Computer underground Digest Wed 3 Mar, 1999 Volume 11 : Issue 14 ISSN 1004-042X Editor: Jim Thomas (firstname.lastname@example.org) News Editor: Gordon Meyer (email@example.com) Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Commie Radiator: Etaion Shrdlu, Mssr. Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Cu Digest Homepage: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest CONTENTS, #11.14 (Wed, 3 Mar, 1999) File 1--REVIEW: "Countdown Y2K", Peter de Jager/Richard Bergeon File 2--Cyber Sleuths Have More Than Your Number (TCD fwd) File 3--Dangers of New Internet Bill (PFAW fwd) File 4--Bill Lifting Encryption Controls Re-Introduced (CDT fwd) File 5--SurfWatch blocks the Web's #1 pro-censorware site File 6--Linkname: LII's Focus on Gambling File 7--"Cyberporn" Busts: When will they ever learn? File 8--PGP 6.0.2i now available File 9--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 10 Jan, 1999) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 08:29:10 -0800 From: "Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor"
Subject: File 1--REVIEW: "Countdown Y2K", Peter de Jager/Richard Bergeon BKCNDY2K.RVW 990130 "Countdown Y2K", Peter de Jager/Richard Bergeon, 1999, 0-471-32734-4, U$29.99/C$46.50 %A Peter de Jager %A Richard Bergeon %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D '99 %G 0-471-32734-4 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O U$29.99/C$46.50 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 firstname.lastname@example.org %P 330 p. %T "Countdown Y2K: Business Survival Planning for the Year 2000" The authors have already had one crack at this, since this book is a "complete update" (according to the publisher) of "Managing 00." The level of experience is not exactly evident. Chapter one is a disorganized aggregation of the various types and ways that the 2000 year is going to present problems. (The blame is once again laid on Hollerith cards.) It also tries to present an idea of the size and scope of the crisis by looking at the volume of work to be done. Because of the lack of structure, though, the impression left is generally one of confusion. It is also rather odd that the authors did not take the opportunity to present more examples from the problems that have arisen, and how much work it took to deal with them. (Appendix A gives a "case study": of a fictional company.) The disarray extends into chapter two with discussions of project 2000 team composition, systems inventories, and a completely bizarre table of "best before" dates for Microsoft products. Talk about embedded systems get really disorienting in chapter three. We are told "an aluminum plant began to run amok" (because of leap year, not Y2K) but without more details it seems likely that this was due to a process control failure, not an embedded system. There is also mention of the failure of older GPS (Global Positioning Systems) in August of 1999, without mention of the fact that this only coincidentally falls close to December 31, 1999, and has a different cause. Chapter four returns to Y2K projects, with some helpful information. However, it is also clear that this material is dated, since it talks about "event horizons" that have passed for just about everyone. Y2K is a project, like any other project, and chapters five to seven basically provide generic project management advice. Chapter five looks at macro planning topics. There is a rehash of prior material and a bit of a checklist in chapter six. Personnel issues dominate chapter seven. Chapter eight gets into the nitty gritty of conversion with a look at date formats, coding, and the windowing, bridging, or wrapping approaches to software fixes. There is a recommendation to look to the resources that you have, in terms of general maintenance software, in chapter nine. A list of different types of maintenance tools, and how they can be used for a Y2K project, is in chapter ten. Chapter eleven looks at outsourcing and takes a balanced approach, although its answer to the all important "how to assess" question is a reminder of that old saw: if you can tell the difference between good advice and bad advice you don't need any advice. Chapter twelve is very important to any Y2K plan: how to plan for failure. Which deficiency will create the most mess, and what can you do about it? Legal problems and lawsuits are overviewed in chapter thirteen. For those still needing tools or outsourcing, Appendix B lists Y2K vendors. Appendix C provides information on Web sites. The bibliography in appendix D is, for once, annotated. Unfortunately, when you look at the annotations, they are fairly obviously just recycled press releases. Given the fact that the authors have already had one chance at the subject, and have been at the forefront of publicizing the problem, it is disappointing that the result isn't of higher quality. On the other hand, one cannot say that it is any worse than the others in the pack. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKCNDY2K.RVW 990130 ====================== email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Comp Sec Weekly: http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/computer_security Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: editor@TELECOM-DIGEST.ORG Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:53:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: File 2--Cyber Sleuths Have More Than Your Number (TCD fwd) Source: TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Feb 99 Volume 19 : Issue 18 ((MODERATORS' NOTE: For those not familiar with Pat Townson's TELECOM DIGEST, it's an exceptional resource. From the header of TcD: "TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * email@example.com * ======" )) ================== From--Monty Solomon Subject--Cyber Sleuths Have More Than Your Number Date--Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:39:39 -0500 http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/bigstory/022199/privacy.html By Andrew Alexander Cox Washington Bureau Washington -- "You're kidding!" my wife exclaimed when I told her that someone had gained access to our private bank records, lifted our account number and recorded our balance. There was more. They had also tracked our recent long-distance calls, identifying those we had telephoned by name, address and occupation. And they had compiled dossiers on us, complete with Social Security numbers, property holdings and financial dealings. "That's incredible," she said. "How can they do that?" Easily, it turns out, in the computer age. "They," I finally confessed, was actually my Cox Newspapers Washington Bureau colleague Elliot Jaspin, a Pulitzer Prize-winning high-tech wizard who had delved into our personal lives at my invitation. He was trying to come up with a way for our reporters to use computer databases to do background checks on little-known figures who suddenly break into the news, quickly learning about pending lawsuits or long-concealed arrests. Start with only my name, I suggested, and see what you can get. He hit pay dirt within a few days. Given more time -- and a little money -- he soon would have been able to obtain confidential records of my credit card purchases, salary, stocks, bonds, credit history, life insurance policy, recent air travel, whether I had ever been nailed for speeding, and even my medical records going back 10 years. While the popular notion is that a computer linked to the Internet is a key that unlocks all kinds of personal secrets, most databases on the Internet are dull as dishwater. Switchboard, for example, will allow you to instantly discover Uncle Edgar's telephone number in Dubuque. But then, calling information will get you the same thing. The Internet, however, carries ads for a burgeoning and largely uncontrolled industry of "information brokers" that -- for a fee -- will reveal the most intimate details of your life, right down to that birthmark on your backside or ancient records of psychological treatment. For fees as low as $40 per search, they will disclose non-published telephone numbers or track down the owners of private aircraft. Corporate Investigative Services of Huntsville, Ala., has a Web site that also allows you to listen to the theme music from "Mission Impossible" while you link to hundreds of other sites. Some companies, like AutoTrack, have assembled massive computerized databases containing several billion public records. Using sophisticated database software, information is quickly plucked from scores of different files, and within minutes is woven together into a report. AutoTrack files are interesting, but not nearly as revealing as companies that use what they politely term "pretexts" to shoehorn information from banks, phone companies and anyone else you may do business with. The major weapon here is a huckster's patter rather than a computer. Judging from information broker ads, everything is up for grabs. That includes the location of your safe deposit box, your bank deposits anywhere in the world, and even your bank account history, including dates and amounts of deposits, checks written or wire transfers. As privacy expert Robert Ellis Smith of Rhode Island noted, "Every fact about you is on record somewhere," and information brokers see that as fair game. Posing as a forgetful husband, telephone repairman or bank clerk, a private investigator can often get this information by outwitting low-level clerks at the phone company or some obscure branch of a major bank. There are few laws forbidding disclosure. "It's our company policy not to release any customer information without a court order or some legal document," said Sandy Arnette, a spokeswoman for Bell Atlantic in Baltimore. "But there is no state or federal law against disclosure." In fact, the House Banking Committee found only three states -- Connecticut, Illinois and Maine -- with laws making it a crime to induce an employee of a financial institution to disclose data about a customer's account. And there are no federal statutes against using "pretexts" to wangle private data from financial institutions. Rep. James A. Leach, R-Iowa, chairman of the House Banking Committee, tried unsuccessfully to get the practice outlawed last year, and he has introduced the same bill again this year. But who cares if you have a checking account in Duluth and own 40 acres of scrub land in Texas? Creditors do. Banks, who need to collect on bad credit card debts, routinely turn to lawyers who specialize in collections. And these lawyers, in turn, use information brokers to find assets they can attach. "We do a lot of credit card collection. Thousands of cases a week," said Mike Martin of Advanced Research Inc. The American Bankers Association supports Leach's proposed legislation to outlaw fraudulently obtaining information from banks. But ABA member banks "hire us to do exactly what it is they're trying to shut down," Martin said. Information brokers also will chase deadbeat dads. "Very often, it gets used for good purposes," private investigator Edmund Pankau of Houston said. "Not long ago," he recalled, his firm traced the financial dealings of a Houston man who had left his family. The information allowed them to locate the man in another city. "He had skipped out on his ex-wife," Pankau said, "but they needed to find him because his daughter needed a bone marrow transplant and he was the only one who could help." Some in the press also use information brokers to snoop. Al Schweitzer, a controversial private investigator -- he pleaded