HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 03:34:36 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@proponent.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Sci.electronics Phone Fraud!
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 11, Message 2 of 4

[Moderator's Note: Monty also passed this along for us today.  PAT]

 From: larryc@shell.portal.com (Larry WB Ching)
 Newsgroups: sci.electronics
 Subject: SCI.ELECTRONICS Phone fraud !!!
 Summary: A recent attempt to rip-off sci.electronics correspondents.
 Keywords: fraud, con artists, phone numbers
 Message-ID: <C077BC.GBn@unix.portal.com>
 Date: 1 Jan 93 23:16:23 GMT
 Sender: news@unix.portal.com
 Organization: Portal Communications  -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091  


 At about 6PM Thursday evening, I got a phone call. The operator said
that he had a collect call to me from Charles Pooley in New York. The
name was familiar, but I didn't remember exactly why. I said I would
accept the call, but then the "operator" said the call couldn't get
through because I had the call collect option blocked. He then said he
could pass the call through if I gave him my calling card number. I
said that I'd rather call Mr. Pooley myself, and could the "operator"
give me Mr. Pooley's number.  There was a pause, then a phone number
with a San Jose area code! It didn't occur to me until later that , if
the call was from New York, why was the call-from number (408) !??!

 I remembered that Charles and I had been corresponding on a topic
from sci.electronics. I was lucky enough to have an old message from
him lying around, and emailed him a message about my mysterious phone
call.

 Charles Pooley replyed to me today -- turns out the guy tried the
same scam on him too! But this time, the bogus operator said the
collect call was from me to Charles! Charles was also wary, and didn't
give the crook his calling card number.

 So - WATCH OUT! How this con artist chose my name and Charles' to try
is beyond me. As far as public postings in sci.electronics, I don't
think Charles and I had exchanged more than four public postings. Most
of our correspondence has been via "private" email.

 This has definitely raised my paranoia level. If, out of the millions
of public postings during 1992, someone should choose two
correspondents who have exchange only a slight amount of messages ....
I mean, why us?  Or, is there a "boilerroom" operation going on, with
a bunch of phony operators, armed with USENET listings -- calling
people with this con?

 OH! - I may have put my phone number in one of my public
sci.electronics postings - that's probably how the scamsters make
their selection. Makes sense ...

CHILDREN BEWARE!!!


larryc@shell.portal.com


[Moderator's Note: I note the public access site you use for Usenet
(Portal Com) is located in area 408 (San Jose, CA).   PAT]
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 11:57:20 EST
From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 17, Message 2 of 9

John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com> writes:

> But what people do not understand is that those preciously
> private telephone numbers will soon be displayed out of state on
> a wide scale.  It is only other CALIFORNIANS that will not see
> the number displayed.

yazz@locus.com (Bob Yazz) replied:

> You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand,
> do you John?  The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered,
> period.  I can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac
> Bell over this.

Californians may *think* they control everything, but in reality NOT.
The California PUC has absolutely no jurisdiction over the carrying of
telephone calls in interstate commerce.  That is the exclusive
jurisdiction of the FCC.  In fact, this genie is already out of the
bottle.  All of the major carriers are right now happily delivering
your billing number to their 800 and 900 customers who subscribe to
ANI.  The PUC is allowing it, one assumes because they know they have
no authority to stop it.  Unless, of course, you mean to imply that
the most egalitarian California PUC would allow number delivery to big
bad business but not to "da people".  :^|

yazz> Sounds like an incentive to switch to a long distance company
yazz> that does not use SS7.  How do you think AT&T might feel about
yazz> this?

Go and find one.  Do you *really* think that AT&T is the only carrier
with SS7 on its mind?  It may be ahead in its deployment, but it is
not alone.  Now I know why John and others have been referring to some
of the arguments in this thread as Luddite.  Do you really think that
LECs and IECs expect to make enough money from CNID and ANI to pay for
the tremendous investment in SS7?  Dream on.  SS7 is being deployed
because it promises to provide *much* faster and more robust call
setup than its predecessors.  I doubt you will get any company to drop
SS7. A more realistic, and less technically ignorant, campaign would
be to persuade one or more IECs to drop calling number delivery over
SS7.  (A campaign which I would oppose, but one that at least is not
just plain stupid).

Since you want to kill SS7 to stop CNID and ANI, may I assume you
intend to deprive the rest of us of ISDN as well?  You can't do that
either witout SS7.


Andy Sherman   Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
(201) 896-7018  -  andys@sbi.com or asherman@sbi.com
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 05:59:39 GMT
From: rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 20, Message 12 of 17

> I believe the bankcard passwords are also often in the clear in the
> ISO mag stripe. Shudder! Remember having read something to that
> effect on the net. Could some please deny ... please .. please!

Denied.  (You're welcome!)

Bank card passwords are stored in encrypted form (one way encryption
using the DES algorithm on a combination of the account number, user
selected PIN and a few other things) which allows for local
verification of passwords but only by your own bank.  There are two
different standards by which this is done, but each has a
bank-specific encryption key (often refered to as the Pin Verification
Key, or PVK).  This key is kept highly confidential -- anyone with the
key could generate the hashed pin for each possible password (only
10,000 in the typical four digit password) , compare each to the
hashed value on the card, and decode the PIN that way.

Your own back can verify the password within the ATM; other bank's ATM's
must query your bank via the network.


rob boudrie
From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Date: 7 Jan 93 07:58:16 GMT
Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com
Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 14, Message 5 of 14

We have a 12 line hunt group with numbers in three prefixs (834-, 762-
and something else) in a hunt group without any problem. They are all
served off the same 2B switch ...


Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.   Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                         jwasilko@airage.com
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:38:40 GMT
From: brc@halcyon.com (Brian Cartmell)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: HELP Needed With Motorola Micro-Tac
Organization: Encryption
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 16, Message 11 of 12

Someone was telling how to reset and put a Motorola in test mode by
connecting pin 20-21 but my micro-tac has a eight pin connector with
what looks like a ground. Does anyone have a idea of how to put this
in test mode?


Thanks,

Brian
Date: 4 Jan 93 21:05:28 GMT
From: Ken.Blackney@noc.ocs.drexel.edu (Ken Blackney)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Need History/Stories re: Rotary Mechanism
Organization: Drexel Univ -- Telecom & Networking
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 8, Message 5 of 11

I am publishing the 93 edition of Drexel University's telephone
directory.  The cover artwork shows a rotary phone dial and a handset.

I would like some stories (more on the fun side than the technical
side) of the dial (when it started, how it worked, how many still
used, etc) to include in an "About the cover art" section inside the
directory.


Thanks much,

Ken
From: lamb@xtcn.com (Richard Lamb)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Will a UK Telephone Work in the US (Will it Ring?)
Date: 11 Jan 93 21:28:38 GMT
Organization: XtcN Ltd
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 18, Message 12 of 18

I bought a phone in the UK and am using it in the US.  The DTMF stuff
works fine, but I cant seem to make it ring.  Should I be able to ?


Rick
XtcN Ltd, lamb@xtcn.com, Tel:508-655-2960, FAX:508-655-4559, Telex:6504829720
11 Roxbury Ave.,Natick MA 01760,4425 Butterworth Pl.N.W.,Washington D.C. 20016
From: bp@teaser.lis.pitt.edu (Bryan Petty)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Info Wanted: Telecom in Holland?
Date: 12 Jan 93 04:12:51 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 18, Message 15 of 18

I am doing some research on the Telecommunications infrastructure in
Holland. If anyone can recommend any references or contacts for
information it would be greatly appreciated. If there is any interest
I will post a summary. 


Thanks! 

Bryan Petty    University of Pittsburgh   Graduate Telecom Student/Slave
From: rathmann@nic.cerf.net (Raul Rathmann)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56
Date: 11 Jan 93 07:58:47 GMT
Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF Customer Group
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 18, Message 6 of 18

Hi folks:

I am considering picking up a Toshiba Strata DK-56 PBX with various
handsets.  Does anyone have any opinions on this unit, good or bad?

Also important, I will be hooking up a PC based voice mail system to
this PBX, probably with Dialogic equipment.  Anyone know of any
gotchas?  I understand that some systems don't signal a disconnect
correctly or at all.  Does this unit have this problem?


Thanks - Raul    rathmann@cerf.net
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 11:10:14 PST
From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ...
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 11, Message 4 of 4

Hi!

I have the SID chart from the telecom archives, but it's quite old.
Has anyone managed to get a list of SIDs for US cellular service
providers?  My carrier (Nynex mobile in NJ) tells me to just 'dial
*611' to find out what system you are on.  "We do not have that
information."  My phone displays SID, and I've noticed that there are
many new ones I've wandered into that are not on the list.

It is difficult to get *any* information out of Nynex.  They tell me
they have call delivery into Philadelphia.  I try it and it doesn't
work.  I call them when I'm in Philly, and ask them to call me back on
my mobile number and it *still* doesn't work.  What do they conclude?
Of course, everything is working fine.

Finally, I attempted to get roaming rates and information from Nynex.
They sent me a booklet from 1990 with a few roamer ports listed.  What
I really wanted was the rates. When I lived in Chicago, Cell/One in
Chicago had a nice handy booklet with all of this.  But Nynex told me
they could and would give the information out only for cities/systems
I specifically requested.  That is, in order to find out the rates
for, say, California I would have to name each city and have them read
the information to me over the phone.

How the rates that the customer pays are a confidential item, to be
specifically kept *from* the customer I'll never know. After a lot of
complaining and threatening to cancel my service they finally
photocopied their roamer information -- which is up to date and
includes all systems, roamer ports, daily and per minute charges, etc.

Do many other 'service' providers give customers this much of a hard
time when they want to find out rates?  In the last two years I'd say
my experience with the cellular industry is that the carriers never
have anybody who knows anything answering the phone, and they
absolutely refuse to let you speak with anybody who knows anything.


<sigh>,
reb

-- *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* reb@ingres.com  or  reb%ingres.com@lll-winken.llnl.GOV
h:861 Washington Avenue Westwood NJ 07675 201-376-5766   ICBM: ??.??N   ??.??W
w: reb  Ingres   Park 80 West Plaza I    Saddle Brook, NJ 07662   201-587-1400



[Moderator's Note: Both Cellular One and Ameritech in Chicago have the
booklet you describe, listing roamer ports in hundreds of cities and
dialing instructios, etc. They send them out as part of the sign up
kit or you can get that information mailed out anytime.   PAT]
From: jdelancy@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Prodigy <> Internet
Date: 4 Jan 93 20:48:56 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 9, Message 9 of 15

About a month or so ago, someone posted that a gateway for Email from
Internet to/from Prodigy would probably be in business by Christmas.
Anyone have the latest status on that "activation"?
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 12:08:43 GMT
From: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch (Jan Steinman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto
Reply-To: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 15, Message 10 of 10

In article 3@eecs.nwu.edu, Tony Harminc <TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA> () writes:

> This past November, a company I consult for had three unauthorized
> calls to (416) 976-9467 made on one of its lines.  Each call was one
> minute long and was billed at $24.  Thinking back, we remember the
> likely perpetrator -- a man claiming to be serving legal papers on
> someone who supposedly used to work at the office address.  There were
> several small discrepancies to his story, but he seemed just as
> puzzled as we were.  He asked to use the phone, and I remember that he
> did a lot of dialing, but when challenged he showed a pager with
> display and claimed he was calling his voicemail.

This sounds like a scam I heard about from a client in New York City.
It is simple to do, given the right information. All you need is a
bunch of numbers of pagers that display a number to call. Call those
pagers, and give the 976 number to call. The process server may have
been an unwitting victim of this hoax.

For whatever reason, my client assigned pagers to virtually all their
staff, and the numbers were sequential. The hoax was discovered one
day when every beeper in the whole joint began ringing, and people
compared numbers and discovered they were the same number. This was
not too long ago -- not everyone recognizes the significance of 976,
especially when it is in the form of a generally important interrupt,
like your pager going off!


Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths		    steinman@hasler.ascom.ch
2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA    +1 503 657 7703
Beundenfeldstrasse 35, CH-3013, Bern, Switzerland    +41 31 999 3946
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 23:07:06 -0800
From: haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Reference for "Tragedy of the Commons" Article
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 9, Message 15 of 15

Several people have asked for the reference for the Garret Hardin
"Tragedy of the Commons" article that I mentioned in connection with
telemarketing.  The reference is:

   {Science Magazine} (Amer Assn for the Advancement of Science)
   vol 162, p 1243, 13 December 1968

The axe Hardin was grinding in writing the article was population
control; but the argument is widely applicable.  It goes roughly like
this.

Suppose there is a meadow which produces enough grass to feed 1000
cows.  Suppose it is used in common by 100 farmers, each with 10 cows.
Now if a farmer acquires an extra cow he has increased his wealth by
10%, while each of the 1001 cows is affected by a food shortage of
only 0.1%.  Hence the temptation is overwhelming to stick in an extra
cow or two.  If only one farmer did this the effect would be
practically insignificant; but when all the farmers give in to this
temptation all the cows suffer from malnutrition as the meadow becomes
seriously overgrazed.


