Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA14859; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 09:07:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 09:07:03 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199702241407.JAA14859@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #51 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Feb 97 09:07:00 EST Volume 17 : Issue 51 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Hacker Challenges Dark Side Book (Tad Cook) CC Docket No 96-263 and Southwestern Bell's Solution (Simple Nomad) Re: CC Docket No 96-263 and Southwestern Bell's Solution (Jeff LaCoursiere) Hurdle Cleared in Pac Bell/SWBT Merger (Tad Cook) URL Correction in "SMS Database Searchable?" (Judith Oppenheimer) 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 public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@massis.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* 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 twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Hacker Challenges Dark Side Book Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 00:48:43 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Hacker challenges `dark side' book By Simson Garfinkel Special to the Mercury News KEVIN Poulsen was one of the most talented "dark side hackers" ever to phreak a phone call. For more than two years, Poulsen lived the life of a fugitive as part of the seedy Los Angeles underground. He made money by reprogramming Pacific Bell's computers for pimps and escort services, re-activating old telephone numbers and building a voice-mail network pairing prostitutes with their johns. And he cleaned up by messing with the phones used by Los Angeles radio stations, rigging their call-in contests so that he would always win the big bucks or the car. But Poulsen got caught and he spent more than five years in jail. Behind bars in 1993, Poulsen did what any phone phreak would do: He picked up the pay phone and started making collect calls. But these calls where different: they went to Jonathan Littman, a journalist in Mill Valley who had just published a magazine article about Poulsen's crimes and exploits and was about to write a book on the same topic. Poulsen wanted to make sure that Littman got the story right. He felt that Littman had made a lot of mistakes in the magazine article. Today, Poulsen feels somewhat betrayed by the journalist to whom he gave total access. After reading an advance copy of Littman's book, Poulsen says Littman has twisted the truth in order to make a more compelling story. "Most of my complaints about Littman's book are small things," said Poulsen, who is on parole and living in Sherman Oaks, a Los Angeles suburb. "He has major events right but then he changes the meaning of them by changing minor events and making up quotes." Littman stands by his work. The book, "The Watchman: The Twisted Life and Crimes of Serial Hacker Kevin Poulsen," is due to be published next month by Little, Brown and Co. It's an insider's look at the world of a criminal computer hacker, one of the most detailed yet published. "He was one of the first to hack the Internet and get busted for it," said Littman, referring to Poulsen's 1984 arrest for breaking into university computers on the ARPAnet, predecessor to today's Internet. "They decided not to prosecute him because he was 17" when he was arrested, Littman said. Instead, Poulsen was hired by a Silicon Valley defense contractor. "It was every hacker's dream -- to commit a crime and instead of going to jail, to get a job with what was a top think tank and defense contractor," Littman said. Soon, however, Poulsen was back to his old tricks -- with a vengeance, according to the book. He started physically breaking into Pacific Bell offices, stealing manuals and writing down passwords. Much of what he found went into a storage locker. But Poulsen couldn't handle his finances, and got behind in his rent. When the locker company broke open Poulsen's lock his stash was discovered and a trap was laid. As the FBI closed in, Poulsen left town, a fugitive on the run. Guilty plea He was caught June 21, 1991, and spent nearly three years in pre-trial detention. On June 14, 1994, in federal court in Southern California, he pleaded guilty to seven counts of computer fraud, interception of wire communications, mail fraud, money laundering and obstruction of justice. He was then transferred to Northern California to face a spying charge, based on his possession of material the government called classified. He pleaded guilty to fraud, possession of unauthorized access devices and fraudulent use of a Social Security number, and was released June 4, last year. The Watchman is Littman's second book on the computer hacker underground. His first, "The Fugitive Game," followed the exploits of hacker Kevin Mitnick, who was on the run and eventually caught by computer security expert Tsutomu Shimomura and New York Times reporter John Markoff. Shimomura and Markoff wrote their own book describing the chase, and they both objected to Littman's version of the events. For his part, Poulsen seems most angry about the implication of the new book's title -- that he was somehow obsessed with eavesdropping and largely acted alone. Only two wiretaps In the book, Littman has Poulsen listening to dozens of conversations -- even wiretapping the telephones of people trying to sell used equipment through newspaper classified ads, to see if they are being honest with their prices. Poulsen insists that he wiretapped the telephones of only two people: another hacker who was also an FBI informant and his high-school girlfriend. "He also reports that I obsessively followed the details of every escort date, including details of the tricks," Poulsen says, among other complaints. "He made that up. Totally made that up." Littman denies making up quotes, and insists that everything in the book was told to him by one of the participants. "I've written a book about a very complicated story about controversial people who had very different versions of what happened," Littman said. "I've done the best I can to view them objectively. Somebody else might view them differently, and the participants obviously have a subjective perspective. My views are in the book." But Poulsen says that Littman's fundamental premise is flawed. "John had a problem in writing this book," Poulsen said. "He wanted to sell it as the troubled loner-hacker-stalker guy. The problem is I had five co-defendants and it is hard to portray someone as a troubled loner when you have five other people making it happen." Not a loner Ron Austin, Poulsen's friend and co-conspirator, agrees. "Littman has to write an interesting book, I guess," he said. "He downplays the role of a lot of people, but I think that's because he is writing a book about Kevin. My role is downplayed." Austin also said the role of Justin Petersen, a hard-rocking hacker and co-conspirator is underplayed. Austin, also on parole, said he is concerned that the controversy regarding Littman's portrayal of Poulsen might obscure some of the more important issues raised by Littman's book: That the FBI engaged in widespread wiretapping of foreign consulates in the San Francisco area, the FBI's apparent hiring of an informant to commit illegal acts on the agency's behalf, and that the FBI's apparent ability to decrypt files on Poulsen's computer that had been encrypted with the U.S. government's Data Encryption Standard, a popular data-scrambling algorithm. The FBI office in Los Angeles declined to comment on the Poulsen case. A representative of the FBI's Washington office said, "We normally do not comment on books that are coming out until we have had an opportunity to review the book." As a condition of his plea bargain, Poulsen is prohibited from discussing FBI wiretaps. Littman said he feels "lucky as a writer to have been able to spend some time with Poulsen and these other characters in the story." "One thing about Poulsen is he really had a very highly developed ethical model that he believed in," Littman said. "He found it challenged by his circumstances and the people he associated with. I found it fascinating to see how he resolved this age-old computer hacker ethic with a changing world." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 17:06:28 -0600 From: Simple Nomad Subject: CC Docket No 96-263 and Southwestern Bell's Solution It is very interesting that Southwestern Bell would be party to a complaint to the FCC about Internet users hogging their voice network resources, when they already have a solution that they are marketing. The complaint, before the FCC as CC Docket No 96-263, is a request for "per minute" pricing, is intended to get a chunk of data traffic, aka Internet access, off voice networks. But Southwestern Bell already has a plan to do just that. That's right, SBC Communications aka Southwestern Bell announced last January 14th in California that it had a solution to get data users off of voice networks and onto their own separate network. Internet/ Intranet Transport Services, or IITS, has been quietly tested with two ISPs in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area for months, and is now available in the Dallas/Ft. Worth metroplex, Austin, Houston, San Antonio, St. Louis, Kansas City, Topeka, Wichita, Tulsa, Oklahoma City, and Little Rock. Other areas in TX, OK, AR, KS, and MO are targeted for later this year. The service, aimed exclusively at ISPs, has several advantages for everyone: - Since Southwestern Bell maintains the modem pool, the ISP can get rid of modems. - Faster and more reliable connections for users since they no longer compete with voice network users. - SWB gets Internet users off their voice network and has a new revenue stream. - Eventually SWB could sell this to large companies that have home users. - Current support up to 33.6Kbps, with 56Kbps on the way. The technology, developed by Technology Resources Inc. (R & D for SBC) and Northern Telecom (Nortel), works like this -- IITS recognizes the call is a data call and redirects it at the originating switch to the appropriate ISP over a frame relay connection directly to the ISP, bypassing the voice network, being pumped in over 1.5Mbps (180 simultaneous users) or 45Mbps (5040 simultaneous users) lines. Pricing is a "per port" rate plus the monthly high speed pipe. All the ISP needs is a router that supports Layer 2 Forwarding protocol -- normal authentication takes place, and supposedly admins at ISPs can have some degree of control over their ports (knocking down a hosed user, set timers for inactivity). SBC wants to keep their "intelligent" switches that do this routing at about 75% capacity to leave room for "quick growth needs" as they arise. And since (by SBC's projections) the cost would save ISPs 20% over the old ISP-owned modem pool solution, it is expected to be an easy sell, especially for ISPs just starting up and not wanting to fork out the expense for buying and maintaining a modem pool. What SHOULD the target area be? California. By some estimates, 40% of the U.S.'s Internet activity starts or involves California. California residents have been complaining about access problems, several second delays before getting a dial tone after lifting the receiver, and calls not going through. THIS is the reason for the push for a "per minute" rate, and I would hope that the FCC would have enough sense to not honor CC Docket No 96-263 with anything except a statement that says "you have your own solution already, implement it". Now let's hope that CC Docket No 96-263 can be put behind us, since the dozens of players behind this odd request already have a solution developed, tested, and being implemented. Simple Nomad February 22, 1997 Nomad Mobile Research Centre ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 18:27:26 CST From: Jeffrey D. LaCoursiere Subject: Re: CC Docket No 96-263 and Southwestern Bell's Solution I have been to SWB's presentation of IITS, and I can tell you that we won't be using it if we can help it. I have enough trouble with Bell as it is, and I'll be !$#% if I am going to let THEM control the one thing that seperates ISP's today (IMHO), modem uptime. In addition, we do clever things with routing (proxy arp, switched ethernet behind modems, etc.) that will be impossible to reproduce using IITS. No SNMP access. No access to ARP tables. We also have some scalability concerns. All this aside, I think they will probably sell quite a few of them, especially if they force us into it. For example, I cannot get any more trunks in downtown Dallas until June. If I hit capacity in Dallas before then, what am I supposed to do? Their answer: IITS. Hmmm. If they are going to take the trouble to intelligently switch calls to the voice or data networks, I say put our PRI's on the data network and switch the calls to us exactly as they are switching them to the IITS equipment now. It would have the same effect, as far as seperating the modem calls from the voice network, and I would get to keep my modems. Even though IITS is up and running today, there are very few CO's that use the switching equipment needed to get the modem calls off the voice network. Even if I were to replace all of my PRI's with IITS, 90% of the callers into my service would still use up voice trunks. It will take time to deploy the switching equipment. Lastly, what the heck does Bell know about this business? We have all witnessed large ISP's growing very fast take big dips in customer satisfaction. What happens when IITS grows faster than they can handle it? Will I have to put up with their inability to handle the growth and quirks of something on the very bleeding edge of technology? While all my customers go elsewhere? I don't want to be the guinea pig myself. I would think most medium->large ISP's feel the same. Hell, it took a good year and a half to stabalize our service to my own satisfaction. So will it be an easy sell? Not to me. Not to horribly change the subject -- the FCC docket is the main idea here, and I agree that it should be shot down. But IMHO, IITS is _NOT_ the answer. Jeff LaCoursiere President FastLane Communications, Inc. ------------------------------ Subject: Hurdle Cleared in Pac Bell/SWBT Merger Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 12:13:44 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Hurdle cleared in phone merger But Pac Bell faces $590.5 million refund order By Howard Bryant Mercury News Staff Writer An administrative law judge of the California Public Utilities Commission Friday approved the $24 billion takeover of Pacific Telesis Group by Texas-based Southwestern Bell Communications Inc., but on the condition Pacific Bell first refund $590.5 million to customers. The proposed decision is the first major step toward what could be