Telecom Claim - True or False?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Matthew Poole, Jul 22, 2004.

  1. In article <>, "E. Scrooge" <scrooge@*shot.co.nz (*sling)> wrote:
    *SNIP*
    >Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to dial
    >out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP as the
    >person at Telecom claimed, thanks.
    >

    Absolutely not. It must first disconnect you, then establish a new
    connection.
    Ever tried making a phone call while someone else is already on the
    phone? It doesn't work terribly well. Modems are no different. They
    have no super powers to work around the limitations imposed by the PSTN
    - No dial tone, no phone call.

    --
    Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
    "Veni, vidi, velcro...
    I came, I saw, I stuck around"

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
    Matthew Poole, Jul 22, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Matthew Poole

    E. Scrooge Guest

    The person I spoke to at Telecom today claimed that trojan dialer could dial
    out to another country while the modem was aready in use connected to a
    local ISP.
    She didn't know it could but still claimed it can do it.

    This is on dial up. I don't see how the modem can dial out when it's
    already connected in use. Though a dialer could dial out was a computer was
    on but off the Net leaving the modem free for another dial up program.

    What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook Islands -
    of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.
    Odd thing is it only showed the one call which was back on the 20th June,
    and only lasted for a minute which came to $1.45. No more such calls since
    then and none showing today at Telecom from the date they sent the account.
    It's possible the old PC did pick up something, as the homepage was changed
    and locked to Microsoft. Adaware and some other program cleaned the crap
    out of the registry.
    Bit odd how the call wasn't to a high charge number and didn't last longer
    than 1minute 8 seconds. The woman from Telecom claimed she made a 5 second
    call to her daughter in Australia LOL. I said her daughter must've been
    right next to the phone to answer it and only take 5 seconds for the call.
    I also pointed out that it took a lot longer than a minute just to get
    through to Telecom, it must've taken close half an hour all up. The small
    bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just cross
    the charge out on the original one I've got. Even the Post Office only goes
    by the charge on the invoice, there's no computer check on it when they scan
    the bar code. Like adjustments the Power Companies can make, Telecom should
    send out a new invoice to be perfectly legal instead of having me alter the
    thing.

    Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to dial
    out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP as the
    person at Telecom claimed, thanks.

    Cheers,
    E. Scrooge
    E. Scrooge, Jul 22, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Matthew Poole

    Collector Guest

    E. Scrooge said the following on 22/07/2004 21:44:

    > The person I spoke to at Telecom today claimed that trojan dialer could dial
    > out to another country while the modem was aready in use connected to a
    > local ISP.
    > She didn't know it could but still claimed it can do it.
    >
    > This is on dial up. I don't see how the modem can dial out when it's
    > already connected in use. Though a dialer could dial out was a computer was
    > on but off the Net leaving the modem free for another dial up program.
    >
    > What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook Islands -
    > of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.
    > Odd thing is it only showed the one call which was back on the 20th June,
    > and only lasted for a minute which came to $1.45. No more such calls since
    > then and none showing today at Telecom from the date they sent the account.
    > It's possible the old PC did pick up something, as the homepage was changed
    > and locked to Microsoft. Adaware and some other program cleaned the crap
    > out of the registry.
    > Bit odd how the call wasn't to a high charge number and didn't last longer
    > than 1minute 8 seconds. The woman from Telecom claimed she made a 5 second
    > call to her daughter in Australia LOL. I said her daughter must've been
    > right next to the phone to answer it and only take 5 seconds for the call.
    > I also pointed out that it took a lot longer than a minute just to get
    > through to Telecom, it must've taken close half an hour all up. The small
    > bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    > charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just cross
    > the charge out on the original one I've got. Even the Post Office only goes
    > by the charge on the invoice, there's no computer check on it when they scan
    > the bar code. Like adjustments the Power Companies can make, Telecom should
    > send out a new invoice to be perfectly legal instead of having me alter the
    > thing.
    >
    > Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to dial
    > out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP as the
    > person at Telecom claimed, thanks.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > E. Scrooge
    >
    >

    A modem of the common household variety cannot handle more than one call
    at a time. That said how ever, spyware can hand up the line and silently
    (speaker off) dial another number.
    Collector, Jul 22, 2004
    #3
  4. Matthew Poole

    Jason M Guest

    On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:44:03 +1200, "E. Scrooge" <scrooge@*shot.co.nz
    (*sling)> wrote:

    >What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook Islands -
    >of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.

    --snip--
    >The small bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    >charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just cross
    >the charge out on the original one I've got.


    Was the number Cook Islands 0068 238872?
    I know an elderly couple who have had a dialler call that number at a
    cost of hundreds of dollars, and Telstra have insisted that they pay
    or they will list them on Baycorp.
    All the searches I have done indicate that people have just paid the
    bill and put a toll-bar on their phoneline.

    I don't understand why the owner of the number in the Cook Islands
    cannot be traced and prosecuted for fraud, and Telstra along with
    them. If the Cook Islands govt doesn't want to do that then NZ should
    stop sending them $12 million in aid each year.
    Jason M, Jul 22, 2004
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    says...
    > E. Scrooge said the following on 22/07/2004 21:44:
    >
    > > The person I spoke to at Telecom today claimed that trojan dialer could dial
    > > out to another country while the modem was aready in use connected to a
    > > local ISP.
    > > She didn't know it could but still claimed it can do it.
    > >
    > > This is on dial up. I don't see how the modem can dial out when it's
    > > already connected in use. Though a dialer could dial out was a computer was
    > > on but off the Net leaving the modem free for another dial up program.
    > >
    > > What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook Islands -
    > > of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.
    > > Odd thing is it only showed the one call which was back on the 20th June,
    > > and only lasted for a minute which came to $1.45. No more such calls since
    > > then and none showing today at Telecom from the date they sent the account.
    > > It's possible the old PC did pick up something, as the homepage was changed
    > > and locked to Microsoft. Adaware and some other program cleaned the crap
    > > out of the registry.
    > > Bit odd how the call wasn't to a high charge number and didn't last longer
    > > than 1minute 8 seconds. The woman from Telecom claimed she made a 5 second
    > > call to her daughter in Australia LOL. I said her daughter must've been
    > > right next to the phone to answer it and only take 5 seconds for the call.
    > > I also pointed out that it took a lot longer than a minute just to get
    > > through to Telecom, it must've taken close half an hour all up. The small
    > > bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    > > charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just cross
    > > the charge out on the original one I've got. Even the Post Office only goes
    > > by the charge on the invoice, there's no computer check on it when they scan
    > > the bar code. Like adjustments the Power Companies can make, Telecom should
    > > send out a new invoice to be perfectly legal instead of having me alter the
    > > thing.
    > >
    > > Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to dial
    > > out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP as the
    > > person at Telecom claimed, thanks.
    > >
    > > Cheers,
    > > E. Scrooge
    > >
    > >

    > A modem of the common household variety cannot handle more than one call
    > at a time. That said how ever, spyware can hand up the line and silently
    > (speaker off) dial another number.


    And this is almost certainly what they do. I recently cleaned up a
    machine for some friends, one of the complaints was they would be
    disconnected often while on the internet. The dialler must have been
    doing this when it was making the calls to Diego Garcia.
    Patrick Dunford, Jul 22, 2004
    #5
  6. Matthew Poole

    E. Scrooge Guest

    "Jason M" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:44:03 +1200, "E. Scrooge" <scrooge@*shot.co.nz
    > (*sling)> wrote:
    >
    > >What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook

    Islands -
    > >of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.

    > --snip--
    > >The small bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens

    again I get
    > >charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just

    cross
    > >the charge out on the original one I've got.

    >
    > Was the number Cook Islands 0068 238872?
    > I know an elderly couple who have had a dialler call that number at a
    > cost of hundreds of dollars, and Telstra have insisted that they pay
    > or they will list them on Baycorp.
    > All the searches I have done indicate that people have just paid the
    > bill and put a toll-bar on their phoneline.
    >
    > I don't understand why the owner of the number in the Cook Islands
    > cannot be traced and prosecuted for fraud, and Telstra along with
    > them. If the Cook Islands govt doesn't want to do that then NZ should
    > stop sending them $12 million in aid each year.


    That's the number all right. I'm sure if I still had it the bill would've
    been a lot more than $1.45 - especially if it could call out while the modem
    was in use on the Net.
    Since it's a malicious phone number telecom should be able to block that
    number, same with Telstra for their customers.

