TELECOM Digest     Thu, 30 Jun 94 22:38:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 307

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    USACM Calls for Clipper Withdrawal (Association For Computing Machinery)
    ACM Releases Crypto Study (Association For Computing Machinery)
    BOC Name Changes (was Re: Bell Atlantic Marketing) (Garrett Wollman)
    Cheapest Cellular Carrier in NYC? (krazykev@panix.com)
    Information Wanted on TDD Devices (Arieh Cimet)
    Re: KERMIT Through an Intermediate Telnet Node? How? (James Carlson)
    Re: KERMIT Through an Intermediate Telnet Node? How? (Kenneth J. Morrill)
    Re: Bilingual Telephone Numbers? (Jeff Bamford)
    Re: Bilingual Telephone Numbers? (John Harris)
    Re: AT&T, Paris and Freedom (Stephen Melvin)
    Re: Bidding War For - Western Union ?! (Daryl Gibson)
    Re: Cellular Phones and Lightning (Tobin M. Creek)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. 

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax 
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: 708-329-0571
                        Fax: 708-329-0572
  ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help 
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 16:35:37 +0000
From: US ACM, DC Office <usacm_dc@acm.org>
Subject: USACM Calls for Clipper Withdrawal

                              
                              U S A C M

 Association for Computing Machinery, U.S. Public Policy Committee

                          * PRESS  RELEASE *
 
Thursday, June 30, 1994 

Contact: 
Barbara Simons (408) 463-5661, simons@acm.org (e-mail)
Jim Horning  (415) 853-2216, horning@src.dec.com (e-mail)
Rob Kling (714) 856-5955, kling@ics.uci.edu (e-mail)


     COMPUTER POLICY COMMITTEE CALLS FOR WITHDRAWAL OF CLIPPER 

            COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY "TOO IMPORTANT" FOR 
                     SECRET DECISION-MAKING

     WASHINGTON, DC The public policy arm of the oldest and largest
international computing society today urged the White House to
withdraw the controversial "Clipper Chip" encryption proposal.  Noting
that the "security and privacy of electronic communications are vital
to the development of national and international information
infrastructures," the Association for Computing Machinery's U.S.
Public Policy Committee (USACM) added its voice to the growing debate
over encryption and privacy policy.

     In a position statement released at a press conference on Capitol
Hill, the USACM said that "communications security is too important to
be left to secret processes and classified algorithms."  The Clipper
technology was developed by the National Security Agency, which
classified the cryptographic algorithm that underlies the encryption
device.  The USACM believes that Clipper "will put U.S. manufacturers
at a disadvantage in the global market and will adversely affect
technological development within the United States."  The technology
has been championed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the
NSA, which claim that "non-escrowed" encryption technology threatens
law enforcement and national security.

     "As a body concerned with the development of government
technology policy, USACM is troubled by the process that gave rise to
the Clipper initiative," said Dr. Barbara Simons, a computer scientist
with IBM who chairs the USACM.  "It is vitally important that privacy
protections for our communications networks be developed openly and
with full public participation."

     The USACM position statement was issued after completion of a
comprehensive study of cryptography policy sponsored by the ACM (see
companion release).  The study, "Codes, Keys and Conflicts: Issues in
U.S Crypto Policy," was prepared by a panel of experts representing
various constituencies involved in the debate over encryption.

     The ACM, founded in 1947, is a 85,000 member non-profit
educational and scientific society dedicated to the development and
use of information technology, and to addressing the impact of that
technology on the world's major social challenges.  USACM was created
by ACM to provide a means for presenting and discussing technological
issues to and with U.S. policymakers and the general public.  For
further information on USACM, please call (202) 298- 0842.

   =============================================================


       USACM Position on the Escrowed Encryption Standard

The ACM study "Codes, Keys and Conflicts: Issues in U.S Crypto Policy"
sets forth the complex technical and social issues underlying the
current debate over widespread use of encryption.  The importance of
encryption, and the need for appropriate policies, will increase as
networked communication grows.  Security and privacy of electronic
communications are vital to the development of national and
international information infrastructures.

