-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Although it's not directly related to the cypherpunks agenda, I wanted to forward this message to the list to show the lengths that law enforcement agencies will go to do their bidding. Unfortunately, it would appear that we can expect more of the same shady behaviour in the future. 8<------ Begin forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 22:18:18 EST Reply-To: David Sobel <uunet!washofc.cpsr.org!dsobel> Sender: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility <uunet!VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU!CPSR%GWUVM.BITNET> From: David Sobel <uunet!washofc.cpsr.org!dsobel> Organization: CPSR Civil Liberties and Computing Project Subject: New disclosures in 2600 case New disclosures in 2600 case As you may recall, last November at a shopping mall outside of Washington, DC, a group of people affiliated with the computer magazine "2600" was confronted by mall security personnel, local police officers and several unidentified individuals. The group members were ordered to identify themselves and to submit to searches of their personal property. Their names were recorded by mall security personnel and some of their property was confiscated. However, no charges were ever brought against any of the individuals at the meeting. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility ("CPSR") filed suit under the Freedom of Information Act and today received the Secret Service's response to the FOIA lawsuit, in which we are seeking agency records concerning the break-up of the meeting. I think it's safe to say that our suspicions have now been confirmed -- the Secret Service *did* obtain a list of names from mall security identifying the people in attendance at the meeting. There are three main points contained in the Secret Service's court papers that are significant: 1) The agency states that the information it possesses concerning the incident was obtained "in the course of a criminal investigation that is being conducted pursuant to the Secret Service's authority to investigate access device and computer fraud." 2) The agency possesses two relevant documents and the information in those documents "consists solely of information identifying individuals." 3) The information was obtained from a "confidential source," and the agency emphasizes that the FOIA's definition of such a source includes "any private institution which provided information on a confidential basis." Taken together, these facts seem to prove that the Secret Service wanted names, they had the mall security people collect them, and they came away from the incident with the list they wanted. The agency asserts that "[t]he premature release of the identities of the individual(s) at issue could easily result in interference to the Secret Service's investigation by alerting these individual(s) that they are under investigation and thus allowing the individual(s) to alter their behavior and/or evidence." CPSR, in conjunction with EFF and the ACLU, is planning to challenge the actions of the mall security personnel, the local police and the Secret Service on the ground that the incident amounted to a warrantless search and seizure conducted at the behest of the Secret Service. David Sobel CPSR Legal Counsel dsobel@washofc.cpsr.org 8<------ End of forwarded message ------- Cheers. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.2 iQCVAgUBK9gSjpRLcZSdHMBNAQG2EwP/VKX6j0F90NYWyfiyyP5C0gjtBVXG1ed4 AzETLqMOVnG+vjRS6h6cSTwoojJHhKhAmQGmW8gDlp98KLRAiY2ULMmxaMTA/cKW jIuECDaKLdA21lPgcPhvKsAqQEHPBv1AALA6WTSeGQ6IRlugPfXE4LX+TBYH6/Q7 f69b7sJZgZ8= =Ou0Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Paul Ferguson | Uncle Sam wants to read Network Integration Consultant | your e-mail... Centreville, Virginia USA | Just say "NO" to the Clipper fergp@sytex.com | Chip...