<?php

include("eff_setup2.php");

$smarty = new EFFSmarty;

$smarty->assign('title','EFFector Vol. 17, No. 13, April 15, 2004');

// if breadcrumb == true, then it fill in the right trail in the issue
// array
$smarty->assign('breadcrumb','true');

// example:
$issue = array("EFFector" => "/effector/", "Volume 17" => "/effector/17/");

//Creative Commons - If you need to turn OFF the CC license, set cc = false
//$smarty->assign('cc',"false");

$smarty->assign('issue',$issue);
$smarty->assign('issue',$issue);
$smarty->assign('effector',"true");
$content  = '
<div id="featuretext">

<h1>
EFFector &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Vol. 17, No. 13 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; April 15, 2004
</h1>

<p>
A Publication of the <a href="http://www.eff.org/">Electronic Frontier
Foundation</a> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ISSN 1062-9424
</p>


<h4>In the 285rd Issue of EFFector:</h4>

<a name="toc"></a>

<ul>
  <li><a href="#I"> Action Alert: Don\'t Subsidize the Surveillance State!</a></li>
  <li><a href="#II"> Google\'s Gmail: A Rough Guide to Protecting Your Privacy</a></li>
  <li><a href="#III"> Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT - Sections 202 and 217</a></li>
  <li><a href="#IV"> EFF @ the 2004 Computers, Freedom & Privacy Conference</a></li>
  <li><a href="#V"> EFF Seeks Socially Responsible Technical Director</a></li>
  <li><a href="#mini"> MiniLinks (19): American Airlines: 1.2 Million Passengers Served to Gov\'t Contractors</a>
  <li><a href="#cal">Staff Calendar</a>: 04.17.04 - 04.18.04 - Wendy Seltzer speaks at Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL; 04.20.04 -  04.23.04 - Kevin Bankston, Cindy Cohn, Chris Palmer, Fred  von Lohmann, Wendy Seltzer, Seth Schoen and Lee Tien speak  at CFP, Berkeley, CA </li>
  <li><a href="#admin"> Administrivia</a></li>
</ul>

<hr size="1" />

<a name="I"></a>

<p>
<h1>Don\'t Subsidize the Surveillance State! Tell the FCC to Keep CALEA Off the Net</h1>
</p>

<p>
The FBI wants to apply a decade-old telephone surveillance law to 
the Internet - and it\'s going to cost you. The Communication 
Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA) forced phone 
companies to build convenient wiretap features into their networks, 
but at least it provided money for the changes.  That money is 
long gone, and now the FBI wants the FCC, network equipment 
companies, broadband ISPs and their customers to pay for a new 
surveillance regime.  This novel interpretation of the law will 
be bad for innovation, consumers and civil liberties.  Tell the 
FCC to keep CALEA off the Net!  
</p>

<p>
Make your voice heard:<br>
<a href="http://www.eff.org/activism/calea/">http://www.eff.org/activism/calea/</a>
</p>

<p>
Join EFF today:<br>
<a href="https://secure.eff.org/">https://secure.eff.org/</a>
</p>

<p>
EFF\'s comments on the FBI proposal:<br>
<a href="http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/20040413_EFF_CALEA_comments.php">http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/20040413_EFF_CALEA_comments.php</a>
</p>

<hr size="1" />

<a name="II"></a>

<p>
<h1>Google\'s Gmail: A Rough Guide to Protecting Your Privacy</h1>
</p>

<p>
As we noted in last week\'s EFFector, Google has introduced a new 
beta email service called "Gmail" that raises a number of privacy 
concerns. 
</p>

<p>
While the media has largely focused on the fact that Gmail will 
scan the contents of your email messages in order to target ads, 
the more serious problem from a privacy perspective is Google\'s 
ability to link your Gmail account information with your Google 
web searches.  By linking your complete Google search history - 
tagged with your name and personal details - to your email records, 
Google can create a highly nuanced picture of you as a reader 
and as a person.  Such pictures present irresistible targets for 
government investigators, civil lawsuit plaintiffs, and even 
identity thieves.  A single attack or disclosure could release 
deeply sensitive details about your life to the world without 
your knowledge or consent.
</p>

<p>
Below, we explain how personal information from your Gmail 
account can be linked to your Google searches, provide a 
technical "how-to" for (temporarily) keeping the two separate, and 
offer our recommendations for a longer-term solution to the 
problem.  Although we focus here on Google, these recommendations
apply to any business - Yahoo, Hotmail/MSN - that offers both 
search and email services and can link the two.  
</p>

