Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!texbell!chinacat!telecom-gateway From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Neighbor Bugs Family By Eavesdropping Message-ID: Date: 29 Nov 89 04:13:37 GMT Sender: news@chinacat.Lonestar.ORG Organization: Green Hills and Cows Lines: 26 Approved: telecom-request@chinacat.lonestar.org X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 535, message 6 of 7 In article , telecom@eecs.nwu. edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: > What a laugh! All I can say is if the average member of the public > knew as much about cordless phones, cellular phones and sundry > 'wireless intercoms' as the readers of TELECOM Digest they would > *never* use such devices with any expectation of privacy; recently > passed and poorly thought out federal laws not withstanding. One of those "poorly thought out federal laws" concerns the monitoring of cellular traffic. Scanners are blocked from receiving the 800 MHz cellular band and I've heard that you can get at least a slap on the wrist for violating these provisions (listening to cellular calls). From where I am sitting at the keyboard, I can see two communications receivers that I use in conjunction with my work. Both are perfectly capable of tuning from low band VHF right on through UHF and everything in between. Are these radios now clandestine? Am I OK as long as I don't saunter over and turn one on and tune it to a cellular frequency? And if I do, who is going to know? What are the detection and enforcement provisions of the cellular privacy law? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !