[comp.org.eff.talk] Information Hiding

greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) (04/07/91)

... edg@netcom.COM (Ed Greenberg) writes:
>... ziegast@eng.umd.edu (Eric W. Ziegast) writes:

>>6. The Caller ID compatable answering machine

>I want one of these :-)

This is an idea I've been thinking of.  Why should the person see the
number?  Make it automated, and don't reveal numbers.  You program your
phone with known numbers you want to have ring specially.  Others behave
normally.  You have the option of taking a call, deciding you never want
to be contacted by that person again, and make the equivalent of a KILL
file for that number.  You need not know the number.  You could also have
a setup to automatically inform police officials of the offending call,
who would be cleared for specific number information.

This also allows for call-back ability, to be able to connect back to the
originating caller, without needing to know the number, and other enhanced
features.

This provides the security that the receiver wants, while not infringing
on the rights of the caller by having numbers visible.  In this case,
having visible numbers should be an expensive ability, and must be shown
as necessary on a case-by-case basis.  Stiff penalties for patching into
the information without authorization, and even more stiff for abuse of
obtained numbers, especially when illegally obtained.

In the Domino's Pizza realm, they don't need the number displayed.  They
still ask for the number (standard procedure), then punch in that number.
If it matches, it says so.  If not, it says it doesn't, but doesn`t give
out the real number.  The electronics will only let you know as much as
you need to know.  They know more themselves, but they won't tell you
everything.

>-- 
>Ed Greenberg 		| Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com
>P. O. Box 28618	| Work: +1 408 764 5305 | CIS: 76703,1070
>San Jose, CA  95159	| Fax:  +1 408 764 5003 | WB2GOH @ N6LDL.CA.USA

A setup like that (which someone should have already thought of, and
probably has) would be what should be put in.  Freedoms currently
exercised aren't infringed, and you get the enhanced abilities.

--
///   ____   \\\ "It says, `Golgafrincham Ark Fleet, Ship B, Hold 7, Telephone
| |/ /    \ \| |  Sanitizer, Second Class,' and a serial number." "A telephone
 \\_(\____/)_//                sanitizer?  A dead telephone sanitizer?"  "Best
greg \_\\\/ hoss.unl.edu       kind." "But what's he doing here?" "Not a lot."

greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) (04/07/91)

... greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) writes:

>Why should the person see the
>number?  Make it automated, and don't reveal numbers.  You program your
>phone with known numbers you want to have ring specially.  Others behave
>normally.  You have the option of taking a call, deciding you never want
>to be contacted by that person again, and make the equivalent of a KILL
>file for that number.  You need not know the number.  You could also have
>a setup to automatically inform police officials of the offending call,
>who would be cleared for specific number information.

One thing useful would be to print a programmed name on a display for the
valid callers, so you'd know which OK caller it is.  Non-coded names would
display as OUTSIDE CALL or something like that.  During the call, you can
either register the call on your machine, refuse any further calls, or
leave it as unknown, ring.

Editing features will be needed, like being able to scroll through the
list of programmed names and change their status from valid to unknown or
ignored, and same the other way.  Direct programming by number would be
necessary, for primary configuration.  With the list scrolling, you could
have it automatically dial the number corresponding to that name.

All this WITHOUT revealing the phone number to you.

--
///   ____   \\\ "It says, `Golgafrincham Ark Fleet, Ship B, Hold 7, Telephone
| |/ /    \ \| |  Sanitizer, Second Class,' and a serial number." "A telephone
 \\_(\____/)_//                sanitizer?  A dead telephone sanitizer?"  "Best
greg \_\\\/ hoss.unl.edu       kind." "But what's he doing here?" "Not a lot."

peter@taronga.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/12/91)

greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) writes:
> This provides the security that the receiver wants, while not infringing
> on the rights of the caller by having numbers visible.  In this case,
> having visible numbers should be an expensive ability, and must be shown
> as necessary on a case-by-case basis.

So you only get the facilities the phone company wants to provide in the CO.

We all know how well that works.

Or will you have to rent stuff that (like a pitney-bowes franking machine)
is unbreakable-into, and you're not allowed to tap your own line. Back to
pre-carterfone, everyone...
-- 
               (peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com)
   `-_-'
    'U`