TELECOM Digest     Fri, 22 Jul 2005 17:06:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 335

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Bush Creates New Post to Fight Global Piracy (Reuters News Wire)
    China Internet Users Grow 18 Percent; Reach 103 Million (Reuters News)
    It Rings, It Plays, It Has TV (Gregory Lamb)
    NYC's Consumer Affairs Suing Cellcos Re: False Adverts (Danny Burstein)
    Is Co-Existence of HLR and HSS Possible? (qazmlp1209@rediffmail.com)
    Round Three For Texas Telecom Bill (USTelecom dailyLead)
    Need to Drop SBC LD Service; Info Wanted on Alternatives (George)
    VOIP Intercom (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster (Tony P.)
    Re: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster (DevilsPGD)
    Re: VoIP Phone Home? (Marc Popek)
    Re: Spam Fighting Technique Fought by Some Netizens (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Spam Fighting Technique Fought by Some Netizens (jmeissen@aracnet)
    Re: Ethics of Deterrence (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Prepaid + Pay phones (Duh_OZ)
    Re: Western Electric - Major Works - Status Today? (Jim Haynes)

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.  

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

From: Reuters News Wire <reuters@telecom-digest.org> 
Subject: Bush Creates New Post to Fight Global Piracy
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 12:21:33 -0500


President Bush has created a new senior-level position to fight global
intellectual-property piracy and counterfeiting that cost American
companies billions of dollars each year, Commerce Secretary Carlos
Gutierrez said on Friday.

"Intellectual-property theft is a major problem around the world. We
believe that it is costing U.S. businesses about $250 billion in lost
sales," Gutierrez told Reuters in an interview with reporters and
editors.

Bush has tapped Chris Israel, currently deputy chief of staff for
Gutierrez, to head up the administration's anti-piracy efforts. China
 -- where 90 percent of music and movies are pirate copies -- will be a
chief priority, Gutierrez said.

"Frankly, our goal is to reduce (China's piracy levels) to zero,"
Gutierrez said. He declined to specify a timetable, but acknowledged
it could be a lengthy effort.

Gutierrez got a personal glimpse of rampant piracy in China during a
visit earlier this month, when he was offered the chance to buy a
pirated copy of the newest Star Wars movie for $1 dollar, an aide
said.

The United States will closely monitor a long list of anti-piracy
pledges China made at this month's high-level Joint Commission on
Commerce and Trade meeting, including a promise to increase criminal
prosecutions, Gutierrez said.

The skyrocketing U.S. trade deficit -- which reached a record $618
billion last year -- has compounded U.S. concerns about piracy and
counterfeiting.  Companies that produce movies, music and software and
other intellectual property account for a growing share of what the
United States has to sell to the rest of the world.

U.S. manufacturers of products ranging from shampoo to auto-safety
glass also complain that they often have to compete with counterfeit
versions of their own products in China and other markets around the
world.

The Commerce Department estimates nearly 7 percent of the goods in the
global market are counterfeit.

Israel was a public policy executive at Time Warner, a media company
with strong interests in intellectual property rights protection,
before joining the Commerce Department. He also has worked in Congress
as a legislative aide.


Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

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

From: Reuters News Wire <reuters@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: China Internet Users Grow 18 Percent to Hit 103 Million
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 12:23:01 -0500


The number of Web users in China, the world's second largest Internet
market, grew by 9 million people in the first half of this year to hit
103 million, the China Daily said on Friday. The growth represented an
increase of 18.4 percent over the same period last year in a market
that still has vast potential for further growth, the report said,
citing a survey released by the "quasi-governmental" China Internet
Network Information Center on Thursday.

"While more than 67 percent of the U.S. population, about 135 million,
have access to the Internet, in China the percentage is only about 7.9
percent," it said.

State media previously predicted 120 Chinese million would be surfing
the Web by the end of the year as computers find their way into more
homes and domestic telecoms networks grow.

Nearly 20 percent of China's Web surfers had shopped online, and
Internet-based transactions in the six months of 2005 could total
around 10 billion yuan ($1.23 billion), the newspaper said.

"Most of China's Internet users are well educated and have hefty
purchasing power," analyst Lu Weigang was quoted as saying.

The burgeoning online gaming market proved especially lucrative, with
Internet gamers spending 4 billion yuan on virtual equipment for their
online alter-egos in the first six months, it said.

The Internet's explosive growth in China has come despite the
government's stepped-up efforts to control of the medium, in which
occasional pockets of free speech have appeared in chat sites and
blogs.

Beijing pressures popular Web portals to block sensitive news and
screen chatrooms for "politically sensitive" statements and regularly
blocks access to some foreign Web pages. The government announced
earlier this year that all China-based Web sites had to register by
June 30 or face being declared illegal and shut down. ($1=8.11 Yuan)

Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

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

From: Gregory M. Lamb <lamb@cs.monitor.com> 
Subject: It Rings, It Plays, It Has TV
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 12:27:33 -0500


http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0721/p14s02-stct.html

First there were TVs. Then came PCs. Now, mobile phones are becoming
the 'third screen' for viewing video.

By Gregory M. Lamb | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Mobile phones once wanted only your ears; now they're after your eyes,
too. By delivering a variety of viewing options -- video games, music
videos, clever ads, news, weather, and sports -- the littlest screen
may have the biggest of futures. Already, cellphones serve as a third
screen for some consumers -- along with their televisions and
computers. Because it's always with its user, some think the cellphone
could become the most important of the trio -- the first source for
entertainment and information.

Plenty of questions remain, of course. Some are technological, such as
the need to beef up battery life to power heavier usage and to employ
bandwidth more efficiently so that the system doesn't jam. Others are
financial: How much will subscribers pay to watch something on a tiny
screen? If phones eventually can share video with other users, can the
content be designed to prevent unauthorized sharing?

Still, the promise of a new viewing audience is luring everyone from
manufacturers to content providers.

"We're at the very early stages of [producing] what could be pretty
interesting" video for cellphones, says Larry Shapiro, an executive
vice president at the Walt Disney Internet Group, the online arm of
the Walt Disney Co.

So-called third-generation (3G) mobile phones, which transmit data at
much faster speeds than today's 2G digital phones, will open up the
prospects for better content, Mr. Shapiro says. Already, 3G games on
phones "are equivalent to Game Boy Advance quality in terms of
graphics and richness."

For advertisers, phones represent new opportunities to reach
consumers. For mobile-phone companies, video and other data offer new
revenue streams as increased competition for cellphone customers
squeezes profit margins.

Third-generation phones are already in use in Japan, South Korea, and
Europe. In Germany, mobile-phone giant Vodafone announced this month
that it had sold 411,000 3G phones there since they were introduced
late last year.  Though that represents just 1.5 percent of the
company's German customers, they bring in 4 percent of total sales
revenue. The company aims to have 10 million 3G customers in Germany
by next March.

In the United States, mobile-phone companies are in the midst of field
trials of 3G phones with the expectation of broad deployment in the
next year or two.

Better video will be one of the chief advantages of 3G. Worldwide,
about 25 percent of all digital TVs sold in 2010 will be in the form
of mobile phones, predicts a report last month from Strategy
Analytics, a consulting firm in Boston.

Meanwhile, "for younger consumers, cellphones are already the third
screen," says Avi Greengart, principal analyst for mobile devices at
Current Analysis, another consulting firm. They're being used for
everything from text messages to downloading ring tones and playing
games.

"Their phones go with them everywhere," Mr. Greengart says. "They've
grown up with these devices. They expect them to do just about
anything. And they're willing to pay for additional services --
certainly to a much higher degree than baby boomers."

Mobile phones aren't going to replace TV or computers, but they will
become a complementary source of media, says Dan Steinbock, author of
the new book "The Mobile Revolution" and a researcher at Columbia
University's tele-information institute in New York.

The quick, widespread adoption of cellphones has led to some
optimistic projections about their future, he says. But so far they
have been used in concert with existing media, such as when TV viewers
used their cellphones to vote for contestants on the "American Idol"
TV show.

It's likely that cellphone video may be used to deliver short bursts
of information, which in turn will cause people to seek out a TV or
computer screen for more extended viewing.

That's been the strategy so far in Asia, where short-form video, in
one- to five-minute bursts, has taken off among 3G phone users.

