-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I am no expert, Johnny, so I may be way off base, but it seems
to me that cookies can be used for monitoring all sorts of
Internet browsing behavior. Whether or not it is possible to
program a cookie to send its data into the number-crunchers is
unknown to me, but I suspect that they could.
In view of that, the most likely scenario I could think of,
barring the one proposed by McCandlish, is that cookies are
distributed to visitors in order to gauge their overall Web
habits, and to formulate a psy-op targeting this group in order
to convince them that Goddard is all wrong, that the truth will
never be known, or that it just isn't worth the effort to try to
figure it out - whatever it takes to neutralize the group with
regard to that topic.
Make sense to you?
- - David
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
********** <David H. Stern, M.D. <dstern@copi.com> **********
______________________________________________________________
\ /|****************************************|\ /
\\ //| DEEP TIMES NEWS SERVICE |\\ //
\\\ ///| http://www.copi.com/article
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for your forward on internet privacy. Living here in the DC
area it has become quite clear to me that the web is a creation of the
intelligence community arising from the very secret Command, Control and
Communications (C-3) initiatives of the Reagan administration. It would
be foolish to think that such a technology is somehow immune from
government and other snooping.
I have felt for some time that what we need is a law assuring
internet privacy for users similar to that provided to telephone users,
which would require court orders for government snooping. To be
effective such a law should carry stiff criminal penalties for
violations (its the only thing that curbs the behavior of government
agents). If you are concerned about these issues please advocate this
legislation at the federal level. Dan Alcorn dalcorn@erols.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
I will look into it. Thanks for making me
aware of this. Keep me posted.
-- David Bresnahan
-------------------------------------------------------
Talk USA - National Talk Show & FREE Newsletter
Visit http://talkusa.com for details on where to listen
Check out FREE STUFF at http://talkusa.com/adindex.htm
Live Chat, Listener Survey, and Interactive Forum
24-hr Voice Mail: 800-338-8824
P.O. Box 1168
West Jordan, UT 84084-7168
Off/Fax: (801) 562-5362
To subscribe FREE, e-mail subscribe@talkusa.com
To unsubscribe, e-mail unsubscribe@talkusa.com
-----------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:08:09 -0800
To: johnny@wildfieldstudios.com (The First Church of Common Sense)
From: censored@censored.sonoma.edu (Project Censored)
Subject: Re: Update on Navy email address
X-Info: Evaluation version at news4.realnews.net
It all sounds pretty sinister. Let us know more when ;you have proof
or answers.
Peter
Hey!!! Check out the Project Censored WWW site at:
http://censored.sonoma.edu/ProjectCensored/
or mailto:project.censored@sonoma.edu
Project Censored
Sonoma State University
1801 East Cotati Ave.
Rohnert Park, Ca. 94928
707/664-2500
Fax 707/664-2108
Message-ID: <01BD25D0.FD4F9B80.dstern@copi.com>
From: "David H. Stern, M.D." <dstern@copi.com>
Reply-To: "dstern@copi.com" <dstern@copi.com>
To: 'The First Church of Common Sense' <johnny@wildfieldstudios.com>
Cc: "'censored@censored.sonoma.edu'" <censored@censored.sonoma.edu>
Subject: RE: Update on eavesdropping
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 18:26:50 -0800
Organization: Deep Politics / Deep Times
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Monday, January 19, 1998 12:50 AM, The First Church of Common Sense
[SMTP:johnny@wildfieldstudios.com] wrote:
> David, I just clicked on "Find account" to see if "pong" was still
there.
> It appears that he is, I typed in the navy email address where it says
,"If
> you forgot the URL for your personalized webcrawler, type in your
email
> address and password. If you forgot your password, we'll email your
URL
to
> you." I did as instructed, then : "pong@v6550c.nrl/navy.mil." we have
> emailed you the URL of your personalized webcrawler". Johnny
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
FYI:
"NRL" stands for "Naval Research Laboratory"
Complete:NO_DATA v6550c.nrl/navy.mil
Query:All records (ALL):v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
Authoritative Answer
v6550c.nrl.navy.mil A 132.250.152.161
v6550c.nrl.navy.mil MX 0 v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
v6550c.nrl.navy.mil HINFO dec microvax-II vms
nrl.navy.mil NS net.nrl.navy.mil
nrl.navy.mil NS grizzly.nrl.navy.mil
v6550c.nrl.navy.mil A 132.250.152.161
net.nrl.navy.mil A 132.250.1.131
net.nrl.navy.mil A 132.250.108.131
grizzly.nrl.navy.mil A 132.250.116.12
grizzly.nrl.navy.mil A 132.250.110.12
grizzly.nrl.navy.mil A 132.250.108.12
Complete: v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
WHOIS data on v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
Dr. Leon Esterowitz code5605 ba50/172a
767-3535
esterowitz@v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
Dr. Filbert J. Bartoli, Jr. (Fil) code5613
ba50/172
767-3612
bartoli@v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
Dr. James S. Shirk (Jim) code5613
b216/1006
767-4871
shirk@v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
Dr. James R. Lindle (Ryan) code5613
ba50/183
404-7374
lindle@v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
Dr. Steven R. Flom for code5613
ba50/150
767-3795
flom@v6550c.nrl.navy.mil
WHOIS for "PONG" at same: No match found
You might want to email or telephone one of the characters
listed above. They may be able to explain how a channel for
said item might appear on your browser.
David H. Stern, M.D. Deep Times News
Mr. Pompei, Thank you for your valued input. As you point out, it is
just as easy for the Navy to use "cookies" to "gauge threats, or to
gather dirt" as it is for you. However, the implications of the Armed
Forces checking up on the activities of US citizens are far more
ominous and alarming than if you did it. As to your admonition to "be
a little careful about our conspiracy theories"; I agree, but let's
also be careful about our state of denial and complacency. Yesterday's
"conspiracy theories" are fast becoming todays news, as newly
declassified documents are released which support the "wild claims"
made by "conspiracy theorists" of the 60's & 70's. As Federal Judge
Sporkin said in his recent ruling on Navy computer snooping: "In these
days of 'Big Brother' ".Indeed! Thank you, and have a happy Eternity,
Johnny Asia, Pope-About-Town of The First Church of Common Sense.
http://www.angelfire.com/ct/johnnyasia/index.html
>I'd like to inject some information of my own, regarding cookies and
>internet privacy.
>
>As most of us know, cookies are small packets of data stored by a WWW
host
>on the machine's hard drive. It's useful for them to track your web
>habits, history, etc. Cookies *do not* ever get executed; the only
data
>available to the host is that from the cookies, and whatever
backdoors may
>exist in the browser software.
>
>It's very easy to block cookie storage, particularly on Unix stations.
>Simply remove write permission to the .netscape/cookies file. The
browser
>won't popup any annoying windows asking for confirmation or complain
about
>errors, and it won't store the cookie. It's probably a simple task
on the
>Windows platform, as well.
>
>Whenever you run a piece of software on your machine, you are relying
on
>trust to establish that the program is secure, and won't be used to
>transmit unauthorized data. If you have no access to its internals,
you
>have to rely on the hackers to find and report the holes, which can
be a
>slow and unreliable process. However, now that netscape is going to
>release the source code to its browser, the internals are open to
closer
>scrutiny, and its security can be more accurately assesssed, and
>improved. Hopefully, this will be a value to browser customers..
>
>So, as far as I can tell from reading the previous messages, it may be
>that the navy was looking at the user's cookies to gague their
threat, or
>to gather dirt. It's as easy for the navy to do it as it is for me.
>
>However, I shudder at the thought of resting the security of my
computer
>in the hands of a law. Because it's illegal to enter my house doesn't
>keep me from locking my door. Therefore, I'd suggest that you read
up on
>internet security; there are several good newsgroups and websites, and
>remember that you should disable the 'cookies', and possibly use other
>means to ensure your online privacy.
>
>And, folks, let's be a little careful about our conspiracy theories.
>
>- J
>
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com