[ News ] [ Paper Feed ] [ Issues ] [ Authors ] [ Archives ] [ Contact ]

..[ Phrack Magazine ]..
.:: Phrack World News XXX Part 1 ::.

Issues: [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 9 ] [ 10 ] [ 11 ] [ 12 ] [ 13 ] [ 14 ] [ 15 ] [ 16 ] [ 17 ] [ 18 ] [ 19 ] [ 20 ] [ 21 ] [ 22 ] [ 23 ] [ 24 ] [ 25 ] [ 26 ] [ 27 ] [ 28 ] [ 29 ] [ 30 ] [ 31 ] [ 32 ] [ 33 ] [ 34 ] [ 35 ] [ 36 ] [ 37 ] [ 38 ] [ 39 ] [ 40 ] [ 41 ] [ 42 ] [ 43 ] [ 44 ] [ 45 ] [ 46 ] [ 47 ] [ 48 ] [ 49 ] [ 50 ] [ 51 ] [ 52 ] [ 53 ] [ 54 ] [ 55 ] [ 56 ] [ 57 ] [ 58 ] [ 59 ] [ 60 ] [ 61 ] [ 62 ] [ 63 ] [ 64 ] [ 65 ] [ 66 ] [ 67 ] [ 68 ] [ 69 ] [ 70 ]
Current issue : #30 | Release date : 1989-12-24 | Editor : Taran King
Phrack Inc. XXX IndexKnight Lightning & Taran King
Network Miscellany IIITaran King
Hacking & TymnetSynthecide
Hacking VM/CMSGoe
The DECWRL Mail GatewayDedicated Link
Decnet Hackola : Remote Turist TTY (RTT)Hobbit
VAX/VMS Fake MailJack T. Tab
Consensual Realities in CyberspacePaul Saffo
The Truth About Lie DetectorsRazor's Edge
Western Union Telex, TWX, and Time ServicePhone Phanatic
Phrack World News XXX Part 1Knight Lightning
Phrack World News XXX Part 2Knight Lightning
Title : Phrack World News XXX Part 1
Author : Knight Lightning
                                ==Phrack Inc.==

                    Volume Three, Issue 30, File #11 of 12

            PWN                                                 PWN
            PWN        P h r a c k   W o r l d   N e w s        PWN
            PWN        ~~~~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~        PWN
            PWN                Issue XXX/Part 1                 PWN
            PWN                                                 PWN
            PWN          Created, Written, and Edited           PWN
            PWN               by Knight Lightning               PWN
            PWN                                                 PWN
            PWN         Special Thanks to Dark OverLord         PWN
            PWN                                                 PWN

         Happy Holidays and Welcome to Issue XXX of Phrack World News!

This issue of Phrack World News contains stories and articles detailing events
and other information concerning Acid Phreak, AT&T, Apple Computer Co.,
Bellcore, Bernie S., Klaus Brunnstein, Cap'n Crunch, Captain Crook, Chaos
Communications Congress, Cheshire Catalyst, Clifford Stoll, CompuServe, Leonard
Mitchell DiCicco, Emmanuel Goldstein, FCC, Katie Hafner, Harpers Magazine,
Intellical, Michael Synergy, Kevin David Mitnick, Phiber Optik, Phonavision,
Phrozen Ghost, Prime Suspect, Sir Francis Drake, Susan Thunder, Telenet, Terra,
Tuc, Tymnet, The Well, and...

      Announcing the Fourth Annual...

                                 SummerCon '90
                               June 22-24, 1990
                             Saint Louis, Missouri

This year's convention looks to be the more incredible than ever.  Many of you
will be hearing from us directly over the next few months about what will be
taking place and where SummerCon '90 will be held specifically.  The posted
date is of course a tentative one (as we are still six months away), but any
and all changes or new information will be in PWN and passed to our network

If you are thinking about attending SummerCon '90, please find a way to contact
us as soon as possible.  If you are not on the Internet or one of the public
access Unix systems across the country, then post a message on bulletin boards
that asks who is in contact with us.  Chances are that there will be someone on
there that can reach us.

                 Knight Lightning / Forest Ranger / Taran King

      "A New Decade Is Upon Us... And The Future Never Looked Brighter!"