The Clipper Chip, or "Escrowed Encryption Standard" (EES) Initiative,
raises fundamental policy issues that must be fully addressed and
publicly debated.  After reviewing the ACM study, which provides a
balanced discussion of the issues, the U.S.  Public Policy Committee
of ACM (USACM) makes the following recommendations.

  1.  The USACM supports the development of public policies and
technical standards for communications security in open forums in
which all stakeholders -- government, industry, and the public --
participate.  Because we are moving rapidly to open networks, a
prerequisite for the success of those networks must be standards for
which there is widespread consensus, including international
acceptance.  The USACM believes that communications security is too
important to be left to secret processes and classified algorithms.
We support the principles underlying the Computer Security Act of
1987, in which Congress expressed its preference for the development
of open and unclassified security standards.

  2.  The USACM recommends that any encryption standard adopted by the
U.S. government not place U.S. manufacturers at a disadvantage in the
global market or adversely affect technological development within the
United States.  Few other nations are likely to adopt a standard that
includes a classified algorithm and keys escrowed with the U.S.
government.

  3.  The USACM supports changes in the process of developing Federal
Information Processing Standards (FIPS) employed by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology.  This process is currently
predicated on the use of such standards solely to support Federal
procurement.  Increasingly, the standards set through the FIPS process
directly affect non-federal organizations and the public at large.  In
the case of the EES, the vast majority of comments solicited by NIST
opposed the standard, but were openly ignored.  The USACM recommends
that the standards process be placed under the Administrative
Procedures Act so that citizens may have the same opportunity to
challenge government actions in the area of information processing
standards as they do in other important aspects of Federal agency
policy making.

  4.  The USACM urges the Administration at this point to withdraw the
Clipper Chip proposal and to begin an open and public review of
encryption policy.  The escrowed encryption initiative raises vital
issues of privacy, law enforcement, competitiveness and scientific
innovation that must be openly discussed.

  5.  The USACM reaffirms its support for privacy protection and urges
the administration to encourage the development of technologies and
institutional practices that will provide real privacy for future
users of the National Information Infrastructure.

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 16:34:47 +0000
From: "US ACM, DC Office" <usacm_dc@acm.org>
Subject: ACM Releases Crypto Study


                Association for Computing Machinery

                           PRESS RELEASE

Thursday, June 30, 1994

Contact:

Joseph DeBlasi, ACM Executive Director (212) 869-7440 
Dr. Stephen Kent, Panel Chair (617) 873-3988 
Dr. Susan Landau, Panel Staff (413) 545-0263


    COMPUTING SOCIETY RELEASES REPORT ON ENCRYPTION POLICY

      "CLIPPER CHIP" CONTROVERSY EXPLORED BY EXPERT PANEL

     WASHINGTON, DC   A panel of experts convened by the nation's
foremost computing society today released a comprehensive report on
U.S. cryptography policy.  The report, "Codes, Keys and Conflicts:
Issues in U.S Crypto Policy," is the culmination of a ten-month review
conducted by the panel of representatives of the computer industry and
academia, government officials, and attorneys.  The 50-page document
explores the complex technical and social issues underlying the
current debate over the Clipper Chip and the export control of
information security technology.

     "With the development of the information superhighway,
cryptography has become a hotly debated policy issue," according to
Joseph DeBlasi, Executive Director of the Association for Computing
Machinery (ACM), which convened the expert panel.  "The ACM believes
that this report is a significant contribution to the ongoing debate
on the Clipper Chip and encryption policy.  It cuts through the
rhetoric and lays out the facts."

     Dr. Stephen Kent, Chief Scientist for Security Technology with
the firm of Bolt Beranek and Newman, said that he was pleased with the
final report.  "It provides a very balanced discussion of many of the
issues that surround the debate on crypto policy, and we hope that it
will serve as a foundation for further public debate on this topic."

