phrack/issue29/10.txt

                                ==Phrack Inc.==

                    Volume Three, Issue 29, File #10 of 12

            PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN
            PWN                                                 PWN
            PWN        P h r a c k   W o r l d   N e w s        PWN
            PWN        ~~~~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~        PWN
            PWN                Issue XXIX/Part 1                PWN
            PWN                                                 PWN
            PWN                November 17, 1989                PWN
            PWN                                                 PWN
            PWN          Created, Written, and Edited           PWN
            PWN               by Knight Lightning               PWN
            PWN                                                 PWN
            PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN PWN


                  Welcome to Issue XXIX of Phrack World News!

Although Phrack Inc. is officially four years old, Phrack World News is not.
PWN originally in its first issue (which was in Phrack Inc. II... its a long
story) was known as "Phreak World News," but quickly changed and starting with
Phrack Inc. Issue III became Phrack World News as you see it today.

This issue of Phrack World News contains stories and articles detailing events
and other information concerning AT&T, Clifford Stoll, Kent O'Brien, Kevin
David Mitnick, Datacrime, DEC, FAX, FCC, Galactic Hackers Party, IBM, Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, Leonard Mitchell DiCicco, MCI, NASA, Robert
Morris, Shockwave Rider, SummerCon '89, The "NEW" TAP Magazine, 2600 Magazine,
Viruses, Worms Against Nuclear Killers, and much more so keep reading and
enjoy.

:Knight Lightning

        "The Real Future Is Behind You... And It's Only The Beginning!"
_______________________________________________________________________________

Judge Proposes Community Service For Hacker's Accomplice       October 13, 1989
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by Kathy McDonald (New York Times)

LOS ANGELES -- A federal judge says she is inclined to sentence a man who
pleaded guilty to helping computer hacker Kevin Mitnick steal a computer
security program to community service and asked him to submit a proposal on
such a sentence.

U.S. District Judge Mariana R. Pfaelzer said Leonard Mitchell DiCicco, of
unincorporated suburban Calabasas, had been helpful in the case, in which he
reported Mitnick to officers at Digital Equipment Corporation in Massachusetts.

Mitnick has admitted he stole a DEC computer security program and
electronically brought it to California.

Pfaelzer gave DiCicco, age 23, until November 1 to come up with a detailed
proposal for his community service.

"I favor the handicapped, older people, something which is out in the
community," Pfaelzer said.

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 agreement with the government, DiCicco pleaded guilty 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.

He said after Thursday's (October 12) court appearance that he would like to
put his computer talents to use to help others.

Assistant U.S. Attorney James Asperger did not object to giving DiCicco
community service rather than a prison term, saying:  "I think Mr. DiCicco's
cooperation in this case was essential to the prosecution of both Mr. Mitnick
and himself.  He is certainly lower in culpability than Mr. Mitnick."

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

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
_______________________________________________________________________________

How Hacker Jammed 911 Police Lines                              October 4, 1989
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by Benny Evangelista

He is a brilliant, but lonely teenage computer hacker with too much time on his
hands.

And the police said the 16-year-old San Gabriel boy used that time to put a
sophisticated high-tech spin on age-old teenage telephone pranks by tying up
police emergency lines from Hayward, California to Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and
harassing other people, all from what he thought was the safety of his home
Commodore 64 computer.

The calls that jammed Hayward police and Alameda County sheriff's lines were
potentially dangerous, but officials said that no emergency was neglected
because of them.

This is the way he got his kicks, but he had most of us just absolutely
crazed," said Connie Bullock, security director for one of the long-distance
companies that suffered thousands of dollars of losses.

The boy, who police would not identify because of his age, is <was> scheduled
to be arraigned October 16th in Los Angeles County Juvenile Court for making
telephone bomb threats, fraudulently obtaining long-distance telephone service,
interfering with a police officer and making harassing phone calls.

"Our goal is to get him on probation so we can doctor him for the next couple
of years," said Sgt. Bernie Kammer, of the Los Angeles County sheriff's
computer crime detail.

"Hopefully, he may be one of the guys who sends the next space capsule up,"
Kammer said.

The hacker, who has used handles like "Kent O'Brien," surfaced sometime last
October, said Bullock, director of network security for ComSystems
Incorporated, a Van Nuys-based long distance company.

Bullock learned that someone had tapped into the electronic phone mail system
of a Cedar Rapids-based long-distance company using ComSystems lines.

A security officer for the Iowa company began receiving harassing and
threatening calls, some at home in the middle of the night, she said.

The hacker became good at cracking home answering-machine codes in the Southern
California area and possibly elsewhere, and changed several outgoing messages,
she said.

He also broke into the phone mail system at Sears administrative office in
Hayward, California and called workers there, she said.  He even commandeered
one phone mail box and had other people leave messages.

He would also make anonymous calls or just let the phone ring in the middle of
the night and hang up.  He phoned in bomb threats to his old high school and a
fast-food restaurant, Kammer said.

In all cases, he used a computer synthesizer to disguise his voice, Kammer
said.  And he routed the calls in ways to make tracing impossible.

Then he started calling Cedar Rapids police emergency 911 lines, bombarding
dispatchers in the middle of the night with a series of computer-assisted calls
that would tie up the lines for hours.  He would make small talk and ask about
the weather, said Cedar Rapids Detective Stan McCurg.

The boy could call up five or six other people, hold their lines captive and
route the calls to police, McCurg said.

"The scary thing is he had the capability to screw you over and you couldn't do
anything about it," McCurg said.

Police say the boy pulled the same trick on the Alameda County Sheriff's
office, San Francisco police and the Los Angeles County sheriff's office in
Crescrenta Valley.

The calls did not cause any safety problems, but there was always that
potential, Kammer said.

The big break came after the boy started calling Hayward police dispatchers in
late February.  At first, the dispatchers played along, trying to find out who
and where the boy was while the boy gave false clues to throw them off.

"It was like, 'Catch me if you can,'" said Hayward Detective Dennis Kutsuris.

On March 2, dispatchers kept him talking from 8:10 a.m. to 1:20 p.m., long
enough to trace the call to his San Gabriel home.  That night, police served a
search warrant and found the boy in bed talking on the phone using his
synthesizer.

The hacker was a lonely boy who dropped out of high school because it didn't
challenge him, but had passed his general education equivalency exam and was
taking courses from a community college, according to Kammer and Bullock.

Police seized the computer equipment, but formal charges were not filed until
last month because of the complex followup investigation, Kammer said.

Bullock said her company lost about $71,000 worth of calls, plus four angered
customers.  Kammer said although police believe the loss could be "hundreds of
thousands" of dollars, they can only prove the loss of $2000 in court.

In the meantime, Hayward police received another call September 6th from a
computer-synthesized voice that they feel came from the boy.  Kammer said a
relative had given the boy another computer, but they have no proof that he was
back to his old tricks.

Still, that incident, along with Cedar Rapids police reports will be used for a
probation report, Kammer said.

Bullock said the case was intriguing at first, but became frustrating as her
file grew to 2 feet thick.

"He had me by the guts," she said.  "I was obsessed with finding him.  He's a
typical 16-year old, but a little more menacing.  He is pretty smart, but he
had absolutely nothing to do, but sit in his room with his computer equipment
and all he had to do was talk on the phone."
_______________________________________________________________________________

Just The FAX, Please                                           November 6, 1989
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by Noam Cohen (New York Times)

Teachers in rural Minnesota are ready to hear the most up-to-date version of
the oldest excuse in the book:  "Honest, teach, the fax ate my homework."

Yes, the facsimile machine has gone to school in Sibley County, an agricultural
area 60 miles southwest of Minneapolis-St. Paul.

It is the last component to be installed in a four-year-old interactive
television system, or ITV, that brings advanced classroom instruction to small,
isolated areas through closed-circuit cable television.

In an education system where students adjust the contrast knobs to get a better
look at their calculus teacher, it is hardly surprising that these students are
the first in the country to use the fax to receive or hand in homework.

David Czech, the telecommunications director for the school district who is
responsible for its cable system education program, said that now, televised
teachers can even give surprise quizzes.

"The fax makes the classroom truly self-contained," said Kelly Smith, an
assistant principal at Gibbon-Fairfax-Winthrop High School, in Sibley County,
who taught mathematics for the ITV program before fax machines were introduced.
He said that when he taught he "had to rely on transportation in the district
and assignments always stacked up."

The fax machines, part of a special line made by Ricoh Corporation, transmit on
the same wiring that carries the television image to students.  By using cable
instead of telephones, the district saves money on telephone costs and receives
quicker, cleaner copies.

The machines have a built-in copier, allowing one student to retrieve the
assignment and hand copies to classmates (usually no more than eight).
Students then use the machine to hand back work.

The Sibley County school district purchased and installed the fax machines with
the remaining $22,000 of a $150,000 state grant for ITV, according to Czech.

The machines, which school officials and a Ricoh spokeswoman say are the first
to be used in high school education, have generated interest elsewhere.  Czech
says he has received calls from education officials in Hawaii, Wisconsin, Ohio
and other parts of Minnesota.
_______________________________________________________________________________

MCI Sues AT&T -- Charges Deceptive Advertising                 October 12, 1989
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
       "We Welcome The Opportunity To Discuss Who Is Misleading Whom..."

AT&T is using false and malicious advertising to protect its long-distance
business, MCI Communications Corporation charges in a lawsuit filed Tuesday,
October 10.

MCI, whose 10 percent market share makes it a distant number two to AT&T's 75
percent, says its giant rival is resorting to false claims in the hope of
stemming the loss of 100,000 customers to MCI each week.

AT&T, however, says it will defend itself with a countersuit.  According to
AT&T spokesman Herb Linnen:  "We welcome the opportunity to discuss who is
misleading whom... we have been quite concerned for some time now about MCI's
misleading print and broadcast advertising.  We have taken our complaints
directly to MCI without success."

He added, "AT&T stands behind its advertising."

This latest litigation is simply the latest chapter in MCI's long and very
bitter battle with AT&T, which began in the 1970's when MCI successfully broke
AT&T's long-distance monopoly by offering "Execunet," the first long-distance
service bypassing AT&T offered to the public.  The two companies have battled
each other at the Federal Communications Commission, which authorizes the rates
for each, ever since.  This is the first time since AT&T's divestiture that the
arguments have been taken into a courtroom.

In an interview, MCI Chairman William McGowan said that "AT&T ads are sleazy,"
and he noted that the nine month old campaign grew increasingly negative,
forcing MCI into the courts.

AT&T responded saying that MCI is resorting to the courts since "...they just
can't hack it in the marketplace..."

McGowan responded that he believes a lawsuit is the only way to fight a company
which is spending two million dollars a day on advertising.  He said, "Our
budget is big -- $51 million -- but how do you compete with someone who is nine
or ten times your size in advertising?"

MCI is still studying the impact of the latest round of AT&T ads, but McGowan
said he is sure MCI should have gained "a lot more" than 100,000 customers per
week if not for the advertising.  The advertising has not affected professional
telecommunications managers, but does have an impact on individual and small
business customers, he said.

The MCI suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, alleges that
AT&T's advertising campaign "maliciously attacked MCI's honesty and the value
of MCI's products and service by falsely and deceptively representing that it
is superior to its competitors in general, and MCI in particular, in terms of
trustworthiness, quality and price.

MCI's suit cites AT&T ads that assert MCI's rates are cheaper than AT&T's only
when calls are made over 900 miles away and after 7 p.m. MCI's suit also takes
umbrage at AT&T's advertisement which states that MCI customers "might have
better luck calling Mars than trying to reach MCI representatives for an
explanation of their bills."

The ads, the suit charges, also claim non-AT&T companies provide slow telephone
connections; that other companies do not operate worldwide like AT&T; and that
competing 800, facsimile and WATS services are inferior.

The suit says AT&T "has wrongfully profited and MCI has been damaged by being
wrongfully thwarted from maximizing its sales potential."

The suit asks the court to order AT&T to discontinue advertising its services
for a period of one year and that advertisements after that time be approved by
the court and carry a notice to that effect in the advertisement itself.
Additionally, it asks for profits "wrongfully amassed" by AT&T on the sale of
its products and services during the past year, plus interest and legal fees.

McGowan was particularly irked by a claim that MCI's fax service has 57 percent
more problems than AT&T faxes.  He said that number was arrived at by figuring
the difference between AT&T service -- with 4.9 percent errors -- and MCI, with
7.7 percent errors.  Rather than reporting the 2.8 percent difference, the ad
claims a 57 percent higher rate -- the percentage increase between 4.9 percent
and 7.7 percent.

"Talk about misleading," McGowan said.

"Yes, talk about misleading," said Herb Linnen.  "They've survived this long in
part based on the deceptions they've used on a public not well educated on the
technical aspects of telephony... we'll clear this up once and for all in court
with a countersuit."

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

Unleashing Ma Bell                                             October 24, 1989
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by Peter Passell (New York Times)

                  Could AT&T's rivals in long-distance phone
                 service survive no-holds-barred competition?

Since the breakup of the telephone monopoly in 1984, the Federal Communications
Commission has kept AT&T on a short leash to prevent the giant company from
chewing up the "small fry."

But now two of those small fry have grown into profitable multibillion-dollar
corporations, and AT&T is asking the regulators for the freedom to fight for
market share.  If the FCC agrees -- a crucial decision could come as early as
Thursday -- high-volume telephone users are likely to reap a bonanza from lower
prices.

When the Bell System was dismembered, analysts generally agreed that rivals
would need a lot of help from Washington to gain a secure foothold in the
long-distance market dominated by the ultimate name-brand company.

The analysts were right:  After AT&T's competitors lost their discounts on
regulated charges for hookups to local telephone exchanges, all of them took a
financial bath and some went broke.

But in the ensuing consolidation, a few companies emerged with both the
technical capacity to match AT&T's service and the marketing savvy to sell
themselves to once-skeptical consumers.

MCI Communications now has 12 percent of the long-distance market and in the
last year has grown four times as fast as AT&T.

US Sprint Communications, with its much-ballyhooed all-fiber-optic system, has
an 8 percent share and is the principal carrier for 117 of America's 800
largest companies.

Joel Gross, a communications analyst at Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, believes
a fourth network, assembled from a half-dozen smaller companies, will soon
emerge.

One reason AT&T's rivals have managed to do so well in the last few years is
continuing regulatory discrimination.

Last summer, the FCC switched AT&T from traditional fair-rate-of-return
regulation to a more flexible "price-cap" system that gives the company
discretion to adjust individual rates within a narrow price band.

But neither the old price regulations nor the new ones apply to MCI, US Sprint
and other smaller long-distance companies.  And they have taken advantage of
AT&T's inability to cut prices, offering volume discounts where AT&T is most
vulnerable to customer defections.

AT&T has fought back, convincing the FCC to allow it fast-track approval for
rate concessions needed to hang onto its biggest customers.

And it is now asking the commission for broad discretion to cut rates by more
than the 5 percent permitted under the price-cap rule.  If the FCC agrees, it
is a sure bet that AT&T will price aggressively, accepting sharp reductions in
its fat profit margins to check its loss of market share.

It is obvious why MCI and US Sprint are unhappy at the prospect of an AT&T
unleashed. But it is not so easy to see how the public would lose from the
ensuing donnybrook.

One worry is that AT&T would slash prices by enough to drive rivals out of
business, and then be free to price-gouge.

But as Peter Pitsch, a former FCC staff member who now consults for AT&T points
out, such "predatory" pricing is only a plausible option if the predator can
hope to make up the inevitable short-term losses with long-term monopoly gains.
And two considerations make such a calculation unlikely.

Once the cables have been laid and the switches installed, it costs very little
to operate a long-distance phone system.  Thus even if AT&T were able to drive
MCI and US Sprint into bankruptcy, their creditors would find it advantageous
to continue to sell long-distance services.

And if AT&T somehow did manage to shut down its rivals, the FCC would hardly be
likely to reward it with permission to charge monopoly prices.

Another concern is that price-cutting would make long-distance service
unprofitable for all, discouraging further investment.

That, however, might not be such a bad thing.  Losses are capitalism's way of
telling businesses to slow down:  There is enormous overcapacity in
long-distance communications and more investment anytime soon is unlikely to be
productive.

Does all this mean the commission will hang tough and permit AT&T to flex its
competitive muscles? A year ago, when the FCC was dominated by Reagan-appointed
free marketers, the answer would have been easy.

Today, with a Bush-appointed majority led by a chairman, Alfred Sikes, of less
certain ideological bent, it is hard to say.

MCI and US Sprint have managed to squeeze a lot of regulatory mileage out of
their underdog status, and certainly will not give up the privileges that go
along without a fight.

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

AT&T Strikes Back:  Countersues MCI                            October 27, 1989
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AT&T struck back on Thursday, October 27 at advertising claims made by MCI
Communications Corporation and received two rulings from the Federal
Communications Commission affecting regulation of its long distance services.

AT&T said in a countersuit against MCI filed in Washington, DC that MCI was
misleading consumers through false and deceptive advertising in its business
and residential long distance service.  AT&T's filing denied similar
allegations made by MCI in a suit filed October 10.

Victor Pelson, AT&T group executive, said MCI unfairly compared its discount
service with AT&T's regular long distance service rather than its discount
service.  Pelson also denied claims that the quality of MCI voice service was
superior to AT&T's, or that its facsimile service featured fewer garbled
transmissions than AT&T's.

"We intend to clarify any misconceptions in the market," said Merrill Tutton,
AT&T Vice President for consumer marketing.

MCI spokeswoman Kathleen Keegan Thursday responded that, "our ad claims are
accurate...  We will soon be filing a motion for a preliminary injunction to
cause AT&T to cease its advertising campaign."

Also on Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission upheld a decision
giving AT&T greater freedom to compete for big corporate customers but rejected
another pricing plan by AT&T.

The FCC voted unanimously to uphold a pricing plan known as Tariff 12, which
lets AT&T offer corporate customers a package of communications services.  AT&T
contends it is at a disadvantage because MCI does not have to submit detailed
filings to the FCC before they can serve customers.  MCI had challenged Tariff
12, asking the FCC to overrule it and prohibit AT&T from offering full service
communications packages to its customers.

In the second item, the FCC declared unlawful a pricing plan known as Tariff
15, that AT&T had applied solely to a single customer, the Holiday Corporation,
owner of the largest hotel chain in the United States.  The FCC said AT&T could
no longer justify the special rates to a single customer to meet competition
when MCI was making the same service available to customers generally.

                        >--------=====END=====--------<