501 lines
28 KiB
Plaintext
501 lines
28 KiB
Plaintext
r103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I had not planned to post this as a special issue, and had
|
|
put itdirect in the TELECOM Archives. However, the demand
|
|
for copies (basedon the mail I received Saturday alone)
|
|
indicates it would be betterhandled in a couple of
|
|
newsgroups.I had not anticipated the large demand for
|
|
copies. Here it is: Date: Tue, 15 May 90 02:40:28 pdt
|
|
From: Emmanuel Goldstein <emmanuel-well.uucp> Subject:
|
|
2600 Articles: The Phrack E911 Affair
|
|
|
|
******************************************************
|
|
|
|
THE FOLLOWING TWO ARTICLES ARE FROM THE JUST-RELEASED SPRING
|
|
EDITION OF2600 MAGAZINE, THE HACKER QUARTERLY. WE FEEL THAT
|
|
THE CURRENT HAPPENINGSIN THE COMPUTER WORLD ARE EXTREMELY
|
|
SIGNIFICANT FOR ANYONE WHO HAS ANYINTEREST IN COMMUNICATIONS
|
|
AND/OR TECHNOLOGY. WE'D BE MOST INTERESTED INANY FEEDBACK ON
|
|
THIS TOPIC.
|
|
|
|
**************ARTICLE ONE: AN OVERVIEW*****************
|
|
|
|
A year ago, we told the stories of Kevin Mitnick and Herbert
|
|
Zinn,two hackers who had been sent to prison. It was then,
|
|
and still is today,a very disturbing chain of events:
|
|
mischief makers and explorers imprisonedfor playing with the
|
|
wrong toys and for asking too many questions. We saidat the
|
|
time that it was important for all hackers to stand up to
|
|
such grossinjustices. After all, they couldn't lock us all
|
|
up.It now appears that such an endeavor may indeed be on the
|
|
agendas of some verypowerful U.S. governmental agencies. And
|
|
even more frightening is therealization that these agencies
|
|
don't particularly care who or what gets sweptup along with
|
|
the hackers, as long as all of the hackers get swept
|
|
up.Apparently, we're considered even more of a threat than
|
|
we had previouslysupposed.In retrospect, this doesn't come
|
|
as a great deal of a surprise. In fact, it nowseems to make
|
|
all too much sense. You no longer have to be paranoid or of
|
|
abeen witnesses to. Censorship, clampdowns, "voluntary"
|
|
urine tests, liedetectors, handwriting analysis,
|
|
surveillance cameras, exaggerated crises thatinvariably lead
|
|
to curtailed freedoms.... All of this together with
|
|
theoverall view that if you're innocent, you've got nothing
|
|
to hide. And all madeso much more effective through the
|
|
magic of high tech. Who would you target asthe biggest
|
|
potential roadblock if not the people who understand
|
|
thetechnology at work? It appears the biggest threats to the
|
|
system are thosecapable of manipulating it.What we're about
|
|
to tell you is frightening, plain and simple. You don't
|
|
haveto be a hacker to understand this. The words and ideas
|
|
are easily translatableto any time and any
|
|
culture.Crackdown"We can now expect a crackdown...I just
|
|
hope that I can pull through this oneand that my friends can
|
|
also. This is the time to watch yourself. No matterwhat you
|
|
are into.... Apparently the government has seen the last
|
|
straw intheir point of view.... I think they are going after
|
|
all the 'teachers'...andso that is where their energies will
|
|
be put: to stop all hackers, and stoppeople before they can
|
|
become threats."This was one of the reactions on a computer
|
|
bulletin board to a series of raidson hackers, raids that
|
|
had started in 1989 and spread rapidly into early
|
|
1990.Atlanta, St. Louis, and New York were major targets in
|
|
what was then anundetermined investigation.This in itself
|
|
wouldn't have been especially alarming, since raids on
|
|
hackerscan almost be defined as commonplace. But this one
|
|
was different. For the veryfirst time, a hacker newsletter
|
|
had also been shut down.Phrack was an electronic newsletter
|
|
published out of St. Louis and distributedworldwide. It
|
|
dealt with hacker and phone phreak matters and could be
|
|
found onnearly all hacker bulletin boards. While dealing
|
|
with sensitive material, theeditors were very careful not to
|
|
publish anything illegal (credit cardnumbers, passwords,
|
|
Sprint codes, etc.). We described "Phrack World News"
|
|
(aregular column of Phrack) in our Summer 1989 edition as "a
|
|
must-read for manyhackers". In many ways Phrack resembled
|
|
2600, with the exception of being sentvia electronic mail
|
|
instead of U.S. Mail. That distinction would prove to
|
|
bePhrack's undoing.It now turns out that all incoming and
|
|
outgoing electronic mail used by Phrackwas being monitored
|
|
by the authorities. Every piece of mail going in and
|
|
everypiece of mail coming out. These were not pirated
|
|
mailboxes that were beingused by a couple of hackers. These
|
|
had been obtained legally through theschool the two Phrack
|
|
editors were attending. Privacy on such mailboxes,though not
|
|
guaranteed, could always be assumed. Never again.It's fairly
|
|
obvious that none of this would have happened, none of this
|
|
couldhave happened had Phrack been a non-electronic
|
|
magazine. A printed magazinewould not be intimidated into
|
|
giving up its mailing list as Phrack was. Had aprinted
|
|
magazine been shut down in this fashion after having all of
|
|
their mailopened and read, even the most thick-headed
|
|
sensationalist media types wouldhave caught on: hey, isn't
|
|
that a violation of the First Amendment?Those media people
|
|
who understood what was happening and saw the
|
|
implicationswere very quickly drowned out in the hysteria
|
|
that followed. Indictments werebeing handed out.
|
|
Publisher/editor Craig Neidorf, known in the hacker world
|
|
asKnight Lightning, was hit with a seven count indictment
|
|
accusing him ofparticipating in a scheme to steal
|
|
information about the enhanced 911 systemrun by Bell South.
|
|
Quickly, headlines screamed that hackers had broken intothe
|
|
911 system and were interfering with emergency telephone
|
|
calls to thepolice. One newspaper report said there were no
|
|
indications that anyone haddied or been injured as a result
|
|
of the intrusions. What a relief. Too bad itwasn't true.In
|
|
actuality there have been very grievous injuries suffered as
|
|
a result ofthese intrusions. The intrusions we're referring
|
|
to are those of thegovernment and the media. The injuries
|
|
have been suffered by the defendantswho will have great
|
|
difficulty resuming normal lives even if all of this
|
|
isforgotten tomorrow.And if it's not forgotten, Craig
|
|
Neidorf could go to jail for more than 30years and be fined
|
|
$122,000. And for what? Let's look at the indictment:"It
|
|
was... part of the scheme that defendant Neidorf, utilizing
|
|
a computer atthe University of Missouri in Columbia,
|
|
Missouri would and did receive a copyof the stolen E911 text
|
|
file from defendant Robert J.| Riggs located inAtlanta and
|
|
known in the hacker world as Prophet| through the
|
|
LockportIllinois| computer bulletin board system through
|
|
the use of an interstatecomputer data network."It was
|
|
further part of the scheme that defendant Neidorf would and
|
|
did editand retype the E911 Practice text file at the
|
|
request of the defendant Riggsin order to conceal the source
|
|
of the E911 Practice text file and to prepareit for
|
|
publication in a computer hacker newsletter."It was further
|
|
part of the scheme that defendant Neidorf would and
|
|
didtransfer the stolen E911 Practice text file through the
|
|
use of an interstatecomputer bulletin board system used by
|
|
defendant Riggs in Lockport, Illinois."It was further part
|
|
of the scheme that the defendants Riggs and Neidorf
|
|
wouldpublish information to other computer hackers which
|
|
could be used to gainunauthorized access to emergency 911
|
|
computer systems in the United States andthereby disrupt or
|
|
halt 911 service in portions of the United
|
|
States."Basically, Neidorf is being charged with receiving a
|
|
stolen document. There isnothing anywhere in the indictment
|
|
that even suggests he entered any computerillegally. So his
|
|
crimes are receiving, editing, and transmitting.Now what is
|
|
contained in this document? Information about how to
|
|
gainunauthorized access to, disrupt, or halt 911 service?