<p>
<strong>The Problem</strong>
</p>

<p>
Google uses cookies - bits of identifying data that automatically 
allow a website to "recognize" you - to link every Google search 
you conduct on the same computer and browser.  This could be used 
to help Google to refine your search results or their display to 
match your preferences more closely.  Even though Google keeps 
this search information stored on its servers, without your name 
and other personalized information it has no way explicitly to 
link searches to your other activities and correspondence on 
the Internet.
</p>

<p>
The problem is that the Gmail service may change this.  All of a 
sudden, Google can know exactly who you are every time you search 
the Internet using its service.  And not only that, its databases 
know who is sending you email, to whom you respond, and even what 
you write about.  With innumerable search results and up to 1 gigabyte 
of email messages per Gmail account at its disposal, Google could 
pull together an extremely detailed dossier on each of the 
millions of people who use its services every day.  Such a vast 
assemblage of nuanced personal information could become a bigger 
privacy nightmare than government projects such as Total 
Information Awareness (TIA).
</p>

<p>
As we note above, Google isn\'t the only threat.  Yahoo and Hotmail, 
although they\'re not (yet) offering to archive a full gigabyte 
of your personal email messages, can also link your email account 
to your search history - and to your instant messaging as well.  
Amazon is getting in on the game, too, announcing this week its 
new "A9" search service, which will allow the company to correlate 
your book browsing and purchases with your search and click 
history via cookies. 
</p>

<p>
<strong>The Fix</strong>
</p>

<p>
Contrary to what we suggested last week, merely deleting cookies 
"often" is not enough to prevent this from happening.  You would 
have to delete cookies both before and after you use Gmail - each 
and every time.  There\'s a better way. 
</p>

<p>
Delete Past Linkability
</p>

<p>
For current and prospective Gmail users, we suggest that you start 
by deleting your existing Google cookies before you use Gmail 
(and before you enter your real name or existing email address in 
any Google form).  This will help prevent your pre-existing search 
history from becoming associated with your identity in the future.  
(Note that it will also cause you to lose any Google preferences 
you have entered, such as language or adult content preferences.)
</p>

<p>
Prevent Future Linkability
</p>

<p>
In addition, we suggest that you use one of the two following 
schemes to prevent a link between your Gmail account and your 
Google searches:
</p>

<p>
(1) If you don\'t already have two or more web browser programs 
installed on your computer, obtain a second browser.  Use the 
second browser only to access Gmail, and never use it for Google 
searches.  To serve as a reminder for which browser to use, you 
could configure your second browser to load Gmail automatically 
when it starts.
</p>

<p>
(2) Use an "anonymizing" or cookie-controlling proxy service such 
as Anonymizer.com whenever you use Google search.  For example, if 
you are an Anonymizer.com subscriber, you can create a web browser 
bookmark to the URL <a href="https://anon.ssl.anonymizer.com/http://www.google.com/">https://anon.ssl.anonymizer.com/http://www.google.com/</a>
Use this bookmark whenever you want to make a Google search.  You 
can then feel free to log on to the Gmail service using your 
ordinary web browser.
</p>

<p>
<strong>Our Recommendations to Google</strong>
</p>

<p>
Google doesn\'t have to make us jump through these kinds of technical 
hoops in order to protect our search privacy.  In fact, Google could 
easily reassure its users about linking email to search with one 
simple step.  Because each cookie is associated with a particular 
domain, Google could move the Gmail service from gmail.google.com to
www.gmail.com - thereby keeping the gmail.com cookie separate from the
google.com cookie.   While using separate domains may not be as 
convenient for some users as a single sign-on at a single domain, 
single sign-on could easily be offered as an opt-in feature, giving 
people a fair opportunity to assess the privacy/convenience 
trade-off before Google starts collecting their data. 
</p>

<p>
Finally, Google has said that it will not use Gmail to determine 
who is using the Google search engine for particular searches.  
This is a good policy, but it needs to be spelled out clearly on 
the Gmail privacy policy page: www.google.com/gmail/help/privacy.html
</p>

<p>
<strong>What\'s Next?</strong>
</p>

<p>
EFF is pleased that Google has so far been forthcoming about many 
of the features and issues raised by Gmail.  We plan to continue 
our talks with the company, and we hope that Google will adopt our
recommendations.  When the final version of the Gmail service is 
released, we\'ll take a fresh look and let you know whether or not 
the service makes the grade for protecting your privacy.
</p>

