28 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981

Classified Ads
TD Extra News

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

Message Digest 
Volume 28 : Issue 278 : "text" Format

Messages in this Issue:
  Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been.. 
  Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad 
  Re: Western Union's satellite loss 
  Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been.. 
  Re: Western Union's satellite loss 
  Re: Western Union's satellite loss 
  Re: Email scams: it's different when it's personal 
  Re: FCC Chairman: Bandwidth Shortage Threatens Future of Cell Phones 
  Another T-Mo service to bite the dust 

====== 28 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 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, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:43:41 +1100 From: David Clayton <dcstar@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been.. Message-ID: <pan.2009.> > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > As I said, tracking data is only useful when combined with other > information, but even then it poses problems: the cell phone may be at > a particular place at a particular time, and a prosecutor may be able to > prove that, but proving that a particular individual was at the place, > at that time, requires corroboration via other data. > > Paradoxically, it may become a valid defense for an accused person to > state under oath that (s)he switched his/her phone with someone else > because (s)he don't like the government being able to track his/her > movements. It isn't just governments, anyone who can get their hands on this information can effectively track someone for any sort of nefarious purpose - I wonder how much the industrial espionage sector has benefited by having access to the effective movement patterns of individuals courtesy of the equipment the individual themselves use? The argument that this data - which is in the hands of private companies - is secure may not hold much water with those who have seen supposedly confidential data leak out of these places on a regular basis - and we only ever hear about a fraction of the actual number of security breaches! -- 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: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:49:24 +0000 (UTC) From: ranck@vt.edu To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Message-ID: <hanf14$l1$1@solaris.cc.vt.edu> David Clayton <dcstar@nospam.myrealbox.com> wrote: > On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:13:29 -0400, ranck wrote: > > Uh, it should be much simpler than that. Really, all the card needs to > > "remember" is how much has been used as a total, it doesn't need to > > store transaction details. I'm not saying they don't store those > > details, but they really should not need to, and the merchant's machine > > has no need to be able to query previous transactions. It only needs to > > query how much "money" is available. If I were designing such a > > card/chip system and wanted to store transactions on the card itself I'd > > encrypt those so merchants could not get the info and only report back a > > maximum allowable charge amount when queried. But why store them at > > all? > > > Unfortunately the simple "Is the transaction under the limit" test doesn't > really work if the card number has also been used in a non-swipe mode, > such as an Internet purchase, where the chip does not get (immediately) > updated. Even using the card on non-chip EFTPOS terminals will not update > that info. But, none of that is mitigated by storing some transactions on the card/chip, so why bother? > > Do you know for a fact this info is stored on the card/chip? Do you > > have a reference to an article or technical description? > > > I don't have any specifics at the moment, but I recall being told at an > industry conference a year or so ago that one of the "features" of these > chip cards was that they would hold sufficient information/ability to do > off-line approvals of transactions based on previous use patterns - all in > the name of improved security. That pattern matching could be done on the card/chip and result in a yes/no report back to the merchant's machine. Again, no need to allow merchant machines to query transaction information from the card. In fact, the credit card companies probably consider transaction and purchase pattern info as a valuable resource, so they are unlikely to allow a merchant system to query it. It would also be illegal in some situations I can think of. I understand your concern. I just don't think any rational credit card company would allow any merchant to query transactions off a card. Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va.
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:48:49 -0700 From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss Message-ID: <siegman-4EEE75.07484909102009@news.stanford.edu> In article <965befa0-efc4-4515-b20e-1111430a7c47@e34g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > (This was the same bane of commuter railroads--the capital investment > of trains and stations had to be big enough to handle the rush hours, > but most of the time the investment was idle.) > Just realized: Can't recall ever seeing that same line of argument (capital investment, operating and maintenance and insurance and medical costs, and fraction of time idle) applied to the family car (and then integrated over a community, of course). ***** Moderator's Note ***** Ah, but having a car means you are in charge of your life and can do whatever you want. ;-) Ask any advertising executive: the investment isn't in the capability, it's in the possibility. Bill Horne, who has got to get that muffler fixed today ... Moderator
