-----Original Message----- On Behalf Of EPIC News Sent: 19 November 2002 23:54 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: EPIC Alert 9.23
============================================================== @@@@ @@@@ @@@ @@@@ @ @ @@@@ @@@@ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@ @@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @@@ @@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@ @ @@@ @@@@ @ @ @@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ ============================================================== Volume 9.23 November 19, 2002 -------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_9.23.html ======================================================================= Table of Contents ======================================================================= [1] Public Protest Over Pentagon Surveillance System Mounts [2] Appeals Court Permits Broader Electronic Surveillance [3] Homeland Security Bill Limits Open Government [4] Circuit Court Approves Faxed Warrants [5] DC City Council Attacks Camera System, Adopts Regulations [6] California Passes Database Privacy Legislation [7] EPIC Bookstore - Data Protection Law [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events ======================================================================= [1] Public Protest Over Pentagon Surveillance System Mounts ======================================================================= The Pentagon's proposed "Total Information Awareness" (TIA) surveillance system is coming under increasing attack. In an open letter sent yesterday, a coalition of over 30 civil liberties groups urged Senators Thomas Daschle (D-SD) and Trent Lott (R-MS) to "act immediately to stop the development of this unconstitutional system of public surveillance." Newspapers across the country have written editorials castigating the program. The New York Times has said that "Congress should shut down the program pending a thorough investigation." The Washington Post wrote, "The defense secretary should appoint an outside committee to oversee it before it proceeds." William Safire's recent column, which played a major role in igniting the public outcry, called the surveillance system "a supersnooper's dream." The TIA project is part of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)'s Information Awareness Office, headed by John Poindexter. The surveillance system purports to capture a person's "information signature" so that the government can track potential terrorists and criminals involved in "low-intensity/low-density" forms of warfare and crime. The goal of the system is to track individuals by collecting as much information about them as possible and using computer algorithms and human analysis to detect potential activity. The project calls for the development of "revolutionary technology for ultra-large all-source information repositories," which would contain information from multiple sources to create a "virtual, centralized, grand database." This database would be populated by transaction data contained in current databases, such as financial records, medical records, communication records, and travel records, as well as new sources of information. Intelligence data would also be fed into the database. A key component of the project is the development of data mining or knowledge discovery tools that will sift through the massive amount of information to find patterns and associations. The surveillance plan will also improve the power of search tools such as Project Genoa, which Poindexter's former employer Syntek Technologies assisted in developing. The Defense Department aims to fund the development of more such tools and data mining technology to help analysts understand and even "preempt" future action. A further crucial component is the development of biometric technology to enable the identification and tracking of individuals. DARPA has already funded its "Human ID at a Distance" program, which aims to positively identify people from a distance through technologies such as face recognition and gait recognition. A nationwide identification system might also be of great assistance to such a project by providing an easy means to track individuals across multiple information sources. The initial plan calls for a five year research project into these various technologies. According to the announcement soliciting industry proposals, the interim goal is to build "leave-behind prototypes with a limited number of proof-of-concept demonstrations in extremely high risk, high payoff areas." The FBI and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are also working on data mining projects that will merge commercial databases, public databases, and intelligence data. Documents obtained by EPIC through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show that the developers of the new passenger profiling system in the TSA held meetings with Poindexter's team earlier this year. EPIC is currently involved in a FOIA lawsuit to obtain documents from the Information Awareness Office. The coalition's letter to Senators Daschle and Lott is available at: http://www.epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/tialetter11.18.02.html EPIC's Total Information Awareness Page: http://www.epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/ Information Awareness Office's Total Information Awareness project description: http://www.darpa.mil/iao/TIASystems.htm ======================================================================= [2] Appeals Court Permits Broader Electronic Surveillance ======================================================================= The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review issued an opinion this week broadly expanding the Justice Department's surveillance authority. The Court held that the Department of Justice could use looser foreign intelligence standards to conduct criminal investigations in the United States. The Court of Review convened in September for the first time in its 23 year existence to hear the Justice Department's appeal of an unprecedented decision by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), a special panel of federal judges that oversees implementation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The extraordinary ruling, issued by the FISC in May, revealed a pattern of FBI misrepresentations to the FISC and cast serious doubt on the veracity and accuracy of claims made by the Justice Department and the FBI in support of requests for approval of national security and anti-terrorism surveillance. The court