huridocs-tech GILC Alert - April 1999

=======================================================================
Global Internet Liberty Campaign News Alert               15 April 1999

[1]  ENFOPOL Threatens Internet Privacy in Europe
[2]  Censored Internet Access in Utah Public Schools and Libraries
[3]  Internet Regulation in Bulgaria Threatens ISPs with License
     Requirements
[4]  Electronic Frontiers Australia Appoints Cassidy as New Executive
     Director
[5]  Egypt: Seminar Discusses Freedom of Expression and National
     Security Concerns in the Information Age
[6]  SORM-2 in Russia Threatens Privacy, Anti-SORM Movement is yet to
     Galvanize
[7]  IRIS Responds to French Court Decision Making ISP Liable
[8]  GILC Members’ Statement Resists Australian Internet Censorship
[9]  Appearance of Patches to Disable Intel's PSN Feature
[10] Rights body criticizes attempts to control Internet (Africa)
[11] About the Global Internet Liberty Campaign

=======================================================================
[1] ENFOPOL threatens Internet Privacy in Europe
=======================================================================
Enforcement Police (ENFOPOL) is the draft of a resolution for the Council of
the European Union, reports Telepolis, a German online technology magazine.
It extends the resolution of the Council from January 17, 1995 on new
technologies,such as satellite communication and the Internet.  The 1995
resolution detailed technical requirements that had to be fulfilled to
enable interception of telecommunications messages in cases where member
states work together. The resolution of 1995, the genesis of Enfopol,  is
available online at

     <http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/lif/dat/en_496Y1104_01.html>

Enfopol surveillance plans to target any form of telecommunications
including encrypted or non encrypted data, mobile telephony or
communications over the new Iridium system and other satellite mobile phone
services that may follow.  Network operators not only have to provide
appropriate interfaces but also enable interception in the shortest possible
time.  These plans would be put into place by Justice and Home Affairs
(JHA), the organization within the European Council responsible for
coordinating police, customs, and justice activities of the EU’s 15 member
states.

"People still don't understand the technical aspects [of surveillance],"
said Erich Moechel, of quintessenz, GILC member and editor of Telepolis, and
who has authored some of the articles on Enfopol.  "They still think
cellular phones are anonymous and they can't imagine what people would even
do with their data."  See Info World Electric story at

    <http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990310.wimonitor.htm>

GILC member Förderverein Informationstechnik und Gesellschaft (FITUG)
states in its press release that Enfopol increases the necessity of a public
discussion for several reasons.  For instance, the draft excludes the
question of the costs for such measures; yet as demonstrated through
discussions about the TKÜV in Germany last year, neither service providers
nor the state can finance such measures.

Various European countries show tendencies to refrain from a regulation of
cryptography. Enfopol opposes them with the frank demand for the provision

of plain text.  Enfopol opens a backdoor for attempts to restrict the use of
cryptographic methods.  The consequences of such interception machinery for
the privacy of citizens and data protection are disregarded as well.  FITUG
asks the European Council to defer the Enfopol plans, make the draft
including technical details public and set going a Europewide discussion of
the scheme.  For more information on FITUG (German): <http://www.fitug.de/>

If Enfopol becomes legal reality, police forces will get any surveillance
power they wish.  "The danger here is that the EU is mixing police issues
with secret service issues," says GILC member Erich Moechel.  According to
the language of the Enfopol documents, the interception of messages would be
allowed for any "legally empowered authority," which he said could mean
secret service employees as well as police.  Citing the internal memos
published by Telepolis, Moechel suggests that Enfopol is even targeting the
central terrestrial masterstation of the Iridium network in Italy as a main
spot from which to monitor telecommunications traffic. (see Info World
Electric story)

Privacy advocates in Germany have created a Web site called Freedomforlinks
to protest Enfopol.  Web site's sponsors asked concerned citizens to send
e-mails to the European Union's Ombudsman, Jacob Sodermann, demanding that
the Enfopol issue be clarified.  Sodermann responded stating that he is not
responsible for the matter and directed the thousands who sent him e-mails
to the European Parliament in Luxembourg.  See protest site at
<http://www.freedomforlinks.de/Pages/protest.html>

Various other protest and discussion sites are now running regarding
Enfopol.  These include:
<http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990310.wimonitor.htm>
<http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9903103monit>
ENFOPOL timeline 91-99
<http://www.heise.de/tp/english/special/enfo/6382/1.html>
Discussion site
<http://www.a-site.at/Staat/enfopol-forum.htm>

=======================================================================
[2] Censored Internet Access in Utah Public Schools and Libraries
=======================================================================
The Censorware Project recently released a report, "Censored Internet
Access in Utah Schools and Libraries" that examines the state of Utah's use
of a commercial Internet censoring product in all Utah public schools and
some public libraries, as recorded in the log files generated by the
software itself. The Censorware Report is available online at
<http://censorware.org/reports/utah/>

The report states that the Utah Education Network (UEN) is an agency of the
Utah state government charged with providing telecommunications services,
including internet access, to public schools and libraries in the state.
UEN uses a commercial software package to censor the internet access of all
of the 40 school districts and at least 8 of the 70 library districts in
Utah.

Results of this censoring were examined and revealed that many users were
banned from accessing sites useful for educational purposes.  Among the
documents banned by Utah are the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the
Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, all of
Shakespeare's plays, and The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes. Banned accesses
made up less than 1% of overall accesses, most of which were banner ads
presumed (by the software) to be sexually explicit.  The report concludes
that the stated problem of minor accessing sexually explicit material is
considerably less than some organizations would have the public and the
Congress believe.

The Salt Lake Tribune has a front-page story on this subject at
<http://www.sltrib.com/> Press release at
<http://censorware.org/press/press_03-23-99.html>

=======================================================================
[3] Internet Regulation in Bulgaria threatens ISPs with License
Requirements
=======================================================================
The Internet Society of Bulgaria <http://www.isoc.bg/kpd/> is struggling
against a decree accepted by the Bulgarian Committee for Post and
Telecommunications <http://www.cpt.bg/>, under which Internet Service
Providers would be licensed by the state.

In its claim motion, the Internet Society of Bulgaria opposes Subsections 4,
9 and 11 of Title II of Decree RD 09-235/1998 by the head of the Posts and
Telecommunications Committee (6 Gourko str., Sofia 1000), published in the
State Gazette, issue 154/12. 28.. 1998.  In their motion, the Internet
society of Bulgaria asks the Supreme Administrative Court to repeal the
decrees.  The motion is available online at
<http://www.isoc.bg/kpd/index-eng.htm>

The motion claims that the decree contradicts various laws including
provisions of the Telecommunications Act, the Constitution of the Republic
of Bulgaria, and the European Convention on Human Rights. (See motion for
details on violations)  For example, the decree violates the procedures for
issuance, which require a discussion about any promulgation of any decree.

In addition, it also violates the directives, recommendations, and
principles of the European Union in the field of telecommunications.
Although these are not binding on domestic legislation, they are the basis
for the creation of the European Internet legislation.  The principles of
the European Union in the field of telecommunications published in the
official web server of the European Union
<http://europa.eu.int/pol/infso/info_en.htm> do not provide for regulation
(a general or individual license) of operators providing access to Internet.

Such regulation puts the internet in danger since general access to
Internet in Bulgaria will depend on a permission, or lack of permission, by
a state authority such as the State Telecommunications Commission.  It will
lead to impermissible and broad restrictions on the freedom to access
information.

=======================================================================
[4] Electronic Frontiers Australia Appoints Jon Cassidy as New
Executive Director
=======================================================================
On 23rd March 1999, Internet freedom watchdog Electronic Frontiers Australia
(EFA) announced the appointment of its first Executive Director, Mr. Jon
(Darce) Cassidy of Adelaide.  Mr. Cassidy joined EFA in 1997 and has taken
up his appointment.  He will run the EFA national office from Adelaide.

