Pat, the Editor

For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
Add this Digest to your personal   or  

 

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 17 Jul 2005 15:50:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 327

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Finger Scanning At Disney Parks Causes Concern (Monty Solomon)
    A Pass on Privacy? (Monty Solomon)
    Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster (Monty Solomon)
    Mossberg: Tracking Cookies are Spyware (Monty Solomon)
    Tune in Tomorrow for the Digital Living Room? (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Who Really Controls Internet? (Tony P.)
    Re: Who Really Controls Internet? (John Levine)
    Re: Camelot on the Moon - From Our Archives (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Camelot on the Moon - From Our Archives (Jeffrey Mattox)
    Re: For Surfers, a Roving Hot Spot That Shares (Tony P.)
    Re: Nigeria Jails Woman in $242 Million Fraud (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Muzzling the Muppets/Bush Wants PBS to Toe Republican Line (Hancock)
    Re: Prepaid GSM With Roaming Allowed Available in the US? (LH)
    Re: Don't Let Data Theft Happen to You (B.M. Wright)
    Re: 866 383 0986 (Steve Sobol)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 00:15:07 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Finger Scanning At Disney Parks Causes Concern


ORLANDO, Fla. -- The addition of finger scanning technology at the
entrances of Walt Disney World theme parks for all visitors has caused
concern among privacy advocates, according to a Local 6 News report.

Tourists visiting Disney theme parks in Central Florida must now
provide their index and middle fingers to be scanned before entering
the front gates.

The scans were formerly for season pass holders but now everyone must
provide their fingers, Local 6 News reported. They have reportedly
been phased in for all ticket holders during the past six months,
according to a report.

Disney officials said the scans help keep track of who is using
legitimate tickets, Local 6 News reported.

http://www.local6.com/news/4724689/detail.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How could it tell something like that
unless there was some control samples as well? For example, finger
prints or scans _after_ the tickets were used, or when the tickets
were purchased? What good is just a random set of fingerprints without
some name or other controlled circumstances to go with it? Or is
Disney World taking down names and addresses and supplying these
finger scans to some third person or agency as well?   Hmm ... PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 04:33:17 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: A Pass on Privacy?


By CHRISTOPHER CALDWELL

Anyone making long drives this summer will notice a new dimension to
contemporary inequality: a widening gap between the users of automatic
toll-paying devices and those who pay cash. The E-ZPass system, as it
is called on the East Coast, seemed like idle gadgetry when it was
introduced a decade ago. Drivers who acquired the passes had to nose
their way across traffic to reach specially equipped tollbooths -- and
slow to a crawl while the machinery worked its magic. But now the
sensors are sophisticated enough for you to whiz past them. As more
lanes are dedicated to E-ZPass, lines lengthen for the saps paying
cash.

E-ZPass is one of many innovations that give you the option of trading
a bit of privacy for a load of convenience. You can get deep discounts
by ordering your books from Amazon.com or joining a supermarket
'club.' In return, you surrender information about your purchasing
habits. Some people see a bait-and-switch here. Over time, the data
you are required to hand over become more and more personal, and such
handovers cease to be optional. Neato data gathering is making society
less free and less human. The people who issue such warnings --
whether you call them paranoids or libertarians -- are among those you
see stuck in the rippling heat, 73 cars away from the ''Cash Only''
sign at the Tappan Zee Bridge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/magazine/17WWLN.html?ex=1279339200&en=c1f10d3de06adea6&ei=5088

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 04:49:13 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster


By MATT RICHTEL and JOHN MARKOFF

SAN FRANCISCO, July 15 - Add personal computers to the list of
throwaways in the disposable society.

On a recent Sunday morning when Lew Tucker's Dell desktop computer was
overrun by spyware and adware -- stealth software that delivers
intrusive advertising messages and even gathers data from the user's
machine -- he did not simply get rid of the offending programs. He
threw out the whole computer.

Mr. Tucker, an Internet industry executive who holds a Ph.D. in
computer science, decided that rather than take the time to remove the
offending software, he would spend $400 on a new machine.

