Computer Privacy Digest Fri, 12 Nov 93 Volume 3 : Issue: 073
Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears
_Naissance d'un virus_ soonly published :-)
Re: Is there an effective way to stop junk phone calls?
Re: Is there an effective way to stop junk phone calls?
Re: Is there an effective way to stop junk phone calls?
Citizens Getting Credit Reports on Businesses
GAO report Communications Privacy
Privacy Source
threads in comp.dcom.telecom
Re: Re: California Driver License and SSN
The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the
effect of technology on privacy. The digest is moderated and
gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy
(Moderated). Submissions should be sent to
comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administrative requests to
comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil.
Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil
[129.139.160.133].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cccf <cccf@altern.com>
Subject: _Naissance d'un virus_ soonly published :-)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 93 11:15:51 EST
By the general secretary of the Chaos Computer Club France (CCCF), the
French translation of "The Little Black Book of Computer Viruses" will
soonly by published by Addison-Wesley France (fax: +33 1 48 87 97 99).
Naassance d'un Virus (dec 1993, 237 pages, circa 98 FF).
--
Jean-Bernard Condat, PO Box 155, 93404 St-Ouen Cedex, France
Phone: +33 1 47874083, fax: +33 1 47874919, email: cccf@altern.com
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Is there an effective way to stop junk phone calls?
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1993 21:13:51 -0600 (CST)
From: Ron Bean <nicmad!madnix!zaphod%astroatc.UUCP@cs.wisc.edu>
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 700
"Daniel P. B. Smith" <dpbsmith@world.std.com> writes:
>Does anybody know an effective method of stopping junk phone calls from
>automatic computer equipment? Here are six things which do NOT work:
^^^^^^^^^
[six things deleted]
>Anybody know anything that WORKS?
Get one of those automatic call-director boxes that says
"press 1 to talk to me, press 2 to send a fax" etc. A recorded
message is not likely to "press 1".
If you have to deal with humans, just say "dial your extension
now", and don't give them any clues (your friends will know what
to dial because you've told them ahead of time).
==================
zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean)
uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod
------------------------------
From: Leo@Sylvia.LANCE.ColoState.EDU (Leo J Irakliotis)
Subject: Re: Is there an effective way to stop junk phone calls?
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 02:47:18 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, College of Engineering
In <comp-privacy3.71.3@pica.army.mil>, "Daniel P. B. Smith" <dpbsmith@world.std.com> writes:
>I didn't see an FAQ posted, so here goes.
>
>Does anybody know an effective method of stopping junk phone calls from
>automatic computer equipment?
> [...]
>Anybody know anything that WORKS?
My $0.02 solution (not the best but it does work): let my answering machine
handle the traffic. Even when I am at home, I wait to hear who's calling.
I inform my friends and colleagues so when they get the "beep" tone, they
just have to say "pick up the phone you lousy greek", :-), and of course I
pick it up.
I used to have a caller ID unit, but it turned to be useless. Even phone
calls from my office to my home were blocked so there was no way to tell
who was calling.
The "answering machine screening" seems to work fine and so far I had no
problem. It is not the best solution, but at least it gets the job done.
================================= Optoelectronic Computing Systems Center
Leo J. Irakliotis Department of Electrical Engineering
Colorado State University
Leo@Sylvia.LANCE.ColoState.EDU Fort Collins, CO 80523
l.irakliotis@ieee.org Phone: (303) 491-2021
================================= Fax: (303) 491-2249
------------------------------
From: amyh@tc.fluke.COM (Amy Heidner)
Subject: Re: Is there an effective way to stop junk phone calls?
Organization: Fluke Corporation
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 17:11:26 GMT
From: "Daniel P. B. Smith" <dpbsmith@world.std.com> writes:
> Anybody know anything that WORKS?
This works pretty well for us: As soon as I'm aware that it's a junk
call (whether sales or donation solicitation), I interrupt and say,
politely but firmly, "We make it a policy not to do any phone solicitation.
I would like to be taken off your list, and Federal Law requires you
to do so once I've requested it."
We get (now) about 1-2 junk calls a month. Most of our friends and
acquaintances get 10-20 times that many.
--
Amy Heidner Fluke Corporation Everett, WA
amyh@tc.fluke.COM (206) 356-5498
------------------------------
From: Wm Randolph Franklin <wrf@ecse.rpi.edu>
Subject: Citizens Getting Credit Reports on Businesses
Date: 10 Nov 1993 22:25:46 GMT
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
There's been extensive discussions about obtaining credit reports on
private citizens (you need to be extending credit, considering
employment etc), and about businesses vetting each other (e.g. D&B).
However, there's another case to consider.
Are there any easy ways for private citizens to obtain credit reports on
businesses with whom they are considering doing business? E.g., when I
went to Borneo, I paid the tour company a few thousand $$$ a few months
in advance. I'd have liked to check them out first. Also, would it be
legal for me to obtain personal credit reports on the company's
officers?
Thanks. Emailed replies will be summarized and posted.
------------------------
Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261
ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA
Oh, don't the day seem lank and long
When all goes right, And nothing goes wrong?
And wouldn't life seem exceedingly flat.
With nothing whatever to grumble at?
