Computer underground Digest Wed Aug 24, 2020 Volume 6 : Issue 76 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET) Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Copylate Editor: John Holmes Shrudlu CONTENTS, #6.76 (Wed, Aug 24, 2020) File 1--ACTION ALERT! PTO Commission Lehman's Intell. Property report File 2--Good, bad, ugly, confused, and wary File 3--EFF - "This bill will pass" - Telecom reg - WATCH OUT ISPs! File 4--Congressional Committee on the Net (fwd) File 5-- Clinton's Crime Bill - new threat to Sysops? (fwd) File 6--EPIC Statement on FBI Wiretap Bill File 7--Updates on 12-ICPR, Jerusalem File 8--Fourth International Virus Bulletin Conference File 9--The CuD Header now Appears at the END OF EACH ISSUE File 10--Cu Digest Header Information (unchanged) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2020 15:48:13 -0700 From: Jim Warren Subject: File 1--ACTION ALERT! PTO Commission Lehman's Intell. Property report Hi all -- [blind cc'ed to numerous folks] Just spotted this in Dave Farber's interesting-people msgs. Personally, I think that Lehman and the PTO is permanently-entrenched in offering nothing better than band-aids to protect the past. I think that the *only* chance we have for a more-enlightened approach to freedom versus software monopolies is massive, virulent [articulate] *torching* of our Congress-creatures. (At the least, it will force the monopolists to spend much more loot bribing friendly votes from the representatives they are buying.) Like always, freedom requires vigilence AND action. --jim Jim Warren, columnist for MicroTimes, Government Technology, BoardWatch, etc. -or- 345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax/415-851-2814 ===re=== >From Tue Aug 16 04:56:33 1994 From: (Mahatma Kane-Jeeves) Has anyone here seen the so-called Lehman Panel report? It is available by ftp from, in the directory /pub/nii-ip. It is offered there in several formats. The deadline for comments is September 7th. (Sorry about the short notice, but I've only just recently discovered the report myself.) The Lehman Panel is more officially known as the "Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights", a subcommittee of President Clinton's "Information Infrastructure Task Force". The Lehman Panel report makes a number of recommendations concerning changes to current intellectual property law, in light of challenges presented by the National Information Infrastructure (NII) project. This appears to me to be quite an important report, which could play a major role in shaping vital aspects of our near-future society. I find the whole approach taken by the panel disturbing, though perhaps not surprising. Very briefly, my general concerns are these: There appears to be a natural tension between current intellectual property law and the widespread deployment of computer networking. (John Barlow has put it more simply: "Copyright is dead".) The Lehman panel's report, rather than trying to accomodate and adapt to the inevitable effects of the NII, instead recommends tightening up existing laws, and expanding their scope, in an attempt to preserve the status quo and protect established interests. It seems to me that this approach would dramatically undercut the potential of the NII, making many of its most natural uses and benefits illegal. Worse, I believe this approach would create a body of law which will make speed limits look well-respected by comparison, and any attempt to enforce these laws is likely to be destructive and unpleasant for all of us. There are numerous other, more specific things in this report which make me unhappy, too -- such as the presumption that the NII should be little more than a new marketplace for old businesses; the creation of gratuitous new rights for major record labels which would hurt artists, and would enable the record companies to control the digital audio server industry; and most frightening of all, the shameless suggestion that the public schools should be used to pound these new rules into the heads of children as early as Kindergarten. I've obviously considered firing off a letter of comment myself, but after I calmed down I realized how little impact that would be likely to have. So I decided the most constructive thing I could do would be to post this "alert" here, in the hope that someone with better qualifications and resources than myself might pick up the ball. Thanks for your attention. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Aug 94 09:11 MDT From: chuck@MU.LAW.UTAH.EDU(Charles Perkins) Subject: File 2--Good, bad, ugly, confused, and wary Jerry Leichter knocks down a straw man in his argument that free market concerns (about cryptograpy and the clipper chip) should not take precedence over public interest and safety. He correctly argues that we have regulations for our safety. However, his article assumes that the proposed regulations will safeguard citizens' safety and interests in a manner similar to current automotive and industrial regulations. I do not share this assumption. In fact, I am afraid that these proposals will reduce my safety and compromise my own interests. I am not concerned about the ethical use of the powers of observation that would be created by the digital telephony proposals. I AM concerned about the unethical uses. The unethical uses by government officials or criminals (anyone using these avenues without authority but with the technical ability and illicit knowlege.) I also am concerned about the precedent this would set. I would like to think that I have a right to privacy in my communications with others. ------------------------------ From: karl@MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) Subject: File 3--EFF - "This bill