HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lemon@unssun.nevada.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Comp. privacy policies in diff countries? (repost)
Keywords: computers privacy Europe USA rights policy
Date: 28 Jul 92 20:40:31 GMT
Reply-To: lemon@unssun.nevada.edu
Followup-To: alt.privacy
Organization: University of Nevada, Reno

Hi, 
I recently posted something of this nature to comp.org.eff.talk as well.

I am curious about what other countries, especially those in Europe, are
doing about computer privacy W/RE email, files, sysadmins searching files,
and stuff like that.  I know the USA's government and judicial system
seems to be having a hard time deciding what to do in terms of extending
our bill of rights to the electronic medium.  But are other countries' 
governments having the same troubles?  If so, why?  If not, what are they
doing about it (laws, amendments, policies)?  Oh, and for that matter, is
the privacy "thang" considered by computer users in Europe to be _as_
important as it is to users here in the USA?  Or do we in the USA just
tend to hold more stringently to the ideal of privacy?  Does anyone forsee
a problem with the EC and differing thoughts on privacy from within Europe?
Just that I can't recall seeing anything related to this topic come out
of Europe, and it makes me wonder....

Anyhow, if anyone has any insights as to the above, or, i'm sure, can direct
me to a prior-work/FAQ-like-thingy on this subject, much obliged. ;^) 

I'm not only interested in this now, but i think i'm going to do a public
policy paper on it. ;^)  So i really need to find out sources of info for
foreign countries as well as USA, as this paper should be comparative in
nature.  Our library seems a little outdated in this case. :(

John

Ps: Followups to alt.privacy.

      John A. LeMon           "Good my Lord, put your discourse in some frame  
     U. Nevada, Reno              and start not so wildly from my affair."     
  lemon@unssun.nevada.edu                       --Shakespeare              
 "My voice will rise and be heard, even if it kills me (or my mbox)!" -- Me.
From: fuller@athena.cs.uga.edu (James P. H. Fuller)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: California Drivers License
Date: 29 Jul 92 15:15:12 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish) writes:

>What I find offensive is that the DMV is hyping the new
>system on the basis of its advantages to businesses.
>
>Every time a merchant swipes your card through a reader,
>your name, address, age, sex, height, weight, etc. can
>potentially be recorded and asociated with a list of your
>purchases.  The ease with which this can be done makes it
>much more likely that it will be done.  There's nothing to
>keep merchants from doing this now other than the time it
>takes to key in all the information.
>
>Every time you use your license for ID you'll be offering
>information about yourself for market research or other
>uses.

   So OK, don't use the license as ID.  The only time you *have* to show
your license is when a cop pulls you over, and that's almost exclusively
a function of how you drive (I haven't been pulled over in ten years.)
As for having to show your license in stores, pay cash.  People who can't
deal with this small inconvenience are voluntary slaves to the system any-
way and probably won't care about whatever may be encoded on some magstrip.

                                                     -- jf
From: gallaghe@vax.sonoma.edu (Mycal)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: RE: California Drivers Licences
Date: 29 Jul 92 03:02:00 GMT
Organization: Sonoma State University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


These things are also very easy to forge.  the first two layers, the mag card
blank and the photo/info layer are beyond simple if you have access to a color
laser.  The hardest part is the holograph,  but I know 10 guys that can make
these things in there garage.  They have the compleat holo lab set up.

Doesn't seem very secure to me.

also what would it take to rewrite the info on the mag strip?  the guy pulls
you over and gets some other john doe's info. ha that would be funny.

what do you think?

mycal
From: spent@milton.u.washington.edu (Spencer mullen)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: job application
Keywords: jobs
Date: 21 Jul 92 16:49:03 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle


Just how much information do I really absolutely have to reveal on a job
application?  Must I reveal  ALL previous employers if asked to?
From: rpatel@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Rachana D Patel)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: job application
Keywords: jobs
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:37:19 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


WHat about driver's license or social security number?
Do you have to provide each form of identification for all forms
they ask. 
Do places have the right to right down your driver's license number?
And if they do have it what could be the worst scenario?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rachana D. Patel                             rpatel@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
University of Pennsylvania                   Management and Technology Program
From: scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: California Drivers License
Date: 30 Jul 92 17:12:12 GMT
Organization: BASIS International, Ltd., Albuquerque NM USA

In article <1992Jul29.151512.18321@athena.cs.uga.edu> fuller@athena.cs.uga.edu (James P. H. Fuller) writes:
>karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish) writes:
>
>>What I find offensive is that the DMV is hyping the new
>>system on the basis of its advantages to businesses.
>>
>>Every time a merchant swipes your card through a reader,
>>your name, address, age, sex, height, weight, etc. can
>>potentially be recorded and asociated with a list of your
>>purchases.  The ease with which this can be done makes it
>>much more likely that it will be done.  There's nothing to
>>keep merchants from doing this now other than the time it
>>takes to key in all the information.
>>
>>Every time you use your license for ID you'll be offering
>>information about yourself for market research or other
>>uses.
>
>   So OK, don't use the license as ID.  The only time you *have* to show
>your license is when a cop pulls you over, and that's almost exclusively
>a function of how you drive (I haven't been pulled over in ten years.)
>As for having to show your license in stores, pay cash.  People who can't
>deal with this small inconvenience are voluntary slaves to the system any-
>way and probably won't care about whatever may be encoded on some magstrip.

Go out and get a passport.  They are the ultimate legal ID and they
don't tell anybody shit except that you are who you say you are.
There is also a mystique about passports that makes sales clerks
very sober.

-- 
Scott Amspoker                       |    
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM |  Too bad ignorance isn't really
                                     |  bliss.  Then it could be outlawed.
scott@bbx.basis.com                  |
From: paul@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: NIST stumbles on proposal for public key encryption
Date: 27 Jul 92 13:03:48 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

The industry newspaper/magazine "Network World" has an excellent
article about the NIST's Digital Signature Standard (DSS) and the
controversy surrounding it, as opposed to international acceptance of
RSA for both signatures and encryption.

See "Network World", 7/27/92, p. 1, "NIST stumbles on proposal for
public key encryption".
From: vanembur@romulus.rutgers.edu (Bill Van Emburg)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: California Drivers License
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:25:00 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <8eRLlQe00WB6QUcnV=@andrew.cmu.edu> dh4j+@andrew.cmu.edu (David O Hunt) writes:

> Does anyone realize how _scary_ this is?  People have amazingly little
> privacy as it is.  Can you imagine what would happen in any law enforcement
> agency could just call up your signature, fingerprints, credit report, etc?
> 

If I read that article right, and the CA DMV already has the
fingerprint information, then law enforcement agencies already have
access to all this information.  The only difference now is that not
quite as many people will have to be paid to retrieve the info, and
the quality of the data received will be better....
-- 

					-BVE
					(er..that's Bill Van Emburg)
					(vanembur@remus.rutgers.edu)
	"You do what you want, and if you didn't, you don't"
From: dh4j+@andrew.cmu.edu (David O Hunt)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: California Drivers License
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:57:00 GMT
Organization: Masters student, Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

[...article deleted...]

Does anyone realize how _scary_ this is?  People have amazingly little
privacy as it is.  Can you imagine what would happen in any law enforcement
agency could just call up your signature, fingerprints, credit report, etc?

Big Brother, here we come!

David Hunt - Graduate Slave | My mind is my own.          | Towards both a
Mechanical Engineering      | So are my ideas & opinions. | Palestinian and
Carnegie Mellon University  | <<<Use Golden Rule v2.0>>>  | Jewish homeland!
============================================================================
Email:  dh4j@cmu.edu            Working towards my "Piled Higher and Deeper"

Democracy is based on the theory that the people know what they want...and
they deserve to get it - GOOD AND HARD!
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: edp@math.zko.dec.com (Eric Postpischil)
Subject: Re: Junk telephone calls and junk mail
Reply-To: edp@math.zko.dec.com (Eric Postpischil)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:44:29 GMT

In article <kmeyer.04mi@amiganet.chi.il.us>, kmeyer@amiganet.chi.il.us
(Karl Meyer) writes:

>>Private Citizen
>>Box 233
>>Naperville, IL 60566
>>
>>1-800-CUT-JUNK
>>
>>Call or write for forms. $20/year. Worked for me. Highly
>>recommened.
>>
>>#include standard disclaimer
>
>Thanks for the info, but I don't feel I should have to pay anything to keep
>these people from calling me.  I recall a Nova eposode where a guy sent
>letters
>to these phone solicitors informing them that if they called him they
>were
>accepting his offer for the use of his phone for commercial purposes at
>the
>rate of $100 per minute. He has taken a couple of companies to court
>and won
>settlements. For $100 per minute I'd be willing to listen to anyone try
>to sell
>me something.

That's what Private Citizen, Incorporated, does.  They put your name on
a list of names and your number on a list of numbers (separate lists so
telemarketers cannot match up your name with your number) and mail the
lists to telemarketers along with a contract offering "listening
services" for a fee.  PCI sends you instructions on what to do in case
one of the telemarketers does contact you.  PCI isn't some corporation
out to make a profit, it's a guy who's annoyed by telemarketers just
like you and me and is doing something about it.


                                -- edp (Eric Postpischil)
                                "Always mount a scratch monkey."
                                edp@alien.enet.dec.com
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,comp.eff.org,misc.legal,misc.activism.progressive
From: scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: job application
Keywords: jobs
Date: 23 Jul 92 02:52:10 GMT
Organization: BASIS International, Ltd., Albuquerque NM USA

In article <84122@netnews.upenn.edu> rpatel@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Rachana D Patel) writes:
>
>WHat about driver's license or social security number?
>Do you have to provide each form of identification for all forms
>they ask. 
>Do places have the right to right down your driver's license number?
>And if they do have it what could be the worst scenario?

I've never tried this but why not indicate on your application that
your SSN will be provided upon the offer of employment.  As someone
who interviews and hires job applicants, I certainly wouldn't be
put off by such a thing.

-- 
Scott Amspoker                       |    
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM |  Too bad ignorance isn't really
                                     |  bliss.  Then it could be outlawed.
scott@bbx.basis.com                  |
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Subject: Re: California Drivers License
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 23:13:52 GMT

In article <Jul.28.15.24.59.1992.1627@romulus.rutgers.edu>
vanembur@romulus.rutgers.edu (Bill Van Emburg) writes:
>In article <8eRLlQe00WB6QUcnV=@andrew.cmu.edu> dh4j+@andrew.cmu.edu
(David O Hunt) writes:
>> Does anyone realize how _scary_ this is?
>
>If I read that article right, and the CA DMV already has the
>fingerprint information, then law enforcement agencies already have
>access to all this information.

What I find offensive is that the DMV is hyping the new
system on the basis of its advantages to businesses.

Every time a merchant swipes your card through a reader,
your name, address, age, sex, height, weight, etc. can
potentially be recorded and asociated with a list of your
purchases.  The ease with which this can be done makes it
much more likely that it will be done.  There's nothing to
keep merchants from doing this now other than the time it
takes to key in all the information.

Every time you use your license for ID you'll be offering
information about yourself for market research or other
uses.
--

    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@forel.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: twap8@isuvax.iastate.edu (Mike McNarney)
Subject: DL records
Reply-To: twap8@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 14:02:00 GMT

I apologize if this query is inappropriate for this newsgroup, but
it seems like a good place to start.

I ran a red light on my bicycle last night, not knowing that the
moron behind me tooting his horn was not a moron but a Des Moines
Police Cadet. Needless to say, I was pulled over. He wanted to see
some i.d. (I gave him my Iowa DL), proceeded to lecture me on the
dangers of running red lights on my bike, and threatened to call
my parents (I am 21). Fortunately, he did not cite me for a mover
(er, moving violation). My questions are:

1) Did I have to give him _any_ ID at all? I am pretty sure I would have
to tell him my name/address (but not ssn), but would I have to show
my 'papers' to him?

