29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for March 31, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 82 : "text" Format
====== 29 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ====== |
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne 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, and other stuff of interest.
|
Date: 29 Mar 2011 17:57:40 -0000
From: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Swiping Is the Easy Part
Message-ID: <20110329175740.46324.qmail@joyce.lan>
>There's also a contact version of EMV chips. Every credit and debit
>card in most countries other than the US has one. I don't entirely
>understand why the US banks are going straight to contactless.
>***** Moderator's Note *****
>
>Maybe it's because they let the other guys do the scut work for a
>change? Perhaps it's because they had an attack of common sense, and
>decided to let someone else do free R&D?
ObTelecom: The Europeans did smartcards first so they could do offline
authorization. The card itself knows its authorization limit. That's
because it was a lot more expensive to make phone calls than in the US,
where for a very long time all but the tiniest card transactions are
authorized online with the bank.
R's,
John
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:38:26 -0400
From: bernieS <bernies@netaxs.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Fun with annoyance callers
Message-ID: <20110330133837.60105.qmail@gal.iecc.com>
Someone had some fun with one of those annoying telemarketers who
called and tried to sell him a bogus "Hacker Proof" product and
service. The called party did a nice job of social engineering on
the telemarketer, recorded the call, and created an amusing song from
the source material. All of it is here for your listening enjoyment:
http://www.paradoxexplorer.com/thoughtconduit/news?id=389
-bernieS
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:45:09 -0400
From: "Pete Cresswell" <x@y.Invalid>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: No Signal: Homes Often Baffle Wi-Fi From Routers
Message-ID: <qlc6p6hr2ij6113prf40bvd35ib357f80o@4ax.com>
Per John Mayson:
> Yet I
>still have hard to explain dead spots in my house, some even in the
>same room as my wireless router. I have tried every tweak I can find
>and nothing really helps.
I wound up with two hotspots instead of one.
The first one is the wireless router in my server closet - that
covers rec room and the bedrooms above.
The second is a router converted to just being a WAP located in
the kitchen - that covers kitchen, living room, and backyard
patio.
Besides the fifty bucks for the extra device, the only two
downsides I can see are:
- Having to pull Ethernet to the kitchen (which I did anyhow
to serve the new TV)
- Having to connect to one or the other device with the
Windows laptops. Windows allows specification of
a preferred device, but I still have to disconnect and
then reconnect if a laptop that's normally used in the
rec room is used in the living room.
Not a huge deal, but it would be a lot nicer if Windows
could make an intelligent choice based on signal strength.
--
PeteCresswell
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:56:33 +0100
From: Peter R Cook <PRCook@wisty.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: No Signal: Homes Often Baffle Wi-Fi From Routers
Message-ID: <phMgv1Lhz3kNFw5L@wisty.plus.com>
In message <qlc6p6hr2ij6113prf40bvd35ib357f80o@4ax.com>,
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> writes
>Per John Mayson:
>> Yet I
>>still have hard to explain dead spots in my house, some even in the
>>same room as my wireless router. I have tried every tweak I can find
>>and nothing really helps.
>
>I wound up with two hotspots instead of one.
>
>The first one is the wireless router in my server closet - that
>covers rec room and the bedrooms above.
>
>The second is a router converted to just being a WAP located in
>the kitchen - that covers kitchen, living room, and backyard
>patio.
>
>Besides the fifty bucks for the extra device, the only two
>downsides I can see are:
>
>- Having to pull Ethernet to the kitchen (which I did anyhow
> to serve the new TV)
>
>- Having to connect to one or the other device with the
> Windows laptops. Windows allows specification of
> a preferred device, but I still have to disconnect and
> then reconnect if a laptop that's normally used in the
> rec room is used in the living room.
>
> Not a huge deal, but it would be a lot nicer if Windows
> could make an intelligent choice based on signal strength.
Pete
As I understand it, if the two access points are on different channels,
but have the same SSID the Wireless client SHOULD do what you want and
roam to the strongest signal.
--
Peter R Cook
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:34:46 -0400
From: "Pete Cresswell" <x@y.Invalid>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: No-Call List Enforcement In USA: Dead or Dying?
Message-ID: <iac6p657g9si8qog9ako4utob1p1c3t32u@4ax.com>
I've been fairly diligent in registering complaints about
telephone solicitors to both the federal and Pennsylvania state
no-call list enforcers.
For some years, it seemed effective. Even got a check for a few
dollars from the Penna Attorney General as my part of some class
action suit they brought against a violator.