Mitnick's Partner Gets Community Service                      November 29, 1989
By Kathy McDonald (New York Times)

    "Man Sentenced To Community Service For Helping Steal Computer Program"

LOS ANGELES -- A federal judge has sentenced a 24-year-old suburban Calabasas
man to community service at a homeless shelter for his role in helping computer
hacker Kevin Mitnick steal a computer security program.

In rejecting a sentencing report that suggested a prison term, U.S. District
Judge Mariana Pfaelzer noted that Leonard Mitchell DiCicco had voluntarily
notified authorities of the computer hacking.

"I think you can do some good" in the community by using his computer skills
productively, Pfaelzer told DiCicco.

She sentenced DiCicco to five years of probation, during which he must complete
750 hours of community service through the Foundation for People, a Los Angeles
group that matches probationers with community service projects.

DiCicco was assigned to develop a computer system for the Anaheim Interfaith
Shelter, said Frances Dohn, a foundation official.

DiCicco also was ordered to pay $12,000 in restitution to Digital Equipment
Corporation of Massachusetts, from which Mitnick stole a computer security

Assistant U.S. Attorney James Asperger agreed with the community service
sentence, saying DiCicco's cooperation had been crucial in the case against

DiCicco reported Mitnick to DEC officers.  Mitnick later admitted he stole the
program and electronically brought it to California.

DiCicco pleaded guilty in July to one count of aiding and abetting the
interstate transportation of stolen property.  He admitted that in 1987 he let
Mitnick, age 25, of suburban Panorama City, use his office computer at
Voluntary Plan Administrators in Calabasas to break into the DEC system.

Mitnick pleaded guilty and was sentenced in July to one year in prison and six
months in a community treatment program aimed at breaking his "addiction" to
computer hacking.

Under a plea bargain agreement with the government, DiCicco pleaded guilty in
July in exchange for a promise that he would not be prosecuted for any of the
other instances of computer hacking he and Mitnick carried out.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

If you are looking for other articles related to Leonard Mitchell DiCicco and
the famous Kevin David Mitnick please refer to;

"Pacific Bell Means Business"                      (10/06/88) PWN XXI....Part 1
"Dangerous Hacker Is Captured"                     (No Date ) PWN XXII...Part 1
"Ex-Computer Whiz Kid Held On New Fraud Counts"    (12/16/88) PWN XXII...Part 1
"Dangerous Keyboard Artist"                        (12/20/88) PWN XXII...Part 1
"Armed With A Keyboard And Considered Dangerous"   (12/28/88) PWN XXIII..Part 1
"Dark Side Hacker Seen As Electronic Terrorist"    (01/08/89) PWN XXIII..Part 1
"Mitnick Plea Bargains"                            (03/16/89) PWN XXV....Part 1
"Mitnick Plea Bargain Rejected As Too Lenient"     (04/25/89) PWN XXVII..Part 1
"Computer Hacker Working On Another Plea Bargain"  (05/06/89) PWN XXVII..Part 1
"Mitnick Update"                                   (05/10/89) PWN XXVII..Part 1
"Kenneth Siani Speaks Out About Kevin Mitnick"     (05/23/89) PWN XXVII..Part 1
"Judge Suggests Computer Hacker Undergo Counseling"(07/17/89) PWN XXVIII.Part 1
"Authorities Backed Away From Original Allegations"(07/23/89) PWN XXVIII.Part 1
"Judge Proposes Comm. Service For Hacker's Accomp."(10/13/89) PWN XXX....Part 1

Chaos Communications Congress
by Terra of the Chaos Computer Club

On December 27-29, 1989 is the Chaos Communication Congress at Eidelstaedter
Buergerhaus, Hamburg, West Germany.

The topics of this Congress include:

-  The new German PTT law

-  Discussion about Copyright and Freedom of Information act

-  Women and Computers

-  Mailbox and other Networks (Zerberus, InterEuNet, UUCP)

-  Workshops for East and West German people to build networks between the two

-  Discussion between Professor Klaus Brunnstein and CCC members about the
   problems of viruses and worms.

-  Workshops about Unix and UUCP for beginners, advanced, and special people

-  Presswork in a special room

-  Workshop Cyberbrain or Cyberpunk

-  Workshop and Discussion about Secure Networks (Special:  TeleTrust, coding
   mixed gateways)

The prices to enter the Congress are

33 DM for Normal people
23 DM for CCC-members
53 DM for Press



Phonavision At The University of California                    October 15, 1989
Taken From the New York Times

CALIFORNIA -- Students at two campuses of the University of California, at
Berkeley and Los Angeles, have become the test market for a new public
video-telephone booth called Phonavision.