2) And more importantly, if I had been cited, would it go on my
driving record (and my insurance rates up)? He probably could get
my ssn/dl# by running my name/address through the state computer,
and put it on my record. But since I wasn't driving....

Thanks in advance for your help.

-Mike.

----------------------
Mike McNarney
twap8@isuvax.bitnet
Iowa State University, USENET censors
Ames,Iowa 50013-0007
From: tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: job application
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:26:51 GMT
Organization: SSRL, Stanford, CA

In article <1992Jul21.164903.23450@u.washington.edu>, spent@milton.u.washington.edu (Spencer mullen) writes:
> 
> Just how much information do I really absolutely have to reveal on a job
> application?  Must I reveal  ALL previous employers if asked to?

If you want the job, the answer is probably yes.
Many employers are getting freaked by various scam artists, fraudsters, and
so forth, so they are careful. You can't just turn round and fire someone
if you later find out that they have lied on the application - various labor
laws and potential lawsuits make it expensive and difficult.

Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Junk telephone calls and junk mail
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 11:43:59 GMT

In article <BrqzBI.M4y@acsu.buffalo.edu> visbrown@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (BILL) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.043329.3616@bnr.ca>, photon@crchh15.bnr.ca (Sam Ladymon) writes...
>>Keywords: 
>> 
>> 
>>There is an organization that will contact the junk mail database
>>houses and the junk callers (those people that call you
>>during dinner) and request that you be removed from their lists.
>>Most people who have used the service report an 80%+ drop
>>in junk telephone calls. 
>> 
>>Private Citizen
>>Box 233
>>Naperville, IL 60566
>> 
>>1-800-CUT-JUNK
>> 
>>Call or write for forms. $20/year. Worked for me. Highly
>>recommened.
>> 
>>#include standard disclaimerT
>
>
>Why waste your money?  There is an industry group that all reputable 
>direct marketers belong to that maintains a list of people who do not 
>wish to receive unsolicited calls and mail and the members agree not to 
>solicted idividuals listed.  Cost?  Nothing.  Unfortunately, I dont have 
>the adresses handy.  Personnaly, I like receiving junk mail.  I have a 
>very large trash can!

The outfit is the Direct Marketing Association and its subsidiary,
Telephone Preference something or other.  I know it's in New York
City (try directory assistance for area code 212).

From what I remember of a conversation with someone from that office,
it takes about four to six weeks before your name becomes known to the
mailers/telemarketers.  I've forgotten what DMA/TP will do if the
mailers/telemarketers continue after that period.

Dave

Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093


-- 

Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
From: ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu (Wm. L. Ranck)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: California Drivers License
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:59:24 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

bu571@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wes Perkhiser) writes:
:      From that evolved a new license/ID system.  It stores an 
: applicant's photo, fingerprint, and signature in a digital data-
: base on optical disk.  The digitized signature and photo are used 
: to produce a plasticized license/ID card.  The cards are similar 
: to credit cards, but lack raised letters or embossed information.
:
   I read an article in this morning's Roanoke Times & World News.
Virginia is planning to start using this system in the Fall.  They
didn't mention fingerprints, but the digitized pictures and mag stripe 
were talked about.  According to the article it will be a 5 year 
phase in of the new licenses.  Oh, yes, the year the holder turns
21 will be printed on the front of the license so the poor bartenders
and store clerks don't have to do any calculation to know when someone
is underage.  
   Is it just me, or does it bother other people that store clerks can't
add and subtract anymore?

Bill Ranck

Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Subject: Re: California Drivers License
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 23:44:44 GMT

In article <184@bbx.basis.com> scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker) writes:
>Go out and get a passport.  They are the ultimate legal ID and they
>don't tell anybody shit except that you are who you say you are.
>There is also a mystique about passports that makes sales clerks
>very sober.

And then you're denied service by a sober sales clerk.

The driver's license number is what many on-line
credit verification services want.

--

    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@forel.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: tomrice@netcom.com (Tom R. Rice)
Subject: Re: California Drivers Licences
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 02:25:52 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

Many times people who work around sources of large AC current flows
will find that their mag-striped cards are rendered unreadable by
the erasing of the data bits by the AC mag fields (welders, for 
example).  If the cop finds your card mis-reads or garbles, is he
likely to charge you with "tampering"?  There'll doubtless be some
criminal penalty for diddling with the cards' data.

TRR    WB6BYH
From: kmeyer@amiganet.chi.il.us (Karl Meyer)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Junk telephone calls and junk mail
Date: 23 Jul 92 00:43:51 GMT
Organization: Amiga Network Information Systems

In article <1992Jul21.043329.3616@bnr.ca>, photon@crchh15.bnr.ca (Sam Ladymon)
writes:
>Keywords: 
>
>
>There is an organization that will contact the junk mail database
>houses and the junk callers (those people that call you
>during dinner) and request that you be removed from their lists.
>Most people who have used the service report an 80%+ drop
>in junk telephone calls. 
>
>Private Citizen
>Box 233
>Naperville, IL 60566
>
>1-800-CUT-JUNK
>
>Call or write for forms. $20/year. Worked for me. Highly
>recommened.
>
>#include standard disclaimer

Thanks for the info, but I don't feel I should have to pay anything to keep
these people from calling me.  I recall a Nova eposode where a guy sent letters
to these phone solicitors informing them that if they called him they were
accepting his offer for the use of his phone for commercial purposes at the
rate of $100 per minute. He has taken a couple of companies to court and won
settlements. For $100 per minute I'd be willing to listen to anyone try to sell
me something.
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: johne@vcd.hp.com (John Eaton)
Subject: Re: job application
Organization: Hewlett-Packard VCD
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 22:07:20 GMT

tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox) writes:
: 
: If you want the job, the answer is probably yes.
: Many employers are getting freaked by various scam artists, fraudsters, and
: so forth, so they are careful. You can't just turn round and fire someone
: if you later find out that they have lied on the application - various labor
: laws and potential lawsuits make it expensive and difficult.
:
Lying on the application is one of the few areas left where you can be fired
and have no recourse. If you have a problem employee who is lazy and/or 
incompentant the first thing you should do is go over their application
with a fine toothed comb. If you find one material misreprensention then
you can dump them on the spot without having to worry about wrongful discharge
lawsuits.

If they do sue you then your case involves objective facts such as whether or
not they had a degree from a certain University rather than subject judgements
like whether or not they are incompentant. 

John Eaton
!hp-vcd!johne 

 
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: edp@math.zko.dec.com (Eric Postpischil)
Subject: Re: job application
Keywords: jobs
Reply-To: edp@math.zko.dec.com (Eric Postpischil)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 13:20:43 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.164903.23450@u.washington.edu>,
spent@milton.u.washington.edu (Spencer mullen) writes:

>Just how much information do I really absolutely have to reveal on a job
>application?  Must I reveal  ALL previous employers if asked to?

You do not have to do what is asked of you (and the employer does not
have to give you a job) but you must tell the truth.  If you are asked
to reveal all jobs but do not want to, try declining in a polite way. 
E.g., you could list all the relevant jobs and then write a small note
at the end:  "unrelated jobs omitted".  Or you could write "jobs before
198x omitted", or something else appropriate.  Or you could cluster
several jobs.  For example, before I had much professional experience, I
filled in some time during school vacations with temporary
clerical/data-entry jobs, so I just wrote one generic description for
those and put it on my resume just to show that I kept busy.  Thus, you
could fill in "miscellaneous jobs with several employers, each of
duration three months or less".


                                -- edp (Eric Postpischil)
                                "Always mount a scratch monkey."
                                edp@alien.enet.dec.com