- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Global online intellectual property conf at American Univ
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 21:05:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Global online intellectual property conf at American Univ Folks in the DC area might want to stop by this free conference on intellectual property next week at American University. I'll be giving the closing remarks; Mike Nelson from the White House will be presenting the opening statement. -Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- All who are interested are invited to attend a conference . . . The 1996 Conference of American University's Global Intellectual Property Project OWNERSHIP ON-LINE: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IMPLICATIONS OF THE GLOBAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE October 16, 1996 1:00-6:00 pm Husghes formal Lounge American University 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, DC 20016-8071 Free and Open to the Public Opening Session: Michael R. Nelson Special Assistant for Information Technology White House Office of Science and Technology Panel 1: Where are we and how did we get here? Panel 2: Where are we going? Closing Session: Declan McCullagh, HotWired Participants Include: David Holtzman, IBM's inforMarket Theodore Henke, Atlantic Mutual Insurance Companies Adam Eisgrau, American Library Association Elizabeth Blumenfeld, America On-Line Chris Meyer, Meyer and Klipper (formerly of the Patent and Trademark Office) Carsten Fink, World Bank Edward Comor, American University James Boyle, American University Peter Jaszi, American University Edward Malloy, Department of State Manuel Gameros, Mexican Finance Ministry Organizing Committee: Erran Carmel, American University Carole Ganz-Brown, American University and National Science Foundation Renee Marlin-Bennett, American University Conference Sponsors: American University Atlantic Mutual Companies Visit our Website, under construction, but with updated information, at: http://gurukul.ucc.american.edu/MOGIT/glipp96.htm or call: 202-885-1843

