Slashdot Mirror


Overseas Crooks Abuse TTY Phone Service

Rick Zeman writes "The Arizona Daily Star is reporting on how 419 scammers and credit card thieves are abusing the US' TTY service which enables hearing-impaired citizens to make phone calls with the help of an intermediary operator. 'The callers try to use stolen credit-card numbers to make big purchases of merchandise from American companies. The operators often suspect fraud, but they can't just hang up. Federal rules require them to make the calls and keep the contents strictly confidential.' Yes, Virginia, they have no shame...."

211 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. No authentication leads to abuse... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anything that's totally given away for free meant to help a certain segment of society should at least seek proof that the person taking advantage of the service is a member of that segment of society.

    No government in the USA hands out handcapped parking permits to everyone who asks. There's a documentation process to certify that one is entitled to it. Sure, that process sometimes gets fooled into giving a permit to somebody not entitled to it, but as least there's a paper trail created by such a fraud that can be followed once it is discovered.

    Free TTY services be allowed to issue usernames and passwords to their customers, keep text logs of the conversations, and able to revoke the access of those who abuse their accounts. Basically, the laws that are requiring them to be open are also regulating this service to its death. This needs to be fixed quick.

    1. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 2, Informative

      50 state governments are in the USA, not to mention countless county and city governments,
      all of which supply aid in some form to those with special needs.

      --
      Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
    2. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Unnngh! · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I did a quick googling and found some statistics:

      http://www.access-board.gov/telecomm/marketrep/app endices/ttyvm.htm

      That's 200000-700000 people using an older type of tty terminal. Maintaining a database and logs for this many users alone is a fair-sized task, and the offices are distributed nationwide.

      I'm afraid a cost-benefit analysis would reveal that it's (currently) cheaper to let the scammers scam:(

    3. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Abm0raz · · Score: 2, Informative

      well, there's the federal, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, several other protectorates. This doesn't count the several thousand county, township, borough, and city governments per state.

      -Ab

      --
      Nothing fails quite like prayer.
    4. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by BlewScreen · · Score: 4, Insightful
      keep text logs of the conversations, and able to revoke the access of those who abuse their accounts.

      You can't be serious... Would you advocate keeping a log of every voice call as well, and revoking phone service from those who "abuse their accounts"???

      Who's going to define "abuse"? Can a TTY user have phone sex, or is this something the deaf shouldn't be allowed to access?

      -bs

      --
      That that is is not that that is not. That that is not is not that that is.
    5. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      A good solution would be to require a newer TTY terminal that would actually rip out the caller's larynx. Then all TTY users would be legit TTY users.

    6. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by timmi · · Score: 1
      I was just brainstorming about how this could be dealt with.

      My first thought is, Access to the Internet based relay should be a members-only thing, where members are given a chance to register a username and password when they buy the TTY machine.

      A self serve method could involve entering the serial number of your TTY unit.

      clearly there needs to be some verification that people using the service are from the US.

    7. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Free TTY services be allowed to issue usernames and passwords to their customers, keep text logs of the conversations,"

      Yeah, because only hearing people should be allowed private phone conversations. The Fourth Amendment doesn't apply to deaf people.

    8. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by 77Punker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Credit card companies should handle credit scams; that's how they do it for non-TTY credit scammers.

    9. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by flossie · · Score: 1
      Can a TTY user have phone sex, or is this something the deaf shouldn't be allowed to access?

      Actually, I think a pretty good case could be made that the TTY users shouldn't have access to phone sex services. Not only is it pointless (they could just use IM or e-mail instead) but it would be unfair to the person relaying the conversation. Would you want your daughter/mother to be relaying phone sex for people?

    10. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by the_mad_poster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Insightful? Last I checked, phone sex was not illegal whereas credit card and wire fraud are.

      I do, however, agree that logging calls is a very, very Bad Thing to do. The companies being scammed need to have safeguards in place to make sure they can not only recognize problems, but go back and figure out what happened, who did it, and where they are with the help of law enforcement.

      TTY ops are intermediaries. Their job is not to protect companies on one side of the line from fraud and vice versa. They are there to channel information, not concern themselves with its content.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    11. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Macgruder · · Score: 2, Informative

      Devil's Advocate here...

      Maybe we need to rethink the whole 'equal access' thing. Why jump through hoops to give the disabled to nearly every segment of society? So they can feel 'normal'? They aren't... that's part of the definition.

