From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 94 11:37:20 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: (fwd) Re: NETCOM/FBI Spying "Business as Usual"
Message-ID: <199409071837.LAA10783@netcom3.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



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: lewiz@netcom.com (Lewis De Payne)
> Subject: Re: NETCOM/FBI Spying "Business as Usual"
> Message-ID: <lewizCvrsCz.E1B@netcom.com>
> 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: <CvqnGC.Csq@rci.ripco.com>
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 17:24:35 GMT
> Approved: mitnick@hideout.com
> Lines: 25
> 
> Glen Roberts (glr@ripco.com) wrote accurately:
> :
> : Some of you may be aware of the FBI subpeona for email transactions of
> : lewiz@netcom.com. 
> :
> : She wouldn't discuss the particulars of lewiz@netcom.com, 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
>