EFA's Media Release dated 23rd March reports that Mr. Cassidy has a
background in broadcasting and worked for the Australian Broadcast
Corporation (ABC) for over 30 years.  During this time he worked in Sydney,
Canberra, Melbourne and Adelaide on a variety of programs including Four
Corners, This Day Tonight, AM, PM and Background Briefing.  From 1989 to
1997 he was the ABC's manager for South Australia.

He taught Media studies (broadcasting politics) at RMIT on a part time basis
for two years and has long been an advocate of public access to the means of
mass communication.  He was active in the creation of the public
broadcasting sector in Australia and served on the board of station 3CR
between 1976 and 1989, and on the board of 3D Radio (5DDD Adelaide) in
1997-98.

Announcing the appointment, EFA Chair Kimberley Heitman said, "This
is a major step forward for EFA, which has depended entirely on volunteer
board members since its foundation in 1994.  The appointment also comes
at a crucial time in the development of the Internet in Australia.  Recently
the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the
Arts, Senator Alston, announced a draconian censorship proposal that will
strangle the domestic Internet and mark Australia as a repressive nation."

=======================================================================
[5] Egypt: Seminar Discusses Freedom of Expression and National Security
Concerns in the Information Age
=======================================================================
On 15-16 February 1999, the Group for Democratic Development (GDD) held a
seminar entitled "Freedom of Expression and National Security Concerns in
the Information Age".  Some of the main recommendations were drafted in the
final session for the government.

These recommendations include the need for a clear definition of what
constitutes 'National Security' considering the current evolution of
technology, information and communications.  GDD recommended that 'National
Security' should not be so wide as to encroach upon the right of
individuals to disseminate and receive information and an appropriate
balance must be achieved between the need to safeguard legitimate national
security and the equally important need for freedom of expression and
information.

GDD also recommended that  restrictions currently imposed on public freedoms
must be removed in order to allow the people to practice their legitimate
civil liberties.  The participants believed that this would in turn
facilitate the development of a public awareness that would provide a true
protection for national security and identity in the face of any external
threat.  For more information about the Group for Democratic Development, or
to obtain GDD publications, contact, gdd@egyptonline.com

The Egyptian government is trying to hook Nile villages and big city
neighborhoods on to the Internet and reduce subscription costs to make
Internet and information accessible. More information on this is available
online at <http://www.arabia.com/content/tech/3_99/egypt11.shtml>

=======================================================================
[6] SORM-2 in Russia Threatens Privacy, Anti-SORM Movement is yet to
Galvanize
=======================================================================
A Moscow Times March 16 article by Jen Tracy entitled "Who Reads Your
Email?" reports on SORM (System for Operational-Investigative Activities.)
A 1995 regulation called SORM -1 gave the security services the power to
monitor all telecommunications transmissions provided they first obtained a
warrant.  The following is an excerpt of the Moscow Times article.

In August 1998, the FSB and the State Communications Agency, Goskomsvyaz,
drew up an addendum to the SORM regulations called SORM-2.  This would
require all 350 of Russia's Internet service providers to install an
FSB-provided  "black box" monitoring device in their main computers, and to
build a high-speed fiber-optic line from that device to the FSB.  Because
SORM-2 is to be enacted as a regulation and not a law, it will be reviewed
by the Justice Ministry, but will not need the approval of either parliament
or President Boris Yeltsin.

These SORM-2 listening devices would route copies of all Internet traffic to
FSB computers with or without warrant.  In theory, a warrant would be
needed to actually read any of the documentation piling up in the FSB’s
hands.  But in practice, human rights groups say, the FSB is unlikely to
worry about such legal niceties when the information it wants is just a
mouse-click away.  In other words, human rights activists are predicting a
complete loss of Internet privacy for the more than 1 million people in
Russia who use the Internet and for tens of thousands more who use credit
cards or other electronic  banking instruments here.

