, Deutsche Telekom, Lotus, Novell, NTT, the Telstra Corporation and Unisource. The group held private meetings from Dec. 6 through Dec. 9 in New York, attended by 24 phone carriers and 14 computer companies, including Intel, Microsoft, Sun and the Hewlett-Packard. "The prospect of Internet censorship raises troubling issues for business." Denise Caruso's column. While most of the outcry has raised valid concerns about the First Amendment and civil liberties, little of the discussion has focused on how censorship could cripple much of the Internet's commercial potential. "This proposal will have more than a chilling effect," Ms. Fulton said. "It may well mean a cold death for everyone except very rich and very cautious media companies." GIA_nts (11 kb)

1 0

List of reliable remailers
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail, which is available at: ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/premail/premail-0.33a.tar.gz For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = "<remail(a)extropia.wimsey.com> cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"portal"} = "<hfinney(a)shell.portal.com> cpunk pgp hash"; $remailer{"alumni"} = "<hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu> cpunk pgp hash"; $remailer{"bsu-cs"} = "<nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu> cpunk hash ksub"; $remailer{"c2"} = "<remail(a)c2.org> eric pgp hash reord"; $remailer{"penet"} = "<anon(a)anon.penet.fi> penet post"; $remailer{"ideath"} = "<remailer(a)ideath.goldenbear.com> cpunk hash ksub reord"; $remailer{"hacktic"} = "<remailer(a)utopia.hacktic.nl> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"flame"} = "<remailer(a)flame.alias.net> cpunk mix pgp. hash latent cut post ek reord"; $remailer{"rahul"} = "<homer(a)rahul.net> cpunk pgp hash filter"; $remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"syrinx"} = "<syrinx(a)c2.org> cpunk pgp hash cut reord mix post"; $remailer{"ford"} = "<remailer(a)bi-node.zerberus.de> cpunk pgp hash ksub"; $remailer{"hroller"} = "<hroller(a)c2.org> cpunk pgp hash latent ek"; $remailer{"vishnu"} = "<mixmaster(a)vishnu.alias.net> cpunk mix pgp. hash latent cut ek ksub reord"; $remailer{"robo"} = "<robo(a)c2.org> cpunk hash mix"; $remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer(a)replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"spook"} = "<remailer(a)valhalla.phoenix.net> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord"; $remailer{"rmadillo"} = "<remailer(a)armadillo.com> mix cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; $remailer{"ecafe"} = "<cpunk(a)remail.ecafe.org> cpunk mix"; $remailer{"wmono"} = "<wmono(a)valhalla.phoenix.net> cpunk mix pgp. hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"shinobi"} = "<remailer(a)shinobi.alias.net> cpunk mix hash latent cut ek reorder"; $remailer{"amnesia"} = "<amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub"; $remailer{"gondolin"} = "<mix(a)remail.gondolin.org> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord"; $remailer{'alpha'} = '<alias(a)alpha.c2.org> alpha pgp'; $remailer{'gondonym'} = '<alias(a)nym.gondolin.org> alpha pgp'; catalyst(a)netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura(a)replay.com is _not_ a remailer. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (c2 robo hroller alpha) (gondolin gondonym) (flame hacktic replay) (alumni portal) Use "premail -getkeys pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu" to get PGP keys for the remailers. Fingering this address works too. Over the past few weeks, the remailer-list has been showing somewhat poor performance of the remailers. Well, most of the problem was my fault, rather than that of the remailers. I had managed to turn off suid on my sendmail binary, with bad results. It's fixed now. Last update: Mon 18 Dec 95 6:49:26 PST remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- mix mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com __...-++-+++ 9:56:07 99.98% hacktic remailer(a)utopia.hacktic.nl *********+* 7:46 99.94% ecafe cpunk(a)remail.ecafe.org #-##_#--#### 49:58 99.92% c2 remail(a)c2.org + ++-.--++++ 1:27:22 99.91% flame remailer(a)flame.alias.net *********+* 12:10 99.85% amnesia amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com +--+------- 2:55:50 99.84% portal hfinney(a)shell.portal.com ####*# .#**+ 54:51 99.80% replay remailer(a)replay.com ** ********# 24:11 99.80% bsu-cs nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu #_##.#*#-# 50:50 99.64% rmadillo remailer(a)armadillo.com + +++++++ ++ 39:23 99.55% vishnu mixmaster(a)vishnu.alias.net #-*#*++* 20:25 99.40% alumni hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu #_*_.-+*++ 1:00:21 99.37% ford remailer(a)bi-node.zerberus.de .--._._.-+++ 14:08:00 99.24% spook remailer(a)valhalla.phoenix.net **** - * *+* 22:56 99.10% hroller hroller(a)c2.org ## -...-##+# 44:42 98.83% wmono wmono(a)valhalla.phoenix.net * * .* *+* 16:13 98.72% penet anon(a)anon.penet.fi _--_--__.. 31:02:40 98.56% shinobi remailer(a)shinobi.alias.net - -_- +++-- 52:27 96.76% extropia remail(a)extropia.wimsey.com .----_.-.- 13:31:30 94.19% rahul homer(a)rahul.net +**+*_.*#++# 1:18:24 99.92% gondolin mix(a)remail.gondolin.org -_.------ 8:23:37 79.17% robo robo(a)c2.org # *# 3:38 57.61% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien

1 0

Re: Political Cleanup program
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:35 AM 12/18/95 -0500, Brian Davis wrote: >> A better solution is to move assets and money into forms where >> politicians cannot get at them, thus reducing the power of politicians, >> and thus the incentive to buy favors from them. > >I'm not sure what you mean here: are politicians to be prohibited from >campaigning (which cost money)? And if politicians, who generally take >the form of human beings, can't get at $$$, how can you or I? Brian, the above means cut the power and the purse of politicians so they have nothing to sell to contributors so no contributors will buy. DCF

1 0

(fwd) the anonymizer (Mac Anonymous Web Proxy?)
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 10:04:16 -0700 >From: webmaster(a)silkpresence.com (Pete Storm) >To: apple-internet-providers(a)solutions.apple.com >Subject: the anonymizer >Message-ID: <v02140a03acf9fc782bf3(a)[204.17.38.3]> > > hi all, > > if everyone could take a look at ><http://anonymizer.cs.cmu.edu:8080/prog/snoop.pl>, i'd appreciate it. by >following a link at this site, you begin surfing anoymously. now, can this >be programmed and run on a mac(s)? if so, please contact me personally and >we'll talk about my clients contracting out for this. > > if you can't get ahold of my (e.g. mail bounces) try >webmaster(a)joshua.silkpresence.com or webmaster(a)aimc.com as well as we're in >the middle of registering the new network. > >thanks, >phs > > >>>>>> > >Pete Storm >SilkPresence.Com Internet/WWW Publishing and Solutions >webmaster(a)SilkPresence.Com http://SilkPresence.Com > >Fabio Casartelli (August 1, 1970 - July 18, 1995) (TdF No. 114) > >Fallen in the quest for ultimate glory... > > ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 958-3971 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell The NEW(!) e$ Home Page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/ >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf(a)clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<<

1 0

Re: Motorola Secure Phone
by andr0id＠midwest.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>That just refers to the fact that it is no longer legal to sell >scanners that can listen in to that range. I havn't seen any scanners that block the 900 MHz range. Didn't think they were blocking that. There isn't any reason to. After all they don't block the 49 MHz. >(BTW, a couple of years ago Nuts & Volts ran >an article with information on a program and some toys that let >a laptop computer, properly wired into a cell phone, act as a >cell scanner. Never did wire it up, but it looked like fun ;) > Most cellular phone like the Motorola and the NEC can scan cellular channels. Whats neat is that they require little or no modification. They can scan through all cellular channels including control, pause on a channel that has audio, and should signal level. I've use the Novatel and Motorola phones to even force the transmit on my phone on a channel that was already in conversation and create a three way call. Since the cellular system already proccessed the original MIN and ESN of the calling party my ESN is never checked. All of this without modifying my phone internaly or adding a computer. This type of stuff makes encryption needed. More and more people are using PCMCIA cellular modems for all kinds of transaction not realizing that anyone can pretty much intercept and use that information. Digital will help in some ways but harm on others. $49 bucks will buy you an upconverter that will enable any scanner that can pick up the 400 MHz range to pickup cellular. Dr0id

1 0

Re: Political Cleanup program
by Richard Huddleston 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Detweiler wrote: * >JB: * >>Politics is traditionally corrupt, it appears, because donors to politicians * >>and political campaigns expect a quid pro quo for their donations. Various * >>unsatisfactory solutions include campaign spending limits, etc. * > * >I have an unusual view that I've never seen elsewhere: the problem with * >our government is not that money or PACs are involved, but that the system * >does not handle or resolve the conflicts between them very well. in other * >words, in contrary to the current view that all PACs are evil, I think the * >problem is not that we have PACs, but that our current system does not * >balance their demands in some sensible manner. the system is * >susceptible to corruption. it is conceivable however that there would be * >a system that involves money and politics but still avoids corruption. Not to sound like a dupe or anything, but every time I get discouraged at the rampant mealyism of our political system I go read the first couple of paragraphs of a text from GOVT 101. There, I get reminded that the way most political debate is handled elsewhere is with bullets. Personally, I welcome a complete equity between all lobbyists seeking to obtain a politico's ear. Take the money out of the equation, and let the merits of their causes, if any, stand on their own. Happy holidays, Richard

