TELECOM@Usc-Eclb.arpa (03/15/83)
TELECOM AM Digest Saturday, 15 January 1983 Volume 3 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - TCP SMTP Mail Development
Outgoing Only Payphones/MD WATTS Lines
Harrassing Calls - Federal Laws Re. Calling Number
Alternatives To Unlisted Number
Local Measured Service - Commentaries
Call Waiting Makes It To Ann Landers
[If this is the 5th or so copy of this issue you have received,
please accept my apology]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 14 Jan 1983 1450-PST
From: The Moderator <JSol@USC-ECLC>
Subject: Administrivia
We are receiving reports of digests arriving mangled and of mail
system problems both related to ECL's mail software and with the
software of other systems. During the conversion effort, it will be
commonplace to have digests misdirected, or to arrive garbled, or
partially missing...
Some people are submitting mail to the TELECOM@MIT-AI and
TELECOM@MIT-MC addresses and are encountering difficulties. I strongly
urge readers to use the TELECOM@USC-ECLB address to send submissions.
TELECOM-REQUEST@USC-ECLB seems to be receiving messages properly. I
will be happy to remail to you any issues you don't receive. I need to
know the issue number of the last digest you received successfully.
If the above addresses should fail after this point, I want to be
informed. My personal address is JSOL@USC-ECLC, feel free to direct
things there if all else fails, but PLEASE TRY THE OTHER ADDRESSES
FIRST! Send to me the failure notices so I can find out just what is
going on. Thanks.
TELECOM is being used as an experiment to help us maintain a high
quality mail service. I want to thank you all for your patience in
this matter.
Cheers,
--JSol
------------------------------
Date: 5 Jan 1983 1315-PST
From: Mike Newton <Newton@CIT-20>
Subject: Outgoing only payphones/MD WATTS lines
Old TELECOM archives discussed pay phones that could not be
called. There are some of these at LAX, but I have never remembered
to look carefully carefully at them at the time I was there -- my
question is: Do they have any kind of `phone-number' at all?
If they are like some WATTS line in Maryland they may not be
truly "out-going only".
When working for a small financial company in the Annapolis
area I was often puzzled by the two watts lines. While the other
buttons on the phone had normal numbers like 268-1234 (prefix is close
but not necessarily right -- I don't remember) the two watts lines had
numbers of the form 015-9876 written on them. On day I realized that
the nine in the fourth position signified a special (pay ... ) phone.
I then tried dial 268-9876 and while this did not work, after a couple
more tries I found the correct prefix -- the watts line rang. The
same prefix (??? 267 ??? -- another Annapolis prefix) also worked on
the other line.
Is this possibly true of the outward only payphones??
(Note that since these watts lines were for interstate calls,
using them for an intrastate call was probably "against the rules" --
but the calls probably cost more than a local call anyway.)
(I think the lines were for out-going call, but I do not
remember.)
mike
------------------------------
Date: 12 January 1983 16:46-EST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC>
Subject: harrassing calls
I don't know about a possible New York law, but there is definietely
NOT a federal law which would prevent the phone company from giving
you or the police the phone number of the harrasser. In an important
Supreme Court decision in 1979 (Smith v. Maryland) the court ruled
that the information as to what number someone dials is the property
of the tlephone company and they can do with it what they will.
(There are laws against WIRETAPPING without a court order, but the
number, as opposed to the content of the communication was held not
subject to the requirement of a warrent.)
Smith, who had been discovered to be making harrassing calls to
someone was caught because a PEN REGISTER had been placed on his
phone--a device which records what local numbers an individual dials.
The pen register had been placed at the request of the police, but
without a warrent. The argument went that a caller voluntarily turns
over his number and the calling number to the phone company as part of
the "contract" in which the phone comapny agrees to complete the call.
The phone comapny can then do what they want with this information,
including choosing to give it to the police, without the requirement
of a warrent.
As far as I know, this decision still stands at the Federal level..
------------------------------
Date: 10 January 1983 18:51-EST (Monday)
Sender: CARTER at RU-GREEN
From: _Bob <Carter at RUTGERS>
Subject: 'Unlisted No.':Only $299.95
The following appeared in the Sunday New York Times, section 6 (the
'magazine'), page 65, Jan. 9, l983.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
@b(PSST!) @b(WANT AN UNLISTED TELEPHONE NUMBER?)