    E. Scrooge
    E. Scrooge, Jul 22, 2004
    #6
  7. Matthew Poole

    E. Scrooge Guest

    "Patrick Dunford" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > > E. Scrooge said the following on 22/07/2004 21:44:
    > >
    > > > The person I spoke to at Telecom today claimed that trojan dialer

    could dial
    > > > out to another country while the modem was aready in use connected to

    a
    > > > local ISP.
    > > > She didn't know it could but still claimed it can do it.
    > > >
    > > > This is on dial up. I don't see how the modem can dial out when it's
    > > > already connected in use. Though a dialer could dial out was a

    computer was
    > > > on but off the Net leaving the modem free for another dial up program.
    > > >
    > > > What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook

    Islands -
    > > > of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans

    use.
    > > > Odd thing is it only showed the one call which was back on the 20th

    June,
    > > > and only lasted for a minute which came to $1.45. No more such calls

    since
    > > > then and none showing today at Telecom from the date they sent the

    account.
    > > > It's possible the old PC did pick up something, as the homepage was

    changed
    > > > and locked to Microsoft. Adaware and some other program cleaned the

    crap
    > > > out of the registry.
    > > > Bit odd how the call wasn't to a high charge number and didn't last

    longer
    > > > than 1minute 8 seconds. The woman from Telecom claimed she made a 5

    second
    > > > call to her daughter in Australia LOL. I said her daughter must've

    been
    > > > right next to the phone to answer it and only take 5 seconds for the

    call.
    > > > I also pointed out that it took a lot longer than a minute just to get
    > > > through to Telecom, it must've taken close half an hour all up. The

    small
    > > > bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    > > > charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just

    cross
    > > > the charge out on the original one I've got. Even the Post Office

    only goes
    > > > by the charge on the invoice, there's no computer check on it when

    they scan
    > > > the bar code. Like adjustments the Power Companies can make, Telecom

    should
    > > > send out a new invoice to be perfectly legal instead of having me

    alter the
    > > > thing.
    > > >
    > > > Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to

    dial
    > > > out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP

    as the
    > > > person at Telecom claimed, thanks.
    > > >
    > > > Cheers,
    > > > E. Scrooge
    > > >
    > > >

    > > A modem of the common household variety cannot handle more than one call
    > > at a time. That said how ever, spyware can hand up the line and silently
    > > (speaker off) dial another number.

    >
    > And this is almost certainly what they do. I recently cleaned up a
    > machine for some friends, one of the complaints was they would be
    > disconnected often while on the internet. The dialler must have been
    > doing this when it was making the calls to Diego Garcia.


    Thanks for that. I couldn't see how a modem could make a call while still
    connected to the ISP it called at the same very time.
    I was lucky it was only a very brief problem, I must've got rid of it after
    a clean up on the old PC, otherwise I'm sure it would've tried to call out
    again since June 20th.

    E. Scrooge
    E. Scrooge, Jul 22, 2004
    #7
  8. Matthew Poole

    Brett Guest

    On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 23:23:26 +1200, "E. Scrooge" <scrooge@*shot.co.nz
    (*sling)> wrote:

    >
    >"Jason M" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:44:03 +1200, "E. Scrooge" <scrooge@*shot.co.nz
    >> (*sling)> wrote:
    >> Was the number Cook Islands 0068 238872?
    >> I know an elderly couple who have had a dialler call that number at a
    >> cost of hundreds of dollars, and Telstra have insisted that they pay
    >> or they will list them on Baycorp.
    >> All the searches I have done indicate that people have just paid the
    >> bill and put a toll-bar on their phoneline.
    >>
    >> I don't understand why the owner of the number in the Cook Islands
    >> cannot be traced and prosecuted for fraud, and Telstra along with
    >> them. If the Cook Islands govt doesn't want to do that then NZ should
    >> stop sending them $12 million in aid each year.

    >
    >That's the number all right. I'm sure if I still had it the bill would've
    >been a lot more than $1.45 - especially if it could call out while the modem
    >was in use on the Net.
    >Since it's a malicious phone number telecom should be able to block that
    >number, same with Telstra for their customers.
    >
    >E. Scrooge
    >


    That's a great idea to get the telco's to block these numbers.
    But you might find out that these numbers in the cooks are owned by Telecom
    or Telstra as it's a great little earner for them.

    Doesn't nz have a fraud division and close connections with the cooks.
    Maybe they are waiting for an official complaint before the can get off
    there buts, woops I mean leap into action.

