Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: fmsys!macy@usenet.ins.cwru.edu (Macy Hallock) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Why 900-STOPPER Message-ID: Date: 3 Mar 91 00:18:00 GMT Sender: news@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Mr. News) Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA +1 216 722 3053 Lines: 45 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 173, Message 3 of 9 Originator: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: hub.eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu In article is written: > The Moderator claims that 1-900-STOPPER is worthless because any trace > need merely trace through their system; this adds one step, it doesn't > stop anyone. When I do not want the orginating number of a call recorded (or wish to make a call that will not contain any reference of the call on the calling number's bill) ... I use Litel's (a regional carrier) 950-XXXX access number. ANI is not passed on most Feature Group B trunks. Of course, the call will show on the credit card bill, and the originating point of presence will be idenitfied for billing purposes, but the number I called from will not show ... and there is really no way to scan all the possible carriers for a near random FG B call, I think. This is considerably safer than a 1+ or 0+ call because the telco never captures the digits once the 950-XXXX is dialed. Therefore, the telco cannot be the means of determination. I've also been known to use a PBX DISA local number for the same thing, with much the same effect ... although I suspect the FG B is more secure. Of course, no phone call is really secure ... random use of payphones is always the safest way to protect your security/anonminity. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy [Moderator's Note: You make a good point. There are several ways of doing what STOPPER does for much less money, including using a pay phone. My eyebrows raised only once during your article, and that was you mention of using someone's DISA. I *assume* you are authorized to be on there; and if so, what kind of protection do you think it gives you? The owner of the phone will get back-audited, and if he keeps any sort of traffic records for the PBX the call will come back to the DISA and your password for the use of same, no? And even if he does not keep any traffic records, do you want your employer (whoever; you *said* you were authorized to be there, right?) to get the grief as a result of your call? PAT]