guilty in 1992 to illegally buying Social Security records -- became a legend by compiling detailed dossiers on Hollywood stars for the National Enquirer. After actor Kiefer Sutherland split from Julia Roberts, Schweitzer used her phone records to locate him at his ranch in Whitefish, Mont. He used the same method to track down Marlon Brando's daughter in Tahiti. But there is a darker side of riffling through private information. Federal officials express growing concern about "identity fraud" or "identity theft," in which a con artist uses purloined personal financial information to assume your identity, then loots your bank account or makes costly purchases with your credit card number. The extent to which Americans are actually harmed by this is unclear. A report last year by the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, suggests a startling rise in identity fraud. Trans Union, a leading credit reporting firm, told GAO that the number of inquiries about credit fraud it receives each year jumped from 35,235 in 1992 to 522,922 in 1997. Two-thirds involved identity fraud. But in the same report, GAO acknowledged that it could find "no comprehensive statistics on the prevalence of identity fraud." Pressured by the Federal Trade Commission and the threat of restrictive legislation, some large data collection firms have begun self-regulation. Several such companies represented by the Individual Reference Services Group recently agreed to abide by rules limiting unauthorized disclosure of information. But hundreds of other firms remain essentially unregulated, including the bulk of information brokers. A decade ago, only a handful existed. Today, said Evan Hendricks, editor of the Washington-based Privacy Times newsletter, there may be as many as 2,000. The explosion of the Internet and higher-powered computers means we've entered an era where "nothing is private," Pankau warned. "I can't think of anything that's private," agreed Smith, who publishes Privacy Journal, a monthly newsletter that monitors how new technology affects privacy. But the extent of actual financial harm is difficult to gauge. My wife was most troubled by the notion that someone could so easily obtain information we thought was private. Disclosure, she conceded, does not automatically mean damage. "But I would argue that just the mere unauthorized access [to private information] is one form of harm," Hendricks said, "and psychological harm is very real." ================== [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The technique called 'pretexts' as well as what some term 'social engineering' does not work as well as it used to, but sadly it still works well enough in some companies to get the information desired. One of the largest credit bureaus, Trans-Union Credit Information Corporation, takes the problem of 'social engineering' and 'pretexts' seriously enough that for a number of years its larger customers -- for example banks and credit card processing centers, or anywhere there might be several clerks working all day long doing nothing but pulling credit bureau reports for other departments, etc -- were supplied with large posters to place on walls in the office which warned about this problem. The poster showed a very stern-looking Uncle Sam, with top hat and appropriately striped trousers, etc. With a frown on his face and fingers in front of his lips the caption said, 'Please do not violate our trust in you. You are entrusted with files from the credit bureau as a specific part of your job. It is against federal law to retrieve information without a specific and legitimate reason for doing so. It is against the law to deliberatly place incorrect information in a bureau file. Both of these crimes are punishable by a fine of up to XXX dollars, or ten years imprisonment, or both, as a court of law would direct. "DO NOT BE DECEIVED by a telephone call you might receive, or a 'favor' asked of you by a co-worker! You will NEVER be contacted by the credit bureau asking you to reveal a password or information you saw in a bureau file. If a person claiming to be a superior at your company calls and tries to get you to provide this type of information you should disconnect the call and tell your supervisor immediatly. The executives at your company would never ask you to do something like that. They would go through 'channels' to obtain the information they legitimatly need from our files. "If you would like to talk to us about one of our employees at the credit bureau or about an incident which happened to you in your present employment, you can speak with us in confidence by calling 800-xxx-xxxx. No one will ever know you called, and we will take what actions are needed after our own investigation. THANK YOU FOR KEEPING THE TRUST WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED IN YOU." Across the top of the poster in larger block letters, "Uncle Sam Wants You to Keep the Trust." A most effective poster and constant reminder (Uncle Sam with pursed lips staring at you all day) that innocent looking situations could be serious problems. More and more people are getting wise to this: do not believe what you hear just because it was said on the phone; stay in control of your phone calls; never allow a phone caller to pressure you into revealing things. I am not recommending that when you get a phone call from someone you have never met before who claims to be in authority that you tell him he is full of sausage; I am just suggesting that you not be that concerned about being considered 'uncooperative' or 'antisocial'. Someone from the 'phone company' will deal with their contact person at your company, not you. Someone from the credit bureau or the computer network, etc will deal with their contact at