will pass" - Telecom reg - WATCH OUT ISPs! An excerpt from Farber's "interesting people" list: I. Overview During the final hours before the Senate telecommunications bill (S.1822) was marked-up by the Senate Commerce Committee, a provision was added which would expand the current FCC regulation on obscene and indecent audiotext (900 number) services to virtually all electronic information services, including commercial online service providers, the Internet, and BBS operators. This proposal, introduced by Senator Exon, would require all information service providers and all other electronic communication service providers, to take steps to assure that minors do not have access to obscene or indecent material through the services offered by the service provider. ...... II. Summary of Exon Amendment The Exon amendment which is now part of S.1822, expands section 223 of the Communications Act to cover anyone who "makes, transmits, or otherwise makes available" obscene or indecent communication. It makes no distinction between those entities which transmit the communications from those which create, process, or use the communication. This section of the Communications Act was originally intended to criminalize harassment accomplished over interstate telephone lines, and to require telephone companies that offer indecent 900 number services to prevent minors from having access to such services. The 900 number portions are know as the Helms Amendments, having been championed by Senator Jesse Helms. These sections have been the subject of extension constitutional litigation. If enacted into law, these amendments would require that anyone who ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "makes, transmits, or otherwise makes available" indecent communication ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ take prescribed steps to assure that minors are prevented from having ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ access to these communications. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ If I remember correctly the EFF was quite sure that a bill of this kind was going to pass, so they rolled over and said "ok" to the one offered. Now look where it is going to get all of us. You want to know how to destroy what we have here? Force every provider, every carrier, and every end-node to verify by legally acceptable proof of age each and every person online. Since there is no way to filter newsgroups 100%, you have to accept only those who are legally of age -- or else you filter every message. There goes the library connections we've been working for, as an example. The libraries THEMSELVES could be held legally liable for permitting a minor to use their terminals if they have Internet access. This bill MUST GO DOWN TO DEFEAT. Flood your congressmen and senators phones RIGHT NOW. DO NOT allow this thing to pass. While you're at it fire the EFF and rip up your membership cards. IMHO they're asleep at the switch or have sold us all out. Take your pick; either is equally bad. Just what DOES the EFF stand for? Or perhaps clearing the playing field of all "small guys" so the telcos, who have been giving you folks operating money, can come in and take over? What's the real agenda here guys? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2020 15:36:20 -0500 (CDT) From: Charles Stanford Subject: File 4--Congressional Committee on the Net (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date--Fri, 12 Aug 2020 15:35:11 +0400 To--Multiple recipients of list SAIS-L Subject--Congressional Committee takes to the Net (long) This is the initial posting from the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the U.S. House of Representatives, chaired by the Honorable George Brown of California. We have agreed to serve as the "beta" testers for House Committees trying to learn how to use the Internet. We posted this message to some of the USENET newsgroups that discuss topics relevant to our jurisdiction over Federal civilian research and development activities to: (1) Increase the number of people who know we do have Internet access; (2) Indicate how we can be reached on the net; and (3) Start learning how to take advantage of this information system in our daily activities. Getting the Congress to use Internet has been discussed in a few threads on various USENET newsgroups of late. Some of you may be familiar with the E-Mail Pilot Project established by the Committee on House Administration, chaired by the Honorable Charlie Rose of North Carolina. Those Members of the House currently maintaining an electronic mailbox for constituent communications may be found by e-mailing "" with the text "HELP" or "INFO" in the message body. You will receive an automated response with the necessary instructions. Also, the text of legislation introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives during the current Congress is now available on a W.A.I.S server located at the House Information Systems data center. The server may be accessed from the directory at or using the following information: Server: diamond Port: 210 Database Name: USHOUSE_house_bill_text_103rd It can also be found on in: Congressional Information/Legislative Resources The database contains the text of House bills beginning with October 1993 and is updated daily. What follows now is the message you will automatically receive in response to messages sent to, the Committee's Internet address. It describes items like the Committee's gopher server, which you can also find at ----------- begin ----------- Welcome to the electronic mailbox system for the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the U.S. House of Representatives. This Internet service is provided for ease