found that DOJ and FBI officials had submitted erroneous information in more than 75 applications for search warrants and wiretaps and had improperly shared intelligence information with agents and prosecutors handling criminal cases on at least four occasions. As a result of these problems, the court refused to give DOJ the broad new surveillance powers it sought to employ after the September 11 terrorist attacks. Specifically, the FISC ruled that new procedures proposed by Attorney General John Ashcroft earlier this year would give DOJ prosecutors too much control over national security investigations and would allow the government to improperly use intelligence information for criminal cases, without the requisite showing of "probable cause." The court noted that it was rejecting the new DOJ procedures "to protect the privacy of Americans in these highly intrusive surveillances and searches." The government argued in its appeal that the FISC failed to properly apply changes to FISA that were contained in the USA PATRIOT Act, which Congress enacted in the wake of the September 11 attacks. EPIC joined the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Democracy and Technology, Center for National Security Studies, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Open Society Institute in submitting an amicus brief that argued that expanding the executive branch's powers would jeopardize fundamental constitutional interests, "including the First Amendment right to engage in lawful public dissent, and the warrant, notice, and judicial review rights guaranteed by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments." (See EPIC Alert 9.17.) The Court of Review's decision, released yesterday, permits the government to remove the separation that has long existed between officials conducting surveillance on suspected foreign agents and criminal prosecutors investigating crimes. The Court of Review concluded that the FISC read into FISA limitations on the Act's scope of FISA that never existed and appear nowhere in the statute. The court concluded that the changes to FISA under the USA PATRIOT Act are constitutional, although just barely: Our case may well involve the most serious threat our country faces. Even without taking into account the President's inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance, we think the procedures and government showings required under FISA, if they do not meet the minimum Fourth Amendment warrant standards, certainly come close. Attorney General Ashcroft has announced that he intends to use FISA to sharply increase the number of domestic wiretaps. EPIC and its coalition partners are considering a number of options in the wake of the appellate decision, including a potential request for the Supreme Court to review the decision, and urging Congress to amend FISA to reflect the opinion of the lower court that the Justice Department is not authorized to use FISA's looser surveillance standards in ordinary criminal cases. The FISC Review Court is a special three-judge panel appointed by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist in accordance with provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The judges are: Hon. Laurence H. Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; Hon. Edward Leavy, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Hon. Ralph B. Guy, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. All three judges were appointed by President Ronald Reagan. The Court of Review's ruling is available at: http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/newsroom/02-001.pdf The civil liberties amicus brief is available at: http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/fisa/FISCR_amicus_brief.pdf Background information on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, including information on the current controversy, the government's brief and the FISC's May 2002 Memorandum Opinion and Order, is available at: http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/fisa/ ======================================================================= [3] Homeland Security Bill Limits Open Government ======================================================================= The Senate is likely to approve a measure to create a cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security today or tomorrow. The legislation creating the department contains a number of provisions that will enhance government surveillance powers while limiting public access to government records and advisory committees. Limited privacy protections are included in the bill. Section 225 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 includes the entire text of the Cyber Security Enhancement Act (CSEA), which previously passed the House as a free-standing measure. The CSEA, originally sponsored by Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX), allows service providers to voluntarily provide government agents with access to the contents of customer communications without consent based on a "good faith" belief that an emergency justifies the release. The same section grants law enforcement the power to install pen register and trap and trace devices without a court order where there is an ongoing attack on a "protected computer." Any computer involved in interstate commerce or communications qualifies as a "protected computer." Further, section 225 introduces fines and 20-year prison terms for offenders who recklessly cause or attempt to cause serious bodily injury. Section 891 contains the entire text of the Homeland Security Information Sharing Act (HSISA), another measure that passed the House earlier in the session as H.R. 4598. HSISA will facilitate the sharing of sensitive intelligence information with state and local authorities. Section 891 also allows greater sharing of grand jury information and the content of electronic intercepts with state and local authorities. Title II of the bill broadly exempts "critical infrastructure information" (CII) voluntarily submitted to the Department of Homeland Security from the Freedom of Information Act. CII is information that relates to the operation of systems such as the national power grid and telecommunications networks. Once disclosed to the government, CII could not be used against the company in civil litigation, and government agents who disclose the information would be subject to criminal penalties and fines. Section 871 allows the Department to form advisory committees with industry representatives that are exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), an