<p>
<strong>The Big Picture</strong>
</p>

<p>
What we\'ve offered here is a short-term fix for current/prospective 
Gmail users and a few brief recommendations for Google, barely 
scratching the surface of the privacy issues surrounding Web mail.  
A temporary work-around is just that - temporary.  In the longer term, 
we are exploring bigger picture issues including: 
</p>

<ul>

<li>Concern over the growing trend to move large portions of people\'s
    lives online via 3rd party providers, abandoning hard-won legal
    protections.
</li>

<li>Risks of potential correlation of large swaths of private online
    activity beyond mail and searching at all the major providers:
    MSN, Yahoo, AOL and now potentially Google.
</li>

<li>Different legal rules that may apply to mail that is indexed, 
    searched or keyword matched by a third party - even when all these 
    tasks are entirely automated.
</li>

<li>What risks users should be aware of, what technical measures they
    can take to protect their privacy, and what legal and contractual
    measures they should demand to protect their rights.
</li>

</ul>

<hr size="1" />

<a name="III"></a>

<p><h1>Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT - Sections 202 and 217: "Authority 
to Intercept Wire, Oral and Electronic Communications Relating to 
Computer Fraud And Abuse Offenses" and "Interception of Computer 
Trespasser Communications"</h1></p>
</p>

<p>
Apologists justified the broad, civil-liberties corroding powers 
granted to the government under the USA PATRIOT Act by arguing 
that they would be used to put terrorists behind bars.  Yet 
several provisions can be used against Americans in a wide range of
investigations that have nothing to do with terrorism.  Worse, 
the Department of Justice has worked to expand and/or make 
permanent a number of these provisions - despite the fact that 
they were sold to the public as "temporary" measures and are 
scheduled to expire, or "sunset," in December of 2005.
</p>

<p>
Every two weeks, we profile one of the 13 provisions scheduled 
to sunset and explain in plain language what\'s wrong with the 
provision and why Congress should allow it to expire.  This week
we tackle two at once: Sections 202 and 217.
</p>

<p>
<strong>Why Sections 202 and 217 Should Sunset</strong>
</p>

<p>
The two provisions together make it easier for the FBI to get 
privacy-invasive wiretap orders and to intercept your electronic 
communications when investigating computer crimes - even when 
those crimes have absolutely nothing to do with terrorism. 
</p>

<p>
Wiretap orders are like "super-warrants" - only the most serious 
crimes justify their use.  Yet in the climate of fear in the wake 
the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Justice Department persuaded 
Congress to expand the government\'s wiretap powers without ever 
having to cite even a *single instance* in which a computer-crime 
investigation - much less a terrorism investigation - had been 
hindered due to lack of surveillance authority.  
</p>

<p>
The DoJ also succeeded in pushing through a provision that under 
some circumstances gives the FBI the power to intercept your 
private electronic communications - email messages, faxes, 
instant messages, etc. - *without* a judge\'s approval.
</p>

<p>
<strong>How Sections 202 and 217 Changed the Law</strong>
</p>

<p>
<li>Section 202: The FBI can get a court\'s authorization to 
"bug" face-to-face conversations or tap phone calls only when 
investigating especially serious crimes.  PATRIOT added computer 
crime to the list of felonies that justify such profound 
violations of privacy - despite the fact that the Justice 
Department never presented evidence to suggest that this is 
necessary in the battle against either computer crime or 
terrorism.
</p>

<p>
<li>Section 217:  It used to be that in order to intercept your 
private electronic communications in a computer-crime 
investigation, the FBI had to seek permission from a court.  
No more.  Now, so long as a computer service provider merely 
claims you are "trespassing" on its network, the FBI is free to 
intercept your private communications as it so chooses.  
</p>

<p>
<strong>Conclusion</strong>
</p>

<p>
Anti-terrorism laws cannot be justified by fear alone - they must 
address a real need or be repealed.  Absent a clear demonstration 
from the FBI that these new surveillance powers are necessary, 
Congress should allow Sections 202 and 217 to expire.
</p>

<p>
<strong>Next Time</strong>
</p>

<p>
We\'ll look at USA PATRIOT Section 218, which allows the FBI to 
investigate garden-variety criminals with surveillance powers 
once reserved for international spies and terrorists.
</p>