    Brett
    Brett, Jul 22, 2004
    #8
  9. Matthew Poole

    Brendan Guest

    On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:56:15 GMT, Jason M wrote:

    > I don't understand why the owner of the number in the Cook Islands
    > cannot be traced and prosecuted for fraud, and Telstra along with
    > them. If the Cook Islands govt doesn't want to do that then NZ should
    > stop sending them $12 million in aid each year.


    The answer is very simple:

    1. Telstra/Telecom/etc ALL benefit financially from these fraudulent calls.
    They get a cut. The profit from it. They are in on the racket.

    They could simply put a voice prompt on the line when calling one of these
    problem countries, requiring you to press a couple of stated numbers before
    it connects the call. Problem solved. So why don't they ?

    See 1, above.

    I wonder if a claim under some of the consumer protection acts could be
    made.

    --

    .... Brendan

    "We were nearly one of the last to realize that in the age of information science the most expensive asset is knowledge." -- Mikhail Gorbachev

    Note: All my comments are copyright 23/07/2004 1:42:27 a.m. and are opinion only where not otherwise stated and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
    Brendan, Jul 22, 2004
    #9
  10. Matthew Poole

    JedMeister Guest

    ha ha , good one.

    Classic case of baffle the customer with bullshit - and, you can never argue
    with a stupid person.

    Typical telecom/xtra helpdesk strategy.



    if you can't
    "E. Scrooge" <scrooge@*shot.co.nz (*sling)> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The person I spoke to at Telecom today claimed that trojan dialer could

    dial
    > out to another country while the modem was aready in use connected to a
    > local ISP.
    > She didn't know it could but still claimed it can do it.
    >
    > This is on dial up. I don't see how the modem can dial out when it's
    > already connected in use. Though a dialer could dial out was a computer

    was
    > on but off the Net leaving the modem free for another dial up program.
    >
    > What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook

    Islands -
    > of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.
    > Odd thing is it only showed the one call which was back on the 20th June,
    > and only lasted for a minute which came to $1.45. No more such calls

    since
    > then and none showing today at Telecom from the date they sent the

    account.
    > It's possible the old PC did pick up something, as the homepage was

    changed
    > and locked to Microsoft. Adaware and some other program cleaned the crap
    > out of the registry.
    > Bit odd how the call wasn't to a high charge number and didn't last longer
    > than 1minute 8 seconds. The woman from Telecom claimed she made a 5

    second
    > call to her daughter in Australia LOL. I said her daughter must've been
    > right next to the phone to answer it and only take 5 seconds for the call.
    > I also pointed out that it took a lot longer than a minute just to get
    > through to Telecom, it must've taken close half an hour all up. The small
    > bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    > charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just

    cross
    > the charge out on the original one I've got. Even the Post Office only

    goes
    > by the charge on the invoice, there's no computer check on it when they

    scan
    > the bar code. Like adjustments the Power Companies can make, Telecom

    should
    > send out a new invoice to be perfectly legal instead of having me alter

    the
    > thing.
    >
    > Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to

    dial
    > out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP as

    the
    > person at Telecom claimed, thanks.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > E. Scrooge
    >
    >
    JedMeister, Jul 22, 2004
    #10
  11. Matthew Poole

    JedMeister Guest

    I think a claim would be successful (at least if I were the judge ha ha).
    This dialer scam is not new, and a simple strategy as you outlined would
    prevent dialler fraud so it is the telcos fault for not implementing
    blocking systems.

    Of course, if it were the telco losing out on the cash, the problem would be
    fixed overnight .

    "Brendan" <> wrote in message
    news:fov8otf9a2iu$...
    > On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:56:15 GMT, Jason M wrote:
    >
    > > I don't understand why the owner of the number in the Cook Islands
    > > cannot be traced and prosecuted for fraud, and Telstra along with
    > > them. If the Cook Islands govt doesn't want to do that then NZ should
    > > stop sending them $12 million in aid each year.

