Article reprinted from STATES NEWS SERVICE, August 5, 1990 Author: Brooks Boliek Showdown over computer 'crime' Some of the nation's computer pioneers see the digital world in which they toil as a cybernetic rangeland with its own kind of frontier justice. And some of them have set out to change the system. Their rallying cry is Operation Sun Devil and other government probes into malfeasance by so-called computer "hackers." These investigations, they assert, smack of hang-em-high justice and all to often become examples of government heavy-handedness. "Some of the government's actions clearly weren't constitutional," said Mitch Kapor, founder of Lotus Development Corp. and a new software firm ON Technology in Cambridge, Mass. Kapor, along with a small group of fellow computer pioneers, recently announced the formation of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a group dedicated to protecting the rights of computer users. Its ultimate goal is to extend the same First Amendment protection that the print and broadcast media enjoy to digital communications. "Our idea is to get people to understand the issues and not to try and make decisions in a controversial and confrontational atmosphere," Kapor said. Secret Service and U.S. Justice Department spokesmen in Washington declined to comment on Operation Sun Devil or other computer investigations. But they stressed that the federal agencies are mindful of the need to protect civil rights. "We are not just some renegade agency breaking into peoples's computer systems,"said Secret Service Agent Rich Adams. "We would not be investigating if we were not mandated by Congress. That's why we're involved." The foundation is pushing its goals by providing legal assistance to computer users who become victims of what they see as overly zealous law enforcement officials. It also is awarding grants to civil liberties organizations such as the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility in Palo Alto. Kapor stresses that the foundation is not a defense fund for "hackers" and does not support breaking into computer systems or pirating software. The foundation has already had an impact. It recently located defense witnesses in the government's case against computer bulletin board operator and newsletter publisher Craig Neidorf. On July 27, in the middle of the trial, the government abruptly dropped its case against Neidorf. Neidorf was accused of interstate transportation of a stolen BellSouth Corp. document describing its emergency 911 system, a charge which stems from the government's investigation into a group of hackers called the Legion of Doom. Prosecutors dropped Neidorf's case when Sheldon Zenner, Neidorf's attorney, showed that the information which BellSouth alleged was proprietary could be purchased by calling an 800 number and paying $13. 'Private police force' Terry Gross, an attorney that aided Neidorf's defense team, accused the government of serving as a private police force for large corporations. "I think it is a very serious concern that we should all have of the government being used as a private police force for private corporations," Gross said. "Especially when BellSouth made a claim that the government accepted." The foundation contends that prosecutors, policemen and judges must think of computer communications in the same way they think of printed and broadcast communications. In the eyes of foundation leaders, their main opponent is the federal government. Operation Sun Devil, a two-year investigation, has so far resulted in seven arrests and some 40 computers and 23,000 disks of data. Kapor's group draws a parallel between the Pentagon Papers case, which involved classified government papers documenting the history of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, and Neidorf's. If Neidorf had published the document in a newspaper, as The New York Times and The Washington Post published the Pentagon Papers, he would have been protected. "The example they use is a good one," said Ken Wasch, executive director of the Software Publishers Association. If someone printed a document on how to get into a federal facility there would be no restrictions on publication, he explained. "But if you put it on a (computer) bulletin board there would be." Complex issues Kapor said the Secret Service, the lead investigating agency for computer crimes, as well as the FBI and prosecutors often fail to understand the complex issues that arise with computer crimes. He said law enforcement officers are like most people when it comes to computers: uninformed. Kapor believes that people are afraid of computers because they don't understand them. To minimize the misunderstanding, the foundation wants to educate law enforcement officers, judicial officers and the public about digital communications. "There is a hugh gap between where most of us regular folk are today and where the technology is," Kapor said. Feds claim expertise Secret Service agent Adams disputed the notion that federal officials lack computer expertise. The service has been investigating computer crimes since 1984, he said. "I think it's just the opposite is true," Adams said. "We are very effective in our investigations and if we didn't have the expertise we wouldn't be as effective." Adams acknowledged that a lack of manpower means his agency must pick and choose what to investigate. "They (the EFF) would lead you to believe that we are out there cracking everyone's computer system and looking into every bulletin board," he said. "We simply do not have the manpower to do that. We pinpoint the large dollar losses and those are the ones we investigate." At least one member of Congress has expressed some concern over the government's crackdown on computer crime. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., wants to change the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 to prevent the government from going too far. Neidorf was indicted under the law. "As far as I can tell all he did was republish a document in Phrack (his newsletter)," Leahy said during a hearing on the issue. "That's not a heck of a lot different than someone walking down the street who picks up a document and writes a letter to the editor." The Neidorf case has disturbed Leahy, who said he is face with the nettlesome problem of balancing the need for computer security with individual rights. "We know people work very hard to create products with their computers," he said. "They ought to be able to protect those. At the same time, I don't want to see the mass resources of the United States Justice Department turned loose on things that don't make that much difference."