Source
Automatically imported from: http://commons.somewhere.com:80/rre/1998/911.from.cell.phones.html
Content
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.
911 from cell phones
``` [Risks messages on 911 from cell phones, a new-generation Word macro virus, and the negative rate of progress in software engineering, plus alerts on 911 from cell phones, Y2K issues for nonprofits, and shrinkwrap licenses.]
---
This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help@weber.ucsd.edu
---
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:57:08 -0700 (PDT) From: risks@csl.sri.com
RISKS-LIST: Risks-Forum Digest Tuesday 23 June 1998 Volume 19 : Issue 83
---
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 16:37:18 -0400 From: cseymour@mail11.mitre.org (Chip Seymour) Subject: Expectations of technology
We have wittingly fallen victim to a behavior modification problem that has resulted from the way we think technology works (or should work). Or, perhaps the way we FAIL to think about it. Either way, it appears to be life threatening.
Two cases in point:
Last week, a smoky fire broke out in the basement of a Chase Manhattan Bank building on Wall Street. People working on the 22nd floor of the building noticed the "lights started to flicker and then the phones went dead, but the computers were still working."
Apparently the company's UPS kicked in, allowing the computers to remain functional. However, a person's perception of a power failure is that either everything stays on (power) or everything shuts down (failure).
The failure of the lights and phones would lead one to believe the power has been lost. However, the computers continued to run, leading the people to confusion. "We all looked at each other because we couldn't figure out what the heck was going on."
They remained at the helm for another 20 minutes before someone smelled smoke. Then a person from another part of the building warned them to leave. At the end, thirteen people were injured.
The second case involves a horrible traffic accident where the driver and passenger were injured and pinned in a flaming vehicle. A witness dialed 911 on his cellular phone.
U.S. residents "all know" that 911 is the number to call to request emergency equipment. What we don't "all know" is that cellular calls to 911 do not automatically provide an Automatic Location Identifier to emergency responders (although a few 911 cell ALI systems have sprouted since this accident happened).
In Massachusetts, where this accident happened, all cellular 911 calls are routed to one of two State Police barracks, then are transferred to the responding agency. This 911 call was answered 50 miles away.
The witness was fairly spun up because of the immediate danger to the accident victims. Due to his excitement, the 911 operator had difficulty understanding the caller, resulting in a delayed response. The victims were finally extricated, treated at a local hospital (multiple fractures, burns, sucking chest wound), and eventually released.
The risk here is that the witness couldn't fathom that the 911 call wasn't sent to the closest 911 Public Safety Answering Point, and that the 911 operator had no indication of the accident location. He expected technology to work the way he thought it should work.
The public at large seems to have a notion that technology will always perform in the manner perceived, with little notion of how that perception is developed. I suspect, in our frantic pursuit of the newest and fastest whozywatts, this will be the case for a while, and it's our fault.
Chip Seymour
---
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 01:32:39 +0300
From: Mikko Hypponen
A Word macro virus called WM/PolyPoster was recently found. As the number of macro viruses is soon reaching 3000, there's nothing special about this. However, under the right conditions, this virus sends copies of a victim's Word documents to 23 different Usenet newsgroups under subject lines like "New Virus Alert!," "Important Princess Diana Info" and "How to find child pornography."
Risks are obvious and three-fold:
1. Private and confidential data is disclosed to the world
2. When unsuspecting fellow users download and read these documents, they get infected themselves
3. The user's name get's archived to services like DejaNews as posting messages related to software pirates or child porn.
More details at: http://www.DataFellows.com/news/pr/eng/fsav/19980618.htm http://www.DataFellows.com/v-descs/agent.htm
This virus is not known to be widespread at this time.
Mikko Hermanni Hypponen - Mikko.Hypponen@DataFellows.com Tel +358 9 859 900 Data Fellows Group, PL 24, FIN-02231 Espoo, Finland http://www.DataFellows.com/
---
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Phil Agre
An article in the 17 Jun 1998 Wall Street Journal (Robert Cwiklik, "Honest, mom, I don't even know what those @#$%& words mean", page B1) describes a program called "Secret Writer's Society" that is supposed to help children write by reading their writing back to them in automatically generated speech. Under certain conditions, however, the recitation is augmented with every obscenity in the English language. The problem is evidently that the program also reads out loud its full dictionary of words that it is supposed to filter out.
Judging from the sound of the conditions under which the problem arises, some kind of array bounds check is not being done. Assuming that this isn't another in the Wall Street Journal's recent series of urban myths, it's a depressing comment on the state of computer programming. Way back when I was a college student, we were taught programming languages that automatically prevented your program from reading random swatches of memory through automatic bounds checking. This was presented as a boring and well-established technology, which of course it was. So many of the problems reported on Risks result from the failure to apply methods that were prevalent 40 years ago.
