From: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Monday, 3 January 1994 Volume 04 : Number 106 In this issue: Re: action plan for '94 Re: action plan for '94 Re: action plan for '94 Stop this nonsense, action plan Re: action plan for '94 Subscribe Re: action plan for '94 Was anyone in Chandler on 22 December? Re: Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 [none] Re: action List suicide Re: Stop this nonsense, action plan Throwing sand Re: Stop this nonsense, action plan See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the skunk-works or skunk-works-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rich Thomson Date: Sun, 02 Jan 94 17:46:59 MST Subject: Re: action plan for '94 In message Mary Shafer writes: > Just don't send any messages to me that look like classified material. > That's not too much to ask, I think. I'm not stopping you from sending > them to anyone else, just to me. If that means that you can't send them > to the skunk works list, then you need to get your own list, unless you > can convince the list owner to produce a subset of the list that doesn't > mind. Hmm... I think you've got this backwards. I am not responsible for what you CHOOSE to see and/or read. You elected to subscribe to the skunk-works list, and I think its pretty clear that stuff of questionable or unknown classification could come up on this list. It is not we who are responsible for what you read, it is you who are responsible for this. If subscribing to skunk-works causes you problems, you should deal with them yourself instead of requesting that the world bend in order to accommodate some discomfort on your part. Having said that, I also don't think its unreasonable to request people to put a "spoiler" on any material that could cause people with clearances a problem. I also wouldn't object to subsetting the mailing list and create "ostrich" list of people who don't wish to see such material; however I don't think its likely that someone could be found to moderate such a list and the extra confusion it would cause to those who would contribute to skunk-works doesn't seem worth the small benefit. Like most electronic forums, this one is self-regulating amongst its readership. If you don't like what you're reading, stop reading it. Its really that simple. -- Rich - -- Between stimulus and response is the will to choose. ------------------------------------------------------------------ IRC: _Rich_ Rich Thomson Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com Fractal Freak ------------------------------ From: megazone@WPI.EDU (MegaZone) Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 20:02:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: action plan for '94 Once upon a time Rich Thomson shaped the electrons to say... >responsible for this. If subscribing to skunk-works causes you >problems, you should deal with them yourself instead of requesting >that the world bend in order to accommodate some discomfort on your All that she is asking is that people NOT place those classification headers on mail ot the list. Which is probably a good idea since the list is about speculation on classified projects and we don't need to confuse matters more by tagging on such headers to non-classified material. (Any one with real classified material is not likely to send it here anyway, unless they LIKE prison.) It is a simple request and it is a good one, IMHO. I've been thinking of adding an 'X-header' to my news post with rotating quotes and the like, and I'll probably through some of these in... But you can block X headers rather simply in any decent newsreader... It isn't so simple in many mailers, and that is a header. NOT in the body. - -- megazone@wpi.wpi.edu megazone@world.std.com megazone@hotblack.schunix.dmc.com "I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity. Use your mind, think!" Moderator: WPI anime FTP site, 130.215.24.1 /anime, the anime FanFic archive; rec.arts.anime.stories, questions to anime-dojinshi-request@wpi.wpi.edu GTW d-- -p+ c++(++++) l u+ e+ m+(*)@ s++/+ !n h- f+ !g w+ t+@ r+@ y+(*) ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 20:44:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: action plan for '94 Very well. Please unsubscribe me from this list. Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com On Sun, 2 Jan 1994, Rich Thomson wrote: > > In message > Mary Shafer writes: > > Just don't send any messages to me that look like classified material. > > That's not too much to ask, I think. I'm not stopping you from sending > > them to anyone else, just to me. If that means that you can't send them > > to the skunk works list, then you need to get your own list, unless you > > can convince the list owner to produce a subset of the list that doesn't > > mind. > > Hmm... I think you've got this backwards. I am not responsible for > what you CHOOSE to see and/or read. You elected to subscribe to the > skunk-works list, and I think its pretty clear that stuff of > questionable or unknown classification could come up on this list. It > is not we who are responsible for what you read, it is you who are > responsible for this. If subscribing to skunk-works causes you > problems, you should deal with them yourself instead of requesting > that the world bend in order to accommodate some discomfort on your > part. > > Having said that, I also don't think its unreasonable to request > people to put a "spoiler" on any material that could cause people with > clearances a problem. I also wouldn't object to subsetting the mailing > list and create "ostrich" list of people who don't wish to see such > material; however I don't think its likely that someone could be found > to moderate such a list and the extra confusion it would cause to > those who would contribute to skunk-works doesn't seem worth the small > benefit. > > Like most electronic forums, this one is self-regulating amongst its > readership. If you don't like what you're reading, stop reading it. > Its really that simple. > -- Rich > -- > Between stimulus and response is the will to choose. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > IRC: _Rich_ Rich Thomson > Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com Fractal Freak ------------------------------ From: tslage78@Calvin.EDU (Thomas Slager) Date: Sun, 2 Jan 94 21:07:22 EST Subject: Stop this nonsense, action plan Listen idiots, this list is about Black Projects, not trying to see if the Government is out to get us. Mary Shafer is definately one of our biggest repositories of knowledge. I wish prm would simply delete from the list those that are ruining it for the rest of us. A year ago this was a fun list to subscribe to, with a lot of AIRPLANE related stuff comming across. Lets get back to real stuff, the rest of you can go start your own list. - -- Would you like me to go sit in a corner | Tom Slager jr. and rust, or just fall to pieces | tslage78@ursa.calvin.edu Where I'm standing? --Marvin | 'Ees just zis guy, You know? ------------------------------ From: Jamie Aycock Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 20:59:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: action plan for '94 On Sun, 2 Jan 1994, Rich Thomson wrote: > > In message > Mary Shafer writes: > > Just don't send any messages to me that look like classified material. > > That's not too much to ask, I think. I'm not stopping you from sending > > Hmm... I think you've got this backwards. I am not responsible for > what you CHOOSE to see and/or read. You elected to subscribe to the > skunk-works list, and I think its pretty clear that stuff of > questionable or unknown classification could come up on this list. It > is not we who are responsible for what you read, it is you who are ..... > > > Like most electronic forums, this one is self-regulating amongst its > readership. If you don't like what you're reading, stop reading it. > Its really that simple. > -- Rich Self-regulating doesn't necessarily mean that she had to stop reading anything - self-regulating also mean putting people back in place gently as needed. Not only do I think you're being totally paraniod (an arguable point, granted), what you said is completely and totally off of the topic of this group, which is incidenently, aircraft of the skunk works facilities (not very arguable). Jamie ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 21:31:00 -0500 (EST) Subject: Subscribe subscribe skunk-works jwilson@krypton.dfrf.nasa.gov Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com ------------------------------ From: MP%MPA15C@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 02 JAN 94 18:38 Subject: Re: action plan for '94 >Like most electronic forums, this one is self-regulating amongst its >readership. If you don't like what you're reading, stop reading it. >Its really that simple. On the other hand since this list is indeed self-regulating it relies first and foremost upon the integrity of the poster. Gratiutious posting of off-topic material demonstrates a distinct lack of self-regulation on the part of the poster. Misuse of classification designations shows a distinct lack of self-regulation as well and it probably would entitle you to a felony conviction with a stay at a federal pennitenitary if it could be shown that you did so deliberately and maliciously. ________________________________________________________________________ Mark Perew (714) 380-5484 | My New Year's resolution is not to make mp@mpa15c.mv-oc.unisys.com | any New Year's resolutions. cb103@cleveland.freenet.edu | ============== "All opinions are mine," sayeth the poster ============== ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 22:06:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: Was anyone in Chandler on 22 December? The SR-71 is carrying an experiment called LEOEX (pronounced leo-x) which stands for Low Earth Orbit EXperiment. It's a receiver/transmitter package and we're simulating a low-earth-orbit satellite. We overfly Motorola's facility in Chandler eastward-bound, turn over New Mexico (Farmington is sort of the top of the turn), and then overfly them westward. We flew our first flights on Wednesday, the 22nd of December. Was anyone here in a position to hear it? We did boom Chandler and a number of other places--we got 25 complaints and one damage claim. I suggested that we do a fuel dump on the next flight, so that people can actually _see_ how fast the plane is moving and I'm pretty sure we'll do it. I also suggested that we do a low pass over Dryden after the second flight and the pilot was only too happy to comply. It was sort of a Christmas present for the Facility and was greatly enjoyed. I _love_ looking down on the plane as it skims across the lakebed toward Dryden and the visceral feel of the overflight and the beauty of the afterburner. I think I'm going to really like being the Chief Engineer on this airplane. Speaking (writing?) of Kelly's aircraft, my F-104 with the periscope is coming right along. We made several landings (both conventional and low-L/D) using the periscope on Thursday, the 23rd. We've been extended to the end of January or until we run out of aircraft time, whichever comes first, so we'll probably have no trouble using up the rest of the aircraft time (about 25 hours, as I recall). The fairing over the periscope is exceedingly draggy and was causing a lot of buffet until we put about 20 vortex generators on it. It's still producing some buffet, but it's much reduced and doesn't affect Steve's (Ishmael, who also flew the SR-71 flights the preceding day) view throught the periscope. It's at times like this that I love flight test. It's taken the F-104 a long time to get to this point but it's been worth it. Regards, Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com ------------------------------ From: MJH7540@tntech.edu Date: Sun, 02 Jan 1994 21:38:25 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 From: IN%"skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu" 2-JAN-1994 03:55:57.06 To: IN%"skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu" CC: Subj: Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 Return-path: Received: from harbor.ecn.purdue.edu by tntech.edu (PMDF V4.2-13 #3874) id <01H76YWU7V80D1IFM6@tntech.edu>; Sun, 2 Jan 1994 03:55:42 CST Received: by harbor.ecn.purdue.edu (5.65/1.32jrs) id AA11177; Sun, 2 Jan 94 03:22:12 -0500 Received: by harbor.ecn.purdue.edu (5.65/1.32jrs) id AA11165; Sun, 2 Jan 94 03:22:09 -0500 Date: Sun, 02 Jan 1994 03:22:09 -0500 From: skunk-works-digest-owner@ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 Sender: skunk-works-digest-owner@ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu Reply-to: skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu Message-id: <9401020822.AA11165@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Sunday, 2 January 1994 Volume 04 : Number 105 In this issue: throwing sand in the All-Seeing Eye... Re: throwing sand in the All-Seeing Eye... Re: action plan for '94 See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the skunk-works or skunk-works-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Sat, 1 Jan 94 12:29:16 PST Subject: throwing sand in the All-Seeing Eye... (this is a lengthy article about my plan to have fun with paranoid people in the US government) I've often wondered if various entities of the US government monitor the public messages in groups such as this or monitor unencrypted electronic mail. I've worked in the communications industry since 1987 and I know how easy it is to monitor digital communications -- in fact, it is often necessary to monitor data communications to find problems in the hardware or software. There have been rumors that NSA can scan international links for keywords like "MX missile" or "Stealth bomber". It's very easy to set up this kind of filter program -- for instance, if you mention Kibo in a Usenet public message, he will respond. With that in mind, I'd like to propose an experiment (maybe prank is a better description...). The following is a list of phrases that are put at the beginning of classified files by the US