* * *
How? With PriveCode(R): the Telephone Access Control TerminalTM
.an affordable, convenient alternative to Ma Bell's unlisted number
system.
@i(Here's how it works:)
Just plug PriveCode into any modular jack in your home or apartment,
turn it on, and you're in complete control over who can reach you.
You simply assign a three digit Access Code to people you want to hear
from. Whenever anyone dials your regular listed telephone number,
PriveCode intercepts their call and @i(stops all your phones from
ringing.) PriveCode then asks the caller to enter their Personal
Access Code. Only after a valid code has been entered will PriveCode
signal you with a pleasing electronic sound, and display caller's
personal code, so you know who is calling @i(before) you pick up your
phone. PriveCode even tells you who called while you were out.
Callers without valid Access Codes never get through. Since PriveCode
handles up to 16 different codes at a time it's just like having 16
private lines...on your present Ma Bell line.
* * *
PriveCode is available in fine department stores, electronic specialty
shops and phone stores.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The accompanying cut shows a flat base (about 12"x9"x1") with a
standard TouchTone desk set resting on the LH top. On the RH half of
the base, there is a protruding vertical console, about the size of a
deck of cards resting on its long edge, about 3" back from the front.
On the front of the console, what is apparently a plasma or LED
display shows the digits '139' and some unreadable garbage. On the
base just in front of the console are two buttons and a slide switch.
A similar device has been mentioned before in the Digest, although I
seem to recall that in a previous case, investigation showed that
screening was actually by a simple call-back-and-count-rings trick.
I called the 800 number in the ad, and got the following info.
The unit is FCC registered. The recommended retail selling price is
$299.95, although the clerk has heard of some discounting.
The unit takes the line off-hook on every call. No claim is made that
the unit 'senses' the caller's number. Instead, it generates a
digitally-stored woman's voice which asks him to enter his access
code. He may do so by tone, or by responding with a 'verbal pulse' to
a number as she cycles through the numbers 1-0, pausing after each
digit. Any monosyllable counts as a 'verbal pulse.'
The caller is given three chances to enter a valid three-digit access
code, and if he fails the unit hangs up. Tone entry may take place as
soon as the phone is answered, and a maximum of nine tones may be
entered. If he is responding with 'voice pulses,' the recorded voice
will cycle through the digits a maximum of 9 times.
The unit may be connected to an answering machine (or to a standard
phone) through an output port and callers giving the access code
'123' are always routed to the output port. Callers may be given a
bogus access code which causes the unit to present a phony ringing
signal to the caller but not to ring the phone.
The number '123' is reserved for the output port, and ten three-digit
combinations are reserved for programming. The user may select the 16
access codes from any of the remaining 990 combinations.
There are four ringing modes, which may be bound to access codes, to
allow the user to get some information about who is calling from the
ringing pattern.
The unit displays the successful access code in the console window
whenever the caller succeeds in generating a ring. It remembers
uncompleted calls by valid access code holders, and will display their
codes on demand.
I asked the clerk about the odds of breaking through. (As I understand
it, three tries to get 16/990 combinations gives the caller a 5
percent chance of bingo on the first call, and greater chances on
later calls.) The clerk said that of course 'hackers could use
computers' to get through.
The distributor of this device is
International Mobile Machines Corp.
100 North 20th St.
Dept. No. 104
Philadelphia, Pa.
19103
800-523-0103, Ext. 110
In Pa. 215-569-1300, Ext. 110
I called my N.J. Customer Service Representative to ask about the
price of getting an unlisted number for an existing residential line.
She said that there would be a one-time charge of either $12 or $16,
and no increment to the monthly bill. I do not know what the odds are
that a caller could find an unlisted number by stochastic calling.
(I.e. Could a caller on my ESS get the number by permuting the four
final digits?) I assume they would be higher than 1 in 20.
_B
------------------------------
Date: 4 January 1983 16:12 est
From: LSchwarz.Activate at RESTON
Subject: Local Measured Services (LMS)
cc: LSchwarz.Activate at RESTON
Acknowledge-To: LSchwarz.Activate at RESTON
I just joined this mailing list last month and have reviewed the
previous "archived" issues since its origin. I am involved with a
committee to suggest the rate structure alternatives to the Local
Telephone CO.
