30 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for December 19, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 323 : "text" Format
====== 30 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 that person, or email address
owner.
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of
that address. 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: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 12:04:41 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstarbox-usenet@yahoo.com.au>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Voice mail auto delete
Message-ID: <pan.2011.12.18.01.04.38.759266@yahoo.com.au>
Some people may be aware of the goings-on in the U.K. over "phone hacking"
which led to the closure of the newspaper "News of the World" and is still
the subject of a parliamentary commission.
One thing which arose this week was in regard to an issue with "hacking"
the private voice mail of a person to listen to their messages,
specifically in regards to a missing person who's voice mail quota was
full and rejecting new messages only to suddenly accept messages in the
middle of the police investigation and misleading the police as to whether
this person was actually still alive.
The upshot was that when it was eventually discovered that the voice mail
was hacked, the people doing the hacking were blamed for deleting the
messages and therefore causing many other issues (apart from illegally
accessing the voice mail).
Now it is claimed that the voice mail messages would be deleted
automatically and therefore the "hackers" were not responsible for the
message deletions, but my understanding is that only played messages
would be auto-deleted, not the unheard ones, but this could also vary with
each network.
If in this particular circumstance the played messages were subsequently
auto-deleted to make space for new ones, then those doing the hacking were
still responsible.
Does anyone know what the current methods/rules are for the various voice
mail services in use around the world?
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:24:08 -0600
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Voice mail auto delete
Message-ID: <EPednfrv4eNFoHPTnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <XgLG3B.A.8nF.Nwh7OB@telecom>,
David Clayton <dcstarbox-usenet@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>Now it is claimed that the voice mail messages would be deleted
>automatically and therefore the "hackers" were not responsible for the
>message deletions, but my understanding is that only played messages
>would be auto-deleted, not the unheard ones, but this could also vary with
>each network.
I definitely varies by voice-mail service.
On (at least) large-scale VM systems, e.g. 'Octel', there are configuration
options to auto-delete messages -- 'heard' or 'un-heard' -- after a specified
number of days; unless the message has specifically been marked as 'saved'.
There is a 'system default' value, plus over-rides by 'class of service',
and individual account.
Small corporate VM systems may behave significantly differently.
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:36:02 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstarbox-usenet@yahoo.com.au>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Voice mail auto delete
Message-ID: <pan.2011.12.18.22.35.34.156250@yahoo.com.au>
On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:24:08 -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article <XgLG3B.A.8nF.Nwh7OB@telecom>, David Clayton
> <dcstarbox-usenet@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>Now it is claimed that the voice mail messages would be deleted
>>automatically and therefore the "hackers" were not responsible for the
>>message deletions, but my understanding is that only played messages
>>would be auto-deleted, not the unheard ones, but this could also vary
>>with each network.
>
> It definitely varies by voice-mail service.
>
> On (at least) large-scale VM systems, e.g. 'Octel', there are
> configuration options to auto-delete messages -- 'heard' or 'un-heard' --
> after a specified number of days; unless the message has specifically
> been marked as 'saved'.
>
> There is a 'system default' value, plus over-rides by 'class of service',
> and individual account.
>
> Small corporate VM systems may behave significantly differently.
That's what I would have thought, in the case I outlined it would have
been a major UK telco so I assume that they would have a reasonable policy
of retaining all unheard messages (which was implied by the statements of
not being able to leave a new VM when it was full), but more than likely
would auto-discard listened to messages (which was also implied by the
ability to leave new VMs after the mailbox was "hacked").
I wonder if any UK readers of the CDT have any more info on this?
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 19:00:46 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Reframing the Debate Over Using Phones Behind the Wheel
Message-ID: <p06240858cb142a43b4f2@[10.0.1.3]>
Reframing the Debate Over Using Phones Behind the Wheel
By MATT RICHTEL
December 17, 2011
For years, policy makers trying to curb distracted driving have
compared the problem to drunken driving. The analogy seemed fitting,
with drivers weaving down roads and rationalizing behavior that they
knew could be deadly.
But on Tuesday, in an emotional call for states to ban all phone use
by drivers, the head of a federal agency introduced a new comparison:
distracted driving is like smoking.
The shift in language, in comments by Deborah Hersman, the chairwoman
of the National Transportation Safety Board, opened a new front in a
continuing national conversation about a deadly habit that safety
advocates are trying desperately, and with a growing sense of
futility, to stop.
Her new tack also echoes a growing consensus among scientists that
using phones and computers can be compulsive, both emotionally and
physically, which helps explain why drivers may have trouble turning
off their devices even if they want to. In effect, they are saying
that the running joke about BlackBerrys as "CrackBerrys" is more
serious than people think.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/us/reframing-the-debate-over-using-phones-while-driving.html
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) 2011 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 (4 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues