BBS in a Box 2/BBS in a box - Trilogy II.iso/Files/MUG News/EFF/effector1.08

Text File | 1992-07-14 | 19.7 KB | 468 lines | [TEXT/EDIT]

########## | Volume I                                   Number 8 |
########## |                                                     |
###        |                  EFFECTOR ONLINE                    |
#######    |                                                     |
#######    |             First Anniversary Edition               |
###        |                                                     |
########## |            The Electronic Newsletter of             |
########## |         The Electronic Frontier Foundation          |
           |                                                     |
########## |                                                     |
########## |                                                     |
###        |                      Editors:                       |
#######    |          Gerard Van der Leun ([e-mail])          |
#######    |           Mike Godwin ([e-mail])            |
###        |           Mitchell Kapor ([e-mail])           |
###        |                   Managing Editors:                 |
###        |Chris Davis ([e-mail]), Helen Rose ([e-mail])|
           |                                                     |
########## |       Reproduction of EFFector Online via all       |
########## |            electronic media is encouraged           |
###        |      To reproduce signed articles individually      |
#######    |     please contact the authors for their express    |
#######    |                       permission.                   |
###        |                                                     |
###        |               Published Fortnightly by              |
###        |    The Electronic Frontier Foundation (eff.org)     |

effector n, Computer Sci. A device for producing a desired change
                      -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==-

                           In this issue:

THE FIRST YEAR IN THE LIFE OF THE EFF: A SCORECARD
EFF SEEKS AMICUS STATUS IN TWO KEY COMPUTER-CRIME CASES
UPDATE ON THE STEVE JACKSON CASE
EFF PRESENTATIONS ABOUT COMPUTER SEARCHES
REPORT ON THE CRYPTOGRAPHY AND PRIVACY CONFERENCE
WHAT TO TELL PEOPLE WHO STILL THINK EFF IS A HACKER DEFENSE FUND
MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION



******************************************************************

THE FIRST YEAR IN THE LIFE OF THE EFF

We wrote our mission statement in June of 1990 and began to build the
foundation in June of that year. Here's what we said about what we would
begin to do a little more than a year ago.


EFF Mission Statement -- April, 1990

A new world is arising in the vast web of digital, electronic media
which connect us. Computer-based communication media like electronic
mail and computer conferencing are becoming the basis of new forms of
community. These communities without a single, fixed geographical
location comprise the first settlements on an electronic frontier.

While well-established legal principles and cultural norms give
structure and coherence to uses of conventional media like newspapers,
books, and telephones, the new digital media do not so easily fit into
existing frameworks. Conflicts come about as the law struggles to define
its application in a context where fundamental notions of speech,
property, and place take profoundly new forms. People sense both the
promise and the threat inherent in new computer and communications
technologies, even as they struggle to master or simply cope with them
in the work place and the home.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has been established to civilize the
electronic frontier; to make it useful and beneficial not just to a
technical elite, but to everyone; and to do this in keeping with our
society's highest traditions of the free and open flow of information
and communication.


A LOOK BACK -- June, 1991
=========================

When we began in 1990 there was a void separating the pioneers of
computer networking and the rest of the world. The technologies were
ill-understood outside of a small, technically minded part of the
population. One of our first tasks was to begin to build bridges between
these groups.

In our first year The Electronic Frontier Foundation has accomplished a
great deal in several distinct areas:


Legal
----

*Filed suit against the Secret Service for the unlawful search and
seizure of computers, BBS systems, books and manuscripts at Steve
Jackson Games in Austin, Texas.

*Helped defend Craig Neidorf, unjustly accused of publishing purloined
documents.

*Filed friend of the court briefs challenging unjust prohibitions of
computer use as part of computer crime sentencing

*Lobbied effectively at the state level to change legislation inimical
to computer networking.


Communications and Public Education
-------------- --- ------ ---------

*Inspired and helped to organize and present the first Computers,
Freedom and Privacy Conference. CFP was a four day event that brought
together, in search of knowledge and common ground,representatives from
computer networking, law enforcement and privacy advocate groups.

