EPIC logo

                             E P I C  A l e r t
Volume 11.17                                        September 10, 2004

                              Published by the
                Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
                              Washington, D.C.


Table of Contents

[1] EPIC Files Briefs in Support of Driver and Financial Privacy
[2] Bill Introduced to Make 9/11 Commission Recommendations Law
[3] Census Bureau Revamps Policy on Data Sharing
[4] EPIC Files Comments on Use of Voter Social Security Numbers
[5] Bush Establishes Civil Liberties Board
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore: Your Evil Twin
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

[1] EPIC Files Briefs in Support of Driver and Financial Privacy

EPIC recently filed two "friend of the court" briefs in leading
privacy cases.  In the first, Kehoe v. Fidelity Federal Bank and
Trust, the State of Florida sold more than 500,000 of its citizens'
records from motor vehicle registries without their consent for a
penny each to Fidelity Federal Bank.  Fidelity used the records, which
primarily related to individuals who recently bought cars, to send
junk mail solicitations.  Under the federal Drivers Privacy Protection
Act (DPPA), states are obligated to first obtain the consent of
individuals before selling their personal information from motor
vehicle registries.  However, Florida failed to implement the federal

At issue in the case is whether a person whose personal information
has been sold must prove that she was actually harmed in order to
recover damages under the DPPA.  Relying upon the recently decided
case Doe v. Chao, in which the Supreme Court held that actual damages
must be demonstrated under the Privacy Act (see EPIC Alert 11.04), the
lower court held that a victim must demonstrate actual harm before
recovering a default award of $2,500 under the DPPA.

The EPIC brief, which was joined by the ACLU of Florida, argues that
victims should receive the award by default, as it is a strong
deterrent to indiscriminate release of personal information.  EPIC
distinguished the Doe v. Chao Privacy Act case from Kehoe, arguing
that the DPPA is one of the few tools available to protect personal
information from unaccountable commercial entities, such as data
brokers and private investigators.  EPIC also argued that the DPPA was
enacted to protect individuals from mere disclosure of personal
information, as such release has led to high-profile stalking,
robbery, and murder incidents.

Florida's failure to shield personal information in government records
has resulted in a wealth of commercial databases available on Florida
residents that are not available in other states. For instance,
documents obtained by EPIC indicate that ChoicePoint's law
enforcement-oriented "AutoTrackXP" service includes thirty-six extra
databases on Florida residents.  There are also marketing databases on
Florida drivers, such as "SUV Owners of Florida," that are not
available on other states' residents.

In the second case, EPIC was joined by a coalition of consumer and
civil liberties groups representing 41 million individuals in arguing
that California should be allowed to regulate disclosure of personal
information among financial institution affiliates.  In American
Bankers Association v. Lockyer, financial institutions sued to
invalidate the strong privacy protections of SB1, California's
Financial Information Privacy Act.  That law requires financial
institutions to obtain consent of consumers before selling personal
information to third parties, and allows consumers to opt out of
information disclosure among affiliated companies and companies that
have joint marketing agreements.  The lower court upheld SB1's
protections (see EPIC Alert 11.13).

Limiting disclosure of personal information is important because there
is no transparency in the use of the data, and because financial
affiliate structures can be enormous.  The coalition brief argues that
SB1's protections are critical because identity theft and fraud are
being driven by insider access to personal information.  The more a
financial institution can exploit information among affiliates, the
greater the risk of fraud.  Furthermore, if the court invalidates SB1,
by implication, a broad range of unrelated laws could be affected.

EPIC also argued that allowing exploitation of personal information
among affiliates would result in three obnoxious data practices:
first, information disclosed to affiliates is not subject to
time-tested "fair information practices" that promote accuracy and
accountability.  Over time, this could result in a return to unfair
practices that led to passage of the Fair Credit Reporting Act or to
new types of abuses.  Second, it could result in "first degree price
discrimination," a practice where a company uses information to
determine the maximum price that a consumer will pay for a service.
Last, it could result in customer discrimination, practices where
businesses either refuse to serve or give disincentives to less
profitable customers.