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 17:34:32 +0100 From: Peter R Cook <PCook@wisty.plus.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been.. Message-ID: <0b9x+fEYY2zKFwsr@wisty.plus.com> In message <1ojtc5lveosr7lvvf0kuov5hrssvavua5d@4ax.com>, "Tony Toews [MVP]" <ttoews@telusplanet.net> writes >hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > >>> Question to our knowledgable folk here: is enough of the phone's ID >>> transmitted in the clear when it does the periodic "here I am" ping >>> that people could track it? (Aside from the cellco, of course). >>> >>> In other words, could the NYPD, now that it's got this database, use >>> its own receivers to keep maps of everyone's travel? >> >>An enormous number of people in NYC are on their cell phones at any >>given moment. Even with today's technology I suspect the volume of >>calls and callers would be too high to be tracked. > >If the cell phone system can track the mere existence of a cell phone >and it's nearest tower and if the software exists in the cell command >and control ssytem then I see no reason why the "volume of calls and >callers would be too high to be tracked." Just throw some more >hardware at the problem. > >Tony Try www.childlocate.co.uk -- Peter R Cook
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 10:35:57 -0700 (PDT) From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss Message-ID: <68bd3da9-943f-4510-a689-208704c5c16c@t2g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> On Oct 9, 1:14 am, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote: > For commuter railroads, the biggest problem was competition from > highways that were publicly funded and paid no taxes.  I agree > that streetcards were killed by the well known NCL conspiracy > between GM and oil companies. That was clearly demonstrated in Philadelphia. After the NCL takeover the system immediately purchased 1,000 GMC buses to replace streetcars. Telecom refs: The transit company had a massive private dial telephone system throughout the city, as did most transit carriers. The suburban carrier and the Reading Railroad used magneto (local battery) phones. The stuff was upgraded in the 1980s. It used to be standard that subway tunnels had phones in case a train broke down and the motorman had to call for assistance. Trains have radios now. I wonder if the tunnel phones are still there and working or have been vandalized or eliminated. Many commuter train tunnels, such as under the Hudson and East Rivers in NYC, are wired so that cellphones work in them. But many subway tunnels are not, though transit carriers are negotiating deals with cellphone companies. A lot of people are opposed to this since they don't want cell phone yakkers on the subway trains. I agree. The pioneer automated Metroliner train phone was a prototype for tunnel antennas and the celluar 'handoff' technology. Getting radio waves to propagate properly in a tunnel is not easy. Speaking of modern technology, one thing I dislike on new subway cars are automated announcements. They are frequent and constant, and give the train a "1984" atmosphere. In old sci-fi movies the idea of computerized announcements was always shown as an undesirable aspect of future life when humans were enslaved. I recently rode an older subway car without the automation and while the train was noisier overall, the absence of constant announcements was quite pleasant.
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 12:37:52 -0700 From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss Message-ID: <hao3ei$g08$1@news.eternal-september.org> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> ***** Moderator's Note ***** >> >> I doubt it was that simple: operators may not have been needed in >> off-peak hours, but they still had to earn enough to make a living, >> and telco managers knew that. Automated switch gear, although >> initially expensive, also meant the operating companies could avoid >> training costs, wages, and retirement benefits for operators. > > Back in the peak days of manual service--the 1910s when telephone > usage was high but virtually all manual--compensation was very low. > The young women could only afford to live in rooming houses or doubled > up. There were virtually no benefits, nor any payroll taxes in those > days. Most were doing the job only until they found a husband which > was the norm in those days. The job of a basic A or B operator was > very simple and required little training, supervision was intensive. > Even back then the boards had automatic ringing. The more experienced > operators would handle long distance or supervision. > > WW I drove up wages and increased traffic which changed the wage/ > capital balance and motivated Bell to develop panel for big cities and > use step for community dial offices too small to justify paying an > operator 24/7. But intermediate offices remain manual for many years. > > The cost of converting to dial was substantial. New dial sets had to > be installed at every subscriber, a big labor cost. Subscribers had > to be educated on how to use dial; they even sent out people door to > door to do so plus extensive publicity campaigns. Engineers had to > study the geography and commerce of the area to plan for future growth > and capacity requirements. The switch had to be custom designed for > that location, then built, then installed. Men had to be trained to > maintain the switch which was much more complex than a switchboard. > Arrangements for dial connections to/from nearby offices had to be > arranged, including trunking. Cutover required busying out > interoffice trunks, holding most calls, providing for emergency calls, > making the cut, checking it, and resuming service. If an emergency > call came in the cutover had to wait. (Ref: Cinn Bell writeup on > cutover). The Bell System cared about its operators and made > arrangements long in advance to mimize layoffs. Offices planned for > dial would freeze hiring, and temps used if needed. > > Cutover to dial still required many operators for DA, assistance, and > long distance. (In 1970, Bell pay phones at a resort hotel were > _manual_, answered by a toll operator on the presumption that any > guest using a phone would be calling long distance and needed the toll > operator anyway.) > The same thing happened in the early 70's when TSPS came along, GTE in Calif. dropped over 50% of toll operators. -- The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) 2009 I Kill Spammers, inc, A Rot in Hell. Co.
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:11:01 -0400 From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Email scams: it's different when it's personal Message-ID: <op.u1jzwnipo63xbg@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:08:46 -0400, <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote, inter alia: > ... [much snipped] ... > > Web browsers should not be so damn automated that the mere opening of > an email triggers all sorts of havoc. I quite agree. No reason to allow iFrames, or ActiveX, or cross-site scripting, copy/pasting, or the like. And even most pages that do use these abominations seem to have more static work-arounds in place so that, even though I refuse such actions, their pages load usably anyway. One notable exception (OK, two really): the T-Mobile Forums and my.t-mobile sites. Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:20:58 -0700 From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: FCC Chairman: Bandwidth Shortage Threatens Future of Cell Phones Message-ID: <_jRzm.238884$cf6.230927@newsfe16.iad> Steven wrote: > Sam Spade wrote: > >> John Mayson wrote: >> >>> SAN DIEGO - The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission >>> warned Wednesday of "a looming spectrum crisis" if the government >>> fails to find ways to come up with more bandwidth for mobile devices. >>> >>> Julius Genachowski said the government is tripling the amount of >>> spectrum available for commercial uses. The problem is that many >>> industry experts predict wireless traffic will increase 30 times >>> because of online video and other bandwidth-heavy applications. >>> >>> More at... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,562420,00.html >> >> >> Maybe it will all die a natural death, then folks can rediscover >> wireline service. >> >> ***** Moderator's Note ***** >> >> There will be a couple of generations before cellular users get tired >> of their electronic leash: as I've been saying for a long time, the >> only thing money can really buy is the right to be left alone. >> >> I don't know if the backlash will start because of the cellular >> generation getting older and wiser, or because some efficiency expert >> will prove how much being constantly turned on impairs real >> productivity - but it will happen. >> >> Bill Horne >> Moderator >> > And we will be going back to SXS, regulation and The Bell System. > Well, we are already headed back to the Bell System, wireline or wireless. Regulation? I think not except perhaps more cops to stop the highway deaths from wireless "communications." SXS? Are you even remotely serious? If so, then we can exchange modern cars for Model Ts and perhaps the highway deaths from the inane use of wireless will dramatically decrease. (tongue embedded in cheek mode)
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:24:02 -0400 From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Another T-Mo service to bite the dust Message-ID: <op.u1j0icdao63xbg@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> Arriving to my T-Mobile handset's SMS inbox, the afternoon of Oct. 8: | T-Mobile will no longer offer scheduled or on demand SMS (text) | alerts as of 10.13.2009. Your other T-Mobile services will not be | affected by this change. Mmphh! Five days' notice for such a service reduction? On the heels of their (now rescinded) $1.50/mo. paper-billing surcharge? What's the point, now, of the 300 SMS message bucket on my plan? I've been getting two stock quotes, two News-of-the-Day, and one weather alert each day -- I'll miss those! Outlandish! Comments? Advice or suggestions? TIA. And cheers, -- tlvp
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. Contact information: Bill Horne Telecom Digest 43 Deerfield Road Sharon MA 02067-2301 781-784-7287 bill at horne dot net Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom 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 (9 messages)

Return to Archives**Older Issues