leilabd@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Leila Burrell-Davis) (09/12/90)
A women's group that I belong to has received a number of complaints from women about the way in which the police and British Telecom in the UK handle reports of obscene or 'nuisance' calls - essentially the charge is that unless you've been having calls threatening physical violence for an extended period they're just not interested. We plan to take this up with the authorities, but before we do I would be very interested to know what it is technically possible for the phone company to do to trace such calls. I have seen some discussion in this group as regards the US but don't know to what extent it is applicable to the UK. Leila Burrell-Davis, Computing Service, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK Tel: +44 273 678390 Fax: +44 273 678470 Email: leilabd@syma.sussex.ac.uk (JANET: leilabd@uk.ac.sussex.syma) [Moderator's Note: Can any of our readers in the UK explain the laws there on the topics of telephone harassment and call tracing? PAT]
martin@bellcore.bellcore.com (Martin Harriss (ACP)) (09/13/90)
In article <12079@accuvax.nwu.edu> leilabd@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Leila Burrell-Davis) writes: [ stuff about harassing phone calls deleted ] >We plan to take this up with the authorities, but before we do I would >be very interested to know what it is technically possible for the >phone company to do to trace such calls. I don't really know about the legal side of things, but as a former employee of the UK telephone industry I do know something about the technical side. I'm afraid I have to make the following somewhat cowardly statement about the technical feasability of call tracing: "It all depends". It depends mainly on what kind of switching equipment the call is routed through. In the newer, processor controlled switches, the capability is there to trace the call. Whether it's used or not is another matter, and probably depends as much as anything on what BT feels like doing on a particular day. (I'm referring here specifically to the System X and system Y switches.) On the older equipment (there's still a lot of it around) it becomes more complex. (I'm referring here not only to Strowger exchanges, but also crossbar (TXK1, TXK3) and the old electronic exchanges (TXE2, TXE4)) It is possible to trace calls on these exchanges, but only with considerable effort. It requires engineering personel stationed at the echange where the call is being received. When the offending call arrives, the call can be held, and a path traced back through the switches. This is, of course, tedious and time consuming. Moreover, the call can only be held within the exchange: if the call originated outside the exchange the best you can do is determine which exchange the call came in from, and maybe try and trace through the originating exchange. But if the caller always phoned from a different exchange, this wouldn't do much good. I wonder, however, if there may be a simpler solution for you. BT has a device called a printer meter, which can be attached to a phone line and records dialled digits and meter pulses for that line. Now I wonder if, in the situations you are interested in, that you suspect you know who is causing the harassing calls? Maybe you could arrange to have a printer meter placed on the suspects line. It used to be that since the printer meter only recorded dialled digits and meter pulses, not the actual conversation, no warrant or court order was required to connect it. (An aside: the printer meter was originally designed to help solve billing disputes, but it was found useful by the authorities for detecting all sorts of nefarious activies.) If you have specific questions, I may be able to help; email me. Martin Harriss martin@cellar.bae.bellcore.com
julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey) (09/14/90)
In article <12079@accuvax.nwu.edu>, leilabd@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Leila Burrell-Davis) writes: > > A women's group that I belong to has received a number of complaints > from women about the way in which the police and British Telecom in > the UK handle reports of obscene or 'nuisance' calls - essentially the > charge is that unless you've been having calls threatening physical > violence for an extended period they're just not interested. > We plan to take this up with the authorities, but before we do I would > be very interested to know what it is technically possible for the > phone company to do to trace such calls. I have seen some discussion > in this group as regards the US but don't know to what extent it is > applicable to the UK. My sister who is a legal reptile practicing in the UK (Kent) specialises is battered women. She could possibly explain what "Old Bill" (The Fuzz) and BT will and can do legally. I could call her and ask, but reptiles hate to give away information free that they can charge money for. If this thread gets into it, I may call her. She will suspect my motives though. I know that technically in the old days BT could trace a call as long as they had an engineer or two standing around. I have heard rumours and seen some stuff a few years ago in the {New Scientist} about the capabilities for "supervisory loops" - eavesdropping to most people - on the new System-X switches. I also recall an article in the {New Scientist} claiming that the reason BT went with an Ericsson AXE-10 switch for its overseas calls was its better snooping features. But I digress. Simply put, telcos can trace calls, they are usually reluctant to do it because most of the reported harassment calls are domestic in nature. The cops traditionally do not like to be involved in domestic disputes, even if violence is involved. There are many reasons for this which I will not get into here. But if you persist, the cops and telco will trace a call. Note that the more modern and sophisticated a switch, the better the tracing capabilities. BT is introducing itemised billing. If they can tell you who you called, they can also run it back the other way. They may not want to do it, or admit they can, but they can. They do this internally to trace trouble reports and fix equipment. I have discussed obscene callers extensively with Pac-Bell security people. The conversations covered tracing the calls and what they did with the perpetrators. If there is any interest I can post that info separately. There used to be a BT intercept service available when I last lived in the UK. It was a long time ago - the 60s - so my memory is slightly faded. I used to call a lot of politicians and others in the news. I would often hit an intercept operator who would ask me who I was calling and what my name was. If I was acceptable, my call would be put through. The people I dealt with had the GPO (Old BT) provide this service for a fee because of harassment. I had a politician friend who had an intercept on his line, I always gave my name as Harry Roberts. I was put through immediately. At that time a minor hood called Harry Roberts had gunned down three cops and was the most wanted man of the decade. His name and picture were in the press daily. Never did anyone question the name or send a squad car around to check. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice (213) 653-4495
julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey) (09/15/90)
In article <12079@accuvax.nwu.edu>, leilabd@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Leila Burrell-Davis) writes: > We plan to take this up with the authorities, but before we do I would > be very interested to know what it is technically possible for the > phone company to do to trace such calls. I just spoke to my sister who is a member of the world's second oldest profession. She was professionally evasive - has anyone ever got a straight answer from an ambulance chaser? Anyhow the gist of the conversation was: If you have a problem with obscene, harassing, threatening calls, call the constables. You may also call BT by dialling 1500 and asking for customer relations. Much waffle about how tapping phones is illegal, so I had to explain tracing calls and examining call records is not tapping. Now the technical stuff. Her local exchange (CO) which is a TXE-4 (Reed relay job) now has itemised billing. So they obviously have records of outgoing calls. I also recall a court case I sat in on in Lambeth Magistrates court, this was in 1967. The prisoner was accused of "Stealing electricity". His actual offence was calling the emergency services - 999 (UK equiv of 911 that goes back to the forties). But annoying the emergency services is on the cops home turf and is more important to them than some poor soul being woken at one in the morning to hear an anatomical inventory. Obviously if they could trace calls then, they can trace calls now. In the old days, special equipment had to be placed on lines in the CO to trace a call and sometimes an engineer had to be present. But today with computers and electronic switching, no one has to be around while the call is going through. By the way the TXE-4 exchange will accept Touch Tone, but you have to ask them to turn it on, for which there is no charge. Yup, the UK has free Touch Tone. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice (213) 653-4495
martin@bellcore.bellcore.com (Martin Harriss (ACP)) (09/18/90)
In article <12193@accuvax.nwu.edu> julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey) writes: >Now the technical stuff. Her local exchange (CO) which is a >TXE-4 (Reed relay job) now has itemised billing. So they obviously >have records of outgoing calls. I also recall a court case I sat in on >in Lambeth Magistrates court, this was in 1967. The prisoner was >accused of "Stealing electricity". His actual offence was calling the >emergency services - 999 (UK equiv of 911 that goes back to the >forties). But annoying the emergency services is on the cops home turf >and is more important to them than some poor soul being woken at one >in the morning to hear an anatomical inventory. Obviously if they >could trace calls then, they can trace calls now. In the old days, >special equipment had to be placed on lines in the CO to trace a call >and sometimes an engineer had to be present. But today with computers >and electronic switching, no one has to be around while the call is >going through. 999 (and for that matter 100, for the operator) is a special case - it's not like a normal call. When an operator answers, the circuit is held all the way back to the calling phone. Even if the call is coming from another exchange, special equipment will hold the call over the junction (operator calls often use a different set of circuits than normal calls). The only way to release the circuit is for the operator to pull the plug or throw the release key. This 'Manual Hold', as it is known, has been BT/PO/GPO's way of doing busness for many years. I suspect what was happening in the case cited here was that the accused was continually calling 999. Someone got fed up with it, and held the call while the engineering staff traced it back. Even if the calls were made in the middle of the night, the circuit could be held indefinitely, such as until the engineering staff comes to work the next day. Incidentally, ANI, and hence itemised billing is not native to TXE4's - it's an after-market add-on unit. Touch tone, though, is a standard option. Martin Harriss martin@cellar.bae.bellcore.com
tjo@its.bt.co.uk (Tim Oldham) (09/20/90)
BT has set up a trial "Nuisance Call Bureau" in Canterbury, Kent. I'm not involved in this area of work, or any part of the telecom network, but I believe it's intended to help victims in whatever way it can, presumably including tracing and location mapping. My back copies of internal magazines show that there is a `BT Task Force examining the problem'. All I can say is ask your local BT office for advice and more on this bureau. The cops should be involved. Standard disclaimer applies. I speak for myself, not BT. Tim Oldham, BT Applied Systems. tjo@its.bt.co.uk or ...uunet!ukc!its!tjo