of communication with the Members and staff of the Committee. If your message is addressed to a specific Member, it will be printed out in hard copy and forwarded to the Member's office for response by U.S. Mail. If your message is addressed to a staff member of the Committee, it will be forwarded electronically to that staff member for response. Depending on the nature of the response, it might reach you in either electronic or postal form. Messages for the Committee press office will be acknowledged electronically and then followed up on, if necessary, with material by post or fax. You can reach the press office directly via Internet at "". The Committee also maintains a bulletin board on the House of Representatives Internet gopher server at "". Much of the public information material provided by the Committee is available on this gopher system. Much of this information also is available on the Committee's "Straight Talk" voice-response system. Dial 202/225-3018 and follow the menu instructions for a touch-tone telephone. Thank you for contacting the House Science Committee. Please be patient as we experiment with this new way of better serving your communications needs. If you wish to write to the Committee, please direct your correspondence to: Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 2320 Rayburn House Office Building U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 ----------- end ----------- At this time, we suggest you supply both your e-mail and postal addresses in any communication to the Committee. Each office in Congress has its own policy for responding to public inquiries. So, if we forward your e-mail to a particular Member's office, they may choose to respond with a regular letter. Our Committee hopes to increase our use of e-mail in responding to public inquiries. We have chosen the following subset of USENET groups for our initial foray into the alt.california alt.cyberspace alt.dcom.telecom alt.politics.datahighway comp.dcom.telecom sci.agriculture sci.astro sci.chem sci.engr sci.environment sci.geo.geology sci.math sci.misc sci.physics sci.research talk.environment talk.politics.crypto Please feel free to repost this message to other groups that might find the information of value. Your comments on what should be carried by this channel of communications would also be welcomed. --------------- Committee on Science, Space, and Technology U.S. House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 HOUSESST@HR.HOUSE.GOV DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in this posting are those of the sender and do not necessarily reflect those of the Committee, the Chairman or any Member of Congress. ** End of text from cdp:pol.access.usa ** *************************************************************************** This material came from PeaceNet, a non-profit progressive networking service. For more information, send a message to *************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Aug 94 14:38:00 EDT From: "W. K. (Bill) Gorman" <34AEJ7D@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU Subject: File 5-- Clinton's Crime Bill - new threat to Sysops? (fwd) Look at the civil forfeiture provisions buried deep in the Crime Bill. Looks like Sysops will be facing civil forfeiture for their OPINIONS now; the Crime Bill just redefines darn near everything as a TERRORIST ACT. ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Here is a synopsis of the wonderful things hidden in the so-called "Crime Control Act of 1993." Property Forfeiture for Speeches, Writings and Assembly by Ross Regnart The Crime Control Act of 1993 The Crime Control Act of 1993 redefines Illegal Search and Seizure while eliminating an innocent citizen's civil redress in suits against government officials and agents. [Title VII Section 2337] Incorporated: were provisions of proposed S.45 titled "Terrorism Death Penalty Act of 1991" Both bills contained language which can charge law abiding citizens of being agents or affording support to terrorist organizations. Consider: the Proper Forfeiture Effects on organizations and individuals when Speeches, Writings, and Assemblies mentioned in S.45 are combined with the Forfeiture Provisions of Biden's SB 266 now incorporated in The Crime Control Act of 1993: any individual or organization in the United States who had or should have had knowledge that an associate might commit a terrorist act can have their property seized. Written like Federal Drug Forfeiture Laws, a citizen who allowed their home or other real property to be used for an assembly would start out guilty having to prove they did not have knowledge of unlawful methods of the organization or individuals they allowed to use their property. See S.8 Definitions Title VII Section 2332 "Local" C Politically active organizations and labor unions are especially vulnerable to The Crime Control Act of 1993 provisions which define bodily acts as "terrorist acts" A fist fight at a demonstration or picket line would qualify. The physical act need not cause bodily harm as its provisions refer to "involving any violent act". S.8 The Crime Control Act of 1993 Forfeiture Provisions which seem aimed at public dissent are written like RICO laws taking on the added prospect of Political Property Forfeiture. Broadly written intent to commit terrorist acts is defined: "appear to be intended (1) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (2) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion." It would appear that provisions contained in Senator Biden's proposed Senate Bill 266, now included in The Crime Control Act of 1993, target any group of persons which would dare demonstrate for or against any issue. Any picket line which is alleged to have blocked public access could qualify to intimidate or coerce a civilian population. Should violence result for any reason at a public assembly, the Property Forfeiture Provisions of The Crime Control Act of 1993 may be triggered causing forfeiture of attending demonstrators' homes used for meetings and the vehicles they used for transportation to the event. Demonstrators and/or pickets who left messages on a member or organization computer BBS System could cause the forfeiture of the system and all its records. The fact the system operator had no knowledge of any planned violence will Not Prevent Property Forfeiture of organization and member assets. Conspiracy is enough. Under provisions of The Crime Control Act of 1993 Property Forfeiture, Arrest, Huge Fines, and Prison Sentences can result from "activities which appear to be intended toward violence". Distributing political action flyers could qualify. The Crime Control Act of 1993 Terrorist Provisions when first examined are misleading for they give the reader the impression they are after agents of a foreign power wishing to do Americans harm. The "Trojan Horse" in The Crime Control Act of 1993: anyone in the United States committing an undefined violent act or attending an assembly can be charged with terrorism. S.8 Terrorism Forfeiture Provisions Would Be Retroactive Going Back 4 Years. Discovery of Witnesses and Evidence Eliminated If a Defendant under Section 2333 of Title VII terrorist acts and/or conspiracy seeks to discover from the Department of Justice the evidence against him, the attorney for the Government may object on the grounds that compliance will interfere with a criminal investigation or prosecution of the incident, or a national security operation related to the incident, which is the subject of Civil Litigation. Example: Government Civil Forfeiture. Expected: Defense against Government charges may be difficult where citizens have no access to knowing of the alleged evidence against them or the right to cross examine government's secret witnesses. Secret Witnesses - Secret Trials: Protection of jurors and witnesses in Capital Cases Chapter 113B Section 138 states that the list of jurors and witnesses need not be furnished to Capital Offense Defendants should the court find by a preponderance of the evidence that providing the list may jeopardize the life or safety of any person. Title VII Section n2337 The Crime Control Act of 1993 eliminates civil suits against U.S. and Foreign Governments by innocent persons injured resulting from Government Agents in prusuit of terrorist acts. Title VII Section 711: Sentencing Guidelines Increased for Terrorist Crimes The United States Sentencing Commission shall have the power to provide an increase in the base offense level for any felony committed in the United States that involves or is intended to promote international terrorism. Participation by political activists in Lawful Speeches, Writings and Public Assemblies may be used as evidence by Government to show that a political participant was aware of the unlawful methods of the individual or organization they are alleged to have afforded support. One person's violent unlawful act at an assembly may be enough for the Government to allege the assembly Appears To Be Intended Toward Violence or Activities which could Intimidate or Coerce a Civilian Population. Under current drug forfeiture laws: innocent citizens have been implicated by informants who will often testify to anything to mitigate their own arrest. This has resulted in innocent citizens being arrested and killed by drug agents; forfeiture of the property; and financial ruination. Under proposed provisions of The Crime Control Act of 1993 special breaks are afforded informants, even against the death penalty. Government will have no difficulty Creating Informants to cause the incarceration of any citizen considered a threat to one's political agenda. Disproportionate zero tolerance laws have served as precedents for expanding forfeiture: Since 1984, forfeiture laws have been operating on the erroneous contention that property can possess intent to commit crime. Innocent owners can have their property seized prior to trial on mere suspicion, starting out guilty, the owner having to prove they did not have reason to know that their property was being used to facilitate a forfeitable offense. Government need only show the property owner was negligent in making his property available for illegal drug activity to cause its forfeiture. The Forfeiture Scam: tenants arrested on real property when offered a sentencing deal by a prosecutor or immunity from further prosecution, often reply in testimony, "that had the real property owner been vigilant, he or she could have discovered drug activity taking place on their property." Government has used against real property owners in Civil Forfeiture actions the fact that a property owner had reported to police that a tenant was dealing drugs at their property to show an owner had prior knowledge of the activity. Elderly citizens afraid to face machine guns and other threats by drug dealers are especially vulnerable to having their homes and rental property siezed. Elderly property owners, often in bad health, are easy prey for Police Forfeiture Squads. The Crime Control Act of 1993 will allow government to use against its citizens illegally seized evidence. Searches, wiretaps and seizures that result in obtaining evidence from an invalid warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate found to be invalid based on misleading information or reckless disregard of the truth may in many instances override Constitutional 4th Amendment protection against illegal search and seizure. S.8 The