*Distributed the first eight issues of our electronic newsletter,
EFFector Online, throughout the net.

*Published the first issue of our quarterly print newsletter, EFFector.

*Become a presence on the Internet with our node, eff.org.

*Created an FTP archive on eff.org for documents on computer networking
and privacy law.

*Given a net home at eff.org to groups like Computer Professionals for
Social Responsibility and the new Computers and Academic Freedom group.

*Spoke to numerous groups nationwide on the issues of civil liberties
and computer networking.

*Developed a network of relationships with the local and national media
that has affected the climate of opinion about computer networking and
begun to reverse the slide into "hacker hysteria" that was beginning to
grip the nation.

*Established a fully staffed operational headquarters in Cambridge,
Massachusetts.


Policy
------

*Worked with Senator Leahy's Privacy Task Force in Washington,D.C. in
order to advance the concerns of the computer networking community in
the formation of legislation in this critical area.

*Argued successfully for the removal of anti-encryption provisions in
S.266, the Senate Crime bill

*Testified before the Federal Communications Committee concerning the
public access and design needs of the National Research and Education
network.

*Made grants in aid to Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
as well as joining them in numerous policy projects and workshops around
the nation.

*Created a voice that is listened to in Washington on issues concerning
computer networking.

*Launched the Open Road program in order to make sure that the needs of
the public in the building of the National Public Network are addressed
at the beginning of the project.

*Helped define the issues of protecting nodes and carriers from
unwarranted risks and liabilities in providing information services from
the producer to the consumer.

And
---

*Begun research and development into creating the tools that will allow
non-technical individuals using PCs to access the net over voice-grade
telephone lines in a simple and straightforward fashion.

We are proud that we have been able to accomplish so much in such a
short time. We have had a lot of help doing it from friends and
supporters from all sectors of American society in the public and the
private sectors. In this we have been fortunate.

At the same time, we see more clearly than we did a year ago just how
far we have to go,and how much work lies ahead of us. The issues that
those of us in the computer, telecommunications, and computer networking
fields can see clearly now will affect every American and
much of the entire world within the next ten years. The opportunities
are immense and the potential for an increase in human knowledge, wisdom
and well-being beyond our calculation.

We now know that we cannot know all of what lies ahead. Instead, we can
try to prepare as best we can, and to protect the legitimate interests
of the individual and society as best we can, for the full dawn of the
Global Information Age.

We hope that we can count on you for your continuing good will and
support.


************************************************************

EFF SEEKS AMICUS STATUS IN TWO KEY COMPUTER-CRIME CASES

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has sought to intervene as an amicus
curiae in two important computer-crime cases.

In the case of United States v. Robert Riggs, we have joined an appeal
of part of sentence imposed upon Riggs, who was a member of the so-
called "Legion of Doom" and, at one time, a co-defendant of Craig
Neidorf. We have gone on record as opposing the sentencing restriction
on Rigg's private computer-use and ownership after Riggs is released
from prison.

We believe that the judge's decision to forbid Riggs to own or privately
use a computer during the supervisory period following his release is a
restriction on his First Amendment rights beyond what is allowed by the
federal sentencing statute. In addition, we believe such restrictions
tend to promote the notion that computers are inherently dangerous
instrumentalities, the access to which falls properly within the scope
of governmental action. We hope here to lessen the momentum behind these
restrictions, which prosecutors have been seeking in cases all across
the country.

We are also seeking amicus curiae status in United States v. Robert
Morris. Morris, who was prosecuted under the Computer Fraud and Abuse
statute, was the author of the Internet Worm, which accidentally shut
down large portions of the Internet in 1988. Morris is seeking Supreme
Court review of his case, and we are about to file an amicus curiae
petition urging the Supreme Court to hear the case.

Our goal in this case is not to defend or justify Morris's actions, but
to establish that the law used to prosecute him was interpreted too
broadly. As it now stands, the law would make no distinction between
someone like Morris, whose out-of-control program accidentally caused
damage to remote computer use, and a computer terrorist who set out
intentionally to cause damage to remote computers.