EPIC's Kehoe v. Fidelity Federal Bank and Trust Page:


For more information about drivers privacy, see EPIC's Drivers Privacy
Protection Act and Drivers License Privacy Page:


EPIC's ABA v. Lockyer Page:


For more information about SB1 and preemption of state law, see EPIC's
Preemption Page:


[2] Bill Introduced to Make 9/11 Commission Recommendations Law

A bipartisan group of Senators has introduced a vast 280-page bill
intended to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.  The
proposed legislation, known as the 9/11 Commission Report
Implementation Act of 2004, covers subjects ranging from intelligence
reform to information sharing to border and transportation security.

The bill first would establish the National Intelligence Authority, an
agency that will incorporate most of the country's existing
intelligence agencies.  A presidentally-appointed National
Intelligence Director would advise the President on intelligence
matters, oversee most intelligence activities, and would have
authority over the intelligence budget.

Further, the legislation would drastically change the way government
agencies share information.  The bill requires the President to create
an "information sharing network" to exchange broadly defined
"terrorism information" between local, state, and federal agencies, as
well as with the private sector "where appropriate."  The bill also
establishes an advisory council, mandates presidential and agency
reports to Congress, and requires an annual assessment by the General
Accounting Office to provide for oversight of the network.  However,
the bill envisions very little accountability to the public, stating
only that the advisory council will let the public know about its
activities "as appropriate and in a manner consistent with the
protection of classified information and applicable law."

The bill proposes a number of changes to transportation security,
including a requirement that the Department of Homeland Security
consolidate the controversial "no fly" and "selectee" watch lists that
are now used to flag terrorists and keep them off airplanes.  Further,
the bill mandates that the agency create an "automated biometric entry
and exit data system" to track immigrants and visa holders.  The
system would link all information systems maintained by federal
agencies involved in immigration enforcement.

The legislation includes several measures concerning identification
and screening.  The bill requires that all birth certificates, state
drivers' licenses, and identification cards comply with regulations
set by the Department of Homeland Security, including a rule that
licenses must have "a digital photograph or other unique identifier."
Federal agencies will not be permitted to accept ID cards that do not
follow those standards.  Further, the bill establishes a
"comprehensive integrated screening system" to verify the identities
of all people attempting to enter the country, access commercially
owned critical infrastructure, and travel via transportation systems.
This system is to utilize biometric identifiers to the extent the
Secretary of Homeland Security deems "appropriate and feasible."

The legislation also creates a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight
Board, the members of which will be appointed by the President.  The
Board is tasked with reviewing the government's antiterrorism efforts
and advising the President and agencies on civil liberties
implications of current and future measures.  The bill further
provides for privacy and civil liberties officers within a number of

The time line for the legislation is expected to be a fast one, with
bill co-sponsor Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) voicing confidence that
the Governmental Affairs Committee will markup and report the bill to
the Senate floor before the end of the month.

The executive summary of the 9/11 Commission Report Implementation Act
of 2004:


The full text of the 9/11 Commission Report Implementation Act of


For more information about the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, see
the EPIC 9/11 Commission Page:


[3] Census Bureau Revamps Policy on Data Sharing

The Census Bureau recently revised its policy on sharing statistical
information about "sensitive populations" with law enforcement and
intelligence agencies.  According to a statement by the Bureau,
"[e]ffective immediately, all special tabulations of data requested by
a federal, state or local law enforcement agency or intelligence
agency will require prior approval by the appropriate Associate
Director at the Bureau whenever the request involves sensitive
populations, including minority groups."  The Census Bureau
acknowledged that the policy change was made in response to "recent
concerns about data tabulations provided to law enforcement agencies
that are now part of the Department of Homeland Security."

EPIC obtained documents in July through the Freedom of Information Act
revealing that the Census Bureau gave the Department of Homeland
Security Customs and Border Protection Bureau statistical information
on people who identified themselves on the 2000 census as being of
Arab ancestry.  One tabulation obtained by EPIC showed cities with
populations of 10,000 or more and with 1,000 or more people who
indicated that they are of Arab ancestry.  For each city, the
tabulation provided total population, population of Arab ancestry, and
percent of the total population which is of Arab ancestry.  A second
tabulation, more than a thousand pages in length, showed the number of
census responses indicating Arab ancestry in zip codes throughout the
country.  The responses indicating Arab ancestry were subdivided into
Egyptian, Iraqi, Jordanian, Lebanese, Moroccan, Palestinian, Syrian,
Arab/Arabic, and Other Arab.

