|
Computer Privacy Digest Vol 2 #003
NOTICE: TO ALL CONCERNED Certain text files and messages contained on this site deal with activities and devices which would be in violation of various Federal, State, and local laws if actually carried out or constructed. The webmasters of this site do not advocate the breaking of any law. Our text files and message bases are for informational purposes only. We recommend that you contact your local law enforcement officials before undertaking any project based upon any information obtained from this or any other web site. We do not guarantee that any of the information contained on this system is correct, workable, or factual. We are not responsible for, nor do we assume any liability for, damages resulting from the use of any information on this site.
Computer Privacy Digest Thu, 07 Jan 93 Volume 2 : Issue: 003
Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears
Detector Detectors (WAS Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions)
Akron BBS Trial Delayed
Re: RSA Algorithm
Re: The UPS clipboard
Re: Ownership of Telephone Numbers
Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions
Re: Zip+4 Problems?
Re: Zip+4 Problems?
Re: Zip+4 Problems?
Re: Zip+4 Problems?
The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the
effect of technology on privacy. The digest is moderated and
gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy
(Moderated). Submissions should be sent to
[email protected] and administrative requests to
[email protected].
Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil
[129.139.160.133].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 11:10:21 EST
From: Alton Jay Mitchell <ajaym@ihlpe.att.com>
Subject: Detector Detectors (WAS Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions)
Organization: AT&T
>
> These "radar detector detectors" probably operate by looking for
> spurious microwave local oscillator radiation from the detectors. Any
> superhet or synchrodyne detector is going to have a local oscillator,
> and shielding it sufficiently is probably too expensive. Too much
> leaks back through the mixer to the antenna.
Does anyone have any information as to how close the detector detector
has to be for an positive identification?
------------------------------
Date: 01 Jan 93 13:07:23 EST
From: David Lehrer <71756.2116@compuserve.com>
Subject: Akron BBS Trial Delayed
=
AKRON BBS TRIAL DELAYED
The Akron BBS Trial originally scheduled for Monday, January 4,
1993 has was continued--will *not* happen Monday the 4th. A new
trial date was not determined. Mark Lehrer's attorney requested
the continuance and since Summit County Prosecutor Lynn Slaby
assigned a new prosecutor 'due to calendar year rotation' was not
resisted.
David Lehrer
=
Distribution:
>internet:[email protected]
------------------------------
From: D Anton Sherwood <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: RSA Algorithm
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 10:20:20 GMT
In article <[email protected]> David O Hunt <[email protected]> writes:
>
>Could someone please explain the RSA algorithm to me - the part that REALLY
>confuses me is how one key can remain public but not be useable to decrypt.
The two keys are complementary. What is encrypted with the private key is
decrypted only with the public key; what is encrypted with the public key is
decrypted only with the private key.
--
Anton Sherwood [email protected]
+1 415 267 0685 1800 Market St #207, San Francisco 94102 USA
"We all hate poverty, war and injustice, unlike the rest of you squares."
------------------------------
From: Jarrod Staffen <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The UPS clipboard
Date: 3 Jan 93 00:51:05 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.
Well, when I worked at UPS (last year), I was constantly in contact with
those clipboards, and it would have taken very little for me or anyone
with the huevos to do some tampering. The fact is, yes it would be
quite challenging to get away with a data heist. But if I had no class,
and could be bought, I know I could find a group of 10 guys to pose
as UPS employees, get past the security gates, walk into a sorting hub,
and nab just as much information as we wanted. Not just electronic
clipboards, but all shipping info that gets scanned. This constitutes
all Next-day air and 2nd day air shipping (Customer record, date of delivery,
sorting pedigree, useless as any of this info may seem).
BTW, UPS is not ignoring security risks. They just ignore people
who ask about safety risks. They know what is possible. But they
do throw some __HEAVY__ penalties for anybody who screws with them.
Any employee of UPS knows the word FELONY, and how easy it could be
to have that word stamped across their forehead. People aren't stupid,
and neither is UPS. They don't typically hire anyone without getting
a complete sample of fingerprints, handwriting & print, photo,
etc, etc. including an FBI check or equavelent.
IMO, though, I think they should do something more to ensure the
safety of their electronic data.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jarrod Staffen Spontaneity has
[email protected] its time and place.
* The opinions expressed here are not claimed or supported by anyone. *
------------------------------
From: Daniel Burstein <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Ownership of Telephone Numbers
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 03:06:33 GMT
Organization: Panix, NYC
regarding "moving" an "800" number from one carrier to another. This is a
VERY special situation that just started.
history: In the OLD days, the first three digits of the 800 number (after
the 800, that is) defined where the call was supposed to wind up. So, for
example, 800-225-xxxx was the Boston area.
(Oh, the fun we used to be able to have with that...)
More or less 15 years ago, ATT modifed their system so that each 800
number dialed was "looked up" in a central system, and "converted" to a
more normal number. This allowed any 800 user anywhere in teh country to
get whatever number they (or ATT) wanted them to have. Lots of other
advantages to this as well, such as time of day routing, call originiation
routing, etc.
Once divestiture took place (i.e, the breakup of ATT), the original
procedure used with 800 numbers was to give certain prefixes to ATT,
others to MCI, Allnet, etc. So, for example, ATT might have the 800-225
exchange, but 800-950- would belong to MCI.
Move a few years forward. The various carriers all complained that they
couldn't swap numbers, which meant that a customer with, say,
1-800-225-9901 was an ATT client, and could NOT switch carriers while
keeping hte same number.
The FCC listened to this, saw that computer technology had (somewhat)
improved(?), and ordered that just about all 800 exchanges be opened to
every carrier. So.... more or less the following now happens when you
"dial" an 800 number.
1) The call is "held" at the local central office, while
2) a query is made to some sort of centralized data base (I have -no- idea
who figures out who runs this, or charges for it).
3( the info as to who owns the number, which lines to push it through,
etc., are relayd back to the CO, and the call is connected.
danny (how can they call it a video dial tone?) burstein
[email protected]
------------------------------
From: Richard Pierson <[email protected].com>
Subject: Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions
Reply-To: Richard Pierson <[email protected].com>
Organization: Leave the %$##@#$ Bylaws ALONE !!!
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 17:01:13 GMT
There is also a product on the market from uniden that
you plug your detector into and when is senses a radar
detector shuts off your radar unit, a Detectors, detector,
detector so to say (Just saw one in truckstops of america
last wednesday for $90.00).
Wonder how long it'll be before chip registration is required
and eprom programmers are licensed by the govt.
--
##########################################################
There are only two types of ships in the NAVY; SUBMARINES
and TARGETS !!!
#1/XS1100LH #2/10/10/92
Richard Pierson E06584 vnet: [908] 699-6063
Internet: [email protected].com,|| UUNET:uunet!bcr!fist
#include <std.disclaimer> My opinions are my own!!!
I Don't shop in malls, I BUY my jeans, jackets and ammo
in the same store.
------------------------------
From: Esther Lumsdon <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Zip+4 Problems?
Organization: Verdix Corp
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 23:17:31 GMT
Dick Grady <[email protected]> writes:
>In article <[email protected]> Dewey Coffman <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>
>> I'm a big fan of using my Zip+4 on my mail, does giving out this
>> "extra" +4 of zip code give out any more info about yourself
>> other than "where to send the mail"?
There is a small problem related to Zip+4. After you decide to possibly
give away some privacy by filing an address forwarding order with the
Post Office, you need to fill it out carefully. Do not use the Zip+4
on your old address, or only mail with that Zip+4 will get forwarded to
you. Yup, I did this once.
--
------ Esther Lumsdon Product Support Engineer, Verdix Corporation
205 Van Buren St Herndon, Virginia, USA
[email protected] or esther%[email protected]
------------------------------
From: Hans Lachman <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Zip+4 Problems?
Organization: Netcom
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 00:53:02 GMT
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:
>instead of putting name and address for my return address on bills, etc.,
>I simply put my plus-four zip in the upper left hand corner and leave the
>other lines blank....
I used to put only my last name, apartment number, and Zip+4 code on the
return address space on bills. I thought this would be enough since the
Zip+4 code identified a group of 7 apartments. Once I forgot to put stamps
on my mail, and the letters did get returned to me, but via the Dead Letter
Office. My return address info was considered "insufficient" so they opened
each piece to see exactly where it should be returned.
Hans Lachman
[email protected]
------------------------------
From: "M. Adams/StarOwl" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Zip+4 Problems?
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:12:13 GMT
Dick Grady <[email protected]> writes:
>No. In fact, it usually is a little less specific than your street
>address. For example, on my street, there are about 10 houses per "+4"
>code.
Actually, it depends on just where you live. In my parents' neighborhood
it works out to one ZIP+4 code per half-block.
However, in some locations, individual post-office boxes have their own
ZIP+4 code. For awhile, my mailing address was PO Box 4####, Memphis, TN,
38174-####. Not that that gives anyone any indication where I live.... ;)
And going to the extreme...I currently live at a unique address that is
served by not one, but two ZIP+4 codes -- one for this address, and one
for this block.
Of course, that might be because I live in a church.... ;)
--
Michael D. Adams | Bigotry not being founded on reason cannot be
[email protected] | removed by argument. -- Samuel Johnson
[email protected] | There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned
NBCS: B1f+t-w+g+k++s+me+h-qv | lies, and statistics. -- Benjamin Disraeli
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Zip+4 Problems?
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:41:08 -0600 (CST)
From: Ron Bean <nicmad!madnix!zaphod%[email protected]>
Ed Ravin <[email protected]> writes:
>As you may have guessed already, because of these databases, it doesn't
>matter a whole lot whether you supply your ZIP+4 to someone who wants it--
>they can always look it up themselves. The databases software allows you
>to supply a street address and city name or ZIP code and it spits out
>the corrected street name (standardized spellings, etc) and the ZIP+4.
This can also cause them to generate the wrong zipcode
(including the 5-digit part) if there's another street with a
similar (mis)spelling. And I frequently recieve mail with the
right zip+4 but the wrong city, because I live near the boundary
between two cities that have overlapping zipcodes.
==================
[email protected] (Ron Bean)
uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V2 #003
******************************
|
|