He is not alone in his surrender in the face of growing legions of
digital pests, not only adware and spyware but computer viruses and
other Internet-borne infections as well. Many PC owners are simply
replacing embattled machines rather than fixing them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/technology/17spy.html?ex=1279252800&en=5b2b6783f66a7422&ei=5090


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And how long do they have those _new_
machines until they also get polluted and have to be replaced?  I'd
think there might be a market in doing some dumpster diving, retrieving
those old machines, doing a total init of the hard drive and starting
over from scratch, reloading them, etc. My pay for same would come
 from refurbishing the old machines with a totally new (and as of
then unmolested) hard drive, absolutely _loaded_ with all the most
recent virus protection and spam protection software. Then I would
sell them for fifty or a hundred dollars each. And I would probably
load Linux on them instead of Windows, or maybe in addition to Windows
2000 or Windows 98.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 04:58:41 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Mossberg: Tracking Cookies are Spyware


Despite Others' Claims, Tracking Cookies Fit My Spyware Definition

By WALTER S. MOSSBERG

Suppose you bought a TV set that included a component to track what
you watched, and then reported that data back to a company that used
or sold it for advertising purposes. Only nobody told you the tracking
technology was there or asked your permission to use it.

You would likely be outraged at this violation of privacy. Yet that
kind of Big Brother intrusion goes on every day on the Internet,
affecting millions of people. Many Web sites, even from respectable
companies, place a secret computer file called a "tracking cookie" on
your hard disk. This file records where you go on the Web on behalf of
Internet advertising companies that later use the information for
their own business purposes. In almost all cases, the user isn't
notified of the download of the tracking cookie, let alone asked for
permission to install it.

Luckily, the leading Windows antispyware programs can detect and
remove these tracking cookies. It is the best defense a user has
against this tactic.

Now, though, some of the companies that place these files on your hard
disk are complaining about that defense. Some are urging the
antispyware software companies to stop detecting and removing tracking
cookies. They assert that the secret placement of these tracking
mechanisms is a legitimate business practice, and that tracking
cookies aren't really spyware or aren't harmful.

Unfortunately for consumers, this twisted reasoning is having some
impact. In the most notable case, Microsoft disabled the detection and
removal of tracking cookies when it purchased an antispyware program
from a small company called Giant and turned it into Microsoft Windows
AntiSpyware. That is a big reason why I can't recommend the Microsoft
product, which still is in the test phase but is available for anyone
to download.

http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20050714.html



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And have you noticed how many sites
refuse to admit you at all if you refuse to accept their cookies?
On our web site http://telecom-digest.org until last year when the
site was greatly overhauled, I used cookies only for the purpose of
referring to the user by name and telling him how often he had been
there. _No other reason_. I finally quit it, when various users were
offended by it; not apparently because I called them by name, or
referenced how often they had been around, but because of all the
potential for misuse otherwise. And I did get 'legitimate' business
inquiries about the cookies. Companies wanted to by them, etc and get
more details, etc. But that just made me feel very uneasy and unethical.
That's the main reason I distribute NY Times and other newspapers on
this site (see td-extra) with no login nor registration requirements. I
just don't think it is anyone's business who reads what around here.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 05:25:53 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Tune in Tomorrow for the Digital Living Room?


When Microsoft introduced its long-awaited Xbox 360 console on May 12
in an MTV special, its intentions went beyond just fun and games, The
company called the long-awaited product a "future-generation game and
entertainment system." While Xbox 360 promises to offer video games
compatible with HDTV, fast processing and a lot of memory, Microsoft
also noted that the system can play DVDs and CDs, stream music from
MP3 players, and network with the company's "Media Center" PCs to
stream digital content around the house, among other tasks.

Microsoft's market: The increasingly crowded living room. In fact, the
parade of technology companies targeting home entertainment is a long
one. Dell Computer sells TVs. Apple Computer's iMac Mini is viewed by
analysts as a potential entertainment server. Media-ready PCs abound
from the likes of Hewlett-Packard. These technology stalwarts are
selling wares that were typically offered by consumer electronic
giants such as Sony. But do they have what it takes to compete in your
living room? Is the so-called digital living room -- in which audio
and visual content is available on demand and combined with Internet
and other applications in one seamless environment -- fact or fantasy?
Who will the winners ultimately be? Wharton experts say the digital
living room is becoming a reality, but slowly.

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index.cfm?fa=viewArticle&id=1212

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Who Really Controls Internet?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 10:21:16 -0400


In article <telecom24.323.4@telecom-digest.org>, usa-today@telecom-
digest.org says:

> ICANN is the organization that decides, among other things, what
> top-level domains are allowed -- a top-level domain being .com, .org,
> .uk, etc. The nameservers it controls maintain those, so when you type
> in " http://www.usatoday.com ", your computer's message ("Send me that Web
> page") goes to the right place.

> Yes, it's more complicated than that. But I covered the complexities
> of the workings of the Net in an earlier column.

> What's important is that _he who controls the root nameservers
> controls the traffic on the Internet._ And right now that's the
> government of the U.S. of A. (Cue patriotic music.)