Its developers claim that it is the world's first video telephone for the
general public.

Each of the campuses has one of the large, silver-color phone booths in its
student union.  Phonavision opened on October 9, for a week of free
demonstrations.  Starting October 16, video phone calls from one campus to the
other will cost $10 for three minutes.

"We view all this semester as a test," said Stephen Strickland, chief executive
officer of the Los Angeles-based company, Communications Technologies, that
developed the video phones.  "We want to be sure that when we do go to market
with this service, it's as good as it can be."

"We feel we're probably six months to a year away from having a system that we
can go out and market," Strickland said.  "I see them in airport lobbies, hotel
lobbies, shopping centers, indoor high-traffic locations."  Video telephones
are already widely used in business, he added.

Phonavision callers speak to each other on standard telephone receivers.

A snapshot-size image of their own face is projected on one half of a small
screen, and the other half shows a picture of the person to whom they are

As a caller talks, the video screen shows small movements of the mouth or face.
But sudden movements mean a distorted picture.

With a tilt of a caller's head, for example, the image will move to the side in
separate parts, starting with the top of the head and moving down in a wavelike

Annalee Andres, a sophomore from Santa Ana, California, who has not yet
selected a major, was one of the first students to try out Berkeley's new video
phone.  She and her friends crowded around the phone booth in the Martin Luther
King Jr. Student Center, taking turns talking to a student from UCLA.

"I think it has a long way to go yet, but it's really cool," she said.  "I can
really see where it's leading."

Ms. Andres speculated on the effects that widespread use of video phones would
have.  "What if they catch you and you're just out of the shower?" she asked.
"It'll change dating."

Daniel Ciruli, a junior from Tucson, Arizona, majoring in computer science, was
enthusiastic about his trial session, but he said the fee would keep him away
in the future.

"It's a new toy," he said.  "But at $10 for three minutes, with only one other
Phonavision, it's not going to be something that students are beating down the
door to use."

The video phone booth offers other services:  Recording and dealing in
videotapes and a place to send and receive fax messages.  The booth accepts $1,
$5, $10 and $20 bills, as well as Mastercard and Visa.

Gary Li, a senior from Beijing, who is majoring in electrical engineering,
started setting up Berkeley's phone booth in April.  Since then he has spent
about 20 hours a week repairing kinks in the system.

Berkeley and UCLA were chosen as tryout spots for the new service because most
students know somebody at the other campus, said Strickland, the company's
chief executive.

"That's a place where we can get novelty use," he said, adding that "Berkeley
and UCLA have a reputation for being front-runner schools -- places that are
innovative, that like new technology."

Strickland said his company has spent almost three years developing
Phonavision.  He would not disclose total costs, but priced the video phone
booths at $50,000 each.

The Omnipresent Telephone                                      October 10, 1989
Taken from The New York Times

Whatever the psychological implications, new technology has clearly made the
phone more omnipresent.  More calls are generated because of answering
machines, now owned by 28 percent of the nation's households, according to the
Electronic Industries Association.  People who use them say they make and
receive more calls because of them.

"In olden days you would just miss the call," said Michael Beglin, a
businessman in Nashville.

Jill Goodman, an art dealer in New York, says she talks on the phone so often
that "I'm tortured about it, teased and insulted."  She uses the phone to
socialize, shop and check in with people she wants to stay in touch with but
does not want to take the time to see.

"I have two lines in the country, two lines at home in the city and three lines
in my office, if that gives you any idea of how much phone I can generate," she

A month ago, after resisting initially, she decided to have a car phone
installed.  "I thought it might be nice to have a couple of hours without being
reachable," she said.  "But I didn't like not being able to reach when I wanted

Increasingly, too, people are using the phone to get services, information and

The 900 numbers, which require callers to pay the cost, and the 800 numbers,
paid for by the calls' recipients, are growing quickly.

Sprint Gateways started a new 900 service in May that already has 250 lines.
Callers can get wrestling trivia, financial updates, real-estate information
and a host of other data.  They can even play a version of "Family Feud," which
receives as many as 7,000 calls a day, said Adrian Toader, the director of
sales and marketing.

Telephone shopping through 800 numbers continues to grow, too.  In 1986, L.L.
Bean, the Freeport, Maine, retailer, received 60 percent of its orders by
telephone and 40 percent by mail; by 1988, telephone orders had risen to 70
percent.  Like an increasing number of retailers, L.L. Bean allows customers to
call in their orders 24 hours a day.

But callers to 800 numbers often want more than a new shirt or sweater.

Susan Dilworth, who takes telephone orders for L.L. Bean, said, "A lot of
people call and say:  'I'm coming to New England for the first time.  How
should I dress?'"  Other callers order merchandise but then begin talking about
their personal lives.  "I think they're lonely," Mrs. Dilworth said.

Indeed, these anonymous but personal contacts are so popular that some people
are becoming hooked.

Marilyn Ng-A-Qui, the acting executive director of the New York City Self-Help
Clearinghouse, said one man called looking for help because he had run up a
$5,000 bill calling 900 numbers.  "It is emerging as a problem all over the
country," she said.

Despite the deluge of telephone conversation, there are holdouts.  Lois Korey,
a partner in a New York advertising agency, writes letters whenever she can,
often suggesting lunch meetings.  "I really like to see who I'm talking to,"
she said.

But even her partner, Allen Kay, calls her from his office just four feet away.
The only time he could not telephone, Mrs. Korey said, was when he was in his
car.  And now those days are over.  "He got a car phone a month ago, and he
calls all the time," she said.  "When I sit in the front seat of his car, I try
to step on it."

Higher Phone Rates For Modem Users                            November 26, 1989
(Material gathered from an Apple digest on Usenet)

A new regulation that the FCC is quietly working on will directly affect you as
the user of a computer and modem.  The FCC proposes that users of modems should
pay extra charges for use of the public telephone network which carry their

In addition, computer network services such as CompuServe, Tymnet, & Telenet
would also be charged as much as $6.00 per hour per user for use of the public
telephone network.  These charges would very likely be passed on to the

The money is to be collected and given to the telephone company in an effort to
raise funds lost to deregulation.

Jim Eason of KGO newstalk radio (San Francisco, California) commented on the
proposal during his afternoon radio program during which, he said he learned of
the new legislation in an article in the New York Times.  Jim took the time to
gather the addresses which are given below.

It is important that you act now.  The bureaucrats already have it in there
mind that modem users should subsidize the phone company and are now listening
to public comment.  Please stand up and make it clear that we will not stand
for any government restriction on the free exchange of information.

The people to write to about this situation are:

Chairman of the FCC
1919 M Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554

Chairman, Senate Communication Subcommittee
SH-227 Hart Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Chairman, House Telecommunication Subcommittee
B-331 Rayburn Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Here is a sample letter:

Dear Sir,
     Please allow me to express my displeasure with the FCC proposal which
would authorize a surcharge for the use of modems on the telephone network.
This regulation is nothing less than an attempt to restrict the free exchange
of information among the growing number of computer users.  Calls placed using
modems require no special telephone company equipment, and users of modems pay
the phone company for use of the network in the form of a monthly bill.  In
short, a modem call is the same as a voice call and therefore should not be
subject to any additional regulation.

FCC Orders Refunds to Long-Distance Companies                 November 30, 1989
Taken from Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Local telephone companies may have to refund as much as $75
million to long-distance companies and large private-line business customers,
the Federal Communications Commission says.

Pacific Northwest Bell in Idaho is one of the 15 companies named.  The local
phone companies accumulated overcharges between 1985 and 1988 under FCC
guidelines that allowed prices of these high capacity private-line services to
exceed the phone companies' costs of providing the services.

The FCC ordered a refund as it considered challenges to the special pricing
scheme, which the local phone companies provide for long-distance companies or
large business customers.  The commission voted 4-0 that the scheme was legal
during the 1985-88 period, when the high prices were designed to keep too many
customers from switching from the regular public network to private lines, but
that market conditions no longer justify continuation of the special pricing.
The commission said it expects the local phone companies to refrain from
requesting such special prices in the future.

While examining the challenges to the special pricing scheme, the commission
said it found that local phone companies in some cases had charged more than
allowed under the commission's guidelines.  Therefore, the companies must
refund those charges, which could amount to as much as $75 million, the
commission said.  The FCC said the amount of the refunds will not be known
until the local phone companies file detailed reports with the commission.  The
companies have 40 days to make their filings.