government. They are taken from Department of Defense manual DOD 5220.22-M and Title 32, Section 2001 Code of Federal Regulations. Note: comments are placed between square brackets, i.e. [this is a comment]. My experiment is to see what happens if you start putting some of these at the beginning of your Internet messages... [primary markings] TOP SECRET (TS) [markings shown in parentheses are accepted abbreviations. For example, you could just put (TS) on a document, instead of TOP SECRET] SECRET (S) CONFIDENTIAL (C) [additional markings] SENSITIVE COMPARTMENTED INFORMATION [very secret intelligence information] (SCI) DISSEMINATION AND EXTRACTION OF INFORMATION CONTROLLED BY ORIGINATOR [this marking, also written as ORCON, is used on information that clearly identifies a US intelligence source or method] (ORCON) WARNING NOTICE - INTELLIGENCE SOURCES OR METHODS INVOLVED [this marking is used on information that could identify an intelligence source or method] (WNINTEL) SINGLE INTEGRATED OPERATIONAL PLAN - EXTREMELY SENSITIVE INFORMATION [US nuclear war fighting plans] (SIOP-ESI) CRITICAL NUCLEAR WEAPON DESIGN INFORMATION (CNWDI) RESTRICTED DATA - This material contains RESTRICTED DATA as defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Unauthorized disclosure subject to administrative and criminal sanctions. [used for nuclear secrets that are below CNWDI] FORMERLY RESTRICTED DATA - Unauthorized disclosure subject to administrative and criminal sanctions. Handle as RESTRICTED DATA in foreign dissemination. Section 144b, AEC 1954. [this label applies to nuclear secrets that have been transferred to a military agency from the Department of Energy or it's predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission] LIMITED DISSEMINATION [used on information in Special Access Programs] (LIMDIS) FOREIGN GOVERNMENT INFORMATION [classified material that originated with a US ally] (FGI) COSMIC TOP SECRET [NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) document that is classified TOP SECRET] NATO SECRET NATO CONFIDENTIAL NATO RESTRICTED ATOMAL [NATO nuclear secrets] NOT RELEASABLE TO CONTRACTORS/CONSULTANTS [this might be used if the powers-that-be are discussing cancelling a contract with an aerospace company...] (NOCONTRACT) CAUTION - PROPRIETARY INFORMATION INVOLVED [this marking is used on documents that would prove harmful to a company. For example, it could be marked on TRW documents that weren't supposed to go to Martin Marietta Co.] (PROPIN) REPRODUCTION REQUIRES APPROVAL OF ORIGINATOR OR HIGHER GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY. CLASSIFIED BY MULTIPLE SOURCES NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS [under no circumstances can this data be released, not even to a US ally] (NOFORN) [this is the dreaded NOFORN marking that Cliff Stoll jokingly said meant 'No Fornication' in his book "The Cuckoo's Egg"...] Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com - ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Sat, 1 Jan 1994 18:45:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: throwing sand in the All-Seeing Eye... Please don't send such messages to me. Since I sometimes telnet to this system while at work, I really don't want these things appearing on my screen. While you may chafe against security restrictions and think they're silly, remember that some of us would lose our jobs if we lost our clearances. Actually, I think you overestimate your importance in the Government's eyes, but I don't want to spoil your fun. Just leave me out. Regards, Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com - ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 00:56:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: action plan for '94 My employer is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I have a clearance and work on several restricted projects. I do not wish to find myself reading documents marked with security markings, particularly at work. It's bad enough with real classified documents and the security rag; I have no desire to have these spuriously marked documents pop up on my monitor. Just don't send any messages to me that look like classified material. That's not too much to ask, I think. I'm not stopping you from sending them to anyone else, just to me. If that means that you can't send them to the skunk works list, then you need to get your own list, unless you can convince the list owner to produce a subset of the list that doesn't mind. Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com - ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 ********************************* To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest in the body of a message to "listserv@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe skunk-works-digest local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe skunk-works-digest in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to either "skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu" or, if you don't like to type a lot, "prm@ecn.purdue.edu". A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from harbor.ecn.purdue.edu, in /pub/skunk-works/digest/vNN.nMMM (where "NN" is the volume number, and "MMM" is the issue number). ------------------------------ From: skunk-works-owner@ecn.purdue.edu Date: Sun, 2 Jan 94 21:41:13 -0600 Subject: [none] ***** UNDELIVERABLE MAIL sent to sbooth, being returned by lonestar!root ***** mail: Error # 2 'Problem with mailfile' encountered on system lonestar Received: from harbor.ecn.purdue.edu by lonestar.utsa.edu via SMTP (931110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO) for sbooth id AA15545; Sun, 2 Jan 94 21:41:04 -0600 Received: by harbor.ecn.purdue.edu (5.65/1.32jrs) id AA04734; Sun, 2 Jan 94 22:35:59 -0500 Received: from bank.ecn.purdue.edu by harbor.ecn.purdue.edu (5.65/1.32jrs) id AA04726; Sun, 2 Jan 94 22:35:55 -0500 Received: from gemini.tntech.edu by bank.ecn.purdue.edu (5.65/1.32jrs) id AA21782; Sun, 2 Jan 94 22:35:51 -0500 Received: from tntech.edu by tntech.edu (PMDF V4.2-13 #3874) id <01H78002SMC0D1IHQD@tntech.edu>; Sun, 2 Jan 1994 21:38:25 CST Date: Sun, 02 Jan 1994 21:38:25 -0600 (CST) From: MJH7540@tntech.edu Subject: Re: Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 To: skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu Message-Id: <01H78002UHUQD1IHQD@tntech.edu> X-Vms-To: IN%"skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: skunk-works-owner@ecn.purdue.edu Precedence: bulk From: IN%"skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu" 2-JAN-1994 03:55:57.06 To: IN%"skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu" CC: Subj: Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 Return-path: Received: from harbor.ecn.purdue.edu by tntech.edu (PMDF V4.2-13 #3874) id <01H76YWU7V80D1IFM6@tntech.edu>; Sun, 2 Jan 1994 03:55:42 CST Received: by harbor.ecn.purdue.edu (5.65/1.32jrs) id AA11177; Sun, 2 Jan 94 03:22:12 -0500 Received: by harbor.ecn.purdue.edu (5.65/1.32jrs) id AA11165; Sun, 2 Jan 94 03:22:09 -0500 Date: Sun, 02 Jan 1994 03:22:09 -0500 From: skunk-works-digest-owner@ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 Sender: skunk-works-digest-owner@ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu Reply-to: skunk-works-digest@ecn.purdue.edu Message-id: <9401020822.AA11165@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Sunday, 2 January 1994 Volume 04 : Number 105 In this issue: throwing sand in the All-Seeing Eye... Re: throwing sand in the All-Seeing Eye... Re: action plan for '94 See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the skunk-works or skunk-works-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Sat, 1 Jan 94 12:29:16 PST Subject: throwing sand in the All-Seeing Eye... (this is a lengthy article about my plan to have fun with paranoid people in the US government) I've often wondered if various entities of the US government monitor the public messages in groups such as this or monitor unencrypted electronic mail. I've worked in the communications industry since 1987 and I know how easy it is to monitor digital communications -- in fact, it is often necessary to monitor data communications to find problems in the hardware or software. There have been rumors that NSA can scan international links for keywords like "MX missile" or "Stealth bomber". It's very easy to set up this kind of filter program -- for instance, if you mention Kibo in a Usenet public message, he will respond. With that in mind, I'd like to propose an experiment (maybe prank is a better description...). The following is a list of phrases that are put at the beginning of classified files by the US government. They are taken from Department of Defense manual DOD 5220.22-M and Title 32, Section 2001 Code of Federal Regulations. Note: comments are placed between square brackets, i.e. [this is a comment]. My experiment is to see what happens if you start putting some of these at the beginning of your Internet messages... [primary markings] TOP SECRET (TS) [markings shown in parentheses are accepted abbreviations. For example, you could just put (TS) on a document, instead of TOP SECRET] SECRET (S) CONFIDENTIAL (C) [additional markings] SENSITIVE COMPARTMENTED INFORMATION [very secret intelligence information] (SCI) DISSEMINATION AND EXTRACTION OF INFORMATION CONTROLLED BY ORIGINATOR [this marking, also written as ORCON, is used on information that clearly