> But ICANN is a private organization, and it's supervision by the DoC
> is based on a memorandum of understanding that was written in 1997,
> when "the President directed the Secretary of Commerce to privatize
> the management of the domain name system (DNS) in a manner that
> increases competition and facilitates international participation in
> its management."

Those are just TLD name servers, nothing more. The Internet would
still work if those were to just disappear but it would be less useful
or easy to use than it is now.

Every server gets an IP address. That's what you really use to
connect.  DNS is just there to translate human readable to machine
readable.

For example:

Doing a lookup for Ebay brings up:

I:\dm\bin>nslookup www.ebay.com
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:    hp-core.ebay.com
Addresses:  66.135.208.89, 66.135.208.90, 66.135.192.123, 66.135.192.124
Aliases:  www.ebay.com

In other words, hit ebay and your request directs to one of the
addresses listed.

Yes its clunky. But in the early days we used it. Many servers had and
still have hosts files where you could put a readable name and it's ip
address and all requests first went to hosts, then out to any
available DNS servers.

For example -- at my current place of employment we host several
database servers which then connect across a point to point connection
to a cluster at a different location. We use host entires on our
machines to get at the servers on the cluster.

------------------------------

Date: 17 Jul 2005 11:14:05 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Who Really Controls Internet?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> The root nameserver configuration is one of the last of the informal
> things left over from the early days of the internet.  I don't know
> how long that will last, but I don't think passing it over to ICANN is
> a good thing any more than allowing government control would be.

Having just returned from the ICANN meeting in Luxembourg, I can say
that the root server operators understand exactly what's going on, and
they have no interest in being controlled by anyone.  They are also in
a uniquely powerful position since switching to other roots would both
be very expensive (the apparent 13 roots are actually over 100 servers
spread around the world) and would require reconfiguring every other
nameserver on the entire Internet, which ain't gonna happen.

R's,

John


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Luxembourg? Is that where they are on
vacation now? I thought they just got back from a trip to Argentina.
What a real laugh (no, actually very sad) that organization ICANN is.
Is MCI footing the bill for all these international vacations Vint
Cerf and Esther Dyson and others go on several times per year, or are
they still getting money they extort from internet users who think
ICANN is somehow going to help them protect their sites against spam
and viruses?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Camelot on the Moon - From Our Archives
Date: 16 Jul 2005 15:59:39 -0400
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)


Justa Lurker  <JustaLurker@att.net> wrote:

> (2) ... as well as numerous mentions of "NASA color video and sound
> we were all observing from the moon".  While there was indeed
> capability for color video from the Command Module [at that point, in
> orbit around the moon tens of miles overhead], the transmissions from
> the Apollo 11 Lunar Module on the surface of the moon were monochrome.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I recall, what we saw on television
> that night was entirely black and white. However, in the NASA archives
> (reached via this report in our telecom archives) there are many color
> photos of the same event; also you can see the certificate NASA awarded
> Don Kimberlin for his part in the project.  PAT]

Indeed, the Apollo 11 camera was monochrome.  I don't think it was
until Apollo 14 that we got color images from the moon's surface in
realtime.  And the monochrome images from 11 were pretty awful due to
limited channel bandwidth.

The color images in the NASA archives were all shot on 70mm rollfilm
in a modified Hasselblad still camera, and did not appear in the press
until after the astronauts had brought the film back and the KSC guys
processed it.

For another interesting viewpoint on the video downlink for Apollo 11,
let me recommend the Australian film _The Dish_.

scott

"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 03:22:14 -0500
From: Jeffrey Mattox <jmat@nowhere-around-here)
Subject: Re: Camelot on the Moon - From Our Archives


(Please withhold my email address.)

For more about the moon walk video, I recommend a terrific Australian
movie, The Dish, which theatrically documents the Australian role in
receiving the video from the moon.

 From Yahoo! Movies:

    Based on a true story, THE DISH takes a smart, witty, comical look
    at the differing cultural attitudes between Australia and the U.S.
    while revisiting one of the greatest events in history.

Although the Australian radio telescope shown in the movie, Parkes,
was receiving video when the moon walk begin, it was not that video
which most of the world actually saw.  Starting a few minutes after
the first step, Parkes was the main source.  The movie dose not
mention this and that caused some controversy in Australia.  But the
movie is accurate in most other respects.

Here's a great description and photos about "Operations at Parkes":

    http://www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/apollo11/parkes_operations.html

About the Parkes and Honeysuckle Creek controversy:

    http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/Apollo_11/PKS_and_HSK.html

More about the movie's accuracy:

    http://www.outreach.atnf.csiro.au/visiting/parkes/looselybased.html


Jeff

"Failure is never quite so frightening as regret." -- from The Dish

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: For Surfers, a Roving Hot Spot That Shares
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:58:55 -0400


In article <telecom24.322.2@telecom-digest.org>, monty@roscom.com 
says:

> By JOHANNA JAINCHILL

> When the Sunningdale Country Club in Scarsdale, N.Y., opened its gates
> last week to a location shoot for "The Sopranos," a new fixture was on
> display in the mobile dressing rooms - a roving Wi-Fi hot spot.

> With a device called the Junxion Box, the production company can set
> up a mobile multiuser Internet connection anywhere it gets cellphone
> service. The box, about the size of a shoebox cover, uses a cellular
> modem card from a wireless phone carrier to create a Wi-Fi hot spot
> that lets dozens of people connect to the Internet.

> The staff members of "The Sopranos," squeezed into two trailer
> dressing rooms, needed only the Junxion Box and their laptops to
> exchange messages and documents with the production offices at
> Silvercup Studios in Queens.

> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/14/technology/circuits/14share.html?ex=1278993600&en=56a56edcee958205&ei=5090

All I can say about this is that I feel for the poor members of that 
country club. 

Showtime was recently in the RI state house for two days shooting
scenes for their new series "Brothers". One whole corridor of the
basement level was filled with production gear and people for two
days.

I've never seen so many cables in my life. Yet this whole thing was
set up and broken down in < 12 hours.

In the case of Showtime, I think they used wired net connections
because I distinctly saw a cluster of Cat-5 running out from the
legislative IT space.

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Nigeria Jails Woman in $242 Million Fraud
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 23:45:15 -0400


The scam involved $242 million dollars, she is out only about a
quarter of that, and she only gets two and a half years in jail?  And
she'll probably be paroled in less than a year if their penal system
is like ours.

Is it any wonder these people keep right on doing this?  I still get
about a dozen of these Nigerian email scams per day.

What even is the point in going after them if all they are going to
get is a slap on the wrist?  The EFCC is wasting their time.


Fred Atkinson

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Muzzling the Muppets/Bush Wants PBS to Toe Republican Line
Date: 16 Jul 2005 19:26:24 -0700


Monty Solomon wrote:

> As head of the board that doles out $400 million in federal funds for
> public broadcasting, Tomlinson is actually required by law to provide
> PBS and NPR with "maximum protection from extraneous influence and
> control" by meddling politicians.

I don't want any political interference in PBS.

Unfortunately, IMHO, some PBS programming was politically biased
reflecting left-aisle attitudes and did not present a balanced
viewpoint.  For example, their series on New York City focused heavily
on the lowest social station and gave short-shrift or a even negative
view to the wealthy and business community.  A more balanced
presentation would've focused on reasons factories and the middle
class left the city in the 1950s.  All the show did was simply blame
them for the troubles the people in the city had during those years.
The story of the poor and disenfranchised is important, but the
stories and concerns of the middle class and business community are
important too.

Harry Truman and Richard Nixon both independently remarked that
history will be written by a liberal perspective because most writers
and social critics are of a liberal bent.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Prepaid GSM With Roaming Allowed Available in the US?
From: LH <lh@lh.com>
Date: 17 Jul 2005 04:34:58 GMT


Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam0339@zugschl.us> wrote in
news:telecom24.324.10@telecom-digest.org: 

> Hi,

> A friend of mine lives in the States, has two kids and bad credit
> records. She wants (alone) to come visit Europe this fall, and wants
> her kids to be able to call her in Europe by dialing a local US
> number.

> A GSM phone useable in the European GSM networks is available here, I
> have a spare Nokia 6310. The issue is the prepaid SIM that allows a
> phone located in Europe to be reachable with an American number.

Telestial http://www.telestial.com/prepaid_sim_cards.htm sell
country-specific prepaid SIM cards or prepaid roaming SIM cards
(generally with numbers based in Monaco or Lichenstein).

If your friend already has a USA cell phone or spare phone line, she
could set up call forwarding to the prepaid European number. Alterna-
tively, if you search on Google, there are a number of companies
offering virtual number and 'follow-me' services, providing a US based
number which can be forwarded internationally at rates that are not
too expensive.

This may become extremely expensive if she is paying both call
forwarding and incoming roaming rates with a prepaid roaming SIM,
versus a country-specific SIM where generally only the call
forwarding rate would apply.