    >
    > The answer is very simple:
    >
    > 1. Telstra/Telecom/etc ALL benefit financially from these fraudulent

    calls.
    > They get a cut. The profit from it. They are in on the racket.
    >
    > They could simply put a voice prompt on the line when calling one of these
    > problem countries, requiring you to press a couple of stated numbers

    before
    > it connects the call. Problem solved. So why don't they ?
    >
    > See 1, above.
    >
    > I wonder if a claim under some of the consumer protection acts could be
    > made.
    >
    > --
    >
    > ... Brendan
    >
    > "We were nearly one of the last to realize that in the age of information

    science the most expensive asset is knowledge." -- Mikhail Gorbachev
    >
    > Note: All my comments are copyright 23/07/2004 1:42:27 a.m. and are

    opinion only where not otherwise stated and always "to the best of my
    recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
    JedMeister, Jul 22, 2004
    #11
  12. On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 02:12:32 +1200, "JedMeister"
    <> wrote:

    >I think a claim would be successful (at least if I were the judge ha ha).
    >This dialer scam is not new, and a simple strategy as you outlined would
    >prevent dialler fraud so it is the telcos fault for not implementing
    >blocking systems.
    >
    >Of course, if it were the telco losing out on the cash, the problem would be
    >fixed overnight .


    They may well now be losing cash on diallers, as TelstarClear failed
    to turn up to a Disputes Tribunal hearing and the referee ordered that
    their customer was not liable for the bill cause by a dialler
    ($4,329.63). See the latest Consumer magazine.
    Stephen Worthington, Jul 22, 2004
    #12
  13. Matthew Poole

    thing Guest

    it can't she's a f*ck wit.

    more like telecom's screwed billing system screwed up again. If your not
    dialing the cook islands I would suggest a block with a pin.

    regards

    Thing

    E. Scrooge wrote:
    > The person I spoke to at Telecom today claimed that trojan dialer could dial
    > out to another country while the modem was aready in use connected to a
    > local ISP.
    > She didn't know it could but still claimed it can do it.
    >
    > This is on dial up. I don't see how the modem can dial out when it's
    > already connected in use. Though a dialer could dial out was a computer was
    > on but off the Net leaving the modem free for another dial up program.
    >
    > What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook Islands -
    > of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.
    > Odd thing is it only showed the one call which was back on the 20th June,
    > and only lasted for a minute which came to $1.45. No more such calls since
    > then and none showing today at Telecom from the date they sent the account.
    > It's possible the old PC did pick up something, as the homepage was changed
    > and locked to Microsoft. Adaware and some other program cleaned the crap
    > out of the registry.
    > Bit odd how the call wasn't to a high charge number and didn't last longer
    > than 1minute 8 seconds. The woman from Telecom claimed she made a 5 second
    > call to her daughter in Australia LOL. I said her daughter must've been
    > right next to the phone to answer it and only take 5 seconds for the call.
    > I also pointed out that it took a lot longer than a minute just to get
    > through to Telecom, it must've taken close half an hour all up. The small
    > bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    > charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just cross
    > the charge out on the original one I've got. Even the Post Office only goes
    > by the charge on the invoice, there's no computer check on it when they scan
    > the bar code. Like adjustments the Power Companies can make, Telecom should
    > send out a new invoice to be perfectly legal instead of having me alter the
    > thing.
    >
    > Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to dial
    > out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP as the
    > person at Telecom claimed, thanks.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > E. Scrooge
    >
    >
    thing, Jul 22, 2004
    #13
  14. Jason M wrote:
    > I don't understand why the owner of the number in the Cook Islands
    > cannot be traced and prosecuted for fraud


    Because often you are agreeing to a legal agreement when you click "Yes, I
    want to install this dialer". None of the dialers I've come across install
    without prompt.

    Cheers,
    NIcholas Sherlock
    Nicholas Sherlock, Jul 22, 2004
    #14
  15. Matthew Poole