While standing in line at the ATM "you might not want to watch an
entire episode of 'Seinfeld,' " Greengart says, "but a 2-1/2-minute
standup comedy routine could be compelling." Some companies are
creating serials told in one- or two-minute episodes. Dubbed
"mobi-sodes," they are suitable for viewing in a spare moment, such as
waiting in a supermarket checkout line or at a dentist's office.

A video-equipped cellphone can be a mobile baby sitter, too. "I can
tell you there's nothing better than sticking 'Sesame Street' in front
of a 5-year-old," Greengart says.

As for what Americans can watch on their cellphones, Sprint offers
Sprint TV, which includes programming from Fox News, Fox Sports, the
Weather Channel, ABC, and other sources. Some of it is identical to
the televised version; some is specially adapted for use on
phones. The Weather Channel, for example, prints its text larger in
proportion to the screen size than on TV to make it readable.

Early video on phones has been herky-jerky - "a slide show with
audio," acknowledges Dale Knoop, manager for multimedia services at
Sprint.  But even before the arrival of 3G handsets, quality has
greatly improved, he says. Sprint now sends its video at about 15
frames per second; a conventional TV signal sends 30 frames per
second.

Two Minute Television is offering short original programs like "Genius
on a Shoestring," "Adventures in Speed Dating," and "News with a
Punchline," asking users to watch ads instead of pay a fee. SmartVideo
Technologies, which is distributing the programming, claims a current
rate of 15 to 18 frames per second. With 3G, that will rise to 24
frames.

Early signs from overseas indicate video-phone viewers have little
tolerance for conventional ads, Mr. Steinbock warns. Advertisers must
be entertaining or risk the wrath of viewers. "You don't want to turn
on your mobile device just to be turned off by 10 advertising
messages," he says.

Another cellphone development that could draw viewers: video
projectors. This fall, Mitsubishi Electric will introduce its Pocket
Projector. About the size of a digital camera, it attaches to a mobile
phone. Using three advanced light-emitting diodes (LEDs), it can
project the incoming video image onto a wall or desktop at sizes up to
40 diagonal inches.

To extend battery life, a consumer will probably turn it on only when
he or she needs to display a big screen, as when playing an online
video game, says Ramesh Raskar, a scientist at the Mitsubishi Electric
Research Laboratories in Cambridge, Mass.

The device can also be attached to other mobile devices, such as DVD
players or digital cameras, to let a group of people see a movie or
snapshots more easily. Eventually, the projector may shrink enough to
be built right into the phone.

In the end, though, what people will want most is a reliable way to
communicate, Greengart says. "Does it have a camera, does it have a
music player, does it have videos, is it a PDA [personal digital
assistant], does it make me a sandwich? All those things are nice," he
says. "But it has to be a phone first."

Look who's snapping up cellphones.

Three-quarters of the world live within range of mobile-phone
services, but only one-quarter actually subscribe. Now, that's beginning to
change, especially in Africa.

      . The fastest-growing mobile-phone market is Nigeria, where by
mid-2003 the number of mobile phones had grown 143 percent in a single
year.

      . It took 15 years for Britain to see mobile phones outnumber
wire-line phones; it took Zambia five.

      . There were 6 mobile phones for every 100 Africans in 2003, a
far smaller ratio than for Europeans (55 out of 100), Americans (49),
or Asians (15). But Africa has twice as many mobile phones to
wire-line phones, a ratio no other continent can match.

      . A group of mobile-phone networks is pushing manufacturers to
come up with a $30 mobile phone for the developing world. Earlier this
month, Philips Electronics said it would deliver key electronic
components that could push the price below $20.

      Sources: PC World; Vodaphone

www.csmonitor.com | Copyright 2005 The Christian Science Monitor.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, the Christian Science Publishing Society. 

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: NYC's Consumer Affairs Suing Cellcos Re: False Adverts (fwd)
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:10:05 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


"New York City Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) Acting
Commissioner Jonathan Mintz today announced the agency has filed suit
in New York Supreme Court against three major wireless companies for
pitching cell phones and services in deceptive advertisements that
misled consumers. DCA filed suit against Nextel Communications Inc.,
Sprint Spectrum L.P., and T-Mobile USA Inc.  seeking maximum fines and
compliance with New York City's landmark Consumer Protection Law.