<p>
For this analysis:<br>
<a href="http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/PATRIOT/sunset/202.php">http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/PATRIOT/sunset/202.php</a>
</p>

<p>
For previous profiles:<br>
<a href="http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/PATRIOT/sunset/">http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/PATRIOT/sunset/</a>
</p>

<hr size="1" />

<a name="IV"></a>

<p>
<h1>EFF @ the 2004 Computers, Freedom & Privacy Conference</h1>
</p>

<p>
EFF staff members will present at a number of tutorials and panels 
at this year\'s Computers, Freedom & Privacy conference, which 
takes place Tuesday-Friday of next week (April 20-23) at the 
Claremont Resort & Spa in Berkeley, CA.  EFF will also be 
presenting our 2004 Pioneer Awards at 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, 
April 22nd at Chabot Space and Science Center in Oakland, CA,
in conjunction with the conference.  
</p>

<p>
Below is a quick guide to the panels EFF is participating in - 
we hope to see you there!
</p>

<p>
CFP Program:<br>
<a href="http://www.cfp2004.org/program/">http://www.cfp2004.org/program/</a>
</p>

<p>
Tuesday, April 20:<br>
Lee Tien: "RFID and Privacy" <br>
Chris Palmer: "Network Surveillance HOW-TO: A Tutorial Workshop 
on Snooping Around Modern Networks."<br>
Lee Tien: "Telecommunications Law for the Rest of Us" 
</p>

<p>
Wednesday, April 21:<br>
Lee Tien: "Tapping the Net, Revisited: Voice Over IP and Law 
Enforcement"
</p>

<p>
Thursday, April 22:<br>
Seth Schoen: "Trusted Computing"<br>
Kevin Bankston: "Wardriving, Wireless Networks and the Law"<br>
Wendy Seltzer: "Privacy and Liberty Implications of Suing File 
Sharers"<br>
Cindy Cohn: "Data Retention and Privacy: A \'Real World\' Approach 
to EU and US Regulations"<br>
Fred von Lohmann and Jason Schultz: "The Next Drug War: 
Possession Statutes Target Technology"<br>
EFF: "2004 Pioneer Awards"
</p>

<p>
Friday, April 23:<br>
Wendy Seltzer: "Cease and Desist: Two Years of Fighting Online 
Chill"
</p>

<hr size="1">

<a name="V"></a>

<h1>EFF Seeks Socially Responsible Technical Director</h1>

<p>
EFF is seeking a fulltime technical director to start immediately
and work out of EFF\'s San Francisco (Mission District) office.
This person will be responsible for managing four members of
EFF\'s technical staff and their various projects.  Technical staff
responsibilities include keeping our internal systems running
and providing expert support to our attorneys and members.
It also includes actively building, and supervising the building of,
technologies that advance free speech and privacy.  The technical
director will be responsible for creating a cogent technology
strategy for EFF.  The director must be a team player.  This
person must be a good writer, good speaker and good listener.
This person may be called on to be an expert witness, conference
speaker, declarant in a court case, or debater against entertainment
companies or government attorneys.  Comfort with advocating for a
position essential.
</p>

<p>
Project management experience absolutely required.  Extensive
experience (10 years+) with the Internet and various related
technologies also required.  Ideally, this person is already well
known and respected within the Internet community.  The job
requires an in-depth understanding of network protocols and
security, and experience with software and/or hardware development.
Experience with telecom industry and technologies highly desirable.
Familiarity with Internet civil liberties issues and EFF\'s
work required.  Salary at nonprofit scale and includes benefits
package.  This is a job for someone who wants to affect positive
social change in the world.  While the compensation is low and
the work is hard, what we\'re working on is cutting edge, and you
couldn\'t find a better group of people with which to work.
</p>

<p>
To apply, send a cover letter and your resume with links to some
samples of your work to ctojob@eff.org no later than April 15,
2004.  We request that you send these materials in a non-proprietary
format, such as an ASCII text file.  No phone calls please!
</p>

<hr size="1" />

<a name="mini"></a>

<p>
<h1>miniLinks</h1>
</p>

<p>
miniLinks features noteworthy news items from around the Internet.
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ How Apple Can Afford to Take a Loss on the iTunes Music Store  </STRONG><br>
The company\'s profits tripled on a 900% increase in iPod sales:<br>
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3627425.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3627425.stm</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ GMail - the Good, the Bad and the Ugly  </STRONG><br>
According to Danah Boyd:<br>
<a href="http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=175">http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=175</a><br>
(Apophenia weblog)
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ This Just In:<br> Another Reason to Love Google  </STRONG><br>
The company is considering changes to Gmail after hearing critics\' 
concerns - a classy move that companies make only once one in a 
google:<br>
<a href="http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=176">http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=176</a><br>
(Reuters)
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ FL Reconsiders Ban on Recounts  </STRONG><br>
You read that right - the Florida legislature had been planning 
to address the inauditability of e-voting machines by making
some recounts illegal:<br>
<a href="http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/8417117.htm?1c">http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/8417117.htm?1c</a><br>
(Registration unfortunately required.)
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Iraqster:<br> Soldiers Swap Music During Wartime  </STRONG><br>
The New York Times on the file sharing in Iraq:<br>
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/13/arts/music/13TROO.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/13/arts/music/13TROO.html</a><br>
(Registration unfortunately required.)
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Microsoft Creates RFID Council  </STRONG><br>
A booster club for the tiny radio-tracking chips, run by a company 
famous for its security expertise.  We feel better about the 
little buggers already:<br>
<a href="http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/33328.html">http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/33328.html</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ FCC Taking TV Down the Tubes  </STRONG><br>
Public Knowledge President Gigi Sohn with a great editorial on (some of) 
what\'s wrong with the FCC\'s approach to regulation:<br>
<a href="http://news.com.com/2010-1025_3-5189489.html">http://news.com.com/2010-1025_3-5189489.html</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Rave Reviews for ClearPlay\'s New DVD Player  </STRONG><br>
We love that it can eliminate both violence AND "vain references 
to deity."  That would make "The Passion," oh, 17 seconds long?
<a href="http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=177">http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=177</a><br>
(San Francisco Chronicle)
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Cable Decision Held Until Supremes Weigh In  </STRONG><br>
The FCC and cable ISPs are appealing the 9th Circuit loss that 
would have forced cable companies to open up to competition:<br>
<a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-5189485.html">http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-5189485.html</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Copyright for Facts? Judge Tells Boat Company to Pound Sand  </STRONG><br>
Boats.com tried to stop price-scrapers with a copyright claim, 
but the case didn\'t float:<br>
<a href="http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=178">http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=178</a><br>
(Associated Press)
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ American Airlines:<br> 1.2 Million Passengers Served to Gov\'t 
Contractors</STRONG><br>
AA is the third airline to admit to secretly turning over 
passenger data for government surveillance research - this time 
to four companies competing for a CAPPS II contract.  No matter 
where you stand on passenger profiling, this shouldn\'t be 
happening in secret and neither the airlines nor the government 
should be lying about it:<br>
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A720-2004Apr9.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A720-2004Apr9.html</a><br>
(Registration unfortunately required.)<br>
Take action today - ask Congress for hearings:<br>
<a href="http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=2888">http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=2888</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Canada Rejects Copyright Extension Bill  </STRONG><br>
As Larry Lessig asks, "Will the sanity ever stop?"
<a href="http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=179">http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=179</a><br>
(CBC - Prince Edward Island)
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ A Unified Theory of Filesharing and CD Sales  </STRONG><br>
Ed Felten reconciles different studies and disparate methods:<br>
<a href="http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000574.html">http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000574.html</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Musing About the Coming Panopticon  </STRONG><br>
Jamais Cascio\'s "scenarios and anticipations" for a world in 
which we surveil ourselves:<br>
<a href="http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/000554.html">http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/000554.html</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Claria Files Leathery, Reptilian IPO  </STRONG><br>
The adware company formerly known as Gator is going public:<br>
<a href="http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,63008,00.html">http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,63008,00.html</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ VoteHere for Transparent Elections  </STRONG><br>
The election security company has released its source code, 
documentation of known issues and a host of other materials 
for public review.  Bravo!
<a href="http://www.votehere.net/news/archive04/040604.htm">http://www.votehere.net/news/archive04/040604.htm</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Broadcast Flag for Digital Radio?  </STRONG><br>
The technology is very young, but according to Public Knowledge 
and Digital Consumer, the FCC may already be preparing to 
slap a broadcast flag on it:<br>
<a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1027-5186980.html">http://news.com.com/2100-1027-5186980.html</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ Fighting Censorship with P2P  </STRONG><br>
Ross Anderson envisions a future in which government censors and 
news syndicates don\'t control what news we hear:<br>
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3611227.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3611227.stm</a><br>
</p>

