From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 27 14:48:18 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0RJmIC00659; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:48:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:48:18 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401271948.i0RJmIC00659@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #42 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:48:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 42 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson You've Got Problems! (Monty Solomon) Creating Software on Demand/CompUSA Rolls Out Automated System (Solomon) T-Mobile USA Adds More Than 1 Million Net New Customers in Q4 (Solomon) New Wireless Standard to Carry Cable TV Signal (Monty Solomon) SBC Reports Strong 4th-Quarter Long Distance Launch in Midwest (Solomon) EarthLink Reports Net Income of $10.7 Million in 4th Quarter (Solomon) Microsoft Hops on the RFID Bandwagon (Monty Solomon) Plans for Wireless Directory Raise Concerns About Privacy (M Solomon) Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? (Fred Atkinson) Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? (Barry Margolin) Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? (Justin Time) Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? (noname) Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? (Andrew Bell) Re: Why SCO's McBride Declared War (Chris Jones) Re: New Virus Infects PCs, Whacks SCO (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Overseas Toll Free Numbers (Michael D. Sullivan) Getting True, Important Security Updates From Microsoft (Andrew Bell) 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 is 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: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 01:39:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'You've Got Problems!' As more users turn to the vast array of content beyond AOL's walls, the Net provider is fighting back in an urgent bid to remain relevant. By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 1/26/2004 After five years, Rich Krause finally gave up AOL. The 46-year-old attorney in Stillman Valley, Ill., got his Internet access from a small local dial-up provider, but also maintained a subscription to America Online, the nation's largest Internet service provider, with its vast array of news and entertainment resources. But Krause rarely used the AOL services. "The features that they had on AOL I didn't find particularly useful or necessary," he said. He had no use for chat rooms or instant messaging. And as for finding information online, he could run a search on Yahoo or Google to locate resources that were as good as AOL's. So six months ago, Krause quit AOL. He wasn't alone. According to documents filed by AOL's parent company, Time Warner Inc., with the Securities and Exchange Commission, AOL lost 2 million US subscribers between September 2002 and September 2003. This Sunday AOL will launch a massive marketing blitz during the Super Bowl in an expensive attempt to reverse that trend, or at least hang on to the 24.7 million customers who remain. The company is spending $7.5 million to sponsor the halftime show, an extravaganza featuring Janet Jackson, P. Diddy, and Kid Rock. And during the game, we'll see the father-and-son cast of the cable TV show "American Chopper" promoting a new AOL feature that will speed up Web surfing, even for customers who use slow telephone modem connections. It's a colorful and costly effort to convince Internet users that one of the old titans of the Internet hasn't sunk into irrelevance. AOL made its bones by protecting ordinary consumers from the intimidating complexity of the Internet. In the process, the service introduced millions of new computer users to the online world. http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2004/01/26/youve_got_problems/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 01:37:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Creating Software on Demand / CompUSA Rolls Out Automated System By Chris Gaither, Globe Staff, 1/26/2004 EMERYVILLE, Calif. -- Customers are still trying to figure out what it is. But the whirring machine inside the front door of the CompUSA store here may transform the way software is sold. The SoftwareToGo system is the first in a major US retail chain to create software titles on demand, said its manufacturer and CompUSA. The electronics seller has installed the machines in stores in Seattle, Dallas, and in the San Francisco Bay area, with plans to roll it out nationwide, including in Massachusetts, starting next quarter. For now, CompUSA and software publishers see the machine as a way to increase the number of titles they sell, without taking up valuable space on shelves. But in the future, its advocates say, systems like SoftwareToGo might reduce inventory problems, keep popular items available for purchase even when they're gone from shelves, and cut down on software theft -- major problems for stores. As he gave a recent demonstration of the system, Mitchell Rawlings, general manager of the Emeryville CompUSA, was interrupted by an employee bearing an empty box of Microsoft Office Professional software. Someone had sliced the top with a razor, removed the discs, and walked out. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/01/26/creating_software_on_demand/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:36:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: T-Mobile USA Adds More Than 1 Million Net New Customers in Q4, Topping off Strong Annual Growth with More Than 3.2 Million Net Additions in 2003 - Jan 27, 2004 12:30 AM (BusinessWire) BONN, Germany & BELLEVUE, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 27, 2004-- -- T-Mobile annual customer growth of 32% -- More net additions than in 2002 T-Mobile International, the mobile communications subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom AG (NYSE:DT), today announced fourth quarter 2003 customer results of its U.S. operations, T-Mobile USA, Inc. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40316661 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 08:41:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New Wireless Standard to Carry Cable TV Signal By Yukari Iwatani Kane TOKYO, Jan 27 (Reuters) - A new wireless technology with enough bandwidth to carry cable television signals from a wall-mounted outlet to a TV anywhere in the home could be on the market as early as next year, an industry group said on Tuesday. The Multiband OFDM Alliance, led by Texas Instruments Inc (NYSE:TXN), the world's top maker of microchips for cell phones, said it would publish standards for the technology in May. The group said it expected products with the technology, known as Ultra Wideband, to ship in 2005. Ultra Wideband operates at a lower power than the wireless local area network standard known as WiFi, but is capable of handling much larger amounts of data, including streaming video. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40317337 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 08:44:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SBC Reports Strong 4th-Quarter Long Distance Launch in Midwest Improved Retail Access Line Trends, Record Gains in Long Distance, DSL SAN ANTONIO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 27, 2004-- Note: SBC Communications Inc.'s fourth-quarter earnings conference call will be broadcast live via the Internet at 10 a.m. EST on Jan. 27, 2004, at www.sbc.com/investor_relations . -- 2.9 million long distance lines added companywide, including 1.7 million from Midwest launch - best ever quarter -- 377,000 DSL lines added / 8th consecutive quarter of accelerated growth -- 32 percent reduction in consumer retail access-line losses companywide compared with 3rd quarter, including 54 percent reduction in the Midwest SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) today reported fourth-quarter and full-year 2003 financial and operating results that reflect strong growth in long distance and DSL lines and continuing improvement in access line trends. SBC's full-year net income for 2003 was $8.5 billion, or $2.56 per diluted share, compared with $5.7 billion, or $1.69 per diluted share, in 2002. Excluding the cumulative effect of previously announced accounting changes in both years, 2003 earnings were $6.0 billion, or $1.80 per diluted share, versus $7.5 billion, or $2.23 per diluted share. Net income for the fourth quarter of 2003 was $905 million, or $0.27 per diluted share, compared with $2.4 billion, or $0.71 per diluted share in the fourth quarter of 2002. Excluding the effect of an extraordinary item and items announced during the quarter, fourth-quarter 2003 earnings were $0.34 per diluted share. The prior-year period also was affected by a number of previously reported items that increased fourth-quarter 2002 earnings by $0.22 a share, including a $0.12 impact from a change in directory accounting. Excluding these items, earnings were $0.49 cents per diluted share. Year-over-year quarterly earnings comparisons also were impacted by access line losses, increases in pension and retiree benefit costs, and higher costs associated with strong growth in long distance and DSL subscribers. Revenues for the fourth quarter of 2003 totaled $10.1 billion, compared with $11.2 billion in the year-earlier period. Operating expenses totaled $8.9 billion for the latest quarter, compared with $9.0 billion in the prior-year period. A change in accounting method for the directory business reduced both fourth-quarter 2003 revenues and expenses versus the fourth quarter of 2002. For the full year 2003, revenues were $40.8 billion, compared with $43.1 billion in 2002. SBC's consolidated revenue and operating expense totals do not include proportionate results from Cingular Wireless, which is 60 percent owned by SBC. Cingular's revenues for the latest quarter were $3.9 billion, compared with $3.7 billion in the prior-year period. Fourth-quarter revenues benefited from strong subscriber growth in long distance and DSL and increases in business data sales, offset by ongoing access-line losses. Fourth-quarter expenses were increased by investments in initiatives to drive growth in long distance and DSL and to prepare for the company's planned first-quarter 2004 launch of SBC DISH Network video service and to expand its capabilities in the large-business market. Compared with expense levels in the year-earlier period, fourth-quarter operating expenses were positively impacted by the directory accounting change but adversely impacted by increased pension and retiree benefit costs. Increased pension and benefit costs had a $0.09 per share negative impact on fourth-quarter 2003 earnings, compared with the prior-year period. Full-year 2003 operating expenses totaled $34.4 billion in 2003, versus $34.5 billion in 2002. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40318482 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 08:50:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EarthLink Reports Net Income of $10.7 Million in Fourth Quarter ATLANTA, Jan. 27 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- EarthLink, Inc. (Nasdaq: ELNK) today announced financial results for its fourth quarter ending December 31, 2003. Financial highlights for the quarter: * Net subscriber growth of 248,000 in the fourth quarter and 219,000 for the full year. * Revenues of $348.6 million, an increase of 0.2 percent from the fourth quarter 2002. * Earnings before interest income and expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, and facility exit costs (adjusted EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure) of $36.5 million compared to $20.2 million from the fourth quarter 2002. * Earnings before facility exit costs, acquisition-related amortization and accretion dividends (a non-GAAP measure) of $19.4 million, or $0.12 per share, compared to a loss of ($3.2) million, or ($0.02) per share, from the fourth quarter 2002. * Net income of $10.7 million, or $0.07 per share, compared to a loss of ($36.9) million, or ($0.24) per share, from the fourth quarter 2002. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200401271202_PRN__CLTU001 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 09:06:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Hops on the RFID Bandwagon By Marguerite Reardon Staff Writer, CNET News.com Microsoft on Monday announced new software designed to help small and midsize companies better manage their supply chains wirelessly. The company has added radio frequency identification technology, which combines silicon chips and radio frequency technology to track inventory, to its Microsoft Axapta Warehouse Management software. Microsoft has been testing the new RFID software with KiMs, a Danish snack food company, since December 2003. KiMs, which was already using Axapta, is using the new software to monitor pallets or cartons of finished goods as they move out of production and into a third-party warehouse. The company said that the new software provides much greater knowledge of the exact location of products at various points in its supply chain. ... http://news.com.com/2100-7343-5147145.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 09:09:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Plans for Wireless Directory Raise Concerns About Privacy By LISA NAPOLI January 26, 2004 After last year's campaigns against spammers and telemarketers, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are poised to tackle the next privacy frontier: the nation's 150 million wireless phones. As a group of carriers quietly works to create the first wireless white pages, legislation is in the works to protect consumers concerned about the privacy issues of those numbers going public. Privacy advocates say the proposed protections are not strong enough. The Wireless 411 Consumer Privacy Act was introduced in both the House and the Senate before the holiday recess. The bill would require existing customers who want to be listed in a national database of numbers to "opt in," or specifically say they want to be listed, while new wireless subscribers would have to "opt out," that is, choose not to be listed. The proposed legislation also insists that consumers not be charged a fee for keeping their numbers private, a practice that generates $50 million in revenue for land-line companies each year. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/26/technology/26directory.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: Fred Atkinson From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 01:34:46 -0500 The question was asked where to get Mailwasher. The URL is http://www.mailwasher.net. It is written by a fellow who lives in New Zealand. There is a free version which is limited to one account and there is a paid version which isn't so limited. When I was in graduate school at Johns Hopkins University, one of my professors (who taught management courses, his speciality was TQM) was direct associate of Dr. Deming. Someone said something about how everyone was trying to invent the better mousetrap. He said something that made me chuckle, but after you think about it you realize he is right. He suggested that the best solution is to just get rid of the mouse. So, perhaps they will start enforcing that new anti-spam law and start busting those mice who send that stuff. Fred ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? Organization: Looking for work Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 06:56:48 GMT In article , Jeffrey Mattox wrote: > The Mail Washer web site says : "... the bounced messages look > exactly like a returned mail message you would receive if you sent an > email off to a wrong address. There is no way the spammers can tell > it is not genuine." > But that is wrong! Spammers can tell because the bounce message > comes as a delayed email (which they will ignore) rather than a > refused connected by the SMTP protocol. With spammers using every > trick they can to get emails through spam filters, why would anybody > believe they would be fooled by a faked bounce message? Besides, > spammers aren't interested in cleaning their lists. It's