" 'You can't promise a great deal in the headline and hide the true
costs in the fine print,' said DCA Acting Commissioner Jonathan
Mintz. "If a cell phone company promises free long distance, consumers
should get free long distance - period ..."

( rest of article describes a whole bunch of "free long distance"
claims which required additional fees, Nextel's "incoming free" which
also required more money ... numerous related things, and a claim
against T-Mobile that "Billing of roaming charges and minutes of use
and services may be delayed" which I don't quite understand)

 	rest at:
 	http://www.nyc.gov/html/dca/html/pr_072105.html

Minor disclosure: I'm a shareholder in Omnipoint ...

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

From: qazmlp1209@rediffmail.com
Subject: Is Co-Existence of HLR and HSS Possible?
Date: 22 Jul 2005 09:50:29 -0700


Is it possible for HLR and HSS to co-exist in a Network?

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

Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:27:29 EDT
From: USTelecom dailyLead <ustelecom@dailylead.com>
Subject: Round Three For Texas Telecom Bill


USTelecom dailyLead
July 22, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=23252&l=2017006

		TODAY'S HEADLINES
	
NEWS OF THE DAY
* Round three for Texas telecom bill
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* France Telecom, Auna reportedly reach deal
* Nokia faces increased pressure
* SBC strategy shift affects DISH sales
* Earnings Reports
USTELECOM SPOTLIGHT 
* Hearst-Argyle CEO to Share Broadcast Television Perspective at TELECOM '05
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Skype CEO envisions video phone boom
VOIP DOWNLOAD
* Wi-Fi VoIP handset sales rise
* Vonage unveils VoIP cordless phone
* Securing VoIP a joint effort

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=23252&l=2017006

Legal and Privacy information at
http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp

SmartBrief, Inc.
1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20005

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

Subject: Need to Drop SBC LD Service. Info on Other Carriers?
From: George <gh424NO824SPAM@cox.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 08:15:09 -0500
Organization: Cox Communications


Beginning in September, all of SBC's LD calling plans will have a
monthly charge, so I need to find a new home -- one that will only
charge me for calls, with no monthly fee or minimum.  Assuming there
still is such a thing.

But I'm having trouble finding reviews of particularly the smaller 
companies or resellers.  Where can I go to find that?  Is there a 
newsgroup?  I'm talking about companies like Everdial/Primus, which 
I currenly use as a dial-around, or maybe Americom.  And I'm 
particularly interested in honest dealing and customer service.  
Assuming there still is such a thing.

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

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: VoIP Intercom?
Date: 22 Jul 2005 14:59:46 -0400
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)


We have a number of stations, some of them in the same building on a
single ethernet switch, and some of them in another building somewhere
else in the world but with internet or intranet connections to that
switch.

These stations need to be linked with an intercom, using external
hardware.  This should act like a party line, where one unit can press
a talk button and be heard on all the other units.

Selective calling features or multiple channels would be nice, but not
essental.  There will be fewer than ten total units in place.

Does anyone have any suggestion for a device that does this as a
simple standalone device, preferably with minimum configuration?  I
know Telex makes some VOIP modules which can be integrated with their
intercom frames, but they all seem to require a central switch.

--scott

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

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster
Organization: ATCC
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:52:52 -0400


In article <telecom24.331.2@telecom-digest.org>, pae@dim.com says:

> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 04:49:13 -0400, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
> wrote:

>> By MATT RICHTEL and JOHN MARKOFF

>> 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.

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And how long do they have those _new_
>> machines until they also get polluted and have to be replaced? [...]

> If he spends that $400 (actually, $499 or so) on a Mac Mini, he can
> probably go for a good long time. There are no known viruses on OS/X.

No known viruses per se, but plenty of hacks. I know at least two
people who've had their Mac OS-X machines hacked to the point that
they were no longer usable without re-installing the OS.
 
> I don't know if anything bad can happen from using IE on the Mac; I
> don't believe so. Safari is not perfect, but it works just fine for
> almost all of my browsing. One thing I like in Safari: there is a
> pull-down option in Safari for resetting *everything*: cache, cookies,
> etc. I do this periodically -- I like to flush all my cookies
> periodically just as a regular practice.