Later this Spring the local teleco will propose the new LMS request.
The request will include four basic factors in determining the
telephone rate for local telephone customers (both residential and
business). They are:
1. Distance - the rate will be based on the distance between two
central switching stations regardless of what
boundaries.
2. Frequency- the rate will be based on number of calls made per
month. The higher number the costlier will it be.
3. Time of Day - the rate will be higher at peak hours and for
peak users.
4. Duration - the rate will be based on time the phone is connected.
The higher the duration the costlier will it be.
In conclusion, the committee has expressed five negative aspects which
may be resulted from the initiation of LMS as:
1. Consumer confusion be created by the complexity of four factors.
2. Uncertainity to their monthly bill's figures.
3. Increased customer anxiety.
4. Discouragement of phone use by user-sensitive pricing as well as
impacts on cohesiveness of volunteer community organizations.
5. Differential negative impacts of duration charges on speech and
hearing impaired persons.
(Insider's Report: Duration rates will be scary to the data-line users
as well as can damage all CBBS systems!!!!)
Alternatives will be reported in the next issue.
<LJ>
------------------------------
Date: 14-Jan-1983 09:42
From: decwrl!RHEA::CASTOR::J_COVERT%Shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Call Waiting makes it to Ann Landers
Dear Ann Landers:
What is proper when one has the new telephone device that allows a
person to receive a second call while engaged in a first?
I believe it is rude to cut off the first caller just because another
call comes in. A once-close friend of mine always did that. Recently
she bawled me out for avoiding her, complained that I never call
anymore. Just as I began to explain, her phone clicked. She told me
she had to take another call.
Unless the second call is an emergency, I believe one should tell the
second caller, "I have someone on the line and will return your call
as soon as possible," then go back to the first call and wind it up
gracefully. Right or wrong?
- San Antonio
You are right. This problem is one I'be been hearing a lot about
since all the high-tech telephone equipment has been popping up.
Thanks for writing.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
**********************
-------TELECOM@Usc-Eclb.arpa (03/15/83)
TELECOM AM Digest Saturday, 15 January 1983 Volume 3 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - TCP SMTP Mail Development
Outgoing Only Payphones/MD WATTS Lines
Harrassing Calls - Federal Laws Re. Calling Number
Alternatives To Unlisted Number
Local Measured Service - Commentaries
Call Waiting Makes It To Ann Landers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 14 Jan 1983 1450-PST
From: The Moderator <JSol@USC-ECLC>
Subject: Administrivia
We are receiving reports of digests arriving mangled and of mail
system problems both related to ECL's mail software and with the
software of other systems. During the conversion effort, it will be
commonplace to have digests misdirected, or to arrive garbled, or
partially missing...
Some people are submitting mail to the TELECOM@MIT-AI and
TELECOM@MIT-MC addresses and are encountering difficulties. I strongly
urge readers to use the TELECOM@USC-ECLB address to send submissions.
TELECOM-REQUEST@USC-ECLB seems to be receiving messages properly. I
will be happy to remail to you any issues you don't receive. I need to
know the issue number of the last digest you received successfully.
If the above addresses should fail after this point, I want to be
informed. My personal address is JSOL@USC-ECLC, feel free to direct
things there if all else fails, but PLEASE TRY THE OTHER ADDRESSES
FIRST! Send to me the failure notices so I can find out just what is
going on. Thanks.
TELECOM is being used as an experiment to help us maintain a high
quality mail service. I want to thank you all for your patience in
this matter.
Cheers,
--JSol
------------------------------
Date: 5 Jan 1983 1315-PST
From: Mike Newton <Newton@CIT-20>
Subject: Outgoing only payphones/MD WATTS lines
Old TELECOM archives discussed pay phones that could not be
called. There are some of these at LAX, but I have never remembered
to look carefully carefully at them at the time I was there -- my
question is: Do they have any kind of `phone-number' at all?
If they are like some WATTS line in Maryland they may not be
truly "out-going only".