---
End of RISKS-FORUM Digest 19.83
---
Standard Risks reuse disclaimer:
Reused without explicit authorization under blanket permission granted for all Risks-Forum Digest materials. The author(s), the RISKS moderator, and the ACM have no connection with this reuse.
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:22:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Audrie Krause
[...]
NetAction Notes ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Published by NetAction Issue No. 38 June 20, 1998 Repost where appropriate. Copyright and subscription info at end of message. * In This Issue: ACTION ALERT: Support 911 Access From Cell Phones Preparing for the Millennium "Shrinkwrap" License Update About NetAction Notes ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ACTION ALERT: Support 911 Access From Cell Phones
Circulate this action alert through July 15, 1998
NetAction is supporting an effort by the Ad Hoc Alliance for Public Access to 911 to convince the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to ensure that emergency 9-1-1 service is available from wireless telephones.
Send a fax to the FCC from NetAction's fax server, at:
========== Background On The Issue
The Ad Hoc Alliance for Public Access to 911, a national group of consumer, victim rights, and related organizations, has been involved in a protracted battle with the wireless industry to open up access to 9-1-1 emergency services from wireless telephones. The Alliance is asking the Federal Communications Commission to quickly address a pervasive and insidious form of blocking 9-1-1 calls that does not allow callers to access the strongest compatible signal over any available cellular carrier when making emergency calls.
Most cellular companies provide their customers with filled-in maps that show coverage areas that do not adequately reflect the real coverage pattern for most cellular phones. In reality, the cellular service areas look like Swiss cheese. The problem of this Swiss cheese effect, or "holes" in coverage, can be critical in emergencies. Several tragic accidents and deaths have occurred as a result of victims who were unable to reach emergency services from their cellular phones because their phones could not access available signals from other cell systems when they dialed 911.
The Alliance has demonstrated that when the two existing cellular coverage areas are overlaid, most of these holes are filled in. This means that one cell company was able to find a site that filled the "hole" in the other's coverage. It is obvious that the principle cause of the "holes" problem is the reluctance of the cellular industry to incur the cost of additional cell sites.
Over four years ago the Alliance filed a petition with the FCC to require newly manufactured cell phones to select the strongest compatible channel of communication from any cell carrier whenever 9-1-1 is dialed. This petition was intended to provide the consumer with the best opportunity to complete the emergency call. The wireless industry, bloated with profits and not used to being responsive to public scrutiny, has worked to block the efforts of the Alliance so they can continue to use "public safety" as a ploy to get more subscribers to their own system while refusing to fill in the coverage holes.
Jim Conran, president of the Alliance, said "We have experienced years of obstruction and delay by the cellular industry of our strongest signal proposal. The cellular industry fails to appreciate the fact that they are using billions of dollars worth of the public's airwaves for free and that use carries with it a public service obligation. The record in this proceeding amply shows that reliance on the good faith of the cellular industry to reach an agreement concerning any regulation, even when the public safety clearly requires such regulation, has not been productive. When, as here, market place objectives subvert the public interest, government action is required. The FCC has a responsibility to adopt the rule change proposed by the Alliance that will ensure that all cell phones can send a call to 9-1-1 over the strongest available channel of communication.
The wireless industry has been gearing up to defeat the efforts of the Alliance to implement a simple change in newly manufactured cellular phones that will correct this problem for 9-1-1 calls. We need your support NOW. Please contact the FCC and tell them that you want the Commission to adopt the strongest compatible signal change as proposed by the Alliance.
To send a fax to the FCC from NetAction's fax server, visit our web site at:
Or, write to the FCC at the following address:
The Honorable William E. Kennard Chairman Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, NW 8th Floor Washington, DC 20554
For more information on the Ad Hoc Alliance for Public Access to 911,
contact Jim Conran by email at
Preparing for the Millennium
For several years now, information technology managers responsible for the huge computer systems operated by government and large corporations have been working diligently to solve the "Year 2000 Problem." Also known as the "Millennium bug," this "problem" is the result of a programming decision made in the early days of computers. Instead of programming the internal calendars in computers to "read" years in four-digit increments (for example, 1998), computers were programmed to read only the last two digits (for example, 98).
What this means as we approach the Millennium is that, unless the problem is fixed, most of the world's computers will "read" the year 2000 as 1900. The result will be horrendous problems for government agencies, banks, insurance companies, and countless other large and small businesses. And also for non-profit organizations. NetAction was contacted recently by the technology manager for a large statewide nonprofit organization in California, who has been researching this issue for the past six months, and is worried that non-profit organizations aren't taking the "Year 2000 Problem" seriously. Although she asked not to be identified by name, she offered to prepare a brief article for NetAction Notes, to help non-profit organizations begin to address the "Year 2000 Problem."
