[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(fwd) Re: NETCOM/FBI Spying "Business as Usual"
I found this in the eff group, and think it has some implications for
remailer operators and their logs. (That the FBI is subpoenaing e-mail
records is not news, but the connection to the Kevin Mitnick case is.)
Explanation: In an earlier message, Glen Roberts of "Full Disclosure"
gave his informed speculation that this subpoena has to do with the
FBI's search for uber-hacker Kevin Mitnick. The guy being subpoenaed
and monitored, Lewis De Payne, comments below.
The concern for remailer operators is that while I was reading this
saga, all I could think of was 'Why didn't they use remailers?" I
planned to comment on this in the public groups. (And I may still, if
somebody else doesn't beat me to it.)
But of course the concern is that if the FBI is going on a fishing
expedition (a legal term :-}) for e-mail records, and Netcom is
cooperating, then had they used remailers to communicate, we could now
be seeing subpoenas of *remailer logs*. (This will happen eventually.
All the more reasons for multiple national jurisdictions, for
destruction of logs, for bonding of remailers, and for "forward
secrecy" (a la Diffie-Hellman) to be implemented somehow.)
> Xref: netcom.com alt.2600:23077 alt.2600hz:100 alt.privacy:18575 comp.org.eff.talk:39275
> Newsgroups: alt.2600,alt.2600hz,alt.privacy,comp.org.eff.talk
> Path: netcom.com!lewiz
> From: [email protected] (Lewis De Payne)
> Subject: Re: NETCOM/FBI Spying "Business as Usual"
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Followup-To: alt.2600,alt.2600hz,alt.privacy,comp.org.eff.talk
> Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
> X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
> References: <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 17:24:35 GMT
> Approved: [email protected]
> Lines: 25
> Glen Roberts ([email protected]) wrote accurately:
> : Some of you may be aware of the FBI subpeona for email transactions of
> : [email protected]
> : She wouldn't discuss the particulars of [email protected], and said they
> : were "not open to talking about it."
> I will be sending you a story for Full Disclosure. In it, I will discuss
> how tech support at netcom told another party (whose name will remain
> anonymous until I receive a subpoena) that the FBI was watching my acct,
> and that they were served with an order. This was disclosed to a
> third-party by tech support! I will also discuss my conversation with
> the various people at netcom regarding this matter, as well as the
> letter I sent to netcom explaining to them that their "monitoring" of
> my account to conform with the _sealed_ court order was slowing me
> down too much, and that if they didn't correct it, I might go find
> another provider, and then they wouldn't be able to monitor me.
> Lots more to come... in Full Disclosure Live.
> cc: Kathleen Carson, S.A., FBI, LA, CA. || Pursuant to Court Order
> Kenneth G. McGuire, III. S.A., FBI, LA, CA. || served August 11, 1994
> Stanley E. Ornellas, S.A., FBI, LA, CA. || on Netcom Communications