"This is a police-state practice. (The FSB) should not be alone in its
right to surveillance.  Society should be able to audit the agency in
return. It's a step toward dictatorship," said Anatoly Levenchuk, a
Moscow-based Internet expert.  (See Levenchuk’s web page for more
information on SORM at <http://www.libertarium.ru/eng/sorm/index.html>

In SORM-2 the FSB has come up with its own solution to the expensive
problem of setting up a Russian-style ECHELON system (ECHELON is a system of
communication interceptions owned by the United States’ National Security
Agency) The FSB wants Internet service providers to pay for the installation
and maintenance of the SORM-2 black boxes and dedicated FSB hotlines.  Such
costs would mean huge setbacks for all Internet service providers and in
turn users.

Human-rights activists and Internet service providers face conflicts in
together resisting SORM-2.  Many providers "disdain the fiery talk of the
human rights and privacy rights activists, and instead try to speak
carefully of SORM-2 as a narrow business dispute with the FSB over who will
pay for it" reports the Moscow Times.  "There is no conflict now (over
SORM-2)," said Andrei Sibrant, director of Moscow's Glasnet. "When the FSB
comes to me with specific documents detailing what technology I need to
install and how much I will have to pay for it, then there will be a massive
conflict..."

Levenchuk, the Internet analyst has long been trying to organize a movement
against SORM but due to lack of sufficient provider interest, it hasn’t been
very successful. Prygov who works with Levenchul has set up an anti-SORM
website at (www.antisorm.df.ru.).  The fear of financial detriment and the
alleged futility of opposing the FSB are some of the reasons why the
movement has not gained Internet service provider interest.  "We refused to
give [the FSB] information, but they're professional," said Sorokin of
Peterlink. "They threaten to revoke our operating license. We want to
protect our clients' rights - but we also have to protect our business."

Boris Pustintsev of Citizen’s Watch is pessimistic about an anti-SORM
movement among providers, but expresses some hope for it if half the
providers and human rights activists could unite.  "We will broadcast (news
of the battle) throughout the world.  The FSB can't close them all down.
That would be a scandal of international proportion and Russia can't have
that right now," Pustintsev added.

Citizens' Watch has set a self-imposed deadline of June to draft proposals,
to be read in the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, on creating a
system of checks and balances on SORM-2.  One such proposal described by
Vdovin would involve giving a "key" to the FSB computers receiving
information from SORM-2 black boxes and hotlines to an independent third
party. That key would only be loaned to the FSB when its agents can produce
a court order; the third party would also keep a log of all FSB SORM-2
eavesdropping activity.  But human rights and privacy activists are quick to
add that SORM-2 raises fundamental questions about freedom that can't be
solved with a few laws and clever ideas.

=======================================================================
[7] IRIS responds to French Court Decision Making ISP Liable
=======================================================================
GILC member IRIS released a statement against the Paris Appeal Court
decision, condemning the French Internet Service Provider (ISP) AlternB.  In
this statement IRIS recalls its position in relation to rights and
responsibilities with regards to Internet content.  The statement, in part,
is as follows:

Making an ISP liable for Internet content created by a third party (whether
the ISP has been aware or not of this content), puts this technical
intermediary in the position of a judge and a censor.  However, it should be
noted that the role of the ISPs is limited to automatic transport and
hosting of information written and published by third parties, who should
remain the only responsible for the information they provide.  Such an
assimilation of responsibilities would hurt the Rule of Law.

While current laws are naturally, and without restriction, applicable to the
content provider, the legislator should explicitly recognize that the ISPs
are incapable of estimating the illegal or harmful character of an
information, especially when it is published by a third party.  However, the
justice should have means to identify the authors of publicly available
Internet content.


To be able to do that, there is absolutely no necessity to require each
content provider to put his personal details on his web site (except in the
case of sites offering commercial transactions).  Preserving this from of
anonymity with regards to the public access is in many cases legitimate and
necessary for protecting the content provider and also for ensuring personal
data protection.  IRIS recalls its position with regards to anonymity of
publicly available content: the ISPs have the technical means to identify
the author of a content hosted by them, and can provide these means to the
law authorities if needed.  This applies to AlternB.

The signatories urge all the commentators not to be mislead: this case, and
this debate, is not the only one involving total anonymity. The signatories
call to a large mobilization in support to the French ISP AlternB, and more
generally for the defence of the founding principles of our society, with
respect to the protection of human rights and the public liberties.

Statement in French is at
<http://www.iris.sgdg.org/info-debat/comm-alternb0299.html>
Statement in English is at
<http://www.iris.sgdg.org/info-debat/comm-alternb0299-en.html>
List of signatures is at
<http://www.comite-altern.sgdg.org/sign-alternb.html> and a summary of the
reactions from the government, political parties, deputies and senators, and
trade-unions at
<http://www.comite-altern.sgdg.org/politiques.html>

=======================================================================
[8] GILC Members’ Statement Resists Australian Internet Censorship
=======================================================================
A number of GILC members have issued a statement in response to the
Australian ministry for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts’
announcement of a proposal to introduce draconian measures to block
information on the internet that is rated RC, X or R according to Australian
film and video classification standards.

The statement reports that the Australian Government requires online
service providers to take responsibility to remove RC and X-rated material
from the Internet once they have been notified of its existence.  The regime
also provides for self-regulatory codes of practice for the online service
provider industry, to be overseen by the Australian Broadcasting Authority
(ABA).  These codes of practice must include a commitment by an online
service provider to take all reasonable steps to block access to such
content hosted overseas, once the service provider has been notified of the
existence of the material by the ABA.  Many millions of websites are likely
to be blocked if the proposals are effectively implemented.

GILC members oppose efforts to restrict the free flow of information on the
Internet, as these would place unreasonable burdens on well-established
principles of privacy and free speech.

- GILC members oppose the filtering and blocking regime that has been
announced by the Australian government as it will restrict freedom of
expression and limit access to information. Government-mandated use of
blocking and filtering systems violates basic international human rights
protections.

- These measures will prevent individuals from using the Internet to
exchange information on topics that may be controversial or unpopular by
blocking any domain or page which contains a specific key-word or character
string in the URL, and over-ride self-rating labels provided by content
creators and providers.

-Government mandated blocking and filtering of content is unreasonable
because it does not consider the dynamic nature of the Internet.

- It is unlikely that the government blacklist will cover a substantial
percentage of adult or offensive content, as there are millions of such
locations on the Internet. Tunneling and other technologies that are
available make it relatively easy for informed users to access any website
they wish despite the existence of a filter.

- The proposals will not protect minors on the Internet, as they intend to,
but will prevent lawful access to information by adults. Additionally the
introduction of mandatory adult verification mechanisms poses a threat to
privacy of adults.

Additional links for more information on this are at:
<http://www.gilc.org/>, The Global Internet Liberty
Campaign,
<http://www.dcita.gov.au/nsapi-graphics/?MIval=dca_dispdocID=3648>, media
release by the minister of IT, arts and communications.
<http://www.aba.gov.au/>, Australian Broadcasting Authority
<http://www.oflc.gov.au/>, Australian Office of Film & Literature
Classification
<http://www.epic.org/free_speech/intl/hrw_report_5_96.html>, HRW report,
SILENCING THE NET: The Threat to Freedom of Expression On-line.,
<http://www.glaad.org/glaad/access_denied/index.html>, GLAAD report, Access
Denied: The Impact of Internet Filtering Software on the Lesbian and Gay
Community,
<http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/burning.html>,
ACLU report, Fahrenheit 451.2: Is Cyberspace Burning? How Rating and
Blocking Proposals May Torch Free Speech on the Internet,
<http://www.leeds.ac.uk/law/pgs/yaman/watchmen.htm>, Cyber-Rights &
Cyber-Liberties (UK) Report: Who Watches the Watchmen: Internet Content
Rating Systems, and Privatized Censorship.

