Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 18:23:20 CDT
From: rex@iqsc.COM (Rex Black)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Unreliable Call Return Feature on Southwestern Bell
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 634, Message 1 of 12

I originally posted this article to the Risks Digest, where it
generated a lot of comment and questions.  A fellow reader suggested
that the conversation be moved here so it could generate more light
than heat.

Rex

            -------ORIGINAL POSTING-------

I know that caller ID has generated a number of discussions about
privacy and risks to individuals.  I'd like to pass on a personal
experience I had with a related technology, call return.

I was using my modem and computer to telecommute on Sunday afternoon.
Shortly after hanging up, my phone rang.  The caller asked with whom
she was speaking.  I responded by asking who she was trying to reach.
It turned out that she had just been the victim of a harassing phone
call.  Southwestern Bell has a phone feature (call return) that allows
a person to press a star-sequence (i.e., *1) to call back the last
caller.  According to the phone salesman who (aggressively) marketed
it to me when I had my phone connected three months ago, it uses the
same logic as caller ID.  (He mentioned that Southwest Bell would
offer caller ID in the fall.)  He promoted call return as a "great way
to deal with obscene or harassing callers."  My experience Sunday
afternoon points out a serious risk associated with such technology.
Clearly, the system has a bug.  That bug lead someone to believe that
I was harassing them.  Depending on what was said, the system
identified me as a misdemeanant or a felon.

On Monday, I called Southwestern Bell and explained my concern.  While
the person I spoke with understood my concern, he did not help.  He
repeated the standard disclaimer about "no phone system is perfect,
the phone company can not guarantee accuracy, blah, blah, CYA,
CSWBA..."  I did manage to get from him some further information:
First, this was hardly the first time this happened.  He mentioned
that incidents like mine occur frequently.  Second, the phone
company's policy requires that, before turning a case over to the
police, someone must repeatedly call and harass someone.  One instance
does not suffice.

I then called the P.U.C.  I spoke with a woman there who, when she
realized I was calling to voice concerns about caller ID and call
return, adopted a very tired tone of voice.  She gave me a docket
number and said that I should send in my comments to the P.U.C.  I
asked about groups who may have joined fight against such technology.
She said that SWB had just submitted the caller ID request, but she
expected that a number of people would get involved in the ensuing
discussion.  She did not sound pleased at the prospect.


Rex


[Moderator's Note: It either identified you as one of those things, or
it possibly identified the person who returned the call to you as a
crackpot, which is not unheard of. Nothing is perfect, but I would not
resist this technology simply because of occassional errors.   PAT]