a waste of > their time because it costs them nothing to keep the bad addresses. > Damn them! I disagree. Mail often has to go through several hops before it gets to the server that recognizes the mail account names. Also, many spammers make use of open mail relays, they don't send directly to the destination mail servers. For these reasons, they have no reason to expect that the "No such user" error will occur during their SMTP dialog; many of the legitimate failures are delayed. You *are* correct that many spammers don't include a valid return address, so the bounces will not go back to them in the first place. And you're also probably correct that they don't care about cleaning up their lists. Spam lists are valued by their size, not quality, even though spammers often advertise (in spam!) how clean their lists are. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Barry is quite correct about how lists are valued by their size. I personally would rather have a small list of active, useful participants rather than a list of a million names 99 percent of whom toss my stuff in the garbage each day. I think they define 'clean' to mean how much email sticks versus what bounces but part of that problem is the number of netters who pitch it without taking the trouble to bounce it back. Spammers work by numbers and if there was a way to enforce valid return addresses on email and spam, and everyone who found it unwelcome did bounce it back, I suspect the spammers would be shocked by the volume of returned stuff they get, that they then had to dispose of, etc. Thats one reason I use the 'bounce' feature in Mail Washer; hoping to God at least some of it gets back to the (true) originator to discourage them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? Date: 27 Jan 2004 05:50:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Jeffrey Mattox wrote in message news:... > Pat: > [Please do not publish my email address -- too much spam already.] > You wrote: >> TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Really not a problem at all. >> I use a software package called 'Mail Washer' which does that. >> ... Anything you tell Mail Washer to bounce and blacklist gets >> returned to the sender with a very realistic looking notice from >> postmaster@your.site saying no such user. ... PAT] > This particular feature of Mail Washer will do more harm than good. > An truly invalid email address is reported to the SMTP server during > the actual connection when the email is sent. The SMTP protocol > tells the sending machine that the address is invalid and the message > body never even gets sent. > When you send a "bounce" message yourself in reply to a spam, it's > just another email going over the Internet and it will be totally > ignored by the spammer. Spammers don't include a valid reply address > anyway, so your bounce message will likely just generate another > bounce message (a reply to your bounce) causing even more traffic. > Even if spammers get your bounce message, they'd know it was faked > because it didn't come during the SMTP connection when the spam was > sent. In fact, your faked bounce message is a *positive indication* > that your address is valid because you got the spam!! > <> > But that is wrong! Spammers can tell because the bounce message > comes as a delayed email (which they will ignore) rather than a > refused connected by the SMTP protocol. With spammers using every > trick they can to get emails through spam filters, why would anybody > believe they would be fooled by a faked bounce message? Besides, > spammers aren't interested in cleaning their lists. It's a waste of > their time because it costs them nothing to keep the bad addresses. > Damn them! > The companies that are advertising this "feature" of their product > are either idiots or (more likely) are hoping to impress people with > a feature that sounds good, but, in fact, is detrimental. > Jeff I use Mailwasher PRO, which you can upgrade to with a small donation to the author of the freeware, to handle my e-mail. I have set the option to only mark for deletion rather than mark for deletion and bounce for the reasons Jeff stated. Mailwasher also has the ability to mark domains as being on your "blacklist" so any mail coming from that domain is automatically classified as being "spam" and marked for, but not deleted or bounced. The only thing about Mailwasher I would like to see is to add the ability to check messages on Yahoo! and some of the other web-based mail services. It does Hotmail which is POP3 compatible, but not others. Rodgers Platt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have that same Mail Washer Pro, and it sits right in front of my email client and calls for the client when it has finished its review each time. I should have mentioned that to the original correspondent. Yes, Mail Washer is free, but if you send the NZ guy a small donation you can use the 'Pro' version which has a few more features. I strongly believe in sending money to people who promote using the net properly; the guys who put their shareware out for others. PAT] ------------------------------ From: noname Subject: Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:00:43 GMT In article , Jeffrey Mattox says: > The Mail Washer web site says : "... the bounced messages look > exactly like a returned mail message you would receive if you sent an > email off to a wrong address. There is no way