Over the past year or so, however, I've been getting a stream of
lame letters from the Penna Attorney General with statements so
the effect that telemarketers are going offshore and/or are using
VOIP providers to spoof and relay calls to the extent that
there's nothing that can be done.
This is coincident with a sharp rise in telemarketing calls to
both my home phones and my cell phone (the cell phone at .32 per
call yet.... and these guys' robo calling equipment even leaves
voicemail messages....so there's no escape via selective
answering).
"Lame" bc somehow I think that if those telemarketing calls were,
instead, threats to some person in high political office, that
effective action would be quickly taken.
Can anybody who really knows comment? Is No-Call List
enforcement really dead or dying?
Is there any technological solution here or on the horizon -
especially for cell phone users? Challenge/Response? Gold
Lists?
--
PeteCresswell
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:55:37 -0400
From: "Pete Cresswell" <x@y.Invalid>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: 'Robo-call' law in limbo after lawsuit fails
Message-ID: <oed6p6hb51hiesvf0ppuhdh6a484j1nkuk@4ax.com>
Per Michael Moroney:
>Speaking of which, how does "Rachel" and her gang get into the public
>telephone system with such high volume, undetected (undetected enough
>so that apparently nobody can seem to find them) ? VOIP?
According to the letters I've been getting from the Pennsylvania
Attorney General's office (in response to my filing complaints
about telemarketing calls to my cell phone), telemarketers are
using VOIP services to spoof callerIDs, relaying calls between
providers, and moving offshore - all of which, according the atty
gen's office, make prosecution impossible for them.
--
PeteCresswell
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:28:06 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: 'Robo-call' law in limbo after lawsuit fails
Message-ID: <imvelm$spv$3@reader1.panix.com>
In <oed6p6hb51hiesvf0ppuhdh6a484j1nkuk@4ax.com> "\(PeteCresswell\)" <x@y.Invalid> writes:
>Per Michael Moroney:
>>Speaking of which, how does "Rachel" and her gang get into the public
>>telephone system with such high volume, undetected (undetected enough
>>so that apparently nobody can seem to find them) ? VOIP?
>According to the letters I've been getting from the Pennsylvania
>Attorney General's office (in response to my filing complaints
>about telemarketing calls to my cell phone), telemarketers are
>using VOIP services to spoof callerIDs, relaying calls between
>providers, and moving offshore - all of which, according the atty
>gen's office, make prosecution impossible for them.
Which, of course, is total garbage. Just get ahold of someone
who's been scammed by these folk and trace the credit card
transaction.
Could "Rachel" get away with this for a few weeks? Sure. But
this specific group has been active for over a year. And
the calls are coming to my numbers in multiple parts of
the country.
- What I don't understand is why the FCC/FTC are doing
diddly squat. Well, I can understand why that would be
their initial position, but Congressional folk are getting
hefty numbers of complaints. (And they're getting their
own batch of calls, too).
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
***** Moderator's Note *****
Congressmen have all their numbers on a special "don't even think
about it" list, which every telemarketeer obeys carefully. After
all, Congressmen are much more important than ordinary people, so they
can't be having their time wasted.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 17:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: 'Robo-call' law in limbo after lawsuit fails
Message-ID: <imvpqn$5t3$1@reader1.panix.com>
In <imvelm$spv$3@reader1.panix.com> danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> writes:
[snippeth]
>- What I don't understand is why the FCC/FTC are doing
>diddly squat. Well, I can understand why that would be
>their initial position, but Congressional folk are getting
>hefty numbers of complaints. (And they're getting their
>own batch of calls, too).
>***** Moderator's Note *****
>Congressmen have all their numbers on a special "don't even think
>about it" list, which every telemarketeer obeys carefully. After
>all, Congressmen are much more important than ordinary people, so they
>can't be having their time wasted.
But that's part of why I don't understand the FTC/FCC ass sitting.
Senator Charles Schumer [D-NY] himself, while at a meeting on Capitol
Hill, got one of these calls to his cell phone. And he went publicly
ballistic over it. Yet this garbage, especially the "Rachel"
calls, continue to this day.
"But here comes the cavalry! Senator Chuck Schumer says
he's "had enough" - after getting a robocall about fraudulent
car warranty renewals during a health care meeting on Capitol
Hill last week, he held a Sunday press conference to demand a
Federal Trade Commission investigation into the businesses
behind the calls..."
http://gothamist.com/2009/05/11/schumer_calls_for_investigation_int.php
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:58:24 -0400
From: "\(PeteCresswell\)" <x@y.Invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Blocking Junk Calls
Message-ID: <6nd6p6dqrlkgltl0otgp66s8uvk2aok1ii@4ax.com>
Per Fred Atkinson:
> How come I almost never get telemarketing calls?
