cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1996-07-14 - Re: Can’t block caller ID in Massachusetts?

Header Data

From: Roger Williams <roger@coelacanth.com>
To: “sfuze@sunspot.tiac.net>
Message Hash: 4eb0e876a6961e4bb8d45c16522f8b30019da6954f35b7f3dd481944aec2bb67
Message ID: <rogerk9w7qzx8.fsf@sturgeon.coelacanth.com>
Reply To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960713164442.13725A-100000@sunspot.tiac.net>
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-14 05:52:17 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 13:52:17 +0800

Raw message

From: Roger Williams <roger@coelacanth.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 13:52:17 +0800
To: "sfuze@sunspot.tiac.net>
Subject: Re: Can't block caller ID in Massachusetts?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960713164442.13725A-100000@sunspot.tiac.net>
Message-ID: <rogerk9w7qzx8.fsf@sturgeon.coelacanth.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>>>>> "Millie" == sfuze@tiac net <sfuze@sunspot.tiac.net> writes:

  > I'd never use a cellular to place a call of importance anyway.

  > We all know how easily cellular can be intercepted, I hope...  And
  > EVERY number you ever call on a cellular is logged too.

Yes, except that we weren't talking about securing the privacy of the
conversation; we were discussing methods of keeping the identity of
the caller from being reported to WATS-line customers.

Until recently at least, ANI and CLID information was not available
on calls from cellular phones (the rationale was that the cellular
phone customer has to pay for *incoming* calls as well).  I thought
that this was mandated by law, in Mass anyway.

Certainly, though, if I was calling the BATF toll-free to rat on my
neighbourhood Uzi dealer, I'd never call from my own phone, anonymous
re-phoner or not.

-- 
Roger Williams                         finger me for my PGP public key
Coelacanth Engineering        consulting & turnkey product development
Middleborough, MA           wireless * DSP-based instrumentation * ATE
tel +1 508 947-8049 * fax +1 508 947-9118 * http://www.coelacanth.com/

Thread