|
Wanted: A Hackers' Charter
Emmanuel Goldstein
Americans have a reputation for being fiercely protective of their
liberties. It is what makes their country so different from all
the rest, or so they believe. Freedom of assembly, freedom of speech,
the right of privacy - fundamental premises that form the foundation
of their society. Yet, as the century moves to its close, there
is ample evidence to suggest that these freedoms are becoming more
theoretical than actual.
Much of this is a result of the advance of technology. The same
rules of liberty do not apply in the cybernetic world. Private files
are far more easily accessible to unauthorised eyes when they are
stored on computer; electronic publications are not afforded the
same protections as ‘real’ publications; and sending
someone electronic mail by no means guarantees the same level of
privacy as dropping mail into a mailbox.
American society has evolved to the point where it believes in storing
everything about itself on computer; birth records, death records,
credit reports, telephone bills, hospital data, and so on. While
all these computers are not yet trading information, it is remarkable
easy to obtain a detailed profile of someone in a very short time
by glancing at key files.
A growing number of people have a legal right to access this personal
information. Others do not have the right but do have the knowledge
and the motivation. Others still are simply out to explore the systems
themselves. Commonly known as computer hackers, the last are often
portrayed as the biggest threat to privacy. Recently, three hackers
in Atlanta were sent to prison simply for gaining access to a computer
system, the equivalent of opening the drawer of a filing cabinet.
Similar inequities are present in publishing. While most magazines
and newspapers are able to operate freely under the 1st Amendment
of the Constitution, which protects freedom of the press, electronic
publications are not included. In 1990, an electronic magazine called
Phrack was shut down, its list of subscribers seized, and its editor
put on trial for publishing an article that was alleged to contain
proprietary telephone company information. The claim was eventually
proven to be unsubstantiated but not until after the magazine had
been forced to stop publication. The same moves against a printed
magazine or newspaper would have been difficult, if not impossible.
Public and press would both have been outraged at the attempt.
In this particular case, the government was able to monitor the
electronic mail going to and from the magazine by gaining access
to a computer that acted as a step in the mailing process. This
is tantamount to opening every letter going to and from a location
and then resealing the envelopes. Here the agents merely had to
copy each message as it passed by, unthinkable in the case of conventional
mail.
Computer bulletin board systems form what is perhaps the most valuable
form of free speech we have today. Anybody with a computer can call,
speak their mind on a variety of issues, communicate privately with
other users, and if he/she chooses, remain anonymous. There can
be no judgement based on personal appearance or the sound of a voice:
the words tell the whole story and everyone starts out equal. Yet
the authorities frequently look on the bulletin boards as criminal
tools, as though all kinds of illicit behaviour could be festering
within private and anonymous communications It is not unusual for
a computer bulletin board to be seized by the authorities to investigate
the contents of private electronic mail. When this happens, all
private mail within the system is perused.
It is sad and ominous that technology is allowing those in power
to keep an eye on people surreptitiously, conveniently,and thoroughly.
Those who discover how the system works are themselves targeted
as threats to society. Discouraged from learning the technicalities
of massive computer systems, the public believes what it is told.
Americans assume their way of life is incorruptible: an Orwellian
scenario could never unfold, no matter how much information is gathered
on the public. This may be a valid assumption, but even if the political
system is wholly benevolent, can it be guaranteed for all time?
This power of scrutiny in the hands of a future regime that did
not value human life as highly as at present, or in the hands of
a totalitarian society, an Adolf Hitler, is all too easy to imagine.
There are two sides to every revolution. After the initial glory
comes the purge and the reign of terror. The computer revolution,
while different in kind, is not immune.
Emmanuel Goldstein is editor of 2600, The Hacker Quarterly,
published in the USA, and a freelance writer and broadcaster.
(CX5050)
Subject Headings
Access
to Personal Information
Computer
Users
Computers
Hackers
Privacy
Connexions
Links - Connexions
Directory A-Z Index - Connexions
Library
Periodicals
& Broadcasters Online - Volunteer
Opportunities - Publicity
& media relations resources
Connexions
Phone: 416-964-1511
E-mail:
www.connexions.org
|