covert@covert.enet.dec.com (John R. Covert 10-Sep-1990 1123) (09/10/90)
From: Dale Neiberg
Washington, DC
202 822 2402 (Work)
In TELECOM Digest, vol 10, issue 588, Tom Neff writes about his
experience with a Panasonic KX-T1470 answering machine:
>I turned on the shortwave receiver in my apartment this morning and
>was flipping past the 5-6 MHz neighborhood when I distinctly a voice
>coming from the speaker. It was my friend in the other room!
> [process of identifying the culprit deleted]
>Is everyone with a Panasonic answering machine bugging himself?
The following is reprinted from _Monitoring_Times_ for September 1990,
page 101:
"Check this one out. According to a reader in California, there is a
way to tune in _wired_ telephones on your shortwave radio. This
reader says that he was talking to a friend on his new AT&T model 612
programmable telephone when he happened to switch on his shortwave
receiver. There, to his horror, was his voice -- loud and clear!
"The signals reappeared every few kilohertz from 4.5 to 8.8 MHz, but
was particularly strong in the 6 to 7 Hz [_sic_] range. Apparently
his voice was modulating the time base oscillator of the
microprocessor in the telephone!
"Has Ma Bell inadvertently planted bugs in homes and offices around
the country? Let us know if you have been hearing strange voices on
your radio!"
(End of excerpt)
Dalenagle@uunet.uu.net (John Nagle) (09/13/90)
The whole area of consumer products with built-in bugging
potential is getting out of hand. It might be worth raising this
issue with the FCC, which to a limited extent regulates telephone
instruments. They could at least insist on a labelling requirement.
So far, I know of the following devices which have bugging
potential:
Baby monitors
Cordless phones
Some Rolm PBX phones
Some AT&T ISDN phones
Any more?
John Naglewilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu (Mark Wilkins) (09/18/90)
This is a little different than the problem being dealt with in the earlier thread, but an associate had a very strange experience and I was curious if anyone had any idea how it could come about. This individual, who wants to remain anonymous for obvious reasons, received an extremely odd call on her answering machine at home. A rather mercenary discussion between two college students was recorded, in which they described such matters as exchanging various social favors in return for finding each other jobs. In particular, one of them said something like "She told me I couldn't have another part-time job at the same time if I wanted this one. I was thinking I could recommend you..." "Great," said the other. "If I do it," said the first, "will you buy me clothes, and take me out to dinner?" At first, she just assumed this was crosstalk of some particularly nasty kind, although the voices were much more clear than they often are when crosstalk is a problem. However, the next day a person she'd been interviewing for a job came in and said that he was unavailable, but he knew the perfect person. Instantly, everything clicked. He had been the one whose conversation was recorded on the phone. Apparently he had a sophistcated auto-dial speaker phone, either with more than one line or with three-way calling. The question I have is this: Does anyone know of a way that someone inexperienced with such matters could accidentally set up a three-way call? Or did this have to be intentional? Ignore, for the moment, the possibility of a strange switching error. Specifically, do many types of production phone equipment have bugs which could cause this sort of thing? As it turns out, the position was not funded by higher-ups and therefore nobody got the job. However, it is good to know that things like this can happen, I think, because such accidents could cause significant damage. Mark Wilkins wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu
garif@cmcl2.nyu.edu (Talking Head) (09/21/90)
wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu (Mark Wilkins) writes: >This individual, who wants to remain anonymous for obvious reasons, >received an extremely odd call on her answering machine at home. I get these on my office answering machines quite often. The conversations that I overhear usually concern me or my data centers. Eighty percent of the time its interesting in a negative sort of way. >The question I have is this: Does anyone know of a way that someone >inexperienced with such matters could accidentally set up a three-way >call? Or did this have to be intentional? Ignore, for the moment, >the possibility of a strange switching error. Specifically, do many >types of production phone equipment have bugs which could cause this >sort of thing? Sure, quite a few people who call me use either a) antiquated AT&T PBXs with three-way calling or b) brand new systems that are set to the wrong PBX selector. When they call me with three-way, i.e. when they're talking to someone and want to bridge me in, my answering machine will answer and normally they will either hang up or leave a message and then hang up. The trick is this: with the old AT&T PBX the flash is signalled by going onhook then offhook in a short interval; this causes the PBX to hang up the third call and lets the primary continue hir call with the original called party. (with the new switches, the flash will not work properly if the PBX selector is set incorrectly) Sometimes, the PBX will not hang up the call and you will continue to talk to the third party... Next time you initiate a third way call and get an answering machine, be sure your third party is properly disconnected, else hir answering machine may confer your conversation at a later time. >As it turns out, the position was not funded by higher-ups and >therefore nobody got the job. However, it is good to know that things >like this can happen, I think, because such accidents could cause >significant damage. Damage? That depends on to whom. I'm usually quite entertained when individuals who work for me call and say they can't do something or be somewhere then promptly inform someone that I am a gullible fool. A better example: someone was trying to sell me a very expensive car; he called me and left a message stating that he couldn't do better than $NNN,NNN; then he goes on to tell some lady (turns out to be his ex-wife) that the car was as good as sold and that I would never try to negotiate a price that would even get near the $NN,NNN that they paid for it two years hence. Well, you can imagine that I didn't quite pay what HE was asking and instead negotiated with HER and got a Big Cash Savings. The Bell System at work. You just have to make it work for you. Forgive me if I've rambled. I'm a bit surprised people haven't caught on to this neat little phenom yet. I "use" it all the time. Lee Chen garif@nyu.edu