your company, not you. And how shall I say this bluntly, yet in a form suitable for this family-rated e-journal? If you suddenly find yourself with a new girl friend or a new boy friend as happened to me many years ago when this new 'friend' discovers that you work for a large credit card processing center or the credit bureau or a large national ISP or the phone company/bank/government in a sensitive position, give careful consideration whether he wants you for your body, your wit and your charm, or if all that love-bombing, melt in your arms tenderness is intended as a way to get a bit more. Does he want to get in your pants, or does he want to get in your desk drawer at work? . Especially if he already knew about your employment before he discovered how madly in love he was with you. And before you unlock that desk drawer at work in exchange for that momentary fling, consider well what you have to gain, and what you have to lose. No matter how smart you are, there is always someone smarter who can catch you at what you did. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 15:52:05 -0500 From: Matthew Gaylor Subject: File 3--Dangers of New Internet Bill (PFAW fwd) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People For the American Way Foundation Press Release <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, March 4, 1999 CONTACT: Nancy Coleman, David Elliot or Lela Shepard at 202-467-4999 INTERNET BILL WOULD FORCE SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES TO TRADE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOR INTERNET ACCESS AID Proposed Internet legislation would misuse the power of the federal government's purse strings to restrict adult and student Constitutional rights and substitute government-imposed censorship for the judgment of local parents and teachers on how to manage online access, People For the American Way Foundation warned today. In hearings before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, People For the American Way Foundation's Legal Director Elliot Mincberg spoke out against such legislation, including S.97, a bill sponsored by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) that would require any school receiving federal discounts for Internet service to impose censoring software on school computers. "The Internet offers students, teachers and librarians vast treasures waiting to be mined," Mincberg said. "It is appropriate for school officials and parents on a local level to develop acceptable use policies for accessing the Internet. But it is entirely inappropriate for the federal government to use the power of its purse strings to force local schools to accept an onerous censorship policy." The 1996 Telecommunications Act requires the federal government to offer discounted Internet access to schools, a discount called E- rate access. The proposed legislation would attach unacceptable string to that aid by focing schools, as a condition of receiving the discount, to impose censoring filters aimed at blocking material deemed "harmful to minors." Mincberg explained that the legislation is misguided for three reasons. First, the courts consistently have struck down government attempts to restrict Internet access as violations of the First Amendment. Second, mandatory filtering requirements would discourage local officials from developing more sensible and effective alternatives. And third, federally mandated filtering would lead to numerous lawsuits across the country and erode local control. "Mandatory Internet filtering in public libraries and schools, particularly if mandated by the federal government as a condition on E-rate access, raises serious legal and constitutional problems and threatens to frustrate the tremendous potential of the Internet," Mincberg testified. PFAWF has a long history of opposing Internet censorship and served as co-counsel and co-plaintiff in the Communications Decency Act, which was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1997. More recently, PFAW Foundation represented a group of Loudoun County, Virginia citizens who successfully challenged a public library Internet censorship policy in federal court. ====================================================================== PFAWF Press Releases -- http://www.pfaw.org/news/ ====================================================================== To subscribe to the People For the American Way Foundation Press Release distribution list, please sign up for our Activist Network at http://www.pfaw.org/activist/ or send a message to: firstname.lastname@example.org with the message: subscribe pfaw-presslist ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 14:41:31 -0500 (EST) From: Ari Schwartz Subject: File 4--Bill Lifting Encryption Controls Re-Introduced (CDT fwd) The Center for Democracy and Technology /____/ Volume 5, Number 4 CDT POLICY POST Volume 5, Number 4 February 25, 1999 (1) BILL LIFTING ENCRYPTION CONTROLS RE-INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS Reps. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), joined by over 200 other Members of the House of Representatives, today re-introduced the Security and Freedom through Encryption (SAFE) bill, HR 850. Like its predecessors in prior years, HR 850 promotes privacy and security online by lifting export controls on encryption. The bill also affirms the right of all Americans to use whatever form of encryption they choose and prohibits the government from imposing domestic controls on encryption through mandatory "key-escrow" or "backdoor" systems. The unusually large number of original co-sponsors signing onto the bill at the outset demonstrates bipartisan opposition to Clinton Administration policy and widespread support for promoting the availability and use of strong encryption. The co-sponsor list includes the entire House Republican leadership (with the exception of the Speaker who, by tradition, does not co-sponsor bills), as well as Democratic leaders Richard Gephardt (D-MO) and David Bonior (D-MI). __________________________________________________________ (2) SUMMARY OF SAFE ACT, H.R. 850 * Guarantees all Americans the freedom to use any type of encryption anywhere in the world, and allows the sale of any type of encryption domestically. * Prohibits the government from requiring a backdoor into peoples' email and computer files ("mandatory key recovery"). * Modernizes U.S. export controls to permit the export of generally available software and hardware if a product with comparable security is commercially available from foreign suppliers (creates a level playing field). * Creates criminal penalties for the knowing and willful use of encryption to conceal evidence of a crime, BUT specifies that the use of encryption does not constitute probable cause of a crime. * Calls upon the Attorney General to compile examples in which encryption has interfered with law enforcement. * Calls upon the President to convene international conference to draft encryption policy agreement. _________________________________________________________ (3) BACKGROUND ON ENCRYPTION FIGHT By the end of the 105th Congress (1997-98), the SAFE bill had 249 co-sponsors in the House. The bill was reported with widely divergent amendments by 5 committees: Judiciary, International Relations, National Security, Intelligence, and Commerce, and was not brought before the full House for a vote, partly because of the opposition of then-Rules Committee Chairman Gerald Solomon (R-NY). Solomon has retired and SAFE Act co-sponsor David Dreier (R-CA) now chairs the Rules Committee. A hearing on the SAFE Act has tentatively been scheduled for March 4, before the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property. Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) has announced plans to introduce in the Senate similar legislation lifting encryption export controls. Meanwhile, the Clinton Administration continues to review incremental changes to the export control regulations. http://www.cdt.org/crypto/admin/index.html For more information on the SAFE bill, including the text of the legislation and relevant background information on the encryption policy debate, please visit CDT's encryption policy issues page at http://www.cdt.org/crypto . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 12:06:01 -0600 From: Bennett Haselton Subject: File 5--SurfWatch blocks the Web's #1 pro-censorware site The Filtering Facts web site at http://www.filteringfacts.org -- the only non-profit Web site dedicated to promoting mandatory blocking software in public libraries -- is currently blocked by SurfWatch. You can go to http://www1.surfwatch.com/testasite/body.html and type in "http://www.filteringfacts.org/", and the message appears: "http://www.filteringfacts.org is BLOCKED by content category Drugs/Alcohol" (If you want to see this, you'll probably want to do it quickly before SurfWatch updates their blocked site list.) SurfWatch is even one of the seven programs on the official Filtering Facts list of censorware "recommended for libraries". Filtering Facts is a site established in 1997 to promote censorware in libraries, funded by the Family Research Council and Enough is Enough. SurfWatch says in their press materials that every URL is reviewed by a human being before being added to their database: http://www1.surfwatch.com/about/body-filter.html: "Before adding any site to our database, each site 'candidate' is reviewed by a SurfWatch Content Specialist. Deciphering the gray areas is not something that we trust to technology; it requires thought and sometimes discussion. We use technology to help find site candidates, but rely on thoughtful analysis for the final decision." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 15:35:34 -0600 (CST) From: Jim Thomas Subject: File 6--Linkname: LII's Focus on Gambling ((CuD Moderator's note: A reader sent over the following URL. Given the increased concern over Internet gambling, some readers might the linked article of interest. We include a short excerpt. The fill article is worth a look)). Linkname: LII's Focus on Gambling URL: http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/gambling/ The LII LII Backgrounder on Gambling Online gambling revenues in 1998 are expected to be $535 million, rising to $955 million in 1999 and $2.3 billion by 2000. --ZDNN, "Online Gambling a $10B Industry" I. Introduction The popularity explosion and information revolution fueling the Internet and World Wide Web in the mid-1990's created both brand-new industries and reinvented old ones. Secure transmission technologies and the credit card combined to fashion a powerful lure for the online consumer. Internet transactions for goods and services, once considered risky propositions, are now commonplace, as seen in the success of Amazon.com and eBay. The very same factors that have led to growth in online consumer transactions, combined with the unregulated nature of the Internet, have attracted commercial online gambling. Gambling, though widespread in the United States, is subject to legislation at both the state and federal level that bans it from certain areas, limits the means and types of gambling, and regulates the activity in countless other ways. A standard strategy for avoiding laws that prohibit, constrain, or aggressively tax gambling is to locate the activity just outside the jurisdiction that enforces them in a more "gambling friendly" legal environment. Gambling establishments are often found near state borders and on ships that cruise outside territorial waters. They have exploded, in recent years, in Indian territory. Internet-based gambling takes this strategy and extends it to a totally new level of penetration, for it threatens to bring gambling directly into homes and businesses in localities where the same activity could not be conducted by a physical gambling establishment. Online gambling appears to represent a complete end-run around both government control and prohibition. A site operator need only establish itself in a friendly offshore jurisdiction, such as the Bahamas, and begin taking bets. Anyone with access to a web browser can find the site and place wagers by credit card. Confronted with this blatant challenge to local policies, regulators and lawmakers have begun to explore the applicability of current law and the desirability of new regulation to online gambling. The issues include whether a person, located in a state that prohibits commercial gambling and accessing an offshore Internet site from a home-computer, violates either state or Federal law and further whether the site operator is as well? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 15:35:34 -0600 (CST) From: Jim Thomas Subject: File 7--"Cyberporn" Busts: When will they ever learn? ((CuD MODERATORS' NOTE: From the "When will they ever learn" department: The following two snippets from the Chicago Tribune reaffirm our belief in social Darwinism. With chat rooms swarming with undercover cyber-police and other net-monitors, the "kiddie sting" seems to get 'em every time. Or, at least often enough that you'd think that online predators would eventually catch on.)) =========== NEW LENOX MAN JAILED IN PORN CASE The Chicago Tribune, 24 February, 1999 By Stanley Ziemba, Tribune Staff Writer. A 35-year-old New Lenox man was being held Tuesday in the Will County Jail on a charge of disseminating child pornography over the Internet. Steven F. Bauer of the 1500 block of Cimmeron Drive was arrested Monday in the Oakbrook Center shopping mall by Oak Brook police and members of the Illinois Internet Child Exploitation Task Force. According to a spokesman for Illinois Atty. Gen. Jim Ryan, Bauer went to the mall thinking he was about to meet a 13-year-old girl to whom he allegedly had sent pornographic material over the Internet and with whom he allegedly had arranged a meeting through an Internet chat room. But Bauer's contact was a member of the Internet Child Exploitation Task Force posing as a child, spokesman Charles Jolie said. ========= (And from CuD's own home town): 4-YEAR SENTENCE FOR MAN IN INTERNET SEX-ABUSE CASE Chicago Tribune, February 19, 1999 By Abdon M. Pallasch, Tribune Staff Writer. The first of four men caught last year in the Lake County Sheriff Department's investigation of men seeking underage sex partners on the Internet was sentenced Thursday to 4 years in prison. Richard Patterson, 28, of Wonder Lake in McHenry County, drove to Gurnee Mills mall in June to meet what he thought would be a 15-year-old boy named Rob he had met on the Internet. "Rob" turned out to be Sheriff's Deputy Rick White. Patterson was convicted last month of attempted aggravated criminal sexual abuse. The next of the four men netted by White for attempting to pick up young men over the Internet, Douglas Scott, 34, of Sycamore in DeKalb County, is set to be sentenced Monday after being convicted in December on charges of attempted indecent solicitation of a minor, among other charges. The others charged in the investigation, David Fredericks, 34, of Richmond in McHenry County, and Michael H. Bailey, 45, of Bartlett, are awaiting trial. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 08:30:11 -0500 From: Udhay Shankar N Subject: File 8--PGP 6.0.2i now available (If you are receiving this a second time, apologies) The latest international version of PGP, version 6.0.2i, is now available for download from http://www.pgpi.com. It includes the ability to encrypt a portion of your local hard drive (create a virtual encrypted volume) and to attach photographs to public keys, among other new features. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:51:01 CST From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 9--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 10 Jan, 1999) Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are available at no cost electronically. CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest Or, to subscribe, send post with this in the "Subject:: line: SUBSCRIBE CU-DIGEST Send the message to: email@example.com DO NOT SEND SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE MODERATORS. The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-6436), fax (815-753-6302) or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA. To UNSUB, send a one-line message: UNSUB CU-DIGEST Send it to CU-DIGEST-REQUEST@WEBER.UCSD.EDU (NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line) CuD is readily accessible from the Net: UNITED STATES: ftp.etext.org (188.8.131.52) in /pub/CuD/CuD Web-accessible from: http://www.etext.org/CuD/CuD/ ftp.eff.org (184.108.40.206) in /pub/Publications/CuD/ wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ EUROPE: ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom) The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the Cu Digest WWW site at: URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/ COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts unless absolutely necessary. DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not violate copyright protections. ------------------------------ End of Computer Underground Digest #11.14 ************************************
<--">Return to the Cu Digest homepage
Page maintained by: Jim Thomas - firstname.lastname@example.org