1 0

yellow journalism and Encryption
by Vinnie Moscaritolo 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following is an example of the asswipe media's attempt to write about encryption. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/examiner/article.cgi?year=1996&month=10&day=0… icle=BUSINESS2814.dtl Encryption controversy pits life against liberty TOM ABATE EXAMINER COLUMNIST The Clinton administration tried again last week to rally support for an encryption policy that would give the FBI the means to tap any electronic communication, without unduly infringing on civil liberties or impeding software exports. At stake in the policy battle are software exports worth millions, Fourth Amendment rights Americans have enjoyed for centuries, and innocent lives that the good guys say might be saved if they're able to keep snooping on the bad guys. And the reason all of this has become a policy jumble is simple. Computers have made it cheap and easy to create unbreakable secret codes to protect phone calls, e-mail and data files against electronic bugging. That's why this technology, called encryption, means profits in Silicon Valley, more privacy for you and me, and a problem for federal investigators. Because secret codes allow criminals to nullify the fed's favorite tool - the wiretap. "Wiretapping is the main issue," said Stewart Baker, former general counsel of the National Security Agency, the CIA's code-breaking and eavesdroping cousin. "For the administration to abandon the position it started with three years ago would be to say, "We are the administration that is going to give up the wiretap as a law enforcement tool,"" he said. That's why last week the administration tried a new variant in its 3-year-old campaign to require that code-making systems be built with a "spare key" investigators could retrieve, under court order, to crack any code. When the administration first proposed this idea in 1993, it involved a device called the "Clipper chip," which would have deposited spare keys with government agencies. Almost no one outside the FBI liked that idea, so last week the administration floated a compromise: to let U.S. firms export strong code-making products, provided they deposited the spare key with some third party. Exports are the odd piece in this policy puzzle. The U.S. government has no authority to regulate secret codes within U.S. borders. But a law passed after World War II put secret codes in the same category as munitions, products that cannot be exported without a license. The government has used this export-licensing authority to indirectly control code-making software here. Most high-tech firms are unwilling to sell two sets of encryption products, one full- and the other half-strength, so they have sold weak encryption products everywhere. In essence, the administration hopes to use export controls to change the balance of power in a new war. This time the enemy isn't the Japanese or the Germans, as during WWII, or even our Cold War adversaries, the Russians. Instead, the administration fears drug smugglers, organized criminals and terrorists will use code-making devices to evade electronic evidence-gathering techniques, notably wiretapping. "If two criminals are discussing a plot over the telephone and we have a wiretap order, the encryption would negate the wiretap," said Michael Vatis, a senior Department of Justice official. The same would happen if investigators seized the computerized bookkeeping records of a drug-smuggling ring only to find they were saved in an unbreakable code. But as frustrating as it might be to seize a mound of indecipherable evidence, it was the prospect of losing the wiretap that got Vatis most aroused. "For serious investigations involving terrorists or organized crime . . . where you're worried about hundreds of people being killed . . . the whole point is to keep the investigation secret or the whole thing blows up," he said. Having access to a spare set of code-breaking keys "is not a shift in the balance of power," Vatis said. "It's preserving the status quo." Not so, argued Daniel Weitzner, an attorney with the civil libertarian Center for Democracy and Technology inWashington, D.C. Forgetting encryption for a moment, Weitzner said, a wiretap is unlike any other tool in the investigator's arsenal. "To get documents sitting on my computer, the FBI has to come into my office with a search warrant," Weitzner said. "I have to know about it." Exactly the reverse is true for a wiretap. To be effective, the subject must be ignorant of the tap. Weitzner said this notion of a "secret search" went against a central principle of the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unreasonable search and seizure. "When wiretapping was allowed in 1968, Congress basically said they were going to create an exception to this rule," Weitzner said. But in the three years since the Clipper debate began, the FBI has enlarged its interest beyond preserving phone taps and has asked for spare keys to the codes used to protect Internet traffic and stored computer files, Weitzner said. "If the FBI is able to transfer its wiretap authority to the Internet, it would give the bureau access to a new realm of activities," Weitzner argued. Using the spare keys to Internet transmissions could give the agency access to medical records, charge card receipts or other data stored or transmitted on the global network. Moreover, the agency might be able to tap some of this information in transit, without the knowledge of the person being investigated, whereas today agents would have to visit the doctor's office or bank, potentially alerting the target. "If all things in the digital world are open to wiretap-type scrutiny, then we have lost the protection against secret searches," Weitzner said. "What is on the way to happening is that the exception could swallow the rule." The temptation to tap wires is as old as wired communication itself, according to Clifford Fishman, law professor at Catholic University's Columbus School of Law in Washington, D.C., and author of a textbook on wiretapping. During the Civil War, both sides tapped telegraph lines to spy on troop movements. Wiretaps were common in the early days of the telephone, and Supreme Court decisions during the 1920s said this was no invasion of privacy because the tap was on a public telephone pole and not inside a home. In response, Congress made wiretaps illegal at the federal level as part of the Communication Act of 1934. But Fishman said state investigators kept right on using wiretaps, as did the feds, who sometimes used unauthorized taps on Mafia and political figures during the long reign of former FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. Congress legalized federal wiretaps in 1968 at a time when Richard Nixon was campaigning against the liberal Earl Warren Supreme Court. "The mood in Congress was to defang the Republicans on law enforcement," Fishman said. "Lyndon Johnson, with palpable reluctance, signed this bill to permit federal officials to obtain a court order to do a wiretap or a bug and use this information in court." Fishman, a former New York City district attorney, considered wiretapping essential to investigating the most dangerous crimes and called the administration's latest spare-key proposal a good compromise. But civil libertarians fear that giving investigators the keys to unlock any coded phone call or electronic document will greatly expand the realm of secret searches and tempt them to abuse a power that was denied them in the days when ensuring privacy meant putting wax seals on envelopes. Much of the coverage of the encryption controversy has centered on the complaints of Silicon Valley firms that they are losing hundreds of millions of dollars in exports to foreign competitors who don't have to limit the strength of their encryption products. Though that may be the case, there's more at stake here than money or jobs. Our wired society is about to decide how easy it should be for investigators to figuratively climb up the telephone pole to put alligator clips on our secrets, whether innocent or criminal. To give investigators the keys to every code might be too much temptation and a threat to civil liberties. To deny investigators the keys may handcuff them in the fight against increasingly sophisticated and deadly forms of crime. That is the nature of the choice on encryption policy, and that is why there is no simple compromise. Tom Abate's column appears every other Sunday. You can reach him this fool mailto:tabate@examiner.com Vinnie Moscaritolo http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A ------------------------------------------------------- "...and by the way, Mr.Speaker, the Second Amendment is not for killing little ducks and leaving Huey and Dewey and Louie without an aunt and uncle. It's for hunting politicians, like in Grozny, and in the colonies in 1776, or when they take your independence away." --- Rep. Robert (B-1 Bob) Dornan (R-CA) responding to Bill Clinton's "State of the Union" address, January 25, 1994

3 2

Re: Dallas Semiconductor turns on Internet commerce at the touch of a button
by dustman＠athensnet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Robert Hettinga wrote: > iButton users will have universal access to their World Wide Web ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > e-mail at public Internet connections (hotels, airports, kiosks) and ^^^^^^ I think that says it all.

3 2

EUB - Pay attention next time guys.
by Maryanto Tuan dan Puan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please unsubscibe lamdn(a)idola.net.id Tx Posted-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 17:08:12 -0400 >Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 17:09:35 -0400 (EDT) >From: Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> >X-Sender: unicorn@polaris >To: John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> >Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Subject: EUB - Pay attention next time guys. >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > >On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, John Young wrote: > >> 10-7-96. WaPo: >> >> "Russian Crime Finds Havens In Caribbean" >> >> Russian organized crime groups are using unregulated and >> secretive Caribbean banks to launder their illicit >> gains, according to U.S. and Caribbean law enforcement >> officials. One bank that has drawn the scrutiny of U.S. >> authorities is European Union Bank in Antigua. EUB >> describes itself as the first bank on the Internet, >> offering the chance to open accounts, wire money, order >> credit cards or write checks by computer from anywhere >> in the world, 24 hours a day. A U.S. official said, "The >> bank is being investigated for violating U.S. laws with >> open solicitations on the Net, which is at best for tax >> evasion and at worst for money laundering." >> > >Of course I'm very interested to hear exactly what laws have been broken >in this case. Last I checked offering accounts, credit cards, and checks >24 hours a day was a selling point, not a crime. This hardly surprises me >however. The money laundering and tax evasion rhetoric is dragged out >whenever there is no tangible crime being committed. > >EUB is probably in more trouble than they realize because they chose an >interesting solution to their bandwidth problem. > >For a long time their home page resolved to a U.S. access provider, and >only forwarded offshore for the secure HTTP connection. This might still >be the case. > >See below: > >European Union Bank (EUB-DOM) > PO Box 1948 > St. John's, > Antigua and Barbuda > > Domain Name: EUB.COM > > Administrative Contact: > Richards, Pete (PR374) 75057.2515(a)COMPUSERVE.COM > (809) 480-2370 > Technical Contact, Zone Contact, Billing Contact: > Kulkov, Val (VK41) val(a)GREATIS.COM > (202) 835-7489 > > Record last updated on 03-Dec-95. > Record created on 23-Jun-95. > > Domain servers in listed order: > > ELF.GREATIS.COM 205.229.28.5 > WHALE.GREATIS.COM 205.229.28.10 > > >I found this curious and called them up to ask them about it. I think, >though I don't remember exactly, that I spoke with Mr. Richards. Whoever >it was, they were very sure that their U.S. connection would not be a >problem. I think they are about to be in for a great big surprise. They >have effectively put themselves in U.S. jurisdiction and their local >access provider is likely to be in some trouble as it is the easiest thing >to reach. > >Prediction: EUB will change its structure dramatically in the next 6 >months if it still exists at all in that time. Lesson learned: Never >involve the United States directly. Clever political risk analysis would >have prevented a great deal of trouble for EUB. Future institutions take >note. > >-- >I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist >unicorn(a)schloss.li > > >

2 1

New On WWW.Infowar.Com
by Betty G. O'Hearn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We thank our sponsors: National Computer Security Association Open Source Solutions New Dimensions International - Security Training New On WWW.Infowar.Com This week. Take a look. Pass it on. * Internet plug pulled on Colombia's guerrillas. * VP Gore Statement on Encryption, Oct. 1, 1996. * Europe * UK Tries to Remove Pornography from the Net. * Data Protection and Privacy on the Internet. * "Avoiding Technologically-Induced Delusions of Grandeur: Preparing the Air Force for an Information Warfare (IW) Environment" * Michael Wilson's, "Terrorism in a New World--THE EVOLUTION IN REVOLUTION" * Cyberwar, by Campen, Dearth, and Goodden. * Issues from the C4I-Pro-Digest. * 50 Fascinating URL's. * EMP gun's to be tested by law enforcement. * Administration to ease export of encryption software. * An interesting editorial comment on the Gulf War Syndrome. * Microsoft goofs in China. * New For August and September... Check it out and see what you missed.! and More Utilities!!!!! ************************************************************* DIRECT REQUESTS to <list(a)infowar.com> with one-line, in the body NOT the subject line: leave news_from_wschwartau (to leave group) subscribe news_from_wschwartau (to join group) Infowar.com Managed by Winn Schwartau winn(a)inforwar.com http://www.infowar.com 813-393-6600 Voice 813-393-6361 Fax Comments, Content, or Sponsor Opportunities ? betty(a)infowar.com 813-367-7277 Voice 813-363-7277 Fax Betty G.O'Hearn Information Warfare and InfoSecurity Assistant to Mr. Winn Schwartau http://www.infowar.com betty(a)infowar.com 813-367-7277 Voice 813-363-7277 FAX