|
|
Hardly. The document(erroneously referred to as "911
|
|
software" by the media which caused all kindsof
|
|
misunderstandings) is quoted in Phrack Volume 2, Number 24
|
|
and makes forone of the dullest articles ever to appear in
|
|
the newsletter. According to theindictment, the value of
|
|
this 20k document is $79,449. See story that follows this
|
|
one|Shortly after the indictments were handed down, a member
|
|
of the Legion of Doomknown as Erik Bloodaxe issued a public
|
|
statement. "A group of three hackers|ended up pulling files
|
|
off a Southern Bell system| for them to look at. Thisis
|
|
usually standard procedure: you get on a system, look around
|
|
forinteresting text, buffer it, and maybe print it out for
|
|
posterity. No memberof LOD has ever (to my knowledge) broken
|
|
into another system and used anyinformation gained from it
|
|
for personal gain of any kind...with the exceptionof maybe a
|
|
big boost in his reputation around the underground. A
|
|
hacker| tookthe documentation to the system and wrote a file
|
|
about it. There are actuallytwo files, one is an overview,
|
|
the other is a glossary. The information ishardly something
|
|
anyone could possibly gain anything from except
|
|
knowledgeabout how a certain aspect of the telephone company
|
|
works."He went on to say that Neidorf would have had no way
|
|
of knowing whether or notthe file contained proprietary
|
|
information.Prosecutors refused to say how hackers could
|
|
benefit from the information, norwould they cite a motive or
|
|
reveal any actual damage. In addition, it's widelyspeculated
|
|
that much of this information is readily available as
|
|
referencematerial.In all of the indictments, the Legion of
|
|
Doom is defined as "a closely knitgroup of computer hackers
|
|
involved in: a) disrupting telecommunications byentering
|
|
computerized telephone switches and changing the routing on
|
|
thecircuits of the computerized switches; b) stealing
|
|
proprietary computer sourcecode and information from
|
|
companies and individuals that owned the code
|
|
andinformation; c) stealing and modifying credit information
|
|
on individualsmaintained in credit bureau computers; d)
|
|
fraudulently obtaining money andproperty from companies by
|
|
altering the computerized information used by thecompanies;
|
|
e) disseminating information with respect to their methods
|
|
ofattacking computers to other computer hackers in an effort
|
|
to avoid the focusof law enforcement agencies and
|
|
telecommunication security experts."Ironically, since the
|
|
Legion of Doom isn't a closely knit group, it's unlikelythat
|
|
anyone will be able to defend the group's name against these
|
|
charges --any defendants will naturally be preoccupied with
|
|
their own defenses.(Incidentally, Neidorf was not a part of
|
|
the Legion of Doom, nor was Phracka publication of LOD, as
|
|
has been reported.)The Hunt IntensifiesAfter learning of the
|
|
Phrack electronic mail surveillance, one of the
|
|
systemoperators of The Phoenix Project, a computer bulletin
|
|
board in Austin, Texas,decided to take action to protect the
|
|
privacy of his users. "I will be addinga secure encryption
|
|
routine into the e-mail in the next 2 weeks - I
|
|
haven'tdecided exactly how to implement it, but it'll let
|
|
two people exchange mailencrypted by a password only known
|
|
to the two of them.... Anyway, I do notthink I am due to be
|
|
busted...I don't do anything but run a board. Still,there is
|
|
that possibility. I assume that my lines are all tapped
|
|
until provenotherwise. There is some question to the wisdom
|
|
of leaving the board up atall, but I have personally phoned
|
|
several government investigators and invitedthem to join us
|
|
here on the board. If I begin to feel that the board
|
|
isputting me in any kind of danger, I'll pull it down with
|
|
no notice - I hopeeveryone understands. It looks like it's
|
|
sweeps-time again for the feds. Let'shope all of us are
|
|
still around in 6 months to talk about it."The new security
|
|
was never implemented. The Phoenix Project was seized
|
|
withindays.And the clampdown intensified still further. On
|
|
March 1, the offices of SteveJackson Games, a publishing
|
|
company in Austin, were raided by the SecretService.
|
|
According to the Associated Press, the home of the managing
|
|
editorwas also searched. The police and Secret Service
|
|
seized books, manuals,computers, technical equipment, and
|
|
other documents. Agents also seized thefinal draft of a
|
|
science fiction game written by the company. According to
|
|
theAustin American-Statesman, the authorities were trying to
|
|
determine whetherthe game was being used as a handbook for
|
|
computer crime.Callers to the Illuminati bulletin board (run
|
|
by Steve Jackson Games), receivedthe following
|
|
message:"Before the start of work on March 1, Steve Jackson
|
|
Games was visited by agentsof the United States Secret
|
|
Service. They searched the building thoroughly,tore open
|
|
several boxes in the warehouse, broke a few locks, and
|
|
damaged acouple of filing cabinets (which we would gladly
|
|
have let them examine, hadthey let us into the building),
|
|
answered the phone discourteously at best, andconfiscated
|
|
some computer equipment, including the computer that the BBS
|
|
wasrunning on at the time."So far we have not received a
|
|
clear explanation of what the Secret Service waslooking for,
|
|
what they expected to find, or much of anything else. We
|
|
arefairly certain that Steve Jackson Games is not the target
|
|
of whateverinvestigation is being conducted; in any case, we
|
|
have done nothing illegaland have nothing whatsoever to
|
|
hide. However, the equipment that was seized isapparently
|
|
considered to be evidence in whatever they're investigating,
|
|
so wearen't likely to get it back any time soon. It could be
|
|
a month, it could benever."To minimize the possibility that
|
|
this system will be confiscated as well, wehave set it up to
|
|
display this bulletin, and that's all. There is no
|
|
messagebase at present. We apologize for the inconvenience,
|
|
and we wish we dared domore than this."Apparently, one of
|
|
the system operators of The Phoenix Project was
|
|
alsoaffiliated with Steve Jackson Games. And that was all
|
|
the authorities needed.Raids continued throughout the
|
|
country with reports of more than a dozenbulletin boards
|
|
being shut down. In Atlanta, the papers reported that
|
|
threelocal LOD hackers faced 40 years in prison and a $2
|
|
million fine.Another statement from a Legion of Doom member
|
|
(The Mentor, also a systemoperator of The Phoenix Project)
|
|
attempted to explain the situation:"LOD was formed to bring
|
|
together the best minds from the computer underground- not
|
|
to do any damage or for personal profit, but to share
|
|
experiences anddiscuss computing. The group has always
|
|
maintained the highest ethicalstandards.... On many
|
|
occasions, we have acted to prevent abuse of systems....I
|
|
have known the people involved in this 911 case for many
|
|
years, and therewas absolutely no intent to interfere with
|
|
or molest the 911 system in anymanner. While we have
|
|
occasionally entered a computer that we weren't supposedto
|
|
be in, it is grounds for expulsion from the group and social
|
|
ostracism todo any damage to a system or to attempt to
|
|
commit fraud for personal profit."The biggest crime that has
|
|
been committed is that of curiosity.... We havebeen
|
|
instrumental in closing many security holes in the past, and
|
|
had hoped tocontinue to do so in the future. The list of
|
|
computer security people whocount us as allies is long, but
|
|
must remain anonymous. If any of them chooseto identify
|
|
themselves, we would appreciate the support."And The Plot
|
|
ThickensMeanwhile, in Lockport, Illinois, a strange tale was
|
|
unfolding. The public UNIXsystem known as Jolnet that had
|
|
been used to transmit the 911 files had alsobeen seized.
|
|
What's particularly odd here is that, according to the
|
|
electronicnewsletter Telecom Digest, the system operator,
|
|
Rich Andrews, had beencooperating with federal authorities
|
|
for over a year. Andrews found the fileson his system nearly
|
|
two years ago, forwarded them to AT&T, and wassubsequently
|
|
contacted by the authorities. He cooperated fully. Why,
|
|
then, washis system seized as well? Andrews claimed it was
|
|
all part of theinvestigation, but added, "One way to get
|
|
hackers| is by shutting down thesites they use to
|
|
distribute stuff."The Jolnet raid caused outrage in the
|
|
bulletin board world, particularly amongadministrators and
|
|
users of public UNIX systems.Cliff Figallo, system
|
|
administrator for The Well, a public UNIX system
|
|
inCalifornia, voiced his concern. "The assumption that
|
|
federal agents can seizea system owner's equipment as
|
|
evidence in spite of the owner's lack of proveninvolvement
|
|
in the alleged illegal activities (and regardless of
|
|
thepossibility that the system is part of the owner's
|
|
livelihood) is scary to meand should be to anyone
|
|
responsible for running a system such as this."Here is a
|
|
sampling of some of the comments seen around the country
|
|
after theJolnet seizure:"As administrator for Zygot, should
|
|
I start reading my users' mail to makesure they aren't
|
|
saying anything naughty? Should I snoop through all the
|
|
filesto make sure everyone is being good? This whole affair
|
|
is rather chilling.""From what I have noted with respect to
|
|
Jolnet, there was a serious crimecommitted there -- by the
|
|
federal authorities|. If they busted a system withemail on
|
|
it, the Electronic Communication Privacy Act comes into
|
|
play.Everyone who had email dated less than 180 days old on
|
|
the system is entitledto sue each of the people involved in
|
|
the seizure for at least $1,000 pluslegal fees and court
|
|
costs. Unless, of course, the authorities| did it by
|
|
thebook, and got warrants to interfere with the email of all
|
|
who had accounts onthe systems. If they did, there are
|
|
strict limits on how long they have toinform the
|
|
users.""Intimidation, threats, disruption of work and
|
|
school, 'hit lists', andserious legal charges are all part
|
|
of the tactics being used in this'witch-hunt'. That ought to
|
|
indicate that perhaps the use of pseudonyms wasn'tsuch a bad
|
|
idea after all.""There are civil rights and civil liberties
|
|
issues here that have yet to beaddressed. And they probably
|
|
won't even be raised so long as everyone acts onthe
|
|
assumption that all hackers are criminals and vandals and
|
|
need to besquashed, at whatever cost....""I am disturbed, on
|
|
principle, at the conduct of at least some of the
|
|
federalinvestigations now going on. I know several people
|
|
who've taken their systemsout of public access just because
|
|
they can't risk the seizure of theirequipment (as evidence
|
|
or for any other reason). If you're a Usenet site, youmay
|
|
receive megabytes of new data every day, but you have no
|
|
common carrierprotection in the event that someone puts
|
|
illegal information onto the Net andthence into your
|
|
system."Increased RestrictionsBut despite the outpourings of
|
|
concern for what had happened, many systemadministrators and
|
|
bulletin board operators felt compelled to tighten
|
|
thecontrol of their systems and to make free speech a little
|
|
more difficult, fortheir own protection.Bill Kuykendall,
|
|
system administrator for The Point, a public UNIX system
|
|
inChicago, made the following announcement to the users of
|
|
his system:"Today, there is no law or precedent which
|
|
affords me... the same legal rightsthat other common
|
|
carriers have against prosecution should some other
|
|
party(you) use my property (The Point) for illegal
|
|
activities. That worries me...."I fully intend to explore
|
|
the legal questions raised here. In my opinion, therights to
|
|
free assembly and free speech would be threatened if the
|
|
owners ofpublic meeting places were charged with the
|
|
responsibility of policing allconversations held in the
|
|
hallways and lavatories of their facilities forreferences to
|
|
illegal activities."Under such laws, all privately owned
|
|
meeting places would be forced out ofexistence, and the
|
|
right to meet and speak freely would vanish with them.
|
|
Thecommon sense of this reasoning has not yet been applied
|
|
to electronic meetingplaces by the legislature. This issue
|
|
must be forced, or electronic bulletinboards will cease to
|
|
exist."In the meantime, I intend to continue to operate The
|
|
Point with as little riskto myself as possible. Therefore, I
|
|
am implementing a few new policies:"No user will be allowed
|
|
to post any message, public or private, until his nameand
|
|
address has been adequately verified. Most users in the
|
|
metropolitanChicago area have already been validated through
|
|
the telephone numberdirectory service provided by Illinois
|
|
Bell. Those of you who receivedvalidation notices stating
|
|
that your information had not been checked due to alack of
|
|
time on my part will now have to wait until I get time
|
|
before beingallowed to post."Out of state addresses cannot
|
|
be validated in the manner above.... The shortterm solution
|
|
for users outside the Chicago area is to find a system
|
|
closer tohome than The Point."Some of the planned
|
|
enhancements to The Point are simply not going to
|
|
happenuntil the legal issues are resolved. There will be no
|
|
shell access and no fileupload/download facility for now."My
|
|
apologies to all who feel inconvenienced by these policies,
|
|
but under thecircumstances, I think your complaints would be
|
|
most effective if made to yourstate and federal legislators.
|
|
Please do so!"These restrictions were echoed on other large
|
|
systems, while a number ofsmaller hacker bulletin boards
|
|
disappeared altogether. We've been told by somein the hacker
|
|
world that this is only a phase, that the hacker boards will
|
|
bewords and identities "registered". But there's also a
|
|
nagging suspicion, thefeeling that something is very
|
|
different now. A publication has been shutdown. Hundreds, if
|
|
not thousands, of names have been seized from mailing
|
|
listsand will, no doubt, be investigated. The facts in the
|
|
911 story have beentwisted and misrepresented beyond
|
|
recognition, thanks to ignorance andsensationalism. People
|
|
and organizations that have had contact with any of
|
|
thesuspects are open to investigation themselves. And,
|
|
around the country,computer operators and users are becoming
|
|
more paranoid and less willing toallow free speech. In the
|
|
face of all of this, the belief that democracy willtriumph
|
|
in the end seems hopelessly naive. Yet, it's something we
|
|
dare notstop believing in. Mere faith in the system,
|
|
however, is not enough.We hope that someday we'll be able to
|
|
laugh at the absurdities of today. But,for now, let's
|
|
concentrate on the facts and make sure they stay in
|
|
theforefront.==> Were there break-ins involving the E911
|
|
system? If so, the entire storymust be revealed. How did the
|
|
hackers get in? What did they have access to?What could they
|
|
have done? What did they actually do? Any security holes
|
|
thatwere revealed should already have been closed. If there
|
|
are more, why do theystill exist? Could the original holes
|
|
have been closed earlier and, if so, whyweren't they? Any
|
|
hacker who caused damage to the system should be
|
|
heldaccountable. Period. Almost every hacker around seems to
|
|
agree with this. Sowhat is the problem? The glaring fact
|
|
that there doesn't appear to have beenany actual damage.
|
|
Just the usual assortment of gaping security holes thatnever
|
|
seem to get fixed. Shoddiness in design is something that
|
|
shouldn't beoverlooked in a system as important as E911. Yet
|
|
that aspect of the case isbeing side-stepped. Putting the
|
|
blame on the hackers for finding the flaws isanother way of
|
|
saying the flaws should remain undetected.==> Under no
|
|
circumstance should the Phrack newsletter or any of its
|
|
editors beheld as criminals for printing material leaked to
|
|
them. Every publication ofany value has had documents given
|
|
to them that were not originally intendedfor public
|
|
consumption. That's how news stories are made. Shutting down
|
|
Phracksends a very ominous message to publishers and editors
|
|
across the nation.==> Finally, the privacy of computer users
|
|
must be respected by the government.It's ironic that hackers
|
|
are portrayed as the ones who break into systems,read
|
|
private mail, and screw up innocent people. Yet it's the
|
|
federalauthorities who seem to have carte blanche in that
|
|
department. Just what didthe Secret Service do on these
|
|
computer systems? What did they gain access to?Whose mail
|
|
did they read? And what allowed them to do this?Take
|
|
ExceptionIt's very easy to throw up your hands and say it's
|
|
all too much. But the factsindicate to us that we've come
|
|
face to face with a very critical moment inhistory. What
|
|
comes out of this could be a trend-setting precedent, not
|
|
onlyfor computer users, but for the free press and every
|
|
citizen of the UnitedStates. Complacency at this stage will
|
|
be most detrimental.We also realize that one of the quickest
|
|
ways of losing credibility is to beshrill and
|
|
conspiracy-minded. We hope we're not coming across in this
|
|
waybecause we truly believe there is a significant threat
|
|
here. If Phrack issuccessfully shut down and its editors
|
|
sent to prison for writing an article,2600 could easily be
|
|
next. And so could scores of other publications
|
|
whoseexistence ruffles some feathers. We cannot allow this
|
|
to happen.In the past, we've called for people to spread the
|
|
word on various issues. Moretimes than not, the results have
|
|
been felt. Never has it been more importantthan now. To be
|
|
silent at this stage is to accept a very grim and dark
|
|
future.
|
|
|
|
ARTICLE TWO: A REVIEW OF THE E911 DOCUMENT ITSELF
|
|
|
|
Documentation on the E911 SystemMarch 1988 $79,449, 6
|
|
pagesBell South Standard Practice660-225-104SVReview by
|
|
Emmanuel GoldsteinIt otherwise would have been a quickly
|
|
forgotten text published in a hackernewsletter. But due to
|
|
all of the commotion, the Bell South E911 document isnow
|
|
very much in the public eye. Copies are extremely easy to
|
|
come by, despiteBell South's assertion that the whole thing
|
|
is worth $79,449.While we can't publish the actual document,
|
|
we can report on its contents sinceit's become a news story
|
|
in itself. But don't get excited. There really isn'tall that
|
|
much here.Certain acronyms are introduced, among them Public
|
|
Safety Answering Point(PSAP), also known as Emergency
|
|
Service Bureau (ESB). This is what you get (intelco lingo)
|
|
when you dial 911. The importance of close coordination
|
|
betweenthese agencies is stressed. Selective routing allows
|
|
the 911 call to be routedto the proper PSAP. The 1A ESS is
|
|
used as the tandem office for this routing.Certain services
|
|
made available with E911 include Forced
|
|
Disconnect,Alternative Routing, Selective Routing, Selective
|
|
Transfer, Default Routing,Night Service, Automatic Number
|
|
Identification, and Automatic LocationIdentification.We
|
|
learn of the existence of the E911 Implementation Team, the
|
|
brave men andwomen from Network Marketing who help with
|
|
configuration in the difficultcutover period. This team is
|
|
in charge of forming an ongoing maintenanceWe learn that the
|
|
Switching Control Center (SCC) "is responsible for
|
|
E911/1AESStranslations in tandem central offices". We're not
|
|
exactly shocked by thisrevelation.We also find out what is
|
|
considered a "priority one" trouble report. Any linkdown to
|
|
the PSAP fits this definition. We also learn that when ANI
|
|
fails, thescreens will display all zeroes.We could go on but
|
|
we really don't want to bore you. None of this
|
|
informationwould allow a hacker to gain access to such a
|
|
system. All it affords is achance to understand the
|
|
administrative functions a little better. We'd like toassume
|
|
that any outside interference to a 911 system is impossible.
|
|
Does BellSouth know otherwise? In light of their touchiness
|
|
on the matter, we have towonder.We'd be most interested in
|
|
hearing from people with more technical knowledge onthe
|
|
subject. What does this whole escapade tell us? Please write
|
|
or call so thefacts can be brought forward.
|
|
|
|
****************************************************
|
|
|
|
2600 MAGAZINE WANTS TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS AS WELL AS ANY
|
|
ADDITIONAL FACTS YOUMAY BE ABLE TO SHARE WITH US. POST
|
|
PUBLIC COMMENTS HERE. YOU CAN SEND PRIVATEMAIL TO
|
|
2600-well.sf.ca.us OR 2600 EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT, P.O. BOX
|
|
99, MIDDLEISLAND, NY 11953. IF YOU WANT TO CALL US, OUR
|
|
PHONE NUMBERS ARE:(516) 751-2600 (VOICE/MACHINE) OR (516)
|
|
751-2608 (FAX).
|
|
|
|
******************************************************
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9: Text Philez P-Z
|
|
[UD:Punter][Unltd.Time][UnltdBlk]: |