the spammers can tell > it is not genuine." > But that is wrong! Spammers can tell because the bounce message > comes as a delayed email (which they will ignore) rather than a > refused connected by the SMTP protocol. With spammers using every > trick they can to get emails through spam filters, why would anybody > believe they would be fooled by a faked bounce message? Besides, > spammers aren't interested in cleaning their lists. It's a waste of > their time because it costs them nothing to keep the bad addresses. > Damn them! > The companies that are advertising this "feature" of their product > are either idiots or (more likely) are hoping to impress people with > a feature that sounds good, but, in fact, is detrimental. I once used MailWasher until I actually looked at the way SMTP works and realized it was easy to tell that the bounce was counterfeit. I've since switched to PopFile -- it is an email proxy that uses Bayesian rules to filter out the SPAM. You have to teach it for the first week as it doesn't really know how to classify things. But once that's done you should see classification accuracy of 99% or higher. And here's the thing -- it errs on the side of legitimate email. So every once in a while for the first month or so you might see SPAM tagged as legitimate. Just go into the web console and tag it as SPAM and that will increase the accuracy. Right now I'm at 99.65% accuracy. Granted, I munge my address enough that it'll be some time before I start getting spam. http://popfile.sourceforge.net/ In article , pv+usenet@pobox.com says: > me@privacy.net writes: >> How difficult would it be to spoof a message that seemed like it came >> from an ISP's mail server? I'd like this technique to discourage some >> people from sending mail to me. > It's actually pretty trivial -- send a message to a whacko address on > your ISP's mailserver, and mimic the resulting bounce message that > gets sent to you. If you're doing this for specific people that you > actually know and don't like, it's harmless enough. However, DO NOT be > tempted to use this against spammers. All you'll be doing then is > sending random messages to addresses that either don't exist, or don't > belong to the spammer. The only way to bounce a spam is during the > SMTP conversation while the message is coming in, and even then in > most cases the spammer isn't paying attention to the responses > anyway. * If you have the time, see who registered the domain name of the site selling the product. I've had particular success when a certain type of spam gets on my nerves when looking up the domain owner, attempting to send email from a safe account (aka a disposable account) and calling if the number is within the continental U.S. If none of those contact methods works I drop an empty envelope to the address listed. If it comes back undeliverable I scan the returned envelope and send it to the registrar along with the log of calls, emails, etc. I've gotten a few domains hosed that way. ------------------------------ From: Andrew Bell Subject: Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:00:49 -0500 >> TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Really not a problem at all. >> I use a software package called 'Mail Washer' which does that. >> ... Anything you tell Mail Washer to bounce and blacklist gets >> returned to the sender with a very realistic looking notice from >> postmaster@your.site saying no such user. ... PAT] > This particular feature of Mail Washer will do more harm than good. > An truly invalid email address is reported to the SMTP server during > the actual connection when the email is sent. The SMTP protocol > tells the sending machine that the address is invalid and the message > body never even gets sent. While I agree with you that bounce messages are largely ineffective, this statement is only true sometimes. My work email comes to me through no less than 3 SMTP relays. The first one (which I don't control) will never bounce a message unless the from: domain doesn't exist. Don't get me started on the politics of this. :-( The second one (my first point of control) may reject a message for any number of additional reasons, including an invalid to: address. This means that I reject the mail while connected to the relay server, not the originator. The relay server then has to initiate a brand new connection to the originating server to deliver this bounce message. Dealing with these bounces on the relay server makes for an interesting problem. Since about about 80% of these are going to invalid addresses, we have to send legitimate outgoing mail through a different set of relays. Otherwise, the backlog of bounce messages can delay real mail for hours or days. Andrew ------------------------------ From: Chris Jones Subject: Re: Why SCO's McBride Declared War Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:49:32 -0500 Monty Solomon writes: > Online Extra: Why SCO's McBride Declared War > Says the CEO about Linux: "It wasn't like we said, 'Oh, let's go find > people and sue them.' It was a gradual enforcement of our rights" > You have to give SCO Group ( SCOX ) CEO Darl McBride credit for one > thing: He's got moxie. First, in what way was it NOT like they said "Oh, let's sue"? Saying that that isn't what they did doesn't change the fact that what they did looks EXACTLY like that. And no, I don't have to give Darl McBride credit for ANYTHING if I don't want to. He can't make me, and siccing lawyers indiscriminately won't change that fact. How did he end up in this universe without a clue, anyway? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 08:58:59 -0700 From: Joey Lindstrom Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Organization: Telus Sucks! Subject: Re: New Virus Infects PCs, Whacks SCO Monday, January 26, 2004, 11:20:00 PM, Monty wrote: > A mass-mailing virus quickly spread through the Internet on Monday, > compromising computers so that they attack the SCO Group's Web > server with a flood of data on Feb. 1, according to antivirus > companies. Wow. The world's first genuinely-useful virus. Go figure. Joey Lindstrom http://td-extra.interocitor.net ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Overseas Toll Free Numbers Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 07:56:45 GMT In article , postmaster@paul.washington.dc.us says: > Alan Burkitt-Gray wrote: >> The idea is that a +800 xxxx xxxx number can be dialed free of >> charge from anywhere in the world. The system is already in use by >> many of the main hotel chains. For example the Hilton group gives >> +800 4445 8667 on its website (the numbers translate to +800 >> HHILTONS, and it's very similar to its US toll-free number +1-800 >> 445 8667). > The number 011-800-4445-8667# when dialed from an Arlington, Virginia > home telephone produced a US style ring, and after about 10 or 12 > rings went to a recording identifying itself as Hilton Honors, in > essence I was being put into a queue. I hung up, having confirmed > that the numbers do work here. For what it's worth, when I dialed that number from my Verizon landline here in Maryland, I got an interrupt and was cut off. > When I tried dialing it from my Sprint PCS phone (without the # since > you send all the digits before you push 'send'), I got the recording > "Your account is not authorized to make calls to this number" so it > implies that Sprint isn't aware of it yet or doesn't know how to > authorize that 'country code' to be considered a local call. When I tried it from my Verizon Wireless cellphone, James Earl Jones told me it couldn't be completed without a calling card. > This at least confirms that international 800 numbers can be dialed > from U.S. wireline locations (presuming they include US access for > the particular number.) Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: Andrew Bell Subject: Getting True, Important Security Updates from Microsoft Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 09:41:10 -0500 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I guess for many people, it is quite > sufficient. Truely, some links to URLs are outrageously long and > cumbersome to type in. As you know, some URLs go on for eighty to one > hundred characters in length, or more. People need to learn that > Microsoft, various banks, etc do NOT send you email telling you to > 'please click here and verify your account information.' People need > to learn that the only way you EVER go to one of those sites is if > you, yourself originate the inquiry. > What scares me a little however is that Microsoft has some perfectly > legimate way to 'tickle' the bit in your computer to notify you that > Windows Update has something for you. Then the next time you attempt > to use your browser, you get diverted (legitimatly) to Windows Update > to receive the file. What happens when some bad person (a) gets his > hands on the mailing list of people who want to be notified > legitimatly by Microsoft of new security issues, then (b) proceeds to > send a 'tickle' to all those users and (c) figures out some way to > divert them to a malicious but very well counterfieted web site > purporting to be Windows Update. The amateurs out there now who send > those 'here is your latest update' file only fool the really new, > novice users. Imagine the fun when (a), (b) and (c) above get accomp- > lished and only a *very trained, very experienced* user notices there > is something 'not quite right' about that 'Windows Update' page, but > by that time the bad man has already started dumping all over your > hard drive. We are all at the mercy of users who are smarter than > ourselves unfortunatly. PAT] The Microsoft update is a "pull" system. If you enable automatic updates, your PC runs a daemon that checks in with the MS site to see if anything's available, then optionally downloads and installs it. Microsoft never "reaches out" to your system. The browser diversion you mentioned works similarly. IE can (will, by default) check for updates automatically every time you start it. If a newer version exists, it will then redirect you to the IE download page instead of your normal home page. This is a lot riskier than automatic updates. (Picture an attack which changes your home page to a malicious clone of the IE update site - easy to do through either an unpatched browser or social engineering.) This check can be disabled under the Advanced setting tab in Internet Explorer options. Then if you ever see an IE update page at startup, you'll *know* it's evil. (insert Microsoft is evil anyway reference here) Andrew ----------------------------- 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: 620-330-6774 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 second 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) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 V23 #42 *****************************