"I am stunned at the lack of awareness of the problem among non-profits, and think our organizations will suffer if we don't do at least the most basic audit to ensure our critical technology systems and vendors are compliant," the technology manager said in a recent communication with NetAction. "The potential 'suffering' is not just for system failure (oh, that) but for legal liability of our officers as well; note the changes being made in the terms of D&O insurance."
Here are some relevant facts:
Seventy-five percent of U.S. small businesses are not dealing with the Year 2000 problem. Does this include your nonprofit? Do you think you're exempt because you don't have mainframe computers?
WRONG.
Vulnerabilities of non-profits to "Y2K" failures or malfunction include:
--> Desktop computers (47% of computers purchased in 1997 failed a basic year 2000 test).
--> Local area networks (some require upgrades, some are fine, others have no guarantee).
--> Lap-tops (same as desk-tops).
--> Automated faxing systems. --> Phone systems. --> Voice mail systems.
--> Other office equipment. --> Banks, insurance companies, payroll companies, and other vendors and suppliers.
Think you have plenty of time to deal with it? Probably wrong again. Eighty-five percent of year 2000 project managers already admit they underestimated the time and budget required. Government and Fortune 500 companies are already facing down failures because the 18 months remaining until the immutable deadline are not enough for them to fix all their systems.
What can you do about it?
You can at least inventory your systems and decide what critical systems you have to deal with, or what vendors you need a paper trail with. You can decide not to spend a lot of time on it. You might determine, for example, that it doesn't matter to the computer programs on most of your PCs if the system date and day of week is wrong come the new millennium. But you might find out that accurate dates are essential to your accounting or payroll program. The point is, if you don't look, you'll never know how you're vulnerable: until your system fails. Then what?
Resources to help non-profit organizations prepare:
--> "Year 2000 Solutions for Dummies," by IDG books. Like the other 'dummies' books, it's written clearly, simply, and with practical step-by-steps. Deals with everything from desktop PCs to mainframes.
--> The federal government's small business administration has a good model
plan for year 2000 compliance, with an overview of steps and narrative
describing each step in detail. It is similar to many other plans
(thorough). See
--> The San Francisco Bay Area Year 2000 users' group. Composed mostly of
technology managers in large companies, this group nonetheless provides
product guidance, speakers, and opportunities to network and learn from
others. See
For those who want more background on this issue, NetAction's webmaster, Judi Clark, recommends two articles by David Isenberg, which are on the web at:
-->
One final word of advice:
SAVE PAIN LATER: GET STARTED NOW. YOU CAN'T DELAY THE DEADLINE ON THIS ONE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Shrinkwrap" License Update
In the last issue of NetAction Notes, we alerted readers to the need for
consumer action to prevent the adoption of changes in the Uniform Commercial
Code (UCC) that will exempt software purchases from traditional consumer
protection laws, enable the software industry to dictate the terms of
software purchases by validating "shrinkwrap" licenses, and threaten the
rights of software developers to make competing programs. (See NetAction
Notes No. 37, at:
Our Action Alert noted that UCC amendments had to be approved by the American Law Institute (ALI) and the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) before they could be adopted by individual states, and urged consumers to contact both organizations to object to the Article 2B proposal on software licenses.
Subsequently, the American Law Institute (ALI) considered the proposed change on May 15. Todd Paglia of the Consumer Project on Technology, reports that ALI questioned the contract formation principles of 2B and asked the drafting committee to revisit it. According to Todd, "This is a huge vote of no confidence."
The second organization, NCCUSL, will consider Article 2B in late July, so there is still time for consumer action. Letters opposing adoption of Article 2B should be sent to:
Mr. Gene N. Lebrun, Chair Professor Curtis R. Reitz, Secretary Mr. Bion M. Gregory, President National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws 676 North St. Clair Street, Suite 1700 Chicago, Illinois 60611
Fax: (312) 915-0187 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
About NetAction Notes
NetAction Notes is a free electronic newsletter, published by NetAction to promote effective grassroots organizing on the Internet. NetAction is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to educating the public, policy makers, and the media about technology-based social and political issues, and to teaching activists how to use the Internet for organizing, outreach, and advocacy.
To subscribe to NetAction Notes, send a message to:
NetAction is seeking sponsors to provide financial support for the continued publication of NetAction Notes. Sponsors will be acknowledged in the newsletter and on NetAction's Web site. NetAction is supported by individual contributions, membership dues and grants.
For more information about contributing to NetAction, or sponsoring this
newsletter, contact Audrie Krause by phone at (415) 775-8674, by E-mail at
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.