<p>
<STRONG><br>~ PlayFair Fouled by DMCA  </STRONG><br>
An open source project that offered tools to strip the DRM 
from your legally purchased files is now offline because of 
a DMCA notice:<br>
<a href="http://macslash.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/09/1057246&mode=thread">http://macslash.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/09/1057246&mode=thread</a><br>


<hr size="1"/>

<a name="cal"></a>
<h1>Staff Calendar</h1>
<p>For a complete listing of EFF speaking engagements (with
locations and times), please visit the
<a href="http://www.eff.org/calendar/">full calendar</a>.</p>

<ul>

<li>
<strong>
April 17-18 -
</strong>
<p>
Wendy Seltzer speaks at Florida Atlantic University<br>
Boca Raton, FL<br>
<a href="http://www.fau.edu/ipconference">http://www.fau.edu/ipconference</a>
</p>
</li>

<li>
<strong>
April 20-23 -
</strong>
<p>
Kevin Bankston, Cindy Cohn, Chris Palmer, Fred von Lohmann, 
Wendy Seltzer, Seth Schoen and Lee Tien speak at the 2004
Computers, Freedom & Privacy Conference<br>
Berkeley, CA<br>
<a href="http://www.cfp2004.org/program/">http://www.cfp2004.org/program/</a> 
</p>
</li>

</ul>

<hr size="1" />

<a name="admin"></a>
<h1>Administrivia</h1>

<p>
EFFector is published by:
</p>

<p>
The Electronic Frontier Foundation<br />
454 Shotwell Street<br />
San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA<br />
+1 415 436 9333 (voice)<br />
+1 415 436 9993 (fax)<br />
&nbsp;<a href="http://www.eff.org/">http://www.eff.org/</a>
</p>

<p>
Editor:<br />
Donna Wentworth, Web Writer/Activist<br />
&nbsp; <a href="mailto:donna&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;?SUBJECT=EFFector">donna&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;</a>

</p>

<p>
To Join EFF online, or make an additional donation, go to:<br />
&nbsp; <a href="https://secure.eff.org/">https://secure.eff.org/</a>
</p>

<p>
Membership and donation queries: <a href="mailto:membership&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;?SUBJECT=Membership">membership&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;</a>
<br />

General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: <a href="mailto:ask&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;?SUBJECT=Query">ask&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;</a>
</p>

<p>
Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged.
Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To
reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors
for their express permission.  Press releases and EFF announcements
and articles may be reproduced individually at will.
</p>

<p>
To change your address or other information, please visit:
<a href="http://action.eff.org/subscribe/">http://action.eff.org/subscribe/</a>
</p>

<p>
If you have already subscribed to the EFF Action Center, please visit:
<a href="http://action.eff.org/login.asp/">
http://action.eff.org/login.asp/</a>
</p>

<p>
To unsubscribe from the EFFector mailing list, send an email to <a
href="mailto:alerts&#64;action.eff.org">alerts&#64;action.eff.org</a>
with the word "Remove" in the subject.
</p>

<p>
<span style="font-size:smaller">(Please ask <a href="mailto:donna&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;?SUBJECT=UNSUBSCRIBE%20ME%20FROM%20EFFECTOR%20PLEASE">donna@eff.org</a> to manually remove you from the
list if this does not work for you for some reason.)</span>
</p>

<p>
Back issues are available at:<br />
&nbsp; <a href="http://www.eff.org/effector/">http://www.eff.org/effector/</a>
</p>

<p>
You can also get the latest issue of EFFector via the Web at:<br />
&nbsp; <a href="http://www.eff.org/effector/">http://www.eff.org/effector/</a>
</p>

<p class="SM">
<a href="#toc">Back to table of contents</a>
</p>

<p class="SM">
<a href="http://www.eff.org/effector/">Return to EFFector Newsletters
Index</a>

</p>

<hr />

<p>
Please send any questions or comments to <a href="mailto:webmaster&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;?SUBJECT=EFFector">webmaster&#64;&#101;&#102;&#102;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;</a>
</p>


</div>
';

global $REQUEST_URI;
$smarty->assign('content',$content);
$smarty->display('generic.tpl',$REQUEST_URI);

?>
