Hello, this is Sandra Cisneros, author of The House on Mango Street, and this is listener-sponsored
radio, 99.5 FM, WBAI New York.
And one final note, the baño recipe we heard was from a local writer, meaning U.S. writer
Ana Castillo, included in her book, Massacre of the Dreamers.
Stay tuned for Emanuel Goldstein, coming up in just one minute.
You're tuned to listener-sponsored, non-commercial, WBAI in New York, 99.5 FM.
Take it, Dad.
Hey, yeah, we're the same brothers from a long time ago.
We were talking about television and doing it on the radio.
What we did was to help our generation realize that they got to get out there and get busy
because it wasn't going to be televised.
And it's just about 8 o'clock on a Tuesday night, and that means it's time for Off the Hook.
The telephone keeps ringing, so I ripped it off the wall.
I cut myself while shaving, now I can't make a call.
It could be yet much worse, but if I could, they would.
For me, we're on for the best, it's best, it's best, it's best.
I hope that fun is good, but I'm digging it now.
We'll be right back.
We'll be right back.
And a very good evening to one and all.
The program is Off the Hook.
This is Emmanuel Goldstein with all kinds of fun-filled adventure stories from the world of high tech.
We'll be taking phone calls a little later on and sharing some interesting stories of things that have happened in the past week.
I guess one of the more interesting things that have happened to us specifically is the arrival of a little flexi-disc record that came from Vienna.
And this is something that I guess nobody in this country has the guts to put out, so let's check out what our European friends are up to.
It concerns an old friend of ours.
This is a digital hijack.
Our demand, free Kevin Mitnick, now.
Kevin Mitnick, prisoner number 673-53 of Stateford, California.
Accused of electronic communication abuse.
On the run for more than two years behind the codename Condor as the most wanted computer hacker of the world.
The digital hijack attacks everyone, everywhere.
There is no security.
This is a hijack.
Face is down to the floor.
Hands behind your head.
Don't block your head.
Don't block your head.
You're up to the boat.
No I'm over.
We dunno.
Just say.
I watch MMs for you.
I sit down to know who the oil can agar It's hard to ignore.
Hey, global traveler, we have chosen any destination for you.
We'll take you to a place where there is no up or down, where there is no left or right, where there is no way back.
There's just two of your friends, a non-controllable data, action, intelligence, and soul.
We all lose control, the world will never be the same again.
The time has come for the big, big showdown.
Don't dream.
Don't dream.
This is a hijack.
Don't dream.
Don't.
This is a hijack.
Don't dream.
Which is direction?
Don't.
This is a hijack.
Don't dream.
Which is direction?
Don't.
Yes, I got my finger on the trigger.
I got my finger on the trigger.
Now, listen very carefully.
This statement will not be repeated.
First of all, nine neuralgic internet search servers have been invaded by our intelligent software agents.
They are on call.
They are ready to fulfill the following task.
Overflowing the search server systems.
Lycos, AltaVista, Inktomi, NetSearch, Panopticon, Webcrawler, CUSI, InfoseekSpider, and Veronica to hijack the worldwide traveling society.
The result, destabilization of the power servers.
Navigation on the internet becomes a new excitement.
Netscape has already hijacked the internet user.
Now we hijack your attention to show you another direction.
Smashing the boring style of established electronic traffic channels.
Free Kevin Mitnick, the organization Itoi will wait another 24 hours until we blow the system.
We are forced to find new viewpoints.
Viewpoints.
Directions.
Channels.
Excitement.
To survive.
Trash is record now.
Peep.
It's plastic.
Peep.
Trash is record now.
Okay, there we do what we said.
It's plastic.
Now if the guys with the guns can just get out of here, we'll be able to resume our show.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
That came in the mail from Vienna.
And it's kind of a fun thing.
Came on a little flexi-disc there.
You know, remember those?
You used to get them in Cheerios boxes and things like that.
Yeah, well that's a whole lot of fun.
Comes from these people known as Itoi.
And you can, I think you can get a free copy of this record if you just send them email.
And let me track down their email address here.
Mail me at Itoi.com.
That's M-A-I-L-M-E at E-T-O-Y dot C-O-M.
Or you can call them at Country Code 41, City Code 1-3-6-3-3-5-5-7.
They're demand-free.
Kevin Mitnick, the super hack.
I'm not sure if Kevin would really like this kind of attention.
It sort of, I guess, doesn't make him look all that good.
But he's got nothing to do with this.
That much I am certain of.
A lot of interesting, actually, okay, I was wrong.
You can get the record by sending email to record at hijack.org.
Hijack.org, yes.
Record at hijack.org.
In exchange for a statement to president at whitehouse.gov with the demand to free Kevin Mitnick, the super hacker.
It is definitely time to blast sound into the net, the soundtrack for the new traveling generation.
The song Digital Hijack is the first internet underground disco release by Itoi, our final record on FlexiDisc.
Out now, this sound is an agent in your head to spread a new lifestyle.
Joyride, the Veda Highway, the net is our way to get around without major record companies.
Always online, sometimes lost, out there in your mind, our Flexi is plastic, worthless, nothing, our last bit of reality.
What do you think, Fiber?
A bit of fun, huh?
Uh, yeah, right.
Well, you don't look that impressed.
I don't know.
I think statements like this are kind of interesting.
That's what the net is all about, you know, getting alternative views and all that kind of thing.
And they have a website, too.
If you want more information, check out httprom.oit.gatech.edu slash tilde.
This looks like W-I-L-L-D-A-Y slash Mitnick.html.
And that's the story.
That's everything you're going to hear about this.
Yeah, the Kevin Mitnick Flexi Disc.
Who knows?
Who knows what's next out here?
So, what's been up with you this week, Fiber?
Uh, well, I haven't heard any records made by East German terrorists, but, uh, hasn't...
It's been a rather uneventful week, I suppose.
From Vienna, actually.
From Vienna?
Yeah.
Well, they must have moved from Germany to Vienna.
Actually, the return addresses are Vienna and Switzerland.
Really?
Yeah, so I don't quite understand what's going on there.
Uh, okay, well, uh, how about this?
Well, we've got sort of a European theme tonight, so I've got a survey form that came all the way
over from the Access All Areas, uh, convention, and I'm going to give this to you.
Okay.
And you're going to, uh, go through a few of those questions and answer them as honestly
as you can.
Really?
Yes.
Okay.
All right, so let's, uh, let's hear some of these, some of these winner questions.
We, uh, everybody who went to Access All Areas was given this questionnaire.
I understand three people returned it.
Hmm.
I don't know why, but that's just the way it was.
Uh, when I said read it, I meant read it out loud.
Oh, out loud, okay.
So we are on the radio, and...
Yeah, uh, question number one.
Are you still doing this activity?
They don't say what this activity is, do they?
Uh, no.
Well, the title is Hackers and Crackers Survey.
Hackers and Crackers.
I just love being called a cracker.
Anything else?
Any other good questions besides that?
Uh, well, of course, they say, if no, how many years ago did you stop?
Where do you get access to these resources?
Home, at work, university, or college?
Public resource?
Other?
Police state?
Did you say police state, or police state?
Police state.
Oh, police state, okay.
All right.
How many systems have you broken into?
Uh, one to five?
Five to ten?
Ten to twenty?
Uh, all the way up to a hundred plus.
Wow.
Okay.
Do you use any specialist software to help you hack?
Yes or no?
Yes or no question, okay.
What type of software do you use to hack?
Please state.
It's one of those little essay questions.
Uh-huh.
Uh, how much space do they give you for that?
Three lines.
Three lines, okay.
What programming skills do you possess?
Oh, we have a wide assortment here.
Basic, DOS, UNIX, ADA, Java, C, C++, Windows, COBOL, Assembly, none.
Somebody should make a language called none.
Yeah, there you go.
That would confuse everybody.
And, of course, other, police state.
Okay.
Other and none.
Yeah.
There are some really, really interesting questions further on.
Hmm.
First is how you would categorize yourself.
Oh, here's a good incriminating one.
Okay.
Have you ever done any of the following?
Right.
Used passwords illegally.
Misused personal data.
Pass on confidential information.
Expose confidential data.
Hide confidential data.
Sold passwords or codes.
Sell confidential data.
None of the above.
Interesting.
A lot of those, you know, you can do without a computer, too.
I think they should probably point that out.
I think with regards to computers, what they're talking about.
I think 99% of those are usually done without a computer.
Uh-huh.
Where's the other?
There's a terrorist one in there.
That's the one I'm trying to get.
Oh, really?
There's a terrorist one?
Yeah, there's a terrorist one.
I sort of gave it away by saying that, but...
Which of the following organizations would you target to gain entry into, that one?
Uh, no, but I didn't hear that one.
Read that one to me.
Okay.
Uh, would you target...
Uh, oh, and they have, um, different categories, and then they say, in the UK, in the US, or
other country.
And we have private company.
Uh, IT company?
You know what that is?
What that is?
IT.
International, yeah.
Total communications, I would imagine.
Yeah?
No, because then they have telecoms companies right after that.
I don't know.
They're...
Yeah.
Maybe it's information something, or other information technology, or...
Okay, banking financial system, police national computer, national defense system, not a consideration.
National defense system, definitely.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Yeah.
I forgot.
Yeah, you're just reading it out to everybody.
Okay.
Uh, but there's, there's one in there that says, would you consider yourself to be a terrorist?
That's the one that just kind of, kind of grabbed me.
Let's see if, uh, I could find that.
They gave a, a list of different things that you would call yourself, you know, codes kid,
where's kid, terrorist, et cetera.
Oh, yeah.
Personal details.
Yes.
That's it.
Do you, did you consider yourself to be a hacker, freaker, cracker, computer criminal,
terrorist?
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's interesting, you know, I don't know who, who's compiling all this information, but
the questions seem a bit, uh, I don't know, what's the word?
Uh, stupid?
Yeah, that's, I was, I was looking for a better word, but, uh, but stupid will do, yes.
Really, really stupid questions.
I don't know if anybody filled that form out.
And, you know, the thing that, that bugs me is when people categorize hackers as, as the
same thing as terrorists or similar to terrorists, you know, nothing so much as, as the events
of this past week have, have proven what, you know, real terrorism at least could be if
we have not yet proven that, uh, plane disaster was a terrorist act, but if it was, I mean,
that's, that's where the attention should be focused, preventing acts like that and not
going around, uh, pointing at, uh, teenage kids, uh, accusing them of terrorism when
all they're doing is, is at worst, uh, playing with things they don't understand and possibly
breaking things which shouldn't be left out to be broken in the first place.
I guess, I guess you didn't see the latest update on New York One.
Uh, no.
Somebody claims that, uh, the, somebody shot a computer at the plane with a slingshot.
Show, son, what?
I thought New York One was a serious station.
No, I just, I just, actually, I just made that up.
You just made that up.
Yeah.
Oh, boy.
Well, New York One, I'm sure, they'll be contacting you very shortly.
Um, Joko, what do you have?
I'm just looking at this.
First of all, they, they use the word tick instead of, like, we say check.
Yes.
I don't take it that.
British.
Yes.
Please tick which of these sentences you agree slash disagree with.
Um, sophisticated or improved technology acts as a deterrent.
I am more likely to choose to enter a system with less security than a system with more
security.
Stricter legislation would act as a deterrent.
An increase in the number of companies bringing prosecutions would act as a deterrent.
I know someone who's been prosecuted for hacking.
I've been prosecuted for hacking.
Now, this is, this is the one that I'm reacting to.
Please tick all the following statements you agree with.
Company safeguards to protect information are lax.
Software programmers are lazy.
Opportunities to gain access to systems are increasing.
Opportunities to gain access to systems are decreasing.
Tighter security would make gaining access more enjoyable.
Okay.
If yes, why?
If not, why?
How many people filled this out?
I don't, I didn't see anybody really filling it out.
Everybody, everybody took it.
Everybody was reading it and laughing over it, but I didn't see anybody fill it.
But I'd like to see, you know, of the people that do fill it out, what the, you know,
what the results are.
According to the Hackers and Crackers survey that was passed out at the Hacker Convention
last month in England, this research is being conducted to shed light on the hacking phenomenon,
how it happens, when it happens, and what the key issues are for hackers and the hacked.
We are interested in information from current and ex-hackers that will help inform the debate.
The contents of this survey are private and confidential.
The anonymity of respondents will be respected at all times.
Your cooperation in completing this questionnaire is greatly appreciated.
And I guess you can access the survey.
Okay, here's a website.
You can access the survey at www.kinross-and-render.co.uk.
I'll spell that.
www.kinross-and-render.co.uk.
Over there in the UK, .coms are known as .cos, and you have .uk at the end.
That's how it works.
So that was a bit of fun over there.
Continuing with some European news, this just came over to us from Bosnia.
The Avatar Internet Cafe opened its doors on July 5, 1996, in Sarajevo, Bosnia, Herzegovina.
We are open 8 a.m. through curfew, which is currently 11 p.m.
We serve cold Czech Budweiser on tap.
Apparently Czech Budweiser is totally unrelated to Budweiser brand of beer they have over there.
And there's all kinds of legal battles being flung across the ocean.
They have that on tap, sandwiches, coffee, and we provide full Internet access.
Now get this.
We currently have one Power Mac 7100 with a 21-inch monitor, a 14.4 KB link, and a UPS to protect us from nasty Bosnian power surges.
That's it.
That's all they have, a Power Mac and a 14.4 link.
So far, we have had a mixed bag of customers, including the American Embassy staff, I-FOR troops, I-F-O-R?
I'm not sure what that stands for.
Bosnian netheads, computer phobes, and drunkards.
The American ambassador has promised to come if we agree to play the Pulp Fiction soundtrack.
We have...
Makes you wonder what goes on in the ambassadorial headquarters.
We have sponsored a local film festival and will continue to support the art here in Bosnia.
Opening this place was a tough nine months.
We began paperwork in October.
I would like to thank a lot of people, mostly Bosnians.
I would also like to hang the carpenter and drive a wooden stake through his heart.
I guess I could sympathize with that.
I've dealt with some carpenters in my time.
And if you want to donate something, I think it would be a really good idea to do that.
The email address is sowden at m, as in Mary, s, dot m, as in Mary again, f, f, dot c, u, n, i, dot c, z.
That's in Czechoslovakia.
Sold in, s, o, w, d, e, n, at m, s, dot m, f, f, dot c, u, n, i, dot c, z.
I'm sure they could use anything that you've got that's spare.
It's quite a lot to put up in the Internet Cafe over there in Bosnia.
Fiber, you've got some interesting advertisements.
Yeah, it's apparently the corporate espionage classifieds.
Well, yeah, you know, the American newspaper, the Herald Tribune,
which is passed around all over throughout Europe,
has all these advertisements for callback services.
Now, what's a callback service?
It's where you call a certain number, and what happens?
What happens when you call it?
It calls you back?
Call a certain number, and it calls you back,
so you can place a call from within the country.
It calls you back with a dial tone.
But why?
But why?
Yeah, why go to all that trouble to make a phone call?
Well, gee, it could be cheaper rates.
Okay, yeah, I think you got it.
I think you got it in one right there.
Yes, cheaper rates, that's what it's all about.
But, and yes, the international rates directly from a European country are phenomenal.
So let's say you had to call from, I guess, Lichtenstein, okay, just to pick a typical...
Lichtenstein.
Yeah, whatever, a typical European country, and you had to call over to, say, San Marino,
another typical European country.
The rates between those two countries would be, you know, orbiting the Earth someplace.
But if you call to some phone number someplace in the United States,
I believe the way it works is it rings a couple of times on a special number that only you call,
and then that tells it, hey, this person wants to make a phone call.
It calls you at a predetermined number or something,
and then you get a dial tone, you dial away your number,
and you get charged the rate as if it was from the United States.
I guess you also have to pay for the call, you know, from the United States to you.
I don't know how it works, but it's cheaper.
It's cheaper.
So how many ads are there?
Can you give us some idea of what some of the phraseology is?
Enjoy major savings on your international calls.
Save money on international calls.
Callback, with a K, offers lowest rates ever.
And did they give you an example of what the rates are?
Let's see, yeah.
How low, you may ask.
Yes, I am asking, how low are these rates?
To the U.S. from France.
37 cents, assuming they mean a minute.
Right.
Germany, 39 cents.
Hong Kong, 44.
Japan, 38.
Switzerland, 39.
All calls, oh, wait, all calls are billed in six-second increments
with a 30-second minimum.
That's the same as that LCI company that has those commercials on TV.
They bill in six-second increments.
Six-second increments.
I've even heard one-second increments being thrown around by some companies.
Yeah, now I guess they're breaking it down to a tenth of the second or whatever.
So, yeah, one-second intervals and the lowest rates possible.
But, yeah, you know, there's a lot of talk about whether or not these services are even legal.
You know, some countries are trying to shut them down.
But I think just looking at all these advertisements here, it shows you how popular they are.
You know, everybody is always out for a way to, you know, to make a phone call for cheaper.
And if the rates are astronomically high, why not try to figure out a way to make a phone call for cheap?
And, you know, nothing illustrates that better than the whole Internet phone philosophy.
Have you heard the latest?
What our fine friends at Microsoft are doing.
Last week, it's a television network.
This week, they're taking on all the phone companies.
They're going to be releasing tomorrow at HTTP, call in, all the slashes and all that kind of stuff, www.intel.com slash iaweb slash CPC.
Right.
And you will be able to download the Intel Internet phone.
It took Microsoft and Intel getting together to force the issue.
But this will be the year which some of the Internet telephony vendors, each with their own motivations, will provide their customers with the ability to interoperate with other vendors' products.
In other words, you will be able to use this to call people no matter what kind of software they have, whether it's Internet phone, iPhone, you know, whatever you call the things.
There's a lot of them around now.
