Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #773
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Thursday, October 4 2001          Volume 01 : Number 773

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 10:51:11 -0700
From: "Tim Langdell" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] .info irregularities

Sortiris,

I'd certainly recommend writing Dotster about the issue. And I am sure we
would all like to know the outcome of that (even if it is a lack of response
from them).

Tim

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Sotiris Sotiropoulos" <[email-masked]>
To: "ga" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 11:06 AM
Subject: [ga] .info irregularities

> I pre-registered a desirable .info domain name during the pre-registration
> phase with dotster.com.  I was the only bidder for the domain in the
> dotster.com pre-registration program, so I "won" that submission to
Afilias
> from dotster.com (at least that's what I was given to understand).  Funny
> enough, I just checked the .info WHOIS and i noticed that dotster inc. is
now
> the registrant of the domain they were to submit on my behalf!!  what the
hell
> is going on here?!
>
> Furious,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
>

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 14:16:07 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Seventh Annual Conference on Securing Networks and Systems

The Seventh Annual Conference on Securing Networks and Systems will be held 
October 15-22, 2001 at the Town & Country Hotel and Convention Center, San 
Diego, California.  For more information:  
http://www.sans.org/NS2001/NS2001.htm

a special thanks to Bruce James for this advisory.

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 11:34:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick H Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Seventh Annual Conference on Securing Networks and Systems

so how much would it cost for us to send the ICANN board and staff to ths
confrence so we can move forward with our current issues? Might think
about sending them to a NDSS meeting too
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/conferences/ndss/02/index.shtml

- -rick

On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 [email-masked] wrote:

> The Seventh Annual Conference on Securing Networks and Systems will be held
> October 15-22, 2001 at the Town & Country Hotel and Convention Center, San
> Diego, California.  For more information:
> http://www.sans.org/NS2001/NS2001.htm
>
> a special thanks to Bruce James for this advisory.
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 15:23:03 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] CPSR Annual meeting

Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility will hold their 20th 
anniversary meeting October 19 - 21, 2001, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

The Conference Agenda includes presentations on:

ICANN
Electronic voting
Information ethics in the aftermath of September 11th
Information warfare and the role of governments and military establishments
Electronic records and government accountability

for further information and registration details:
http://www.cpsr.org/conferences/annmtg01/

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 14:50:15 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Seventh Annual Conference on Securing Networks and Systems

Danny and all assembly members,

  As an avid fan of Sans for a number of years and a sometime
author of article for Sans, as well as a participant in the Sans
"Boot Camp" security siminars such as this one, I would highly
recommend everyone that can, attend.

  The portions regarding DNS and intrusion detection sections
for this siminar/boot camp please see also:
http://www.sans.org/NS2001/track1.htm
and http://www.sans.org/NS2001/track3.htm .   As well as
http://www.sans.org/NS2001/track4.htm

[email-masked] wrote:

> The Seventh Annual Conference on Securing Networks and Systems will be held
> October 15-22, 2001 at the Town & Country Hotel and Convention Center, San
> Diego, California.  For more information:
> http://www.sans.org/NS2001/NS2001.htm
>
> a special thanks to Bruce James for this advisory.
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 22:34:43 +0200 (MET DST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] .info irregularities

i pre-registered some name through united-domains.de (affiliated with EPAG). But this domain names doesn't appear in the whois database of Afilias. So i decided to register these names real-time through namebargain.com. All my pre-registered names were available through namebargain.com. 12 hour later I checked Afilias whois and my domains didn't appear in the whois. And I could register again through namebargain.com again!. But it didn't appear in the Afilias whois again! So I decided to choose another registrar again. I used IDR and registered my domains (pre-registered with united-domains.de; double real-time registered with namebargain.com) again. Within 20 seconds my domains appeared in the Afilias whois database.

Imagine I could register my pre-registered domains in real-time!!!!!!!!!

Total confusion!

And I predict that sunrise challenge will be a greater fiasco than sunrise registration period!

Good night.
Simon

> I pre-registered a desirable .info domain name 
> during the pre-registration
> phase with dotster.com.  I was the only bidder 
> for the domain in the
> dotster.com pre-registration program, so I 
> 'won' that submission to Afilias
> from dotster.com (at least that's what I was 
> given to understand).  Funny
> enough, I just checked the .info WHOIS and i 
> noticed that dotster inc. is now
> the registrant of the domain they were to 
> submit on my behalf!!  what the hell
> is going on here?!
> Furious,
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.
> org list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ('unsubscribe ga' in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 23:14:09 +0200 (MET DST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] .info irregularities

Btw. make screenshot from the Afilias whois.
You never know.
I did it.

Simon

> i pre-registered some name through united-
> domains.de (affiliated with EPAG). But this 
> domain names doesn't appear in the whois 
> database of Afilias. So i decided to register 
> these names real-time through namebargain.com. 
> All my pre-registered names were available 
> through namebargain.com. 12 hour later I 
> checked Afilias whois and my domains didn't 
> appear in the whois. And I could register 
> again through namebargain.com again!. But it 
> didn't appear in the Afilias whois again! So I 
> decided to choose another registrar again. I 
> used IDR and registered my domains (pre-
> registered with united-domains.de; double real-
> time registered with namebargain.com) again. 
> Within 20 seconds my domains appeared in the 
> Afilias whois database.
> Imagine I could register my pre-registered 
> domains in real-time!!!!!!!!!
> Total confusion!
> And I predict that sunrise challenge will be a 
> greater fiasco than sunrise registration 
> period!
> Good night.
> Simon
> > I pre-registered a desirable .info domain 
> name 
> > during the pre-registration
> > phase with dotster.com.  I was the only 
> bidder 
> > for the domain in the
> > dotster.com pre-registration program, so I 
> > 'won' that submission to Afilias
> > from dotster.com (at least that's what I was 
> > given to understand).  Funny
> > enough, I just checked the .info WHOIS and i 
> > noticed that dotster inc. is now
> > the registrant of the domain they were to 
> > submit on my behalf!!  what the hell
> > is going on here?!
> > Furious,
> > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the 
> ga@dnso.
> > org list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to 
> unsubscribe
> > ('unsubscribe ga' in the body of the 
> message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.
> org list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ('unsubscribe ga' in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 15:15:31 -0700
From: "M. Stuart Lynn" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re:  Memo to Stuart Lynn

Dear Danny:

Thank you for your note and your clarification. I appreciate your 
desire to minimize conflict between the security agenda and your 
proposed GA session.

That security agenda is still shaping up, and I cannot give you 
details at this time. We will post details as soon as they become 
available. However, the most likely scenario for Tuesday, November 13 
is that the morning will be devoted to plenary sessions composed of 
key speakers and panel discussions laying out critical security 
considerations and perspectives. The afternoon will be the start of a 
series of small workgroup meetings addressing particular security 
topics to flesh out some of the major concerns through dialog and 
discussion. These will feed into the efforts of the following day.

I think many of those who participate in the GA will find morning and 
afternoon to be of interest. And we would welcome the broadest 
possible involvement  so that we can all benefit from the best advice.

With regards
Stuart

At 10:17 AM -0400 10/3/01, [email-masked] wrote:
>Dear Stuart,
>
>Thank you for your reply and clarification.  My primary concern is fairness. 
>As I do not believe that it is fair to compress all constituency meetings,
>the Names Council session and the GA session into the same day, I will
>endeavor to make arrangements to hold the General Assembly's annual meeting
>at another venue on November 13 (as you have already indicated that there is
>'no room at the inn'). 
>
>By the same token, as we do not wish to unduly interfere with the schedule
>that you are arranging for the 13th, and have no particular wish to draw
>participants away from the events that you are scheduling, if you could
>advise the tentative schedule for that date, it will be easier for us to plan
>an appropriate meeting time that will minimize the possibility of scheduling
>conflicts.
>
>Upon your reply I will take all necessary steps to secure a sponsor for the
>General Assembly's Annual Meeting.
>
>Best regards,
>Danny Younger
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

- -- 

__________________
Stuart Lynn
President and CEO
ICANN
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Tel: 310-823-9358
Fax: 310-823-8649
Email: [email-masked]
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 00:37:53 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Message from Stuart Lynn to the NC

amateurish, kidish... looks like 80's group management.
kindegarten lectures and digestive talks: stinks hijacking.
Charybde to Sylla, Roberts to Lynn.

On 18:31 03/10/01, [email-masked] said:
>Please be advised that Stuart Lynn has sent the following message to the
>Names Council regarding the upcoming November meetings:

<snip>

>Please send your ideas and comments to [email-masked]
>from where they will be distributed efficiently to all the people
>planning the meeting - or to me directly (but, sadly, I am less
>efficient!).

Sadly he is efficient. Very efficient.

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 01:05:56 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re:  Memo to Stuart Lynn

On 00:15 04/10/01, M. Stuart Lynn said:
>I think many of those who participate in the GA will find morning and 
>afternoon to be of interest. And we would welcome the broadest possible 
>involvement so that we can all benefit from the best advice.

I am not sure Stuart Lynn has better understood the ICANN organization than 
our BC troika has understood BC rules. DNSO is not here to benefit from 
education and advice but to advise or guide the BoD on DNS related issues, 
including security,and Stuart is here to conduct the BoD decisions.

These are blind guides leading the seeing, and if one blind person guides 
his betters, he will be the one to fall into the ditch.

Jefsey

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 18:36:45 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re:  Memo to Stuart Lynn

Jefsey and all assembly members,

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> On 00:15 04/10/01, M. Stuart Lynn said:
> >I think many of those who participate in the GA will find morning and
> >afternoon to be of interest. And we would welcome the broadest possible
> >involvement so that we can all benefit from the best advice.
>
> I am not sure Stuart Lynn has better understood the ICANN organization than
> our BC troika has understood BC rules. DNSO is not here to benefit from
> education and advice but to advise or guide the BoD on DNS related issues,
> including security,and Stuart is here to conduct the BoD decisions.

  I must say personally that Mr. Lynn's comments to which you respond to
here specifically seems to smack of dismissal of the DNSO and the GA
in particular, much along the same lines a la Mike Roberts some weeks
ago.  However I personally am not surprised at this political mindset
and posturing.

>
>
> These are blind guides leading the seeing, and if one blind person guides
> his betters, he will be the one to fall into the ditch.

  It would certainly seem this to be the case given Mr. Lynn's own comments
you responded to above.  Perhaps Mr. Lynn would like to redress?

>
>
> Jefsey
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 17:22:55 -0700 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] FW: Proposed Legislation Significantly Affecting Computer Profess ion (46637)

WRT recent emphasis on computer security, this is just ONE of the items
crossing my desk. In the US, this take the DEA actions as precedent to
by-pass the US 4th amendment. The US Constitution is begining to look like a
moth-eaten rag. Be that as it may, the ICANN is in danger of falling into
this same rat-hole...on the wrong side.

I strongly suggest that we do not allow, what is supposed to be a business
meeting, to be turned into an "educational" event. Especially regarding
points and issues that have very little to do with the ICANN.

Jefsey may theorize on his conspiracies, yet miss the real background
agendii. What direction did Stuart receive from the DoC recently? These
elephants are much larger than Jefsey's old fish.

For the record, I'm in favor of treating  cyber-crime, like Nimda, as
terrorist acts. By every definition, they are. However, retro-active
prosecution, of old non-criminal acts, under new criminal statutes, without
any statute of limitations, criminalizes just about 60% of current technical
professionals. No, I'm not one of them. But, this does smack more than a
little of McCarthyism. Never mind the basic unfairness and injustice.

Now, how much of this is supposed to show up at the MdR ICANN meeting?