1 0

Re: Put up or shut up!
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:44 AM 10/7/96 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: >The reason that no one publishes "How to" step by step instructions for >discretely expatriating your money is exactly the same reason as the reason >that nobody publishes "How to" step by step instructions for buying dope. > >For example one ever popular method of expatriating money, (or repatriating >it to preferred politicians), is by means of a friendly cattle futures >broker. I have read many descriptions of techniques to discretely expatriate one's money over the years. Some were good and many bad but they are certainly out there. Since it is actually a trivial problem until one reaches the second million or so, individuals can usually come up with fair methods for themselves. (Try to avoid the bags of $100 bills on the airplane though.) DCF

1 0

Re: Clipper III on the table
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:50 PM 10/3/96 -0400, Anonymous wrote: > >Ernest Hua <hua(a)chromatic.com> wrote: >> I predict, therefore, Netscape and RSA would NOT capitulate to this >> latest bitter carrot. > >Huh? RSA has already gone over to the dark side. According to >http://www.rsa.com/PRESSBOX/releases/keyrecov.htm: > "The recently announced Key Recovery Alliance, of which RSA is a part, ..." I think we should refer to what they are pushing as the "Key Recovery Alliance Program". K.R.A.P. is a good description as to what we are going to get from them. --- | "Remember: You can't have BSDM without BSD." - alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ | alano(a)teleport.com |

5 5

Re: White House crypto proposal -- too little, too late
by watson＠tds.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Joe Shea, Editor-in-Chief of The American Reporter, said: > Declan, how does your list work? Do you only publish comments that agree with you? I didn't see my first two, and this one only came with your response. Is this your version of freedom of the press, or what? - Maybe Joe would agree to publish everything we send him if we agree to publish everything he sends us. Dave Love to get published

1 0

RE: POLL RESULTS
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Timothy C. May Interesting that Detweiler returned with a _Russian_ nym. ........................................................................ I don't think LD is Russian. I think he's actually an Asparagus. (bwahhahahhahahhah) .. Blanc

1 0

[NEWS] Crypto-relevant wire clippings
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Money Daily: Tuesday, September 24, 1996 IBM, Bank Alliance May Speed Acceptance of Online Banking By Lloyd Chrein If one muscle-bound company is what it will take to turn online banking into a household word, then the recently- formed Integrion Financial Network, a conglomeration of IBM and 15 heavy-hitting U.S. and Canadian banks, may have the right formula, say analysts. In many ways Integrion appears a natural fit: the meeting of a major data-processing player -- IBM -- and institutions that will potentially need a lot of online data processed -- banks. The new company, a separate entity with its own CEO and board of directors, will offer the means for consumers to connect to their banks (via the IBM Global Network, the Internet or commercial online services) and will partner with developers of the necessary online banking software. It is expected to begin operating in early 1997. "If they can use the clout of all these big banks, plus IBM, to decrease the cost of providing online banking and ultimately lower costs and improve service for consumers, then they're going to coax more consumers into online banking," says Karen Epper, an analyst with Forrester Research. "The question is whether this big ship can move quickly enough to keep up with the changes in the online world and stay in the race." As things stand now, it seems like there is a lot of ground to be made up. A recent study by the San Francisco-based Odyssey L.P. found that just a handful of American households use the 'Net for banking -- just 1% of the 14% of U.S. households with access to an online service. "Online banking is confined to a small minority of a small minority," said Nicholas Donatiello president of Odyssey. "But I think it has the potential to be bigger." Members of Integrion, however, took issue with the Odyssey report. "Those numbers don't seem right," said David Fortney, in charge of access and payment strategies for the Charlotte based NationsBank. "But we do agree that there are not a lot of people banking online. We see that as a huge opportunity. We think there is a lot of pent-up demand." A Barnett Bank spokeswoman said that 25% of the bank's current customers use the telephone for home banking, an indicator that online banking through Integrion -- which should be more convenient -- will also be a hit. "We will see an explosion in this area," she predicted. The problem with online banking as it exists now, say Integrion members, is that each bank offers different levels of service, uses different software, and has to bear the full cost of designing and managing its online system. With Integrion, they note, banks will be able to take advantage of economies of scale, ultimately offering consumers a wider choice of software programs and means of accessing their accounts than if they went it alone. "What we hope to do is speed the pace at which electronic banking services will reach the consumer," says Chuck Hieronymi, senior vice president of marketing at NationsBank. "We also hope to speed the rate at which banks will adopt online banking. We hope to attract as many banks to join as possible." The company intends to eventually allow consumers to use most of the major personal finance software, including Microsoft Money and Intuit's Quicken, as well as Internet browsers like Netscape Navigator and Microsoft Explorer and online services Prodigy, America Online and CompuServe. While Integrion hasn't formed any alliances with developers or online services so far, potential partners are warm to the concept. "We fully expect our products and technology will be a part of this," says Matt Cone, business development manager for Microsoft, who notes that there are also potential uses for Windows NT and BackOffice. To attract all the major players under one roof, Integrion needs to be big. And it is: the 15 member banks comprise over half the retail banking population in North America -- more than 60 million households. Member banks are: ABN AMRO, BANC ONE, Bank of America, Barnett Bank, Comerica, First Bank Systems, First Chicago NBD, Fleet Financial Group, KeyCorp , Mellon Bank, Michigan National Bank, NationsBank, PNC Bank, Royal Bank of Canada, and Washington Mutual, Inc. Of course, there is competition, mainly from data processing companies such as CheckFree and Visa Interactive -- IBM will perform their functions for Integrion member banks. Yet according to Epper, even the competitors are potential partners in cyberspace. "CheckFree will compete for the same bill payment system contracts as Integrion, but it will also work with Integrion to support bill payment systems," says Epper. "In the online world, companies that are competitors are also working together. That has been the paradigm for a long time." To have any effect on improving online banking's numbers, Integrion will have to stay on the cutting edge, reacting quickly to rapid changes in security, authentication and other technological advancements. Hieronymi claims that the company will be able to make quick decisions and won't be weighed down by the girth of its many members. But Epper has her doubts. "This company has been speculated about for two years and in serious discussion for the past year," she says. "At the rate at which online banking is moving, if they take that long to make decisions they are likely to lose a real advantage. As it is, they're already a little late to the party." For more Web-formation, visit: http://www.checkfree.comfor CheckFree http://www.forrester.com for Forrester Research http://www.ibm.com for IBM http://www.intuit.com for Intuit http://www.nationsbank.com for NationsBank Computerworld: September 23, 1996 Can Banks Survive the Online Onslaught? By Ralph Soucie Recently, Hugh McColl, chairman of NationsBank, admitted to The Wall Street Journal that he is scared of what technology might do to his business. That isn't something you'd expect from the architect of a $ 192 billion banking powerhouse. Clearly, though, trouble lies ahead for banks. The endgame of the recent bank merger wave looks pretty bleak. Eventually, some eight to 12 banking behemoths will blanket the country. These giants will look, act and smell the same to consumers. Absent some sort of blockbuster development, the entire industry seems headed for the same fate suffered recently by the large retailers. But that blockbuster development is inevitable, and it surely will be driven by information technology. Technology at least the leading-edge stuff that creates monster opportunities isn't most banking executives' major stock-in-trade, so they don't even know where their future competitors are going to come from. To be sure, banks are trying some new tricks as they scrounge for growth. Some, for instance, are using automated teller machines to dispense coupons and sell event tickets. Not a bad idea, but it still doesn't solve the core problem. Electronic home banking software seems a better fit, but so far, it has generated me-too products and little profit. Meanwhile, bankers' favorite retail customers cash-rich individuals with low transaction activity are a threatened species. Taking money from these customers and lending it to free-spending Baby Boomers is really the heart of retail banking nowadays. But families who inherit such liquid assets from their parents are likely to apply much of this loot to debt reduction. The problem is that consumers don't perceive high value in generic banking services, and with good reason. As surely as you're reading this, within a generation we'll be carrying our financial assets around on some form of smart card. You'll deal with your depository bank much as you interact with the bank that issues your credit card. But the irony is that all this doesn't have to be the death knell for the banking industry. Banking executives simply need to worry less about high-tech rivals and more about the value they add to customer services. Take the lowly bank statement, for example. What if a bank offered small businesses the option of receiving their bank statements in electronic form, say, as an Excel spreadsheet file? Why not provide a listing of canceled checks for the entire fiscal year? The owner could then take this disk file, along with his check register, to his accountant. The accountant would then add data such as payee name and the date the check was written. For a small business that writes 100 checks per month, this could save a few hundred dollars in fees. That's a bank service that packs a punch, yet the incremental cost to the bank of providing the service would be very small. Numerous variations are possible. For instance, nonbusiness bank customers might find it useful to flag tax-deductible payments by putting an X in a box when they write the check. The bank can then provide a year-end listing of tax deductions a great headache-buster at tax time. It doesn't take advanced technology to deliver services such as these. What it takes is customer-oriented thinking, combined with simple awareness of how technology can support a new value proposition. So, while bankers should heed Andy Grove's "paranoia is good" message, they should worry less about technology threats and more about an industry culture that's rooted in an assumption of entitlement. Money Daily: Thursday, September 19, 1996 Privacy Storm Shows the Best and Worst of the 'Net By Michael Brush The flap over a new service from Lexis-Nexis is probably misguided, but raises interesting questions about privacy and the power of online communication. An online brouhaha that broke out this week over alleged privacy breaches caused by a new Lexis-Nexis product has put both the best and worst of the 'Net community in high profile. The Dayton, Ohio-based online database company has been swamped with phone calls and faxes this week because of a flurry of e-mails and news-group postings warning readers of the allegedly dire consequences of its new product called P- TRAK. Many of the warnings falsely claim that P-TRAK provides a wide range of potentially sensitive personal information ranging from social security numbers to medical and credit histories. On the bright side, the controversy shows the huge power of the 'Net when used by public-spirited advocates to mobilize a response to a perceived danger -- in this case, a threat to privacy. On the dark side, the fact that many of the allegations in the electronic correspondence are plain wrong shows how easy it is to spread misinformation and, potentially, raise what could amount to an online lynch mob. At issue is a product launched last June which provides Nexis-Lexis clients with basic public information about anyone in a 300 million-name database. The information available is culled from credit bureau records. It is limited to your name, your maiden name or alias (if any), your current and two most recent past addresses, the month and year of your birth, and your phone number -- though not all of that information is available on every person. For nine days after the product was released last June 2, P- TRAK also included your social security number. But the SSNs were pulled on June 11 because of complaints, says Lexis- Nexis spokesman Steve Edwards. If you already know someone's social security number, though, you can search for him or her using that number. P-TRAK is meant to help attorneys track down witnesses, heirs or parents who have stopped paying child support, says Edwards. While the scope of P-TRAK is relatively limited compared to, say, credit reports, which carry news of your payment history, bankruptcies and other such sensitive material, it nonetheless sparked the ire of many 'Net users. For example, one posting that was later widely circulated this week claimed that your social security number, "mother's maiden name, birth date and other personal information are now available to anyone with a credit card." It postulated that the information could allow someone to commit credit card fraud or use your identity. The truth is somewhat tamer. The SSN and mother's maiden name are not included, for example, and the database is available only to clients like law firms and news organizations that can afford Lexis-Nexis's relatively hefty fees. Furthermore, Money Daily's spot check shows that the information available is spotty at best. A search of P-TRAK run on our behalf by the Time Inc. Research Center turned up the right addresses but no phone or birth date for this author. It got the addresses and birth year correct for Money Daily editor Kevin McKean, but had an obsolete phone number. And when confronted with relatively more common names of two other Money Online staffers -- tech director Wilson Smith and reporter Joseph "Tripp" Reynolds -- turned up dozens of people, none of whom proved to be the correct ones. Those limitations notwithstanding, the roar on the 'Net was heard at Lexis-Nexis headquarters. "We have been deluged with people calling, writing and faxing," says Edwards. "People are asking us: 'Why are you putting my medical records, my mother's maiden name, and my credit card history out there?' This has been testing the limits of our customer service." In response, Lexis-Nexis posted a statement on its home page to correct false information about the product and also a form you can use to remove your name from the list, something the company says people could have done all along by calling. By next Monday, Edwards says the firm will also have an 800 number that callers can use. People who phone the company's current 800 number are told to fax name-removal requests to 513-865-1930. The company has stopped short of posting responses in news groups or bulletin boards, though. "There are different schools of thought on that," says Edwards. "One says that you should never respond to news groups from a company standpoint because that increases the amount of flaming. But at this point, I don't know how much worse it could get." In the company's place, other news group participants have stepped in to set the record straight. "I think you owe a post to correct this error," one such correspondent scolded in a reply that pointed out several errors in the message quoted above. Ironically, the information available in P-TRAK is mild compared to what is available elsewhere in the vast Lexis- Nexis database. A related product, called P-FIND, for example, offers additional household information like the appraised value of a home in many states and the number of dependents (both of which are public information). The main Nexis database digs up information from news stories -- often from local papers -- published around the world and in several different languages. Many of those stories, of course, contain information of arrests and charges that may later prove groundless, as well as a volume of personal information about the people cited in the articles. And the legal Lexis service contains not only details from civil and criminal court cases around the nation, but also other potentially sensitive information, such as tax liens and judgments against individuals. Before you get your hackles up over invasion of privacy, though, consider that all of the above is public information -- and, of course, much of it is potentially more sensitive than your previous address. For more Web-formation, visit: Lexis-Nexis (http://www.lexis-nexis.com ) Lexis-Nexis statement ( http://www.lexis-nexis.com/lncc/p-trak/index.html) Form to remove your name from the Lexis-Nexus database (http://www.lexis-nexis.com/lncc/about/ptrak.html) Reuters: Friday, September 20, 1996 Summers: Electronic Cash Won't Affect Economy Much The advent of electronic money is not expected to have any major macroeconomic effect in the medium term, U.S. Deputy Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers said on Friday. "I do not anticipate in the near and medium term significant macro-economic effects," Summers told reporters following a speech to a conference on electronic money sponsored by the Treasury Department. Some analysts have speculated that the Federal Reserve's ability to conduct monetary policy may be undermined by the issuance of electronic money over the Internet or elsewhere. Others have suggested that the Fed and Treasury could lose profits from seigniorage -- the income earned by currency issuers because currency pays no interest to holders. Summers though played down both those concerns. He noted that much U.S. currency is held abroad and said electronic money is unlikely to substitute for that anytime soon. As for monetary policy, it already works indirectly through open market operations, he noted. "As we move from credit cards to debit cards to stored value cards, I think the Fed will continue to have the ability, by operating in the government securities market, to have a substantial influence on the level of interest rates," Summers said. He saw macroeconomic benefits to be gained from the advent of electronic money and stored value. If, like credit cards, they make it easier for consumers to purchase goods during economic downturns, then they can act as a stabilizing force on consumption. "To the extent that these technologies and the Internet make markets more competitive, they will tend to ... be a force against inflation," he added. Reuters: Wednesday, September 18, 1996 Germany to Let Only Banks Issue E-Cash By Catherine O'Mahony Bundesbank council member Franz-Christoph Zeitler on Wednesday welcomed government plans to give only banks the right to issue pre-paid cards or so-called electronic purses. Stressing the German central bank's concern about electronic money, he said banks were the safest guardians of electronic cash systems since they had to meet legally-imposed liquidity restrictions and had long experience of cashless payments. Zeitler said in a statement that electronic money innovations were fundamentally positive as a way to speed up transfers. But "it is also important that the security of payment transfers and currency stability do not get left behind," he added. Electronic purses are plastic cards with an inbuilt micro-chip which stores the electronic cash value of users' accounts and can be