The companies found not to be in compliance with the commission's pricing
guidelines from October 1, 1985 to December 31, 1986 were:

-  Diamond State
-  South Central Bell in Alabama
-  Southwestern Bell in Missouri and Oklahoma
-  Northwestern Bell in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, and North Dakota
-  Pacific Northwest Bell in Idaho

Pacific Northwest Bell is now called U.S. West Communications and is the phone
company that serves most Seattle-area residents.

Companies found not complying from January 1, 1987 to December 31, 1988 were:

-  Ohio Bell
-  Wisconsin Bell
-  Southern Bell in North Carolina and South Carolina
-  South Central Bell in Mississippi and Tennessee
-  Pacific Bell
-  Nevada Bell
-  Southwestern Bell
-  Mountain Bell
-  Northwestern Bell
-  Cincinnati Bell

AT&T v. Intellicall:  Another Lawsuit                          November 8, 1989
Dallas -- AT&T filed a lawsuit charging that a Texas-based corporation equips
its pay telephones to illegally obtain billing information owned by AT&T.

The lawsuit asks for $2 million in punitive damages and an undetermined amount
in actual damages from Intellicall Inc., headquartered in Carrollton, Texas.
It also asks the U.S. District Court in Dallas to order Intellicall to stop its
unauthorized use of AT&T billing information.

At issue is how Intellicall pay phones determine the validity of calling card
numbers for billing purposes.  AT&T contends that Intellicall pay phones are
designed and programmed by Intellicall to reach into and obtain the information
directly from AT&T's card validation system.

That system, called Billing Validation Application (BVA), is a part of AT&T's
network facilities.  Before AT&T completes a call that will be charged to an
AT&T Card, its validation system verifies that the number provided by the
customer is currently valid.

Based on contractual arrangements made before the 1984 breakup of the Bell
System, regional Bell telephone companies also use the validation system.  AT&T
does not permit competitors such as Intellicall to use the system because the
system was built by AT&T and contains valuable competitive information.

AT&T alleges that when callers use an AT&T Card or Bell company calling card at
an Intellicall pay phone, the pay phone automatically places a separate call
through AT&T or local Bell facilities to a pre-programmed telephone number so
that AT&T's validation system will automatically check the card number.

If the card number is valid, the Intellicall pay phone then puts through the
original customer call.

"As a result of these practices," the lawsuit says, "Intellicall
surreptitiously and without authorization obtains validation data from AT&T,
obtains fraud control for calls by its customers without having to invest in
fraud control facilities or otherwise purchase fraud control services, imposes
costs on AT&T, and... obtains an unfair advantage over its competitors
providing pay telephone and/or long-distance service, including AT&T."

Although AT&T does not authorize other companies to accept the AT&T Card and
does not permit competitors to use its validation system, the lawsuit notes
that Intellicall could purchase validation services for Bell company calling
cards from other companies.

AT&T said it notified Intellicall that it was violating AT&T's proprietary
rights and gave Intellicall every reasonable opportunity to halt the fraudulent
validation practice.  Only after Intellicall persisted in its unfair practices
did AT&T decide to take legal action.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

AT&T v. Intellicall:  The Lawsuit Is Over                     November 13, 1989
Dallas -- AT&T and Intellicall, Inc. today announced the settlement of a
lawsuit filed by AT&T against Intellicall, seeking damages and an injunction.
AT&T had accused Intellicall of unauthorized access to AT&T's calling card
validation system.

The settlement also covered potential counterclaims which Intellicall intended
to file against AT&T.

In the agreement, Intellicall acknowledged AT&T's proprietary rights in the
Billing Validation Application system, and agreed to make modifications in its
licensed pay telephone software to safeguard against unauthorized access and
use of the AT&T system.

The terms of the agreement include an undisclosed payment by Intellicall to
AT&T to contribute to the establishment of a compliance program which will
permit AT&T to monitor unauthorized access to its billing systems.

"AT&T is pleased that a settlement recognizing AT&T's proprietary right to the
validation system was reached so quickly," said Gerald Hines, director of AT&T
Card Services.
[ News ] [ Paper Feed ] [ Issues ] [ Authors ] [ Archives ] [ Contact ]
© Copyleft 1985-2021, Phrack Magazine.