But the thing up until now has been that they can't talk to each other.
That's all going to change.
There's also been experimentation.
Somebody actually did this a couple of weeks ago where they were able to place a call from one of the Internet phone programs to a real telephone.
A real telephone.
I heard of a number of people setting up things like that.
But imagine what that's going to do to the phone companies, you know.
We're using the phone network now.
We're starting with the Internet and winding up in a real telephone.
Yeah, but I'd hate to be the person talking on the real telephone waiting with all the net delay for the person.
I have heard the sound call.
They actually did this, some demonstrations on another radio station.
It didn't sound bad at all.
It really didn't sound bad.
Full duplex audio support, all kinds of graphical interfaces and things like that.
I mean, it's coming.
The point is almost here where it will completely take over regular telephone calls.
Do you think it will stay free, though, especially with Microsoft at the...
No, I think that's probably why they stepped in.
Yeah.
Microsoft, unfortunately, seems to be controlling just about everything.
I don't know exactly where it's going to wind up leading, but we'll just have to keep watching.
Anyway, I'll grab a copy of that program.
I'll play with it.
Maybe in the weeks ahead we can do some experimentation here on the radio, compare different kinds of programs together and see what happens.
Continuing over in Europe, Philip Morris has been taking out these full-page ads in newspapers all over the place.
And, you know, it's kind of funny because a lot of people smoke over in Europe, so Philip Morris wasn't really, I don't know, people didn't really hate them all that much.
You know, they sort of, they knew that they didn't really care one way or the other if these people got sick from smoking.
They just sort of, you know, I guess accepted their existence.
But when they started taking out these advertisements, the people over there got so incensed that now they're moving to ban Philip Morris from ever advertising again.
And people are starting to realize how dangerous the cigarette smoking is and all kinds of other things that I guess has been happening over here in America.
And it's all because of this patronizing way of talking to people that Philip Morris has perfected.
Listen to this.
What risks do you take?
Almost every day it seems that one thing or another has been discovered to be some kind of health risk.
In one scientific study, even drinking ordinary chlorinated water was linked to cancer.
But as common sense suggests, not everything described statistically as a risk is a meaningful risk.
For example, lots of people have been persuaded that secondhand tobacco smoke is harmful.
Not surprising, perhaps.
After all, we recognize that smoking itself is a risk factor for certain human diseases
and that some people find secondhand tobacco smoke unappealing and unpleasant.
But what about secondhand tobacco smoke?
Is it really a meaningful health risk to people who've chosen not to smoke?
Not, we think, if you look at the evidence.
And then they come up with all these listings of other activities.
For instance, having a diet highest in saturated fat, relative reported risk, 6.14, whatever that scale is.
Risk for lung cancer, high diet in saturated fat.
Non-vegetarian versus vegetarian diet, 3.08.
Frequently cooking with certain types of oil, 2.8.
Eating one biscuit a day, 1.49.
And then all the way down on the bottom of the list, exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke, 1.19.
Now, you know, anybody with half a brain looking at this will say,
but you know, the difference is that somebody sitting at a table next to you eating something high in saturated fat
isn't really going to pose that much of a risk to you,
whereas someone smoking a cigarette is going to, that's going to affect other people.
The fact that they completely didn't say that resulted in all this outrage over there.
And it's really kind of fun.
I'm sorry I had to leave so soon because the voices were just being raised as I was leaving.
And now Philip Morris has kind of dug their own grave over there.
Wait, so does that mean that if you're eating a biscuit and breathing secondhand smoke
that you're doubling the odds of getting cancer?
Well, you know, if you look at these statistics, who knows?
I mean, they seem to think that eating a biscuit, by the way, a biscuit is a cookie over there.
Oh, really?
Yeah, so that's something else you've got to consider.
But eating one biscuit a day, that's, according to Philip Morris,
that makes it more risky than being exposed to secondhand smoke.
But, you know, they fail to point out that secondhand smoke affects another person,
not just you, and maybe more than one other person.
What if you smoke the biscuit?
I don't know.
I think a lot of people smoke that newspaper after reading this.
Okay, we have a letter here, which I want to read because it has some very interesting points
that I think we should go over.
It sort of defines who we are, what we do, what we talk about, and it's a good letter.
And I wish lots more people would write us letters because it gives us something to talk about.
Dear Emanuel Goldstein, I listened to your show off the hook
and sympathize with Bernie S. and some of the other hackers' rough treatment
under the criminal justice system.
However, I believe that the two major premises used to justify hacking,
going into others' computers and snooping around, are quite bogus.
They are, one, it's educational, and two, it's so easy to get in.
If it's so easy to do, it must be okay.
Let's look at item number two first.
Go along any farm field, and you could probably get in.
Bushels of produce are sometimes left for later pickup.
How could anyone justify just taking the farmer's goods
because he didn't have a pit bull dog there ready to bite off your head?
Well, I think, first of all, a very important distinction to be made
is that when you go into somebody's farm field and start taking their produce,
you are robbing them of something which, obviously, is not going to be replaced.
It's a finite commodity, and you just go in there and you take something.
It's called theft.
And I think hackers are very aware of what theft is and what theft is not.
Continuing with the letter,
a great joy of hacking is raiding the email boxes or finding account files.
In the physical world, the one besides cyberspace,
there are people who are physically able to rip off the front panels of mailboxes and take mail,
and we are quite glad when they are caught and sent to jail.
Likewise, con artists figure out how to get account information,
and again, we are glad when they are caught,
whether it's done under the guise of prankmanship or ill-gotten economic gain.
Well, again, reading mail is something that is frowned upon in most circles that I'm aware of,
but if somebody is sent to prison for actually breaking into a physical mailbox,
I don't think they get sentenced to anything near the amount of time that somebody would get
if they were accused of simply logging into a system,
not even reading the mail, just accessing a system,
or not even accessing a system, just trying to access a system.
You know, it's getting the definitions of becoming a lot easier to meet.
So, there are definite differences here in the way these things are perceived.
Continuing with the letter,
when a child is snatched from a playground, we all are shocked or upset, but it is quite easy.