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Gregory Hicks [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 4:08 PM
|> To: [email-masked]
|> Subject: FW: Proposed Legislation Significantly Affecting Computer
|> Profession (46637)
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> Thought you might be interested in this and might want to 
|> express your 
|> opinion to your elected representative.
|> 
|> Gregory Hicks
|> 
|> ------------- Begin Forwarded Message -------------
|> 
|> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 1:38 PM
|> 
|> The USENIX Board of Directors has decided to alert our 
|> membership that
|> bills pending before the U.S. Congress or in committee 
|> appear to have a
|> detrimental impact on computer professionals.
|> 
|> We are most concerned about aspects of two proposed bills, the
|> Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and the Security Systems Standards and
|> Certification Act (SSSCA), and how they interact with existing
|> legislation such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Digital
|> Millennium Copyright Act.  The ATA redefines virtually all computer
|> crime as terrorism, enlarges the maximum penalty to life in prison
|> without parole, allows broad pre-conviction seizures, and, 
|> furthermore,
|> does this retroactively, removing the existing statute of 
|> limitations.
|> The SSSCA essentially mandates copyright protection in all digital
|> consumer devices and makes disabling or avoidance of copyright
|> mechanisms a felony offense.
|> 
|> More information about these and related issues can be found at:
|> http://www.usenix.org/whatsnew/legislation.html
|> 
|> Similar legislation is being considered in other jurisdictions
|> including Canada and some states.
|> 
|> If you believe that provisions of these or similar acts are
|> inappropriate, we strongly encourage you to contact your elected
|> representatives as soon as possible and register your opinions.
|> 
|>                                 Sincerely,
|>                         The USENIX Board of Directors
|>                     http://www.usenix.org/directory/board.html
|> 
|> ------------- End Forwarded Message -------------
|> 
|> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|> Gregory Hicks                           | Principal Systems Engineer
|> Cadence Design Systems                  | Direct:   408.576.3609
|> 555 River Oaks Pkwy M/S 6B1             | Fax:      408.894.3479
|> San Jose, CA 95134                      | Internet: 
|> [email-masked]
|> 
|> "To do great, important tasks, two things are necessary:
|> a plan and not quite enough time."   -- Anonymous
|> 
|> 
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 20:29:43 -0700
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] .info irregularities

What disturbs me most about the dotster.com pre-registration process is the
fact
that there is no longer a public record of the dotster pre-registration
winning
bid queue.  When we "won" our bid for the .info registration, I was able to
verify our
winning bid by checking back with dotster shortly after the extended Phase 2
pre-registration deadline period.  The dbase with their winning bid
pre-registration queue information is no longer available for public perusal,
and they (as yet) have sent no confirmation of our "winning bid".  In one
response which they sent me *today*, they write:

""PREREGISTRATION FOR INFO
The process of bidding is complete and the domain owners have been selected. 
We
are still in the process of doing all the billing to the large number or our
customer's who have successfully bid on their domain.  However, this is a
lengthy process and we will not be able to list each recipient of the domain
until we have successfully billed their credit card.  This means that if you
go
to the .Info Whois and it says that Dotster is the Registrar, you have not
been
billed.  This entire process for all of our customers should be complete no
later than Wednesday afternoon.  At this time, all awarded domains will have
the
correct owner information and be in the correct account."

1) it's going on two weeks after the pre-registration bid deadline and I have
yet to receive confirmation on my winning bid with respect to the dotster
pre-registration dbase-- a record which ALL winning bid pre-registrants should
have made available to them since,

2) with no record (public or otherwise) of the "correct accounts" there is
really no way to verify if the correct accounts are filled with the correct
registration, and therefore no way to prove any domain hijacking/misplacing at
the registrar level.

I find all of this to be a matter of serious concern.

Most Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Hermes Network Inc.

Ken Stubbs wrote:

> PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHAT THE NAME WAS YOU TRIED TO OBTAIN
>
> ken stubbs
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sotiris Sotiropoulos" <[email-masked]>
> To: "ga" <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 2:06 PM
> Subject: [ga] .info irregularities
>
> > I pre-registered a desirable .info domain name during the pre-registration
> > phase with dotster.com.  I was the only bidder for the domain in the
> > dotster.com pre-registration program, so I "won" that submission to
> Afilias
> > from dotster.com (at least that's what I was given to understand).  Funny
> > enough, I just checked the .info WHOIS and i noticed that dotster inc. is
> now
> > the registrant of the domain they were to submit on my behalf!!  what the
> hell
> > is going on here?!
> >
> > Furious,
> >
> > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 20:54:43 -0700
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] .info irregularities

What disturbs me most about the dotster.com pre-registration process is the
fact that there is no longer a public record of the dotster pre-registration
winning bid queue.  When we "won" our bid for the .info registration, I was
able to verify our winning bid by checking back with dotster shortly after the
extended Phase 2 pre-registration deadline period.  The dbase with their
winning bid pre-registration queue information is no longer available for
public perusal, and they (as yet) have sent no confirmation of our "winning
bid". In one response which they sent me *today*, they write:

""PREREGISTRATION FOR INFO
The process of bidding is complete and the domain owners have been selected. 
We are still in the process of doing all the billing to the large number or
our
customer's who have successfully bid on their domain.  However, this is a
lengthy process and we will not be able to list each recipient of the domain
until we have successfully billed their credit card.  This means that if you
go to the .Info Whois and it says that Dotster is the Registrar, you have not
been billed.  This entire process for all of our customers should be complete
no
later than Wednesday afternoon.  At this time, all awarded domains will have
the correct owner information and be in the correct account."

1) it's going on two weeks after the pre-registration bid deadline and I have
yet to receive confirmation on my winning bid with respect to the dotster
pre-registration dbase-- a record which ALL winning bid pre-registrants should
have made available to them since,

2) with no record (public or otherwise) of the "correct accounts" there is
really no way to verify if the correct accounts are filled with the correct
registration, and therefore no way to prove any domain hijacking/misplacing at
the registrar level.

I find all of this to be a matter of serious concern.

Most Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Hermes Network Inc.
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 21:21:04 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FW: Proposed Legislation Significantly Affecting Computer Profess ion (46637)

Roeland and all assembly members,

  Yes, this was on Crossfire on CNN this evening.  One might also want to
take a look at the dialog discussed there regarding this new update to
current legislation.  The ACLU seem to be taking a strong stance with
respect to protecting civil liberties and COnstitutional as well as
Bill of Rights issues with respect to some of the requests the Atty.
General has requested from the congress with the presidents support
of late.

Roeland Meyer wrote:

> WRT recent emphasis on computer security, this is just ONE of the items
> crossing my desk. In the US, this take the DEA actions as precedent to
> by-pass the US 4th amendment. The US Constitution is begining to look like a
> moth-eaten rag. Be that as it may, the ICANN is in danger of falling into
> this same rat-hole...on the wrong side.
>
> I strongly suggest that we do not allow, what is supposed to be a business
> meeting, to be turned into an "educational" event. Especially regarding
> points and issues that have very little to do with the ICANN.
>
> Jefsey may theorize on his conspiracies, yet miss the real background
> agendii. What direction did Stuart receive from the DoC recently? These
> elephants are much larger than Jefsey's old fish.
>
> For the record, I'm in favor of treating  cyber-crime, like Nimda, as
> terrorist acts. By every definition, they are. However, retro-active
> prosecution, of old non-criminal acts, under new criminal statutes, without
> any statute of limitations, criminalizes just about 60% of current technical
> professionals. No, I'm not one of them. But, this does smack more than a
> little of McCarthyism. Never mind the basic unfairness and injustice.
>
> Now, how much of this is supposed to show up at the MdR ICANN meeting?
>
> |> -----Original Message-----
> |> From: Gregory Hicks [mailto:[email-masked]]
> |> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 4:08 PM
> |> To: [email-masked]
> |> Subject: FW: Proposed Legislation Significantly Affecting Computer
> |> Profession (46637)
> |>
> |>
> |>
> |> Thought you might be interested in this and might want to
> |> express your
> |> opinion to your elected representative.
> |>
> |> Gregory Hicks
> |>
> |> ------------- Begin Forwarded Message -------------
> |>
> |> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> |> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 1:38 PM
> |>
> |> The USENIX Board of Directors has decided to alert our
> |> membership that
> |> bills pending before the U.S. Congress or in committee
> |> appear to have a
> |> detrimental impact on computer professionals.
> |>
> |> We are most concerned about aspects of two proposed bills, the
> |> Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and the Security Systems Standards and
> |> Certification Act (SSSCA), and how they interact with existing
> |> legislation such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Digital
> |> Millennium Copyright Act.  The ATA redefines virtually all computer
> |> crime as terrorism, enlarges the maximum penalty to life in prison
> |> without parole, allows broad pre-conviction seizures, and,
> |> furthermore,
> |> does this retroactively, removing the existing statute of
> |> limitations.
> |> The SSSCA essentially mandates copyright protection in all digital
> |> consumer devices and makes disabling or avoidance of copyright
> |> mechanisms a felony offense.
> |>
> |> More information about these and related issues can be found at:
> |> http://www.usenix.org/whatsnew/legislation.html
> |>
> |> Similar legislation is being considered in other jurisdictions
> |> including Canada and some states.
> |>
> |> If you believe that provisions of these or similar acts are
> |> inappropriate, we strongly encourage you to contact your elected
> |> representatives as soon as possible and register your opinions.
> |>
> |>                                 Sincerely,
> |>                         The USENIX Board of Directors
> |>                     http://www.usenix.org/directory/board.html
> |>
> |> ------------- End Forwarded Message -------------
> |>
> |> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> |> Gregory Hicks                           | Principal Systems Engineer
> |> Cadence Design Systems                  | Direct:   408.576.3609
> |> 555 River Oaks Pkwy M/S 6B1             | Fax:      408.894.3479
> |> San Jose, CA 95134                      | Internet:
> |> [email-masked]
> |>
> |> "To do great, important tasks, two things are necessary:
> |> a plan and not quite enough time."   -- Anonymous
> |>
> |>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 05:13:33 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FW: Proposed Legislation Significantly Affecting Computer Profess ion (46637)

On 02:22 04/10/01, Roeland Meyer said:
>Jefsey may theorize on his conspiracies, yet miss the real background
>agendii. What direction did Stuart receive from the DoC recently? These
>elephants are much larger than Jefsey's old fish.

which conspiracies and old fish ;-) ?

1. Imperial Republic
2. big business interests
3. job protection
4. money

Happily mostly using a wrong evaluation of the internet nature.

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 02:23:20 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Recall of GA Chair

On a point of order, item 8, Recall of GA Chair, should not be included as
an Agenda item for the Oct 11 NC meeting as this item was submitted too late
to the Intake Committee - 17 days prior to the next meeting, which is less
than the 21 days required by its adopted rules.

The basis for this item's inclusion on the NC agenda item would appear to
amount to a single complaint by one person of the GA. To use Philip
Shepard's own words to the Intake Committee regarding NC procedures,
"Remember, each agenda will have a hyperlink to the e-mail input for that
agenda, so anyone can follow the correspondence if they want to spend the
time." http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00056.html. There
are no hyperlinks for this agenda item because there has been no e-mail
input and therefore, no matter how much time NC members may be willing and
able to put into it, it would be a complete waste of their time.

For your further information, the e-mail history is as follows:-

On Sept 23, William X Walsh posted a comment to the General Assembly mailing
list requesting a recall of the GA Chair position, copied to the NC Chair.

On Sept 24, Philip Shepard forwarded the aforementioned comment by William
Walsh to the Intake Committee mailing list.
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00306.html.

On Sept 26, Philip Shepard posted a draft agenda for Oct 11 NC meeting, in
which Recall of GA Chair appears as item 8.
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00309.html. In
consideration of recent events and priorities dictated by the same, serious
consideration of the Intake Committee was not given to this late addition.

On Oct 1st, Philip Shepard instructed the Secretariat to announce the NC Oct
11 meeting agenda, including item 8.
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-intake/Arc00/msg00312.html

Regards,
Joanna Lane

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #773
************************