The documents also included an e-mail from a Customs and Border
Protection official to a Census Bureau analyst explaining that the law
enforcement agency requested the data to determine "which language of
signage, based on U.S. ethnic nationality population, would be best to
post at the major International airports."  In response to the
documents, EPIC joined a coalition of more than 20 civil liberties
organizations last month to send a letter to the Department of
Homeland Security, asking the law enforcement agency to explain its
acquisition and use of statistical census data on Arab Americans.  The
coalition also called for a formal documented investigation into the
matter and Congressional hearings if necessary.

Census Bureau press release on policy change:


Documents obtained by EPIC from the Census Bureau through the Freedom
of Information Act:


For more information on the census and privacy, see EPIC's Census
Privacy Page:


[4] EPIC Files Comments on Use of Voter Social Security Numbers

The Social Security Administration recently issued public notice
announcing that it will institute a new routine use for the Social
Security Number (SSN), which will allow the agency to verify the name,
date of birth and last four digits of the SSN for state voter
registration purposes under the Social Security Act.

The SSN was created in 1936 as a nine-digit account number assigned by
the Secretary of Health and Human Services for the purpose of
administering the Social Security laws.  SSNs were first intended for
use exclusively by the federal government as a means of tracking
earnings to determine the amount of Social Security taxes to credit to
each worker's account.  Over time, however, SSNs were permitted to be
used for purposes unrelated to the administration of the Social
Security system.  For example, in 1961 Congress authorized the
Internal Revenue Service to use SSNs as taxpayer identification

The new routine use for the SSN is pursuant to provisions of the Help
America Vote Act (HAVA), which is the broadest update of voting
procedures in the United States since the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 
HAVA also marks the first time the federal government has asserted a
role in the administration of elections through the creation of the
Election Assistance Commission.

In its comments, EPIC objected to the new routine use on the grounds
that it may lead to demands that voters produce their Social Security
cards as proof of identity on Election Day.  EPIC noted that the SSN
was not created for this purpose, and argued that the expanded use
will expose more users to identity theft or voter fraud.  EPIC asked
the agency not to implement the routine use until state election
administrations agree not to require voters to present their Social
Security cards in order to vote in federal elections.

EPIC comments on use of the SSN for voter registration:


For more information about SSN privacy, see the EPIC SSN Page:


[5] Bush Establishes Civil Liberties Board

In an executive order issued August 27, President Bush announced the
creation of the President's Board on Safeguarding Americans' Civil
Liberties.  The board will be comprised of high-level officials from
the Office of Management and Budget, and the Departments of Justice,
Treasury and Homeland Security, and will be led by Deputy Attorney
General James Comey and the Department of Homeland Security's Under
Secretary for Border and Transportation Security Asa Hutchinson.  The
order does not provide for outside appointments or membership of
non-governmental representatives.

The duties of this board of law enforcement and intelligence officials
include advising the President on civil liberties policy, requesting
reports from federal agencies, and reviewing programs at the request
of the agency in charge of the program.  The board's presumed
influence upon the government's actions affecting civil liberties is
severely constricted by a complete lack of independent investigative
powers.  The executive order also omits any mention of public reports
by the board or other transparency.

The board was created at the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission.
However, it is unclear how likely the board is to achieve the 9/11
Commission's stated goal of "find[ing] ways of reconciling security
with liberty, since the success of one helps protect the other . . .
[I]f our liberties are curtailed, we lose the values we are struggling
to defend."

Executive Order establishing the President's Board on Safeguarding
Americans' Civil Liberties:


9/11 Commission Report (see page 412):


For more information about the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, see
the EPIC 9/11 Commission Page:


[6] News in Brief


The Department of Homeland Security has published a notice in the
Federal Register announcing that it plans to expand the controversial
United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology
(US-VISIT), an already massive program that tracks the travel of
foreign nationals to and from the United States.  According to the
notice, the program will be implemented at the 50 most highly
trafficked land border ports of entry in the United States early next
year.  Furthermore, the notice states the agency has the authority to
collect biometric data from nonimmigrant visitors who travel to the
United States through the Visa Waiver Program, as well as Mexican
citizens traveling to and from the United States.  The Department of
Homeland Security will accept public comments on US-VISIT's expansion
until November 1, 2004.

The Department of Homeland Security's notice on the expansion of


For more information about US-VISIT, see EPIC's US-VISIT Page:



EPIC joined three other civil liberties groups in filing an amicus
brief on September 2, encouraging the First Circuit Court of Appeals
to overturn the controversial ruling that an e-mail provider that
allegedly read messages intended for its users did not break federal
wiretapping laws.  The June decision of a three-judge panel held that
former Interloc vice president Bradley Councilman did not violate the
Wiretap Act because the e-mails were intercepted while temporarily
stored on the hard drive of the company's server -- for as little as a
fraction of a second -- rather than while in transit.  The brief,
filed by the Center for Democracy and Technology and joined also by
the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Library
Association, argues that this decision fails to recognize the intent
of Congress to protect the privacy of electronic communications, and
creates serious constitutional questions under the Fourth Amendment
guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure.

The amicus brief:


Full decision of the three-judge panel in United States v. Councilman:


For more information about interception of communications, see EPIC's
Wiretapping Page:



The Department of Justice has asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
to seal from public view its arguments supporting an unpublished
federal regulation requiring passengers to show identification before
boarding an airplane, stating in court papers that disclosure "would
be detrimental to the security of transportation."  The agency also
seeks to present its arguments outside the presence of appellant John
Gilmore and his counsel.  Gilmore is challenging the dismissal of his
case in March by a federal district court.

EPIC has filed an amicus brief in Gilmore v. Ashcroft, arguing that
meaningful judicial review is necessary to prevent the government from
imposing a secret, vague law upon the public in violation of
constitutional due process rights.

Gilmore v. Ashcroft web site:


EPIC's amicus brief in Gilmore v. Ashcroft:


For more information about air travel privacy, see EPIC's Passenger
Profiling Page:



OpenTheGovernment.org, a coalition of more than 30 civil liberties
groups promoting less secrecy and more democracy in government, has
released a report finding that the federal government has become more
secretive under the current administration, despite increased public
demand for information.  According to the report, the U.S. government
created 60 percent more secrets last year than it did in 2001, the
largest jump in at least a decade, as well as spent the largest amount
last year alone-- $6.5 billion -- securing classified information. The
federal government is also keeping more information classified,
spending $120 dollars maintaining current secrets for every dollar it
spent to release old secrets last year, compared to less than $20 per
year maintaining secrets for every dollar declassifying them from
1997-2001.  In 2003, the government declassified only one-fifth the
number of pages that it declassified in 1997.

Meanwhile, demand for information from the government is rising.
Freedom of Information Act requests have more than tripled from
1998-2003, while federal resources processing these requests have not
increased.  Agencies without backlogged FOIA requests decreased from
12 to 7 last year.

OpenTheGovernment.org report on government secrecy:



The Public Voice, a project of the Electronic Privacy Information
Center, has launched a monthly newsletter called The Megaphone.  EPIC
established the Public Voice project in order to promote the voice of
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in decisions affecting the
future of the Internet.  The project facilitates NGO participation in
policy making on issues ranging from privacy and free expression to
consumer protection and Internet governance, and policy processes such
as the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS).  The Megaphone
highlights recent developments in these areas and provides information
on Public Voice events.  It also includes a list of upcoming NGO
conferences and policy events as well as useful resources.  To
subscribe to The Megaphone, send an e-mail to thepublicvoice at

The Public Voice:


The Megaphone online archive:


[7] EPIC Bookstore: Your Evil Twin

Bob Sullivan, Your Evil Twin: Behind the Identity Theft Epidemic (John
Wiley & Sons 2004).


Investigative reporter Bob Sullivan's Your Evil Twin is an exciting
and thorough work covering the forces behind and consequences of
identity theft.  Sullivan fully develops the nuances of identity
theft, showing how clever individuals can easily take advantage of
credit practices that are premised on a "grant first, ask questions
later" business model.  His survey of the crime covers credit card
fraud, the problem of new accounts being opened in victims' names, and
the worst-case scenario, criminal identity theft, where the impostor
uses the victim's identity in altercations with the police.

Sullivan highlights new, more daring forms of identity theft,
including criminals who buy new automobiles on others' credit,
criminals who hijack hundreds of online auction accounts, and even
those who send authentic-looking solicitations to individuals in order
to get them to divulge personal information.  He also shows how this
crime is more serious than previously thought -- identity theft is now
recognized as a principal source of funding for individuals wishing to
commit crimes of terrorism against the country.

The first chapter of the book, which covers the spectacular crime
spree of identity thief James Rinaldo Jackson, is online at

- Chris Jay Hoofnagle


EPIC Publications:

"The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit on
the Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40.

This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and the
process of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS).  This
reference guide provides the official UN documents, regional and
issue-oriented perspectives, as well as recommendations and proposals
for future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts
for individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved in
the WSIS process.


"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2003: United States Law, International
Law, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2003).
Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2003

The "Physicians Desk Reference of the privacy world."  An invaluable
resource for students, attorneys, researchers and journalists who need
an up-to-date collection of U.S. and International privacy law, as
well as a comprehensive listing of privacy resources.


"FOIA 2002: Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws," Harry
Hammitt, David Sobel and Mark Zaid, editors (EPIC 2002). Price: $40.

This is the standard reference work covering all aspects of the
Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Government in the
Sunshine Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act.  The 21st
edition fully updates the manual that lawyers, journalists and
researchers have relied on for more than 25 years.  For those who
litigate open government cases (or need to learn how to litigate
them), this is an essential reference manual.


"Privacy & Human Rights 2003: An International Survey of Privacy Laws
and Developments" (EPIC 2002). Price: $35.

This survey, by EPIC and Privacy International, reviews the state of
privacy in over fifty-five countries around the world.  The survey
examines a wide range of privacy issues including data protection,
passenger profiling, genetic databases, video surveillance, ID systems
and freedom of information laws.


"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content
Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.

A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content
filtering.  These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering
threatens free expression.


"The Consumer Law Sourcebook 2000: Electronic Commerce and the Global
Economy," Sarah Andrews, editor (EPIC 2000). Price: $40.

The Consumer Law Sourcebook provides a basic set of materials for
consumers, policy makers, practitioners and researchers who are
interested in the emerging field of electronic commerce.  The focus is
on framework legislation that articulates basic rights for consumers
and the basic responsibilities for businesses in the online economy.


"Cryptography and Liberty 2000: An International Survey of Encryption
Policy," Wayne Madsen and David Banisar, authors (EPIC 2000). Price:
$20.  http://www.epic.org/bookstore/crypto00&

EPIC's third survey of encryption policies around the world.  The
results indicate that the efforts to reduce export controls on strong
encryption products have largely succeeded, although several
governments are gaining new powers to combat the perceived threats of
encryption to law enforcement.


EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free
expression, crypto and governance can be ordered at:

      EPIC Bookstore

      "EPIC Bookshelf" at Powell's Books

[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

Ninth National HIPAA Summit.  September 12-14, 2004.  Baltimore, MD.
For more information: http://www.HIPAASummit.com.

Public Voice Symposium: Privacy in a New Era: Challenges,
Opportunities and Partnerships.  Electronic Privacy Information
Center, European Digital Rights Initiative (EDRi), and Privacy
International.  September 13, 2004.  Wroclaw, Poland.  For more

The Right to Personal Data Protection -- the Right to Dignity.  26th
International Conference on Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners.
September 14-16, 2004.  Wroclaw, Poland.  For more information:

Health Privacy Seminar.  Riley Information Services.  September 17,
2004.  Ottawa, Ontario.  For more information:

Public Workshop on Traffic Data Retention.  DG Information Society and
DG Justice and Home Affairs.  September 21, 2004.  Brussels, Belgium.
For more information: http://www.epic.org/redirect/921_workshop.html.

Protection of Children Online and Review of the Safe Harbour
Agreement.  British Institute of International and Comparative Law
2004 Data Protection Research and Policy Group Series.  September 22,
2004.  London, UK.  For more information: http:www.biicl.org.

Online Privacy: Choice of Law.  British Institute of International and
Comparative Law Data Protection Research and Policy Group.  September
23, 2004.  London, UK.  For more information: http:www.biicl.org.

Nethead/Bellhead: The FCC Takes on the Internet.  Cardozo Law School
Florsheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy and the Yale Law
School Information Society Project.  September 28, 2004.  New York,
NY.  For more information: http://www.cardozobellhead.net.

IAPP Privacy and National Security Forum.  International Association
of Privacy Professionals.  September 30, 2004.  Washington, DC.  For
more information:

The Internet and the Law -- A Global Conversation.  Law & Technology
Program, University of Ottawa.  Ottawa, Ontario.  October 1-2, 2004.
For more information:

2004 Telecommunications Policy Research Conference.  National Center
for Technology & Law, George Mason University School of Law.  October
1-3, 2004.  Arlington, VA.  For more information:

Health Privacy Conference.  Office of the Information and Privacy
Commissioner of Alberta.  October 4-5, 2004.  Calgary, Alberta,
Canada.  For more information:

IAPP Entertainment and Privacy Forum.  International Association of
Privacy Professionals.  October 7, 2004.  Los Angeles, CA.  For more
information: http://www.privacyassociation.org/html/conferences.html.

Privacy and Identity: The Promise and the Perils of a Technological
Age.  DePaul University Center for Intellectual Property Law and
Information Technology and  School of Computer Science,
Telecommunications and Information Systems.  October 14-15, 2004.
Chicago, IL.  For more information:

2004 Big Brother Awards Switzerland.  October 16, 2004.  Lucerne,
Switzerland.  For more information: http://www.bigbrotherawards.ch.

DRM 2004: The Fourth ACM Workshop on Digital Rights Management.
Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on
Security, Audit and Control.  October 25, 2004.  Washington, DC.  For
more info: http://mollie.engr.uconn.edu/DRM2004.

2004 Big Brother Awards Austria.  October 26, 2004.  Vienna, Austria.
For more information: http://www.bigbrotherawards.at.

Private and Private International Law Issues Raised by Electronic
Commerce.  The Hague Conference on Private International Law, the
Netherlands Government and the International Chamber of Commerce.
October 26-27, 2004.  The Hague, Netherlands.  For more information:

IAPP Privacy and Data Security Academy & Expo.  International
Association of Privacy Professionals.  October 27-29, 2004. New
Orleans, LA.  For more information:

Privacy and Security: Seeking the Middle Path.  Office of the
Information & Privacy Commissioner of Ontario; Centre for Innovation
Law and Policy, University of Toronto; and Center for Applied
Cryptographic Research, University of Waterloo.  Toronto, Ontario,
Canada.  October 28-29, 2004.  For more information:

2004 Big Brother Awards Germany.  October 29, 2004.  Bielefeld,
Germany.  For more information: http://www.bigbrotherawards.de.

The 2004 Isaac Pitblado Lectures: Privacy -- Another Snail in the
Ginger Beer.  The Law Society of Manitoba, The Manitoba Bar
Association and the University of Manitoba Faculty of Law.  November
19-20, 2004.  Manitoba, Canada. For more information:

National Security, Law Enforcement and Data Protection.  British
Institute of International and Comparative Law Data Protection
Research and Policy Group.  December 8, 2004.  London, UK.  For more
information: http:www.biicl.org.

Seventh International General Online Research Conference.  German
Society for Online Research.  March 22-23, 2005.  Zurich, Switzerland.
For more information: http://www.gor.de.

CFP2005: Fifteenth Annual Conference on Computers, Freedom and
Privacy.  April 12-15, 2005.  Seattle, WA.  For more information:

Subscription Information

Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface:


Back issues are available at:


The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.

Privacy Policy

The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to
send notices about EPIC activities.  We do not sell, rent or share our
mailing list.  We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal
process seeking access to our mailing list.  We do not enhance (link
to other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.

In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address
from this list, please follow the above instructions under
"subscription information."

About EPIC

The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest
research center in Washington, DC.  It was established in 1994 to
focus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper
Chip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical
record privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information.
EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act
litigation, and conducts policy research.  For more information, see
http://www.epic.org or write EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite
200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202 483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248

If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy
Information Center, contributions are welcome and fully
tax-deductible.  Checks should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718
Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009.  Or you can
contribute online at:


Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and
First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the
right of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of
encryption and expanding wiretapping powers.

Thank you for your support.

---------------------- END EPIC Alert 11.17 ----------------------