[Moderator's Note: This is the essence of what many people tried to
explain years ago regards so-called 'victimless crimes'. In some
situations the process of victimization is very slow -- so slow as to
be almost indiscernable; in fact we see no immediate victim and claim
therefore there must not be one. Instead of the personal discipline
in our lives needed to make society as a whole function well, each of
us says, 'well, this one little thing won't hurt, there are no victims.'
After a few months, years or decades, these little (I like to call
them termites in our conciousness) pecadillos each of us practice in
our lives have eaten away enough of our society that there is a
serious erosion we are unable to stop. Bit by bit, piece by piece
until it all collapses like a rotting beach house on the ocean hit by
the tides day after day.  The USA in the 1990's is proof of this. The
termites have been feasting for years, and the foundation is almost
gone. Yes, I am guilty of this same sloth also.  Old I grew too soon
and wise too late. :(  PAT]
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 11:49:04 -0500
From: wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 15, Message 3 of 10

   The answer -- at least one possible answer -- is that the phone
company runs line tests every day at about the same time ... (The same
thing happed to me but at 6:20 AM and would wake me up) ... I don't
remember why but I ended up buying (about $4 at Radio Shack) a
polarity phone line tester; it should the polarity was reversed. Then
all I had to do was to change the red and green wire around in the
jack and I didn't have anymore pings.


Bill
From: mearle@cgull.ccsu.edu (Mark Earle)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cellular One Off-Peak vs SWBMS Off Peak
Date: 5 Jan 93 03:00:45 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 9, Message 5 of 15

Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, the 'B' carrier for cellular phones
in most of Texas, offeres a variety of monthly plans and costs. These
seem to be market taylored. For instance, in DFW there isn't a readily
accessable off peak plan with zero cents per air minute. In many
smaller markets, including Corpus Christi, there is such a plan
available.
 
I pay $40/month (plus taxes, $5 for voicemail on 3rd ring/no ans).
 
Cellular One announced via a full page ad, radio spots, and a TV
spot, their version of off peak.
 
$40/month 240 minutes "free" additional off peak minutes 9 cents
includes 15 "free" peak minutes, additional peak minutes 15 cents.
 
[SWBMS with the above is 40 cents / min peak, no "free" minutes].
 
Off peak is 8 p.m. local through 7 a.m., plus all day Saturday /
Sunday, and four holidays (Easter, 4th July, Thanksgiving, Christmas,
and this year, they included New Year's Day.)
 
In some ways the C1 plan looks better, as the peak minutes are
cheaper, and really, 240 "free" off peak minutes is a lot of talking.
I rarely run up more than 60 or so off peak minutes, and many of those
are because at 0.00/min, who cares?
 
I probably won't change carriers now (although I could next month)
mainly because of the hassles of changing the number people use to get
me.
 
As yet, I'm unsure if the C1 plan includes "features". SWBMS includes
CW, CF, 3W, and detailed billing in the above plan.
 
* In DFW and other large market cities, SWBMS offers the zero - peak
"Advantage" plan, but only to corporate or group buyers. Sometimes
individuals can "push" and get this plan. In Corpus, we can get it
simply by agreeing to a 1 year service commitment.

 
mearle@cgull.ccsu.edu   73117.351@compuserve.com   Mark Earle 1:160/50
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:44:06 GMT
From: paul@panix.com (Paul Gatker)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Baby Bell Breakups
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 8, Message 6 of 11

I heard an interesting theory regarding investing in the Baby Bells.
The theory was that they could be breaking up ala AT&T, and in so
doing, the parts would be much more valuable than the present whole
companies. This due to the rapidly exploding telecom revolution.

The theory sounds very reasonable to me. Any other info, data, on
this?


paul@panix.com          COMPULITE GRAPHICS
Brooklyn NY usa      Design & Consultation
From: cmoore@BRL.MIL (VLD/VMB)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Area Code 610
Date: 11 Jan 93 19:39:13 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 18, Message 10 of 18

Last Octwober, the Digest had a message (repeated below) about the 610
area code.  I have lost track of which digest it was in.  Because 610
has just been announced for a split of 215, I am re-sending the
message.


 >Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 09:08:32 +0200
 >From: spyros@isoft.intranet.gr (Spyros Bartsocas)
 >Subject: Area Code 610

 >Recently the Greek newspapers are filled with ads of '900' type of
 >services located in Australia and North America.  Examples of prefixes
 >used are 609-490, and 609-426.  Are these local 976 type prefixes?  A
 >lot of these are 610-204-xxxx numbers.  Where is 610 located?

 >Spyros Bartsocas    spyros@isoft.intranet.gr

[609-426 & 490 are in Hightstown, NJ; a Moderator's Note, omitted
here, followed.]


[Moderator's Note: I wonder what will become of the +1-610 premium
services once 610 gets used legitimatly here in the USA?  PAT]
From: swslr@well.sf.ca.us (Larry Krone)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Internet / UUCP / Compuserve / Anything in Belize
Date: 11 Jan 93 19:20:16 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 18, Message 16 of 18

Is there any type of Net access available from Belize (Central
America?)

Please Email responses to:   swslr@well.sf.ca.us


Thanks,

Larry Krone