Princess Ida, Act II
------------------------------
cc: comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL
From: KH3@cu.nih.gov
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1993 18:26:57 EST
Subject: GAO report Communications Privacy
GAO recently issued a report "Communications Privacy:
Federal Policy and Actions", GAO/OSI-94-2, dated
November 4, 1993, that may be of interest to members
of your group. The report focused on the following issues:
--The need for information privacy in computer and
communications systems--through such means as
encryption, or conversion of clear text to an
unreadable form--to mitigate the threat of economic
espionage to U.S. industry;
--federal agency authority to develop cryptographic
standards for the protection of sensitive,
unclassified information and the actions and policies
of the National Security Agency (NSA), Department of
Defense, and of the National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NI ST), Department of Commerce,
regarding the selection of federal cryptographic
standards;
--roles, actions, and policies of NSA and the
Department of State related to export controls for
products with encryption capabilities and industry
rationale for requesting liberalization of such
controls; and
--the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI)
legislative proposal regarding telephone systems that
use digital communications technology.
I have placed an electronic version of the report named
OSI-94-2.TXT in the GAO-REPORTS anonymous FTP directory at
NIH (cu.nih.gov) or (ftp.cu.nih.gov).
Joe Sokalski, GAO--Los Angeles
kh3@cu.nih.gov
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 10:53 EST
From: Robert Ellis Smith <0005101719@mcimail.com>
Subject: Privacy Source
Both Vaclav Matyas of Carleton University and Alizade of University of Toronto
asked about sources of information about technology and privacy.
PRIVACY JOURNAL has been the authoritative publication in the field since 1974.
We will send a sample copy of our monthly newsletter to anyone who requests it,
as well as descriptions of the books and special reports we publish on privacy.
Ask for our s pecial discount on subscriptions for users of the net. Books and
subscriptions may be ordered by e-mail with a credit card number.
Robert Ellis Smith, Publisher, Privacy Journal, PO Box 28577, Providence RI
02908, 401/274-7861; MCI mail: rsmith, 510-1719.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 12:21:57 PST
From: Kelly Bert Manning <ua602%freenet.victoria.bc.ca@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: threads in comp.dcom.telecom
Near the beginning of the Digital Detective thread it was pointed out
that DD is the moderator of the comp.dcom.telecom news group, and that
his intent was perhaps to provoke discussion and to increase awareness
of the availability of this information.
I decided to follow up on these comments from the moderator by reading
what the comp.dcom.telecom moderator posted and the remarks he added.
Caller ID and ANI seem to be frequently appearing topics there.
One recent thread names specific companies, such as "Cable and Wireless"
that use ANI signals to recreate Caller ID signals. BC Tel had told me
that this was happening, but some people who responded to my mention of
this here told me(in rather forceful language) that my report of this
was a work of fiction.
I had been aware of ANI for at least 2 years from my own work related
research into computer integrated telephony. My concern was that the
recreation of blocked or non-existent caller ID signals from ISDN ANI
signals made calling number information available to entry level 800
operations, rather than major operations that can afford an ISDN PRI
service connection.
Other threads in comp.dcom.telecom deal with cases where Caller ID
boxes give a false or misleading indication of who called. One thread
deals with a case where someone's phone line appears to be being used,
perhaps by someone connecting to the lines from outside. He has gotten
several angry calls from people who say that their caller ID boxes
shows his number.
Another thread there deals with the fact that some nuisance callers have
already found ways to trick non-ISDN caller ID boxes into displaying a
different number. Apparently the analog Calling number information is
sent as a data burst between the first and second rings. If the caller
sends out a second signal in the correct format he can display any
number they want to on the caller ID box. Apparently most of these boxes
have a stack, and the original call will be there somewhere(assuming no
overflow), but most caller ID subscribers aren't sophisticated enough
to realize what is going on. Some posters suggested that this is similar
to the VCR programming technophobia issue, ie. some people read the
manual or simply look at all the control labels, while others can't
sort out what functionality is available even with the manual in front
of them.
The bottom line seems to be that Caller ID seems to be of limited value
in identifying callers unless subscribers fully understand how to use it.
It may also be of little value in getting the numbers of caller to entry
800 services, since there appear to be ways to display someone else's
number. There is also no guarantee that the originating switch will
provide a caller ID signal. A friend who has a number of the same exchange
as mine told me that her mother's Caller ID box shows "unknown number"
whenever she calls, making it useless for call screening or tracing the
number of callers. BC Tel says that it suppresses Caller ID signals from
type 1 or 2 switches because there is no way for it to provide the free
per call blocking service required by the CRTC.
------------------------------
From: Richard Roda <rerodd@eos.ncsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Re: California Driver License and SSN
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 20:45:14 GMT
In article <comp-privacy3.69.1@pica.army.mil> Dave Gomberg <GOMBERG%UCSFVM.BITNET@cmsa.berkeley.edu> writes:
>The CA driver's license has been repeatedly held by the courts as a
>privledge, NOT A RIGHT. So to grant this privledge, the state could
>require you to do anything it wishes with an appropriate state purpose.
>Collecting child support from delinquent fathers is a legitimate state
>purpose (otherwise welfare must pick up the tab). So CA has a right to
>insist you identify yourself in a way that allows it to determine that
>you are not on any bad guys lists (which themselves are indexed by SSN).
>So you can give your SSN or you can refuse to avail yourself of the
>privledge of driving. Dave
>
That's really neat. Does this mean that if I don't avail myself of the
"privilidge" of driving, that I don't have to pay any taxes that go to
support the highway system? Bzzz! If the highway system were supported by
user fees, I would agree with this logic. But, since it is supported from
my income taxes, I am paying for the road, but don't get to use the road I
pay for because it is a Privilidge(TM).
I don't apologise for Big Brother. Taking tax money to support a service
and then in turn calling the service a privilidge is a time honored way of
getting around those pesky limitations in the constitution.
>Dave Gomberg, role model for those who don't ask much in their fantasy lives.
>GOMBERG@UCSFVM Internet node UCSFVM.UCSF.EDU fax-> (415)731-7797
>
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V3 #073
******************************