open government law. FACA promotes openness and accountability through requiring the recording of minutes, notice of meetings, procedures for holding open meetings, limits on special interests, and balance of viewpoints. Limited privacy protections were included in the bill. Section 222 creates a privacy officer for the department charged with the responsibility of compliance with the Privacy Act, with formulating privacy impact assessments for rules proposed by the Department, and with preparing an annual report to Congress. Section 770 prohibits all federal agencies from implementing the Terrorism Information and Prevention System (TIPS). Section 815 prohibits the new Department from developing a national identification system or card. H.R. 5710, The Homeland Security Act: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:h.r.05710: EPIC's February 26, 2002 Letter to the House Judiciary Committee, regarding the CSEA: http://www.epic.org/security/infowar/csea.html EPIC's Critical Infrastructure Information Page: http://www.epic.org/security/infowar/resources.html EPIC's Open Government Page: http://www.epic.org/open_gov/ ======================================================================= [4] Circuit Court Approves Faxed Warrants ======================================================================= The Eighth Circuit ruled this week that service of a warrant on an ISP by fax complies with the "reasonableness" requirements of the Fourth Amendment. The case was one of the first to address the issue of how the Fourth Amendment applies to the protection of stored e-mail and other files held by Internet Service Providers (ISPs). The case arose after Yahoo! was "served" with a search warrant by fax, a procedure that EPIC argues does not adequately safeguard the Fourth Amendment guarantee of a "reasonable" search. The defendant had argued before the district court that the law enforcement practice of faxing the warrant to the ISP and having the ISP execute the warrant violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The district court agreed, holding that the Fourth Amendment requires the government to be physically present at the ISP during the execution of a search warrant. EPIC filed an amicus brief in the Eight Circuit detailing that the history of U.S. search and seizure law has mandated officer presence at the site of the service of a warrant since the 1700s (see EPIC Alert 9.15). The court resolved the case on the narrow ground that the government's actions were "reasonable," without deciding the broader issue of whether an Internet user has a Fourth Amendment expectation of privacy in their e-mail. The Eighth Circuit's Opinion is available at: http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/11/021238P.pdf For more information on the case, see EPIC's Bach Page: http://www.epic.org/privacy/bach/ Recordings of the oral arguments and other files are available through the Web site of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit: http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/tmp/021238.html ======================================================================= [5] DC City Council Attacks Camera System, Adopts Regulations ======================================================================= In an unexpectedly tight 7 to 6 vote on November 8, the DC City Council approved regulations governing the use of surveillance cameras by the Metropolitan Police Department (see EPIC Alert 9.20). Council members took the opportunity to lambast the police department for setting up the surveillance camera network without seeking prior approval from the City Council. Several members voiced their opposition to the "Orwellian potential" of the cameras and signaled their intention to kill the surveillance program altogether. Council member Jim Graham said, "These cameras have been set up to deal with demonstrations and dissent. This will have a chilling effect and discourage citizens from demonstrating openly here in the capital of the United States of America." Council member Sandy Allen, who held the swing vote, took particular care to note that her vote should not be seen as endorsing a surveillance network. Council member Kathy Patterson is drafting permanent legislation to regulate the cameras and has proposed pilot programs to test the effectiveness of neighborhood surveillance cameras. There is a hearing scheduled for December 12, at which EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg is expected to testify. Other council members might introduce legislation in the coming months to remove the surveillance camera network. Council member Adrian Fenty said at the hearing, "At first I thought Washington, because it's prone to more terrorist attacks, would be a place where visitors would want cameras, but I agree now with my colleagues who say Washington should be a beacon of freedom." EPIC Alert readers, Washington residents, and other interested parties can participate in the public debate over the proposed legislation by continuing to send comments to Council members, either by e-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or by postal mail to: Ms. Phyllis Jones, Secretary to the Council, Suite 5, John A. Wilson Building, 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20004. EPIC's Video Surveillance Page: http://www.epic.org/privacy/surveillance/ Observing Surveillance: http://www.observingsurveillance.org/ National Capital Area ACLU Web site: http://aclu-nca.org/ ======================================================================= [6] California Passes Database Privacy Legislation ======================================================================= A new law in California requires state agencies and businesses that own databases to disclose security breaches involving certain personal information. The bill comes in response to an April 2002 incident in which the records of over 200,000 state employees were accessed by a computer cracker. The California legislation exceeds federal protections, as there is no national requirement for notice to individuals when personal information is accessed without authorization. Senate Bill 1386, sponsored by Senator Steve Peace (D-El Cajon), creates a notice requirement where there has been an unauthorized acquisition of an individual's name along with a Social Security Number, a driver's license number, or an account number and corresponding access code. The notice requirement is also triggered when there is a reasonable belief that a security breach occurred. Notice must be given "in the most expedient