>
> I've been on that list for a couple of years on my current
>number. I had the same experience with my previous numbers.
A year ago, I would have said the same thing.
Keep your fingers crossed and count your blessings....
--
PeteCresswell
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 08:29:24 -0600
From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Blocking Junk Calls
Message-ID: <odf6p6te2ptjnqf8lvmre3tobb8mqos8f2@4ax.com>
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:58:24 -0400, "\(PeteCresswell\)"
<x@y.Invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote:
>Per Fred Atkinson:
>> How come I almost never get telemarketing calls?
>>
>> I've been on that list for a couple of years on my current
>>number. I had the same experience with my previous numbers.
>
>A year ago, I would have said the same thing.
>
>Keep your fingers crossed and count your blessings....
Well,
I'm still not getting telemarketing calls.
But if you've read my recent posts, I am getting annoyance
calls from some company in Harlingen, TX. They never say anything and
just hang up. And it comes from a bunch of different numbers [which I
keep blocking] all in Harlingen, TX according to the reverse lookup.
But I am unable to determine who they are. I've sent a letter
to the NM Attorney General and I'm waiting to see what they do.
Regards,
Fred
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:01:44 -0400
From: "PeteCresswell" <x@y.Invalid>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Very interesting product
Message-ID: <ndh6p6dsro77lptus3n5imrm7lk8r5menk@4ax.com>
Per John Mayson:
>I finally decided on Android and bought a Huawei Ideos 7" tablet.
>
>http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Huawei+-+Ideos+7%22+Tablet+S7+-+White/1411106.p?id=1218264013837&skuId=1411106
I'm probably looking right at it and not seeing... but does anybody
know what the screen rez is?
-- PeteCresswell
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:02:43 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: "Hotshot" dialers
Message-ID: <imvk73$8sp$1@reader1.panix.com>
Keywords: pots
Summary: need a
I'm seeking a one-button dialer. You push a button, and it dials
the number, pauses and dials the access code. In the early days
of MCI Execunet and such; they were as common as bedbugs are
now.
The one I want is not portable, wireless or even iPad
compatible. It installs inside or next to a 2500-type set,
(hopefully) runs off loop current, and has one button. You
program it and that's it.
Suggestions? eBay has dozens of "I've fallen and can't get up"
units but my searches otherwise come up snake eyes....
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:15:38 -0500
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: "Hotshot" dialers
Message-ID: <imvs0h$5gb$1@dont-email.me>
On 3/30/2011 11:02 AM, David Lesher wrote:
> I'm seeking a one-button dialer. You push a button, and it dials
> the number, pauses and dials the access code. In the early days
> of MCI Execunet and such; they were as common as bedbugs are
> now.
>
> The one I want is not portable, wireless or even iPad
> compatible. It installs inside or next to a 2500-type set,
> (hopefully) runs off loop current, and has one button. You
> program it and that's it.
>
> Suggestions? eBay has dozens of "I've fallen and can't get up"
> units but my searches otherwise come up snake eyes....
>
http://www.sandman.com/autodial.html
Sandman is (or was, anyhow, back in Pat's day) a supporter of Telecom
Digest, too.
Dave
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:44:22 -0400
From: Eric Tappert <e.tappert.spamnot@worldnet.att.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: "Hotshot" dialers
Message-ID: <kl17p6h16urtd1d3qp201ku6ccggunple1@4ax.com>
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:02:43 +0000 (UTC), David Lesher
<wb8foz@panix.com> wrote:
>I'm seeking a one-button dialer. You push a button, and it dials
>the number, pauses and dials the access code. In the early days
>of MCI Execunet and such; they were as common as bedbugs are
>now.
>
>The one I want is not portable, wireless or even iPad
>compatible. It installs inside or next to a 2500-type set,
>(hopefully) runs off loop current, and has one button. You
>program it and that's it.
>
>Suggestions? eBay has dozens of "I've fallen and can't get up"
>units but my searches otherwise come up snake eyes....
I googled "speed dialer" and got this on the first page:
http://www.telongo.com/auto-dialers/speed-dialers.html
I know nothing about the company, but there are other suppliers. This
function is also built into phones, such as speaker phones intended
for executives and/or working stiffs. See
http://www.diguniverse.com/TELECOM/CORDED-TELEPHONES/TDKX-TS550W.html
for a Panasonic phone with speed dialing.
Hope this helps.
ET
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition 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 Bill Horne. 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.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
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
Copyright (C) 2009 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.
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 The Telecom Digest (14 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues