Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!emory!att!bu.edu!telecom-request From: lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Do Network Interface Devices Make Fraud Easy? Message-ID: Date: 22 Feb 91 02:35:13 GMT Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 29 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 153, Message 10 of 13 In hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net (Toby Nixon) writes: > In article , rborow@bcm1a09.attmail. > com writes: >> My worry is simple: with these NID's located so conveniently for >> anyone to use, shouldn't I (or anyone else with these NID's) be >> concerned with the probability of fraud? > In Southern Bell land (our subdivision, anyway), these boxes have > latches on them on which you can place a padlock. The telephone ... > this feature! We put on a combination padlock, like you'd use on a > gym locker, so that if we ever need service we can tell the repair > office the combination to the lock, which they record on the repair > order, and we don't need to be there to provide a key. The snazzy ones Keptel (nee Armiger) sells have a place for the customer padlock, and a "tamperproof" screw holding shut the telco side of things. The cute bit is that the telco-door swings away, padlocked customer-door and all along with it. (Conceptually like a little door in the middle of a big door, although that's not how it actually works.) Laird P. Broadfield UUCP: {akgua, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!lairdb INET: lairdb@crash.cts.com