******************************************************************

TRACKING THE STEVE JACKSON CASE

Our major case, the Steve Jackson Games case, is proceeding as expected.
The next stage in our ongoing effort in that case will be the
government's filing of a response to our complaint. As of the week of
June 21, the government has sought a 30-day extension of the deadline
for its response. Such extensions are routinely granted with the
agreement of the plaintiff, and we have agreed in this case. The
extended deadline will mean that the government's response will be due
the first week of August.


******************************************************************

EFF PRESENTATIONS ABOUT COMPUTER SEARCHES

As part of our effort to raise public and government consciousness about
the overkill of searches and seizures in computer-crime investigations,
Mike Godwin has been conducting presentations for a wide variety of
audiences on the civil-liberties issues raised by such cases. Audiences
have included a computer-law seminar at Ohio State University, a private
presentation for Westinghouse corporate security in Pittsburgh, and a
meeting of the Federal Computer Investigators Committee (FCIC) in
Scottsdale, Arizona. We are planning for the presentational materials to
be a resource document for the next CPSR Roundtable in Washington, and
Mike is scheduled to deliver the presentation before an assembly of Ohio
judges in late July.

Of the presentations mentioned above, the FCIC meeting was of particular
significance. This group of representatives of various law enforcement
agencies has been one of the principal policy-making and information-
sharing groups concerned with computer-crime issues. The Scottsdale
meeting included representatives of the FBI, the Secret Service, the
Department of Justice, and other law-enforcement agencies. A key
accomplishment of the meeting was our forging of valuable personal
contacts with members of these agencies. Although the FCIC was in some
ways skeptical of our stress on the civil-liberties of computer users
whose systems are being searched, the overall feedback was positive, and
Arizona prosecutor Gail Thackeray already has asked to use our materials
at other law-enforcement meetings.

******************************************************************

REPORT ON THE CRYPTOGRAPHY AND PRIVACY CONFERENCE

On June 10th, EFF, CPSR, and RSA Data Security Inc. sponsored a one day
conference on cryptography and privacy. The meeting had two motivations:
to express opposition to the cryptography restrictions of Senate bill
S.266 and, more generally, to bring together technologists and policy-
makers to show broad based support for a redirection of our country's
policies on cryptography. In the days prior to the meeting EFF, through
John Podesta, was able to persuade Senator Leahy to prevail upon Senator
Biden to remove the offensive provision from S.266, so by the time of
the conference this was a moot issue.

One outcome of the conference was the adoption of a statement in support
of communications privacy which recommends that the United States
government undertake a new approach to support communications privacy
and to promote the availability of privacy-enhancing technologies. Among
its recommendations are the following:

First, proposals regarding cryptography should be moved beyond the
domain of the intelligence and national security community.

Second, any proposal to facilitate government eavesdropping should be
critically reviewed.

Third, government agencies with appropriate expertise should work free
of NSA influence to promote the availability of cryptography so as to
ensure communications privacy for the general public.

Fourth, the export control restrictions for computer network technology
and cryptography should be substantially relaxed.

As a follow-up John Podesta met with representatives of several
companies to lay the ground-work for continuing coordination on these
issues.


******************************************************************

THE ORIGIN OF THE EFF AND THE CRACKING OF COMPUTER SYSTEMS

(You may want to pass this on to friends and associates.--The Editors)

There is a persistent view in some quarters that the EFF exists
solely as an institution to defend crackers of computer systems.
This is an understandable perception but it is false.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has never condoned the unauthorized
entry into computer systems for any reason.There is absolutely no
question that uninvited computer intrusions represent a major problem on
the electronic frontier; and one which we, and thousands of others,
struggle with on a daily basis.

In like manner, the EFF does not condone the use of governmental powers
to seek out and punish legitimate users of computer systems.  We have
opposed this since our inception and will continue to do so to the limit
of our ability and resources.

Throughout 1990, law enforcement activities which were ostensibly aimed
at "cracking down on crackers" were, in fact, seizing the computer
systems of innocent parties like Steve Jackson and shutting down
bulletin boards used by hundreds of utterly innocent people.  Whether
through ignorance or malice, these actions were depriving many of their
legitimate rights under the Constitution, and chilling the free
expression and growth of the Net.

The EFF was formed in response to these injustices. Our mission was to
protect constitutional guarantees of free speech and freedom from
unreasonable search and seizure. This remains the core of our mission
today.  We believe that these fundamental civil liberties must apply to
all users of computer networks. A threat to the rights of anyone is a
threat to the rights of all. Experience has taught us that these
freedoms must be fought for if they are to be given a firm foundation
in the online world.  Constitutional guarantees, as we have seen by
actions such as Operation Sun Devil, are not the default state online,
but must be "designed" in from the start.  To do nothing risks setting
a series of precedents which will be difficult if not impossible to
reverse at some time in the future.

These beliefs struck a chord with many users of computer networks who
understood the importance of an open, public process by which this
society sorts out the laws and customs which will apply to the online
domain.

Today the EFF has evolved to become an advocacy organization, with broad
concerns in the area of information technology policy, including, but
not limited to civil liberties, which represent the interests of its
members and serve as a bridge between "Cyberspace" and other exotic
locales, like Washington, D.C.

******************************************************************

BECOME A MEMBER OF THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION

In the last issue of EFFector, we initiated our membership program.  We
have so far received well over 100 memberships.  Thank you, early
supporters. In order to continue the work already begun and to expand
our efforts and activities into other realms of the electronic frontier,
we need the financial support of individuals and organizations.

If you support our goals and our work, you can show that support by
becoming a member now. Members receive our quarterly newsletter,
EFFECTOR, our bi-weekly electronic newsletter, EFFector Online (if you
have an electronic address that can be reached through the Net), and
special releases and other notices on our activities. But because we
believe that support should be freely given, you can receive these
things even if you do not elect to become a member.

Your membership/donation is fully tax deductible.

Our memberships are $20.00 per year for students, $40.00 per year for
regular members. You may, of course, donate more if you wish.

Our privacy policy: The Electronic Frontier Foundation will never, under
any circumstances, sell any part of its membership list. We will, from
time to time, share this list with other non-profit organizations whose
work we determine to be in line with our goals. But with us, member
privacy is the default. This means that you must actively grant us
permission to share your name with other groups. If you do not grant
explicit permission, we assume that you do not wish your membership
disclosed to any group for any reason.


>>>---------------- [e-mail] MEMBERSHIP FORM ---------------<<<

Mail to: The Electronic Frontier Foundation, Inc.
Online Office
155 Second St.
Cambridge,MA 02141

I wish to become a member of the EFF I enclose:$__________
$20.00 (student or low income membership)
$40.00 (regular membership)

[ ] I enclose an additional donation of $___________

Name:______________________________________________________

Organization:______________________________________________

Address: __________________________________________________

State:_______Zip:________Phone:( )_____________(optional)

FAX:( )____________________(optional)

Email address: ______________________________

I enclose a check [ ].
Please charge my membership in the amount of $_____________ to my
Mastercard [ ] Visa [ ] American Express [ ]

Number:____________________________________________________

Expiration date: ____________

Signature: ________________________________________________

Date:______________________

I hereby grant permission to the EFF to share my name with other non-
profit groups from time to time as it deems appropriate [ ].
Initials:___________________________

The EFF is a non-profit, 501c3 organization.
Donations to the EFF are tax-deductible.


******************************************************************

Please direct all mail regarding EFFector Online to:
[e-mail]


COMING ATTRACTIONS:

PRIVACY-ENHANCED MAIL
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE EFF FTP ARCHIVE
MAKING IT EASIER TO GET ON THE NET
CONTINUING LEGAL UPDATES
SYSOP LIABILITY ISSUES

******************************************************************