reloaded at special machines. The proposal to restrict such projects to banks is part of a new German banking law which is still under preparation but which is expected to be enforced in 1997. Zeitler said issuers of electronic cash had to be extremely reliable because a sudden collapse of an electronic cash system, due to forgery or technical failure, could have "significant negative" consequences for the economy. While electronic purses, also known as smart cards, are not yet available in cash-dominated Germany, tests are being run on several projects. Current projects being tested in the Munich region include a card to pay for telephone calls and local train tickets and another with broader application, which can be used for small purchases up to 50 marks ($ 33.03). Worldwide, the most prominent electronic purse project is Mondex which was developed in Britain by National Westminster Bank and is on trial in the town of Swindon. Zeitler said it was likely that Bonn would also restrict the rights to create and maintain of Internet-based electronic cash systems to the banking industry. Internet banking is slowly gaining credence in Germany. Bavaria's Bayerische Hypotheken und Wechsel Bank recently launched a securities account accessible via the Internet. ($ 1=1.5138 Mark) American Banker: Thursday, September 19, 1996 Seeking Security, Banks Turn to Internet Certification By DREW CLARK On the Internet, no one can tell if you're a dog. This line, from a New Yorker cartoon, belies a serious problem for banks and merchants setting up sites on the World Wide Web: There is no widely accepted method for authenticating the claims -- or the identity -- of those conducting business on-line. To help solve this problem, two companies have begun certifying businesses by granting them "seals of approval" on the Web. "There needs to be some way that consumers can easily recognize when a site is secure and when it is not secure," said Michael S. Karlin, president of the Security First Network Bank. "Consumers are afraid, even in an FDIC-approved banking situation, and they want the feeling that it is secure." One of the first systems to offer authentication for commercial sites on the World Wide Web is TrueSite, developed by Application Programming and Development Inc. of Camp Springs, Md. BankAmerica Corp., Mellon Bank Corp., and First Bank System Inc. are among 30 financial institutions and 2,000 businesses whose Web sites have been certified. Though the Web provides businesses with a flexible, highly visible medium for presenting their message, on-line business has its drawbacks. A Web site user can download the entire contents of a Web page, alter it, and establish a dummy site at a new location. TrueSite guards against such occurrences by letting certified banks and businesses put a blue check mark symbol on their home pages for an annual fee of $495, which has been waived for six months. Users clicking on the logo will be warned if it has been fraudulently copied. "A user won't have to ask, 'Did I get to the correct site in the first place?,'" said Mark Burnett, president of Application Programming, which has annual revenues of $2 million. "Whether consumers feel comfortable engaging in transactions on the Internet is a function of how they feel," added Jack Rogers, president of the Fairfax, Va.-based American Finance & Investment Corp. "Their perception is as important as reality." Another certification was launched in July by the National Computer Security Association in Carlisle, Pa. The association requires that certified companies protect their Web sites against Internet attacks by using data encryption, by maintaining detailed logs, and by establishing firewalls within the computers that host Web sites. "You better have some confidence that a hacker doesn't have access to checking accounts," said Kevin J. Stevens, a product manager at the for- profit association, which has annual revenues of $5 million. "If banks don't take the steps to be certified and give their market some indication that they have instituted a security program, no public relations is going to resolve only one slip-up." So far six companies have each paid upwards of $8,500 for a detailed on- site audit before getting the association's stamp of approval. Mr. Stevens declined to identify them, but said they include one of the big three auto companies. "This is a great first step. What the NCSA has done is to put the bar up," said Security First's Mr. Karlin. He anticipates that the virtual bank will be certified within two months and hopes that the association will eventually introduce a system with several passing grades. America Online Inc. and the Better Business Bureau are also getting into the certification business. In conjunction with America Online's move to the New York Stock Exchange from Nasdaq, its top officials reemphasized the features of the largest on-line service and announced 10 new criteria that merchants will be required to meet. The standards include processing orders and responding to E-mails within one day of receipt and giving on-line customers equal priority with telephone customers. "AOL members will come to know and have confidence in people who display the seal of approval," said Michael J. Minigan, the service's vice president of interactive marketing. "It is our hope that at some point, merchants doing business on the Web would want to have the AOL seal on their Web sites." Officials at the Better Business Bureau promote self-regulation and full disclosure of company complaints to fill cues missing from on-line commerce. "For $30 a month, a business can design a fabulous Web page that can lead a consumer to think they are a Fortune 500 company," said spokeswoman Holly Cheriko. "The consumer is left without the cues in the traditional marketplace like being able to visit, talk to the sales clerk, and view the quality of the marketplace. They need a trusted means to determine which businesses are reliable and what commitment they have made to the consumer." --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0