When working for a small financial company in the Annapolis
area I was often puzzled by the two watts lines. While the other
buttons on the phone had normal numbers like 268-1234 (prefix is close
but not necessarily right -- I don't remember) the two watts lines had
numbers of the form 015-9876 written on them. On day I realized that
the nine in the fourth position signified a special (pay ... ) phone.
I then tried dial 268-9876 and while this did not work, after a couple
more tries I found the correct prefix -- the watts line rang. The
same prefix (??? 267 ??? -- another Annapolis prefix) also worked on
the other line.
Is this possibly true of the outward only payphones??
(Note that since these watts lines were for interstate calls,
using them for an intrastate call was probably "against the rules" --
but the calls probably cost more than a local call anyway.)
(I think the lines were for out-going call, but I do not
remember.)
mike
------------------------------
Date: 12 January 1983 16:46-EST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC>
Subject: harrassing calls
I don't know about a possible New York law, but there is definietely
NOT a federal law which would prevent the phone company from giving
you or the police the phone number of the harrasser. In an important
Supreme Court decision in 1979 (Smith v. Maryland) the court ruled
that the information as to what number someone dials is the property
of the tlephone company and they can do with it what they will.
(There are laws against WIRETAPPING without a court order, but the
number, as opposed to the content of the communication was held not
subject to the requirement of a warrent.)
Smith, who had been discovered to be making harrassing calls to
someone was caught because a PEN REGISTER had been placed on his
phone--a device which records what local numbers an individual dials.
The pen register had been placed at the request of the police, but
without a warrent. The argument went that a caller voluntarily turns
over his number and the calling number to the phone company as part of
the "contract" in which the phone comapny agrees to complete the call.
The phone comapny can then do what they want with this information,
including choosing to give it to the police, without the requirement
of a warrent.
As far as I know, this decision still stands at the Federal level..
------------------------------
Date: 10 January 1983 18:51-EST (Monday)
Sender: CARTER at RU-GREEN
From: _Bob <Carter at RUTGERS>
Subject: 'Unlisted No.':Only $299.95
The following appeared in the Sunday New York Times, section 6 (the
'magazine'), page 65, Jan. 9, l983.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
@b(PSST!) @b(WANT AN UNLISTED TELEPHONE NUMBER?)
* * *
How? With PriveCode(R): the Telephone Access Control TerminalTM
.an affordable, convenient alternative to Ma Bell's unlisted number
system.
@i(Here's how it works:)
Just plug PriveCode into any modular jack in your home or apartment,
turn it on, and you're in complete control over who can reach you.
You simply assign a three digit Access Code to people you want to hear
from. Whenever anyone dials your regular listed telephone number,
PriveCode intercepts their call and @i(stops all your phones from
ringing.) PriveCode then asks the caller to enter their Personal
Access Code. Only after a valid code has been entered will PriveCode
signal you with a pleasing electronic sound, and display caller's
personal code, so you know who is calling @i(before) you pick up your
phone. PriveCode even tells you who called while you were out.
Callers without valid Access Codes never get through. Since PriveCode
handles up to 16 different codes at a time it's just like having 16
private lines...on your present Ma Bell line.
* * *
PriveCode is available in fine department stores, electronic specialty
shops and phone stores.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The accompanying cut shows a flat base (about 12"x9"x1") with a
standard TouchTone desk set resting on the LH top. On the RH half of
the base, there is a protruding vertical console, about the size of a
deck of cards resting on its long edge, about 3" back from the front.
On the front of the console, what is apparently a plasma or LED
display shows the digits '139' and some unreadable garbage. On the
base just in front of the console are two buttons and a slide switch.
A similar device has been mentioned before in the Digest, although I
seem to recall that in a previous case, investigation showed that
screening was actually by a simple call-back-and-count-rings trick.
I called the 800 number in the ad, and got the following info.
The unit is FCC registered. The recommended retail selling price is
$299.95, although the clerk has heard of some discounting.
The unit takes the line off-hook on every call. No claim is made that
the unit 'senses' the caller's number. Instead, it generates a
digitally-stored woman's voice which asks him to enter his access
code. He may do so by tone, or by responding with a 'verbal pulse' to
a number as she cycles through the numbers 1-0, pausing after each
digit. Any monosyllable counts as a 'verbal pulse.'
The caller is given three chances to enter a valid three-digit access
code, and if he fails the unit hangs up. Tone entry may take place as
soon as the phone is answered, and a maximum of nine tones may be
entered. If he is responding with 'voice pulses,' the recorded voice
will cycle through the digits a maximum of 9 times.
The unit may be connected to an answering machine (or to a standard
phone) through an output port and callers giving the access code
'123' are always routed to the output port. Callers may be given a
bogus access code which causes the unit to present a phony ringing
signal to the caller but not to ring the phone.
The number '123' is reserved for the output port, and ten three-digit
combinations are reserved for programming. The user may select the 16
access codes from any of the remaining 990 combinations.
There are four ringing modes, which may be bound to access codes, to
allow the user to get some information about who is calling from the
ringing pattern.
The unit displays the successful access code in the console window
whenever the caller succeeds in generating a ring. It remembers
uncompleted calls by valid access code holders, and will display their
codes on demand.
I asked the clerk about the odds of breaking through. (As I understand
it, three tries to get 16/990 combinations gives the caller a 5
percent chance of bingo on the first call, and greater chances on
later calls.) The clerk said that of course 'hackers could use
computers' to get through.
The distributor of this device is
International Mobile Machines Corp.
100 North 20th St.
Dept. No. 104
Philadelphia, Pa.
19103
800-523-0103, Ext. 110
In Pa. 215-569-1300, Ext. 110
I called my N.J. Customer Service Representative to ask about the
price of getting an unlisted number for an existing residential line.
She said that there would be a one-time charge of either $12 or $16,
and no increment to the monthly bill. I do not know what the odds are
that a caller could find an unlisted number by stochastic calling.
(I.e. Could a caller on my ESS get the number by permuting the four
final digits?) I assume they would be higher than 1 in 20.
_B
------------------------------
Date: 4 January 1983 16:12 est
From: LSchwarz.Activate at RESTON
Subject: Local Measured Services (LMS)
cc: LSchwarz.Activate at RESTON
Acknowledge-To: LSchwarz.Activate at RESTON
I just joined this mailing list last month and have reviewed the
previous "archived" issues since its origin. I am involved with a
committee to suggest the rate structure alternatives to the Local
Telephone CO.
Later this Spring the local teleco will propose the new LMS request.
The request will include four basic factors in determining the
telephone rate for local telephone customers (both residential and
business). They are:
1. Distance - the rate will be based on the distance between two
central switching stations regardless of what
boundaries.
2. Frequency- the rate will be based on number of calls made per
month. The higher number the costlier will it be.
3. Time of Day - the rate will be higher at peak hours and for
peak users.
4. Duration - the rate will be based on time the phone is connected.
The higher the duration the costlier will it be.
In conclusion, the committee has expressed five negative aspects which
may be resulted from the initiation of LMS as:
1. Consumer confusion be created by the complexity of four factors.
2. Uncertainity to their monthly bill's figures.
3. Increased customer anxiety.
4. Discouragement of phone use by user-sensitive pricing as well as
impacts on cohesiveness of volunteer community organizations.
5. Differential negative impacts of duration charges on speech and
hearing impaired persons.
(Insider's Report: Duration rates will be scary to the data-line users
as well as can damage all CBBS systems!!!!)
Alternatives will be reported in the next issue.
<LJ>
------------------------------
Date: 14-Jan-1983 09:42
From: decwrl!RHEA::CASTOR::J_COVERT%Shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Call Waiting makes it to Ann Landers
Dear Ann Landers:
What is proper when one has the new telephone device that allows a
person to receive a second call while engaged in a first?
I believe it is rude to cut off the first caller just because another
call comes in. A once-close friend of mine always did that. Recently
she bawled me out for avoiding her, complained that I never call
anymore. Just as I began to explain, her phone clicked. She told me
she had to take another call.
Unless the second call is an emergency, I believe one should tell the
second caller, "I have someone on the line and will return your call
as soon as possible," then go back to the first call and wind it up
gracefully. Right or wrong?
- San Antonio
You are right. This problem is one I'be been hearing a lot about
since all the high-tech telephone equipment has been popping up.
Thanks for writing.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
**********************
-------