To spell it out, the easiness of irresponsible behavior does not justify it.
Okay, so I think just to sum up now,
hacking is just like kidnapping children and...
Taking bushels of corn.
Taking bushels of corn, yeah.
Right.
Well, the problem I have with that analogy is that if a farmer could make infinite copies of his produce,
I don't think he would mind very much.
That's true.
He probably wouldn't be a farmer, because what's the point?
So far, every physical, real-world, tangible analogy to hacking that I've heard had to do with tangible goods.
Right, and the tangible goods that would get us upset, like children.
Yeah.
Taking children is something that most people think is a bad thing.
Right.
So, obviously, we're going to react strongly against that,
but my problem is making the jump to where we equate hacking to taking children,
or taking anything, really.
It's just, it's not the same thing.
Basically, yeah, a lot of things are easy.
Let's have this analogy, okay?
You wander onto a farm field, and you walk around a little bit,
and you explore the trails, and you enjoy nature a bit.
How about that?
That's the analogy.
It's easy, yeah, it's illegal, but you don't go to prison if you're caught doing it.
Hey, I just realized who the real one to blame behind all this is.
Who's that?
Space aliens have been landing in farm fields and stealing children for a long time.
Oh, yeah.
And they weren't mentioned once in that letter.
Well, I haven't finished the letter yet, either.
Let's continue.
Let's look at the first item.
Hacking satisfies an educational need.
A good parallel with computers is radio.
Amateur radio allowed people to experiment, still does,
allows people to experiment with electronics without interfering with the professional radio.
That'd be us.
Again, if the amateurs did interfere, even by accident, like if your TV show got screwed up somehow,
most of us would be glad if the FCC put a stop to it.
I'm sure you wouldn't want any radio hackers screwing around with WBAI.
Well, again, you know, it's a question of differences here.
Radio is something that, I guess, through a lot of unfairness is in the hands of a few.
Only a few people have access to what we're able to do.
We're able to broadcast to people, say our opinions and things like that.
Personally, my personal feeling is that that's unfair.
I think everybody should have this opportunity.
That's why I support the free radio broadcasters of California
that kind of piggyback onto unused frequencies
and use them without FCC sanctions and approvals and things like that.
And, you know, they're referred to as pirate radio people,
which I don't really think is a fair term.
The way radio is now, of course, it's very controlled.
Like, we had to play that song before and censor out every other word
because the FCC would get upset if they heard those words for some reason.
And that's just the way they are.
Instead of just regulating frequencies and technical specs,
they regulate content, which, you know, I don't consider to be fair.
So what this person is equating is somebody intentionally interfering
with an existing broadcaster,
which people who start their own radio stations try very hard not to do.
The reason being, if you do interfere with somebody else,
it's obviously going to draw a bad attention to you
and you will be shut down all the faster.
So that's, I don't think that's a very good analogy
because, first of all, radio is not wide open.
I think a better analogy to computer hacking and radio
is somebody going out and listening to shortwave
and exploring all the sidebands,
exploring all the different frequencies,
staying up until four in the morning
to see what station comes on in this particular frequency.
Now, imagine if that was illegal.
Imagine if they said, you're restricted,
you cannot listen to this particular radio.
Hey, wait a minute.
We already do have those kind of laws in this country, don't we?
We can't listen to certain radio frequencies.
Okay, well, there's your analogy then.
You know, telling somebody that you're not allowed to turn on this dial
and listen to this particular frequency at this particular time,
it's not for you,
or taking a signal that's coming into your house via satellites
and telling people that they can't figure out
how to decode that particular signal.
That's more analogous to hacking than interfering.
There's a lot of Morse code that goes over shortwave also,
and they could just easily say that you're not allowed to decode any Morse code
you might hear on shortwave.
Yeah, you know, who uses Morse code?
I can't figure this out.
Who's out there tapping away with Morse code?
Okay, we've got one lunar tick that does it.
But I really, I'd like to be able to decode that too.
And also, if you turn around on shortwave,
you hear those stations that sound like airplanes,
you know, that's like high-speed or low-speed data
or something like that.
I don't know what it is they're sending, you know,
and who's sending what,
but I'd sure like to be able to decode that
and see just what's going on.
I'm sure there's people out there that do this all the time,
and they think we're really lame for not understanding it ourselves.
But that's a better analogy to hacking,
you know, the actual experimenting with technology.
Not interfering, not breaking something,
not deliberately causing harm.
That's totally what hacking is not about.
To finish up the letter here,
stepping away from amateur radio,
other trades that people want to learn
have schools or apprentice programs,
and that includes computer programming.
Well, yeah, you know,
a lot of hackers have never taken courses in computer programming.
Reason being, what would you say the reason is for that?
They suck.
Yeah, okay, that's one good reason.
They're very restrictive.
They tell you what you cannot do.
When you ask why,
they tell you to sit down and shut up.
And they don't, you know,
they don't get into any kind of real experimentation
where you test the limits of technology.
And folks, testing the limits of technology
is how technology is expanded.
That's how things are discovered.
Well, besides which,
most schools can't afford the technology
that's actually used in the business world,
in the real world.
Right, there's a lot of have-nots.
A lot of haves and have-nots.
And then, you know, as we mentioned last week,
the gap is widening between the haves and the have-nots.
When you have TV networks going on in the air
that sort of require web access
for you to get the full picture,
you have to wonder,
are these people that don't have, you know,
computers, TVs, and, you know,
high-speed links and things like that,
where does it leave them?
To finish up, a point I'm trying to make
is you and WBAI are supporting
an irresponsible behavior which is quite elitist.
If you examine an analogous behavior
in the physical world,
you'd be calling for its end, too.
Well, you know,
I think it's the elitist type of behavior
that we're actually trying to fight.
I think most hackers are trying to fight that.
If you look at who hackers are,
you'll see that while some of them
are from a privileged background,
a lot of them are not.
A lot of them are just simply
gaining access any way they can.
And, you know, lots of times,
just gaining access is a crime
because certain people are not allowed
to have these particular types of computers
in their homes.
So the only way for them to get access to the net
is to kind of piggyback onto something
that's unused.
I mean, a lot of us got our start that way.
It's funny, when you see hackers like that
being portrayed in the press,
that's when the real danger starts.
These are the real computer-wilding people,
you know, the people from ghetto backgrounds
that are now, you know, on computer networks.
Isn't it scary?
And that kind of thing.
It's, you know,
there's your real-world comparisons there.
They're totally bogus.
I don't think that that's really relevant
to what we're all about.
It's an interesting letter, though,
and I encourage people to write us
with their opinions
because we would like to see
what people have to say,
and I thank that person for writing.
Our address is off the hook here
at WBAI, 505 8th Avenue,
New York, New York, 10018.
Or you can send us email,
OTH at 2600.com.
It's off the hook,
OTH at 2600.com.
So what do you think?
You think it was a bomb
or you think it was some sort
of mechanical difficulty?
A big rock.
No, actually...
The thing is, you know,
everybody seems to have something
that they want to prove, you know.
They want to prove it's a mechanical failure
so that we can say to ourselves,
hey, you know, we're safe from terrorists.
And other people want to say
it was a terrorist
because there's no way
a plane could have
a mechanical failure like that.
They're both wrong
because both of these things
are very, very possible
and very likely.
Well, both of them are...
I mean, obviously,
the fact that a plane
could blow up
and kill all those people,
whether somebody did it
or whether TWA did it,
is equally bad.
Right.
I think at this point,
TWA should be praying for a bomb.
I guess...
Because people aren't going
to fly on an airline
whose planes just spontaneously explode
after they take off.
No, that's true.
That's true.
And I really could never understand
getting into a plane
and feeling comfortable.
It just doesn't work for me.
And I don't know why
it works for everybody else
unless you somehow
just manage to cloud
your brain completely.
You know what you could do?
What?
You could bring a bomb with you
whenever you fly.
At least then you'll know
where the bomb is.
Well, yeah, I suppose.
And what do you think
of those guys
that were able to get by security?
They didn't get by with a bomb.
They just got by
and managed to get all the way
to the boarding gate
without even going
through the metal detector.
Yeah.
I think there's an analogy
to hacking
in a strange kind of a way
where you get past
the security
for the point of proving
that you can do it.
But when you tell somebody
that,
they treat you
as if you're a criminal yourself.
But I sure would like to know
if somebody can get by
that kind of security.
And up until this event,
I had no idea
that there was no way
of detecting
most explosives,
which is what I'm being told now.
I mean, D'Amato,
Senator D'Amato,
was going crazy,
saying,
oh, yeah,
you would never want to fly again
if you knew what I knew.
He wouldn't get into details,
but it's just basically,
you know,
he was painting
this doomsday scenario
that there's just
no security whatsoever.
And, you know,
I always thought
that all that
metal detection thing
was for a point.
It seems now
that there's little point to it.
I mean, you know,
you go onto an airplane
and you carry something with you
and they don't check it out.
Like, say,
your beeper
or something like that.
You give it to them, right?
And they put it
in that little silver tray
and then they give it
to you on the other side.
Now, if they don't tell you
to check out the beeper
and make it work
and something like that,
they don't know
what's inside it.
It could be anything
and you've just managed
to bypass
the entire detection process.
Well, the worst thing
is portable computers
because all they ever do
is that they ask you
to take it out
and open it up
and they turn it on
and if they see
some kind of title screen
come up,
then they figure it's okay.
So all someone has to do
is invent the bomb
that has a title screen
and they're all set.
No, better yet,
I mean, you could use
a small battery
and put putty explosive
in the rest of the free space.
There's a lot of air
in a lot of laptops.
What if your laptop
is broken
and it doesn't come up
with a...
I guess you can't
bring it with you, can you?
That's interesting.
The point is
there's a lot of security holes
and I remember seeing
one of the newspaper reports,
one of the people
in charge of security
said that we don't talk
about this kind of thing
because we believe
that talking about security
gives us less security.
This guy should be
a system administrator
for CERT
or something like that
because that is
the most bogus way
of dealing with security issues,
kind of like
out of sight,
out of mind.
You know,
you have to talk
about this kind of thing.
You have to raise
all possibilities,
all scenarios
because that's the only way
you're going to outsmart people
that really want
to cause harm.
Unfortunately,
that doesn't seem
to have been happening.
But again,
you avoided the question.
Which do you think it was?
I think it's a bomb.
You think it was a bomb?
Oh, yeah.
Based on what?
Based on the fact
that the plane blew up.
Okay,
so you don't think
a plane could do that
on its own?
Under normal circumstances,
I'd say that's
highly irregular.
And how about
the surface-to-air missile?
What do you think that's?
I think that somebody
somewhere would have
had to have noticed
some like mad Arab
with a rocket launcher
on the ground
in order for that
to have actually happened.
Well, you know,
everybody was saying
it was mad Arabs
that blew up
the Oklahoma City building.
It turned out to be
mad, red, white,
and blue Americans.
Okay, mad Arab
slash militant
Michigan weirdo person.
And they weren't
from Michigan either,
but we won't get
into semantics on that.
Joker, what do you have?
Did you hear about
the security breach
at the Olympics?
I heard some guy
with a gun
walked right into
the Olympic studio.
Yeah, had a security
uniform on,
walked right in,
and they finally caught him
when one of the other
security people
asked him to produce ID.
Wasn't able to produce it.
He was questioned
by the Secret Service
and was set free
on X amount
of dollars bond
when they determined
he was not
a direct threat
to the president.
Interesting.
The president,
that's all they care about?
They've got 80,000 people
in the stadium,
and all they care about
is the safety
of that one person.
That's the Secret Service
for you.
Actually, I wish
they would be that focused
and they wouldn't
expand their territory
so much.
All right, we have
phone calls to take.
212-279-3400.
We like to hear theories
and maybe experiences
at airport machines.
I wish they would
spend as much time
checking people out
on the way in
to airplanes
as they do
on the way
into the country.
You know,
like every time
I come into the country
I get all this
third degree stuff.
