4368 lines
214 KiB
Plaintext
4368 lines
214 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 1 of 11
|
||
|
||
Phrack Inc. Newsletter Issue XXVI Index
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
April 25, 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Greetings and welcome to Issue 26 of Phrack Inc. Things are really
|
||
beginning to heat up as SummerCon '89 rapidly approaches. Be sure to check out
|
||
Phrack World News for further information concerning this incredible event.
|
||
You do not want to miss it.
|
||
|
||
This issue we feature The Disk Jockey's personal rendition of the events
|
||
that can occur in the criminal legal process (after all he should know). Some
|
||
of the terms and situations may vary from state to state due to slight
|
||
differences in state laws.
|
||
|
||
We also present to you a file on COSMOS that is written from more of a
|
||
security standpoint rather than hacker intrusion tips. The Future Transcendent
|
||
Saga continues in this issue with a file on NSFnet and the third appendix of
|
||
the never ending series. This particular appendix is geared to be used as a
|
||
general reference to chapter three of the FTSaga, "Limbo To Infinity." As this
|
||
file is more of a complied directory than actual "how to" knowledge, we just
|
||
consider it a Phrack Inc. release.
|
||
|
||
As always, we ask that anyone with network access drop us a line to either
|
||
our Bitnet or Internet addresses...
|
||
|
||
Taran King Knight Lightning
|
||
C488869@UMCVMB.BITNET C483307@UMCVMB.BITNET
|
||
C488869@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU C483307@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Table of Contents:
|
||
|
||
1. Phrack Inc. XXVI Index by Taran King and Knight Lightning
|
||
2. Computer-Based Systems for Bell System Operation by Taran King
|
||
3. Getting Caught: Legal Procedures by The Disk Jockey
|
||
4. NSFnet: National Science Foundation Network by Knight Lightning
|
||
5. COSMOS: COmputer System for Mainframe OperationS (Part One) by King Arthur
|
||
6. Basic Concepts of Translation by The Dead Lord and Chief Executive Officers
|
||
7. Phone Bugging: Telecom's Underground Industry by Split Decision
|
||
8. Internet Domains: FTSaga Appendix 3 (Limbo To Infinity) by Phrack Inc.
|
||
9. Phrack World News XXVI/Part 1 by Knight Lightning
|
||
10. Phrack World News XXVI/Part 2 by Knight Lightning
|
||
11. Phrack World News XXVI/Part 3 by Knight Lightning
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 2 of 11
|
||
|
||
Computer-Based Systems for Bell System Operations
|
||
|
||
by
|
||
|
||
Taran King
|
||
|
||
|
||
This file contains a variety of operating systems in the Bell System.
|
||
Some of them are very familiar to most people and others are widely unknown.
|
||
Each sub-section gives a brief description of what the computer system's
|
||
functions are.
|
||
|
||
Table Of Contents:
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
I. TIRKS
|
||
a. COC
|
||
b. E1
|
||
c. F1
|
||
d. C1
|
||
e. FEPS
|
||
II. PICS
|
||
III. PREMIS
|
||
IV. TNDS
|
||
a. EADAS
|
||
b. EADAS/NM
|
||
c. TDAS
|
||
d. CU/EQ
|
||
e. ICAN
|
||
f. LBS
|
||
g. 5XB COER
|
||
h. SPCS COER
|
||
i. SONDS
|
||
j. CU/TK
|
||
k. TSS
|
||
l. TFS
|
||
m. CSAR
|
||
V. SCCS
|
||
VI. COEES
|
||
VII. MATFAP
|
||
VIII. Various Operating Systems
|
||
IX. Acronym Glossary
|
||
|
||
|
||
TIRKS (Trunks Integrated Records Keeping System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
TIRKS is the master record-keeping system for the network. It
|
||
supports network operations related to growth and change in the network by
|
||
providing accurate records of circuits and components that are in use and
|
||
available for use. It was developed to mechanize the circuit-provisioning
|
||
process. Two circuit-provisioning aspects are applied: daily circuit
|
||
provisioning and current planning.
|
||
Daily circuit provisioning is processing orders to satisfy customer
|
||
needs for special service circuits and processing orders initiated for message
|
||
trunks and carrier systems for the PSTN. The process begins at various
|
||
operations centers and ends up at the CPCs (Circuit Provision Centers) which
|
||
track orders, design circuits, and assign the components using TIRKS. It also
|
||
prepares work packages and distributes them to technicians working in the field
|
||
who implement them.
|
||
Current planning determines the equipment and facility requirements
|
||
for future new circuits. It apportions forecasts for circuits among the circuit
|
||
designs planned for new circuits.
|
||
TIRKS consists of five major interacting component systems: COC
|
||
(Circuit Order Control system), E1 (Equipment system), F1 (Facility system), C1
|
||
(Circuit system), and FEPS (Facility and Equipment Planning System).
|
||
|
||
o COC controls message trunk orders, special-services orders, and
|
||
carrier system orders by tracking critical dates throughout the
|
||
existence of an order as it flows from the source to the CPC and on
|
||
to the field forces. It provides management with the current status
|
||
of all circuit orders and provides data to other TIRKS component
|
||
systems to update the assigned status of equipment, facilities, and
|
||
circuits as orders are processed.
|
||
|
||
o C1 is the heart of TIRKS. It automatically determines the types of
|
||
equipment required for a given circuit, assigns the equipment and
|
||
facilities needed, determines levels at the various transmission
|
||
level points on the circuit, specifies the test requirements, and
|
||
establishes circuit records for the circuits. All records of
|
||
circuits already installed are kept in C1 for future additions or
|
||
changes.
|
||
|
||
o E1 is one of the two major inventory component systems in TIRKS.
|
||
It contains equipment inventory records, assignment records, and
|
||
pending equipment orders. The records show the amount of spare
|
||
equipment that is available and equipment's circuit identification.
|
||
|
||
o F1 is the other of the major inventory component systems. It
|
||
contains cable and carrier inventory and assigns records.
|
||
|
||
o FEPS supports the current planning process which determines the
|
||
transmission facilities and equipment that will be required for new
|
||
service. It uses data in E1, F1, and C1 as well as other forecasts
|
||
to allocate existing inventories efficiently, to determine future
|
||
facility and equipment requirements, and to update planning
|
||
designs.
|
||
|
||
TIRKS uses IBM-370 compatible hardware and direct-access storage
|
||
devices. It provides benefits to the BOCs through improved service to
|
||
customers, capital and expense savings, and better management control.
|
||
|
||
|
||
PICS (Plug-in Inventory Control System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
PICS is the mechanized operations system developed for the efficient
|
||
management of large amounts of equipment inventories. It assists with both
|
||
inventory and materials management. Inventory managers establish corporate
|
||
policies for the types of equipment and for equipment utilization, assist
|
||
engineering organizations in introducing new types of equipment while phasing
|
||
out older types, and set utilization goals that balance service objectives and
|
||
carrying charges on spare equipment. Material managers work to achieve
|
||
utilization goals by acquiring spare equipment for growth and maintenance
|
||
purposes. They also administer a hierarchy of locations used for storing spare
|
||
equipment.
|
||
PICS/DCPR (PICS with Detailed Continuing Property Records) administers
|
||
all types of CO equipment. The DCPR portion of PICS/DCPR serves as a detailed
|
||
investment database supporting accounting records for all types of CO plug-in
|
||
and "hardwired" equipment. PICS/DCPR accomplishes its goals of increasing
|
||
utilization, decreasing manual effort, and providing a detailed supporting
|
||
record for phone company investment through software, databases, administrative
|
||
procedures, and workflows.
|
||
Two new functional entities are created in the BOC first: PIA
|
||
(Plug-In Administration) and the central stock. PIA is the materials manager
|
||
and is responsible for acquiring equipment, distributing it as needed to field
|
||
locations, repairing it, and accounting for it. The central stock is a
|
||
warehouse where spare equipment is consolidated and managed.
|
||
There are five subsystems in PICS/DCPR:
|
||
|
||
o Plug-in inventory subsystem - maintains order, repair, and
|
||
inventory records for all types of plug-in equipment.
|
||
|
||
o Inventory management subsystem - provides the PIA with mechanized
|
||
processes to assist in various tasks.
|
||
|
||
o Plug-in DCPR subsystem - provides processes required to maintain
|
||
investment records for plug-in units.
|
||
|
||
o Hardwired DCPR subsystem - maintains detailed accounting records
|
||
for hardwired CO equipment.
|
||
|
||
o Reference file subsystem - provides and maintains reference data
|
||
used by all other subsystems.
|
||
|
||
PICS/DCPR runs on IBM-compatible equipment with the IBM Information
|
||
Management System database manager. It interfaces with TIRKS as well as a few
|
||
other circuit-provisioning systems.
|
||
|
||
|
||
PREMIS (PREMises Information System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
PREMIS provides fast, convenient access to information needed to
|
||
respond to service requests. It was developed in response to the need for
|
||
address standardization. It has three mechanized databases: address data, a
|
||
credit file, and a list of available telephone numbers. It also serves a
|
||
function to the LAC (Loop Assignment Center), called PREMIS/LAC. PREMIS/LAC is
|
||
an extension of the address database and provides for the storage of outside
|
||
plant facility data at each address entry.
|
||
PREMIS supports the following service representative tasks:
|
||
|
||
o Determining the customer's correct address. The address related-
|
||
and address-keyable information is the major feature of PREMIS.
|
||
If an input request does not contain an accurate or complete
|
||
address, PREMIS displays information that can be used to query the
|
||
customer. The address database allows PREMIS to give the full
|
||
address and information about the geographic area which includes WC
|
||
(Wire Center), exchange area, tax area, directory group, and the
|
||
service features available for that area. It also displays
|
||
existing or previous customer's name and telephone number, modular
|
||
jacking arrangement at the address, and an indication of whether a
|
||
connect outside plant loop from the address back to the CO was left
|
||
in place. If service was discontinued at the site, the reason for
|
||
disconnect and the date of disconnect are also displayed.
|
||
|
||
o Negotiating service features. PREMIS indicates the service
|
||
features that can be sold at that address, providing useful
|
||
information for discussing these with a customer.
|
||
|
||
o Negotiating a service date. If it indicates that an outside plant
|
||
loop back to the CO has been left in place, PREMIS allows for
|
||
earlier installation as no installer will need to visit the site.
|
||
|
||
o Checking a customer's credit status. PREMIS maintains a
|
||
name-keyable file of customers with outstanding debts to the
|
||
telephone company. If there is a match in the database, the
|
||
customer's file is displayed.
|
||
|
||
o Selecting a telephone number. There is a file in PREMIS listing
|
||
all available telephone numbers from which service representatives
|
||
request numbers for a specific address. The available telephone
|
||
numbers are read from COSMOS (COmputer System for Mainframe
|
||
OperationS) magnetic tape.
|
||
|
||
PREMIS/LAC has a feature called DPAC (Dedicated Plant Assignment
|
||
Card). Records of addresses where outside plant loop facilities are dedicated
|
||
are organized and accessed by address by the LAC through DPAC.
|
||
PREMIS is an on-line interactive system whose prime users are service
|
||
representatives interacting with customers. It uses the UNIVAC 1100 as its
|
||
main computer. It has network links to various other computer systems, too,
|
||
to obtain various pieces of information that are helpful or necessary in
|
||
efficiently completing service functions.
|
||
|
||
|
||
TNDS (Total Network Data System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
TNDS is actually a large and complex set of coordinated systems which
|
||
supports a broad range of activities that depend on accurate traffic data. It
|
||
is more of a concept that incorporates various subsystems as opposed to a
|
||
single computer system. It consists of both manual procedures and computer
|
||
systems that provide operating company managers with comprehensive, timely, and
|
||
accurate network information that helps in analysis of the network. TNDS
|
||
supports operations centers responsible for administration of the trunking
|
||
network, network data collection, daily surveillance of the load on the
|
||
switching network, the utilization of equipment by the switching network, and
|
||
the design of local and CO switching equipment to meet future service needs.
|
||
TNDS modules that collect and format traffic data usually have
|
||
dedicated minicomputers which are at the operating company's Minicomputer
|
||
Maintenance (Operations) Center (MMOC/MMC). Other modules generate engineering
|
||
and administrative reports on switching systems and on the trunking network of
|
||
message trunks that interconnects them. These mostly run on general-purpose
|
||
computers. Still others are located in AT&T centers and are accessed by
|
||
various operating companies for data.
|
||
The functions of TNDS are carried out by various computer systems
|
||
since TNDS itself is just a concept. These subsystems include EADAS, EADAS/NM,
|
||
TDAS, CU/EQ, LBS, 5XB COER, SPCS COER, ICAN, SONDS, TSS, CU/TK, TFS, and CSAR.
|
||
The following sections cover these systems briefly.
|
||
|
||
|
||
EADAS (Engineering and Administrative Data Acquisition System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
EADAS is the major data collecting system of TNDS and runs on a
|
||
dedicated minicomputer at the NDCC (Network Data Collection Center). Each
|
||
EADAS serves up to fifty switching offices. The 4ESS and No. 4 XBAR both have
|
||
their own data acquisition systems built into the switch and they feed their
|
||
data directly to other TNDS component systems that are downstream from EADAS,
|
||
thereby bypassing the need for EADAS on those switches. EADAS summarizes data
|
||
collected for processing by downstream TNDS systems and does so in real-time.
|
||
EADAS is used by network administrators to determine quality of service and to
|
||
identify switching problems. It also makes additional real-time information
|
||
available to these administrators by providing traffic data history that covers
|
||
up to 48 hours. This data history is flexible through the module NORGEN
|
||
(Network Operations Report GENerator) so that administrators can tailor their
|
||
requests for information to determine specifics. Information from EADAS is
|
||
forwarded to other downstream systems in TNDS via data links or magnetic tape.
|
||
|
||
|
||
EADAS/NM (EADAS/Network Management)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
EADAS/NM is one of the three TNDS systems that EADAS forwards traffic
|
||
data downstream to either by data links or magnetic tape. EADAS/NM uses data
|
||
directly from EADAS as well as receiving data from those switching systems
|
||
which do not interface with EADAS previously mentioned. It monitors switching
|
||
systems and trunk groups designated by network managers and reports existing or
|
||
anticipated congestion on a display board at local and regional NMCs (Network
|
||
Management Centers). It is used to analyze problems in near real-time to
|
||
determine their location and causes. EADAS/NM provides information that
|
||
requires national coordination to the AT&T Long Lines NOC (Network Operations
|
||
Center) in Bedminster, NJ which uses it's NOCS (NOC System) to perform
|
||
EADAS/NM-like functions on a national scale. Like EADAS, EADAS/NM uses
|
||
dedicated minicomputers to provide interactive real-time response and control.
|
||
|
||
|
||
TDAS (Traffic Data Administration System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The second of three TNDS systems that is downstream from EADAS is TDAS
|
||
which formats the traffic data for use by most of the other downstream systems.
|
||
It accepts data from EADAS, local vendor systems, and large toll switching
|
||
systems on a weekly basis as magnetic tape. It functions basically as a
|
||
warehouse and distribution facility for the traffic data and runs a batch
|
||
system at the computation center. Correct association between recorded traffic
|
||
data and the switching or trunking elements is the result of shared information
|
||
between TDAS and CU/EQ. Data processed through TDAS is matched against that
|
||
stored in CU/EQ. The data is summarized weekly on magnetic tape or printout
|
||
and is sent for use in preparation of an engineering or administrative report.
|
||
|
||
|
||
CU/EQ (Common Update/EQuipment)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
CU/EQ is a master database which stores traffic measurements taken by
|
||
TDAS and it shares information with TDAS, ICAN and LBS. As said before,
|
||
correct association between recorded traffic data and the switching or trunking
|
||
elements is due to the shared information between CU/EQ and TDAS. It runs as a
|
||
batch system in the same computer as TDAS and is regularly updated with batch
|
||
transactions to keep it current with changes in the physical arrangement of CO
|
||
switching machines which ensures that recorded measurements are treated
|
||
consistently in each of the reporting systems that use CU/EQ records.
|
||
|
||
|
||
ICAN (Individual Circuit ANalysis)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The final of the three systems downstream from EADAS is ICAN, which
|
||
also uses data directly from EADAS but uses CU/EQ for reference information.
|
||
It is a CO reporting system which detects electromechanical switching system
|
||
faults by identifying abnormal load patterns on individual circuits within a
|
||
circuit group. ICAN produces a series of reports used by the NAC (Network
|
||
Administration Center) to analyze the individual circuits and to verify that
|
||
such circuits are being correctly associated with their respective groups.
|
||
|
||
|
||
LBS (Load Balance System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
LBS is a batch-executed system that helps assure the network
|
||
administrator that traffic loads in each switching system are uniformly
|
||
distributed. It analyzes the traffic data to establish traffic loads on each
|
||
line group of the switching system. The NAC uses the resulting reports to
|
||
determine the lightly loaded line groups to which new subscriber lines can be
|
||
assigned. LBS also calculates load balance indices for each system and
|
||
aggregates the results for the entire BOC.
|
||
|
||
|
||
5XB COER (No. 5 Crossbar Central Office Equipment Reports)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The 5XB COER provides information on common-control switching
|
||
equipment operation for different types of switching systems. It is a
|
||
batch-executed system that runs on a BOC mainframe that analyzes traffic data
|
||
to determine how heavily various switching system components are used and
|
||
measures certain service parameters. It calculates capacity for the No. 5
|
||
Crossbar. Network administrators use 5XB COER reports to monitor day-to-day
|
||
switching performance, diagnose potential switching malfunctions, and help
|
||
predict future service needs. Traffic engineers rely on reports to assess
|
||
switching office capacity and to forecast equipment requirements. It produces
|
||
busy hour and busy season reports so service and traffic load measurements can
|
||
be most useful in predictions.
|
||
|
||
|
||
SPCS COER (Stored-Program Control Systems Central Office Equipment Reports)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The SPCS COER is basically the same as the 5XB COER as it too monitors
|
||
switching system service and measures utilization in the same manners as
|
||
mentioned above. The essential differences between the 5XB COER and the SPCS
|
||
COER are that the latter calculates capacity for 1ESS, 2ESS, and 3ESS switching
|
||
offices as opposed to the No. 5 Crossbar switch and SPCS COER is an interactive
|
||
system that runs on a centralized AT&T mainframe computer.
|
||
|
||
|
||
SONDS (Small Office Network Data System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
SONDS collects its own data from small step-by-step offices
|
||
independently of EADAS and TDAS. It performs a full range of data manipulation
|
||
functions and provides a number of TNDS features economically for smaller
|
||
electromechanical step-by-step offices. The data collected is directly from
|
||
the offices being measured. It processes the data and automatically
|
||
distributes weekly, monthly, exception, and on-demand reports to managers at
|
||
the NACs via dial-up terminals. SONDS runs on an interactive basis at a
|
||
centralized AT&T mainframe computer.
|
||
|
||
CU/TK (Common Update/TrunKing)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
CU/TK is a database system that contains the trunking network
|
||
information and as well as other information required by TSS (Trunking
|
||
Servicing System) and TFS (Trunk Forecasting System). The CU/TK is regularly
|
||
updated by CAC (Circuit Administration Center) by personnel to keep it current
|
||
with changes in the physical arrangements of trunks and switching machines in
|
||
the CO. For correct trunking and switching configuration in the processing by
|
||
TSS and TFS, this updating process, which includes maintaining office growth
|
||
information and a "common-language" circuit identification of all circuits for
|
||
individual switching machines, ensures that traffic data provided by TDAS will
|
||
be correctly associated.
|
||
|
||
|
||
TSS (Trunk Servicing System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
TSS helps trunk administrators develop short-term plans and determine
|
||
the number of circuits required in a trunk group. Data from TDAS is processed
|
||
in TSS and the offered load for each trunk group is computed. Through offered
|
||
load calculation on a per-trunk-group basis, TSS calculates the number of
|
||
trunks theoretically required to handle that traffic load at a designated grade
|
||
of service. TSS produces weekly reports showing which trunk groups have too
|
||
many trunks and which have too few that are performing below the
|
||
grade-of-service objective. Trunk orders to add or disconnect trunks are made
|
||
by the CAC after they use the information provided through TSS.
|
||
|
||
|
||
TFS (Trunk Forecasting System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
TFS uses traffic load data computed by TSS as well as information on
|
||
the network configuration and forecasting parameters stored in the CU/TK
|
||
database for long-term construction planning for new trunks. TFS forecasts
|
||
message trunk requirements for the next five years as the fundamental input to
|
||
the planning process that leads to the provisioning of additional facilities.
|
||
|
||
|
||
CSAR (Centralized System for Analysis and Reporting)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
CSAR is designed to monitor and measure how well data is being
|
||
processed through TNDS. It collects and analyzes data from other TNDS systems
|
||
and provides operating company personnel at NDCCs, NACs, and CACs with
|
||
quantitative measures of the accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of the TNDS
|
||
data flow as well as the consistency of the TNDS record bases. CSAR also
|
||
presents enough information to locate and identify a data collection problem.
|
||
CSAR summarizes the results of its TNDS monitoring for the company as input to
|
||
the TPMP (TNDS Performance Measurement Plan) which is published monthly by
|
||
AT&T. CSAR runs as a centralized on-line interactive system at an AT&T
|
||
computer center. Its data is placed into special files, which, at the end of a
|
||
CSAR run, are merged and transferred to the AT&T computer center. CSAR
|
||
performs the proper associations and analyzes each system's results. These
|
||
results are obtained by company managers via dial-up and they can be arranged
|
||
in a number of formats that provide details on overall TNDS performance or
|
||
individual system effectiveness. Specific problems can also be identified
|
||
through these reports.
|
||
|
||
|
||
The following is a diagram of data flow among TNDS systems:
|
||
|
||
*Trunk Network Reporting Systems*
|
||
|
||
|-> TSS ----------------------> TFS
|
||
* Data*| ^ ^
|
||
*Acquisition*| %_______ _______/
|
||
* Systems*| %-CU/TK-/
|
||
_________ |
|
||
| |-->EADAS |
|
||
|Switching| Alt. |
|
||
|Systems | Systems| * Central Office *
|
||
|_________|% | / *Reporting Systems* *System Performance *
|
||
| % %->TDAS-------------------------- *Measurement Systems*
|
||
| % | %_______ | | |
|
||
| % EADAS | LBS 5XB SPCS .............CSAR
|
||
| % | | / COER COER .
|
||
| EADAS/NM CU/EQ-< .
|
||
| % .
|
||
| ICAN SONDS .
|
||
| ^ .
|
||
|__________________________________| Selected data from
|
||
other TNDS Systems
|
||
|
||
|
||
SCCS (Switching Control Center System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The Switching Control Center (SCC) was created to centralize the
|
||
administration, maintenance, and control of the 1ESS switching system. By
|
||
using the remote-interaction interfacing of the MCC (Master Control Center),
|
||
which is a frame of equipment in a 1ESS system that indicates the current state
|
||
of the office equipment, the SCC functions as the centralized maintenance
|
||
center for the switch.
|
||
At the SCC, a minicomputer system called the CSS (Computer Sub-System)
|
||
is added and along with the equipment units that remote the MCC, it makes up
|
||
the SCCS. The CSS can support a number of SCCs. Generally, the CSS is located
|
||
in the MMOC. Basically, a number of switches are handled by each SCC and the
|
||
various SCCs are handled by the CSS.
|
||
The SCCS contains maintenance and administrative data that is sent
|
||
directly from the switches. Through the SCCS, a technician can remotely operate
|
||
the MCC keys on the switches hooked up to it as well as perform any available
|
||
command or task supported by the switch. The SCCS can handle up to 30 or more
|
||
offices although usually only 15 or so are handled per SCC. This number
|
||
depends also on the size of the offices and the amount of data that is
|
||
transmitted.
|
||
Major alarms that sound at a switching office set off alarms at the
|
||
SCC within seconds and it also causes an update of the status of the office on
|
||
the critical indicator panel and it displays a specific description of the
|
||
alarm condition on a CRT alarm monitor at a workstation. Software enhancements
|
||
to the SCCS fall into four broad classes:
|
||
|
||
o Enhanced Alarming - Besides alarms sounding, incoming data can
|
||
generate failure descriptions for easy interpretation and
|
||
real-time analysis techniques.
|
||
|
||
o Interaction with Message History - Using past information on a
|
||
switch's troubles, the SCCS allows pertinent information on a
|
||
specific switch to be provided in case of an alarm.
|
||
|
||
o Mechanization of Craft Functions - Certain conditions no longer
|
||
need to be looked into directly. If an alarm goes off, the SCCS
|
||
can perform routine tests and fix the problem as best it can or
|
||
else, if that doesn't work, a trouble ticket is issued.
|
||
|
||
o Support for Switch Administration - Through the SCCS, data can be
|
||
sent automatically to different operations centers as well as
|
||
other operations systems which require data from the switches.
|
||
|
||
Since the original SCCS came into operation, many changes have taken
|
||
place. The current SCCS supports all of the entire ESS family of switches as
|
||
well as network transmission equipment and it also can maintain several
|
||
auxiliary processor systems, like TSPS (Traffic Service Position System) and
|
||
AIS (Automatic Intercept System), and supports network transmission equipment.
|
||
|
||
|
||
COEES (Central Office Equipment Engineering System)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
COEES is a time-sharing system that runs on a DEC PDP-10. It is the
|
||
standard system for planning and engineering local switching equipment. COEES
|
||
contains component systems for Step-By-Step, Crossbar, 1/1AESS, and 2/2BESS
|
||
switching systems, each of which has a different capability.
|
||
The COEES database stores information obtained from forecasts for each
|
||
local switching office on number of lines of all types, number of trunks of all
|
||
types, average call rate per line and trunk, average usage per line and trunk,
|
||
and all features, signaling types, etc. that are required. COEES determines
|
||
the quantity of each type of equipment in the office needed to satisfy the
|
||
forecasted load at objective service levels, determines an estimated price for
|
||
engineering, procuring, and installing the equipment addition needed to reach
|
||
the require level, and then it sums up the costs of doing it eight different
|
||
ways for the network designer to review. The system also takes into account
|
||
varying parameters like call rate or proportion of lines with certain features
|
||
which is called sensitivity analysis.
|
||
With the information provided by the COEES forecast, the designer can
|
||
then make a recommendation. After a decision is made on the recommendation,
|
||
COEES prints out an order so that the additional equipment can more quickly and
|
||
easily be obtained.
|
||
COEES also puts out a report called call store on a 1ESS, which tells
|
||
the engineer and the equipment supplier how much memory to allocate to
|
||
different functions in the switch depending on inputs that the engineer
|
||
provides to the system.
|
||
|
||
|
||
MATFAP (Metropolitan Area Transmission Facility Analysis Program)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
MATFAP is a computer program that aids in facility planning. It
|
||
analyzes the alternatives available to the operating company for its future
|
||
transmission equipment and facilities using present worth of future expenses
|
||
and other measures.
|
||
By combining trunk and special-service circuit forecasts with
|
||
switching plans, network configuration, cost data, and engineering rules,
|
||
MATFAP can identify what transmission plant will be needed at various locations
|
||
and when it will be needed. It also determines economic consequences of
|
||
specific facility and/or equipment selections as well as routing choices and it
|
||
provides the least-cost assignment of circuits to each facility as a guide to
|
||
the circuit-provisioning process. It is oriented towards metropolitan networks
|
||
and facilities/equipment found in those regions.
|
||
MATFAP provides two benefits. It helps automate the transmission-
|
||
planning process and it takes into account economies that cannot be identified
|
||
by restricted analysis. It also balances circuit loads on high-capacity
|
||
digital lines with additional multiplex equipment. Data from MATFAP is edited
|
||
through RDES (Remote Data Entry System).
|
||
|
||
|
||
Various Operating Systems
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The following is a list of other operating systems used by the Bell System with
|
||
brief descriptions:
|
||
|
||
ATRS (Automated Trouble Reporting System) - aids in the analysis of trouble
|
||
%%%% reports by sorting, formatting, forwarding, and examining them from
|
||
the entire country for standard errors
|
||
BOSS (Billing and Order Support System) - allows access to customer records,
|
||
%%%% CN/A, bill adjustments, and information routing
|
||
CAROT (Centralized Automatic Reporting On Trunks) - operations system that
|
||
%%%%% tests a trunk on electromechanical and electronic switching systems
|
||
and sends its findings to a remote computer terminal
|
||
CATLAS (Centralized Automatic Trouble Locating and Analysis System) - an
|
||
%%%%%% operations system that automates trouble location procedures that
|
||
identify faulty circuit packs in a switch when trouble is detected
|
||
and diagnosed
|
||
CMDS (Centralized Message Data System) - analyzes the AMA tapes to determine
|
||
%%%% traffic patterns
|
||
COSMOS (COmputer System for Mainframe OperationS) - stores the full inventory
|
||
%%%%%% of telephone numbers
|
||
CRIS (Customer Records Information System) - contains the customer billing
|
||
%%%% database
|
||
CRS (Centralized Results System) - a management information system that
|
||
%%% automates the collection, analysis, and publication of many
|
||
measurement results
|
||
CUCRIT (Capital Utilization CRITeria) - used mainly for project economic
|
||
%%%%%% evaluation and capital budgeting and planning
|
||
DACS (Digital Access Cross-connect System) - remote digital access for testing
|
||
%%%% of special-service circuits in analog or digital form
|
||
EFRAP (Exchange Feeder Route Analysis Program) - used in planning of the loop
|
||
%%%%% network
|
||
IFRPS (Intercity Facility Relief Planning System) - also like MATFAP but deals
|
||
%%%%% with radio and coaxial cable as opposed to voice-frequency facilities
|
||
IPLAN (Integrated PLanning And Analysis system) - used mainly for project
|
||
%%%%% economic evaluation
|
||
LMOS (Loop Maintenance Operations System) - maintenance outages on loops
|
||
%%%% remotely by a service employee
|
||
LRAP (Long Route Analysis Program) - like EFRAP, used in planning of the loop
|
||
%%%% network
|
||
LSRP (Local Switching Replacement Planning system) - a system used in the
|
||
%%%% planning of wire centers
|
||
NOTIS (Network Operations Trouble Information System) - aids in the analysis
|
||
%%%%% of trouble reports
|
||
NSCS (Network Service Center System) - at the NSC, aids in the analysis of
|
||
%%%% trouble reports
|
||
OFNPS (Outstate Facility Network Planning System) - similar to MATFAP but
|
||
%%%%% contains a decision aid that identifies strategies for the
|
||
introduction of digital facilities in a predominantly analog network;
|
||
rural transmission facility network planning
|
||
RDES (Remote Data Entry System) - allows for remote editing of on-line
|
||
%%%% computer data
|
||
RMAS (Remote Memory Administration System) - changes translations in the
|
||
%%%% switching systems
|
||
SARTS (Switched Access Remote Test System) - accessed to perform sophisticated
|
||
%%%%% tests on most types of special-service circuits
|
||
SMAS (Switched Maintenance Access System) - through the use of relays,
|
||
%%%% provides concentrated metallic access to individual circuits to
|
||
permit remote access and testing by SARTS
|
||
TASC (Telecommunications Alarm Surveillance and Control System) - an alarm
|
||
%%%% program that identifies the station and transmits it back to the
|
||
central maintenance location
|
||
TCAS (T-Carrier Administration System) - an operations system responsible for
|
||
%%%% T-carrier alarms
|
||
TCSP (Tandem Cross Section Program) - a program for analysis of traffic
|
||
%%%% network planning
|
||
TFLAP (T-carrier Fault-Locating Application Program) - a subprogram of
|
||
%%%%% Universal Cable Circuit Analysis Program which analyzes networks with
|
||
branches, multiple terminations and bridge taps
|
||
|
||
|
||
Acronym Glossary
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
AIS Automatic Intercept System
|
||
AMA Automatic Message Accounting
|
||
ATRS Automated Trouble Reporting System
|
||
BOSS Billing and Order Support System
|
||
C1 Circuit system
|
||
CAC Circuit Administration Center
|
||
CAROT Centralized Automatic Reporting On Trunks
|
||
CATLAS Centralized Automatic Trouble Locating and Analysis System
|
||
CMDS Centralized Message Data System
|
||
CPC Circuit Provision Center
|
||
CO Central Office
|
||
COC Circuit Order Control
|
||
COEES Central Office Equipment Engineering System
|
||
COSMOS COmputer System for Mainframe OperationS
|
||
CRIS Customer Records Information System
|
||
CRS Centralized Results System
|
||
CRT Cathode-Ray Tube
|
||
CSAR Centralized System for Analysis and Reporting
|
||
CSS Computer SubSystem
|
||
CUCRIT Capital Utilization CRITeria
|
||
CU/EQ Common Update/EQuipment system
|
||
CU/TK Common Update/TrunKing system
|
||
DACS Digital Access and Cross-connect System
|
||
DPAC Dedicated Plant Assignment Card
|
||
E1 Equipment system
|
||
EADAS Engineering and Administrative Data Acquisition System
|
||
EADAS/NM EADAS/Network Management
|
||
EFRAP Exchange Feeder Route Analysis Program
|
||
ESS Electronic Switching System
|
||
F1 Facility system
|
||
FEPS Facility and Equipment Planning System
|
||
5XB COER No. 5 Crossbar Central Office Equipment Report system
|
||
ICAN Individual Circuit ANalysis
|
||
IFRPS Intercity Facility Relief Planning System
|
||
IPLAN Integrated PLanning and ANalysis
|
||
LAC Loop Assignment Center
|
||
LBS Load Balance System
|
||
LMOS Loop Maintenance Operations System
|
||
LRAP Long Route Analysis Program
|
||
LSRP Local Switching Replacement Planning system
|
||
MATFAP Metropolitan Area Transmission Facility Analysis Program
|
||
MCC Master Control Center
|
||
MMC Minicomputer Maintenance Center
|
||
MMOC Minicomputer Maintenance Operations Center
|
||
NAC Network Administration Center
|
||
NDCC Network Data Collection Center
|
||
NMC Network Management Center
|
||
NOC Network Operations Center
|
||
NOCS Network Operations Center System
|
||
NORGEN Network Operations Report GENerator
|
||
NOTIS Network Operations Trouble Information System
|
||
NSCS Network Service Center System
|
||
OFNPS Outstate Facility Network Planning System
|
||
PIA Plug-In Administrator
|
||
PICS Plug-in Inventory Control System
|
||
PICS/DCPR PICS/Detailed Continuing Property Records
|
||
PREMIS PREMises Information System
|
||
PSTN Public Switched Telephone Network
|
||
RDES Remote Data Entry System
|
||
RMAS Remote Memory Administration Center
|
||
SARTS Switched Access Remote Test System
|
||
SCC Switching Control Center
|
||
SCCS Switching Control Center System
|
||
SMAS Switched Maintenance Access System
|
||
SONDS Small Office Network Data System
|
||
SPCS COER Stored-Program Control System/Central Office Equipment Report
|
||
TASC Telecommunications Alarm Surveillance and Control system
|
||
TCAS T-Carrier Administration System
|
||
TCSP Tandem Cross Section Program
|
||
TDAS Traffic Data Administration System
|
||
TFLAP T-Carrier Fault-Locating Applications Program
|
||
TFS Trunk Forecasting System
|
||
TIRKS Trunks Integrated Records Keeping System
|
||
TNDS Total Network Data System
|
||
TPMP TNDS Performance Measurement Plan
|
||
TSPS Traffic Service Position System
|
||
TSS Trunk Servicing System
|
||
WC Wire Center
|
||
______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Recommended reference:
|
||
|
||
Bell System Technical Journals
|
||
|
||
Engineering and Operations in the Bell System
|
||
|
||
Phrack IX LMOS file by Phantom Phreaker
|
||
|
||
Phrack XII TNDS file by Doom Prophet
|
||
|
||
Various COSMOS files by LOD/H, KOTRT, etc.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Completed 3/17/89
|
||
______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 3 of 11
|
||
|
||
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|
||
- -
|
||
= %> The Disk Jockey <% =
|
||
- -
|
||
= Presents =
|
||
- -
|
||
= Getting Caught =
|
||
- - Legal Procedures - -
|
||
= =
|
||
- March 24, 1989 -
|
||
= =
|
||
- An Unbiased Look Into The Ways Of Criminal Proceedings -
|
||
= =
|
||
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|
||
|
||
|
||
Preface
|
||
%%%%%%%
|
||
Through this file, I hope to explain what legal action is followed during
|
||
an investigation of toll fraud. All of the contained information is based upon
|
||
actual factual information, and although it differs slightly from state to
|
||
state, the majority of it is applicable anywhere. There seems to be a lot of
|
||
misconception as to the actual legal happenings during and after an
|
||
investigation, so hopefully this will answer some of the too often unasked
|
||
questions.
|
||
|
||
Initiation
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
In our particular story, the whole investigation is tipped off from a
|
||
phone call by someone to the U.S. Sprint security office. The volume of calls
|
||
of "hackers" calling in on other "hackers" is incredible. It is amazing how
|
||
when one user is mad at another and seeks some "revenge" of sorts, he calls a
|
||
security office and advises them that they know of a person who is illegally
|
||
using said company's long distance services. Usually the person will talk to
|
||
either a regular customer service representative, or someone from the security
|
||
office. Typically they will merely say "Hey, a guy named 'Joe' is using your
|
||
codes that he hacks, and his home phone number is 312-xxx-xxxx."
|
||
Next our security person has to decide if this may indeed be a somewhat
|
||
legitimate call. If all seems fairly reasonable, they will start their own
|
||
in-house investigation. This could mean just doing a CN/A on the phone number
|
||
in question to see who the phone is registered under, and check to see if this
|
||
person is a legitimate subscriber to their system.
|
||
A call is placed to the person in question's home telco office. Usually
|
||
they will talk to someone in the security office, or a person whom would carry
|
||
such a capacity in the area of security. They will usually coordinate an
|
||
effort to put some type of DNR (Dialed Number Recorder) on the subscriber's
|
||
telephone line, which will record on an adding machine type of paper all data
|
||
pertaining to: Numbers dialed, DTMF or pulse modes, any occurrence of 2600hz,
|
||
codes and other digits dialed, incoming calls including number of rings before
|
||
answer, time the line was picked up and hung up, etc.
|
||
This DNR may sit on the subscriber's phone line from merely a few weeks,
|
||
to several months.
|
||
At some point either the U.S. Sprint security representative or the telco
|
||
security person will decide that enough time has passed, and that an analysis
|
||
of the DNR tape is due. The Sprint official may visit the telco site and go
|
||
over the tapes in person, or they may be sent from the telco to the Sprint
|
||
office.
|
||
After going over the tapes and finding dialups and codes that were used
|
||
that may possibly be used illegally, Sprint will find the actual owners of
|
||
the codes in question and verify that the codes were indeed used without any
|
||
knowledge or permission of the legitimate owner. They will also put together
|
||
an estimate of "damages," which can include cost of dialup port access, cost
|
||
of investigation, as well as the actual toll charges incurred from the
|
||
usage.
|
||
The Sprint security representative and the local telco security person
|
||
will then go to the local police, usually either state or whatever has the real
|
||
power in that area. They will present the case to the detective or other
|
||
investigator, display all findings, and provided that the case findings seem
|
||
pretty plausible, a search warrant will be composed. After the warrant is
|
||
fully written out (sometimes it is merely a short fill-in-the-blank form) the
|
||
three people investigating the case (the police detective, the local telco
|
||
security representative, and the Sprint security investigator) will go in front
|
||
of a judge and under oath state the evidence and findings that they have as to
|
||
date contained in a document called a "discovery" which justify the need for a
|
||
search warrant. Assuming that the findings seem conclusive, the judge will
|
||
sign the warrant and it will then be active for the time specified on the
|
||
warrant. Usually they are valid for 24 hours a day, due to the circumstances
|
||
that more than likely calls were being made at all hours of the day and night.
|
||
On some agreed date, all the above parties will show up at the suspect's
|
||
house and execute the search warrant and more than likely collect all the phone
|
||
and computer equipment and bring it to the state police post for further
|
||
investigation.
|
||
All information and evidence as well as all the reports will then be
|
||
forwarded to the prosecutor's office to determine what, if any, charges are
|
||
going to be pursued.
|
||
Once charges are finalized through the prosecutor, another discovery
|
||
document is made, listing all the charges and how those charges were derived.
|
||
It is then brought in front of the judge again and if approved, warrants will
|
||
be issued for the individual(s) listed.
|
||
The warrants are usually served by sending over one of the local officers
|
||
to the suspect's house, and he will knock, introduce himself and ask for the
|
||
individual, and then present the warrant to the individual and take them in to
|
||
the station.
|
||
The individual will be processed, which usually means being photographed
|
||
and fingerprinted twice (once for the FBI and once for the state records), and
|
||
then is put into either a holding cell or regular jail.
|
||
Sometimes the bond is already set before the individual is arrested, but
|
||
sometimes it is not. If not, it will be at the arraignment.
|
||
Within 72 hours, the suspect must be arraigned. The arraignment is a time
|
||
when the formal charges are read to the suspect in front of the judge, bail is
|
||
set if it has not been already, and the suspect may pick if he wants a jury
|
||
trial or a trial by judge. This, of course, assumes that the suspect is going
|
||
to plead not guilty, which is the best thing to do in most cases of somewhat
|
||
major capacity. Further court dates are also set at this time. If the suspect
|
||
is unable to afford to retain an attorney, the court will assign a court
|
||
appointed lawyer at this time.
|
||
After the arraignment, the suspect is either allowed to post bail, or is
|
||
returned to the jail to await the next court date. His next court date,
|
||
which is the omnibus, is usually slated for about a month away.
|
||
If the set bail seems unreasonably high, your attorney can file for a
|
||
"bond reduction." You will go in front of the judge and your lawyer will argue
|
||
as to why your bond should be reduced, and how you have a stable life and
|
||
responsibilities and would not try to skip bail. The prosecutor will argue as
|
||
to why your bail should not be dropped.
|
||
At the omnibus hearing, also known as a "fact-finding" hearing (or in some
|
||
states, this is known as the "preliminary hearing."--Ed.) the suspect is again
|
||
brought in front of a judge, along with his own attorney, and the prosecuting
|
||
attorney. At this time the state (meaning the prosecutor) will reveal evidence
|
||
against the suspect, and the judge will decide if the evidence is enough to
|
||
hold the suspect in jail or to continue the case to trial. Nearly always there
|
||
is enough, as warrants would not be issued if there was not, since the state
|
||
could be opening themselves up to a false arrest suit if they were wrong. From
|
||
here a "pre-trial" date is slated, again usually about a month down the road.
|
||
The pre-trial is the last chance for the suspect to change his mind and
|
||
enter a guilty plea, or to continue to trial. It is also the last point in
|
||
which the prosecutor will offer the suspect any type of plea-bargain, meaning
|
||
that the suspect enters a guilty plea in exchange for an agreed upon set of
|
||
reduced charges or sentencing. Assuming the suspect still wishes to enter a
|
||
plea of "not-guilty," the date for jury selection will be slated.
|
||
During the jury selection, your lawyer and you as well as the prosecutor
|
||
will get to meet as many prospective jury members as you wish, and you can each
|
||
ask them questions and either accept or reject them based on if you think that
|
||
they would be fair towards you. This eliminates most possibilities of any jury
|
||
members that are biases before they every sit down to hear your case. After
|
||
the prosecutor and your attorney agree on the members, your trial date is set,
|
||
usually about a week later.
|
||
At trial, the prosecutor will present the case to the jury, starting with
|
||
questioning detectives and investigators on how the case was first discovered
|
||
and how things lead to you, and in each instance, your attorney will be able to
|
||
"cross-examine" each witness and ask questions of their own, hopefully making
|
||
the jury questionable as to the validity of everything that is said. After
|
||
that, your attorney is allowed to call witnesses and the prosecutor will be
|
||
allowed to ask questions as well. By rights you do not have to go to the stand
|
||
if you do not want to, as you have the right to not incriminate yourself. After
|
||
all is said and done, the prosecutor will get to state his "closing arguments,"
|
||
a basic summary of all that was presented and why you should be considered
|
||
guilty, and your lawyer will give his arguments to the jury, as to why you
|
||
should not be judged guilty.
|
||
The jury will go into deliberation, which can last a few minutes, or
|
||
several days. They must all vote and decide if you should be judged guilty or
|
||
not guilty. After the deliberation, court is called back in and the jury will
|
||
announce the results.
|
||
If it is decided that you are guilty, you normally have about 10 days to
|
||
file an appeal, which would have your case sent to a higher court. Otherwise
|
||
your date for sentencing will be set, again usually about a month away.
|
||
At the sentencing, your lawyer will argue why you should be let off easy,
|
||
and the prosecutor will argue why you should be given a hard sentence. The
|
||
judge will come to a decision based on the arguments and then make a decision
|
||
on your sentence. You will then be released to the agency that you are
|
||
assigned to, be it the probation department, the prison system, or the county
|
||
jail.
|
||
|
||
I hope this file gives you a more clear view on what happens in the legal
|
||
system, in future files I hope to discuss the actual dos and don'ts of the
|
||
legal system and advise as to what tricks of the trade are used by legal
|
||
authorities.
|
||
|
||
Any questions/comments/threats can be directed to me at;
|
||
|
||
Lunatic Labs 415.278.7421
|
||
|
||
|
||
-The Disk Jockey
|
||
|
||
Written exclusively for Phrack Newsletter, 1989. This document may be used in
|
||
whole or part as long as full credit for work cited is given to the author.
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 4 of 11
|
||
|
||
The Future Transcendent Saga continues...
|
||
___________________________________________________
|
||
| | | |
|
||
| | NSFnet | |
|
||
| | | |
|
||
| | National Science Foundation Network | |
|
||
| | | |
|
||
| | brought to you by | |
|
||
| | | |
|
||
| | Knight Lightning | |
|
||
| | | |
|
||
| | April 16, 1989 | |
|
||
|_|_______________________________________________|_|
|
||
|
||
|
||
NSF Network Links Scientific Community And SuperComputer Centers
|
||
|
||
When the National Science Foundation (NSF) established its national
|
||
supercomputer centers in 1985, it also planned to create a communications
|
||
network that would give remote locations access to these state-of-the-art
|
||
facilities. NSF planners envisioned a system they dubbed "NSFNET." Based on a
|
||
"backbone" connecting the supercomputer centers, NSFNET would combine existing
|
||
networks and newly created ones into an InterNet, or network of networks, to
|
||
serve the centers and their users. In addition to gaining access to the
|
||
centers' computing technology, researchers at geographically dispersed
|
||
locations would be part of a nationwide research network across which they
|
||
could exchange scientific information. Although the primary role of NSFNET
|
||
remains access to NSF-funded supercomputers and other unique scientific
|
||
resources, its use as a general-purpose network, which enables scientists to
|
||
share research findings, is becoming increasingly important.
|
||
|
||
|
||
NSFnet Components
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
NSFNET is organized as a three-level hierarchy: The backbone; autonomously
|
||
administered wide-area networks serving communities of researchers; and campus
|
||
networks. The backbone has been in use since July 1986 and is fully
|
||
operational. It provides redundant paths among NSF supercomputer centers.
|
||
While several wide-area networks are already connected to the NSFNET backbone,
|
||
more are being built with partial funding from NSF and will be connected as
|
||
they are completed (see the section on NSFnet Component Networks).
|
||
|
||
|
||
SuperComputer Centers
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
NSF created the supercomputer centers in response to a growing concern that a
|
||
lack of access to sophisticated computing facilities had severely constrained
|
||
academic research. A project solicitation in June 1984 resulted in the
|
||
creation of the following centers -- the John Von Neumann National
|
||
Supercomputer Center in Princeton, New Jersey, the San Diego Supercomputer
|
||
Center on the campus of the University of California at San Diego, the National
|
||
Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois, the
|
||
Cornell National Supercomputer Facility at Cornell University, and the
|
||
Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center under joint operation by Westinghouse Electric
|
||
Corporation, Carnegie-Mellon University, and the University of Pittsburgh. All
|
||
the centers are multi-disciplinary and are available to any researcher who is
|
||
eligible for NSF support. They offer access to computers made by Cray
|
||
Research, Inc., Control Data Corporation, ETA, and IBM. The Scientific
|
||
Computing Division of the National Center for Atmospheric Research is the sixth
|
||
center which is part of NSFNET. The SCD has been providing advanced computing
|
||
services to the atmospheric sciences community since the late 1960s.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Protocols
|
||
%%%%%%%%%
|
||
NSFNET is using the TCP/IP protocols of the DARPA InterNet as the initial
|
||
standard. The system will work toward adopting international standards as they
|
||
become established. The protocols link networks that are based on different
|
||
technologies and connection protocols, and provide a unified set of transport
|
||
and application protocols. As the NSFNET system continues to evolve, the
|
||
typical user working at a terminal or work station will be able to connect to
|
||
and use various computer resources -- including the supercomputer centers -- to
|
||
run interactive and batch jobs, receive output, transfer files, and communicate
|
||
with colleagues throughout the nation via electronic mail. Most researchers
|
||
will have either a terminal linked to a local super-minicomputer or a graphics
|
||
work station. These will be connected to a local area network that is
|
||
connected to a campus network, and, via a gateway system, to a wide-area
|
||
network.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Management
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Four institutions are sharing the interim management of NSFNET: The University
|
||
of Illinois (overall project management and network engineering), Cornell
|
||
University (network operations and initial technical support), the University
|
||
of Southern California Information Sciences Institute (protocol enhancement and
|
||
high-level technical support), and the University Corporation for Atmospheric
|
||
Research (management of the NSF Network Service Center through a contract with
|
||
BBN Laboratories, Inc.).
|
||
|
||
|
||
NSF Network Service Center
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The NSF Network Service Center (NNSC) is providing general information about
|
||
NSFNET, including the status of NSF-supported component networks and
|
||
supercomputer centers. The NNSC, located at BBN Laboratories Inc. in
|
||
Cambridge, MA, is an NSF-sponsored project of the University Corporation for
|
||
Atmospheric Research.
|
||
|
||
The NNSC, which currently has information and documents on line and in printed
|
||
form, plans to distribute news through network mailing lists, bulletins,
|
||
newsletters, and on-line reports. The NNSC also maintains a database of
|
||
contact points and sources of additional information about the NSFNET component
|
||
networks and supercomputer centers.
|
||
|
||
When prospective or current users do not know whom to call concerning their
|
||
questions about NSFNET use, they should contact the NNSC. The NNSC will answer
|
||
general questions, and, for detailed information relating to specific
|
||
components of NSFNET, will help users find the appropriate contact for further
|
||
assistance.
|
||
|
||
In addition the NNSC will encourage the development and identification of local
|
||
campus network technical support to better serve NSFNET users in the future.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Connecting To NSFnet
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
NSFNET is part of a collection of interconnected IP-networks referred to
|
||
as the InterNet. IP, the Internet Protocol, is a network protocol which allows
|
||
heterogeneous networks to combine into a single virtual network. TCP, the
|
||
Transmission Control Protocol, is a transport protocol which implements the
|
||
packet loss and error-detection mechanisms required to maintain a reliable
|
||
connection between two points on the network. TCP/IP therefore offers reliable
|
||
delivery of data between heterogeneous computers on diverse networks. An
|
||
example of an application which uses TCP/IP is TELNET, which provides virtual
|
||
terminal service across the network.
|
||
|
||
Only IP-based networks can connect to the Internet; therefore, an organization
|
||
that plans to use NSFnet either must have an existing IP network or have access
|
||
to one. Many large universities and technical firms have links to the InterNet
|
||
in place. The computer science department of a university or the engineering
|
||
support division of a company are most likely to have IP connectivity or to
|
||
have information on the local connections that exist. Prospective users can
|
||
ask the NNSC to determine whether an organization is already connected to the
|
||
Internet.
|
||
|
||
If an organization does not have an IP link, it can obtain one in several ways:
|
||
|
||
*NSF has a program that funds the connecting of organizations to the
|
||
NSF regional/state/community networks that are part of NSFNET. The
|
||
NNSC has more information on this program.
|
||
|
||
*The Computer Science Network, CSNET, provides gateway service to
|
||
several IP-networks, including NSFNET. To get CSNET service, an
|
||
organization must become a CSNET member.
|
||
|
||
*Users may be able to get access to NSFNET through time-share
|
||
accounts on machines at other organizations, such as local
|
||
universities or companies.
|
||
|
||
Some supercomputer centers support access systems other than NSFNET,
|
||
such as Bitnet, commercial X.25 networks, and dial-up lines, which do not
|
||
use IP-based protocols. The Supercomputer Centers' user services
|
||
organizations can provide more information on these alternatives (see
|
||
list).
|
||
|
||
NSF COMPONENT NETWORKS
|
||
|
||
STATE AND REGIONAL NETWORKS
|
||
|
||
BARRNET (California's Bay Area Regional Research Network)
|
||
MERIT ( Michigan Educational Research Network)
|
||
MIDNET (Midwest Network)
|
||
NORTHWESTNET (Northwestern states)
|
||
NYSERNET (New York State Educational and Research Network)
|
||
SESQUINET (the Texas Sesquicentennial Network)
|
||
SURANET (the Southeastern Universities Research Association Network)
|
||
WESTNET (Southwestern states)
|
||
|
||
|
||
CONSORTIUM NETWORKS
|
||
|
||
JVNCNET connects the John Von Neumann National Supercomputer Center
|
||
at Princeton, NJ, with a number of universities.
|
||
PSCAANET is the network of the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center
|
||
Academic Affiliates group.
|
||
SDSCNET is centered at the San Diego Supercomputer Center.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 5 of 11
|
||
|
||
COSMOS
|
||
|
||
COmputer System for Mainframe OperationS
|
||
|
||
Part One
|
||
|
||
by King Arthur
|
||
|
||
Introduction
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
|
||
Throughout the last decade, computers have played an ever growing role in
|
||
information storage and retrieval. In most companies, computerized databases
|
||
have replaced a majority of all paper records. Where in the past it would take
|
||
10 minutes for someone to search through stacks of paper for some data, the
|
||
same information can now be retrieved from a computer in a fraction of a
|
||
second.
|
||
|
||
Previously, proprietary information could be considered "safe" in a file
|
||
cabinet; the only way to see the data would be to have physical access to the
|
||
files. Now, somebody with a computer terminal and a modem can make a quick
|
||
phone call and access private records. It's unfortunate that there are
|
||
"hackers" who try to gain unauthorized access to computers. Yet, it is just as
|
||
unfortunate that most reported computer break-ins could have been prevented if
|
||
more thought and common sense went into protecting computers.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Hackers
|
||
%%%%%%%
|
||
There have been many cases of computer crime reported by the Bell
|
||
Operating Companies (BOCs), but it is hard to say how many actual break-ins
|
||
there are. Keep in mind that the only reported cases are those which are
|
||
detected. In an interview with an anonymous hacker, I was told of one of the
|
||
break-ins that may not have ever been reported. "My friend got the number when
|
||
he misdialed his business office -- that's how we knew that it was the phone
|
||
company's. It seems this Unix was part of some real big Bellcore computer
|
||
network," says the hacker.
|
||
|
||
The hacker explains that this system was one of many systems used by the
|
||
various BOCs to allow large Centrex customers to rearrange their Centrex
|
||
groups. It seems he found a text file on the system with telephone numbers and
|
||
passwords for some of Bellcore's development systems. "On this Bellcore system
|
||
in Jersey, called CCRS, we found a list of 20 some-odd COSMOS systems....
|
||
Numbers, passwords, and wire centers from all over the country!" He adds,
|
||
"Five states to be exact."
|
||
|
||
The hacker was able to gain access to the original Unix system because, as
|
||
he says, "Those guys left all the default passwords working." He was able to
|
||
login with a user name of "games" with the password being "games." "Once we
|
||
were on we found that a large number of accounts didn't have passwords. Mary,
|
||
John, test, banana, and system were some, to name a few." From there he was
|
||
able to eventually access several COSMOS database systems -- with access to ALL
|
||
system files and resources.
|
||
|
||
COSMOS
|
||
%%%%%%
|
||
COSMOS, an acronym for the COmputer System for Mainframe OperationS, is a
|
||
database package currently supported by Bellcore. COSMOS is presently being
|
||
used by every BOC, as well as by Cincinnati Bell and Rochester Telephone.
|
||
COSMOS replaces paper record-keeping and other mechanized record systems for
|
||
plant administration. COSMOS' original purpose was to alleviate congestion in
|
||
the Main Distributing Frame (MDF) by maintaining the shortest jumpers.
|
||
|
||
It can now maintain load balance in a switch and assign office equipment,
|
||
tie pairs, bridge lifters and the like. Additional applications allow COSMOS
|
||
to aid in "cutting-over" a new switch, or even generate recent change messages
|
||
to be input into electronic switches. COSMOS is most often used for
|
||
provisioning new service and maintaining existing service, by the following
|
||
departments: The frame room (MDF), the Loop Assignment Center (LAC), the
|
||
Recent Change Memory Assistance Center (RCMAC), the network administration
|
||
center, and the repair service.
|
||
|
||
Next year COSMOS will celebrate its 15th birthday, which is quite an
|
||
accomplishment for a computer program. The first version or "generic" of
|
||
COSMOS was released by Bell Laboratories in 1974. In March 1974, New Jersey
|
||
Bell was the first company to run COSMOS, in Passaic, New Jersey. Pacific
|
||
Telesis, NYNEX, Southern Bell, and many of the other BOCs adopted COSMOS soon
|
||
after. Whereas Southwestern Bell waited until 1977, the Passaic, NJ Wire
|
||
Center is still running COSMOS today.
|
||
|
||
Originally COSMOS ran on the DEC PDP 11/45 minicomputer. The package was
|
||
written in Fortran, and ran the COSNIX operating system. Later it was adapted
|
||
to run on the DEC PDP 11/70, a larger machine. Beverly Cruse, member of
|
||
Technical Staff, COSMOS system design at Bellcore, says, "COSNIX is a
|
||
derivation of Unix 1.0, it started out from the original Unix, but it was
|
||
adapted for use on the COSMOS project. It bears many similarities to Unix, but
|
||
more to the early versions of Unix than the current... The COSMOS application
|
||
now runs on other hardware understandard Unix."
|
||
|
||
"The newest version of COSMOS runs on the standard Unix System V operating
|
||
system. We will certify it for use on particular processors, based on the
|
||
needs of our clients," says Ed Pinnes, the District Manager of COSMOS system
|
||
design at Bellcore. This Unix version of COSMOS was written in C language.
|
||
Currently, COSMOS is available for use on the AT&T 3B20 supermini computer,
|
||
running under the Unix System V operating system. "There are over 700 COSMOS
|
||
systems total, of which a vast majority are DEC PDP 11/70's. The number
|
||
fluctuates all the time, as companies are starting to replace 11/70's with the
|
||
other machines," says Cruse.
|
||
|
||
In 1981 Bell Laboratories introduced an integrated systems package for
|
||
telephone companies called the Facility Assignment Control System (FACS). FACS
|
||
is a network of systems that exchanges information on a regular basis. These
|
||
are: COSMOS, Loop Facilities Assignment and Control System (LFACS), Service
|
||
Order Analysis and Control (SOAC), and Work Manager (WM). A service order from
|
||
the business office is input in to SOAC. SOAC analyzes the order and then
|
||
sends an assignment request, via the WM, to LFACS. WM acts as a packet switch,
|
||
sending messages between the other components of FACS. LFACS assigns
|
||
distribution plant facilities (cables, terminals, etc.) and sends the order
|
||
back to SOAC. After SOAC receives the information form LFACS, it sends an
|
||
assignment request to COSMOS. COSMOS responds with data for assigning central
|
||
office equipment: Switching equipment, transmission equipment, bridge lifters,
|
||
and the like. SOAC takes all the information from LFACS and COSMOS and appends
|
||
it to the service order, and sends the service order on its way.
|
||
|
||
Computer Security
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Telephone companies seem to take the brunt of unauthorized access
|
||
attempts. The sheer number of employees and size of most telephone companies
|
||
makes it very difficult to keep tabs on everyone and everything. While
|
||
researching computer security, it has become evident that COSMOS is a large
|
||
target for hackers. "The number of COSMOS systems around, with dial-ups on
|
||
most of the machines... makes for a lot of possible break-ins," says Cruse.
|
||
This is why it's all the more important for companies to learn how to protect
|
||
themselves.
|
||
|
||
"COSMOS is power, the whole thing is a big power trip, man. It's like Big
|
||
Brother -- you see the number of some dude you don't like in the computer. You
|
||
make a service order to disconnect it; COSMOS is too stupid to tell you from a
|
||
real telco dude," says one hacker. "I think they get what they deserve:
|
||
There's a serious dearth of security out there. If kids like us can get access
|
||
this easily, think about the real enemy -- the Russians," jokes another.
|
||
|
||
A majority of unauthorized access attempts can be traced back to an
|
||
oversight on the part of the system operators; and just as many are the fault
|
||
of the systems' users. If you can keep one step ahead of the hackers,
|
||
recognize these problems now, and keep an eye out for similar weaknesses, you
|
||
can save your company a lot of trouble.
|
||
|
||
A hacker says, "In California, a friend of mine used to be able to find
|
||
passwords in the garbage. The computer was supposed to print some garbled
|
||
characters on top of the password. Instead the password would print out AFTER
|
||
the garbled characters." Some COSMOS users have half duplex printing
|
||
terminals. At the password prompt COSMOS is supposed to print a series of
|
||
characters and then send backspaces. Then the user would enter his or her
|
||
password. When the password is printed on top of the other characters, you
|
||
can't see what it is. If the password is being printed after the other
|
||
characters, then the printing terminal is not receiving the back space
|
||
characters properly.
|
||
|
||
Another big problem is lack of password security. As mentioned before,
|
||
regarding CCRS, many accounts on some systems will lack passwords. "On COSMOS
|
||
there are these standardized account names. It makes it easier for system
|
||
operators to keep track of who's using the system. For instance: all accounts
|
||
that belong to the frame room will have an MF in them. Like MF01, you can tell
|
||
it belongs to the frame room. (MF stands for Main Frame.) Most of these names
|
||
seem to be common to most COSMOS systems everywhere. In one city, none of
|
||
these user accounts have passwords. All you need is the name of the account
|
||
and you're in. In another city, which will remain unnamed, the passwords are
|
||
the SAME AS THE DAMN NAMES! Like, MF01 has a password of MF01. These guys
|
||
must not be very serious about security."
|
||
|
||
One of the biggest and in my eyes one of the scariest problems around is
|
||
what hackers refer to as "social engineering". Social engineering is basically
|
||
the act of impersonating somebody else for the sake of gaining proprietary
|
||
information. "I know this guy. He can trick anybody, does the best BS job
|
||
I've ever seen. He'll call up a telco office, like the repair service bureau,
|
||
that uses COSMOS. We found that most clerks at the repair service aren't too
|
||
sharp." The hacker said the conversation would usually take the following
|
||
course:
|
||
|
||
Hacker: Hi, this is Frank, from the COSMOS computer center. We've had a
|
||
problem with our records, and I'm wondering if you could help me?
|
||
|
||
Telco: Oh, what seems to be the problem?
|
||
|
||
H: We seem to have lost some user data. Hopefully, if I can correct the
|
||
problem, you people won't lose any access time today. Could you tell me
|
||
what your system login name is?
|
||
|
||
T: Well, the one I use is RS01.
|
||
|
||
H: Hmm, this could present a problem. Can you tell me what password and wire
|
||
center you use that with?
|
||
|
||
T: Well, I just type s-u-c-k-e-r for my password, and my wire centers are: TK,
|
||
KL, GL, and PK.
|
||
|
||
H: Do you call into the system, or do you only have direct connect terminals?
|
||
|
||
T: Well, when I turn on my machine I get a direct hook up. It just tells me
|
||
to login. But I know in the back they have to dial something. Hold on,
|
||
let me check. (3 Minutes later...) Well, she says all she does is call
|
||
555-1212.
|
||
|
||
H: OK, I think I have everything taken care of. Thanks, have a nice day.
|
||
|
||
T: Good, so I'm not gonna have any problems?
|
||
|
||
H: No, but if you do just give the computer center a call, and we'll take care
|
||
of it.
|
||
|
||
T: Oh, thank you honey. Have a nice day now.
|
||
|
||
"It doesn't work all the time, but we get away with it a good part of the
|
||
time. I guess they just don't expect a call from someone who isn't really part
|
||
of their company," says the hacker. "I once social engineered the COSMOS
|
||
control center. They gave me dial-ups for several systems, and even gave me
|
||
one password. I told them I was calling from the RCMAC and I was having
|
||
trouble logging into COSMOS," says another.
|
||
|
||
This last problem illustrates a perfect example of what I mean when I say
|
||
these problems can be prevented if more care and common sense went into
|
||
computer security. "Sometimes, if we want to get in to COSMOS, but we don't
|
||
have the password, we call a COSMOS dial-up at about 5 o'clock. To logoff of
|
||
COSMOS you have to hit a CONTROL-Y. If you don't, the next person who calls
|
||
will resume where you left off. A lot of the time, people forget to logoff.
|
||
They just turn their terminals off, in the rush of going home."
|
||
|
||
The past examples do not comprise the only way hackers get into systems,
|
||
but most of the problems shown here can exist regardless of what types of
|
||
systems your company has. The second article deals with solutions to these
|
||
problems.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 6 of 11
|
||
|
||
+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
|
||
|
||
Basic Concepts of Translation
|
||
|
||
Brought to you by
|
||
|
||
The Dead Lord
|
||
and
|
||
The Chief Executive Officers
|
||
|
||
February 17, 1989
|
||
|
||
+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
|
||
|
||
This tutorial is meant for the hardcore hackers who have entered the world of
|
||
ESS switches. The information here is useful and valuable, although not
|
||
invaluable. You can easily reap the benefits of access to a switch even if you
|
||
only know RC:LINE, but to really learn the system in and out, the concepts
|
||
about translation are ones that need to be mastered.
|
||
|
||
In electromechanical switches, switching was directly controlled by whatever
|
||
the customer dialed. If a 5 were dialed, the selector moved across 5
|
||
positions, and so on. There were no digit storing devices like registers and
|
||
senders. As the network grew larger, this became inefficient and switching
|
||
systems using digit storage and decoding devices were put into use. In this
|
||
type of setup, the customer dials a number, which is stored in a register, or
|
||
sender. The sender then uses a decoder and gives the contents of the register
|
||
as input. The decoder translates the input into a format that can be used to
|
||
complete the call, and sends this translation back to the digit storage device.
|
||
This is a simplified example of translation, since the only input was dialed
|
||
digits and the only output was routable information, but it shows what
|
||
translation is: The changing of information from one form to another.
|
||
|
||
When 1 ESS was first tested in Morris, Illinois in 1960, it introduced a
|
||
switching method called Stored Program Control. Instead of switching and logic
|
||
functions being handled by hardware, it was done through computer programs.
|
||
This greatly expanded the translation function. Because calls are handled by
|
||
many programs, information must be provided for each program. For example,
|
||
when a customer picks up a phone, the switch needs to know if outgoing service
|
||
is being denied, if the line is being observed, line class, special equipment
|
||
features, etc. The line equipment number is given to the translation program
|
||
as input. The translator translates the LEN and produces the answers to these
|
||
and other pertinent questions in a coded form that can be used by the central
|
||
processor of the switch.
|
||
|
||
If the call is an interoffice call, the first three dialed digits are given to
|
||
a translator as input and they translate into a route index and, possibly,
|
||
other information. The route index, in turn, is given as input to another
|
||
translator, which translates into: Which trunk to use (trunk identity),
|
||
transmitter identity, the alternate route, etc. So actually, in early systems,
|
||
translation was a single shot thing, and in Stored Program Control Systems
|
||
(SPCS), the translation function is used many many times.
|
||
|
||
In the 1 ESS, translation data is stored on magnetic memory cards in the
|
||
program store. However, since translation data is constantly being changed,
|
||
there is a provision made to store the changes in an area of the call store
|
||
memory. The area of call store is called the recent change (RC) area. The
|
||
changes are eventually transcribed from the call store into the program store
|
||
by a memory card writer.
|
||
|
||
In the 1A ESS, translation data is stored in the unduplicated call store, with
|
||
backup in the form of disk memory called file store. Additionally, magnetic
|
||
tapes are made of the translation area of call store. When a change in
|
||
translation is made, the change is entered in a duplicated copy of call store.
|
||
After checks are made as to the validity of the change (format and everything),
|
||
the change is then placed in the unduplicated copy of call store. After that,
|
||
the change is also written to a set of disk files in file store. Before the
|
||
new data is written, the old data is written to a part of the disk file called
|
||
"rollback."
|
||
|
||
|------------|-------------|-------------|
|
||
| DATA | 1 ESS | 1A ESS |
|
||
|------------|-------------|-------------|
|
||
| Transient | Duplicated | Duplicated |
|
||
|Information | Call Store | Call Store |
|
||
|------------|-------------|-------------|
|
||
| Generic | Duplicated |Program Store|
|
||
| Program |Program Store| |
|
||
|------------|-------------|-------------|
|
||
| Parameter | Duplicated |Unduplicated |
|
||
| Table |Program Store| Call Store |
|
||
|------------|-------------|-------------|
|
||
|Translation | Duplicated |Unduplicated |
|
||
|Information |Call Store + | Call Store |
|
||
| |Program Store| |
|
||
|------------|-------------|-------------|
|
||
|
||
|
||
Transient Information: Telephone calls or data messages in progress; present
|
||
state of all lines, junctors, and trunks in the
|
||
office.
|
||
|
||
Generic Program: The operating intelligence of the system. It
|
||
controls actions like line and trunk scanning,
|
||
setting up and taking down connections, etc.
|
||
|
||
Parameter Table: Informs the generic program of the size and makeup of
|
||
the office. This information includes equipment
|
||
items (frames and units), call store allocation (call
|
||
registers, hoppers, queues, etc.) and office options
|
||
(days AMA tapes will be switched, etc.).
|
||
|
||
Translation Information: Day to day changeable info which is accessed by
|
||
translator programs. Also includes form tables,
|
||
lists called "translators" which are linked in an
|
||
hierarchical pattern.
|
||
|
||
This is a quote from Engineering and Operations in the Bell System, pages
|
||
415-416:
|
||
|
||
"The 1 ESS includes a fully duplicated No. 1 Central Processor Unit
|
||
(Central Control includes the generic program), program store bus,
|
||
call store bus, program stores, and call stores. The 1 ESS uses
|
||
permanent magnet twister program store modules as basic memory
|
||
elements. These provide a memory that is fundamentally read only,
|
||
and have a cycle time of 5.5 microseconds. The call store provides
|
||
"scratch pad," or temporary duplicated memory.
|
||
|
||
As with the 1 ESS, the 1A CPU has a CPU, prog store bus, and call
|
||
store bus that are fully duplicated. However, the 1A processor uses
|
||
readable and writable memory for both prog and call stores, and has
|
||
a cycle time of 700 nanoseconds. However, the program stores aren't
|
||
fully duplicated, but 2 spare stores are provided for reliability.
|
||
A portion of the call store is duplicated, but only one copy of
|
||
certain fault recognition programs, parameter information, and
|
||
translation data is provided. An extra copy of the unduplicated
|
||
prog and call store is provided for in file store."
|
||
|
||
The program store translation area in the 1 ESS and the unduplicated call store
|
||
translation area in the 1A ESS contain all the info that can change from day to
|
||
day for that office. Here is a list of things that are stored in the
|
||
translation area:
|
||
+ Line Equipment Number (LEN), Directory Number (DN), trunk assignments (all
|
||
explained later).
|
||
+ Office codes.
|
||
+ Rate and route information.
|
||
+ Traffic measurement information.
|
||
+ Associated miscellaneous info for call processing and charging.
|
||
|
||
Call store can be thought of as RAM; it is filled as long as the ESS is
|
||
powered.
|
||
|
||
Program store is like ROM; it is physically written onto magnetic cards. File
|
||
store is simply information stored on magnetic tapes (or disk drives). All
|
||
data that's changeable (rate and route, customers' features, trunk selection,
|
||
alternate paths, etc.) is called translation data and is stored in the
|
||
translation area.
|
||
|
||
Changes in translation are called recent changes and are stored in an area
|
||
called the recent change area.
|
||
|
||
Once again, I stress that this article is sort of a "masters" file for hackers
|
||
who are interested in ESS. If the concepts are too difficult, don't panic.
|
||
Knowledge comes with time. Don't feel bad if you don't catch on right away.
|
||
|
||
Translation data is stored in the form of tables or lists. Each table is
|
||
linked in a hierarchical pattern. Tables high in the hierarchy contain
|
||
pointers (addresses) to the lower tables. Tables low in the hierarchy contain
|
||
the actual data.
|
||
|
||
Most translators are broken down into subtranslators, which are linked by a
|
||
Head Table, or "HT". The HT points to the different ST's stored in memory, in
|
||
the same way that a table of contents in a book points to the pages of each
|
||
chapter. This way, when a new feature is added, it's just a matter of adding a
|
||
new entry in the HT, and having the entry point to a newly stored ST.
|
||
|
||
Translation input is divided into 2 parts: the selector and the index. The
|
||
selector determines which ST to access, and the index determines which item
|
||
(word number) in that particular ST to access. In some cases, the translation
|
||
information may not fit into the space allotted to an ST, so pointers to
|
||
auxiliary blocks and/or expansion tables may have to be given. You can think
|
||
of a BASIC program, where a GOSUB points to a subroutine at location 4000.