FREE0612@uiucvmd (David Lemson) (09/21/90)
In a message of 18 Sep 90 05:54:28, Mark Wilkins <wilkins@jarthur. claremont.edu> writes: >In particular, one of them said something like "She told me I couldn't >have another part-time job at the same time if I wanted this one. I >was thinking I could recommend you..." [Details of conversation deleted] > The question I have is this: Does anyone know of a way that someone >inexperienced with such matters could accidentally set up a three-way >call? Or did this have to be intentional? >Ignore, for the moment, the possibility of a strange switching error. >Specifically, do many types of production phone equipment have bugs >which could cause this sort of thing? Here's my scenario for how this happened: For simplicity, your friend is person A. Person A is the person with the answering machine. The guy who knew your friend and knew there was a job opening is person B. Person B has three-way calling, maybe doesn't even know it. Regardless, he isn't an expert in its use (as are most people who have it). Person C is person B's friend, who is about to be sold a job. Person B called your friend to find out some details about the job. He reached Person A's answering machine. Dismayed, he clicked the receiver down for a millisecond, and dialed up Person C at the dial tone. What he didn't hear was that when he clicked down the receiver, he merely flashed and got the dit-dit-dit-duuuuh of a three-way calling alternate dial tone. He called person C, connected, spoke for a minute, and ... here's where it gets iffy. Person B must have accidentally either hit the "flash" button or the switchhook for a second, because he clicked over to three-way calling. Before he did this, Person A's answering machine could not hear the conversation between men, but after this second click, all three were linked together. The rest is on cassette. The moral of the story is: Don't ever use "Flash" to hang up, unless you really mean to! You might have three-way calling even if you don't know about it! If you hang up, count to five, and then dial, you should be safe. One other thing: The guy must have dialed his friend really fast. Because, unless your friend's answering machine is really old, it should have timed out when it didn't hear anyone on the line for more than ten seconds or so. (While the guy was in the alternate dial tone dialing up his friend, your friend's answering machine should have heard silence) David Lemson d-lemson@uiuc.edu
dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) (09/21/90)
In article <12341@accuvax.nwu.edu>, wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu (Mark Wilkins) writes: > This individual, who wants to remain anonymous for obvious reasons, > received an extremely odd call on her answering machine at home. A > rather mercenary discussion between two college students was recorded, > in which they described such matters as exchanging various social > favors in return for finding each other jobs. [What followed was a description of an answering machine's having recorded a conversation between two parties, neither of whom was the owner of the answering machine, but they conversed about the owner.] I think I can explain how the recording came to be made. One of the parties had called the owner of the answering machine, and reached the machine. The caller, having decided not to leave a message, hung up for a moment, and then called the other party. The caller, however, was calling from a line with three-way calling, or from behind a PBX with three-way calling. The hang-up was not long enough to disconnect the call, but resulted in a transfer dialtone. The caller then dialed the other party. At this point, we have a consultation call. The caller is conversing with the second party, while the answering machine is on hold. The caller, perhaps thinking it was taking too long to connect with the called party, hangs up again, picks up to re-dial, but hears the far end answer. At this point, we have a conference call involving the two parties and the answering machine. By now, the machine has finished its announcement, and is recording a message -- the conversation between the other parties. I have come upon this scenario before, while attempting to debug what was originally reported as a faulty voice-mail system. Dave Levenson Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Internet: dave@westmark.com [The Man in the Mooney] AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave
Norman R Tiedemann <normt@ihlpy.att.com> (09/22/90)
In article <12341@accuvax.nwu.edu>, wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu (Mark Wilkins) writes: >This individual received an extremely odd call on her answering >machine at home. At first, she just assumed this was crosstalk of >some particularly nasty kind, although the voices were much clearer >than when crosstalk is a problem. >However, the next day a person she'd been interviewing for a job came in. >Instantly, everything clicked. He had been the one whose conversation was >recorded on the phone. Apparently he had a sophistcated auto-dial speaker >phone, either with more than one line or with three-way callbing. >The question I have is this: Does anyone know of a way that someone >inexperienced with such matters could accidentally set up a >three-way call? Or did this have to be intentional? This is not that odd, I have gotten this on my machine a couple of times and I now know exactly what causes it here. The person who was recorded just has to have three way calling on his line and it is a very easy thing to do completely ACCIDENTALLY! He calls you, (to schedule the appointment or whatever), gets your machine and decides he doesn't want to leave a message. He taps the switch hook, which instead of hanging up, gives him the second line, the CO on your end doesn't even detect the disconnect and keeps your machine connected (and recording). He now has a threeway setup between your machine, himself and the next person he called. Everything is recorded and unless your machine has a beep or time limit or something on it, he never knows. (I guess he would really get confused if he tried to three way again.) So it is fairly easy for an inexperienced "phone user" to do this and not have a clue about what is going on. Norm Tiedemann AT&T Bell Labs IH 2G-419 att!ihlpy!normt 2000 Naperville Rd. normt@ihlpy.att.com Naperville, IL 60566