You know,
I think it's more important
for people getting on
to things like airplanes
for them to know
where they're coming from
and what they're carrying
with them,
but they don't seem
to really care that much.
Okay, 212-279-3400
is our telephone number.
Let's take some phone calls,
see who's out there.
Good evening.
You're on the air.
Hello?
Yes, go ahead.
Hi.
Just in your closing remarks
a moment ago,
I was surprised to hear
the emphasis
that you folks
are placing on terrorism.
Not that terrorism
isn't a major issue
in the world today,
but as I was talking
with a friend earlier today,
nobody's looking
at the causes
of these events.
For instance,
I don't hear anyone
bemoaning the fact
that Clinton launched
several cruise missiles
at a hotel
in downtown Baghdad.
Uh-huh.
Well, I mean,
what was the final count
of dead in the Gulf War
on the other side?
I've never been able
to get a straight figure
on that,
but I've heard
it's been hundreds
of thousands.
Correct, correct.
And again,
my empathy goes
completely with the people
who lost loved ones
on the flight.
In no way am I
suggesting that
that is not
a momentous event.
And with all due respect,
these people have suffered
a terrible
and a grievous loss.
You also have to ask yourself,
how much grief
are the Olympics worth?
You know,
I mean,
we say,
hey,
we have to have
the Olympics
in this country,
but look at what
we're doing to ourselves.
We're all going crazy
with looking over
our shoulders,
thinking that we're
going to be attacked
in Atlanta,
attacked in New York,
any place.
Is it really worth it?
I mean,
if we live
in a society
where we can't
guarantee safety,
then maybe we should
just leave the Olympics
to some other country
that really doesn't
have that many enemies.
Well,
actually,
that's precisely
what my question
is arising from,
this emphasis
on terrorism.
When you look
at the records
of the people
who are the spokespeople
around so-called
terrorist events,
Stephen Emerson
is one name
that pops up
all the time.
The Kroll Associates
is another name.
There are other firms
that have very distinct
and long-standing ties
to CIA,
whose names
are routinely cited
as, quote-unquote,
experts on terrorism.
There is a very real need
to promote terrorism
as being something
for the ordinary citizen
to worry about.
I'm far more worried
about what the police
will do to me
in Brooklyn
than I am about the notion
of dying on a plane flight.
So I just wanted
to bring that issue up.
I guess that's kind of
like the defining point
for us.
How much are you
willing to put up with
to be considered,
quote-unquote,
secure and safe?
Precisely.
And that argument
serves very real
social control goals
and aspirations
of the people
who run the society.
For instance,
the more controls
that are placed
on people as they travel,
the more ready people
are to control
the movements
of people who are
working, for instance,
to ensure that workers
get a fair wage.
So suddenly it's not
about people
who are carrying bombs.
It's about questioning
everybody about
where they're going
and what they're doing,
which is a very
different premise
to look at.
And so the whole
emphasis on terrorism,
the fear and hysteria
that is induced,
is yet another
replacement for
the common enemy
that societies
have sought to create
since time immemorial,
justifying the violent wars
that people in control
seek to have.
Okay, thanks for your call.
Sure, thanks for the program.
It's great stuff.
Bye-bye.
You think we need
more surveillance?
More security?
It's a hard question.
I mean, you know,
in the wake of all this,
how can you say
you don't need more?
But you also have to look
at the long-term picture.
You know,
what does more
actually give us?
You know,
people looking over
our shoulders,
they have this detector
now for certain airports
that when you walk
through it,
it shows you
as if you're not
wearing any clothes,
removes all those
from you somehow.
Now,
would you submit
voluntarily to something
like that?
You know,
everybody getting on
an airplane,
going through this machine,
and the people,
the McDonald's workers
that, you know,
look at these things.
And that's what I call them
because they get paid
the exact same amount
in many cases.
And I've seen them.
As you walk through
this thing,
they're having conversations
with each other,
not even looking at the screen
half the time.
You know,
you have to sort of wonder
how qualified they are.
I heard that some of them
just get about three hours
of training and that's it.
So you have to wonder.
These are the people
that, you know,
your life is kind of
entrusted to.
So I don't know
if I want them looking at me
as I'm walking through
with no clothes on either.
So I don't know.
That's something else.
You think we need
more security in that regard?
I think it's a pretty
tough argument.
Obviously,
the more security you add,
the easier it is
for those who implemented
the security
to take advantage of it.
Interesting.
And, you know,
it's weird, too,
that we're seeing
the same people
commenting on this.
The caller mentioned
crawl associates.
You know,
they're always commenting
on hackers.
Right.
And it really annoys me
to see the parallels
drawn between
something like this
and hackers.
You know,
as if they're
even remotely similar.
They're so
completely distant.
And I just hope
the people that
comment on hackers
aren't as clueless
when they comment
on something as
important as this.
You really got to
hope that.
Good evening.
You're on the air.
Emmanuel,
have you seen
Monday's
Wall Street Journal?
Uh, well,
considering I never
read the Wall Street
Journal,
probably not.
Well, speaking of
terrorists and hackers,
your worst fears
are confirmed.
I'm going to read
a short piece
of the article,
but just let me say
that just about
everything I don't read
talks about tagging
explosives and finding
recipes for sarin
on the Internet,
okay?
Okay.
This is from
this past Monday's
yesterday's Wall Street
Journal article.
It's called
A Step Behind
Despite Tough Words
Anti-Terrorism Effort
in the U.S.
is Still Flawed.
Sub-headline
Political Legal
Constraints
Old Technology
Hinder FBI
As Threat Grows.
Sub-sub-headline
Nerve Gas Recipe
on Internet.
Okay.
Some excerpts.
Quote,
The technology exists
for imposing
an Orwellian state
with unprecedented
degrees of control,
says Brian Jenkins,
an excerpt on terrorism,
and deputy chairman
of the investigative firm,
Kroll Associates.
Oh, boy.
But if that's the
consequence of a
terrorist attack,
then the terrorists
have won.
Further excerpts.