|
||
Now, if the subroutine is 100 bytes long, but you only have room for 75,
|
||
another GOSUB must be issued to point to the rest of the subroutine. So a full
|
||
translator is quite a large unit -- it can have a head table, subtranslators,
|
||
auxiliary blocks, abbreviated codes, lists, subauxiliary blocks and expansion
|
||
tables. The example below shows a custom calling feature that exists on 5 ESS:
|
||
Dog Control Frequency, "DCF". In the e below diagram, DCF represents the Head
|
||
Table, and has a list of pointers that identify the location of subtranslators
|
||
"A" through "D". The data field "2" in subtranslator "D" is too small to store
|
||
the entire subroutine, so an expansion table "2A" was produced to house the
|
||
entire program.
|
||
|
||
* D.C.F. * head table
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|------|-----------|--------|
|
||
| | | |
|
||
A B C D subtranslators
|
||
|
|
||
---1 data: tables
|
||
|or
|
||
---2 ---->| lists
|
||
| |
|
||
---3 |
|
||
| |
|
||
etc % / expansion
|
||
2-Atable
|
||
|
||
ESS programs access translators by locating their octal address in the Master
|
||
Head Table, which is also called the Base Translator.
|
||
|
||
1 ESS MHT
|
||
%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The 1 ESS has 2 copies of the MHT: One in program store, and one in call
|
||
store. The copy in call store is the one that's used normally, since call
|
||
store memory has a faster cycle time. The one in program store is there for
|
||
backup. The MHT is 338 bytes long (23 bit bytes), and as we mentioned, is used
|
||
as a sort of directory for locating translators. The MHT can point to starting
|
||
addresses of Head Tables (which point to translators), or to tables and lists.
|
||
Head Tables point to subtranslators. Subtranslators can point to auxiliary and
|
||
expansion blocks, lists, or tables.
|
||
|
||
There is another Master Head Table called the Auxiliary Master Head Table,
|
||
which points to other translators. There are 2 copies of the AMHT, one in
|
||
program and one in call store. The AMHT is found by accessing the MHT, and for
|
||
those interested, the address of the AMHT is located in the 28th byte of the
|
||
MHT. The MHT is fixed; meaning that the first byte will ALWAYS be the address
|
||
of the DN translator. The last byte will ALWAYS be the address to the JNNL to
|
||
JNNT/JCN Head Table (explained later). ESS needs a table to read this table.
|
||
Otherwise, how would it know what byte leads where? There is a "T-reading
|
||
octal program" located at (octal address) 1105615 in the parameter area in the
|
||
program store.This address is stored in the generic program and is used to read
|
||
the Master Head Table.
|
||
|
||
1A ESS
|
||
%%%%%%
|
||
A 1A ESS switch call store byte contains 26 bits, named 0 through 25, which is
|
||
a lot more than I can say about an Apple... Bits 24 and 25 are used for parity,
|
||
and are not used for data. This leads to what is known as a K-code. No, a
|
||
K-code is not used by lowly software K-rad pirates, but it is used by us ESS
|
||
hackers. Each call store K-code contains 65,536 bytes, and can be thought of
|
||
as a "page" of memory.
|
||
|
||
Anyway, translation data is stored in the unduplicated call store. Remember,
|
||
we're still talking about 1A ESS. In generic 1AE6 and earlier, unduplicated
|
||
call store starts at K-code 17, and as more translation data is fed into the
|
||
system, it pushes down into K-code 16, 15, 14, etc. In generic 7 and above,
|
||
call store has been increased by a great deal, because of a huge memory
|
||
expansion unit. On the early generics, the entire call store and program store
|
||
had to fit in 38 K-codes. In the later generics, there are 38 K-codes assigned
|
||
to call store (that's split between duplicated and unduplicated), and another
|
||
38 K-codes for program store.
|
||
|
||
Not all K-codes may be used, so it's not really a full 38 K-codes, but hey, you
|
||
can't have all your memory and use it too. Anyhow, because generics 1A E7 and
|
||
higher have such huge call store memories, it's convenient to divide call store
|
||
into 3 parts: The "duplicated call store" (DCS), which is located at the very
|
||
top of the memory map, the "low unduplicated call store," (LUCS), which is
|
||
located in the middle of call store, and the "high unduplicated call store,"
|
||
(HUCS). The LUCS area starts at K-code 17 and goes down as it fills up (being
|
||
very watchful about not going into the DCS area. The HUCS area starts at
|
||
K-code 37 and goes down as it fills up to K-code 20, being mindful not to step
|
||
on LUCS's toes. Translators are classified as being either HUCS or LUCS
|
||
translators, (but not both).
|
||
|
||
LUCS translators aren't fixed; they can exist anywhere in the area as long as
|
||
they're identified by the MHT. HUCS translators can either be fixed or not
|
||
fixed. Note that in generics 1AE6 and earlier, there is no such distinction,
|
||
because there's not enough memory to make such a distinction feasible. As for
|
||
the location of the MHT, in generic 1AE6 and earlier, it's located in K-code 17
|
||
at octal address 3724000, and is 1376 bytes long. The later MHT's were moved
|
||
to K-code 37 at octal address 7720000, and is 3424 bytes long.
|
||
|
||
Translator Types
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
As I said, translators take data as input and change it into another form for
|
||
output. All translators exist in the form of hierarchical lists and tables.
|
||
They reside in call store on 1A's and program store on 1's. The higher data in
|
||
a translator points to the location of the lower data. The lower data contains
|
||
the actual information. The different translators are located by the Master
|
||
Head Table, which contains pointers to all the translators in the system. The
|
||
kind of data that needs to be translated is changeable data.
|
||
|
||
For example:
|
||
|
||
o line equipment number
|
||
o directory number
|
||
o 3/6 digit codes
|
||
o trunk network number to trunk group number
|
||
o trunk network number to peripheral equipment number
|
||
|
||
Now, there are two types of translators: Multilevel and expansion. The
|
||
multilevel translators contain a maximum of six levels of information in the
|
||
form of linked hierarchical tables:
|
||
|
||
1- Head Table
|
||
2- Subtranslator
|
||
3- Primary translator word
|
||
4- Auxiliary block or expansion table
|
||
5- List
|
||
6- Subauxiliary block
|
||
|
||
(1) Head Table: The HT is the "directory" for the translator. It contains
|
||
addresses or pointers to each subtranslator.
|
||
|
||
(2) Subtranslator: The ST's are the main subdivisions, so as an office grows
|
||
larger, or as more features are added, the number of ST's grows larger.
|
||
For example, there is a translator for every 1,000 directory numbers, so if
|
||
an office grows from 3,000 to 8,000 lines, an extra 5 subtranslators must
|
||
be added. Input for translation must contain 2 things: A selector and an
|
||
index. The selector contains the information as to which subtranslator to
|
||
use (in the case of DCF, the selector would either be an A, B, C, or D).
|
||
The index shows which item or word in that particular subtranslator to
|
||
access. In the DCF example, if the selector were "D", the index could be
|
||
1, 2, 3, etc.
|
||
|
||
(3) Primary Translation Word (PTW): Each index points to a PTW, which is a
|
||
byte of information. Often, all you need is 1 byte of information
|
||
(remember that each byte is 23 bits!). If the data isn't stored in the
|
||
PTW, an address will be there to point to an auxiliary block or expansion
|
||
table, where the data will be found. The ESS can recognize whether the
|
||
byte contains data or an address by:
|
||
|
||
1 ESS) The 3 most significant bits will be 0.
|
||
1A ESS) The 4 most significant bits will be 0.
|
||
|
||
So, if all the 3 (or 4 for 1A) most significant bits contain 0's, the word
|
||
will be interpreted as an address. (Anyone want to throw the ESS switch
|
||
into an endless loop????)
|
||
(4) Auxiliary Block: The first byte in the AB contains the length of the
|
||
block. This byte is called the word number (WRDN), and is used by the ESS
|
||
so it knows where the auxiliary block ends. Remember that when the ESS
|
||
reads data, all it sees is:
|
||
|
||
110001011000101010100100101110010010101000101010100100101111
|
||
|
||
So, in order to stop at the end of the block, the WRDN number must be
|
||
present.
|
||
|
||
(5) List: The list is used when additional information other than the standard
|
||
found in the auxiliary block is needed. The list, like the ST, has an
|
||
associated index. The address of the list is found in the AB and the index
|
||
shows which item of data in the list should be looked at. A good example
|
||
of what kind of information is found in the list would be a speed calling
|
||
list.
|
||
|
||
(6) Subauxiliary Block: The list is only large enough to hold a 7 digit phone
|
||
number, and if more information has to be stored (like a 10 digit phone
|
||
number or a trunk identity), an address is stored in the list that points
|
||
to an SB, which acts very much like an AB.
|
||
|
||
Expansion Translator
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The expansion translator has one table (called an expansion table). This type
|
||
of translator gets only an index as input, since this type of translator is
|
||
only a bunch of words. It could have auxiliary blocks, if the space allocated
|
||
to a word is too small.
|
||
|
||
RECENT CHANGE AREA OF CALL STORE (1 ESS)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
The recent change area consists of:
|
||
|
||
+ primary recent change area
|
||
+ auxiliary recent change area
|
||
+ customer originated recent change (CORC)
|
||
|
||
The starting and ending addresses for these rc areas are stored in the MHT.
|
||
The primary recent change area is used to store changes affecting primary
|
||
translation words. Each change is stored in a primary RC register, which
|
||
consists of two 23 bit bytes. These two bytes contain status bits, primary
|
||
translation address in the program store, and the primary translation word
|
||
(PTW) address in call store. The first byte in the register is the "address
|
||
word" (AW) and the second is the new primary translation word. When looking
|
||
through the AW, bits 22 and 21 can tell you what kind of recent change is being
|
||
implemented:
|
||
|
||
11: temporary (not to be put into PS)
|
||
10: permanent (to be put into PS)
|
||
01: delayed (not active yet)
|
||
00: deleted (this space is available)
|
||
|
||
The PTW (abbreviations make things SO much easier) contains the translation
|
||
data or the address of the auxiliary RC (TAG). You can tell whether the data
|
||
is an RC or an address by looking at bits 22 to 18. If they are 0, then this
|
||
byte contains an address, which is stored in bits 17 to 0.
|
||
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 7 of 11
|
||
|
||
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
|
||
<> <>
|
||
<> PHONE BUGGING <>
|
||
<> <>
|
||
<> Telecom's Underground Industry <>
|
||
<> <>
|
||
<> By Split Decision <>
|
||
<> <>
|
||
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
|
||
|
||
|
||
In today's landscape of insider trading, leveraged buyouts and merger mania,
|
||
it is no great shock that a new underground industry has developed within
|
||
telecom -- eavesdropping.
|
||
|
||
Bugs are cheap (starting at $30) and can be installed in as little as 10
|
||
seconds. And you can bet your bottom $1 million that this expense pales in
|
||
comparison to the rewards of finding out your takeover plans, marketing
|
||
strategies, and product developments.
|
||
|
||
According to Fritz Lang of Tactical Research Devices (Brewster, NY), there is a
|
||
virtual epidemic of bugging going on in the American marketplace. Counter-
|
||
surveillance agencies like TRD have sprung up all over. They search for
|
||
eavesdropping equipment, then notify the client if they're being tapped. It's
|
||
up to the client to respond to the intrusion.
|
||
|
||
Each of TRD's employees is a retired CIA or FBI operative. Formerly, they
|
||
planted bugs for Uncle Sam. Since it's illegal to plant bugs for anyone else,
|
||
these men now engage in counter surveillance work, pinpointing eavesdropping
|
||
devices, and sometimes the culprits who put them there, for TRD's client
|
||
companies.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Where Do They Put The Bugs?
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Your TELEPHONE, of course, is a convenient place to install an eavesdropping
|
||
device. But this doesn't mean that the illegal tapping will be limited to your
|
||
phone conversations.
|
||
|
||
Electronic phones have microphones which are always "live," even when the
|
||
telephone is on-hook. Stick an amplifier and transmitting unit to the
|
||
microphone, and you have constant surveillance of all conversations taking
|
||
place in that room, whether or not the phone is off-hook at the time.
|
||
|
||
A device rapidly gaining popularity among today's wire-tappers is a mouthpiece
|
||
containing a tiny bug, which looks exactly like the one of your 2500 set. All
|
||
it takes is one trip to the water cooler or the men's room for the insider to
|
||
surreptitiously make the old switcheroo.
|
||
|
||
LOUDSPEAKERS are another favorite location for wire-tappers, because they can
|
||
pick up conversations when not in use. Paging systems, piped in music, and
|
||
telephone systems all employ some variety of amplifier which the culprit can
|
||
use to his advantage.
|
||
|
||
LINE INTERCEPTORS allow eavesdroppers more extensive coverage of your
|
||
activities, since they can monitor more than on-line communications from a
|
||
single listening post.
|
||
|
||
But really, the number of places you can find a bug is limited only by the
|
||
tapper's imagination. Light switches, plugs, clocks, calculators, legs of
|
||
wooden chairs, staplers, ashtrays, the underside of a toilet bowl -- all of
|
||
these items have proved fertile territory for the little critters.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tools For Finding The Bugs
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
TRD's people use a patented Surveillance Search Receiver to locate the bugs.
|
||
The Receiver uses a broad-band radio spectrum, from 25 kHz to 7 gHz.
|
||
|
||
If there is an unaccounted-for radio frequency emission on the premises, the
|
||
Receiver will tune it in on a small spectrum monitor. It then traces the
|
||
emission to its inevitable source, the bug.
|
||
|
||
For room bugs, they also use a Non-Linear Junction Detector, which can pinpoint
|
||
all electronic circuit diodes or resistors in the architecture of the building.
|
||
|
||
The Detector emits a high microwave signal into walls, furniture, et al.,
|
||
causing any circuit hidden within to oscillate. As soon as they oscillate,
|
||
they become detectable.
|
||
|
||
Mr. Lang clears up a misconception about the Russians bugging our embassy in
|
||
Moscow. "They didn't riddle the building with actual bugs, instead, they
|
||
buried millions of little resistors in the concrete."
|
||
|
||
The embassy, therefore, became a hot bed for false alarms. Whenever the
|
||
American counter-measure people came in with their detectors to look for a bug,
|
||
they'd pick up oscillation readings from the countless resistors and
|
||
capacitors buried in the walls. Finding any real bugs would be infinitely more
|
||
difficult than finding the old needle in a haystack.
|
||
|
||
For finding wire-taps along the phone lines, TRD uses a computerized electronic
|
||
Telephone Analyzer. The unit runs 18 different tests on phone lines between
|
||
the CPE block and the Central Office (CO). Resistance, voltage, and line
|
||
balance are just a few of them. Once they locate a tapped line, they send a
|
||
pulse down it with a time-domain reflectometer, which can pinpoint exactly
|
||
where in the line the bug has been affixed.
|
||
|
||
Bear in mind that wire-tapping is extremely difficult and time consuming. As
|
||
much as 20 hours of conversations has to be monitored every single business
|
||
day. Because of this, key executives' telephones are usually the only ones
|
||
slated for a wire-tap.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Catching The Culprit
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Finding a wire-tap is easier than finding the spy who bugged your office.
|
||
Direct hardwire taps can be traced to the remote location where the snoop
|
||
stores his voltage-activated electronic tape recorder. After you've found the
|
||
monitoring post, it's a matter of hanging around the premises until someone
|
||
comes to collect the old tapes and put in fresh ones.
|
||
|
||
As for room bugs, your best bet is to make the device inoperable, without
|
||
removing it, and wait for the eavesdropping to come back to fix or replace it.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Once Is Never Enough
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Some of TRD's clients have their offices checked monthly, some quarterly.
|
||
After the initial sweep, you can have equipment installed on your phone lines
|
||
which constantly monitors any funny stuff.
|
||
|
||
As for TRD, they offer a money-back guarantee if they fail to detect an
|
||
existing bug on your premises. Mr. Lang assures us that Fortune 500 company
|
||
has been bugged to a greater or lesser extent. That's how out-of-hand the
|
||
problem is getting.
|
||
|
||
Toward the end of our conversation, Mr. Lang pauses. "So you're really going
|
||
to print this, huh? You're really on the up and up?" Then he spills the
|
||
beans.
|
||
|
||
It turns out Mr. Fritz Lang is really Mr. Frank Jones (he says), a licensed
|
||
private investigator with a broad reputation in the industry. He used the
|
||
alias because he suspected I was from a rival counter-measure agency, or worse,
|
||
a wire-tapper, trying to infiltrate his operations.
|
||
|
||
Which quite possibly I am. You can't trust anybody in this spy business.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 8 of 11
|
||
|
||
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
|
||
<> <>
|
||
<> Future Transcendent Saga Appendix III <>
|
||
<> "Limbo To Infinity" <>
|
||
<> <>
|
||
<> Internet Domains <>
|
||
<> <>
|
||
<> April 1989 <>
|
||
<> <>
|
||
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
|
||
|
||
|
||
Special thanks goes out to Henry Nussbacher who did the actual compiling of
|
||
this list. For those of you on Bitnet, you may have seen this previously in
|
||
the form of BITNET GATES.
|
||
|
||
For readers who are a little unsure of what this file shows, I will try to
|
||
explain a little. As you already know from the Future Transcendent Saga, there
|
||
are many different networks all around the world. Most of these networks are
|
||
connected in some way, usually all being called the Internet.
|
||
|
||
Now, as you should know, Taran King and Knight Lighting both have addresses on
|
||
Bitnet that are on the node UMCVMB.BITNET. However, this node also exists
|
||
on the Internet in a different form: UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU.
|
||
|
||
EDU is the Internet domain for academic nodes. Not every node on Bitnet has a
|
||
translation on the Internet. Then again, only a small fraction of the
|
||
nodes on Internet have Bitnet equivalents.
|
||
|
||
So what this file really shows is what network you are sending mail to when you
|
||
have an address that contains a nodename or routing designation that looks a
|
||
little strange. For people on Bitnet it also shows what Bitnet address serves
|
||
as the gateway between Bitnet and whichever network they are sending to on the
|
||
Internet.
|
||
|
||
The following is a table of gateways between Bitnet and other networks. It is
|
||
in the format of;
|
||
|
||
Domain: The upper level recognized name by the Columbia University VM
|
||
mail system.
|
||
|
||
Name: The descriptive name of this network.
|
||
|
||
Gateway: Where the mail is sent to in Bitnet. Unless otherwise specified,
|
||
the gateway expects to receive a BSMTP (Batch Simple Mail
|
||
Transfer Protocol) envelope. Users in general do not need to
|
||
worry about the contents of this field. This is not a mailbox
|
||
for general questions but rather the server machine (daemon) that
|
||
acts as the transporter of mail from one network to another.
|
||
Software postmasters are expected to configure their system so
|
||
that their system sends to the nearest gateway and not to the
|
||
default gateway.
|
||
|
||
Translation: Upon occasion, certain addresses will be translated internally to
|
||
point to an indirect gateway. In such a case, the complete
|
||
address is specified.
|
||
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
|
||
Internet Commercial Clients (COM)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Domain: COM
|
||
Name: Internet - Commerical clients
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: CRD.GE.COM
|
||
Name: General Electric Corporate Research & Development
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@GECRDVM1
|
||
|
||
Domain: HAC.COM
|
||
Name: Hughes Aircraft Co. Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@YMIR
|
||
|
||
Domain: STARGATE.COM
|
||
Name: Stargate Information Service
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@UIUCVMD
|
||
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
|
||
Internet Academic Clients (EDU)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Domain: EDU
|
||
Name: Internet - Academic clients
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: ARIZONA.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Arizona, Tucson
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@ARIZRVAX
|
||
|
||
Domain: BATES.EDU
|
||
Name: Bates College Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@DARTCMS1
|
||
|
||
Domain: CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU
|
||
Name: University of California at Berkeley
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UCBCMSA
|
||
|
||
Domain: BERKELEY.EDU
|
||
Name: University of California at Berkeley Campus Mail Network
|
||
Gateway: BSMTP@UCBJADE
|
||
|
||
Domain: BU.EDU
|
||
Name: Boston University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@BUACCA
|
||
|
||
Domain: BUCKNELL.EDU
|
||
Name: Bucknell University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@BKNLVMS
|
||
|
||
Domain: BUFFALO.EDU
|
||
Name: State University of New York at Buffalo
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@UBVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: BYU.EDU
|
||
Name: Brigham Young University Campus Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@BYUADMIN
|
||
|
||
Domain: CALTECH.EDU
|
||
Name: California Institute of Technology local area network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@HAMLET
|
||
|
||
Domain: CLAREMONT.EDU
|
||
Name: Claremont Colleges Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@YMIR
|
||
|
||
Domain: CLARKSON.EDU
|
||
Name: Clarkson University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@CLVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: CMU.EDU
|
||
Name: Carnegie Mellon University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@CMUCCVMA
|
||
|
||
Domain: COLORADO.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Colorado at Boulder Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@COLORADO
|
||
|
||
Domain: COLUMBIA.EDU
|
||
Name: Columbia University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@CUVMA
|
||
|
||
Domain: CONNCOLL.EDU
|
||
Name: Connecticut College Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@CONNCOLL
|
||
|
||
Domain: CORNELL.EDU
|
||
Name: Cornell University
|
||
Gateway: MAL@CORNELLC
|
||
|
||
Domain: CUN.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Puerto Rico
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@UPRENET
|
||
|
||
Domain: CUNY.EDU
|
||
Name: City University of New York
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@CUNYVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: DARTMOUTH.EDU
|
||
Name: Dartmouth College Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@DARTCMS1
|
||
|
||
Domain: GATECH.EDU
|
||
Name: Georgia Institute of Technology Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@GITVM1
|
||
|
||
Domain: HAMPSHIRE.EDU
|
||
Name: Hampshire College Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@HAMPVMS
|
||
|
||
Domain: HARVARD.EDU
|
||
Name: Harvard University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@HARVARDA
|
||
|
||
Domain: HAWAII.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Hawaii Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UHCCUX
|
||
|
||
Domain: IASTATE.EDU
|
||
Name: Iowa State University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@ISUMVS
|
||
|
||
Domain: KSU.EDU
|
||
Name: Kansas State University
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@KSUVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: LEHIGH.EDU
|
||
Name: Lehigh University Campus Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@LEHIIBM1
|
||
|
||
Domain: LSU.EDU
|
||
Name: Louisiana State University local area network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@LSUVAX
|
||
|
||
Domain: MAINE.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Maine System
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@MAINE
|
||
|
||
Domain: MAYO.EDU
|
||
Name: Mayo Clinic LAN, Minnesota Regional Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@UMNACVX
|
||
|
||
Domain: MIT.EDU
|
||
Name: MIT Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@MITVMA
|
||
|
||
Domain: NCSU.EDU
|
||
Name: North Carolina State University
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@NCSUVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: CCCC.NJIT.EDU
|
||
Name: NJIT Computer Conferencing Center
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@ORION
|
||
Comments: In process of establishing a single NJIT.EDU domain
|
||
|
||
Domain: NWU.EDU
|
||
Name: Northwestern University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@NUACC
|
||
|
||
Domain: NYU.EDU
|
||
Name: New York University/Academic Computing Facility LAN
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@NYUCCVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: OBERLIN.EDU
|
||
Name: Oberlin College
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@OBERLIN
|
||
|
||
Domain: PEPPERDINE.EDU
|
||
Name: Pepperdine University
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@PEPVAX
|
||
|
||
Domain: PRINCETON.EDU
|
||
Name: Princeton University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: VMMAIL@PUCC
|
||
|
||
Domain: PURDUE.EDU
|
||
Name: Purdue University Campus Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@PURCCVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: RICE.EDU
|
||
Name: Rice University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@RICE
|
||
|
||
Domain: ROSE-HULMAN.EDU
|
||
Name: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@RHIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: SDSC.EDU
|
||
Name: San Diego Supercomputer Center
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@SDSC
|
||
|
||
Domain: STANFORD.EDU
|
||
Name: Stanford University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@STANFORD
|
||
|
||
Domain: STOLAF.EDU
|
||
Name: St. Olaf College LAN, Minnesota Regional Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@UMNACVX
|
||
|
||
Domain: SWARTHMORE.EDU
|
||
Name: Swarthmore College Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@SWARTHMR
|
||
|
||
Domain: SYR.EDU
|
||
Name: Syracuse University Local Area Network (FASTNET)
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@SUVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: TORONTO.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Toronto local area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UTORONTO
|
||
|
||
Domain: TOWSON.EDU
|
||
Name: Towson State University Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@TOWSONVX
|
||
|
||
Domain: TRINCOLL.EDU
|
||
Name: Trinity College - Hartford, Connecticut
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@TRINCC
|
||
|
||
Domain: TRINITY.EDU
|
||
Name: Trinity University
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@TRINITY
|
||
|
||
Domain: TULANE.EDU
|
||
Name: Tulane University local area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@TCSVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: UAKRON.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Akron Campus Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@AKRONVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: UCAR.EDU
|
||
Name: National Center for Atmospheric Research Bldr CO
|
||
Gateway: SMTPSERV@NCARIO
|
||
|
||
Domain: UCHICAGO.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Chicago Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UCHIMVS1
|
||
|
||
Domain: UCLA.EDU
|
||
Name: University of California Los Angeles
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UCLAMVS
|
||
|
||
Domain: UCOP.EDU
|
||
Name: University of California, Office of the President
|
||
Gateway: BSMTP@UCBJADE
|
||
|
||
Domain: UCSB.EDU
|
||
Name: University of California, Santa Barbara
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@SBITP
|
||
|
||
Domain: UCSD.EDU
|
||
Name: University of California at San Diego Campus Mail Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UCSD
|
||
|
||
Domain: UCSF.EDU
|
||
Name: Univ of California San Francisco Network
|
||
Gateway: BSMTP@UCSFCCA
|
||
|
||
Domain: UFL.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@NERVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: UGA.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Georgia Campus Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UGA
|
||
|
||
Domain: UIC.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Illinois at Chicago
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UICVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: UIUC.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@UIUCVMD
|
||
|
||
Domain: UKANS.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Kansas
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@UKANVAX
|
||
|
||
Domain: UKY.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Kentucky
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UKCC
|
||
|
||
Domain: UMN.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Minnesota LAN, Minnesota Regional Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@UMNACVX
|
||
|
||
Domain: UNL.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Nebraska Lincoln
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@UNLVAX1
|
||
|
||
Domain: UOREGON.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Oregon
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@OREGON
|
||
|
||
Domain: URICH.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Richmond network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@URVAX
|
||
|
||
Domain: UPENN.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Pennsylvania Campus Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@PENNLRSM
|
||
|
||
Domain: USC.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Southern California, Los Angeles
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@USCVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: UTAH.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Utah Computer Center
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@UTAHCCA
|
||
|
||
Domain: UVCC.EDU
|
||
Name: Utah Valley Community College
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@UTAHCCA
|
||
|
||
Domain: VCU.EDU
|
||
Name: Virginia Commonwealth University Internetwork
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@VCURUBY
|
||
|
||
Domain: WASHINGTON.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Washington Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UWAVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: WESLEYAN.EDU
|
||
Name: Wesleyan University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@WESLEYAN
|
||
|
||
Domain: WISC.EDU
|
||
Name: University of Wisconsin Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@WISCMAC3
|
||
|
||
Domain: WVNET.EDU
|
||
Name: West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@WVNVAXA
|
||
|
||
Domain: YALE.EDU
|
||
Name: Yale University Local Area Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@YALEVM
|
||
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
|
||
United States Of America Government Domains
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Domain: GOV
|
||
Name: Internet - Government clients
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: JPL.NASA.GOV
|
||
Name: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@HAMLET
|
||
|
||
Domain: LBL.GOV
|
||
Name: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@LBL
|
||
|
||
Domain: NBS.GOV
|
||
Name: National Institute of Standards and Technology
|
||
Gateway: SMTPUSER@NBSENH
|
||
|
||
Domain: NSESCC.GSFC.NASA.GOV
|
||
Name: NASA Space and Earth Sciences Computing Center
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@SCFVM
|
||
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
Italian National Network (IT)
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Domain: IT
|
||
Name: Italian national network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@ICNUCEVX
|
||
|
||
Domain: TO.CNR.IT
|
||
Name: CNR (Italian Research Council) Network
|
||
Gateway: CNRGATE@ITOPOLI
|
||
|
||
Domain: INFN.IT
|
||
Name: Italian Research Network
|
||
Gateways: MAILER@IBOINFN
|
||
INFNGW@IPIVAXIN
|
||
Comments: IPIVAXIN is to only be used as a backup gateway in the event that
|
||
IBOINFN is broken.
|
||
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
|
||
Other Standard Domains Not Previously Detailed
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Domain: ARPA
|
||
Name: Advanced Research Projects Agency - US DOD
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: AT
|
||
Name: University Network of Austria
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@AWIUNI11
|
||
|
||
Domain: BE
|
||
Name: Belgian Research Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@BEARN
|
||
|
||
Domain: CA
|
||
Name: Canadian mail domain
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UTORGPU
|
||
|
||
Domain: CDN
|
||
Name: Canadian University X.400 Research Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UWOCC1
|
||
Comments: The gateway at CERNVAX is no longer supported due to
|
||
the high cost of X.25 transfer over public data networks.
|
||
|
||
Domain: CERN
|
||
Name: Center for Nuclear Research Network
|
||
Gateways: 1) MAILER@UWOCC1
|
||
2) MAILER@CERNVAX
|
||
|
||
Domain: CH
|
||
Name: Swiss University Mail Network(s)
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@CEARN
|
||
|
||
Domain: CHUNET
|
||
Name: Swiss University pilot X.400 Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@CERNVAX
|
||
|
||
Domain: DBP.DE
|
||
Name: German X.400 National Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@DFNGATE
|
||
|
||
Domain: DE
|
||
Name: EARN view of German academic networks
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@DEARN
|
||
|
||
Domain: DK
|
||
Name: Denmark's Internet Domain
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@NEUVM1
|
||
|
||
Domain: ES
|
||
Name: Spanish Internet Domain
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@EB0UB011
|
||
|
||
Domain: FI
|
||
Name: Finland's Internet Domain
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@FINHUTC
|
||
|
||
Domain: FR
|
||
Name: French University pilot X.400 Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@CERNVAX
|
||
|
||
Domain: HEPnet
|
||
Name: High Energy Physics network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@LBL
|
||
|
||
Domain: IE
|
||
Name: Ireland Academic X25 Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@IRLEARN
|
||
|
||
Domain: IL
|
||
Name: Israeli Academic Research Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@TAUNIVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: IS
|
||
Name: Icelands Internet Domain
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@NEUVM1
|
||
|
||
Domain: JP
|
||
Name: Japanese network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@JPNSUT00
|
||
|
||
Domain: MFENET
|
||
Name: Magnetic Fusion Energy Network
|
||
Gateway: MFEGATE@ANLVMS
|
||
|
||
Domain: MIL
|
||
Name: Internet - Military clients
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: NET
|
||
Name: Internet - Network gateways
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: NL
|
||
Name: Netherlands Internet Domain
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@HEARN
|
||
|
||
Domain: NO
|
||
Name: Norwegian Internet domain
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@NORUNIX
|
||
|
||
Domain: ORG
|
||
Name: Internet - Organizational clients
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: PT
|
||
Name: National Scientific Computation Network (of Portugal)
|
||
Gateway: MLNET@PTIFM
|
||
|
||
Domain: SE
|
||
Name: SUNET, Swedish University NETwork
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@SEKTH
|
||
|
||
Domain: SG
|
||
Name: Singapore National Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@NUSVM
|
||
|
||
Domain: SUNET
|
||
Name: Swedish University X.400 Network
|
||
Comments: The gateways at CERNVAX and UWOCC1 are no longer supported
|
||
due to the high cost of X.25 transfer over public data
|
||
networks -- see domain SE
|
||
|
||
Domain: UK
|
||
Name: United Kingdom University/Research Network (Janet)
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UKACRL
|
||
Comments: NRSname is basically a reversal of the domain address.
|
||
Example: user@GK.RL.AC.UK becomes user%UK.AC.RL.GK@AC.UK
|
||
|
||
Domain: UNINETT
|
||
Name: Norwegian University pilot X.400 Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@NORUNIX
|
||
|
||
Domain: US
|
||
Name: Internet - USA clients
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
|
||
Domain: UTORONTO
|
||
Name: University of Toronto local area Network
|
||
Gateway: MAILER@UTORONTO
|
||
|
||
Domain: UUCP
|
||
Name: Unix Network
|
||
Gateways: 1) MAILER@PSUVAX1 (USA)
|
||
2) MAILER@UWOCC1 (Canada)
|
||
3) BSMTP@UNIDO (Germany)
|
||
4) MAILER@MCVAX (Netherlands)
|
||
Alternate addressing: user%node.UUCP@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU
|
||
user%node.UUCP@RUTGERS.EDU
|
||
Comments: Only users in Germany are allowed to send to UNIDO. All
|
||
European users are recommended to use MCVAX.
|
||
|
||
Domain: WUSTL
|
||
Name: Washington University local area Network
|
||
Gateway: GATEWAY@WUNET
|
||
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
|
||
Bitnet - Internet Regional Gateways
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Below is a list of those sites that will handle regional traffic between
|
||
Bitnet and the Internet:
|
||
|
||
SMTP@CUNYVM
|
||
SMT@CORNELLC
|
||
MAILER@MITVMA
|
||
MAILER@ICNUCEVM - available only for Italian nodes
|
||
|
||
You should *ALWAYS* use the generic address of SMTP@INTERBIT and never any of
|
||
the addresses mentioned above. The addresses stated above are for
|
||
informational and debugging purposes ONLY. Failure to abide by this rule will
|
||
cause the owners of the gateway to close their service to all Bitnet and EARN
|
||
users.
|
||
|
||
Indirect Domains
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Domains that are unreachable directly, but that the Internet exit of Mailer
|
||
knows how to translate:
|
||
|
||
Domain: DEC
|
||
Name: Digital Equipment Internal Network (Easynet)
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
Sample: user@domain.DEC
|
||
Translated to: user%node.DEC@DECWRL.DEC.COM
|
||
|
||
Domain: OZ (soon to become OZ.AU)
|
||
Name: Australian University Network
|
||
Gateway: SMTP@INTERBIT
|
||
Sample: user@node.OZ
|
||
Translated to: user%node.OZ@UUNET.UU.NET
|
||
|
||
|
||
Domains that are unreachable directly but that are accessible by specifying the
|
||
address explicitly:
|
||
|
||
Name: Xerox Internal Use Only Network (Grapevine)
|
||
Sample: user.Registry@Xerox.Com
|
||
|
||
Name: IBM Internal Use Only Network (VNET)
|
||
Sample: user@Vnet
|
||
|
||
Comments: 1) Mail must be sent directly to user and not via a 3rd party
|
||
mailer (i.e. VM Mailer server)
|
||
2) User within Vnet must first receive approval within IBM to
|
||
establish a circuit and then initiate a virtual circuit. A user
|
||
within Bitnet may not establish communications with a VNET user,
|
||
without the above requirement.
|
||
3) This gateway is only open to selected nodes within IBM which
|
||
have ties with academia (i.e. ACIS).
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 9 of 11
|
||
|
||
PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN P h r a c k W o r l d N e w s PWN
|
||
PWN %%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%% %%%%%%% PWN
|
||
PWN Issue XXVI/Part 1 PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN April 25, 1989 PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN Created, Written, and Edited PWN
|
||
PWN by Knight Lightning PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
|
||
|
||
|
||
Welcome to Issue XXVI of Phrack World News. This issue features articles on
|
||
Robert Tappen Morris, ITT, Telenet, PC Pursuit, a hacker's convention in
|
||
Holland, government wiretapping, viruses, social security numbers, a rivalry
|
||
between two different factions of TAP Magazine and much more.
|
||
|
||
As we are getting closer to SummerCon '89, it is becoming increasingly
|
||
more important for us to get an idea of who to be expecting and who we need to
|
||
contact to supply with further information.
|
||
|
||
Since we only communicate directly with a select group of people at this time,
|
||
we recommend that you contact Red Knight, Aristotle, or Violence (or other
|
||
members of the VOID hackers). These people will in turn contact us and then we
|
||
can get back to you. Keep in mind that only people who are able to contact us
|
||
will be receiving the exact location of SummerCon '89.
|
||
|
||
Please do not wait till the last minute as important information and changes
|
||
can occur at any time.
|
||
|
||
:Knight Lightning
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Cornell Panel Concludes Morris Responsible For Computer Worm April 6, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
By Dennis Meredith (Cornell Chronicle)
|
||
|
||
Graduate student Robert Tappan Morris Jr., working alone, created and spread
|
||
the "worm" computer program that infected computers nationwide last November,
|
||
concluded an internal investigative commission appointed by Provost Robert
|
||
Barker.
|
||
|
||
The commission said the program was not technically a "virus" -- a program that
|
||
inserts itself into a host program to propagate -- as it has been referred to
|
||
in popular reports. The commission described the program as a "worm," an
|
||
independent program that propagates itself throughout a computer system.
|
||
|
||
In its report, "The Computer Worm," the commission termed Morris's behavior "a
|
||
juvenile act that ignored the clear potential consequences." This failure
|
||
constituted "reckless disregard of those probable consequences," the commission
|
||
stated.
|
||
|
||
Barker, who had delayed release of the report for six weeks at the request of
|
||
both federal prosecutors and Morris's defense attorney, said, "We feel an
|
||
overriding obligation to our colleagues and to the public to reveal what we
|
||
know about this profoundly disturbing incident."
|
||
|
||
The commission had sought to determine the involvement of Morris or other
|
||
members of the Cornell community in the worm attack. It also studied the
|
||
motivation and ethical issues underlying the release of the worm.
|
||
|
||
Evidence was gathered by interviewing Cornell faculty, staff, and graduate
|
||
students and staff and former students at Harvard University, where Morris had
|
||
done undergraduate work.
|
||
|
||
Morris declined to be interviewed on advice of counsel. Morris had requested
|
||
and has received a leave of absence from Cornell, and the university is
|
||
prohibited by federal law from commenting further on his status as a student.
|
||
|
||
The commission also was unable to reach Paul Graham, a Harvard graduate student
|
||
who knew Morris well. Morris reportedly contacted Graham on November 2 1988,
|
||
the day the worm was released, and several times before and after that.
|
||
|
||
Relying on files from Morris's computer account, Cornell Computer Science
|
||
Department documents, telephone records, media reports, and technical reports
|
||
from other universities, the commission found that:
|
||
|
||
- Morris violated the Computer Sciences Department's expressed policies
|
||
against computer abuse. Although he apparently chose not to attend
|
||
orientation meetings at which the policies were explained, Morris had
|
||
been given a copy of them. Also, Cornell's policies are similar to
|
||
those at Harvard, with which he should have been familiar.
|
||
|
||
- No member of the Cornell community knew Morris was working on the worm.
|
||
Although he had discussed computer security with fellow graduate
|
||
students, he did not confide his plans to them. Cornell first became
|
||
aware of Morris's involvement through a telephone call from the
|
||
Washington Post to the science editor at Cornell's News Service.
|
||
|
||
- Morris made only minimal efforts to halt the worm once it had
|
||
propagated, and did not inform any person in a position of
|
||
responsibility about the existence or content of the worm.
|
||
|
||
- Morris probably did not intend for the worm to destroy data or files,
|
||
but he probably did intend for it to spread widely. There is no
|
||
evidence that he intended for the worm to replicate uncontrollably.
|
||
|
||
- Media reports that 6,000 computers had been infected were based on an
|
||
initial rough estimate that could not be confirmed. "The total number
|
||
of affected computers was surely in the thousands," the commission
|
||
concluded.
|
||
|
||
- A computer security industry association's estimate that the worm caused
|
||
about $96 million in damage is "grossly exaggerated" and "self-serving."
|
||
|
||
- Although it was technically sophisticated, "the worm could have been
|
||
created by many students, graduate or undergraduate ... particularly if
|
||
forearmed with knowledge of the security flaws exploited or of similar
|
||
flaws."
|
||
|
||
The commission was led by Cornell's vice president for information
|
||
technologies, M. Stuart Lynn. Other members were law professor Theodore
|
||
Eisenberg, computer science Professor David Gries, engineering and computer
|
||
science Professor Juris Hartmanis, physics professor Donald Holcomb, and
|
||
Associate University Counsel Thomas Santoro.
|
||
|
||
Release of the worm was not "an heroic event that pointed up the weaknesses of
|
||
operating systems," the report said. "The fact that UNIX ... has many security
|
||
flaws has been generally well known, as indeed are the potential dangers of
|
||
viruses and worms."
|
||
|
||
The worm attacked only computers that were attached to Internet, a national
|
||
research computer network and that used certain versions of the UNIX operating
|
||
system. An operating system is the basic program that controls the operation
|
||
of a computer.
|
||
|
||
"It is no act of genius or heroism to exploit such weaknesses," the
|
||
commission said.
|
||
|
||
The commission also did not accept arguments that one intended benefit of the
|
||
worm was a heightened public awareness of computer security.
|
||
|
||
"This was an accidental by-product of the event and the resulting display of
|
||
media interest," the report asserted. "Society does not condone burglary on
|
||
the grounds that it heightens concern about safety and security."
|
||
|
||
In characterizing the action, the commission said, "It may simply have been the
|
||
unfocused intellectual meandering of a hacker completely absorbed with his
|
||
creation and unharnessed by considerations of explicit purpose or potential
|
||
effect."
|
||
|
||
Because the commission was unable to contact Graham, it could not determine
|
||
whether Graham discussed the worm with Morris when Morris visited Harvard about
|
||
two weeks before the worm was launched. "It would be interesting to know, for
|
||
example, to what Graham was referring to in an Oct. 26 electronic mail message
|
||
to Morris when he inquired as to whether there was 'Any news on the brilliant
|
||
project?'" said the report.
|
||
|
||
Many in the computer science community seem to favor disciplinary measures for
|
||
Morris, the commission reported.
|
||
|
||
"However, the general sentiment also seems to be prevalent that such
|
||
disciplinary measures should allow for redemption and as such not be so harsh
|
||
as to permanently damage the perpetrator's career," the report said.
|
||
|
||
The commission emphasized, that this conclusion was only an impression from its
|
||
investigations and not the result of a systematic poll of computer scientists.
|
||
|
||
"Although the act was reckless and impetuous, it appears to have been an
|
||
uncharacteristic act for Morris" because of his past efforts at Harvard and
|
||
elsewhere to improve computer security, the commission report said.
|
||
|
||
Of the need for increased security on research computers, the commission wrote,
|
||
"A community of scholars should not have to build walls as high as the sky to
|
||
protect a reasonable expectation of privacy, particularly when such walls will
|
||
equally impede the free flow of information."
|
||
|
||
The trust between scholars has yielded benefits to computer science and to the
|
||
world at large, the commission report pointed out.
|
||
|
||
"Violations of that trust cannot be condoned. Even if there are unintended
|
||
side benefits, which is arguable, there is a greater loss to the community
|
||
as a whole."
|
||
|
||
The commission did not suggest any specific changes in the policies of the
|
||
Cornell Department of Computer Science and noted that policies against computer
|
||
abuse are in place for centralized computer facilities. However, the
|
||
commission urged the appointment of a committee to develop a university-wide
|
||
policy on computer abuse that would recognize the pervasive use of computers
|
||
distributed throughout the campus.
|
||
|
||
The commission also noted the "ambivalent attitude towards reporting UNIX
|
||
security flaws" among universities and commercial vendors. While some computer
|
||
users advocate reporting flaws, others worry that such information might
|
||
highlight the vulnerability of the system.
|
||
|
||
"Morris explored UNIX security amid this atmosphere of uncertainty, where there
|
||
were no clear ground rules and where his peers and mentors gave no clear
|
||
guidance," the report said.
|
||
|
||
"It is hard to fault him for not reporting flaws that he discovered. From his
|
||
viewpoint, that may have been the most responsible course of action, and one
|
||
that was supported by his colleagues."
|
||
|
||
The commission's report also included a brief account of the worm's course
|
||
through Internet. After its release shortly after 7:26 p.m. on November 2,
|
||
1988, the worm spread to computers at the Massachusetts Institute of
|
||
Technology, the Rand Corporation, the University of California at Berkeley and
|
||
others, the commission report said.
|
||
|
||
The worm consisted of two parts -- a short "probe" and a much larger "corpus."
|
||
The problem would attempt to penetrate a computer, and if successful, send for
|
||
the corpus.
|
||
|
||
The program had four main methods of attack and several methods of defense to
|
||
avoid discovery and elimination. The attack methods exploited various flaws
|
||
and features in the UNIX operating systems of the target computers. The worm
|
||
also attempted entry by "guessing" at passwords by such techniques as
|
||
exploiting computer users' predilections for using common words as passwords.
|
||
|
||
The study's authors acknowledged computer scientists at the University of
|
||
California at Berkeley for providing a "decompiled" version of the worm and
|
||
other technical information. The Cornell commission also drew on analyses of
|
||
the worm by Eugene H. Spafford of Purdue University and Donn Seeley of the
|
||
University of Utah.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
People Vs. ITT Communications Services, Inc. March 29, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT TO CERTAIN CURRENT
|
||
AND FORMER CUSTOMERS OF UNITED STATES TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS, INC.
|
||
(NOW KNOWN AS ITT COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC.)
|
||
|
||
By order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
|
||
Michigan, PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT:
|
||
|
||
A class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of certain former and current
|
||
customers against United States Transmission Systems, Inc., now known as ITT
|
||
Communications Services, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "USTS." The Court
|
||
has preliminarily approved a settlement of this lawsuit.
|
||
|
||
YOU ARE URGED TO READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY BECAUSE IT AFFECTS YOUR RIGHTS AND
|
||
WILL BE BINDING ON YOU IN THE FUTURE.
|
||
|
||
I. NOTICE OF A PENDING CLASS ACTION
|
||
|
||
A. Description of the Lawsuit
|
||
|
||
Plaintiffs have sued USTS, alleging that USTS charged customers for certain
|
||
unanswered phone calls, holding time, busy signals, and central office
|
||
recorded messages, hereinafter referred to as "unanswered calls," without
|
||
adequately disclosing such charges to their customers or the public.
|
||
Plaintiffs seek to present their own claims for charges for unanswered
|
||
calls, as well as the claims of other current and former USTS customers for
|
||
similar charges.
|
||
|
||
USTS denies the violations alleged by plaintiffs, and contends that at all
|
||
times, USTS has charged its subscribers fairly and properly and has
|
||
disclosed fully and fairly the basis for its long distance charges. USTS
|
||
has agreed to settle plaintiff's suit solely to avoid the expense,
|
||
inconvenience and disruption of further litigation.
|
||
|
||
This notice is not an expression of any opinion by the Court of the merits
|
||
of this litigation or of the Settlement Agreement. The Complaint, the
|
||
Settlement Agreement and other pleadings in this case may be inspected
|
||
during normal business hours at the office of the Clerk of the United States
|
||
District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, 231 West Lafayette
|
||
Boulevard, Detroit, MI 48226.
|
||
|
||
B. The Settlement Class
|
||
|
||
Plaintiffs and USTS have entered into a Settlement Agreement, which has been
|
||
preliminarily approved by the Court. Under the terms of the Settlement
|
||
Agreement, the parties have agreed, for purposes of settlement only, that
|
||
this suit has been brought on behalf of the following class of persons
|
||
similarly situated to Plaintiffs, hereinafter known as "the Class":
|
||
|
||
All persons and entities that subscribed to and utilized the long distance
|
||
telephone service of USTS or its predecessor ITT Corporate Communication
|
||
Services, Inc., referred to collectively hereinafter as "USTS," at any time
|
||
during the period January 1, 1979 through December 31, 1985.
|
||
|
||
C. How to Remain a Class Member
|
||
|
||
If you were a subscriber to and utilized USTS' long distance service at any
|
||
time during this period, you are a member of the Class. You need do nothing
|
||
to remain a member of the Class and participate in the benefits this
|
||
settlement will provide. If you remain in the Class, you will be bound by
|
||
the results of the settlement and/or the lawsuit.
|
||
|
||
D. How to Exclude Yourself From the Class
|
||
|
||
You are not required to be a member of the Class. Should you decide that
|
||
you do not want to me a member of the Class, you must send an Exclusion
|
||
Notice that states your name, your current address, and your desire to be
|
||
excluded from the Class to the Clerk of the United States District Court for
|
||
the Eastern District of Michigan at the address given at the end of this
|
||
Notice, postmarked no later than April 20, 1989. If you choose to be
|
||
excluded from the Class, you may not participate in the settlement. You
|
||
will not, however, be bound by any judgment dismissing this action and you
|
||
will be free to pursue on your own behalf any legal rights you may have.
|
||
|
||
|
||
II. TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT
|
||
|
||
The Settlement Agreement requires USTS to provide to Class members up to
|
||
750,000 minutes of long distance telephone credits having a maximum value,
|
||
at 30 cents per minute, of $225,000, hereinafter known as the "Settlement
|
||
Credits," and cash refunds up to a maximum of $50,000. These benefits are
|
||
available to Class members who file a proof of claim in a timely manner as
|
||
described in Section III below. Class members may choose one benefit from
|
||
the following options:
|
||
|
||
A. A *standardized credit* toward USTS long distance telephone service of
|
||
$1.50 for each year from 1979 through 1985 in which the Class member (i)
|
||
was a USTS customer, and (ii) claims that s/he was charged by USTS for
|
||
unanswered calls; or
|
||
|
||
B. A *standardized cash refund* of 90 cents for each year from 1979 through
|
||
1985 in which the Class member was (i) was a USTS customer and (ii)
|
||
claims that s/he was charged by USTS for unanswered calls; or,
|
||
|
||
C. An *itemized credit* toward USTS long distance service of 30 cents for
|
||
each minute of unanswered calls for which the Class member was charged
|
||
during the Class period (January 1, 1979 through December 31, 1985) and
|
||
for which the Class member has not been previously reimbursed or
|
||
credited; or,
|
||
|
||
D. An *itemized cash refund* of 30 cents for each minute of unanswered
|
||
calls for which the Class member charged during the Class period
|
||
(January 1, 1979 through December 31, 1985) and for which the Class
|
||
member has not been previously reimbursed or credited.
|
||
|
||
To obtain an *itemized* credit or cash refund, the Class member must
|
||
itemize and attest to each unanswered call for for which a refund or credit
|
||
is claimed. If the total credits claimed by Class members exceed 750,000
|
||
credit minutes, each Class member claiming Settlement Credits will receive
|
||
his/her/its pro rata share of the total Settlement Credits available.
|
||
|
||
Class members need not be current USTS customers to claim the standardized
|
||
and itemized credits. USTS will automatically open an account for any
|
||
Class member who requests credits and executes an authorization to open
|
||
such an account. If a Class member incurs a local telephone company
|
||
service charge in connection with the opening of a USTS account, USTS will
|
||
issue a credit to the Class member's account for the full amount of such
|
||
service charge upon receipt of the local telephone company's bill for the
|
||
service charge. USTS is not responsible for any other service charge that
|
||
a local telephone company may impose for ordering, using or terminating
|
||
USTS service.
|
||
|
||
The Settlement Agreement requires USTS to pay the costs of giving this
|
||
Notice (up to a maximum of $120,000) and of administering the settlement
|
||
described above.
|
||
|
||
The Settlement Agreement further provides that upon final approval of the
|
||
settlement, the Court will enter a judgment dismissing with prejudice all
|
||
claims of plaintiffs and members of the Class that have been or might have
|
||
been asserted in this action and that relate to USTS' billing practices and
|
||
disclosure practices for unanswered calls.
|
||
|
||
Counsel for the Class have investigated the facts and circumstances
|
||
regarding the claims against USTS and their defenses. In view of those
|
||
circumstances, counsel for the Class have concluded that this Settlement
|
||
Agreement is fair and reasonable, and in the best interests of the Class.
|
||
|
||
|
||
III. HOW TO FILE A CLAIM
|
||
|
||
To receive Settlement Credits or a Cash Refund, you must first obtain a
|
||
Proof of Claim Notice; then provide all the information requested and
|
||
return it to the Clerk of the Court postmarked no later than June 30, 1989.
|
||
|
||
|
||
To obtain claim forms: To file completed claim form:
|
||
|
||
USTS Class Action Claim Administrator Clerk of the United States Court
|
||
ITT Communication Services, Inc. ATTN: USTS Settlement
|
||
100 Plaza Drive 231 W. Lafayette Blvd. Room 740
|
||
Secaucus, NJ 07096 Detroit, MI 48226
|
||
|
||
If you have any further questions about this Notice, or the filing of Proof of
|
||
Claim, *write* to the USTS Action Claim Administrator at the above address. If
|
||
you have any questions about this lawsuit or your participation therein as a
|
||
member of the Class, *write* to lead counsel for plaintiffs --
|
||
|
||
Sachnoff Weaver & Rubenstein, Ltd.
|
||
ATTN: USTS Settlement
|
||
30 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2900
|
||
Chicago, IL 60606
|
||
|
||
Always consult your own attorney for legal advice and questions which concern
|
||
you about your rights in any class action matter.
|
||
|
||
DO NOT telephone the Court.
|
||
|
||
DO NOT telephone the attorneys for plaintiff.
|
||
|
||
DO NOT telephone the Claims Administrator; any office of USTS or any of its
|
||
employees.
|
||
|
||
DO NOT telephone any Telephone Company asking for information on this matter.
|
||
Only *written correspondence filed in a timely manner will be considered
|
||
by the Court.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Telenet Announces New PC Pursuit Terms April 9, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Earlier this year, Telenet announced new terms for the PC Pursuit program,
|
||
which placed time limits on the use of the service, and set new rates for
|
||
usage of the service.
|
||
|
||
***** Most of the deal has been called OFF *****
|
||
|
||
In a letter dated March 29, 1989 from Floyd H. Trogdon, Vice President and
|
||
General Manager of Network Services announced several revisions in the earlier
|
||
plans. His latest letter supersedes all previous memos and usage agreements,
|
||
and becomes effective July 1, 1989.
|
||
|
||
There will be THREE membership plans:
|
||
|
||
o REGULAR membership will be $30 per month for up to 30 hours of
|
||
non-prime time (evenings and weekend) use. This can be used by the
|
||
subscriber only. No others allowed to use it.
|
||
|
||
o FAMILY membership will be $50 per month for up to 60 hours of non-prime
|
||
time (evenings and weekend) use. This can be used by the subscriber
|
||
and any immediate family members in the same household. If a single
|
||
person expected to use more than 30 hours per month, s/he would still
|
||
buy this "family" plan, even if the entire "family" consisted of just
|
||
one person.
|
||
|
||
o HANDICAPPED membership will be $30 per month for up to 90 hours of
|
||
non-prime time (evening and weekend) use. To qualify for these terms,
|
||
proof of physical handicap must be provided. Ask Telenet for the exact
|
||
terms.
|
||
|
||
EXCESS HOURS over 30 (or 60/90) per month during non-prime time hours will be
|
||
billed at $3.00 per hour. This is a decrease from the earlier proposed charge
|
||
of $4.50 per hour.
|
||
|
||
PRIME-TIME USAGE will be billed at $10.50 per hour, regardless of how much time
|
||
may be remaining on the PCP membership plan.
|
||
|
||
The billing will be in arrears each month. That is, the July usage will be
|
||
billed in August, etc. Call detail will be automatically provided to any
|
||
subscriber going over thirty hours per month.
|
||
|
||
GRACE PERIOD/FORGIVENESS: All calls will be given a one minute grace period
|
||
for the purpose of establishing the connection. There will never be a charge
|
||
for calls lasting one minute or less. If you disconnect promptly when you see
|
||
that your call will not complete for whatever reason, there will be no charge.
|
||
|
||
There will be a two minute minimum on all connections (after the first minute
|
||
has passed). Otherwise, times will be rounded to the *nearest* minute for
|
||
billing purposes.
|
||
|
||
NEW PASSWORDS AND USER I.D.'s FOR EVERYONE: During April, 1989, all current
|
||
subscribers to PC Pursuit will be issued new passwords and new user identities.
|
||
On May 1, 1989, all existing passwords and ID's will be killed.
|
||
|
||
New users after July 1, 1989 will pay $30 to set up an account. Password
|
||
changes will be $5.00. *Existing* users will never have to pay a fee to adjust
|
||
their account upward or downward from regular < == > family plans. Call detail
|
||
will be provided in June, 1989 to users with more than 30 hours of usage to
|
||
help them determine which plan they should use; however there will be no charge
|
||
for extra hours until July.
|
||
|
||
Because of the confusion and lack of good communication between Telenet and its
|
||
users over the past few months, the official change in terms from unlimited use
|
||
to measured use has been postponed from its original starting date in June to
|
||
July 1.
|
||
|
||
These are just excerpts from the letter to subscribers posted on the Net
|
||
Exchange BBS. If you subscribe to PC Pursuit, I recommend you sign on and read
|
||
the full memo, along with the accompanying Terms and Conditions and price
|
||
schedules.
|
||
|
||
Remember, any changes you may have made in February/March in anticipation of
|
||
the changeover originally planned for May/June are now void. Telenet has
|
||
stated all users will be defaulted to REGULAR memberships effective July 1
|
||
unless they specifically make changes to this during the months of May and
|
||
June.
|
||
|
||
Telenet Customer Service: 1-800-336-0437
|
||
Telenet Telemarketing: 1-800-TELENET
|
||
|
||
Sign up via modem with credit card number handy: 1-800-835-3001.
|
||
|
||
To read the full bulletins, log onto Net Exchange by calling into your local
|
||
Telenet switcher and connecting to '@pursuit'.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 10 of 11
|
||
|
||
PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN P h r a c k W o r l d N e w s PWN
|
||
PWN %%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%% %%%%%%% PWN
|
||
PWN Issue XXVI/Part 2 PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN April 25, 1989 PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN Created, Written, and Edited PWN
|
||
PWN by Knight Lightning PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
|
||
|
||
|
||
Reach Out And TAP Someone April 3, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Two former employees of Cincinnati Bell, who were fired by the company for
|
||
"good cause" according to Cincinnati Bell Chairman Dwight Hibbard are claiming
|
||
they installed more than 1200 illegal wiretaps over a 12 year period from 1972
|
||
- 1984 at the request of their supervisors at the telco and the local police.
|
||
|
||
Among the alleged targets of the snooping were past and present members of
|
||
Congress, federal judges, scores of the city's most prominent politicians,
|
||
business executives, lawyers and media personalities.
|
||
|
||
Leonard Gates and Robert Draise say they even wiretapped the hotel room where
|
||
President Gerald Ford stayed during two visits to Cincinnati; and this part of
|
||
their story, at least, has been verified by the now retired security chief at
|
||
the hotel.
|
||
|
||
As more details come out each day, people in Cincinnati are getting a rare look
|
||
at a Police Department that apparently spied on itself, and at a grand jury
|
||
probe that has prompted one former FBI official to suggest that the Justice
|
||
Department seems more interested in discrediting the accusers than in seeking
|
||
the truth.
|
||
|
||
Cincinnati Bell executives says Gates and Draise are just trying to "get even"
|
||
with the company for firing them. But disclosures thus far seem to indicate
|
||
there is at least some truth in what the two men are saying about the company
|
||
they used to work for.
|
||
|
||
According to Gates and Draise, they were just employees following the orders
|
||
given to them by their superiors at Cincinnati Bell. But Dwight Hibbard,
|
||
Chairman of the Board of Cincinnati Bell has called them both liars, and said
|
||
their only motive is to make trouble for the company.
|
||
|
||
Cincinnati Bell responded to allegations that the company had specifically
|
||
participated in illegal wiretapping by filing a libel suit against Gates and
|
||
Draise. The two men responded by filing a countersuit against the telco.
|
||
In addition to their suit, four of the people who were allegedly spied on have
|
||
filed a class action suit against the telco.
|
||
|
||
In the latest development, Cincinnati Bell has gone public with (according to
|
||
them) just recently discovered sordid details about an extramarital affair by
|
||
Gates. A federal grand jury in Cincinnati is now trying to straighten out the
|
||
tangled web of charges and countercharges, but so far no indictments have been
|
||
returned.
|
||
|
||
Almost daily, Gates and Draise tell further details about their exploits,
|
||
including taps they claim they placed on phones at the Cincinnati Stock
|
||
Exchange and the General Electric aircraft engine plant in suburban Evendale.
|
||
|
||
According to Draise, he began doing these "special assignments" in 1972, when
|
||
he was approached by a Cincinnati police officer from that city's clandestine
|
||
intelligence unit. The police officer wanted him to tap the lines of black
|
||
militants and suspected drug dealers, Draise said.
|
||
|
||
The police officer assured him the wiretapping would be legal, and that top
|
||
executives at the phone company had approved. Draise agreed, and suggested
|
||
recruiting Gates, a co-worker to help out. Soon, the two were setting several
|
||
wiretaps each week at the request of the Intelligence Unit of the Cincinnati
|
||
Police Department.
|
||
|
||
But by around 1975, the direction and scope of the operation changed, say the
|
||
men. The wiretap requests no longer came from the police; instead they came
|
||
from James West and Peter Gabor, supervisors in the Security Department at
|
||
Cincinnati Bell, who claimed *they were getting the orders from their
|
||
superiors*.
|
||
|
||
And the targets of the spying were no longer criminal elements; instead, Draise
|
||
and Gates say they were asked to tap the lines of politicians, business
|
||
executives and even the phone of the Chief of Police himself, and the personal
|
||
phone lines of some telephone company employees as well.
|
||
|
||
Draise said he "began to have doubts about the whole thing in 1979" when he was
|
||
told to tap the private phone of a newspaper columnist in town. "I told them I
|
||
wasn't going to do it anymore," he said in an interview during the week of
|
||
April 2, 1989.
|
||
|
||
Gates kept on doing these things until 1984, and he says he got cold feet late
|
||
that year when "the word came down through the grapevine" that he was to tap
|
||
the phone lines connected to the computers at General Electric's Evendale
|
||
plant. He backed out then, and said to leave him out of it in the future, and
|
||
he claims there were hints of retaliation directed at him at that time; threats
|
||
to "tell what we know about you..."
|
||
|
||
When Dwight Hibbard was contacted at his office at Cincinnati Bell and asked to
|
||
comment on the allegations of his former employees, he responded that they were
|
||
both liars. "The phone company would not do things like that," said Hibbard,
|
||
"and those two are both getting sued because they say we do." Hibbard has
|
||
refused to answer more specific questions asked by the local press and
|
||
government investigators.
|
||
|
||
In fact, Draise was fired in 1979, shortly after he claims he told his
|
||
superiors he would no longer place wiretaps on lines. Shortly after he quit
|
||
handling the "special assignments" given to him he was arrested, and charged
|
||
with a misdemeanor in connection with one wiretap -- which Draise says he set
|
||
for a friend who wanted to spy on his ex-girlfriend. Cincinnati Bell claims
|
||
they had nothing to do with his arrest and conviction on that charge; but they
|
||
"were forced to fire him" after he pleaded guilty.
|
||
|
||
Gates was fired in 1986 for insubordination. He claims Cincinnati Bell was
|
||
retaliating against him for taking the side of two employees who were suing the
|
||
company for sexual harassment; but his firing was upheld in court.
|
||
|
||
The story first started breaking when Gates and Draise went to see a reporter
|
||
at [Mount Washington Press], a small weekly newspaper in the Cincinnati
|
||
suburban area. The paper printed the allegations by the men, and angry
|
||
responses started coming in almost immediately.
|
||
|
||
At first, police denied the existence of the Intelligence Unit, let alone that
|
||
such an organization would use operatives at Cincinnati Bell to spy on people.
|
||
Later, when called before the federal grand jury, and warned against lying,
|
||
five retired police officers, including the former chief, took the Fifth
|
||
Amendment. Finally last month, the five issued a statement through their
|
||
attorney, admitting to 12 illegal wiretaps from 1972 - 1974, and implicated
|
||
unnamed operatives at Cincinnati Bell as their contacts to set the taps.
|
||
|
||
With the ice broken, and the formalities out of the way, others began coming
|
||
forward with similar stories. Howard Lucas, the former Director of Security
|
||
for Stouffer's Hotel in Cincinnati recalled a 1975 incident in which he stopped
|
||
Gates, West and several undercover police officers from going into the hotel's
|
||
phone room about a month before the visit by President Ford.
|
||
|
||
The phone room was kept locked, and employees working there were buzzed in by
|
||
someone already inside, recalled Lucas. In addition to the switchboards, the
|
||
room contained the wire distribution frames from which phone pairs ran
|
||
throughout the hotel. Lucas refused to let the police officers go inside
|
||
without a search warrant; and they never did return with one.
|
||
|
||
But Lucas said two days later he was tipped off by one of the operators to look
|
||
in one of the closets there. Lucas said he found a voice activated tape
|
||
recorder and "a couple of coils they used to make the tap." He said he told
|
||
the Police Department and Cincinnati Bell about his findings, but "...I could
|
||
not get anyone to claim it, so I just yanked it all out and threw it in the
|
||
dumpster..."
|
||
|
||
Executives at General Electric were prompted to meet with Draise and Gates
|
||
recently to learn the extent of the wiretapping that had been done at the
|
||
plant. According to Draise, GE attorney David Kindleberger expressed
|
||
astonishment when told the extent of the spying; and he linked it to the
|
||
apparent loss of proprietary information to Pratt & Whitney, a competing
|
||
manufacturer of aircraft engines.
|
||
|
||
Now all of a sudden, Kindleberger is clamming up. I wonder who got to him? He
|
||
admits meeting with Draise, but says he never discussed Pratt & Whitney or any
|
||
competitive situation with Draise. But an attorney who sat in on the meeting
|
||
supports Draise's version.
|
||
|
||
After an initial flurry of press releases denying all allegations of illegal
|
||
wiretapping, Cincinnati Bell has become very quiet, and is now unwilling to
|
||
discuss the matter at all except to tell anyone who asks that "Draise and Gates
|
||
are a couple of liars who want to get even with us..." And now, the telco
|
||
suddenly has discovered information about Gates' personal life.
|
||
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
|
||
FBI/Bell Wiretapping Network? April 3, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
[Edited For This Presentation]
|
||
|
||
Bob Draise/WB8QCF was an employee of Cincinnati Bell Telephone between 1966 and
|
||
1979. He, and others, are involved in a wiretapping scandal of monumental
|
||
proportions. They say they have installed more than 1,000 wiretaps on the
|
||
phones of judges, law enforcement officers, lawyers, television personalities,
|
||
newspaper columnists, labor unions, defense contractors, major corporations
|
||
(such as Proctor & Gamble and General Electric), politicians (even ex-President
|
||
Gerald Ford) at the request of Cincinnati police and Cincinnati Bell security
|
||
supervisors who said the taps were for the police. They were told that many of
|
||
the taps were for the FBI.
|
||
|
||
Another radio amateur, Vincent Clark/KB4MIT, a technician for South-Central
|
||
Bell from 1972 to 1981, said he placed illegal wiretaps similar to those done
|
||
by Bob Draise on orders from his supervisors -- and on request from local
|
||
policemen in Louisville, Kentucky.
|
||
|
||
When asked how he got started in the illegal wiretap business, Bob said that a
|
||
friend called and asked him to come down to meet with the Cincinnati police. An
|
||
intelligence sergeant asked Bob about wiretapping some Black Muslims. He also
|
||
told Bob that Cincinnati Bell security had approved the wiretap -- and that it
|
||
was for the FBI. The sergeant pointed to his Masonic ring which Bob also wore
|
||
-- in other words, he was telling the truth under the Masonic oath -- something
|
||
that Bob put a lot of stock in.
|
||
|
||
Most of the people first wiretapped were drug or criminal related. Later on,
|
||
however, it go out of hand -- and the FBI wanted taps on prominent citizens.
|
||
"We started doing people who had money. How this information was used, I
|
||
couldn't tell you."
|
||
|
||
The January 29th "Newsday" said Draise had told investigators that among the
|
||
taps he rigged from 1972 to 1979 were several on lines used by Wren Business
|
||
Communications, a Bell competitor. It seems that when Wren had arranged an
|
||
appointment with a potential customer, they found that Bell had just been there
|
||
without being called. Wren's president is a ham radio operator, David
|
||
Stoner/K8LMB.
|
||
|
||
When spoken with, Dave Stoner said the following;
|
||
|
||
"As far as I am concerned, the initial focus for all of this began
|
||
with the FBI. The FBI apparently set up a structure throughout the
|
||
United States using apparently the security chiefs of the different
|
||
Bell companies. They say that there have been other cases in the
|
||
United States like ours in Cincinnati but they have been localized
|
||
without the realization of an overall pattern being implicated."
|
||
|
||
"The things that ties this all together is if you go way back in
|
||
history to the Hoover period at the FBI, he apparently got together
|
||
with the AT&T security people. There is an organization that I
|
||
guess exists to this day with regular meetings of the security
|
||
people of the different Bell companies. This meant that the FBI
|
||
would be able to target a group of 20 or 30 people that represented
|
||
the security points for all of the Bell and AT&T connections in the
|
||
United States. I believe the key to all of this goes back to Hoover.
|
||
The FBI worked through that group who then created the activity at
|
||
the local level as a result of central planning."
|
||
|
||
"I believe that in spite of the fact that many people have indicated
|
||
that this is an early 70's problem -- that there is no disruption to
|
||
that work to this day. I am pretty much convinced that it is
|
||
continuing. It looks like a large surveillance effort that
|
||
Cincinnati was just a part of."
|
||
|
||
"The federal prosecutor Kathleen Brinkman is in a no-win situation.
|
||
If she successfully prosecutes this case she is going to bring
|
||
trouble down upon her own Justice Department. She can't
|
||
successfully prosecute the case."
|
||
|
||
About $200 million in lawsuits have already been filed against Cincinnati Bell
|
||
and the Police Department. Several members of the police department have taken
|
||
the Fifth Amendment before the grand jury rather than answer questions about
|
||
their roles in the wiretapping scheme.
|
||
|
||
Bob Draise/WB8QCF has filed a suit against Cincinnati Bell for $78 for
|
||
malicious prosecution and slander in response to a suit filed by Cincinnati
|
||
Bell against Bob for defamation. Right after they filed the suit, several
|
||
policemen came forward and admitted to doing illegal wiretaps with them. The
|
||
Cincinnati police said they stopped this is 1974 -- although another policeman
|
||
reportedly said they actually stopped the wiretapping in 1986.
|
||
|
||
Now the CBS-TV program "60 Minutes" is interested in the Cincinnati goings-on
|
||
and has sent in a team of investigative reporters. Ed Bradley from "60
|
||
Minutes" has already interviewed Bob Draise/WB8QCF and it is expected that
|
||
sometime during this month (April) April, we will see a "60 Minutes" report on
|
||
spying by the FBI. We also understand that CNN, Ted Turner's Cable News
|
||
Network, is also working up a "Bugging of America" expose.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Crackdown On Hackers Urged April 9, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Taken From the Chicago Tribune (Section 7, Page 12b)
|
||
|
||
"Make Punishment Fit The Crime," computer leaders say.
|
||
|
||
DALLAS (AP) -- The legal system has failed to respond adequately to the threat
|
||
that hackers pose to the computer networks crucial to corporate America, a
|
||
computer expert says.
|
||
|
||
Many computer hackers "are given slaps on the wrist," Mark Leary, a senior
|
||
analyst with International Data Corp., said at a roundtable discussion last
|
||
week.
|
||
|
||
"The justice system has to step up...to the fact that these people are
|
||
malicious and are criminals and are robbing banks just as much as if they
|
||
walked up with a shotgun," he said.
|
||
|
||
Other panelists complained that hackers, because of their ability to break into
|
||
computer systems, even are given jobs, sometimes a security consultants.
|
||
|
||
The experts spoke at a roundtable sponsored by Network World magazine, a
|
||
publication for computer network users and managers.
|
||
|
||
Computer networks have become crucial to business, from transferring and
|
||
compiling information to overseeing and running manufacturing processes.
|
||
|
||
The public also is increasingly exposed to networks through such devices as
|
||
automatic teller machines at banks, airline reservation systems and computers
|
||
that store billing information.
|
||
|
||
Companies became more willing to spend money on computer security after last
|
||
year's celebrated invasion of a nationwide network by a virus allegedly
|
||
unleased by a graduate student [Robert Tappen Morris], the experts said.
|
||
|
||
"The incident caused us to reassess the priorities with which we look at
|
||
certain threats," said Dennis Steinaur, manager of the computer security
|
||
management group of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
|
||
|
||
But computer security isn't only a matter of guarding against unauthorized
|
||
entry, said Max Hopper, senior vice president for information systems as
|
||
American Airlines.
|
||
|
||
Hopper said American has built a "a Cheyenne mountain-type" installation for
|
||
its computer systems to guard against a variety of problems, including
|
||
electrical failure and natural disaster. Referring to the Defense Department's
|
||
underground nerve center in a Colorado mountain, he said American's precautions
|
||
even include a three-day supply of food.
|
||
|
||
"We've done everything we can, we think, to protect the total environment,"
|
||
Hopper said.
|
||
|
||
Hopper and Steinaur said that despite the high-tech image of computer
|
||
terrorism, it remains an administrative problem that should be approached as a
|
||
routine management issue.
|
||
|
||
But the experts agreed that the greatest danger to computer networks does not
|
||
come from outside hackers. Instead, they said, the biggest threat is from
|
||
disgruntled employees or others whose original access to systems was
|
||
legitimate.
|
||
|
||
Though employee screening is useful, Steinaur said, it is more important to
|
||
build into computer systems ways to track unauthorized use and to publicize
|
||
that hacking can be traced.
|
||
|
||
Steinaur said growing computer literacy, plus the activities of some
|
||
non-malicious hackers, help security managers in some respects.
|
||
|
||
Expanded knowledge "forces us as security managers not be dependent on
|
||
ignorance," Steinaur said.
|
||
|
||
"Security needs to be a part of the system, rather than a 'nuisance addition,'"
|
||
Steinaur said, "and we probably have not done a very good job of making
|
||
management realize that security is an integral part of the system."
|
||
|
||
IDC's Leary said the organization surveys of Fortune 1000 companies
|
||
surprisingly found a significant number of companies were doing little to
|
||
protect their systems.
|
||
|
||
The discussion, the first of three planned by Network World, was held because
|
||
computer sabotage "is a real problem that people aren't aware of," said editor
|
||
John Gallant. Many business people sophisticated networks."
|
||
|
||
It also is a problem that many industry vendors are reluctant to address, he
|
||
said, because it raises questions about a company's reliability.
|
||
|
||
Typed For PWN by Hatchet Molly
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Ex-Worker Charged In Virus Case -- Databases Were Alleged Target Apr 12, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
by Jane M. Von Bergen (Philadelphia Inquirer)
|
||
|
||
A former employee was charged yesterday with infecting his company's computer
|
||
database in what is believed to be the first computer-virus arrest in the
|
||
Philadelphia area.
|
||
|
||
"We believe he was doing this as an act of revenge," said Camden County
|
||
Assistant Prosecutor Norman Muhlbaier said yesterday, commenting on a motive
|
||
for the employee who allegedly installed a program to erase databases at his
|
||
former company, Datacomp Corp. in Voorhees, New Jersey.
|
||
|
||
Chris Young, 21, of the 2000 block of Liberty Street, Trenton, was charged in
|
||
Camden County with one count of computer theft by altering a database.
|
||
Superior Court Judge E. Stevenson Fluharty released Young on his promise to pay
|
||
$10,000 if he failed to appear in court. If convicted, Young faces a 10-year
|
||
prison term and a $100,000 fine. Young could not be reached for comment.
|
||
|
||
"No damage was done," Muhlbaier said, because the company discovered the virus
|
||
before it could cause harm. Had the virus gone into effect, it could have
|
||
damaged databases worth several hundred thousand dollars, Muhlbaier said.
|
||
|
||
Datacomp Corp., in the Echelon Mall, is involved in telephone marketing. The
|
||
company, which has between 30 and 35 employees, had a contract with a major
|
||
telephone company to verify the contents of its white pages and try to sell
|
||
bold-faced or other special listings in the white pages, a Datacomp company
|
||
spokeswoman said. The database Young is accused of trying to destroy is the
|
||
list of names from the phone company, she said.
|
||
|
||
Muhlbaier said that the day Young resigned from the company, October 7, 1988 he
|
||
used fictitious passwords to obtain entry into the company computer,
|
||
programming the virus to begin its destruction December 7, 1988 -- Pearl Harbor
|
||
Day. Young, who had worked for the company on and off for two years -- most
|
||
recently as a supervisor -- was disgruntled because he had received some
|
||
unfavorable job-performance reviews, the prosecutor said.
|
||
|
||
Eventually, operators at the company picked up glitches in the computer system.
|
||
A programmer, called in to straighten out the mess, noticed that the program
|
||
had been altered and discovered the data-destroying virus, Muhlbaier said.
|
||
"What Mr. Young did not know was that the computer system has a lot of security
|
||
features so they could track it back to a particular date, time and terminal,"
|
||
Muhlbaier said. "We were able to ... prove that he was at that terminal."
|
||
Young's virus, Muhlbaier said, is the type known as a "time bomb" because it is
|
||
programmed to go off at a specific time. In this case, the database would have
|
||
been sickened the first time someone switched on a computer December 7, he said
|
||
|
||
Norma Kraus, a vice president of Datacomp's parent company, Volt Information
|
||
Sciences Inc, said yesterday that the company's potential loss included not
|
||
only the databases, but also the time it took to find and cure the virus. "All
|
||
the work has to stop," causing delivery backups on contracts, she said. "We're
|
||
just fortunate that we have employees who can determine what's wrong and then
|
||
have the interest to do something. In this case, the employee didn't stop at
|
||
fixing the system, but continued on to determine what the problem was." The
|
||
Volt company, based in New York, does $500 million worth of business a year
|
||
with such services as telephone marketing, data processing and technical
|
||
support. It also arranges temporary workers, particularly in the
|
||
data-processing field, and installs telecommunication services, Kraus said.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Mexico's Phone System Going Private? April 17, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
By Oryan QUEST (Special Hispanic Corespondent)
|
||
|
||
The Mexico Telephone Company, aka Telefonos de Mexico, aka Telmex, is likely to
|
||
go private in the next year or two. The Mexican government is giving serious
|
||
consideration to selling its controlling interest in that nation's
|
||
communications network, despite very stiff opposition from the local unions
|
||
which would prefer to see the existing bureaucracy stay in place.
|
||
|
||
The proposed sale, which is part of a move to upgrade the phone system there --
|
||
and it *does* need upgrading -- by allowing more private investment, is part of
|
||
a growing trend in Mexico to privatize heretofore nationalized industries.
|
||
|
||
The Mexico Telephone Company has spent more than a year planning a $14 billion,
|
||
five-year restructuring plan which will probably give AT&T and the Bell
|
||
regional holding companies a role in the improvements.
|
||
|
||
One plan being discussed by the Mexican government is a complete break-up of
|
||
Telmex, similar to the court-ordered divestiture of AT&T a few years ago.
|
||
Under this plan, there would be one central long distance company in Mexico,
|
||
with the government retaining control of it, but privately owned regional firms
|
||
providing local and auxiliary services.
|
||
|
||
Representatives of the Mexican government have talked on more than one
|
||
occasion with some folks at Southwestern Bell about making a formal proposal.
|
||
Likewise, Pacific Bell has been making some overtures to the Mexicans. It will
|
||
be interesting to see what develops.
|
||
|
||
About two years ago, Teleconnect Magazine, in a humorous article on the
|
||
divestiture, presented a bogus map of the territories assigned to each BOC,
|
||
with Texas, New Mexico and Arizona grouped under an entity called "Taco Bell."
|
||
|
||
Any phone company which takes over the Mexican system will be an improvement
|
||
over the current operation, which has been slowly deteriorating for several
|
||
years.
|
||
|
||
PS: I *Demand* To Be Let Back On MSP!
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 11 of 11
|
||
|
||
PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN P h r a c k W o r l d N e w s PWN
|
||
PWN %%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%% %%%%%%% PWN
|
||
PWN Issue XXVI/Part 3 PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN April 25, 1989 PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN Created, Written, and Edited PWN
|
||
PWN by Knight Lightning PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
|
||
|
||
|
||
Galactic Hacker Party March 30, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
GALACTIC HACKER PARTY
|
||
August 2-4, 1989
|
||
PARADISO, AMSTERDAM, HOLLAND
|
||
|
||
During the summer of 1989, the world as we know it will go into overload. An
|
||
interstellar particle stream of hackers, phone phreaks, radioactivists and
|
||
assorted technological subversives will be fusing their energies into a media
|
||
melt-down as the global village plugs into Amsterdam for three electrifying
|
||
days of information interchange and electronic capers.
|
||
|
||
Aided by the advanced communications technology to which they are accustomed,
|
||
the hacker forces will discuss strategies, play games, and generally have a
|
||
good time. Free access to permanently open on-line facilities will enable them
|
||
to keep in touch with home base -- wherever that is.
|
||
|
||
Those who rightly fear the threat of information tyranny and want to learn what
|
||
they can do about it are urgently invited to interface in Amsterdam in August.
|
||
There will be much to learn from people who know. Celebrity guests with
|
||
something to say will be present in body or electronic spirit.
|
||
|
||
The Force must be nurtured. If you are refused transport because your laptop
|
||
looks like a bomb, cut off behind enemy lines, or unable to attend for any
|
||
other reason, then join us on the networks. Other hacker groups are requested
|
||
to organize similar gatherings to coincide with ours. We can provide low-cost
|
||
international communications links during the conference.
|
||
|
||
[ Despite the wishes of those planning the "Galactic Hacker ]
|
||
[ Party," there will be NO change in plans for SummerCon '89! ]
|
||
|
||
For further information, take up contact as soon as possible with:
|
||
|
||
HACK-TIC PARADISO
|
||
P.O. box 22953 Weteringschans 6-8
|
||
1100 DL Amsterdam 1017 SG Amsterdam
|
||
The Netherlands The Netherlands
|
||
|
||
tel: +31 20 6001480 tel: +31 20 264521 / +31 20 237348
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Subversive Bulletin Boards March 26, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
An article in a newspaper from the United Kingdom had an article relating to a
|
||
computer bulletin board being run by a 14-year-old boy in Wilmslow, Cheshire,
|
||
England. It contained information relating to such things as making plastic
|
||
explosives.
|
||
|
||
Anti-terrorist detectives are said to be investigating for possible breaches of
|
||
the Obscene Publications Act. Apparently reporters were able to easily gain
|
||
access to this bulletin board and peruse articles on such subjects as credit
|
||
card fraud, making various types of explosives, street fighting techniques and
|
||
dodging police radar traps.
|
||
|
||
One article was obviously aimed at children and described how to make a bomb
|
||
suitable for use on "the car of a teacher you do not like at school," which
|
||
would destroy the tire of a car when it was started.
|
||
|
||
The boy's parents did not seem to think that their son was doing anything
|
||
wrong, preferring him to be working with his computer rather than roaming the
|
||
streets.
|
||
|
||
A London computer consultant, Noel Bradford, is quoted as having seen the
|
||
bulletin board and found messages discussing "how to crack British Telecom, how
|
||
to get money out of people and how to defraud credit card companies. Credit
|
||
card numbers are given, along with PIN numbers, names, addresses and other
|
||
details."
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Tale Of TWO TAP Magazines! April 24, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
It seemed inevitable that the battle for the rights to TAP would come into
|
||
play, but many wonder why it has taken so long.
|
||
|
||
The Renegade Chemist, long time member of Phortune 500 and one of its "Board Of
|
||
Directors," has been talking about re-starting TAP Magazine for at least two
|
||
years... nothing ever happened with it until now. TRC claims that the TAP
|
||
Magazine crew in Kentucky is just a fraud and that he is putting on the "REAL
|
||
McCoy."
|
||
|
||
For a free issue of The Renegade Chemist's TAP Magazine, send a self-addressed
|
||
stamped envelope to:
|
||
|
||
Data Security Consultants, Inc.
|
||
TAP Magazine
|
||
P.O. Box 271
|
||
South Windam, CT 06266-0271
|
||
|
||
Now on the other hand, Aristotle of the Kentucky based TAP Magazine has shown
|
||
an almost uncaring attitude about The Renegade Chemist's statements about TAP
|
||
Magazine. He says that he does not "really mind if these people put out a
|
||
magazine. Honestly I just want to help the community and the more magazines
|
||
and information, the better."
|
||
|
||
The really big news about the Kentucky based TAP Magazine came Saturday, April
|
||
22, 1989. Apparently, because of problems with local banks and the Internal
|
||
Revenue Service, TAP Magazine is now FREE!
|
||
|
||
The only catch is that if you want it, you have to send them a self-addressed
|
||
stamped envelope to get each issue or "you can send cash, but only enough to
|
||
pay for postage, 25 cents should cover it." Do not send any kinds of checks
|
||
and/or money orders. Anyone who did will be receiving their checks back or
|
||
at least those checks will not be cashed. The TAP Magazine staff will be
|
||
taking care of the printing costs out of their own pocket.
|
||
|
||
So for the FREE TAP Magazine, send a self-addressed stamped envelope to:
|
||
|
||
P.O. Box 20264
|
||
Louisville, KY 40220
|
||
|
||
Issue 93 is due for the end of April 1989, but Aristotle also wanted me to let
|
||
everyone know that he will be attending SummerCon '89 and bringing with him
|
||
plenty of issues of all the TAPs that he, Olorin The White, and Predat0r have
|
||
published.
|
||
|
||
As I have not seen TRC's TAP, I make no judgements. Instead, get a copy of
|
||
both TAPs FREE and compare them yourself. The market will decide which TAP
|
||
will continue.
|
||
|
||
Information Provided by
|
||
Aristotle and The Renegade Chemist
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Computer Group Wary Of Security Agency April 11, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Taken from the San Francisco Chronicle
|
||
|
||
A public interest group said yesterday that the National Security Agency, the
|
||
nation's biggest intelligence agency, could exert excessive control over a
|
||
program to strengthen the security of computer systems throughout the federal
|
||
government.
|
||
|
||
The group, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility -- based in Palo
|
||
Alto -- urged key members of Congress to focus "particularly close scrutiny" on
|
||
the agency's role in helping to implement legislation aimed at safeguarding
|
||
sensitive but unclassified information in federal computers.
|
||
|
||
"There is a constant risk that the federal agencies, under the guise of
|
||
enhancing computer security, may find their programs -- to the extent that they
|
||
rely upon computer systems -- increasingly under the supervision of the largest
|
||
and most secretive intelligence organization in the country," it said.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Verifying Social Security Numbers April 11, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Taken From The New York Times
|
||
|
||
Dorcas R. Hardy, Commisssioner of the Social Security Administration, told a
|
||
Congressional committee that the agency had verified millions of SSN's for
|
||
private credit companies.
|
||
|
||
TRW, the nation's largest credit reporting company, recently proposed paying
|
||
the Social Security Administration $1,000,000 to have 140 million numbers
|
||
verified.
|
||
|
||
Phil Gambino, an agency spokesman, reported last month that the agency had
|
||
verified social security numbers only at the request of beneficiaries or
|
||
employers and had never verified more than 25 numbers at a time. He said such
|
||
disclosures were required under the Freedom of Information Act.
|
||
|
||
At the hearing yesterday, Dorcas R. Hardy, denied any other verifications at
|
||
first. However, she later admitted that in the early 1980s, 3,000,000 social
|
||
security numbers were verified for CitiCorp and that last year 151,000 numbers
|
||
were verified for TRW. Ms. Hardy said that the 151,000 numbers were just part
|
||
of a "test run."
|
||
|
||
Senator David Pryor, a democrat from Arkansas and chairman of the Special
|
||
Committee on Aging, said that previous commissioners; the Congressional
|
||
Research Service of the Library of Congress, and Donald A. Gonya, chief counsel
|
||
for Social Security have all decided that such verification is illegal.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
PWN Quicknotes
|
||
|
||
1. Prank Virus Warning Message (March 28, 1989) -- An individual placed a time
|
||
bomb message on a government service system in the San Francisco Bay Area
|
||
saying, "WARNING! A computer virus has infected the system!" The
|
||
individual is learning that such a prank is considered almost as funny as
|
||
saying that you have a bomb in your carry-on luggage as you board a plane.
|
||
-- Bruce Baker, Information Security Program, SRI International
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
2. Hackers' Dictionary In Japanese? (March 30, 1989) -- What is this you ask?
|
||
This amusing compilation was put together a decade or so ago by artificial
|
||
intelligence (AI) graduate students at Stanford, MIT, and Carnegie-Mellon
|
||
and recorded the then-current vernacular of their shared cultures. They
|
||
did it for fun, but it somehow ended up getting published.
|
||
|
||
The Hackers' Dictionary contains more than a few puns, jokes, and other
|
||
things that are hard to translate such as "moby," as in "moby memory", or
|
||
"fubar" and its regional variants "foo bar" and "foo baz."
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
3. AT&T's Air Force -- AT&T has an air force that patrols its cable routes,
|
||
some routes 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The AT&T air force includes
|
||
helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. For some areas, AT&T uses infantry
|
||
and armored cars. AT&T's Sue Fleming says, "We hope NOT to find any
|
||
activity. We don't want to 'catch' people. But if we do spot a digging
|
||
crew, the usual procedure is for the pilot to radio the location back to a
|
||
ground crew, who check it out. On occasion, they drop notes -- or even
|
||
land -- but that depends on where the site is. In some areas -- like New
|
||
Jersey -- unauthorized landings bring heavy penalties."
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
4. Terrorist Threat? -- Scientific advisors to the government told a Senate
|
||
panel that telecommunications networks are tempting targets for terrorist
|
||
activity. The experts said that advances in technology -- like fiber
|
||
optics, which concentrates equipment and data -- and the fragmentation of
|
||
the telecom industry after divestiture are reasons for the increased risk.
|
||
Certainly the Hinsdale, Illinois CO fire and the recent severing of a fiber
|
||
backbone in New Jersey have shown us all how vulnerable our country's
|
||
telecom network is.
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
5. FCC Rules On AOS -- The FCC has ruled on a complaint filed this summer by
|
||
two consumer groups against five Alternative Operator Services (AOS)
|
||
companies. The FCC found the complaint valid and has ordered the AOS
|
||
companies to stop certain practices immediately.
|
||
|
||
The ruling states that callers must be told when their calls are being
|
||
handled by an AOS, operators must provide callers with rate information and
|
||
hotel or payphone owners cannot block calls to other long distance
|
||
carriers. (Callers who don't take any special action when making a call
|
||
will still be routed to the pre-subscribed carrier.)
|
||
|
||
The FCC has also ordered the companies to eliminate "splashing" whenever
|
||
technically feasible. Splashing is transferring a call to a distant
|
||
carrier point-of-presence and charging the caller for the call from that
|
||
point.
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
6. Cool New Service -- CompuServe (the world's biggest computer bulletin
|
||
board) users can now dial in and search and find articles from a bunch of
|
||
different technical trade magazines. The database was put together by an
|
||
outfit called Information Access Company. It currently contains full-text
|
||
articles for 50 publications and paraphrased abstracts for 75 more. Most
|
||
coverage begins with the January 1987 issues.
|
||
|
||
You can search the publications by magazine name, author, key word, key
|
||
phrase, etc., then pull up the abstracts of the article of interest and, if
|
||
needed and when available, get the full text of the article. And it's easy
|
||
to use.
|
||
|
||
Charge for the service is $24 per hour, $1 for each abstract, and $1.50 for
|
||
each full-text article accessed. CompuServe charges $12.50 per hour for
|
||
connect time. Both per hour charges are pro-rated, and, with the databases
|
||
being so easy to use, you'll rarely be on the board for more than 10-15
|
||
minutes, so those costs will drop.
|
||
|
||
CompuServe 800-848-8199
|
||
Information Access 800-227-8431
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
7. ISDN Calling Number Identification Services (April 7, 1989) -- Bellcore
|
||
Technical Reference TR-TSY-000860, "ISDN Calling Number Identification
|
||
Services" can be purchased for $46 from:
|
||
|
||
Bellcore
|
||
Customer Service
|
||
60 New England Ave
|
||
Piscataway, NJ 08854-4196
|
||
(201) 699-5800
|
||
|
||
This Technical Reference contains Bellcore's view of generic requirements
|
||
for support of ISDN Calling Number Identification (I-CNIS). The I-CNIS
|
||
feature extends the concepts of Calling Number Delivery and Calling Number
|
||
Delivery Blocking to ISDN lines. I-CNIS also allows the customer to
|
||
specify which Directory Number (DN) should be used for each outgoing call
|
||
and provides network screening to ensure that the specified DN is valid.
|
||
I-CNIS handles calling number processing for both circuit-mode and
|
||
packet-mode ISDN calls and provides four component features: Number
|
||
Provision, Number Screening, Number Privacy, and Number Delivery. Material
|
||
on Privacy Change by the calling party and Privacy Override by the called
|
||
party is also included.
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
8. Founder of TAP Magazine, Abbie Hoffman, born in 1936, passed away on April
|
||
12, 1989. He was found dead in his apartment in New Hope, PA. He was
|
||
fully dressed under the bedcovers. An autopsy was inconclusive. An
|
||
article about him appears in the April 24, 1989 issue of Time Magazine,
|
||
"A Flower in a Clenched Fist," page 23.
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
9. Bill Landreth aka The Cracker, author of Out Of The Inner Circle, has
|
||
reappeared. Supposedly, he is now working as a bookbinder in Orange
|
||
County, California and living with the sysop of a bulletin board called the
|
||
"Pig Sty." -- Dark Sorcerer (April 19, 1989)
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
10. Hacker/Phreaker Gets "Stiff" Penalty (Green Bay, Wisconsin) -- David
|
||
Kelsey, aka Stagehand, plead guilty to two counts of class "E" felonies
|
||
and received a 90 day jail term. Once he has completed his jail term, he
|
||
will serve three years probation and an unknown amount of community
|
||
service hours.
|
||
|
||
In addition to these penalties, Stagehand must also pay restitution of
|
||
$511.00 to Schneider Communications of Green Bay, Wisconsin. Stagehand
|
||
was given all his computer equipment back as part of the plea bargain --
|
||
minus any materials considered to be "ill gotten" gains.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
! ***
|
||
|
||
|
||
1:30:22 p.m. ARE YOU STILL THERE ?
|
||
! ***
|
||
|
||
|
||
1:35:22 p.m. RESPOND OR BE LOGGED OFF
|
||
!
|
||
|
||
y
|
||
supervisors who said the taps were for the police. They were told that many of
|
||
the taps were for the FBI.
|
||
|
||
Another radio amateur, Vincent Clark/KB4MIT, a technician for South-Central
|
||
Bell from 1972 to 1981, said he placed illegal wiretaps similar to those done
|
||
by Bob Draise on orders from his supervisors -- and on request from local
|
||
policemen in Louisville, Kentucky.
|
||
|
||
When asked how he got started in the illegal wiretap business, Bob said that a
|
||
friend called and asked him to come down to meet with the Cincinnati police. An
|
||
intelligence sergeant asked Bob about wiretapping some Black Muslims. He also
|
||
told Bob that Cincinnati Bell security had approved the wiretap -- and that it
|
||
was for the FBI. The sergeant pointed to his Masonic ring which Bob also wore
|
||
-- in other words, he was telling the truth under the Masonic oath -- something
|
||
that Bob put a lot of stock in.
|
||
|
||
Most of the people first wiretapped were drug or criminal related. Later on,
|
||
however, it go out of hand -- and the FBI wanted taps on prominent citizens.
|
||
"We started doing people who had money. How this information was used, I
|
||
couldn't tell you."
|
||
|
||
The January 29th "Newsday" said Draise had told investigators that among the
|
||
taps he rigged from 1972 to 1979 were several on lines used by Wren Business
|
||
Communications, a Bell competitor. It seems that when Wren had arranged an
|
||
appointment with a potential customer, they found that Bell had just been there
|
||
without being called. Wren's president is a ham radio operator, David
|
||
Stoner/K8LMB.
|
||
|
||
When spoken with, Dave Stoner said the following;
|
||
|
||
"As far as I am concerned, the initial focus for all of this began
|
||
with the FBI. The FBI apparently set up a structure throughout the
|
||
United States using apparently the security chiefs of the different
|
||
Bell companies. They say that there have been other cases in the
|
||
United States like ours in Cincinnati but they have been localized
|
||
without the realization of an overall pattern being implicated."
|
||
|
||
"The things that ties this all together is if you go way back in
|
||
history to the Hoover period at the FBI, he apparently got together
|
||
with the AT&T security people. There is an organization that I
|
||
guess exists to this day with regular meetings of the security
|
||
people of the different Bell companies. This meant that the FBI
|
||
would be able to target a group of 20 or 30 people that represented
|
||
the security points for all of the Bell and AT&T connections in the
|
||
United States. I believe the key to all of this goes back to Hoover.
|
||
The FBI worked through that group who then created the activity at
|
||
the local level as a result of central planning."
|
||
|
||
"I believe that in spite of the fact that many people have indicated
|
||
that this is an early 70's problem -- that there is no disruption to
|
||
that work to this day. I am pretty much convinced that it is
|
||
continuing. It looks like a large surveillance effort that
|
||
Cincinnati was just a part of."
|
||
|
||
"The federal prosecutor Kathleen Brinkman is in a no-win situation.
|
||
If she successfully prosecutes this case she is going to bring
|
||
trouble down upon her own Justice Department. She can't
|
||
successfully prosecute the case."
|
||
|
||
About $200 million in lawsuits have already been filed against Cincinnati Bell
|
||
and the Police Department. Several members of the police department have taken
|
||
the Fifth Amendment before the grand jury rather than answer questions about
|
||
their roles in the wiretapping scheme.
|
||
|
||
Bob Draise/WB8QCF has filed a suit against Cincinnati Bell for $78 for
|
||
malicious prosecution and slander in response to a suit filed by Cincinnati
|
||
Bell against Bob for defamation. Right after they filed the suit, several
|
||
policemen came forward and admitted to doing illegal wiretaps with them. The
|
||
Cincinnati police said they stopped this is 1974 -- although another policeman
|
||
reportedly said they actually stopped the wiretapping in 1986.
|
||
|
||
Now the CBS-TV program "60 Minutes" is interested in the Cincinnati goings-on
|
||
and has sent in a team of investigative reporters. Ed Bradley from "60
|
||
Minutes" has already interviewed Bob Draise/WB8QCF and it is expected that
|
||
sometime during this month (April) April, we will see a "60 Minutes" report on
|
||
spying by the FBI. We also understand that CNN, Ted Turner's Cable News
|
||
Network, is also working up a "Bugging of America" expose.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Crackdown On Hackers Urged April 9, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Taken From the Chicago Tribune (Section 7, Page 12b)
|
||
|
||
"Make Punishment Fit The Crime," computer leaders say.
|
||
|
||
DALLAS (AP) -- The legal system has failed to respond adequately to the threat
|
||
that hackers pose to the computer networks crucial to corporate America, a
|
||
computer expert says.
|
||
|
||
Many computer hackers "are given slaps on the wrist," Mark Leary, a senior
|
||
analyst with International Data Corp., said at a roundtable discussion last
|
||
week.
|
||
|
||
"The justice system has to step up...to the fact that these people are
|
||
malicious and are criminals and are robbing banks just as much as if they
|
||
walked up with a shotgun," he said.
|
||
|
||
Other panelists complained that hackers, because of their ability to break into
|
||
computer systems, even are given jobs, sometimes a security consultants.
|
||
|
||
The experts spoke at a roundtable sponsored by Network World magazine, a
|
||
publication for computer network users and managers.
|
||
|
||
Computer networks have become crucial to business, from transferring and
|
||
compiling information to overseeing and running manufacturing processes.
|
||
|
||
The public also is increasingly exposed to networks through such devices as
|
||
automatic teller machines at banks, airline reservation systems and computers
|
||
that store billing information.
|
||
|
||
Companies became more willing to spend money on computer security after last
|
||
year's celebrated invasion of a nationwide network by a virus allegedly
|
||
unleased by a graduate student [Robert Tappen Morris], the experts said.
|
||
|
||
"The incident caused us to reassess the priorities with which we look at
|
||
certain threats," said Dennis Steinaur, manager of the computer security
|
||
management group of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
|
||
|
||
But computer security isn't only a matter of guarding against unauthorized
|
||
entry, said Max Hopper, senior vice president for information systems as
|
||
American Airlines.
|
||
|
||
Hopper said American has built a "a Cheyenne mountain-type" installation for
|
||
its computer systems to guard against a variety of problems, including
|
||
electrical failure and natural disaster. Referring to the Defense Department's
|
||
underground nerve center in a Colorado mountain, he said American's precautions
|
||
even include a three-day supply of food.
|
||
|
||
"We've done everything we can, we think, to protect the total environment,"
|
||
Hopper said.
|
||
|
||
Hopper and Steinaur said that despite the high-tech image of computer
|
||
terrorism, it remains an administrative problem that should be approached as a
|
||
routine management issue.
|
||
|
||
But the experts agreed that the greatest danger to computer networks does not
|
||
come from outside hackers. Instead, they said, the biggest threat is from
|
||
disgruntled employees or others whose original access to systems was
|
||
legitimate.
|
||
|
||
Though employee screening is useful, Steinaur said, it is more important to
|
||
build into computer systems ways to track unauthorized use and to publicize
|
||
that hacking can be traced.
|
||
|
||
Steinaur said growing computer literacy, plus the activities of some
|
||
non-malicious hackers, help security managers in some respects.
|
||
|
||
Expanded knowledge "forces us as security managers not be dependent on
|
||
ignorance," Steinaur said.
|
||
|
||
"Security needs to be a part of the system, rather than a 'nuisance addition,'"
|
||
Steinaur said, "and we probably have not done a very good job of making
|
||
management realize that security is an integral part of the system."
|
||
|
||
IDC's Leary said the organization surveys of Fortune 1000 companies
|
||
surprisingly found a significant number of companies were doing little to
|
||
protect their systems.
|
||
|
||
The discussion, the first of three planned by Network World, was held because
|
||
computer sabotage "is a real problem that people aren't aware of," said editor
|
||
John Gallant. Many business people sophisticated networks."
|
||
|
||
It also is a problem that many industry vendors are reluctant to address, he
|
||
said, because it raises questions about a company's reliability.
|
||
|
||
Typed For PWN by Hatchet Molly
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Ex-Worker Charged In Virus Case -- Databases Were Alleged Target Apr 12, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
by Jane M. Von Bergen (Philadelphia Inquirer)
|
||
|
||
A former employee was charged yesterday with infecting his company's computer
|
||
database in what is believed to be the first computer-virus arrest in the
|
||
Philadelphia area.
|
||
|
||
"We believe he was doing this as an act of revenge," said Camden County
|
||
Assistant Prosecutor Norman Muhlbaier said yesterday, commenting on a motive
|
||
for the employee who allegedly installed a program to erase databases at his
|
||
former company, Datacomp Corp. in Voorhees, New Jersey.
|
||
|
||
Chris Young, 21, of the 2000 block of Liberty Street, Trenton, was charged in
|
||
Camden County with one count of computer theft by altering a database.
|
||
Superior Court Judge E. Stevenson Fluharty released Young on his promise to pay
|
||
$10,000 if he failed to appear in court. If convicted, Young faces a 10-year
|
||
prison term and a $100,000 fine. Young could not be reached for comment.
|
||
|
||
"No damage was done," Muhlbaier said, because the company discovered the virus
|
||
before it could cause harm. Had the virus gone into effect, it could have
|
||
damaged databases worth several hundred thousand dollars, Muhlbaier said.
|
||
|
||
Datacomp Corp., in the Echelon Mall, is involved in telephone marketing. The
|
||
company, which has between 30 and 35 employees, had a contract with a major
|
||
telephone company to verify the contents of its white pages and try to sell
|
||
bold-faced or other special listings in the white pages, a Datacomp company
|
||
spokeswoman said. The database Young is accused of trying to destroy is the
|
||
list of names from the phone company, she said.
|
||
|
||
Muhlbaier said that the day Young resigned from the company, October 7, 1988 he
|
||
used fictitious passwords to obtain entry into the company computer,
|
||
programming the virus to begin its destruction December 7, 1988 -- Pearl Harbor
|
||
Day. Young, who had worked for the company on and off for two years -- most
|
||
recently as a supervisor -- was disgruntled because he had received some
|
||
unfavorable job-performance reviews, the prosecutor said.
|
||
|
||
Eventually, operators at the company picked up glitches in the computer system.
|
||
A programmer, called in to straighten out the mess, noticed that the program
|
||
had been altered and discovered the data-destroying virus, Muhlbaier said.
|
||
"What Mr. Young did not know was that the computer system has a lot of security
|
||
features so they could track it back to a particular date, time and terminal,"
|
||
Muhlbaier said. "We were able to ... prove that he was at that terminal."
|
||
Young's virus, Muhlbaier said, is the type known as a "time bomb" because it is
|
||
programmed to go off at a specific time. In this case, the database would have
|
||
been sickened the first time someone switched on a computer December 7, he said
|
||
|
||
Norma Kraus, a vice president of Datacomp's parent company, Volt Information
|
||
Sciences Inc, said yesterday that the company's potential loss included not
|
||
only the databases, but also the time it took to find and cure the virus. "All
|
||
the work has to stop," causing delivery backups on contracts, she said. "We're
|
||
just fortunate that we have employees who can determine what's wrong and then
|
||
have the interest to do something. In this case, the employee didn't stop at
|
||
fixing the system, but continued on to determine what the problem was." The
|
||
Volt company, based in New York, does $500 million worth of business a year
|
||
with such services as telephone marketing, data processing and technical
|
||
support. It also arranges temporary workers, particularly in the
|
||
data-processing field, and installs telecommunication services, Kraus said.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Mexico's Phone System Going Private? April 17, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
By Oryan QUEST (Special Hispanic Corespondent)
|
||
|
||
The Mexico Telephone Company, aka Telefonos de Mexico, aka Telmex, is likely to
|
||
go private in the next year or two. The Mexican government is giving serious
|
||
consideration to selling its controlling interest in that nation's
|
||
communications network, despite very stiff opposition from the local unions
|
||
which would prefer to see the existing bureaucracy stay in place.
|
||
|
||
The proposed sale, which is part of a move to upgrade the phone system there --
|
||
and it *does* need upgrading -- by allowing more private investment, is part of
|
||
a growing trend in Mexico to privatize heretofore nationalized industries.
|
||
|
||
The Mexico Telephone Company has spent more than a year planning a $14 billion,
|
||
five-year restructuring plan which will probably give AT&T and the Bell
|
||
regional holding companies a role in the improvements.
|
||
|
||
One plan being discussed by the Mexican government is a complete break-up of
|
||
Telmex, similar to the court-ordered divestiture of AT&T a few years ago.
|
||
Under this plan, there would be one central long distance company in Mexico,
|
||
with the government retaining control of it, but privately owned regional firms
|
||
providing local and auxiliary services.
|
||
|
||
Representatives of the Mexican government have talked on more than one
|
||
occasion with some folks at Southwestern Bell about making a formal proposal.
|
||
Likewise, Pacific Bell has been making some overtures to the Mexicans. It will
|
||
be interesting to see what develops.
|
||
|
||
About two years ago, Teleconnect Magazine, in a humorous article on the
|
||
divestiture, presented a bogus map of the territories assigned to each BOC,
|
||
with Texas, New Mexico and Arizona grouped under an entity called "Taco Bell."
|
||
|
||
Any phone company which takes over the Mexican system will be an improvement
|
||
over the current operation, which has been slowly deteriorating for several
|
||
years.
|
||
|
||
PS: I *Demand* To Be Let Back On MSP!
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
==Phrack Inc.==
|
||
|
||
Volume Three, Issue 26, File 11 of 11
|
||
|
||
PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN P h r a c k W o r l d N e w s PWN
|
||
PWN %%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%% %%%%%%% PWN
|
||
PWN Issue XXVI/Part 3 PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN April 25, 1989 PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN Created, Written, and Edited PWN
|
||
PWN by Knight Lightning PWN
|
||
PWN PWN
|
||
PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
|
||
|
||
|
||
Galactic Hacker Party March 30, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
GALACTIC HACKER PARTY
|
||
August 2-4, 1989
|
||
PARADISO, AMSTERDAM, HOLLAND
|
||
|
||
During the summer of 1989, the world as we know it will go into overload. An
|
||
interstellar particle stream of hackers, phone phreaks, radioactivists and
|
||
assorted technological subversives will be fusing their energies into a media
|
||
melt-down as the global village plugs into Amsterdam for three electrifying
|
||
days of information interchange and electronic capers.
|
||
|
||
Aided by the advanced communications technology to which they are accustomed,
|
||
the hacker forces will discuss strategies, play games, and generally have a
|
||
good time. Free access to permanently open on-line facilities will enable them
|
||
to keep in touch with home base -- wherever that is.
|
||
|
||
Those who rightly fear the threat of information tyranny and want to learn what
|
||
they can do about it are urgently invited to interface in Amsterdam in August.
|
||
There will be much to learn from people who know. Celebrity guests with
|
||
something to say will be present in body or electronic spirit.
|
||
|
||
The Force must be nurtured. If you are refused transport because your laptop
|
||
looks like a bomb, cut off behind enemy lines, or unable to attend for any
|
||
other reason, then join us on the networks. Other hacker groups are requested
|
||
to organize similar gatherings to coincide with ours. We can provide low-cost
|
||
international communications links during the conference.
|
||
|
||
[ Despite the wishes of those planning the "Galactic Hacker ]
|
||
[ Party," there will be NO change in plans for SummerCon '89! ]
|
||
|
||
For further information, take up contact as soon as possible with:
|
||
|
||
HACK-TIC PARADISO
|
||
P.O. box 22953 Weteringschans 6-8
|
||
1100 DL Amsterdam 1017 SG Amsterdam
|
||
The Netherlands The Netherlands
|
||
|
||
tel: +31 20 6001480 tel: +31 20 264521 / +31 20 237348
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Subversive Bulletin Boards March 26, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
An article in a newspaper from the United Kingdom had an article relating to a
|
||
computer bulletin board being run by a 14-year-old boy in Wilmslow, Cheshire,
|
||
England. It contained information relating to such things as making plastic
|
||
explosives.
|
||
|
||
Anti-terrorist detectives are said to be investigating for possible breaches of
|
||
the Obscene Publications Act. Apparently reporters were able to easily gain
|
||
access to this bulletin board and peruse articles on such subjects as credit
|
||
card fraud, making various types of explosives, street fighting techniques and
|
||
dodging police radar traps.
|
||
|
||
One article was obviously aimed at children and described how to make a bomb
|
||
suitable for use on "the car of a teacher you do not like at school," which
|
||
would destroy the tire of a car when it was started.
|
||
|
||
The boy's parents did not seem to think that their son was doing anything
|
||
wrong, preferring him to be working with his computer rather than roaming the
|
||
streets.
|
||
|
||
A London computer consultant, Noel Bradford, is quoted as having seen the
|
||
bulletin board and found messages discussing "how to crack British Telecom, how
|
||
to get money out of people and how to defraud credit card companies. Credit
|
||
card numbers are given, along with PIN numbers, names, addresses and other
|
||
details."
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Tale Of TWO TAP Magazines! April 24, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
It seemed inevitable that the battle for the rights to TAP would come into
|
||
play, but many wonder why it has taken so long.
|
||
|
||
The Renegade Chemist, long time member of Phortune 500 and one of its "Board Of
|
||
Directors," has been talking about re-starting TAP Magazine for at least two
|
||
years... nothing ever happened with it until now. TRC claims that the TAP
|
||
Magazine crew in Kentucky is just a fraud and that he is putting on the "REAL
|
||
McCoy."
|
||
|
||
For a free issue of The Renegade Chemist's TAP Magazine, send a self-addressed
|
||
stamped envelope to:
|
||
|
||
Data Security Consultants, Inc.
|
||
TAP Magazine
|
||
P.O. Box 271
|
||
South Windam, CT 06266-0271
|
||
|
||
Now on the other hand, Aristotle of the Kentucky based TAP Magazine has shown
|
||
an almost uncaring attitude about The Renegade Chemist's statements about TAP
|
||
Magazine. He says that he does not "really mind if these people put out a
|
||
magazine. Honestly I just want to help the community and the more magazines
|
||
and information, the better."
|
||
|
||
The really big news about the Kentucky based TAP Magazine came Saturday, April
|
||
22, 1989. Apparently, because of problems with local banks and the Internal
|
||
Revenue Service, TAP Magazine is now FREE!
|
||
|
||
The only catch is that if you want it, you have to send them a self-addressed
|
||
stamped envelope to get each issue or "you can send cash, but only enough to
|
||
pay for postage, 25 cents should cover it." Do not send any kinds of checks
|
||
and/or money orders. Anyone who did will be receiving their checks back or
|
||
at least those checks will not be cashed. The TAP Magazine staff will be
|
||
taking care of the printing costs out of their own pocket.
|
||
|
||
So for the FREE TAP Magazine, send a self-addressed stamped envelope to:
|
||
|
||
P.O. Box 20264
|
||
Louisville, KY 40220
|
||
|
||
Issue 93 is due for the end of April 1989, but Aristotle also wanted me to let
|
||
everyone know that he will be attending SummerCon '89 and bringing with him
|
||
plenty of issues of all the TAPs that he, Olorin The White, and Predat0r have
|
||
published.
|
||
|
||
As I have not seen TRC's TAP, I make no judgements. Instead, get a copy of
|
||
both TAPs FREE and compare them yourself. The market will decide which TAP
|
||
will continue.
|
||
|
||
Information Provided by
|
||
Aristotle and The Renegade Chemist
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Computer Group Wary Of Security Agency April 11, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Taken from the San Francisco Chronicle
|
||
|
||
A public interest group said yesterday that the National Security Agency, the
|
||
nation's biggest intelligence agency, could exert excessive control over a
|
||
program to strengthen the security of computer systems throughout the federal
|
||
government.
|
||
|
||
The group, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility -- based in Palo
|
||
Alto -- urged key members of Congress to focus "particularly close scrutiny" on
|
||
the agency's role in helping to implement legislation aimed at safeguarding
|
||
sensitive but unclassified information in federal computers.
|
||
|
||
"There is a constant risk that the federal agencies, under the guise of
|
||
enhancing computer security, may find their programs -- to the extent that they
|
||
rely upon computer systems -- increasingly under the supervision of the largest
|
||
and most secretive intelligence organization in the country," it said.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Verifying Social Security Numbers April 11, 1989
|
||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||
Taken From The New York Times
|
||
|
||
Dorcas R. Hardy, Commisssioner of the Social Security Administration, told a
|
||
Congressional committee that the agency had verified millions of SSN's for
|
||
private credit companies.
|
||
|
||
TRW, the nation's largest credit reporting company, recently proposed paying
|
||
the Social Security Administration $1,000,000 to have 140 million numbers
|
||
verified.
|
||
|
||
Phil Gambino, an agency spokesman, reported last month that the agency had
|
||
verified social security numbers only at the request of beneficiaries or
|
||
employers and had never verified more than 25 numbers at a time. He said such
|
||
disclosures were required under the Freedom of Information Act.
|
||
|
||
At the hearing yesterday, Dorcas R. Hardy, denied any other verifications at
|
||
first. However, she later admitted that in the early 1980s, 3,000,000 social
|
||
security numbers were verified for CitiCorp and that last year 151,000 numbers
|
||
were verified for TRW. Ms. Hardy said that the 151,000 numbers were just part
|
||
of a "test run."
|
||
|
||
Senator David Pryor, a democrat from Arkansas and chairman of the Special
|
||
Committee on Aging, said that previous commissioners; the Congressional
|
||
Research Service of the Library of Congress, and Donald A. Gonya, chief counsel
|
||
for Social Security have all decided that such verification is illegal.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
PWN Quicknotes
|
||
|
||
1. Prank Virus Warning Message (March 28, 1989) -- An individual placed a time
|
||
bomb message on a government service system in the San Francisco Bay Area
|
||
saying, "WARNING! A computer virus has infected the system!" The
|
||
individual is learning that such a prank is considered almost as funny as
|
||
saying that you have a bomb in your carry-on luggage as you board a plane.
|
||
-- Bruce Baker, Information Security Program, SRI International
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
2. Hackers' Dictionary In Japanese? (March 30, 1989) -- What is this you ask?
|
||
This amusing compilation was put together a decade or so ago by artificial
|
||
intelligence (AI) graduate students at Stanford, MIT, and Carnegie-Mellon
|
||
and recorded the then-current vernacular of their shared cultures. They
|
||
did it for fun, but it somehow ended up getting published.
|
||
|
||
The Hackers' Dictionary contains more than a few puns, jokes, and other
|
||
things that are hard to translate such as "moby," as in "moby memory", or
|
||
"fubar" and its regional variants "foo bar" and "foo baz."
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
3. AT&T's Air Force -- AT&T has an air force that patrols its cable routes,
|
||
some routes 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The AT&T air force includes
|
||
helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. For some areas, AT&T uses infantry
|
||
and armored cars. AT&T's Sue Fleming says, "We hope NOT to find any
|
||
activity. We don't want to 'catch' people. But if we do spot a digging
|
||
crew, the usual procedure is for the pilot to radio the location back to a
|
||
ground crew, who check it out. On occasion, they drop notes -- or even
|
||
land -- but that depends on where the site is. In some areas -- like New
|
||
Jersey -- unauthorized landings bring heavy penalties."
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
4. Terrorist Threat? -- Scientific advisors to the government told a Senate
|
||
panel that telecommunications networks are tempting targets for terrorist
|
||
activity. The experts said that advances in technology -- like fiber
|
||
optics, which concentrates equipment and data -- and the fragmentation of
|
||
the telecom industry after divestiture are reasons for the increased risk.
|
||
Certainly the Hinsdale, Illinois CO fire and the recent severing of a fiber
|
||
backbone in New Jersey have shown us all how vulnerable our country's
|
||
telecom network is.
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
5. FCC Rules On AOS -- The FCC has ruled on a complaint filed this summer by
|
||
two consumer groups against five Alternative Operator Services (AOS)
|
||
companies. The FCC found the complaint valid and has ordered the AOS
|
||
companies to stop certain practices immediately.
|
||
|
||
The ruling states that callers must be told when their calls are being
|
||
handled by an AOS, operators must provide callers with rate information and
|
||
hotel or payphone owners cannot block calls to other long distance
|
||
carriers. (Callers who don't take any special action when making a call
|
||
will still be routed to the pre-subscribed carrier.)
|
||
|
||
The FCC has also ordered the companies to eliminate "splashing" whenever
|
||
technically feasible. Splashing is transferring a call to a distant
|
||
carrier point-of-presence and charging the caller for the call from that
|
||
point.
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
6. Cool New Service -- CompuServe (the world's biggest computer bulletin
|
||
board) users can now dial in and search and find articles from a bunch of
|
||
different technical trade magazines. The database was put together by an
|
||
outfit called Information Access Company. It currently contains full-text
|
||
articles for 50 publications and paraphrased abstracts for 75 more. Most
|
||
coverage begins with the January 1987 issues.
|
||
|
||
You can search the publications by magazine name, author, key word, key
|
||
phrase, etc., then pull up the abstracts of the article of interest and, if
|
||
needed and when available, get the full text of the article. And it's easy
|
||
to use.
|
||
|
||
Charge for the service is $24 per hour, $1 for each abstract, and $1.50 for
|
||
each full-text article accessed. CompuServe charges $12.50 per hour for
|
||
connect time. Both per hour charges are pro-rated, and, with the databases
|
||
being so easy to use, you'll rarely be on the board for more than 10-15
|
||
minutes, so those costs will drop.
|
||
|
||
CompuServe 800-848-8199
|
||
Information Access 800-227-8431
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
7. ISDN Calling Number Identification Services (April 7, 1989) -- Bellcore
|
||
Technical Reference TR-TSY-000860, "ISDN Calling Number Identification
|
||
Services" can be purchased for $46 from:
|
||
|
||
Bellcore
|
||
Customer Service
|
||
60 New England Ave
|
||
Piscataway, NJ 08854-4196
|
||
(201) 699-5800
|
||
|
||
This Technical Reference contains Bellcore's view of generic requirements
|
||
for support of ISDN Calling Number Identification (I-CNIS). The I-CNIS
|
||
feature extends the concepts of Calling Number Delivery and Calling Number
|
||
Delivery Blocking to ISDN lines. I-CNIS also allows the customer to
|
||
specify which Directory Number (DN) should be used for each outgoing call
|
||
and provides network screening to ensure that the specified DN is valid.
|
||
I-CNIS handles calling number processing for both circuit-mode and
|
||
packet-mode ISDN calls and provides four component features: Number
|
||
Provision, Number Screening, Number Privacy, and Number Delivery. Material
|
||
on Privacy Change by the calling party and Privacy Override by the called
|
||
party is also included.
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
8. Founder of TAP Magazine, Abbie Hoffman, born in 1936, passed away on April
|
||
12, 1989. He was found dead in his apartment in New Hope, PA. He was
|
||
fully dressed under the bedcovers. An autopsy was inconclusive. An
|
||
article about him appears in the April 24, 1989 issue of Time Magazine,
|
||
"A Flower in a Clenched Fist," page 23.
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
9. Bill Landreth aka The Cracker, author of Out Of The Inner Circle, has
|
||
reappeared. Supposedly, he is now working as a bookbinder in Orange
|
||
County, California and living with the sysop of a bulletin board called the
|
||
"Pig Sty." -- Dark Sorcerer (April 19, 1989)
|
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
||
10. Hacker/Phreaker Gets "Stiff" Penalty (Green Bay, Wisconsin) -- David
|
||
Kelsey, aka Stagehand, plead guilty to two counts of class "E" felonies
|
||
and received a 90 day jail term. Once he has completed his jail term, he
|
||
will serve three years probation and an unknown amount of community
|
||
service hours.
|
||
|
||
In addition to these penalties, Stagehand must also pay restitution of
|
||
$511.00 to Schneider Communications of Green Bay, Wisconsin. Stagehand
|
||
was given all his computer equipment back as part of the plea bargain --
|
||
minus any materials considered to be "ill gotten" gains.
|
||
_______________________________________________________________________________
|
||
! ***
|
||
|
||
|
||
1:30:22 p.m. ARE YOU STILL THERE ?
|
||
! ***
|
||
|
||
|
||
1:35:22 p.m. RESPOND OR BE LOGGED OFF
|
||
!
|
||
|