Crime Control Act of 1993 amends the "Exclusionary Rule" to add Section 3509 Admissibility of Evidence Obtained By Search or Seizure (a) Evidence Obtained By Objectively Reasonable Search or Seizure (b) Evidence Not Excludable By Statute or Rule: sets the groundwork for Government Forfeiture Squads to at random invade innocent owners' homes and businesses with a minimum of probable cause. Government need only assert that "a search and seizure was carried out in circumstances justifying an objectively reasonable belief that it was in conformity with the Fourth Amendment." Informants: Now being paid by government 25% of net proceeds realized from Forfeited Assets in drug related seizures could earn similar amounts causing forfeiture of citizens homes they allege to have been used by an owner for discussion of attending assemblies which the informant believed "appeared to be intended toward violence or to intimidate or coerce a civilian population." The Crime Control Act of 1993 Informants and law enforcement agencies addressing prevention of terrorist acts are to be funded by Forfeiture and Fines collected from terrorists and/or persons alleged to have afforded terrorists material support. Will Citizens Exercising Their Constitutional Right To Free Expression And Association Be Targeted By Government Agents Who Know Their Jobs Are Dependent ON Property Seizures, Fines and Arrests? >From "Property Forfeiture for Speeches, Writings and Assembly," by Ross Regnart, in the May, 1993 _Asset_Guardian_ newsletter (POBox 513, Franklin, NJ 07416, 1-201-827-0513). Informational posting of this article is allowed as long as credit is given to _Asset_Guardian_. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2020 16:42:34 +0000 From: Dave Banisar Subject: File 6--EPIC Statement on FBI Wiretap Bill *DISTRIBUTE WIDELY* EPIC Statement on Digital Telephony Wiretap Bill The digital telephony bill recently introduced in Congress is the culmination of a process that began more than two years ago, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation first sought legislation to ensure its ability to conduct electronic surveillance through mandated design changes in the nation's information infrastructure. We have monitored that process closely and have scrutinized the FBI's claims that remedial legislation is necessary. We have sponsored conferences at which the need for legislation was debated with the participation of the law enforcement community, the telecommunications industry and privacy advocates. We have sought the disclosure of all relevant information through a series of requests under the Freedom of Information Act. Having thus examined the issue, EPIC remains unconvinced of the necessity or advisability of the pending bill. As a threshold matter, we do not believe that a compelling case has been made that new communications technologies hamper the ability of law enforcement agencies to execute court orders for electronic surveillance. For more than two years, we have sought the public disclosure of any FBI records that might document such a problem. To date, no such documentation has been released. Without public scrutiny of factual information on the nature and extent of the alleged technological impediments to surveillance, the FBI's claims remain anecdotal and speculative. Indeed, the telecommunications industry has consistently maintained that it is unaware of any instances in which a communications carrier has been unable to comply with law enforcement's requirements. Under these circumstances, the nation should not embark upon a costly and potentially dangerous re-design of its telecommunications network solely to protect the viability of fewer than 1000 annual surveillances against wholly speculative impediments. We also believe that the proposed legislation would establish a dangerous precedent for the future. While the FBI claims that the legislation would not enhance its surveillance powers beyond those contained in existing law, the pending bill represents a fundamental change in the law's approach to electronic surveillance and police powers generally. The legislation would, for the first time, mandate that our means of communications must be designed to facilitate government interception. While we as a society have always recognized law enforcement's need to obtain investigative information upon presentation of a judicial warrant, we have never accepted the notion that the success of such a search must be guaranteed. By mandating the success of police searches through the re-design of the telephone network, the proposed legislation breaks troubling new ground. The principle underlying the bill could easily be applied to all emerging information technologies and be incorporated into the design of the National Information Infrastructure. It could also lead to the prohibition of encryption techniques other than government-designed "key escrow" or "Clipper" type systems. In short, EPIC believes that the proposed digital telephony bill raises substantial civil liberties and privacy concerns. The present need for the legislation has not been established and its future implications are frightening. We therefore call upon all concerned individuals and organizations to express their views on the legislation to their Congressional representatives. We also urge you to contact Rep. Jack Brooks, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, to share your opinions: Rep. Jack Brooks Chair, House Judiciary Committee 2138 Rayburn House Office Bldg. Washington, DC 20515 (202) 225-3951 (voice) (202) 225-1958 (fax) The bill number is H.R. 4922 in the House and S. 2375 in the Senate. It can be referred to as the "FBI Wiretap Bill" in correspondence. Electronic Privacy