time," but may be delayed where it would impede a criminal investigation. The law requires notice to be given to individuals in writing or electronically, in accordance with federal e-signature law. If the cost of notice were to exceed $250,000, or where over 500,000 people were affected by the security breach, notice could be delivered through a combination of e-mail, a conspicuous posting on the agency or company Web site, and notification of statewide media outlets. Agencies and companies could also create information security policies in advance of security breaches to address the notice requirement. The law does not apply to non-computerized files, such as personal data stored on paper. Also, only California residents enjoy the law's protections. Californians can bring civil actions for damages and injunctive relief against entities that fail to comply with the law. The law takes effect on July 1, 2003. Senator Peace has been a longtime state leader on privacy. As early as 1996, he attempted to pass a comprehensive information privacy bill in California. Senate Bill 1386: http://www.epic.org/redirect/sb1386.html ======================================================================= [7] EPIC Bookstore - Data Protection Law ======================================================================= Data Protection Law: Approaching its Rationale, Logic and Limits, by Lee A. Bygrave. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/powells/redirect/alert923.html The field of data protection has evolved rapidly in the last ten years, leading to a wide array of laws and regulations around the world. These laws and regulations, although generally guided by the same fundamental principles established by international and European data protection conventions, adopt diverse solutions that denote confusion and incoherence when compared to each other. Lee A. Bygrave¹s book, "Data Protection Law: Approaching its Rationale, Logic and Limits," helps to get the big picture of some of the most important principles that are embodied in the various data protection rules existing in Europe. Bygrave takes on the ambitious task of confronting several issues that the academic world has had trouble coming to terms with, one of which is trying to bridge the concepts of data protection and privacy. "Data Protection Law" is organized into three parts, each analyzing the rationale, logic and limits of data protection laws. In doing so, it describes the origins, aims and purposes of data protection laws, sets out their basic regulatory mechanisms, and attempts to point out where those laws differ from other types of laws -- and to what extent their regulatory mechanisms may be ineffective. In the first section, Bygrave explains the kinds of interests and values that data protection laws promote; he then details the extent to which the processing of information on private collective entities should be regulated by these laws. In the final section, he proceeds to explain the ability of these laws to control profiling practices. The book's principal interest resides in the main thesis that Bygrave tries to convey. An analysis of data protection regulations' rationale, logic and limits has to take into account what the author calls the "electronic interpenetration" of previously distinct spheres of activity. Greater dissemination of information across traditional organizational boundaries has made it more difficult to draft, implement and interpret data protection rules. Bygrave's aim is to provide privacy experts, lawyers and policymakers with a clearer picture of the shift that occurred from different levels of the data protection regulatory framework: from the individual to the collective and systemic, from the national to the inter- and supranational, and from the intra-organizational to the inter-organizational levels. This book will be helpful for privacy scholars, regulators, policymakers, lawyers, and generally anyone who is interested in comparative privacy issues. - Cédric Laurant EPIC maintains a Web page on the issue of data retention at: http://www.epic.org/privacy/intl/data_retention.html ================================ EPIC Publications: "The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2002: United States Law, International Law, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2002). Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2002/ The "Physicians Desk Reference of the privacy world." An invaluable resource for students, attorneys, researchers and journalists who need an up-to-date collection of U.S. and International privacy law, as well as a comprehensive listing of privacy resources. ================================ "FOIA 2002: Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws," Harry Hammitt, David Sobel and Mark Zaid, editors (EPIC 2002). Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/foia2002/ This is the standard reference work covering all aspects of the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Government in the Sunshine Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The 21st edition fully updates the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchers have relied on for more than 25 years. For those who litigate open government cases (or need to learn how to litigate them), this is an essential reference manual. ================================ "Privacy & Human Rights 2002: An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Developments" (EPIC 2002). Price: $25. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/phr2002/ This survey, by EPIC and Privacy International, reviews the state of privacy in over fifty countries around the world. The survey examines a wide range of privacy issues including data protection, telephone tapping, genetic databases, video surveillance, location tracking, ID systems and freedom of information laws. ================================ "Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/filters2.0/ A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering threatens free expression. ================================ "The Consumer Law Sourcebook 2000: Electronic Commerce and the Global Economy," Sarah Andrews, editor (EPIC 2000). Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/cls/ The Consumer Law Sourcebook provides a basic set of materials for consumers, policy makers, practitioners and researchers who are interested in the emerging field of electronic commerce. The focus is on framework legislation that articulates basic rights for consumers and the basic responsibilities for businesses in the online economy. ================================ "Cryptography and Liberty 2000: An International Survey of Encryption Policy," Wayne Madsen and David Banisar, authors (EPIC 2000). Price: $20. http://www.epic.org/crypto&/ EPIC's third survey of encryption policies around the world. The results indicate that the efforts to reduce export controls on strong encryption products have largely succeeded, although several governments are gaining new powers to combat the perceived threats of encryption to law enforcement. ================================ EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free expression, crypto and governance can be ordered at: EPIC Bookstore http://www.epic.org/bookstore/ "EPIC Bookshelf" at Powell's Books http://www.powells.com/features/epic/epic.html ======================================================================= [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events ======================================================================= Ninth ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS). Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Special Interest Group on Security, Audit, and Control (SIGSAC). November 18-22, 2002. Washington, DC. For more information: http://www.acm.org/sigs/sigsac/ccs/ The New Gatekeepers: A Conference on Free Expression in the Arts. Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and National Arts Journalism Program. November 20-21, 2002. New York, NY. For more information: http://www.najp.org/conferences/gatekeepers/panels.htm eSafe Programme 2003-2004 -- Hearing on Options & Requirements. European Commission. November 27-28, 2002. Kirchberg, Luxembourg. For more information: http://www.saferinternet.org/news/esafe.asp International Conference: Privacy: Cost to Resource. Safeguards for Citizens, Opportunities for Businesses: Advantages of a Privacy-Oriented Market. Garante per la Protezione dei Dati Personali (Italian Data Protection Commission). December 5-6, 2002. Rome, Italy. For more information: http://www.garanteprivacy.it/ Transformations in Politics, Culture and Society. Inter- Disciplinary.Net. December 6-8, 2002. Brussels, Belgium. For more information: http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/tpcs1.htm 18th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference (ACSAC): Practical Solutions to Real Security Problems. Applied Computer Security Associates. December 9-13, 2002. Las Vegas, NV. For more information: http://www.acsac.org/ Call for Proposals: December 13, 2002. O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference. April 22-25, 2003. Santa Clara, CA. For more information: http://conferences.oreilly.com/etcon/ Government Convention on Emerging Technologies. Defending America Together: The New Era. Government Emerging Technology Alliance (GETA). January 8-10, 2003. Las Vegas, NV. For more information: http://federalevents.com/govcon/ O'Reilly Bioinformatics Technology Conference. February 3-6, 2003. San Diego, CA. For more information: http://conferences.oreilly.com/macosxcon/ Third Annual Privacy Summit. International Association of Privacy Officers. February 26-28, 2003. Washington, DC. For more information: http://www.privacyassociation.org/html/conferences.html P&AB's Privacy Practitioners' Workshop and Ninth Annual National Conference. Privacy & American Business. March 12-14, 2002. Washington, DC. For more information: http://www.pandab.org/postcard.pdf CFP2003: 13th Annual Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). April 1-4, 2003. New York, NY. For more information: http://www.cfp2003.org/ O'Reilly Open Source Convention. July 7-11, 2003. Portland, OR. For more information: http://conferences.oreilly.com/oscon/ ======================================================================= Subscription Information ======================================================================= Subscribe/unsubscribe via Web interface: http://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/epic_news Subscribe/unsubscribe via email: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" (no quotes) Help with subscribing/unsubscribing: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: "help" (no quotes) Back issues are available at: http://www.epic.org/alert/ The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier. ======================================================================= Privacy Policy ======================================================================= The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to send notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share our mailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal process seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (link to other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name. In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your email address from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription information". Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you would like to change your subscription email address, if you are experiencing subscription/unsubscription problems, or if you have any other questions. ======================================================================= About EPIC ======================================================================= The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest research center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conducts policy research. For more information, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.epic.org or write EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202 483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax). If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, contributions are welcome and fully tax-deductible. Checks should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. Or you can contribute online at: http://www.epic.org/donate/ ======================================================================= Drink coffee, support civil liberties, get a tax deduction, and learn Latin at the same time! Receive a free epic.org "sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" coffee mug with donation of $75 or more. ======================================================================= Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the right of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of encryption and expanding wiretapping powers. Thank you for your support. ---------------------- END EPIC Alert 9.23 ----------------------- . IWS INFOCON Mailing List @ IWS - The Information Warfare Site http://www.iwar.org.uk