1 0

Re: Political Cleanup program
by Johnathan Corgan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:11 AM 12/18/95 -0500, Duncan Frissell wrote: >At 10:35 AM 12/18/95 -0500, Brian Davis wrote: > >>> A better solution is to move assets and money into forms where >>> politicians cannot get at them, thus reducing the power of politicians, >>> and thus the incentive to buy favors from them. >> >>I'm not sure what you mean here: are politicians to be prohibited from >>campaigning (which cost money)? And if politicians, who generally take >>the form of human beings, can't get at $$$, how can you or I? > >Brian, the above means cut the power and the purse of politicians so they >have nothing to sell to contributors so no contributors will buy. Yep. If politicians didn't have capricious, arbitrary, and absolute power over individuals and businesses, there would be no market for influence peddling.

1 0

Re: What ever happened to... Cray Comp/NSA co-development
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:50 AM 12/18/95, Jim Gillogly wrote: >Correction of one detail: > >> tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) writes: >> When you've done this, and concluded that RSA-129 could be done in, say, X >> minutes, then move on to RSA-384 (the BlackNet key cracked by the MIT >> group), and on to the 1024- and 2048-bit keys. Tell us how many years or >> centuries it will take. (Hint: Rivest and Schneier have done these > >The BlackNet key break didn't have any MIT involvement: it was done by >Paul Leyland of Oxford, Arjen Lenstra of Bellcore, Alec Muffet of Sun UK, >and Jim Gillogly of Cypherpunks, RAND, and Gillogly Software in no >particular order. > Sorry, Jim. I thought that Derek Atkins was involved, which led to thinking it was MIT. Now that you've reminded me, some of the details are beginning to come back. (I knew that someone from our list was involved....) --Tim May Views here are not the views of my Internet Service Provider or Government. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Oklahoma University: Is this legal?...
by Carl M. Kadie 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

No state law does or could prempt the 5th Amendment, the ECPA, or the FERPA. Moreover, the one state FOIA (Illinois') I've read in detail *doesn't* even try to do this. I'm enclosing two FAQ's. The first is about email privacy. The second is about student media. I also suggest sending email to marsha-w(a)uiuc.edu (Marsha Woodbury) she is an expert in the application of FOIA laws to universities and a CPSR officer. - Carl Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF or my employer; this is just me. =Email: kadie(a)eff.org, kadie(a)cs.uiuc.edu = =URL: <http://www.eff.org/CAF/>, <ftp://ftp.cs.uiuc.edu/pub/kadie/> = =============== ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/faq/email.privacy =============== q: Can (should) my university monitor my email? a: Ethically (and perhaps legally) email communications should have the same privacy protection as telephone calls. It would be unwise for any university employee to tap email communications without authorization from the university president, university legal counsel, and the academic freedom committee. According to Mike Godwin, legal services counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the U.S.'s Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) could be reasonably construed to protect university email. This is also the reported opinion of the U. of Michigan's lawers. Also, the U.S.'s Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act gives students at all public and most private schools some privacy rights. A U.S. government task force says that "[Email] monitoring [of government employees] of actual communications and communicators may impinge on the Constitutional rights of freedom of speech (1st Amendment), against unreasonable search and seizure (4th Amendment), and against self-incrimination (5th amendment), as well as on the right to privacy, specifically as set forth in both the Privacy Act and the ECPA." In the context of libraries, the American Library Association's Policy on Confidentiality of Library Records suggests this procedure to deal with an official or police request for information about users: 'When drafting local policies, libraries should consult with their legal counsel to insure these policies are based upon and consistent with applicable federal, state, and local law concerning the confidentiality of library records, the disclosure of public records, and the protection of individual privacy. Suggested procedures include the following: 1. The library staff member receiving the request to examine or obtain information relating to circulation or other records identifying the names of library users, will immediately refer the person making the request to the responsible officer of the institution, who shall explain the confidentiality policy. 2. The director, upon receipt of such process, order, or subpoena, shall consult with the appropriate legal officer assigned to the institution to determine if such process, order, or subpoena is in good form and if there is a showing of good cause for its issuance. 3. If the process, order, or subpoena is not in proper form or if good cause has not been shown, insistence shall be made that such defects be cured before any records are released. (The legal process requiring the production of circulation or other library records shall ordinarily be in the form of subpoena "duces tecum" [bring your records] requiring the responsible officer to attend court or the taking of his/her deposition and may require him/her to bring along certain designated circulation or other specified records.) 4. Any threats or unauthorized demands (i.e., those not supported by a process, order, or subpoena) concerning circulation and other records identifying the names of library users shall be reported to the appropriate legal officer of the institution. 5. Any problems relating to the privacy of circulation and other records identifying the names of library users which are not provided for above shall be referred to the responsible officer.' - Carl M. Kadie ANNOTATED REFERENCES (All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.) =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/ecpa.1986.godwin"> law/ecpa.1986.godwin =================</a> * Privacy -- E-mail -- ECPA - University Site Mike Godwin, legal services counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), says that the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) could be reasonably construed to protect university email. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/ferpa.text"> law/ferpa.text =================</a> * Privacy -- Students -- FERPA (Buckley Ammendment) The full text of the Family Educational Right to Privacy Act (Buckley Amendment). =================<a href="http://www.eff.org/CAF/faq/email.policies.html"> faq/email.policies =================</a> * Email -- Policies q: Do any universities treat email and computer files as private? a: Yes, many universities treat email and computer files as private. ... =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/library/confidentiality.1.ala"> library/confidentiality.1.ala =================</a> * Confidentiality -- 1 (ALA) The American Library Association's "Policy on Confidentiality of Library Records" Suggests how to handle police or official requests for information about a user. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/library/computer.draft.ala"> library/computer.draft.ala =================</a> * DRAFT: Access to Electronic ... Services and Networks ... (ALA) A draft interpretation by the American Library Association of the "Library Bill of Rights" Says in part: "Libraries and librarians exist to facilitate [freedom of speech and freedom to read] by providing access to, identifying, retrieving, organizing, and preserving recorded expression regardless of the formats or technologies in which that expression is recorded." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/statements/bill-of-rights.aahe"> statements/bill-of-rights.aahe =================</a> * Bill of Rights ... for Electronic ... Learners This is the "Bill of Rights and Responsibilities for the Electronic Community of Learners". It could become the first widely endorsed statement directly related to computers and academic freedom. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/statements/caf-statement"> statements/caf-statement =================</a> * Computer and Academic Freedom Statement -- Draft This is an attempt to codify the application of academic freedom to academic computers. It reflects our seven months of on-line discussion about computers and academic freedom. It covers free expression, due process, privacy, and user participation. Comments and suggestions are very welcome (especially when posted to CAF-talk). All the documents referenced are available on-line. (Critiqued). =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/statements/caf-statement.critique"> statements/caf-statement.critique =================</a> * Computer and Academic Freedom Statement -- Draft -- Critique This is a critique of an attempt to codify the application of academic freedom to academic computers. It reflects our seven months of on-line discussion about computers and academic freedom. It covers free expression, due process, privacy, and user participation. Additional comments and suggestions are very welcome (especially when posted to CAF-talk). All the documents referenced are available on-line. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/academic/student.freedoms.aaup"> academic/student.freedoms.aaup =================</a> * Student Freedoms (AAUP) Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students -- This is the main U.S. statement on student academic freedom. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/academic/speech-codes.aaup"> academic/speech-codes.aaup =================</a> * Speech Codes (AAUP) On Freedom of Expression and Campus Speech Codes Expression - An official statement of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) It says in part: "On a campus that is free and open, no idea can be banned or forbidden. No viewpoint or message may be deemed so hateful or disturbing that it may not be expressed." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin"> law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin =================</a> * Expression -- Hate Speech -- UWM Post v. U Of Wisconsin The full text of UWM POST v. U. of Wisconsin. This recent district court ruling goes into detail about the difference between protected offensive expression and illegal harassment. It even mentions email. It concludes: "The founding fathers of this nation produced a remarkable document in the Constitution but it was ratified only with the promise of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment is central to our concept of freedom. The God-given "unalienable rights" that the infant nation rallied to in the Declaration of Independence can be preserved only if their application is rigorously analyzed. The problems of bigotry and discrimination sought to be addressed here are real and truly corrosive of the educational environment. But freedom of speech is almost absolute in our land and the only restriction the fighting words doctrine can abide is that based on the fear of violent reaction. Content-based prohibitions such as that in the UW Rule, however well intended, simply cannot survive the screening which our Constitution demands." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/gillard-v-schmidt"> law/gillard-v-schmidt =================</a> * Privacy -- School -- Staff Desk -- Gillard v. Schmidt Description of an appellate court ruling that the school board could not search the desk of a school counselor without a warrant. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/email.gov-employee"> law/email.gov-employee =================</a> * Privacy -- E-mail -- Government Employees A U.S. government task force: "[Email] monitoring [of government employees] of actual communications and communicators may impinge on the Constitutional rights of freedom of speech (1st Amendment), against unreasonable search and seizure (4th Amendment), and against self-incrimination (5th amendment), as well as on the right to privacy, specifically as set forth in both the Privacy Act and the ECPA." Enclosed are guidelines for legitimate monitoring of government employee email. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/mass-student-searches"> law/mass-student-searches =================</a> * Privacy -- Mass Students Searches An excerpt from The ACLU Handbook: _The Rights of Students_, stating that "there must a reasonable suspicion directed specifically at each student before a school official can search students." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/constraints.constitutional"> law/constraints.constitutional =================</a> * Constitution -- Public University -- Constraints Comments from _A Practical Guide to Legal Issues Affecting College Teachers_ by Partrica A. Hollander, D. Parker Young, and Donald D. Gehring. (College Administration Publication, 1985). Discusses the constitutional constraints on public universities including the requires for freedom of expression, freedom against unreasonable searches and seizures, due process, specific rules. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/ecpa.umich"> law/ecpa.umich =================</a> * Privacy -- E-mail -- ECPA - University Site A summary of a newspaper report that the U. of Michigan's lawyers believe(d) that the institution is barred under the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act from reading electronic mail. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/privacy.email"> law/privacy.email =================</a> * Privacy -- E-mail -- Law -- Hernandez "Computer Electronic Mail and Privacy", an edited version of a law school seminar paper by Ruel T. Hernandez. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/privacy.workplace"> law/privacy.workplace =================</a> * Privacy -- Workplace Comments from and about _The new hazards of the high technology workplace_ see (1991) 104 _Harvard Law Review_ 1898. Talks about email and other electronic monitoring. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/email.bib"> law/email.bib =================</a> * Privacy -- E-mail -- Bibliography I have been having an e-mail conversation with Stacy Veeder for several days on the topic of e-mail privacy. She mailed me this bibliography which she has compiled for two papers which she is currently writing. I post it here with permission. PS - She is interested in talking with anyone who has some views on the topic/information to share. Mark N. ================= ================= If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command gopher gopher.eff.org These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org, and then: cd /pub/CAF/law get ecpa.1986.godwin cd /pub/CAF/law get ferpa.text cd /pub/CAF/faq get email.policies cd /pub/CAF/library get confidentiality.1.ala cd /pub/CAF/library get computer.draft.ala cd /pub/CAF/statements get bill-of-rights.aahe cd /pub/CAF/statements get caf-statement cd /pub/CAF/statements get caf-statement.critique cd /pub/CAF/academic get student.freedoms.aaup cd /pub/CAF/academic get speech-codes.aaup cd /pub/CAF/law get uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin cd /pub/CAF/law get gillard-v-schmidt cd /pub/CAF/law get email.gov-employee cd /pub/CAF/law get mass-student-searches cd /pub/CAF/law get constraints.constitutional cd /pub/CAF/law get ecpa.umich cd /pub/CAF/law get privacy.email cd /pub/CAF/law get privacy.workplace cd /pub/CAF/law get email.bib To get the file(s) by email, send email to ftpmail(a)decwrl.dec.com Include the line(s): connect ftp.eff.org cd /pub/CAF/law get ecpa.1986.godwin cd /pub/CAF/law get ferpa.text cd /pub/CAF/faq get email.policies cd /pub/CAF/library get confidentiality.1.ala cd /pub/CAF/library get computer.draft.ala cd /pub/CAF/statements get bill-of-rights.aahe cd /pub/CAF/statements get caf-statement cd /pub/CAF/statements get caf-statement.critique cd /pub/CAF/academic get student.freedoms.aaup cd /pub/CAF/academic get speech-codes.aaup cd /pub/CAF/law get uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin cd /pub/CAF/law get gillard-v-schmidt cd /pub/CAF/law get email.gov-employee cd /pub/CAF/law get mass-student-searches cd /pub/CAF/law get constraints.constitutional cd /pub/CAF/law get ecpa.umich cd /pub/CAF/law get privacy.email cd /pub/CAF/law get privacy.workplace cd /pub/CAF/law get email.bib =============== ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/faq/netnews.writing =============== q: Should my university allow students to post to Netnews or have Web pages? a: Yes. Free inquiry and free expression are an important part of a university's mission. Most universities encourage and support student expression and publication. Most universities also seem to give full network access to all users, even students. (This conclusion is based on an informal survey posted to comp.admin.policy in October, 1991. [cafv01n33]) There is probably no need to create special rules for student computer media; your university likely already has rules for student media. (Look in your Student Code.) In the U.S., most student publications are free of university screening, censorship, and most retaliation. (For state universities, this is a legal requirement.) At the same time, most universities disclaim responsibility for student publications, even when the university "owns the presses." The American Library Association's draft policy recommendation on electronic services and networks says (in part): No user should be restricted or denied access for expressing or receiving constitutionally protected speech. No user's access should be changed without due process, including, but not limited to, notice and a means of appeal. - Carl ANNOTATED REFERENCES (All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.) =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/library/computer.draft.ala"> library/computer.draft.ala =================</a> * DRAFT: Access to Electronic ... Services and Networks ... (ALA) A draft interpretation by the American Library Association of the "Library Bill of Rights" Says in part: "Libraries and librarians exist to facilitate [freedom of speech and freedom to read] by providing access to, identifying, retrieving, organizing, and preserving recorded expression regardless of the formats or technologies in which that expression is recorded." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/statements/caf-statement"> statements/caf-statement =================</a> * Computer and Academic Freedom Statement -- Draft This is an attempt to codify the application of academic freedom to academic computers. It reflects our seven months of on-line discussion about computers and academic freedom. It covers free expression, due process, privacy, and user participation. Comments and suggestions are very welcome (especially when posted to CAF-talk). All the documents referenced are available on-line. (Critiqued). =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/statements/caf-statement.critique"> statements/caf-statement.critique =================</a> * Computer and Academic Freedom Statement -- Draft -- Critique This is a critique of an attempt to codify the application of academic freedom to academic computers. It reflects our seven months of on-line discussion about computers and academic freedom. It covers free expression, due process, privacy, and user participation. Additional comments and suggestions are very welcome (especially when posted to CAF-talk). All the documents referenced are available on-line. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/statements/bill-of-rights.aahe"> statements/bill-of-rights.aahe =================</a> * Bill of Rights ... for Electronic ... Learners This is the "Bill of Rights and Responsibilities for the Electronic Community of Learners". It could become the first widely endorsed statement directly related to computers and academic freedom. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/academic/student.freedoms.aaup"> academic/student.freedoms.aaup =================</a> * Student Freedoms (AAUP) Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students -- This is the main U.S. statement on student academic freedom. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/academic/speech-codes.aaup"> academic/speech-codes.aaup =================</a> * Speech Codes (AAUP) On Freedom of Expression and Campus Speech Codes Expression - An official statement of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) It says in part: "On a campus that is free and open, no idea can be banned or forbidden. No viewpoint or message may be deemed so hateful or disturbing that it may not be expressed." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/academic/academic-freedom.wus"> academic/academic-freedom.wus =================</a> * Academic Freedom (WUS) The Lima Declaration on Academic Freedom and Autonomy of Institutions of Higher Education, an international declaration by the World University Service. Source: _World University Service Academic Freedom 1990: A Human Rights Report_ by Laksiri Fernando, et al. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/academic/academic-freedom.can"> academic/academic-freedom.can =================</a> * CAUT-ACPU Policy on Academic Freedom (Canada) Policy statement on academic freedom for the Canadian Association of University Teachers. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/policies/netnews.uwm.edu"> policies/netnews.uwm.edu =================</a> * Edu -- U. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee -- Netnews These are the network policy resolutions developed by the Computer Policy Committee at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The resolutions were approved by the Committee and forwarded to the Chancellor. They were given final approval by the Chancellor as campus administrative policy (memo dated 02/23/93). They say (to paraphrase) 1) Netnews is important 2) No restrictions should be imposed without wide consultation 3) The principles of intellectual freedom developed for university libraries apply to Netnews material 4) The principles of intellectual freedom developed for publication in traditional media apply to computer media. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/policies/netnews.uwo.ca"> policies/netnews.uwo.ca =================</a> * U. of Western Ontario -- Netnews policy It says in part: "In its publications regarding Usenet, CCS should make it clear that the individual user bears the primary responsibility for the material that he or she chooses to send or display on the network or on the University's computer systems." It also specifies a procedure for dealing with challenges to material. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/news/cafv01n33"> news/cafv01n33 =================</a> [No annotation available.] =================<a href="http://www.eff.org/CAF/faq/netnews.reading.html"> faq/netnews.reading =================</a> * Netnews -- Policies on What Users Read q: Should my university remove (or restrict) Netnews newsgroups because some people find them offensive? If it doesn't have the resources to carry all newsgroups, how should newsgroups be selected? a: Material should not be restricted just because it is offensive to ... =================<a href="http://www.eff.org/CAF/faq/media.control.html"> faq/media.control =================</a> * University Control of Media q: Since freedom of the press belongs to those who own presses, a public university can do anything it wants with the media that it owns, right? a: No. Like any organization, the U.S. government must work within its ... =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/rosenberger_v_u_virginia"> law/rosenberger_v_u_virginia =================</a> * Expression -- Public Forum -- Rosenberger v. U. of Virginia A 1995 U.S. Supreme Court decision that says that it is illegal for a state univeristy to deny funds to a student newspaper on the grounds that the newspaper is religious. The decision confirms that the government cannot discriminate on the basis of viewpoint in (government-owned)limited public forums. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd"> law/san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd =================</a> * Expression -- Public Forum -- Overview -- San Diego Committee v. Gov Bd Excerpts from San Diego Committee v. Governing Bd., 790 F.2d 1471. A decision by an appellate court that applied the Supreme Court's Public Forum Doctrine (to a school newspaper). =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/stanley-v-magrath"> law/stanley-v-magrath =================</a> * Expression -- Public Forum -- Closing -- Stanley v. Magrath Comments from _Public Schools Law: Teachers' and Students' Rights_ 2nd Ed. by Martha M. McCarthy and Nelda H. Cambron-McCabe, published in 1987 by Allyn and Bacon, Inc. It says, in part, "[a]lthough school boards are not obligated to support student papers, if a given publication was originally created as a free speech forum, removal of financial or other school board support can be construed as an unlawful effort to stifle free expression." Also, "school authorities cannot withdraw support from a student publication simply because of displeasure with the content" and "the content of a school-sponsored paper that is established as a medium for student expression cannot be regulated more closely than a nonsponsored paper". Also, it tells what to do about libel in student publications. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/student-publications.misc"> law/student-publications.misc =================</a> * Expression -- Offensive -- Student Publications -- Misc Quotes from the book _Law of the Student Press_ by the Student Press Law Center (1985,1988). They say that four-letter words are protected speech, that public universities are not likely to be liable for publications that they for which they do not control the contents, and that the _Hazelwood_ decision does not apply to universities. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin"> law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin =================</a> * Expression -- Hate Speech -- UWM Post v. U Of Wisconsin The full text of UWM POST v. U. of Wisconsin. This recent district court ruling goes into detail about the difference between protected offensive expression and illegal harassment. It even mentions email. It concludes: "The founding fathers of this nation produced a remarkable document in the Constitution but it was ratified only with the promise of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment is central to our concept of freedom. The God-given "unalienable rights" that the infant nation rallied to in the Declaration of Independence can be preserved only if their application is rigorously analyzed. The problems of bigotry and discrimination sought to be addressed here are real and truly corrosive of the educational environment. But freedom of speech is almost absolute in our land and the only restriction the fighting words doctrine can abide is that based on the fear of violent reaction. Content-based prohibitions such as that in the UW Rule, however well intended, simply cannot survive the screening which our Constitution demands." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/rust-v-sullivan"> law/rust-v-sullivan =================</a> * Expression -- Gag Rule -- Rust v. Sullivan The decision and decent for the so-called abortion information gag rule case. The decision explicitly mentions universities as a place where free expression is so important that gag rules would not be allowed. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/rav-v-st-paul.1"> law/rav-v-st-paul.1 =================</a> * Expression -- Hate Speech -- RAV v. St Paul -- 1 The Supreme Court's _R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul_ decision about hate crimes. The Court overturned St. Paul's Bias-Motivated Crime Ordinance, which prohibits the display of a symbol which one knows or has reason to know "arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender." By 9-0, the Court said the law as overly broad. By 5-4, the Court said that the law was also unfairly selective because it only tried to protect some groups. Included: summary, majority opinion, 3 concurring opinions. =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/perry-v-perry"> law/perry-v-perry =================</a> * Expression -- Public Forum -- Campus Mail -- Perry v. Perry Comments from the ACLU Handbook _The Rights of _Teachers_. It says that campus mail systems (and other school facilities) may or may not be limited public forums depending on how they are managed. (Perry v. Perry was about an interschool mail system that was managed as a nonpublic forum. It was one of the cases that defined the Public Forum Doctrine.) Also, a paraphrase from an ACLU handbook _The Rights of Teachers_. It says that generally, speech, if otherwise shielded from punishment by the First Amendment, does not lose that protection because its tone is sharp. Also, from p. 92, it says that there are legal limits to the oaths a (public) school can ask its teachers to sign. [Some of these same limits might apply to what a school can ask a user to sign as a condition of getting (or keeping) a computer account.] =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/broadrick-v-oklahoma"> law/broadrick-v-oklahoma =================</a> * Expression -- Vague Regulation -- Broadrick v. Oklahoma, et al. Summary of case law on overly vague regulation of expression. It says a statute is unconstitutionally vague when "men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/naacp-v-button"> law/naacp-v-button =================</a> * Expression -- Overbroad Regulation -- NAACP v. Button, et al. Summary of case law on overly broad regulation of expression. It says "[b]ecause First Amendment freedoms need breathing space to survive, government may regulate in the area only with narrow specificity." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/pd-of-chicago-v-mosley"> law/pd-of-chicago-v-mosley =================</a> * Expression -- Content Regulation -- Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley Summary of case law on content-based regulation of expression. It says that "above all else, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content." =================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/cohen-v-california.4"> law/cohen-v-california.4 =================</a> * Expression -- Regulation of Tone -- Cohen v. California -- 4 A short quote from _Cohen v. California_: "We cannot sanction the view that the constitution, while solicitous of the cognitive content of individual speech, has little or no regard for that emotive function which, practically speaking, may often be the more important element of the overall message sought to be communicated." ================= ================= If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command gopher gopher.eff.org These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org, and then: cd /pub/CAF/library get computer.draft.ala cd /pub/CAF/statements get caf-statement cd /pub/CAF/statements get caf-statement.critique cd /pub/CAF/statements get bill-of-rights.aahe cd /pub/CAF/academic get student.freedoms.aaup cd /pub/CAF/academic get speech-codes.aaup cd /pub/CAF/academic get academic-freedom.wus cd /pub/CAF/academic get academic-freedom.can cd /pub/CAF/policies get netnews.uwm.edu cd /pub/CAF/policies get netnews.uwo.ca cd /pub/CAF/news get cafv01n33 cd /pub/CAF/faq get netnews.reading cd /pub/CAF/faq get media.control cd /pub/CAF/law get rosenberger_v_u_virginia cd /pub/CAF/law get san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd cd /pub/CAF/law get stanley-v-magrath cd /pub/CAF/law get student-publications.misc cd /pub/CAF/law get uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin cd /pub/CAF/law get rust-v-sullivan cd /pub/CAF/law get rav-v-st-paul.1 cd /pub/CAF/law get perry-v-perry cd /pub/CAF/law get broadrick-v-oklahoma cd /pub/CAF/law get naacp-v-button cd /pub/CAF/law get pd-of-chicago-v-mosley cd /pub/CAF/law get cohen-v-california.4 To get the file(s) by email, send email to ftpmail(a)decwrl.dec.com Include the line(s): connect ftp.eff.org cd /pub/CAF/library get computer.draft.ala cd /pub/CAF/statements get caf-statement cd /pub/CAF/statements get caf-statement.critique cd /pub/CAF/statements get bill-of-rights.aahe cd /pub/CAF/academic get student.freedoms.aaup cd /pub/CAF/academic get speech-codes.aaup cd /pub/CAF/academic get academic-freedom.wus cd /pub/CAF/academic get academic-freedom.can cd /pub/CAF/policies get netnews.uwm.edu cd /pub/CAF/policies get netnews.uwo.ca cd /pub/CAF/news get cafv01n33 cd /pub/CAF/faq get netnews.reading cd /pub/CAF/faq get media.control cd /pub/CAF/law get rosenberger_v_u_virginia cd /pub/CAF/law get san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd cd /pub/CAF/law get stanley-v-magrath cd /pub/CAF/law get student-publications.misc cd /pub/CAF/law get uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin cd /pub/CAF/law get rust-v-sullivan cd /pub/CAF/law get rav-v-st-paul.1 cd /pub/CAF/law get perry-v-perry cd /pub/CAF/law get broadrick-v-oklahoma cd /pub/CAF/law get naacp-v-button cd /pub/CAF/law get pd-of-chicago-v-mosley cd /pub/CAF/law get cohen-v-california.4

1 0