the nation's initial joining of regional Bell phone companies. Oral arguments over the decision begin March 14, and the full commission could vote on the takeover as early as March 18. It's expected the deal will ultimately be approved, and if that happens, the takeover will represent one of California's biggest utilities being owned by an out-of-state interest. In her ruling, Judge Kim Malcolm also said Pac Bell must continue its commitment to providing service in poor neighborhoods. Until they make a final decision, the five PUC commissioners can rewrite or reject the proposed decision, or instruct Malcolm to make another finding. Observers already say some major retooling of the proposed decision is likely, especially the $590.5 million refund figure. "If the commission adopts this proposed decision, it's a significant win for ratepayers," said Helen Mickiewicz, attorney for the PUC's Office of Ratepayer Advocates. "But their track record tends to suggest that they will keep the refund amount to a minimum." State law requires merging utilities to refund to the public at least half the savings realized from any deal. The judge said that the takeover -- which came as a shocker when announced last April -- would garner savings of $1.181 billion. Her decision would return half that amount, to be paid to customers over a five-year period. PUC attorney Janice Grau said that while the $590.5 million represents a few cents refund on an average telephone bill for Pac Bell's 10 million customers, paying out nearly $600 million is a significant hit. It's not yet clear whether refunds would actually be paid to customers, or whether amounts would instead be credited on bills. It also remains to be determined how former customers might be affected. Contested figures Not surprisingly, Pac Tel's anticipated savings are in dispute. TURN, the San Francisco-based watchdog group, had asked the PUC to order a $1 billion refund, while the Office of Ratepayer Advocates had sought $2.1 billion. Pac Tel, meanwhile, had asked the PUC to grant only $200 million. "The proposed decision shortchanges ratepayers by a significant amount," said Tom Long, telecommunications attorney for TURN. "What the decision doesn't seem to reflect is that merging these two companies will cost more at first, but after five years, the full savings will start to kick in." Pac Tel executive vice president Dick Odgers said he was very disappointed by the judge's ruling, and that the proposed decision was a "gross overestimation" of Pac Bell's savings. The decision represents a mindset "many years behind the times," he said. If approved, Pac Bell will be a wholly owned subsidiary of Texas-based Southwest Bell. Out-of-state ownership of California's biggest telephone company is another clear sign -- perhaps the most concrete yet in California -- of a new era in telecommunications. The result of having the state's biggest phone company run by an out-of-state company, Long said, could be poorer customer service for Californians. "Telephone service is pretty fundamental to getting along in society," Long said. "And it is a cause of concern when the shots are being called from thousands of miles away." Added the PUC's Grau: "There is major concern that over time, the decisions about California's phone service will be made out of Texas." In fact, the PUC continues to grapple with that question. Rules of change This new era began last year with the signing of the landmark Telecommunications Act of 1996, a bill that was designed in large part to spur competition and lower prices for telephone and cable television customers. In theory, markets closed to competition for decades would open and consumers would have unprecedented choice for various services. Reality so far, however, has been something different. Consolidation has been the operative word. In the year since the act was passed, none of the top players in regional phone markets have been challenged by competition, and three of the nation's top 10 telecommunications companies -- MCI, NYNEX and Pac Bell -- have agreed to be taken over by would-be competitors. "It is a source of big concern that local control over important companies is a thing of the past unless regulators halt it," Long said. "The telecomm act was supposed to promote competition, but it has had the perverse effect of starting this industry down the path of an oligopoly structure with a handful of giants controlling the industry." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 12:39:47 -0500 From: Judith Oppenheimer Reply-To: j.oppenheimer@worldnet.att.net Organization: ICB Toll Free News Subject: URL Correction For Article "SMS Database Searchable?" USA Global Link's Global 800 search engine can be found at http://www.thedigest.com/icb/, scroll down to "SEARCH FOR YOUR GLOBAL 800 NUMBER." Judith Oppenheimer ICB Toll Free News j.oppenheimer@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #51 *****************************