NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/comp/dcom/telecom/12843

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-03 | 6.2 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!telecom-request
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 00:52:37 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Approved: [e-mail]
X-Submissions-To: [e-mail]
X-Administrivia-To: [e-mail]
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 5, Message 9 of 9
Lines: 113

[e-mail] (Dave Leibold) wrote:

[quoting from a leaflet distributed with recent phone bills]

> Calling cards can no longer be used as a billing option when placing
> long distance calls from payphones in Bell territory to certain
> destinations:

> + locations in 809 area code(*) (as of October 30, 1992);

> + overseas (as of April 13, 1992) unless you call from a Millenium
> payphone;

> In spite of these restrictions, there are still a number of ways you
> can place overseas or 809 calls from payphones:

> + use your American Express, Visa, Mastercard or EnRoute card in
> Millenium phones (these are the "card swipe" phones);

> + place a person-to-person collect call;

> + bill your call to a validated third number in Canada or the United
> States, or

> + place a cash call from a regular payphone.

This is getting bizarre.  I never carry my calling card because,
unlike the various other cards in my wallet, its number is valuable on
its own -- without the physical card.  This, of course, is because the
PIN is printed right on the card, and the number (with PIN) is
accepted without the card itself.  Now Bell is saying I must carry the
card in order to make these calls (a good start), but the PIN is still
printed on the card and stored unencrypted on the magstripe.

In a previous job I had access to credit card embossing and encoding
equipment, and I was tempted to make copies of my calling card on
credit card stock with a fake number embossed, but with the correct
one on the magstripe.  This solves some of the problem, but I
concluded that, even though it wouldn't be illegal, I would probably
spend a lot of time "helping the police with their enquiries" if I was
ever found with such a card.

> [Moderator's Note:  Well here we go again with the telcos claiming
> that 'fraud is everyone's problem ... '  it is NOT everyone's problem;
> it is telco's problem. They won't install the technology to eliminate
> or help reduce fraud; it is simply easier to discriminate against
> large numbers of citizens whose national origin is that of an affected
> country. I must say Bell Canada seems to be more open about admitting
> what they do; you'll never see AT&T ever put anything in writing about
> their illegal and discriminatory practices. Of course I don't know the
> law in Canada; maybe Bell Canada is breaking no laws by blocking calls
> in this manner. AT&T needs to have the screws turned to them harder
> than ever on this issue.    PAT]

But note that Bell Canada is disallowing such calls to all foreign
countries except the United States.  They are not picking a small (and
troublesome) subset as AT&T seems to have done.  I think it would be
pretty hard to make a case of discrimination against everyone except
American immigrants.


Tony Harminc


[Moderator's Note: Are you *positive* that if you try to use a Bell
Canada card on a call to the UK, Australia or New Zealand it won't go
through?  Forget what their literature says for a moment and try it.
If it does go through on the card, then the very same situation exists
in Canada as here: discrimination against what you term a 'troublesome
subset' ... although a credit grantor can deny credit to someone who
has defrauded or is attempting to defraud them, the credit grantor
cannot, under the law, approve a line of credit then selectively
refuse to honor that line of credit because there 'might be' fraud
committed. If AT&T would put in writing in their published
literature such as their 'International Calling Guide' that credit
cards cannot be used on international calls to point X, Y and Z then
they would have a stronger case in their favor. But in fact, their
literature says just the opposite. Look in the guidebook at the little
boxes checked off which indicate 'collect/credit card calls accepted
to/from this country'. Nearly every country, and certainly all the
verbotin places show the AT&T card as being accepted as payment.

Nor can the credit grantor deny credit under some scenarios and
approve it under other scenarios when the end result would be that a
class of customers against whom discrimination is illegal would be the
persons primarily or exclusively affected. That is just making an end
run around the law, and the courts would rule as such. If AT&T allows
white people with a European ethnic background living in Winnetka, IL
to call the UK using a calling card as payment, they cannot lawfully
refuse to let a Latino person living in the Humboldt Park area of
Chicago call Puerto Rico on the same pre-approved calling card plan.
AT&T might say they disallow all calls to Puerto Rico on a calling
card, but that misses the point. Wealthy people with European ancestry
living in Winnetka have private phones and don't need to run out to
the corner 7/11 and use the payphone. Poor Latinos and Black people do
need to use the payphone. And from the time I take the receiver off
the hook on a payphone and proffer some method of approved payment to
telco, that phone line is leased to me for my use, just like the phone
in someone's home in Winnetka.

Bottom line: people from 'certain ethnic backgrounds' living in the
inner cities get shafted on credit from (the credit grantor) AT&T.
Any other credit card issuer who arbitrarily ruled out certain areas
of cities or certain types of purchases when the result was a large
class of people was primarily affected would get their knuckles
rapped. AT&T deserves no less. VISA and AMEX know how to deal with
fraud where their cards are concerned without discriminating against
credit worthy customers. Why can't AT&T figure out how it is done?
Hopefully they will get slapped around a little on this until they
begin obeying the law like Ma and Pa's corner store has to do when
they issue credit to their customers.   PAT]