=======================================================================
[9] Appearance of patches to Disable Intel's PSN Feature
=======================================================================
Patches to disable Intel's PSN feature' have already begun to appear.  Phil
Karn, a Qualcomm engineer, wrote a patch for Linux, as described below.  The
patch and the explanation can be found at
<http://people.qualcomm.com/karn/code>

Karn is also a long-standing plaintiff in a suit against the US Department
of Commerce, Department of State, and William Reinsch, Undersecretary,
Bureau of Export Administration, Dept. of Commerce.  He is seeking a
declaratory judgment relating to export controls over encryption algorithms,
in book and diskette form.  His latest amended complaint can be found at
<http://people.qualcomm.com/karn/export/amended_complaint.html>

=======================================================================
[10] Rights body criticizes attempts to control Internet in Africa
=======================================================================

Article 19 ("A19"), a London based  human rights NGO expressed its concerns
at the attempts by some African governments to control the use of the
Internet.  Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states
that everyone has the right to freedom of expression and the right to
receive or impart information.  Article 19's website cab be accessed at
<http://www.thebiz.co.uk/article19.htm>

While 51 out of 54 African countries now have Internet access, African
authorities continue to maintain control of the medium at the same time,
says a new A19 report entitled "The Right to Communicate: The Internet in
Africa".

The following is an excerpt from Paul Redfern's report in The Nation,
distributed via Africa News Online at
<http://www.africanews.org/atlarge/stories/19990329_feat10.html>  While
Internet access is largely confined to an educated and affluent elite living
in major cities, around one million Africans use the Internet regularly,
although around three quarters of these are in South Africa, reports
Redfern.  The first official act of Internet censorship came in February
1996 when the Zambian government succeeded in removing a banned edition of
The Post from the newspaper's website by threatening to prosecute the
country's main Internet Service Provider, Zamnet. The Post is available
online at <http://www.zamnet.zm/zamnet/post.arch.20742/post.html>

This Post story contained reports based on leaked documents, which revealed
secret government plans for a referendum on the adoption of a new
constitution.  A presidential decree warned the public that anyone caught
with the banned edition, including the electronic version, would be liable
to prosecution.

A US reader published The Post on his own Internet site enabling interested
readers to access it there.  Hence the governments threats and arrests
seemed futile to some extent as the Post story is accessible.  This
illustrates the difficulty of controlling the Internet.  However governments
have other means of control including charging exorbitant fees for access to
an Internet provider and screening out sites deemed unsuitable.  For
example, Tunisia has screened out Amnesty International’s website.

Article 19's report says that the Internet has proved to be an important
information tool for education purposes and health workers across Africa,
enabling them to have ready access to vital information which might not
otherwise be available or be too expensive.  The report also says the
Internet is changing societies by providing the "ability to publish and
access information in spite of government censorship" and by "empowering
disadvantaged members of society in terms of networking, information-sharing
and even income generation."

A19 says that the Internet is particularly important for journalists and
human rights organizations who need to have access to a reliable and quick
means of communication which was previously not available.

==========================================================
[11] ABOUT THE GILC NEWS ALERT:
==========================================================
The GILC News Alert is the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty

Campaign,an international coalition of organizations working to protect and
enhance online civil liberties and human rights.  Organizations are invited
to join GILC by contacting us at gilc@gilc.org. To alert members about
threats to cyber liberties, please contact members from your country or send
a message to the general GILC address.

To submit information about upcoming events, new activist tools and news
stories, contact:  GILC Coordinator, American Civil Liberties Union 125
Broad Street 17th Floor, New York, New York 10004  USA.  email:
gilc-edit@aclu.org

More information about GILC members and news is available at
<http://www.gilc.org/>. You may re-print or redistribute the GILC NEWS ALERT
freely.  To subscribe to the alert, please send an mail to
gilc-announce@gilc.org with the following message in the body:   subscribe
gilc-announce

========================================================
PUBLICATION OF THIS NEWSLETTER IS MADE POSSIBLE BY A
GRANT FROM THE OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE (OSI)
========================================================



----------------------------------
Send mail for the 'huridocs-tech' list to 'huridocs-tech@hrea.org'.
Mail administrative request to 'majordomo@hrea.org'.
For additional assistance, send mail to: 'owner-huridocs-tech@hrea.org'.
Archives of previous messages posted to the list can be found at:
http://www.human-rights.net/huridocs-tech.