Information Center 666 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E. Suite 301 Washington, DC 20003 (202) 544-9240 (voice) (202) 547-5482 (fax) EPIC is a project of the Fund for Constitutional Government and Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. ======================================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2020 14:04:09 +0300 From: Shmuel Peleg Subject: File 7--Updates on 12-ICPR, Jerusalem ***** Updates ***** 12th ICPR : INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PATTERN RECOGNITION 9-13 October 2020 Renaissance Hotel, Jerusalem, Israel ***** Advance Registration Deadline: 9 August 2020 ***** ***** Authors: Camera ready due August 8 at the IEEE Computer Society ***** =================================================================== 1. Get full updated information by sending E-Mail to 2. A network of 15 Silicon Graphics computers and 10 NCD X-terminals, with a high-speed Internet link, will be available. Bring your Demonstrations!! You could also telnet to your own computer, of course, and read E-Mail. 3. On-Line information about Jerusalem can be obtained by telnet into "", login as www, and then select "[1] Line Mode Interface" followed by "[3] Databases in Israel" and "[13] The Jerusalem Mosaic". Dont worry if you get some funny symbols. If you have Mosaic you can select: 4. The Banquet will be a Bedouine feast, combined with a special sight-and-sound show, at the foot of Massada. An unfogettable experience! During the banquet, the following announcements will be made: * IAPR Announcement: New IAPR Executive Committee, Venue for 14-ICPR * Nomination of IAPR Fellows * Best Industry-Related Paper Award * Best-Paper-Award by the journal "Pattern Recognition" 5. The opening session of the conference will be on Monday, 10 Aug, 08:30 AM: 8:30 Welcome Address: J. Aggarwal, President of IAPR 8:40 Presentation of the K.S. Fu Award 8:45 Address by the winner of the K.S. Fu Award 9:15 Welcome Address: 12-ICPR Conference Chairmen 9:30 Plenary Talk: Avnir, D. - Hebrew University - THE PATTERNED NATURE 10:00 Coffee Break 10:30 Start of 4 Parallel Sessions 6. Master Card is now also accepted for registration payments. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2020 09:32:20 +0100 From: virusbtn@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: File 8--Fourth International Virus Bulletin Conference In light of the last conference announcements, I thought that some readers may find the following short chunk of information useful: Virus Bulletin Conference 1994. The Fourth International Virus Bulletin Conference will be held at the Hotel de France, Jersey, UK, on 8th and 9th September 1994. Speakers at the conference include Vesselin Bontchev, Sara Gordon, Alan Solomon, Joe Wells... Delegates at VB '94 will gain an insight into virus prevalence on a range of platforms and discuss technical and management concerns with internationally acknowledged experts. The conference registration fee is UK#595, and includes admission to all sessions, admission to the exhibition, a copy of the conference proceedings, lunch and mid-session refreshment on both dyas, welcome reception and dinner on Wednesday 7th September, the coference reception and Black Tie Gala Dinner on Thursday 8th September. Anybody requiring further information should Email or fax Petra Duffield on (UK) 01235 559935 (International) +44 1235 559935. Regards, Richard Ford Editor, Virus Bulletin. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2020 19:21:33 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 9--The CuD Header now Appears at the END OF EACH ISSUE We receive periodic complaints from readers that they dislike scrolling through the 60 lines of CuD (or any digest) header at the beginning of a file. Their reasons: 1) Some digest-reading software excludes the Administrivia information, so readers don't know what a CuD is or where to contact editors. 2) Some readers who are interested only in a single article or two must scroll through a long header that repeats each issue. 3) Some readers store CuDs as individual files, and they would prefer the header as a separate file. So, beginning with this issue, we will expermiment with placing the header information as a separate, concluding file that will generally remain the same each issue. If it causes problems, let us know. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 22:51:01 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 10--Cu Digest Header Information (unchanged) Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are available at no cost electronically. CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: Or, to subscribe, send a one-line message: SUB CUDIGEST your name Send it to LISTSERV@UIUCVMD.BITNET or LISTSERV@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302) or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA. Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;" On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG; on RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet); and on Rune Stone BBS (IIRGWHQ) (203) 832-8441. CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome. EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893; In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493 In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: + (ringdown) UNITED STATES: ( in /pub/CuD/ ( in /pub/Publications/CuD ( in /pub/eff/cud/ in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ EUROPE: in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland) in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom) JAPAN: /mirror/ 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 #6.76 ************************************