With regard to Thug's question about the use of false identification for legal purposes, I did some cursory legal research on the subject. A search through LEXIS brings up only three cases throughout all of the federal and state scourts. The first case, and in fact the one most on point is a 1991 US court of appeals case (LEXIS 219121). In this case, the defendant attempted to utilize the 'Thug defense' of no intent to defraud. Unfortunately, the court held that the actual making of false identification papers was the illegal act and that the potential for illegal use was sufficient to merit prosecution. There are a few possible ways a good attorney could get around this ruling though. First of all, the case is not a 'published' decision. Therefore it really holds little fmore than persuasive authority:). Secondly, the defendant in this case actually was involved in a conspiracy to commit illegal acts (whereas Thug is only interested in protecting his true identity). Finally, there is an incredible void of case law on this specific subject. That means that a few cyber test cases making there way through the correct legal channels, argued in the correct way, could start an actually legally recognized 'thug defense'. Unfortunately, there are other problems (legal0 with the use of false ID. Misrepresentation can be both tortious and can be utilized to weasel out of otherwise sufficient contracts. For the interests on this list, it would probably be best to balance all of your interests and only use Thug's suggestions when you are in realistic fear of abuse of your identity. I will do further research on the subject (This was only a quick search). Anyone with other legal questions (NOT people looking for legal advice per se) that I might hellp out with (RESEARCH ONLY) mail me privately. mjmiski@macc.wisc.edu - Although I may detest what you say, I will defend with my life your right to say it - Voltaire