Return to CLS Bibliography Page
Date: Tue Jan 14, 1997 8:16 pm CST
From: David J. Loundy
EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
MBX: David@loundy.com
TO: * Nicholas Johnson / MCI ID: 103-5393
TO: Philip J. Zadeik, Esq.
EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
MBX: Philip.J.Zadeik@bmch-01.bmck.sprint.com
TO: Professor Don Reynolds, Esq.
EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
MBX: 7Reynold@jmls.edu
TO: Leon Edelson, Esq.
EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
MBX: LeonIPLaw@aol.com
Subject: LACC: Foreign spies snoop the Net, from The Netly News
>Delivered-To: alias-loundy_dom/-David@Loundy.com
>Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 19:34:25 +1100 (EST)
>Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:15:25 -0800 (PST)
>From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Reply-To: lacc@suburbia.net
>X-Loop: lacc@suburbia.net
>Precedence: list
>Sender: lacc-request@suburbia.net
>Resent-Sender: lacc-request@suburbia.net
>To: lacc@suburbia.net
>Resent-From: lacc@suburbia.net
>X-Subscription: To unsubscribe from this fine mailing list mail
>lacc-request@suburbia.net with Subject: unsubscribe
>X-Mailing-List: <lacc@suburbia.net>
>ftp://ftp.suburbia.net/pub/mailinglists/lacc/archive/latest/657
>Subject: LACC: Foreign spies snoop the Net, from The Netly News
>
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:14:17 -0800 (PST)
>From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>To: fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu
>Subject: Foreign spies snoop the Net, from The Netly News
>
>
> The Netly News
> http://netlynews.com/
>
> SPY VS. SPY
> January 6, 1997
> By Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com)
>
> Move over, James Bond. Take your last bow, Maxwell Smart. Modern
> spies are jacked into the Net, a recent report from the multiagency
> National Counterintelligence Center says. It claims the Internet is
> now the "fastest growing" means for foreign governments and firms to
> gather information about U.S. businesses.
>
> The eight-page quarterly report says that malevolent "foreign
> entities" are sorting through web sites, pounding on search engines
> and firing off e-mail queries to U.S. defense contractors in hopes of
> winnowing out sensitive data.
>
> "Use of the Internet offers a variety of advantages to a foreign
> collector. It is simple, low cost, non-threatening and relatively
> 'risk free' for the foreign entity attempting to collect classified,
> proprietary, or sensitive information... We also know foreign
> intelligence and security services monitor the Internet," says the
> report, which is distributed to government agencies and contractors.
>
> Search engines apparently serve spies well. Want a copy of
> something you shouldn't be able to get? Perhaps it was left in an
> unprotected directory; try Altavista. "Foreign intelligence services
> are known to use computers to conduct rudimentary on-line searches for
> information, including visits to governments and defense contractors'
> on-line bulletin boards or web sites on the Internet. Access to
> Internet advanced search software programs could possibly assist them
> in meeting their collection requirements," the NACIC briefing paper
> says.
>
> Beware of spam from spies, it warns: "These foreign entities can
> remain safe within their borders while sending hundreds of pleas and
> requests for assistance to targeted US companies and their employees."
> Of course! This is any e-mail spammer's modus operandi: Flood an
> astronomical number of addresses at an infinitesimal cost. Then hope
> that at least some recipients will respond with the information you
> want.
>
> This isn't the first time that the Clinton administration has
> painted economic espionage as a dire threat. Last February, FBI
> director Louis Freeh warned the Senate Select Committee on
> Intelligence of the possible harm. He said foreign governments are
> especially interested in "economic information, especially
> pre-publication data" including "U.S. tax and monetary policies;
> foreign aid programs and export credits; technology transfer and
> munitions control regulations... and proposed legislation affecting
> the profitability of foreign firms acting in the United States."
>
> Note to Freeh: That information already is online. For proposed
> legislation, try Thomas -- or for munition regulations, the White
> House web site is a good bet.
>
> But forget Freeh's rhetoric. The White House isn't serious about
> halting the overseas flow of American secrets over the Net. If it
> were, President Clinton would lift the crypto export embargo. Strong
> encryption is the most effective way for companies to fend off
> foreign data-pirates, but current regulations allow U.S.
> multinational firms to use only the cipher-equivalent of a toy cap
> gun. Worse yet, last week the Commerce Department moved further in
> the wrong direction by releasing its new encryption export
> regulations that continue to keep American businesses at a
> competitive disadvantage compared to their foreign competitors, which
> generally are less hampered by crypto export rules. "The new
> regulations are worse" than the old, says Dave Banisar, a policy
> analyst at the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
>
> Sure, France and Britain spy on us for economic purposes. But
> we're just as guilty. We snooped on the French -- and got several
> U.S. "diplomats" kicked out of France two years ago. We peeked at
> Japanese secrets during automobile trade negotiations -- and got
> caught then, too. Especially under President Clinton, economic
> intelligence has become part of the mission of our spy agencies. Yet
> if we complain about other countries while doing it ourselves, we
> become hypocrites.
>
> Stanley Kober, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, argues in
> a recent paper that it's "folly" for the U.S. to continue such spying
> and risk alienating political allies: "The world is still a dangerous
> place, and it would be folly for the democracies to engage in nasty
> intramural squabbles. Yet that is the danger that economic espionage
> against other free societies poses."
>
> "Washington ought to consider that it may need the cooperation of
> Paris (or other Western capitals) to help deal with a mutual security
> threat" from terrorism, Kober writes.
>
> I asked Kober what he thought of the NACIC report. "It strikes me
> as a normal security reminder," he says. "The specifics are fairly
> slim. It's not the sort of thing that's sent to everyone. It's sent
> to their clients, the people who have government contracts. Since the
> Internet is new, they're telling people to be careful."
>
> Indeed, netizens must be careful. It's common sense, really, and
> defensive driving for the Net. Encrypt that e-mail. Use the
> anonymizer at least once a day. Let paranoia be your watchword. That
> e-mail from your mother may come from the KGB. When you're not
> watching it, your monitor may be watching you.
>
> Be afraid, Maxwell Smart. Your shoe phone may be listening back.
>
>###
Return to CLS Bibliography Page