Or just configure Firefox not to allow cookies and immediately flush
history.
 
> The only real software people will need in general is Office 2004. For
> most, the student edition should work just fine for their home needs.
> If there is not a lot of need for compatibility, the $80 iWork package
> (Presentation software + Apple word processor) should work just fine.
> The main thing lacking in iWork is a spreadsheet; Apple should address
> that in the next release.

> With the dropping cost of hardware, more and more people should
> clearly look at this option. As an aside, I've been surprised that
> Apple hasn't been more aggressive in getting the Mac Mini into Kinkos
> stores so people can "test drive" them there. The current Apple
> machines in Kinkos stores are crappy old G3 machines. According to the
> local Kinkos shop, Dell has been very aggressive getting their
> machines in Kinkos stores. Apple: are you listening?

Apple is clearly moving toward marketing the OS as platform
independent.  It is FreeBSD after all. I'm running it on an Intel
platform.

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

From: DevilsPGD <spamsucks@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:36:20 -0500
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.331.3@telecom-digest.org> Choreboy
<choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote:

> Steve Sobol wrote:

>> Monty Solomon wrote:

>>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And how long do they have those _new_
>>> machines until they also get polluted and have to be replaced?

>> The sad thing is that it's simply not that hard to protect yourself.

>> We have two computers here that never get infected ... the other one
>> can't be infected because it's not on the Net, but my wife's and mine
>> both are.

> One can't be infected because it's not on the internet.  Why is the
> other one safe?
 
Because these days the only real way to get infected is user
stupidity ...

Free hint: When you get an email from "Microsoft" with a patch, don't
install it.

Configure your browser properly to not install unrequested shit.

Don't install spyware laced crap.

> [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]

What kind of dumbass wouldn't try to sell it for $20?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: _This_ kind of dumbass probably. At the
internet cafe here in town, the guy who runs the place typically
offers his refurbished, reloaded machines for $50-100 each, and
considering how little income I have otherwise I would like to recoup
my expenses (usually a few hours work) somewhere around ten dollars
per hour; in other words a wee bit above minimum wage. But I have 
heard Chris (the guy who runs the internet cafe) listen to some very
sad stories from guys then reduce his price to 20-35 dollars on a
specific request for 'hardship rates', which is probably how I would
do it also. In other words, try to make some money for your work, and
as circumsances dictate, give it away. 

Also I would like to comment on your allegation 'the only way to get
infected is by user stupidity'. I think that is sort of a harsh
assessment. _Not everyone_ who owns a computer knows everything about
it; some guys work hard; save their money and buy a computer only to 
have some virus writer load some crap from a web site onto his page.
Not every program which gets loaded on your computer is there because
you gave an okay to load it in. I am reasonably intelligent, yet I
have had that crap dumped on me before my hands were quick enough to
hit a key combination to stop the load from occurring.  PAT]

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

From: Marc Popek <LVMarc@Att.Net>
Subject: Re: VoIP Phone Home?
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:19:05 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet


Interesting point of view.

Marco

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5790337602&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMESE%3AIT&rd=1

Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> wrote in message
news:telecom24.316.10@telecom-digest.org:

> On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 07:39:44 GMT, Marc Popek <LVMarc@Att.Net> wrote:

>> Mostly the cost difference and the convenience.

>> Marc

>> Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> wrote in message
>> news:telecom24.309.2@telecom-digest.org:

>>> Why not just get a two-line RJ-14 type telephone?

>>> Fred

> Well, you can go to Radio Shack and get a very nice two line GE phone
> with caller ID, speakerphone, and a bunch of other features for about
> fifty dollars.  I just got one because I'm going to have two different
> VOIP services at my new place in NC for a while.  When I have the
> bucks, I'm going to get another one, too.

> I used to be leary of phones being sold by Radio Shack.  But what I've
> seen there lately has been an improvement.  It used to be off brands.
> But now there's not so many different model phones but a few good ones
> insteads.

> Fred

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

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Spam Fighting Technique Fought by Some Netizens
Organization: Symantec
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 21:22:26 -0400


In article <telecom24.334.6@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest Editor
noted in response to jmeissen@aracnet.com:
 
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I do the essence of challenge
> response right now, as many other mailing list publishers do. You
> (or some spammer or other idiot) writes to me. When it gets here if
> Spam Assassin detirmines it to be spam it goes into one file. The
> allegedly _legitimate_ letter writers get back an auto-ack from me,
> but since Spam Assassin lets so much garbage through, a lot of
> spammers get an auto-ack also. 

But spammers DON'T get the auto-ack.  Spammers almost universally use
forged sender addresses, so the auto-ack goes to some innocent
bystander.

> (3) then it goes on to say "If you
> were not the writer of what I received, then someone apparently took
> control of your computer; please get help as needed in cleaning out
> the viruses, etc.

The computer that was taken control of is almost always *not* the one
you notified.  Repeat after me: "Spam uses forged sender addresses."
A's machine is a spam zombie, and sends out mail from B and C.
Bounces and challenges go to B and C, who have no way of fixing A's
machine, and probably can't even figure out who A was.


Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First of all, I do not send auto-ack
to 'known (by Spam Assassin) spammers'. Those four to five hundred
letters I receive daily just get dropped in a separate file. Its
the two or three hundred letters which did not meet the Spam Assassin
'point score' which go in the regular mailbox who get the auto-ack.
Trouble is, many of those (which slipped past Spam Asssassin) are also
in fact spam. I cannot refine it any closer without throwing out good
mail, which happens sometimes anyway. There are 'control copies' of 
each issue of the Digest which are sent out in the mail and looped
back to me to test this with. I have the point scoring set as low as
I possibly can without getting legitimate stuff tripped up. When an
issue of this Digest (a controlled mailing) returns in the loop and
falls into the spam pot then I know the point scoring is a bit too
low and I set it up a little. I use Bayesian scoring and Spam Assassin
learns a little from its own experience. The system admin here at MIT
is going to install a newer version of Spam Assassin for me as time
permits; he has a busy schedule also. 

And I have to disagree at least a little with your recitation above
that 'spam uses forged sending addresses'. Yes that is true a little,
but it is very rare (maybe four or five each day [out of about 300 
auto-acks] which are sent out automatically) that I get back a
mailer-daemon from postmaster here with an auto-ack which bounced; and
I have _never yet even once in twenty years_ gotten a letter of
complaint from some person who had been 'accused' of sending spam or
who was 'annoyed' by getting the auto-ack. I get a lot of those
myself, where an auto-ack from someone tells me welcome to their
group, or thanks me for writing them, etc, and if they did not fall in
the spam file and get automatically tossed out when I first log in
here each day, then I toss them out by hand when I comb through the
so-called legitimate mail file. PAT]

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

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: Spam Fighting Technique Fought by Some Netizens
Date: 22 Jul 2005 01:42:29 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom24.334.6@telecom-digest.org>,  Pat wrote:

> Because of my personal experience with this for a few years now, the
> auto-ack begins with the assumption you _are a spammer_ also. It asks
> you to (1) remove this email address from your list. (2) It tells you
> we are not interested at all ...  (3) then it goes on to say "If you
> were not the writer of what I received, then someone apparently took
> control of your computer; please get help as needed in cleaning out
> the viruses, etc.

> Then after a couple paragraphs at least of addressing you as though
> you are the spammer, or the idiot with the zombified computer, it 
> goes on to conclude (4) "for everyone else, good netizens who wrote
> to me, your letter is being read and evaluated and readied for use
> in the Digest. Thank you for writing me."   Now, is the complaint I
> make in (1),(2) and (3) too much of an imposition to read? I very 
> strongly support the work of http://www.bluesecurity.com and hope
> all readers will at least review it and decide from there.  PAT]

The problem with that is it assumes that, for spam, either:
 1) the return address is the spammer's address, or
 2) the return address is the owner of the (probably infected) system 
    that sent the spam.

Neither of those is likely to be true. Most spam will NOT have a
correct return address, just to avoid getting deluged with bounce
messages from places that decide the recipient doesn't exist halfway
through the local delivery process. And they're NEVER the email
address of the owner of the sending machine. All current trojan/virus
spam engines forge From: headers using addresses harvested from
various places on the infected machine or even other addresses from
the list it's trying to deliver to.