identifies a US intelligence source or method] (ORCON) WARNING NOTICE - INTELLIGENCE SOURCES OR METHODS INVOLVED [this marking is used on information that could identify an intelligence source or method] (WNINTEL) SINGLE INTEGRATED OPERATIONAL PLAN - EXTREMELY SENSITIVE INFORMATION [US nuclear war fighting plans] (SIOP-ESI) CRITICAL NUCLEAR WEAPON DESIGN INFORMATION (CNWDI) RESTRICTED DATA - This material contains RESTRICTED DATA as defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Unauthorized disclosure subject to administrative and criminal sanctions. [used for nuclear secrets that are below CNWDI] FORMERLY RESTRICTED DATA - Unauthorized disclosure subject to administrative and criminal sanctions. Handle as RESTRICTED DATA in foreign dissemination. Section 144b, AEC 1954. [this label applies to nuclear secrets that have been transferred to a military agency from the Department of Energy or it's predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission] LIMITED DISSEMINATION [used on information in Special Access Programs] (LIMDIS) FOREIGN GOVERNMENT INFORMATION [classified material that originated with a US ally] (FGI) COSMIC TOP SECRET [NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) document that is classified TOP SECRET] NATO SECRET NATO CONFIDENTIAL NATO RESTRICTED ATOMAL [NATO nuclear secrets] NOT RELEASABLE TO CONTRACTORS/CONSULTANTS [this might be used if the powers-that-be are discussing cancelling a contract with an aerospace company...] (NOCONTRACT) CAUTION - PROPRIETARY INFORMATION INVOLVED [this marking is used on documents that would prove harmful to a company. For example, it could be marked on TRW documents that weren't supposed to go to Martin Marietta Co.] (PROPIN) REPRODUCTION REQUIRES APPROVAL OF ORIGINATOR OR HIGHER GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY. CLASSIFIED BY MULTIPLE SOURCES NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS [under no circumstances can this data be released, not even to a US ally] (NOFORN) [this is the dreaded NOFORN marking that Cliff Stoll jokingly said meant 'No Fornication' in his book "The Cuckoo's Egg"...] Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com - ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Sat, 1 Jan 1994 18:45:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: throwing sand in the All-Seeing Eye... Please don't send such messages to me. Since I sometimes telnet to this system while at work, I really don't want these things appearing on my screen. While you may chafe against security restrictions and think they're silly, remember that some of us would lose our jobs if we lost our clearances. Actually, I think you overestimate your importance in the Government's eyes, but I don't want to spoil your fun. Just leave me out. Regards, Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com - ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 00:56:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: action plan for '94 My employer is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I have a clearance and work on several restricted projects. I do not wish to find myself reading documents marked with security markings, particularly at work. It's bad enough with real classified documents and the security rag; I have no desire to have these spuriously marked documents pop up on my monitor. Just don't send any messages to me that look like classified material. That's not too much to ask, I think. I'm not stopping you from sending them to anyone else, just to me. If that means that you can't send them to the skunk works list, then you need to get your own list, unless you can convince the list owner to produce a subset of the list that doesn't mind. Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com - ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 ********************************* To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest in the body of a message to "listserv@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe skunk-works-digest local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe skunk-works-digest in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to either "skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu" or, if you don't like to type a lot, "prm@ecn.purdue.edu". A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from harbor.ecn.purdue.edu, in /pub/skunk-works/digest/vNN.nMMM (where "NN" is the volume number, and "MMM" is the issue number). ------------------------------ From: dadams@netcom.com (Dean Adams) Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 20:53:33 -0800 Subject: Re: action >>>>Hmm... I think you've got this backwards. I am not responsible for >>>>what you