LH

------------------------------

From: B.M. Wright <bmwright@xmission.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 05:20:49 UTC
Organization:  XMission Internet http://www.xmission.com
Subject: Re: Don't Let Data Theft Happen to You


Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com> wrote:

>> By M.P. DUNLEAVEY

>> That said, Mr. Mierzwinski endorsed the preventive measures offered by
>> Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (www.privacyrights.org), a nonprofit
>> consumer advocacy group, and by the Identity Theft Resource Center
>> (www.idtheftcenter.org), also a nonprofit. Besides the standard advice
>> to shred personal documents, following are some tips I found useful:

>> -- Curtail electronic access to your bank accounts.

> How exactly is one supposed to achieve this?  Every bank that I have
> contacted flat-out refuses to block EFT debits on consumer accounts.
> They will transfer my money to anyone with my account and routing
> numbers who has access to the ACH network, even though there is no
> evidence that I authorized the transaction.  (In fact, the banks have
> strong evidence that I did not approve any such transactions since I
> told them that I have not authorized any third party to electronically
> debit my accounts.)  Even brokerage houses are doing this, and even on
> accounts with no check writing feature.

Yes, the US system is ridiculous, why should anyone be allowed to pull
$ from your account with only a routing code, account number, and
possibly some other easily obtained information?  I don't know what
requirements the bank has before qualifying someone to do these "ACH"
payments, but it is likely easy enough to get approved.  The UK has a
much better system where, you as the account holder either have to
initiate the transaction, or you have previously filled out and signed
a physical authorization paper that the person receiving the money has
to file with the bank.  At any time, you can, as the account holder
withdraw permission for that debit (if it is monthly recurring),
without needing consent from the receiving party.

>> Pay bills through snail mail.

> If you use a normal check this still provides the recipient with your
> account and routing numbers which they can then use to electronically
> debit your account.

With the system in the UK mentioned above, people freely exchange
their routing (aka "sort code") and account number information.  It is
quite a common way for two people to pay each other because most banks
don't charge for UK to UK transfers in the same currency.

Someone also mentioned the credit card terminal PIN system used in
France.  This is similar to what you need in the US to use most debit
cards and the UK is also starting to use this with credit cards that
have embedded smart chips.  However, apparently, it is optional for
the merchant on whether or not they accept payments without the PIN on
chip/PIN enabled cards.  One merchant kept having a faily low value
transaction declined when using the mag-stripe, once they used the
chip reader and I entered my PIN it went through.  Since implementing
this system however, it seems all the banks no longer allow you to
change the PIN over the phone, you have to go to an ATM and not just
any, it has to be specific banks withink the UK.  

This tells me that, it's likely they store the PIN in the chip, with
some type of encryption, which will be broken some day no doubt and
become useless.  Further evidence that makes me believe they store the
PIN inside the chip is the fact that I was told merchants can do "chip
& PIN" transactions while offline.  If this is the case, they are
either 1) When offline hoping you entered the right PIN and
authorizing the transaction regardless 2) Decrypting the PIN, stored
locally on the card, with a certificate stored in the POS terminal
(and once that certificate is compromised you have the keys to the
city).  

If they are not storing the PIN in the card, I see absolutely no
reason why they won't update the PIN for you over the phone, unless
they have some type of PIN database encrypted with a certificate which
is only available within the CHIP on the card.  If anyone familiar
with the system cares to comment?

Just as a side note, some companies within the US tried to implement
smart chip systems in their cards, Providian Smart Visa and the Fleet
Fusion card are two that come to mind.  They failed to get anyone to
actually use it and gave up, converting back to non-chip cards.  I'm
not too sure what their system really had to offer, not much, they
tried to tout it as a way to make more secure online transactions,
have the online web store form automagically filled out with your
details, etc..  At the time, they were sending out free smart card
readers to try to get people using these, probably one of the reasons
they decided it cost too much and scrapped it.

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: 866 383 0986
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:00:34 -0700
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Lisa Metcalf wrote:

> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/TELECOM_Digest_Online2005-1/0596.html

> I have visited the above site as I have just received a hangup
> call from 866 383 0986. 

I don't think that's as strange as you might think.

Someone set their pbx to send that number on outgoing caller ID, and
dialed you, and your telephone company is just displaying the caller
ID that the US telco sent it.

JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)

"Life's like an hourglass glued to the table"   --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"

------------------------------


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
  For syndication examples see http://www.feedrollpro.com/syndicate.php?id=308
    and also http://feeds.feedburner.com/TelecomDigest

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************

Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.

The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum.  Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.

Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu

              ************************

   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V24 #327
******************************

Return to Archives**Older Issues