So in the case of spam all you're doing is taking the unsolicited email
that you got and using it to generate unsolicited email for someone
else.

The only accurate way to identify the source of spam is from the
Received: header generated by your mail server when it accepts the
email. And all that gives you is the IP address of the sending system.
There's no way for anyone other than the infected user's ISP to
associate that information with a username/email address.

While generating an auto-ack for submissions seems like a nice
gesture, in the case of spam all it does is aggravate the
situation. It might be more effective to do something like comp.risks
does now -- ask submitters to tag submissions with a unique identifier
in the subject line. Or create a unique email address that's
recognizable but not harvestable (maybe by adding a tag line to
postings with instructions on how to construct the submission
address).


John Meissen                                jmeissen@aracnet.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First of all, if I were interested in
'doing like comp.risks does' that's one thing, however although I do
have many regular correspondents here, there are also many newer and
inexperienced netizens who write me to _ask questions_ about how
_telephones work_, etc. I cannot have a system where if someone wishes
to write me, he has to include 'keyword' in the subject line. I do not
have a closed-loop of my friends or enemies as my only writers. Far too
much good letters would get trashed that way. And with twenty some
years of postings in our own archives here and many other places, it
would take a long time to teach people how to construct the submission
address.  

Let's just face it: passive filtering of email has been from the
beginning been a dismal failure. All it has gotten us is an ever
increasing ratio of spam/scam to legitimacy; a ratio that now is in
excess of 80-85 percent and will eventually (as close as is mathemat-
ically possible) reach 100 percent; I suppose it could get to 99.99998
percent spam/scam, there will always be a few fools trying to send out
legitimate email. _Filtering does not work_. Filtering is the notion
that 'if we ignore them, they will go away' and I can tell you that
they will not. Filtering is just a deluded act of self-denial which
refuses to admit how bad things have gotten. We continue to keep our
filters running overtime; and a whole branch of software writing, a
whole new industry -- anti-virus, anti-spam software protection -- has
developed to appease those folks who want to use it. 

You may recall my concept several years ago of a 'Business Directory'
which listed the 800 numbers of spammers; the idea was to do as they
asked, and call them _on their 800 number_ to inquire about their
'product' or 'service'. Even though Jeff Slaton wound up having to
damn near mortgage his home to pay his bill to Southwestern Bell after
his 800 number was published here, I did not hear any of the now, all
too common excuses and wimpering about doing the essence of DDOS on
his phone lines.  I did not hear anyone wondering 'oh what if he
decides to sue me for this _illegal_ act I am doing'; i.e. calling him
as requested to complain about the spam.

But now, ICANN is in the picture, and we suddenly hear how _anything_
at all we do to agressively fight spam/scam (instead of just passively
rolling over and accepting it, using filters like the defective and
faulty condoms they are) is illegal, immoral, etc.

That's the genius of the Blue Security approach. It works essentially
like my Business Directory concept. Telephone the _actual offender_
(not just some sap whose computer got compromised or some sysadmin
who can't get his act together) and inform _the actual offender_ what
you want. And its automated, and it does not involve email at all.
The netizen goes to the website of _the actual offender_ and fills in
the blanks on his page explaining what is wanted, which is what he
asked us to do, is it not?  Admittedly, the answers I would give are
not the answers he wanted, but neither were the answers most of you
gave when you telephoned the 800 number of the _actual offender_. And
in that instance, telephone numbers are a lot like IP addresses. Yes,
people in the middle can make changes in how you get from here to 
there, and yes, a sufficient number of connections all at one time
will cause some hassles. But that is neither here nor there. PAT]

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Ethics of Deterrence
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:30:15 -0700
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Eren Reshef wrote:

> Some bloggers have recently claimed our fight is morally flawed. 

I'll go further and tell you you're a criminal.

It's trivially easy for someone to put an URL of a website I own into
a spam.

And if you attack my website in response, and I had nothing to do with
the original spam, you will have law enforcement knocking on your
door.

You're in California, I'm in California, should be as easy as a phone
call.

Did you mention something about the US Constitution? God, I *hate*
when ignorant people claim that the Constitution gives them rights
with no restriction -- you are welcome to certain rights as long you
don't infringe on others' rights in the process of exercising
yours. People who whine about their First Amendment rights being
impugned often forget that.


Steve Sobol, Professional Geek   888-480-4638   PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Steve, you are forgetting a couple
of important factors: although yes, it is 'trivially easy' to put
someone else's URL (for a web page) into spam a third party wants to
send out, if you have a web page, your web page would have to have
one or more 'forms' on it for people to use to fill in their credit
card numbers in order for other folks to come along and deface your
web site, wouldn't it?  Wouldn't it be quite a coincidence if you,
the innocent web site owner happened to have forms all over your
web page which related to the product or service being spammed by 
some other person, _and_ through some 'human error' your web site
got chosen?  I really have to wonder if you read any of the FAQ on
how the BlueSecurity.com system works ... let's say for example, I
am offended by a piece of spam I recieve; I forward it to BlueSecurity; 
someone there who has a modicum of intelligence (about as much 
intelligence as the people who write up filtering software) looks at
it, quickly finds mid the HTML crap on the source page an IP address
which _appears to be_ the offender. He (the investigator) goes to
the URL; is it in fact the product or service being spammed? If not,
then he junks it. If it is the product being spammed, and it has
'forms' around the page for things like credit card numbers, comments
or names/addresses, etc then it gets put somewhere. Now the investi-
gtor finds a thousand more pieces from the same spammer, referring
to the same URL, then acts on it. It is not a willy-nilly process
where 'you' sent me spam so I 'crash your system'. They only release
the 'do not spam me further' notices (which simply goes to that URL
and fills in the aforementioned, already located 'forms') once they
have discovered the _actual offender_, not some innocent bystander.

They got a lot of money from somewhere to put investigators to work
tracking down _good_ URLs of spammers. Admittedly they cannot get
anywhere with much of the crap which comes to them, but they do find
some of them. And it is _not_ DDOS since the spammer is first given
ample warning, and assistance as needed in cleaning his list.

Oh, I know ICANN would not approve of it, nor would many of the old-
time netizens who prefer being in denial about spam/scam, etc. ICANN
tolerates it since it does the dirty work they don't have to do;
driving small web site owners and netizens off of 'their' network, 
then when anyone like Blue Security gets a sum of money for their
'start up costs' and proceeds to catch and punish eve a few of the
spammers, the ICANN-favored users start chanting against it, with all
sorts of warnings: it won't work; even it does a little it is a stupid
thing; those spammers may claim _their_ First Amendment rights and
get _you_ in trouble, yada yada yada ad nauseum ... 

Oh, and by the way, if http://telecom-digest.org 'suddenly stops
working' sometime soon, well ... its just ICANN doing their thing,
trying to silence anyone who tells you how naked they and their merry
band of choristers are. Anytime you cannot get through on
telecom-digest.org, remember that ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu is still
a good address and points to the very same place. PAT]

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

From: Duh_OZ <ozzy.kopec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Prepaid + Pay phones
Date: 21 Jul 2005 19:02:42 -0700


Joseph wrote:

> Go to http://abtolls.com and look for CALLING CARD LONG DISTANCE PHONE
> RATES.

> It doesn't list every card, but you can see that most of them charge
> between 30 and 65 cents per call.

Thanks!   I'll definitely look it over.

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

Subject: Re: Western Electric - Major Works - Status Today?
Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu
Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni
From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes)
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 03:10:40 GMT


In article <telecom24.333.8@telecom-digest.org>,
Jim Millick <jsm@panix.com> wrote:

> From a Lucent friend, an article on Hawthorne Works:

>  At one time, Cicero, IL, was famous for two things that
>  had absolutely nothing in common: Al Capone and Western
>  Electric. The blue-collar town on the West Side of Chicago

Actually there was a connection, however slight.  In the book
Manufacturing the Future : A History of Western Electric by Stephen
B. Adams and Orville R. Butler there is an anecdote about a
W.E. statistician who wandered over to one of the gambling dens and
used his knowledge of statistics to determine that the roulette wheels
were not exactly random (because of personal idiocyncrasies of the
operators).  He was able to win a little money.

--

jhhaynes at earthlink dot net

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


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 #335
******************************