kam@dlogics.COM (Kevin Mitchell) (09/22/90)
We have had similar problems with a voice mail system we were evaluating here at Datalogics. We have over 100 phones on Centrex, with some third party call direction equipment for the receptionist, and a setup that connects you to the paging loudspeakers if you dial 8 from any phone. People would try to make intraoffice calls. After four rings, they would figure the person wasn't at his desk, so they'd flash the switchhook, dial 8, and announce "XYZ please call 3NNN" or somesuch. Immediately afterward, the voicemail system would ask the entire company if they would want to leave a message via the loudspeakers. You see, the "dial 8" is just another extension, and the switchhook flash had the effect of transferring the voicemail system to the paging extension. When the paging system "answered," the voicemail would announce. After about a month of listening to this, we decided against the voicemail system. It turns out that people would rather leave computer mail instead. Now, we only have to smirk at the occasional accidental connection of the operator to the paging system. Kevin A. Mitchell (312) 266-4485 Datalogics, Inc Internet: kam@dlogics.UUCP 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!kam Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473
"Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR" <allbery@ncoast.org> (09/24/90)
As quoted from <12430@accuvax.nwu.edu> by Norman R Tiedemann <normt@ihlpy.att.com>: | In article <12341@accuvax.nwu.edu>, wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu | (Mark Wilkins) writes: | >The question I have is this: Does anyone know of a way that someone | >inexperienced with such matters could accidentally set up a | >three-way call? Or did this have to be intentional? | He calls you, (to schedule the appointment or whatever), gets your | machine and decides he doesn't want to leave a message. He taps the | switch hook, which instead of hanging up, gives him the second line, | the CO on your end doesn't even detect the disconnect and keeps your | machine connected (and recording). He now has a threeway setup between | your machine, himself and the next person he called. Everything is I had the younger brother to this problem for a while. When I moved into the apartment I currently live in, the local CO had an older version of the custom calling package; for example, they had call waiting but no way to turn it off. Until they upgraded, I could not simply flash the switch-hook to hang up, despite the fact that I had *only* call waiting, none of the other features. I got into the habit of holding the switch-hook down for a count of five before dialing another number. I think the problem is gone now, since the CO has upgraded to support *70 (1170), etc., but since I still use the count- of-five approach, I don't know for certain. I also got into the habit of making sure I had dial tone before doing anything else. Until I got wise and changed my ways, a caller (or callee) might have gotten a bit of a surprise just after I supposedly hung up. (Not that this happened often; much more often was that I'd continue to get the busy signal I'd gotten the first time I tried to dial out.) Me: Brandon S. Allbery VHF/UHF: KB8JRR on 220, 2m, 440 Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG Packet: KB8JRR @ WA8BXN America OnLine: KB8JRR AMPR: KB8JRR.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88] uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery Delphi: ALLBERY
U5434122@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (09/28/90)
In article <12430@accuvax.nwu.edu>, normt@ihlpy.att.com (Norman R Tiedemann) writes: > In article <12341@accuvax.nwu.edu>, wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu > (Mark Wilkins) writes: >>However, the next day a person she'd been interviewing for a job came in. >>Instantly, everything clicked. He had been the one whose conversation was >>recorded on the phone. Apparently he had a sophistcated auto-dial speaker >>phone, either with more than one line or with three-way callbing. > He calls you, (to schedule the appointment or whatever), gets your > machine and decides he doesn't want to leave a message. He taps the > switch hook, which instead of hanging up, gives him the second line, > the CO on your end doesn't even detect the disconnect and keeps your > machine connected (and recording). He now has a threeway setup between > your machine, himself and the next person he called. Everything is In Australia three-way calling and enquiry call are the same function. To make a call while in the middle of another, you <Flash> and dial. You are then connected to that party in an enquiry call. If you hang up, your phone will ring with the person you left on hold, or, you can initiate three-way conversation with <flash>3. Every 15 seconds a beep will let all parties know that there are three people connected, to avoid eavesdropping, supposedly. It is possible to use <flash>2 repeatedly to flip between calls without connecting them, or to separate them after three-way has been initiated, and <flash>1 is used to hang up on the person you last spoke to and connect you with whoever is left. From my reading of Norman's comments, three way calling in the USA is initiated by the CO after answer supervision of the second dialled number. Is this the way things *do* work? Can you have enquiry without conference? Curious... Danny