     The ACM report addresses the competing interests of the various
stakeholders in the encryption debate -- law enforcement agencies, the
intelligence community, industry and users of communications services.
It reviews the recent history of U.S. cryptography policy and
identifies key questions that policymakers must resolve as they
grapple with this controversial issue.

     The ACM cryptography panel was chaired by Dr. Stephen Kent.  Dr.
Susan Landau, Research Associate Professor in Computer Science at the
University of Massachusetts, co-ordinated the work of the panel and
did most of the writing. Other panel members were Dr.  Clinton Brooks,
Advisor to the Director, National Security Agency; Scott Charney,
Chief of the Computer Crime Unit, Criminal Division, U.S. Department
of Justice; Dr. Dorothy Denning, Computer Science Chair, Georgetown
University; Dr. Whitfield Diffie, Distinguished Engineer, Sun
Microsystems; Dr. Anthony Lauck, Corporate Consulting Engineer,
Digital Equipment Corporation; Douglas Miller, Government Affairs
Manager, Software Publishers Association; Dr. Peter Neumann, Principal
Scientist, SRI International; and David Sobel, Legal Counsel,
Electronic Privacy Information Center.  Funding for the cryptography
study was provided in part by the National Science Foundation.

     The ACM, founded in 1947, is a 85,000 member non-profit
educational and scientific society dedicated to the development and
use of information technology, and to addressing the impact of that
technology on the world's major social challenges.  For general
information, contact ACM, 1515 Broadway, New York, NY 10036. (212)
869-7440 (tel), (212) 869-0481 (fax).

     Information on accessing the report electronically will be posted
soon in this newsgroup.

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

From: wollman@ginger.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: BOC Name Changes (was Re: Bell Atlantic Marketing)
Date: 30 Jun 1994 21:56:15 GMT
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


In article <telecom14.304.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, Neil Weisenfeld
<weisen@alw.nih.gov> wrote:

> Well, as many of you probably know, C&P Telephone in the Washington
> D.C.  area has recently dropped the C&P name and is now using Bell
> Atlantic (Potomac?).

I don't recall seeing this in the Digest, so ... a few weeks ago, the
Rhode Island PUC announced that NYNEX would not be permitted to charge
customers for the costs associated with their marketing campaign to
get people to forget `New England Telephone'.

(Now, of course, this is a complete sham, since ratepayers end up
paying for everything anyway, but at least the RI PUC has got some
independent-minded people on it ...)


Garrett A. Wollman     wollman@lcs.mit.edu  

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

From: krazykev@panix.com
Subject: Cheapest Cellular Carrier in NYC?
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 18:31:54 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Hi, 

Who has the cheapest rates for cellular calls in NYC?  I am
considering getting a cellular phone.  I already have the phone, so it
is just a question of who has the best deal.

If you could email me at:       krazykev@panix.com
that would be great.

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

From: anl433!cimet@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com (Arieh Cimet)
Subject: Info on TDD Devices
Organization: Motorola Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 02:18:57 GMT


I need information on how TDDs (Telecommunication Devices for the
Deaf) work. I have checked the Bellcore catalog and with the phone
company but have come up with very little.

In particular, I need to know the protocols, interfaces, speed, and
modulation types that such devices use. Also, if these devices have
been adapated for cellular use.

I would appreciate any pointers to standards, documents or any books
available on the subject. Thanks in advance for any response.


I. Arieh Cimet                   e-mail:  cimet@comm.mot.com
Motorola ESMR Infrastructure      phone:  (708) 576-4565
1301 E. Algonquin Road              fax:  (708) 538-3472
Schaumburg, IL 60196

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

From: carlson@xylogics.com (James Carlson)
Subject: Re: KERMIT Through an Intermediate Telnet Node? How?
Date: 30 Jun 1994 16:40:43 GMT
Organization: Xylogics Incorporated
Reply-To: carlson@xylogics.com


In article <telecom14.303.11@eecs.nwu.edu>, jrefling@rosslare.ece.uci.
edu (John Refling) writes:

> Here's the situation:

> +-----+              +---------+               +-----------+
> |  PC | - phone----> | UNIX BOX| -- INTERNET-->| UNIX BOX  |
> +-----+              +---------+               +-----------+

> Now, after you dial the first unix box over the phone and are logged
> in, you telnet to the second unix box.  On the second unix box, you
> start kermit to server mode.  Then you escape back to the pc and try
> to transfer files and the whole thing dies.

> I can sort of see why things won't work -- maybe the boxes get
> confused over where thier input is coming from ... then again it's not
> a problem normally.

> Is there a way to get this to work?

The problem is most likely that either (1) one of those links isn't
transparent or (2) flow control is broken somewhere.

Start by making sure that the telnet is transparent.  Break to the
telnet prompt and turn off the escape character:

 set escape off

Then make sure that the rest of the line is transparent ...


James Carlson <carlson@xylogics.com>            Tel:  +1 617 272 8140
Annex Software Support / Xylogics, Inc.               +1 800 225 3317
53 Third Avenue / Burlington MA  01803-4491     Fax:  +1 617 272 2618

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

From: kmorrill@strauss.udel.edu (Kenneth J Morrill)
Subject: Re: KERMIT Through an Intermediate Telnet Node? How?
Date: 30 Jun 1994 14:58:00 -0400
Organization: University of Delaware


In article <telecom14.303.11@eecs.nwu.edu>, John Refling <jrefling@
rosslare.ece.uci.edu> wrote:

> Here's the situation:

> +-----+              +---------+               +-----------+
> |  PC | - phone----> | UNIX BOX| -- INTERNET-->| UNIX BOX  |
> +-----+              +---------+               +-----------+

> Now, after you dial the first unix box over the phone and are logged
> in, you telnet to the second unix box.  On the second unix box, you
> start kermit to server mode.  Then you escape back to the pc and try
> to transfer files and the whole thing dies.

I connect from home under the same circumstances.  I found that the
zmodem protocol works for one file, but not for a batch of files.  I
have been following the practice of uuencoding binary files and
capturing them as text files, then uudecoding them back to binaries.
I known that this is not the ultimate solution.


Ken Morrill  <kmorrill@strauss.udel.edu> 

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

From: jeffb@audiolab.uwaterloo.ca (Jeff Bamford)
Subject: Re: Bilingual Telephone Numbers?
Organization: Audio Research Group, University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 1994 14:42:22 GMT


In article <telecom14.302.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, Andrew C. Green <ACG@dlogics.
com> wrote:

[Found a Caller I.D. box that was bilingual]

> Now, perhaps I'm missing something here, but I must admit I don't know
> how I would translate "Green, Andrew C." and "(312) 266-xxxx" into
> Spanish without the assistance of this thing. Clearly a bargain at
> twice the price!

 Well, Call Display boxes here are bilingual (at least they are
from the telco).  En francais the time is in 24 hour, the date is
obviously French.  The message that you have new callers is in French,
albeit shortened (nouv appel) etc.  However, if your box only
displayed name and number there would be no difference.  If I had Call
Display I'd run the display in French just to get 24h times.  Any
boxes have that choice?


Jeff Bamford    jsbamford@uwaterloo.ca -- NeXT Mail welcome 

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 06:40:00 -0400
From: joharris@io.org (John Harris)
Subject: Re: Bilingual Telephone Numbers?


The customer is the person to decide if a product makes her/him feel
good.  If a person's native tongue is Spanish, s/he may prefer to see
"Nueva Llamada" instead of "New Calls" on an alpha-capable display.

How much can a few bytes of ROM cost?  It's just good design/marketing 
to add low incremental cost features.


John O. Harris   BEL-Tronics Ltd. Mississauga, ON
joharris@io.org                   (905) 828-1002

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

From: melvin@netcom.com (Stephen Melvin)
Subject: Re: AT&T, Paris and Freedom
Organization: Zytek, Lda. - Paris
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 1994 20:03:12 GMT


In article <telecom14.301.3@eecs.nwu.edu> JeanBernard_Condat@Email.France
Net.FR writes:

> Yesterday, I was invited to look at 'a sound sculpture for the Arc de
> Triomphe by Bill Fontana' in Paris.
 
I went down there today to check it out, actually I thought it was
pretty neat.  This was not obvious from the blurb, but the speakers at
the observation level are transmitting *live* sounds picked up from
microphones around the city.  For example there is a speaker labeled
"Cafe Les Deux Magots" through which you can hear dishes clattering
and people talking as you are looking out in the general direction of
that place.  There are about 15 microphones in cafes, train stations,
etc.  I think it's an interesting idea.  The street level speakers are
transmitting ocean surf sounds. (NB: it costs FRF 31 (~USD 6) to go up
to the top).
 
> I invite all the reader of this message to appreciate during the next
> holidays in France, the Arc de Triomphe of Place de l'Etoile and to
> drink a beer on the Champs-Elysees without the poor Bill Fontana'
> sculpture and the English-written AT&T Direct Services publicity.
   
I don't understand your objection Jean-Bernard.  I don't see this as
an AT&T publicity thing.  They just funded part of it and their name
only appears in small letters at the bottom of the poster describing
the exhibit, I had trouble even finding it.  So what if they have both
French and English descriptions, lots of exhibits in Paris do.
 

Steve Melvin   melvin@netcom.com

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

From: Daryl Gibson <DRG@du1.byu.edu>
Subject: Re: Bidding War For - Western Union ?!
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 1994 19:36:09 MST


> Item in the Sunday paper says two companies, First Data Corp. and
> Forstmann Little & Co. are bidding for Western Union.  First Data is
> described as an information-and-transaction-processing company that
> transfers money.  Forstmann Little & Co. is a leveraged buyout firm.
> First Data bid $896 million, Forstmann Little bid $951 million, and
> First Data added $65 million to its bid.  A bankruptcy court judge
> ruled friday that the company will be auctioned in September.  (Get
> your bid in by Sept 2.)

Just a note on First Data. First Data is a fairly major firm these
days ... it was spun off of American Express a little over a year ago,
I believe; at any rate, if you send American Express money transfers
(as opposed to Western Union money transfers), you're dealing with
First Data. I believe I read something that said they were also the
company that was doing the 1-800-COLLECT operator work for MCI, but I
could be wrong. They are a big transaction processing firm, a large
telemarketing firm, and also do a huge amount of credit card transaction 
processing for smaller banks. They also do American Express' billing, and 
I believe have Amex Money Orders, as well.

American Express spun off the company as an independent entity; I
think it made First Data's bank customers rest easier, knowing that a
competing credit card company wasn't taking care of their customers;
Before the First Data spinoff, that put Amex in the unlikely position
of being one of the biggest issuers of Visa and Mastercards in the
United States.

And while I'm blathering on about Amex, I remember reading that as one
of the first ISDN sites, Amex wired their computers so that when an
agent in their Phoenix office answered the phone, they already knew
who it was on the other end, and had your account on their screen
(assuming you were calling from a number they knew, of course) they
had to ban their customer reps from picking up the phone and saying
"American Express ... how can I help you, Mr. Jones," because it was
bothering too many customers ...


Daryl
(801) 378-2950      (801) 489-6348
drg@du1.byu.edu     71171.2036@compuserve.com

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

From: tmcreek@eos.ncsu.edu (Tobin M. Creek)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones and Lightning
Date: 29 Jun 94 14:57:41 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University


shawnlg@netcom.com (Shawn Gordhamer) writes:

> Someone told me that in a lightning storm, lightning can follow the
> radio waves given out by your cellular phone.  I assume this is
> because the air is more ionized where the waves are strong.  Is this
> true?  Is it unsafe to use a handheld cellular phone in a lightning
> storm?  I'm not talking about a mobile phone with a tall antenna.

I call "Urban Legend" on this one.  I doubt that that statement has
any scientific basis whatsoever.

If it does, then one of these days, my Motorola will go ZOT! and so
will I.  :)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #307
******************************