    Collector Guest

    E. Scrooge said the following on 22/07/2004 21:44:

    > The person I spoke to at Telecom today claimed that trojan dialer could dial
    > out to another country while the modem was aready in use connected to a
    > local ISP.
    > She didn't know it could but still claimed it can do it.
    >
    > This is on dial up. I don't see how the modem can dial out when it's
    > already connected in use. Though a dialer could dial out was a computer was
    > on but off the Net leaving the modem free for another dial up program.
    >
    > What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook Islands -
    > of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.
    > Odd thing is it only showed the one call which was back on the 20th June,
    > and only lasted for a minute which came to $1.45. No more such calls since
    > then and none showing today at Telecom from the date they sent the account.
    > It's possible the old PC did pick up something, as the homepage was changed
    > and locked to Microsoft. Adaware and some other program cleaned the crap
    > out of the registry.
    > Bit odd how the call wasn't to a high charge number and didn't last longer
    > than 1minute 8 seconds. The woman from Telecom claimed she made a 5 second
    > call to her daughter in Australia LOL. I said her daughter must've been
    > right next to the phone to answer it and only take 5 seconds for the call.
    > I also pointed out that it took a lot longer than a minute just to get
    > through to Telecom, it must've taken close half an hour all up. The small
    > bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    > charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just cross
    > the charge out on the original one I've got. Even the Post Office only goes
    > by the charge on the invoice, there's no computer check on it when they scan
    > the bar code. Like adjustments the Power Companies can make, Telecom should
    > send out a new invoice to be perfectly legal instead of having me alter the
    > thing.
    >
    > Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to dial
    > out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP as the
    > person at Telecom claimed, thanks.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > E. Scrooge
    >
    >

    While it is nice to argue that Telescum and Testicula are benefiting
    from thesen calls which is why they dont do anything, but the user has a
    responsibility too.
    Now the TScums(pair) could block the number but I am reasonably sure
    there will be an international agreement somewhere that prevents this.
    TScums can just waive the costs yeah sure then they have to battle not
    to pay the international carrier and start incurring costs.

    Better they require a human to press numbers on thier phone to connect
    with these numbers, using dtmf that way will prevent auto dialing of
    these numbers thou and thats probably against some bloody international
    convention.

    It all boils down to the TScums not wanting to spend money to fix the
    problem by putting up the required fight to put these scammers out of
    business. Same problem with Spam emails really
    Collector, Jul 22, 2004
    #15
  16. Matthew Poole

    colinco Guest

    In article Collector says...
    > It all boils down to the TScums not wanting to spend money to fix the
    > problem by putting up the required fight to put these scammers out of
    > business. Same problem with Spam emails really
    >

    Who shares the money? The Tscums here, Cook Islands Telecom and who
    else? Does the call actually go to the Cooks or stay in Auckland like
    the dodgy sexline jackup a few years ago using Tuvalu numbers.
    colinco, Jul 22, 2004
    #16
  17. Matthew Poole

    Warwick Guest

    "E. Scrooge" <scrooge@*shot.co.nz (*sling)> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The person I spoke to at Telecom today claimed that trojan dialer could

    dial
    > out to another country while the modem was aready in use connected to a
    > local ISP.
    > She didn't know it could but still claimed it can do it.
    >
    > This is on dial up. I don't see how the modem can dial out when it's
    > already connected in use. Though a dialer could dial out was a computer

    was
    > on but off the Net leaving the modem free for another dial up program.
    >
    > What happened is on my Telecom account it shows a call to the Cook

    Islands -
    > of course such calls are well known among other places that trojans use.
    > Odd thing is it only showed the one call which was back on the 20th June,
    > and only lasted for a minute which came to $1.45. No more such calls

    since
    > then and none showing today at Telecom from the date they sent the

    account.
    > It's possible the old PC did pick up something, as the homepage was

    changed
    > and locked to Microsoft. Adaware and some other program cleaned the crap
    > out of the registry.
    > Bit odd how the call wasn't to a high charge number and didn't last longer
    > than 1minute 8 seconds. The woman from Telecom claimed she made a 5

    second
    > call to her daughter in Australia LOL. I said her daughter must've been
    > right next to the phone to answer it and only take 5 seconds for the call.
    > I also pointed out that it took a lot longer than a minute just to get
    > through to Telecom, it must've taken close half an hour all up. The small
    > bill to the Cook Islands has been wiped, but if it happens again I get
    > charged. Telecom wouldn't send out a new invoice, but told me to just

    cross
    > the charge out on the original one I've got. Even the Post Office only

    goes
    > by the charge on the invoice, there's no computer check on it when they

    scan
    > the bar code. Like adjustments the Power Companies can make, Telecom

    should
    > send out a new invoice to be perfectly legal instead of having me alter

    the
    > thing.
    >
    > Anyway if the experts could just state if it's possible for a modem to

    dial
    > out to another number while already connected to the number of an ISP as

    the
    > person at Telecom claimed, thanks.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > E. Scrooge
    >
    >

    Here is a relavant article from a recently published (British) magazine.

    In this case British Telecom do NOT onward pay the bill to the diallers
    target, but nevertheless STILL COLLECT it from the scams victim and then
    give the money to charity.

    So one might wonder if the telcos here are onward paying the funds as well,
    and if they are why are they not withholding them in the same manner as BT?
    And if they are doing that why bill the customer at all?


    Charles Moore writes in this weeks Spectator..

    " On my latest telephone bill, I noticed an item saying that I had made a
    call, on my computer line, to Sao Tome. The charge for this call, which took
    nearly eight minutes, was &[pounds]9.102.Sao Tome is a small island off the
    west coast of Africa, and I was pretty confident that neither I nor any
    member of my family had ever rung it. So I telephoned BT. Gary, who
    answered, said 'Oh yes thats Sao Tome' ( he pronounced as in 'weighty
    tome'). He explained that this was a scam in which clever crooks somehow use
    a modem to rob people.
    'This is unacceptable' Gary went on, 'and therefore we do not pass on the
    money, but give it to charity instead'. Well that was very nice, but
    wouldn't it be better for BT customers, I asked, if we didn't have to pay
    money at all for services run by criminals which we never knowingly used?
    Gary said 'I can see where you are coming from', but confirmed that I must
    still pay the Sao Tome part of my bill. If I was not satisfied, he added, I
    should ring the Independant Comittee for the Supervision of Standards of
    Telephone Information Services. On the six times that I have tried, this
    body has been engaged."

    cheers
    Warwick
    Warwick, Jul 22, 2004
    #17
  18. Matthew Poole

    Ryan Jacobs Guest

    "Nicholas Sherlock" <> wrote in message
    news:cdp4aq$154$...
    >
    > Because often you are agreeing to a legal agreement when you click "Yes, I
    > want to install this dialer". None of the dialers I've come across install
    > without prompt.
    >


    Actually, the current generation of diallers do install silently without
    prompts. Just another reason to ensure any box connected to the internet has
    ALL security precautions in place - AV, firewall, patches, spyware
    detectors, etc.

    RJ out.
    Ryan Jacobs, Jul 23, 2004
    #18
  19. Matthew Poole

    Ryan Jacobs Guest

    "Warwick" <> wrote in message
    news:QEXLc.9953$...
    >
    > >

    > Here is a relavant article from a recently published (British) magazine.
    >
    > In this case British Telecom do NOT onward pay the bill to the diallers
    > target, but nevertheless STILL COLLECT it from the scams victim and then
    > give the money to charity.
    >
    > So one might wonder if the telcos here are onward paying the funds as

    well,
    > and if they are why are they not withholding them in the same manner as

    BT?
    > And if they are doing that why bill the customer at all?
    >
    >


    Hmmmm, interesting. Knowing Telescum & Telstrarscum, I wouldn't be surprised
    if they're both pocketing the proceeds.

    RJ out.
    Ryan Jacobs, Jul 23, 2004
    #19
  20. In article <>,
    lid says...
    > On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 02:12:32 +1200, "JedMeister"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >I think a claim would be successful (at least if I were the judge ha ha).
    > >This dialer scam is not new, and a simple strategy as you outlined would
    > >prevent dialler fraud so it is the telcos fault for not implementing
    > >blocking systems.
    > >
    > >Of course, if it were the telco losing out on the cash, the problem would be
    > >fixed overnight .

    >
    > They may well now be losing cash on diallers, as TelstarClear failed
    > to turn up to a Disputes Tribunal hearing and the referee ordered that
    > their customer was not liable for the bill cause by a dialler
    > ($4,329.63). See the latest Consumer magazine.


    Disputes Tribunal resolutions are not enforceable though
    Patrick Dunford, Jul 23, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Nick

    False positive, false intrusion, false alarm

    Nick, Apr 23, 2006, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,961
    Moe Trin
    Apr 26, 2006
  2. Knowing About
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    664
    Knowing About
    Oct 13, 2006
  3. Kendra Rice

    True or False Trivia Quiz

    Kendra Rice, Dec 2, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    3,256
    thanatoid
    Dec 3, 2007
  4. EMB

    Telecom - true to form

    EMB, Nov 11, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    584
    Matthew Poole
    Nov 13, 2005
  5. sport

    Re: true or false?

    sport, Sep 2, 2003, in forum: A+ Certification
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    329
    natural_4u
    Sep 9, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page