The administration,
the Clinton administration,
wanted the FBI
to have the authority
to conduct
multi-point wiretaps
which would enable
investigators to
monitor cellular phones,
car phones,
and pay phones
that suspects might use
as well as home
or office phones.
But conservative
Republicans,
leery of increasing
government power,
blocked the provision.
Quote,
It was unfortunate
Congress didn't
approve that authority
for multi-point wiretaps,
says James Kallstrom,
assistant director
of the FBI,
who's now leading
the agency investigation
of the TWA crash.
Quote,
That's here now.
That's something we need.
Unquote.
In an interview
at the investigative
command center,
Mr. Kallstrom says
the FBI also needs
to enhance its ability
to deal with new technology,
including email,
encrypted messages,
and digital telephones
that terrorists and criminals
may use to communicate
with others.
getting people
to come from
the industrial age
to the information age
is difficult.
We're going to create
sanctuaries for criminals
if we don't keep up
with the information age.
So is this guy
actually saying
that if they were able
to wiretap
all these people
that they could have
prevented this?
He's hinting very strongly.
Just a couple more things.
In an increasingly complex,
this is not a quote now,
In an increasingly complex
and computerized society,
terrorists' ability
to shut down
crucial segments
of the nation's infrastructure
also stirs growing concern.
Airplanes are the most obvious
and spectacular targets,
but computer networks,
telecommunication systems,
electrical power grids,
and banking systems
are also increasingly
seen as vulnerable.
A few days before
the TWA bombing,
Clinton issued
a little-noted
executive order
calling for the creation
of a Commission
on Critical Infrastructure Protection
to explore
what laws,
regulations,
and finances
will be needed
to defend
the nation's
economic communications
and transportation system
from terrorist attacks.
Jamie Garlick,
Deputy U.S. Attorney General,
said the one-year effort
deserves the same level
of urgency
as the Manhattan Project,
the crash World War II effort
to develop the atom bomb.
Quote,
We're looking for a structure
that cuts across
the government
and private sector,
Ms. Garlick said
in testimony to Congress,
noting few U.S. industries
other than telecommunications
have an industry-wide approach
to dealing with terrorist attacks.
Quote,
We will have the cyber-equivalent
of Pearl Harbor
at some point,
and we don't want to wait
for this to happen.
Okay, yeah,
we've all heard that before.
I know,
but I think it's rather
telling that
in what is widely believed
to not be some rogue hackers
shooting a computer
with a catapult
at a plane
and downing it,
that somehow
even a normally
staid,
conservative,
and well-reasoned newspaper
as the Wall Street Journal
somehow puts
a front-page article
on that links hackers
to a terrorist act.
Yeah,
if not,
you know,
factually,
at least in the back
of your mind,
theoretically.
I'm totally appalled.
As you should be.
Thanks for the call.
Right, bye.
Okay.
You know,
speaking of Clinton
and what he's coming up
with lately,
he came up with something today,
a real gem.
Did you hear this one?
I guess he just sits around
in his office
thinking of ideas.
This idea is,
why don't we have
a new phone number
for those 9-1-1 calls
that aren't really emergencies?
You know,
a nationwide standard
for non-emergency calls
to the police.
I don't know
if it's going to be
9-1-2
or something like that
or who knows.
But this,
I mean,
how long do you think
it took to think of that?
I mean,
those are the kind of things
I think of in the shower,
you know,
sometimes.
You know,
hey,
that would be a good idea,
but there's all this
press attention,
but nobody has said
anything specific,
you know.
Just the president
has thought
that it's a good idea
to have another phone number
for non-emergency calls
to the police
and nationwide standards.
What is that like
if somebody breaks
into your house
with a gun
and then they just
leave suddenly?
Well,
I guess it's for all
those occasions
when you need to
call the police
and you don't know
what to call
and you have to go
to the phone book
and look it up
and it's no big deal
because it's not
an emergency,
you know.
So now they want
to have it
so that,
you know,
you just have it
in the back
of your head
all the time.
Then you'll have
to pay tax
for the enhanced
non-emergency number.
Exactly.
Exactly.
I think that's
the real goal here.
Let's take another
phone call.
Good evening.
You're on the air.
Oh,
thank you.
I think it's
a real shame
that what will happen
is that the,
no doubt,
Congress people
and senators
and so on
will use this
explosion
or whatever it was
as a means
of lobbying
for more money
to have more
anti-terrorism acts
passed,
you know,
more anti-terrorism
mechanics
or whatever you
would call
armaments
all around the
United States
and this already
was a bill,
this was proposed
a couple weeks ago
and it passed
last week
because of the one
that blew up
in Saudi Arabia.
I mean,
not even in our
own territory
and Senator Sam Nunn
said,
we are woefully
unprepared
to deal with
this kind of
catastrophic act
of terrorism
if it occurs.
So what they,
what Congress
has drawn up
was a measure
to take millions
of dollars
and give it
to local police
forces
to train
your local
police
to be more
equipped
in anti-terrorism.
Now,
I don't know
what that means
that they're going
to have,
but now
there's sunbelts.
It could be
something that
is needed,
but we need
to know
exactly what it
is that they're
planning on doing
and make sure
it doesn't
at the same time
infringe upon
the rights
of the rest
of us
because it's
an important
issue.
We shouldn't
just brush
it away,
but at the
same time
we have to
always respect
the freedoms
that supposedly
we stand for.
Anyway,
we are out of
time.
Very sorry
about that.
We can talk
about this
for hours
and no doubt
we will
in the
future.
We'll be
back again
next week
with another
fun-filled
edition of
Off the Hook.
Until then,
have yourselves
a safe week
and stay
out of trouble.
We'll be in
touch over
the airwaves.
Take care.
Take care.
The telephone
keeps ringing
So I ripped
it off the wall
I cut myself
while shaving
Now I can't
make a cough
It could be
yet much worse
But if it could
they would
I hope that's
understood
One day
No
One day
Imagine a world with healthy, free-flowing, wild rivers.
Rivers of life that provide clean, fresh water for people, habitat for fish.
Go to www.boot.co.nz