CHOOSE to see and/or read. You elected to subscribe to the >>>>skunk-works list ... Please... We don't need that kind of talk here. >>>All that she is asking is that people NOT place those classification >>>headers on mail ot the list. Right, and since the original post in question was only a "joke", I really don't think we have anything to worry about along those lines. The main example I can recall where this sort of thing was done here is in transcribing some (formerly!) classified documents for the benefit of the list, such as the OXCART history. It wasn't seriously suggested that we should start filling >skunk-works< with needless "classification headers", and i'm sure that won't be happening. Phew... this has got to be one of the strangest threads i've seen here in years (not to mention off-topic). I sure hope nobody truly winds up "leaving" over it! >>Gratiutious posting of off-topic material demonstrates a distinct >>lack of self-regulation on the part of the poster. Unfortunately there seems to be a lot of that today. :( >>Misuse of classification designations shows a distinct lack of >>self-regulation as well and it probably would entitle you to a >>felony conviction with a stay at a federal pennitenitary if it >>could be shown that you did so deliberately and maliciously. Well, no. Even deliberately typing "top secret" is still not a felony. >Listen idiots ... Sigh. ------------------------------ From: rosattin@netcom.com (Rob Osattin) Date: Sun, 2 Jan 1994 21:12:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: List suicide I'd like to recommend to the person planning to bait the govermnent that he not do it on this list. There are plenty of hacker lists or newsgroups that would probably be only too happy to help him but this is not the place. It's my understanding that the purpose of this list is for the discussion of SR-71, Skunk Works, and new high performance military aircraft as well as for speculating about what may be out there that we don't know about yet. Please, let's stick to the list's stated purpose. It's been suggested that the burden of inappropriate messages is totally the reader's responsibility but I strongly disagree. If certain messages drive a certain subset of the list (those with clearances) off of the list than the list will die. IMHO, the presence of the chief engineer for SR-71's at NASA on this list is an invaluable asset to an SR-71 list. Let's not commit list suicide. Send the hackers packing. Rob Osattin ------------------------------ From: freeman@MasPar.COM (Jay R. Freeman) Date: Sun, 2 Jan 94 21:53:32 -0800 Subject: Re: Stop this nonsense, action plan Tom Slager, Jr., says: > I wish prm would simply delete from the list those that are ruining it > for the rest of us. I concur: Dump Rich Thomson, apologize to Mary Shafer. Now, please. -- Jay Freeman ------------------------------ From: Gschaffe@redstone-emh1.army.mil Date: Mon, 3 Jan 94 0:09:07 CST Subject: Throwing sand Think, people! The suggestion to seed the net with sophomoric pranks is irresponsible. Remember a couple of things: - Uncle Sam is subsidizing the net. Don't foul your drinking water. - If NSA or somebody else cared, they would be spending YOUR tax dollars to investigate. There's enough wasted effort and money already. Security of what NEEDS to be secured is precious. Everything else is fair game, including unnecessarily classified info. There's a process for doing it right. Be smart, not a smarty-pants. Glenn Schaffer Personal opinions .... My employer has not approved this message. ------------------------------ From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn_Remseth?= Date: Mon, 3 Jan 1994 09:07:39 +0100 Subject: Re: Stop this nonsense, action plan > subscribe to, with a lot of AIRPLANE related stuff comming across. Lets get > back to real stuff, the rest of you can go start your own list. Hear, hear! (Rmz) Bj\o rn Remseth !Institutt for Informatikk !Net: rmz@ifi.uio.no Phone:+47 22855802!Universitetet i Oslo, Norway !ICBM: N595625E104337 ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 ********************************* To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest in the body of a message to "listserv@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe skunk-works-digest local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe skunk-works-digest in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to either "skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu" or, if you don't like to type a lot, "prm@ecn.purdue.edu". A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from harbor.ecn.purdue.edu, in /pub/skunk-works/digest/vNN.nMMM (where "NN" is the volume number, and "MMM" is the issue number).