      I mean, what's the point? What is the justification here? I'm not asking this to make flames or troll here... I honestly want to know why this is considered to be a good and desirable thing?

      --
      I'm not crazy,I'm actively irresponsible.
    12. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by abb3w · · Score: 5, Informative

      Free TTY services be allowed to issue usernames and passwords to their customers,

      Yes. Requiring some sort of proof that the service is needed as you suggest might also be desirable.

      keep text logs of the conversations,

      No.

      As I recall my sign language instructor explaining, the TTY Relay Service operator (and, I suppose, anything they might keep a hypothetical log with) is legally considered to be part of the telephone. They are NOT allowed to discuss anthing they hear; and any testimony they give about anything they have heard prior to a wiretap warrant being issued is legally inadmissable. You can be planning a murder, and the operator just has to relay the messages back and forth. It's a condition of legal privilege similar to those of spouses, doctors, lawyers, and the Secret Service.

      Allowing mandatory logging would effectively put a bug into the phone of every deaf person who has need of this service. Any regulation or legislation permitting this would be struck down in court as a violation of the equal protection and reasonable search clauses.

      As for the phone companies doing it themselves, they are under what is called "common carrier protection"-- they make no judgements over what to carry, they just send the voices back and forth, whether it's a call to mom or a death threat. Yes, harrassing calls are illegal, but the phone company only can take action AFTER the recipient complains. Logging, and revoking access based on use, would remove the Telco common carrier protection, and they REALLY don't want to do that. Not to mention the incidental that this might get them sued for civil rights violations under that pesky equal protection clause again.


      This report does lead me to wonder, however. I recall being informed by a professor who specializes in history of computing that the phone phreak community back in the 1970's to 1990s was had a very large blind community. While speculations on the cause of that are moot to the matter at hand, there might actually be a group of deaf/hard-of-hearing folk who are gathering around this new (and even less moral) illegal activity. If so, it would be depressing.

      Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, I just argue with one.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    13. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by arkanes · · Score: 1

      I have a deaf friend and I've talked to her via TTY a couple times. It's very wierd and I was totally uncomfortable, but the woman involved was almost unreally professional, to the point of reproducing my stammers and mutters about how I didn't really like it. I can't even imagine the mindset involved to be able to do that sort of thing all day long, without letting yourself get involved in the conversation.

    14. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by ScaredSilly · · Score: 1

      Essentially because people are economically disadvantage when they don't have equal access. The point is not so people with disabilities can feel normal. The point is so that people can be functional and independent, despite their disability.

    15. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      keep text logs of the conversations

      We did that unofficially at my previous tech support gig. The entries looked like:

      Have talked to user 6 times via relay service. You will want to stab yourself before you've finished telling the relay operator how to get into the network control panel.
      They all meant well, sure, but providing tech support to someone who's not a computer expert via someone who thinks a TTY is spiffy is an exercise in sadomasochism.
      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    16. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Buran · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm hearing-impaired. I have to use closed captioning to watch TV. Closed captioning is required of broadcasters/cable channels by law. It's only fair, since some of my tax money supports the television system. If I have to pay something, I should be able to use it. Similarly, many programs broadcast audio descriptions on a second audio track for the blind. Both can be turned off if they aren't desired.

      If we have to pay for it (the phone system in the US is partly paid for by taxes), we should be able to use it somehow.

    17. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by The_K4 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They will handle it, however they way that handle it is by forcing the merchant to give the money back to the person who's stolen card was used. Now the merchant is out moeny for falling for the scam (which is bad but partly their fault) and the deaf people still have long lines and a difficult time using services that are almost vital to them doing things you and I take for granted.

    18. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by The_K4 · · Score: 1

      More to the point would you be confortable using this if you deaf g/f called you using this and the person relaying was a guy with a really deep voice?

    19. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by awtbfb · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's 200000-700000 people using an older type of tty terminal.

      Since this is /. I'll chime in here with some clarifying information. TTYs are not what most /.ers would consider a tty. To communicate with the old, unfortunately almost standard, Baudot style TTY, you need to buy a special modem. Baudot is dog slow (45.45 Baud) and a fast typist can easily out-type the protocol. At the receiving end it is incredibly painful to wait for someone to get through a long sentence. Newer, proprietary, fast protocols (e.g., TurboCode) have removed this bottleneck, but computer compatibility still requires hardware.

      This hardware requirement why internet relays are so nice - you can just use a regular computer without messing with extra gear and you can call from just about anywhere. Furthermore, you can now access the internet relays via smartphones and PDAs, thus giving users a truly mobile option.

    20. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by kabocox · · Score: 1

      What do they need that for on a phone? That's what chat rooms are for!

    21. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid a cost-benefit analysis would reveal that it's (currently) cheaper to let the scammers scam:(

      Like email?

    22. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by benzapp · · Score: 1

      You can be planning a murder, and the operator just has to relay the messages back and forth. It's a condition of legal privilege similar to those of spouses, doctors, lawyers, and the Secret Service.

      Do you really believe our justice system would require the level of moral depravity you are discussing?

      I've got news for you, I don't give a shit what your job is, but if you reasonably believe someone is planning to commit a serious felony such as murder, you are required to report it to the authorities. This is true for all professions, even with lawyers in many instances. If your client tells you he is going to kill someone you have to report it. Not only could you be disbarred, but you could be imprisoned for obstruction of justice. If a patient tells his psychiatrist he is going to kill someone... same thing.

      Your conception of freedom is disturbing.

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    23. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Federal, state, county, and city/town levels... there's a lot.

    24. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Isbiten · · Score: 1

      Because one day you might be disabled too, and I don't think you want to sit around in your home all the day thinking: Oh well at least those normal people won't have to think about me now...

      --
      I fought the corporate America, and the corporate America bought the law.
    25. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by The_Mystic_For_Real · · Score: 1

      "Federal, state, county, and city/town levels
      The key word is levels. They are all parts of the same government.

      --

      _____

      Thank you.

    26. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by bluGill · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We don't give the disabled access to everything. Case in point: you do not see wheel chair bound workers placing the I beams of skyscrappers.

      We provide the disabled access where it is feasible. I know many hard of hearing (and a few deaf) people, and the majority are otherwise normal smart people. They can function in society with just a little help. Now I have a choice: I can give them money for food each day, or I can pay for a few things like TTY operators and let them then earn their living. The latter is cheaper, and gets beggars off the streets. (I prefer to leave that room for musicans who provide me a service in return for my money)

      Now there are also those who are deaf because of mental problems. That is a different situation. I'd prefer them off the streets though, (They would freeze in our winters) and most in limited ways are interesting people. We support them because it is the right thing. We give them TTY because it is not only cheaper than supporting them right out, but it lets them do something useful.

    27. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Macgruder · · Score: 1

      We support them because it is the right thing

      But why is it the right thing?

      Sure, it's a nice thing. But why be nice? And what makes it 'Right'?

      --
      I'm not crazy,I'm actively irresponsible.
    28. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Elias+Serge · · Score: 1

      including local and special district governments, the us has somewhere between 50-70k total.

    29. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by T-Ranger · · Score: 2, Interesting
      When was the last time you saw a merchant flip over your card and compare signatures?

      Iddiot CC merchants deserve what they get.

    30. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, you are incorrect.

      There generally is not a magical moral duty in the US. Unless you have done something specific such that a duty might arise, you don't need to report crimes or potential crimes (as distinguished from withholding information in an investigation), or do anything to help save people. While it may be morally reprehensible to sit back and watch someone die due to something you aren't responsible for, when you could've easily saved them, you generally are not legally required to help. This isn't just for crimes, it's also for torts.

      As for lawyers, while ethical codes vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, the ABA Model Rules are good as rules of thumb at the very least. Rule 1.6(b) states that:

      A lawyer may reveal [confidential information] to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes is necessary to prevent the client from committing a criminal act that the lawyer believes is likely to result in imminent death....

      Note the use of 'may.' That means it's at the lawyer's discretion. It is not the same as 'shall,' where the lawyer has no choice in the matter. The preamble and official comments make clear that a decision to not break confidentiality isn't a breach of ethics and isn't punishable.

      IIRC, some jurisdictions don't permit a breach at all. Though failure to disclose information is of course never the same thing as rendering active assistance in illegal activities, which is forbidden. And after-the-fact knowledge is definately subject to confidentiality rules.

      This all can weigh pretty heavily on criminal defenders. It's not entirely uncommon for a defender to know for a fact that their client is guilty, to know where the bodies are buried literally, and to not only be unable to do anything about that, but to still have to work to get their client off the hook.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    31. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      As far as I know only police officers are legally obligated to arrest people when they see them commit crimes, luckily they don't always do it or there would be even more poor saps in prison because of minor drug crimes. Well, they SHOULD be minor, but for some reason a lot of 'em are felonies.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    32. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      I would suspect that even they have some discretion. For example, if they could only arrest one person due to, e.g. time constraints (the other one would get away), they'd probably opt for the worse offender. It seems similar to prosecutorial discretion, wherein the government doesn't have to try to make every possible criminal case, due in no small part to their inability to do so. Instead they can pick the cases they want to prosecute.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    33. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Feztaa · · Score: 1

      Hey, I check the signature all the time. I've even caught a handful of people. Some of them actually were "just using my father's card" or whatever, but when you've got a native woman with the name "Alphonse Lao" on the card, you've got a problem. ;)

    34. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by MikeDawg · · Score: 1
      Would you want your daughter/mother to be relaying phone sex for people?

      Those two little s--ts, that is what they have been doing all this time without telling me?

      --

      YOU'RE WINNER !
      Another lame blog

    35. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by MikeDawg · · Score: 1

      I almost always do (when I don't its because I personally know the customer, and his/her card). What I find is that 75% time, if a person has "See ID" written down on the back of the card, and I ask to see their ID, they actually thank me for taking the time, and comparing signatures/names. And, for those people that say they are too busy and don't have the time, I am a bartender and I will take the time, even when the bar is extremely busy, and I have been able to walk away many times with very few complaints about time.

      --

      YOU'RE WINNER !
      Another lame blog

    36. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by gumbi+west · · Score: 1
      You can be planning a murder, and the operator just has to relay the messages back and forth.

      Well, murder is one of the exceptions. I have a friend who is a mental health professional, and he said that if a client says things that makes him think the client is reasonably likely to attempt murder, he has the legal responsibility to inform the police or the person. Not a privilege, a legal responsibility.

      This may vary from state to state though.

    37. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by mog007 · · Score: 1

      Actully it depends on the credit card company. Visa takes the bite out of their own profits, while Discover charges the merchant. This is probably why Discover isn't accepted in as many places as Visa.

    38. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      Maybe we need to rethink the whole 'equal access' thing. Why jump through hoops to give the disabled to nearly every segment of society? So they can feel 'normal'? They aren't... that's part of the definition.

      It's not about Normal, there's no such thing as that, really. Average, maybe, but that's a broader term that easily includes people with disabilities. Why make efforts to let disabled people participate in activities that their friends enjoy, and like to talk about? I don't know why anyone would question this. And you or I could become disabled tomorrow. For myself I'd be consoled at least to know that, with a new disability, I have a chance at continuing most of the things I'm accustomed to doing now. How could anyone not want to have that kind of 'safety net for the soul' looming ready, should life decide to throw a really shitty card at you?

    39. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by GreeboNZ · · Score: 1

      I'm just curious, why were you uncomfortable?
      I'm not the previous poster, but I rather feel I'd be uncomfortable to pass my conversations through someone I didn't know, even if they were very professional about it. I'm not sure why, but I'd much rather type directly. However buying expensive equipment to do that is rather prohibitory, which leads on to the next point you mentioned:

      A bit offtopic to what we're discussing but I just wanted to add in that I really hate the TTY standard. I out-type it so easily. I've been using iprelay but it's extremely insecure (it's raw, nothing encrypted). Hey, maybe I should invent a new, open standard for TTY (because I despise that I'm forced to buy proprietary software and hardware in order to do TTY).
      How about standard Hayes-compatible/ASCII modems? Surely you can't outtype 56 (well, 33) kbit? It's kind of mind-boggling that such a ridiculous outdated standard is still the standard in this narrow application, when there is a much faster, better, standard used for everything else, that is produced in commodity quantities and is hence very cheap! Surely regular modems would make a better teletype?

    40. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by thogard · · Score: 1

      When the V.90 standards were going though, the FCC should have told every modem company that the only way to get their stuff approved would be to make the device so it could talk teh old TTY standard. It would be trivial for any modern modem to do it, its just no one does.

      Outside of the US, tty has gone away as it has been replaced mostly with SMS.

    41. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by GreeboNZ · · Score: 1

      Outside of the US, tty has gone away as it has been replaced mostly with SMS. I'm not in the US, but here, SMS costs 20c per 160 character message. Not really practical for a conversation, even with a phone with a full keyboard.

    42. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by JuggleGeek · · Score: 1
      It's only fair, since some of my tax money supports the television system. If I have to pay something, I should be able to use it.

      Tax money pays for roads, too, but I don't believe that blind people should receive a drivers license.

      I'm not opposed to TTY service, but I do believe that if the service is being abused (especially if it's being abused in order to commit a crime) that there should be some limits. The only people that gain if TTY is used as a middleman to perpetrate fraud are the scammers.

    43. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by billcopc · · Score: 1

      If you ever find the answer to this I hope you'll send such enlightenment to my inbox.

      I have a strong disliking for those born with mental illness. If you're going to be a dumb vegetable all your life and make your family suffer, why bother ? It's one thing to go senile of old age, but it's another to be totally helpless from the get-go. At least have them neutered so they don't propagate the pain. There are already too many Timmy's in this world, they suffer, we suffer, everyone suffers. Put an end to the suffering.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    44. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by bluGill · · Score: 1

      Get to know a few of these people one time. Sure they are not intelligent, but that doesn't mean they are not worth knowing. And the large majority are sterile so they are not mating and passing the bad genes on, unlike those who get mental illness latter in life who pass those bad genes on. (Assuming it is genetic, not always a given)

      Yes it is hard on the family, but I know several families where one kids has Down's syndrome (Once you know one you often know several because they stick together), and the kids are interesting and worth know. They are not dumb vegetables. They get around (sort of), and have personalities of their own.

    45. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by Buran · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've seen some suggestions here that look good, like requiring a note from an audiologist (mine would happily write a note for any service I did require) as is the case for handicapped parking placards/plates. It certainly would make sense to implement some such thing.

      Blind people and drivers licenses aren't quite the same as TTY services or closed captioning. If someone doesn't use TTY correctly or is deaf and doesn't use captioning, no one gets hurt -- but a person who can't see well enough to operate a car could hurt not only themselves but others, so the requirements are more strict. There are jobs I can't do (911 operator, for instance) because my disability could get someone hurt, and I recognize the necessity of the restrictions.

    46. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by The_K4 · · Score: 1

      Here in CA they don't usually check signatures, but they REQUIERE ID. In fact when I first moved here I had some stores that reefused to take my CC because i was using out of state ID!

    47. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by abb3w · · Score: 1

      I have a friend who is a mental health professional, and he said...

      There are subtle variations is degrees of protection of privilege that depend on the nature of the relationship-- doctor-client privilege is subject to different protections than lawyer-client privilege. You'd probably have to ask a or law professor specializing in that field to get the details explained... and the answer might take a semester, since (as you noted) privilege is usually recognized at the state level.

      Not a privilege, a legal responsibility.

      No, no, no... the privilege is that of the CLIENT. Anything the doctor, lawyer, shrink, or whatever says is *NOT* subject to privilege (save to the extent that it reveals the clients privileged communications), and the client may reveal any of it to anyone they choose.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    48. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by mrbrown1602 · · Score: 1

      No government in the USA hands out handcapped parking permits to everyone who asks

      In the state of Louisiana, you can go into a doctors office, give them any cooky reason, and they'll give you the proper documentation to get a handicap permit.

      Yeah, I know its off-topic, but believe me - it happens. ;-)

    49. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by glpierce · · Score: 1

      The first thing I thought when I started reading about the problem in the article was why there was no authentication. Username/password, account/pin numbers, etc. would solve the problem immediately. The same confidentiality would apply to the accounts as it does to the phone calls (which would include address, name, credit card info, etc. when ordering merchandise, anyway).

      --
      G
    50. Re:No authentication leads to abuse... by pqdave · · Score: 1

      Sounds good, but sorry, Homeland Security has decided you're a Timmy...Please report for ster...I mean Candy.

  2. What a horrible job. by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Let's describe the job of a Relay Operator:
    No matter what the phone call, or what the content of that phone call is, the Relay Operator must, by law continue the conversation.

    When a deaf person is feeling lonely they might decide to call a phone entertainment line, man or woman, having to type this in, and say what the deaf person types.

    Like the job of a relay operator isn't bad enough, now the operators have to deal with Nigerian poor grammer while perpetrating fraud.

    --
    Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
    1. Re:What a horrible job. by JanneM · · Score: 3, Informative

      Um, yes. By law, and by the very job specification they had when applying, they do have to do this. It's not like it's a huge surprise, right: "Oh mai gahd! A human wants to talk about sex! With a member of the opposite gender!!"

      Assistants to disabled people have dealt with this for a long time; there is even accepted codes of conduct for various situations (basically, assistants should have a similar moral outlook as their bosses, or they will likely not be able to work together over time).

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    2. Re:What a horrible job. by ShortSpecialBus · · Score: 4, Informative

      I worked as a relay operator for about 9 months before I quit because it was ridiculous.

      Mind you, this wasn't normal tty relay. This was IP-Relay, which allows anyone with a computer to use it as a tty basically.

      Because I've signed NDA's and don't really want to break federal law, I can't go into detail about any calls, but I think I can safely say that what the article describes is pretty accurate.

      Also, As for sex lines, that's not too common with IP-Relay. What is common though is bored high school kids calling each other and being very creative with what they make you say/type.

      It's funny for a while, and not that bad of a job, but a lot of it is tedious, dull, and annoying (Touchtone menus...AARGH).

      --
      //FIXME: Bad .sig
    3. Re:What a horrible job. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      sweet - where can I get a job assisting a deaf porn star?

      Also, if Hitler was deaf, would his TTY assistant have been tried at Nuremburg?

    4. Re:What a horrible job. by JanneM · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: I am not an asistant, though I do know people who are.

      Assisting a deaf anyone: by and large deaf people do not need assistants. Active assistance would usually only come into play when you have serious physical difficulties in your daily life.

      Nurenberg: interesting question (with the disclaimer above, and instead assuming Hitler to be, for instance, paraplegic). I do not know, but I assume that no, an assistant would not be responsible in a trial. No more than a nurse or physician, for instance, no matter how disreputable their charge may be. But yes, there would certainly be questions on where an assistants responsibility would be (especially considering their own life if refusing) in extreme situations such as that.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    5. Re:What a horrible job. by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 2, Funny

      OSR :-
      Bart :- First name Mike , last name roatch.
      Moe :- Hey everyone I am looking for Mike Roatch.
      Still cracks me up

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    6. Re:What a horrible job. by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      Can you insert meta tags into the conversation in either direction?

      Operator reads: "I am the nephew of rich General Hooya..."
      Operator says: "He says *coughbullshit* he's the nephew of rich General Hooya *snicker*..."

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    7. Re:What a horrible job. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      No, the TTY operator must say EXACTLY what is written, in the first person.

      It's hard to get used to talking to a person whom is, in effect, acting.

    8. Re:What a horrible job. by J2000_ca · · Score: 1

      Lol I'm sorry I was one of those dumb kids. On another note IP-Relay wasn't suppose to work to Canadian locations but most operator would let you phone. Is there any reason why they said no calls to Canada?

    9. Re:What a horrible job. by Dimensio · · Score: 1

      I've also heard about pranksters who will use a TTY service to have fun at the expense of the operator, such as calling an automated service to "leave a message" then cutting and pasting the entire Windows XP EULA (yes, someone did this, according to a report) into the input box (the TTY input was done via a web browser). The operator is required by law to continue speaking as long as text comes on, even if it's something utterly stupid like that, and there's nothing that they can do about it legally.

      A few have been fighting back on the 419 and other scams, though. Many have been anonymously contacting the company to whom an obviously fraudulent order was placed (in cases where it was clear that the company was suckered by the scam artist) and warning them about the call. Not legal, but I'm not sure that it's necessarily unethical.

    10. Re:What a horrible job. by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      Yea, I know some stories about that :) Some ppl had the ip-relay operator call their house and record some messages on their answering machine. Some of them were very NSFW.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    11. Re:What a horrible job. by elemental23 · · Score: 1

      I don't know, but I saw an adult personal ad once that started out "Want to fuck a blind girl?"

      The mind boggles.

      --
      I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
    12. Re:What a horrible job. by Stray7Xi · · Score: 1

      "When a deaf person is feeling lonely they might decide to call a phone entertainment line, man or woman, having to type this in, and say what the deaf person types."

      And if there's no authentication a hearing person could then just use the TTY to call themselves and make the relay operator play the part of the phone entertainer. For all those narcissists to have phonesex with themselves.

  3. Doesn't surprise me by mindless4210 · · Score: 1

    Of course scammers are going to find loopholes to do what they want. Although it's shocking to me that they're able to do it still... how long do you think that will last for?

    --
    Wireless News www.DailyWireless
    1. Re:Doesn't surprise me by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      It will last long enough for the U.S. government to make an overly broad and presumptuous law that takes away yet another sliver of our rights (ours, probably meaning in this case the handicapped)

    2. Re:Doesn't surprise me by mindless4210 · · Score: 1

      I don't doubt that one bit.

      --
      Wireless News www.DailyWireless
  4. No different by JanneM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How is this different from the same scammers calling people with the same pitch?

    I would be a lot more worried about the idea of an outside party filtering my incoming calls without any control from me.

    More specifically, it is hard to have fun with phone salesmen or religious door-knockers once they learn to avoid you. :)

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    1. Re:No different by BCW2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The difference is that most small business owners have a concience and will bend over backwards to help someone they think is disabled. Then they get caught in the scam and lose.

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    2. Re:No different by twbecker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The crime itself is the same but it's much harder for the retailer to be suspicious of an American operator who isn't speaking improper English with a heavy accent of some sort.

      --
      "The problem with internet quotations is that many are not genuine" -Abraham Lincoln
    3. Re:No different by JanneM · · Score: 1

      So you are saying you will discriminate people with the "wrong" accent? And besides, you _know_ you are talking over a TTY - most likely you really are talking to a disable person; how do you decide their "impropriety" of English in that case?

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    4. Re:No different by timmi · · Score: 1

      The major difference is that when the Nigerian scammer calls directly on a voice line, they must pay the overseas phone bill, speak fluent English.

    5. Re:No different by twbecker · · Score: 1

      I'm saying I'd like to be able to use my intuition to determine the sincerity of someone requesting a service, and having an operator in the middle hampers my ability to do that.

      --
      "The problem with internet quotations is that many are not genuine" -Abraham Lincoln
    6. Re:No different by JanneM · · Score: 1

      So you never ever react to any kind of impersonal communication, such as email (or messages on slashdot)? Your loss.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    7. Re:No different by Dimensio · · Score: 1

      So you are saying you will discriminate people with the "wrong" accent?

      If I can identify someone placing an order as being from Nigeria, you can bet that I will "discriminate". Corruption and fraud are the primary source of the country's income.

    8. Re:No different by MechaStreisand · · Score: 1

      Stop being deliberately obtuse. He never said that he never reacts to impersonal communication: he said that his ability to use his intuition is hampered. For a supposed university researcher, you sure can be pretty stupid.

      --
      Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
  5. We've gotten this by bravehamster · · Score: 5, Informative

    At the computer shop I run we've literally recieved hundreds of these phone calls. The conversation typically goes like this (but relayed, so it takes forever)

    Do you sell laptops?
    No, we don't sell any laptops.
    How about desktops?
    Yes, we do desktops.
    Will you ship overseas?
    No, no overseas shipments.
    Ok..ok...how about Los Angeles.
    We can do that.
    Ok, I have credit card, I can pay now.
    We'd need some sort of verification that you are the cardholder.

    The conversation goes downhill from there. The first few times we took it seriously, but since then we've refused to take relay calls. If we hear the operator say "This is a relay call" we interrupt and say "Sorry, we don't take relay calls" and then HANG UP. If you don't hang up, the operator will say "hold" while they type out the message and then wait for a response. Waste..of...goddamn...time. Slamming the reciever down helps. If there's any people who genuinely use the service...sorry, we just can't afford to spend hours wading through these phone calls to get to you.

    --
    ---- El diablo esta en mis pantalones! Mire, mire!
    1. Re:We've gotten this by requim · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be surprised if you were hit with a nice fat lawsuit from the ACLU because of this practice. Discriminating your customers their ability to hear.

      I certainly understand the frustration, but that's aiken to saying that we should simply ban all (insert favorite stereotype) because of (insert bias).

      Sounds like a place I want to live.

    2. Re:We've gotten this by Samhailt · · Score: 1, Flamebait



      You know the first few times I had a disabled person come to my store and ask me to help him get his wheelchair up the steps and inside I took them seriously.

      But now I just can't be bothered by that waste of time. And to think they want ME to put in a ramp so they can get in here.

      Waste...of...goddamn...time. Pushing them over into the street usually helps them to not want to come back too.

      --
      "We want to take over the world, but we don't want to do it tomorrow, it's OK if it's next week"-- Linus Torvalds
    3. Re:We've gotten this by John_Sauter · · Score: 3, Funny
      I have gotten many such calls at my little computer shop. Sometimes I get into a sympathetic conversation with the operator, who is perfectly willing to tell me the caller is probably a fraud.

      I don't sell laptops and I don't ship overseas. If the caller asks why, I say that I am a retail store and prefer that my customers pick up their merchandise in person. My final defense, which I haven't had to use yet, is to say that I only sell the Commodore Amiga.
      John Sauter (J_Sauter@Empire.Net)

    4. Re:We've gotten this by Samhailt · · Score: 1

      Flaimbait? I guess I can see that a little.

      But I still defend the fact that the kind of careless attitude that we should not deal with disabled people because it is a waste of time is wrong.

      The people who call this guy who are actually deaf and just want a computer do not deserve to be treated that way. That is all I was trying to say.

      Maybe I should have said it clear without the sarcasim.

      --
      "We want to take over the world, but we don't want to do it tomorrow, it's OK if it's next week"-- Linus Torvalds
    5. Re:We've gotten this by ShortSpecialBus · · Score: 4, Informative

      They could be fired/jailed for that. When I worked as a Relay Operator, the main things stressed were Confidentiality and Transparency. You are NEVER NEVER allowed to talk to either end. Your job is a telephone line. You can't answer questions, you can't do anything. If you get asked questions, you basically have to tell the person that you are a telephone line and don't know anything, and to ask the person who they are talking to. Or my favorite thing to do was just type the questions that they asked me to the TTY user.

      --
      //FIXME: Bad .sig
    6. Re:We've gotten this by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If there's any people who genuinely use the service...sorry, we just can't afford to spend hours wading through these phone calls to get to you.

      Thankfully, legitimate deaf people can use the internet to make their orders, a lot quicker I would guess.

    7. Re:We've gotten this by YaRness · · Score: 2, Interesting

      i don't think that would hold up under scrutiny. the deaf person can still come into the store and buy a computer.

    8. Re:We've gotten this by aosgood · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Obviously you don't have deaf parents or family like myself. Hanging up on someone just because they are deaf is like parking your car in a handicap spot or being a member of the KKK. This is completely crazy. Some people haven't been given the gift of hearing when they were born or had complications during birth to 3 years old. My dad had Scarlet Fever and because of that he lost his hearing. My mother, they just don't know. I think you guys could handle relay calls a little bit better like have them email you from a friends or family computer.

      Sorry for the ranting but this just bothers me since i have been around the deaf community all my life.

    9. Re:We've gotten this by John_Sauter · · Score: 1
      They could be fired/jailed for that. When I worked as a Relay Operator, the main things stressed were Confidentiality and Transparency. You are NEVER NEVER allowed to talk to either end. Your job is a telephone line. You can't answer questions, you can't do anything. If you get asked questions, you basically have to tell the person that you are a telephone line and don't know anything, and to ask the person who they are talking to. Or my favorite thing to do was just type the questions that they asked me to the TTY user.
      Maybe so, but these operators are people, not telephone lines, no matter what they are supposed to be. I can certainly understand how someone doing a job like this would appreciate a few kind words once in a while.
      John Sauter (J_sauter@Empire.Net)
    10. Re:We've gotten this by fo0bar · · Score: 4, Informative
      I have several deaf friends who use both TTY relay services and the newer internet relay services. And because of this, admittedly I use the internet relay services occasionally. While this is technically an abuse of the system, as I myself am not deaf, it can be a real convieience. One thing to mention, if you do use these services, deaf or not, is to be POLITE. Remember, this is a throwback of the original TTY services, so there is a certain formality to the conversation. Use the proper etiquette, and be sure to thank the CA (communication assistant) at the end of the conversation. This must be an incredibly boring and tedious job, so at lease use a little manners when dealing with them.

      That being said, I would recommend at least listening to the first sentence of the caller before thinking about hanging up. Just yesterday I called a local computer shop to check the price of a power supply, and the conversation was quick and polite. (I doubt nigerian scammers would want to buy a $60 power supply and ask about the store hours). Here's approximately how a conversation goes: (other end begins with a colon)

      : dialing... 1... 2... answered... (male) thank you for calling computershop inc. how can i help you q ga
      hello. what is your lowest price on a 500 watt power supply q ga
      : let me check one moment (hold music) I have one for 59 90 ga
      thank you. and what time are you open until tonight q ga
      : 6 pm ga
      thanks a lot ga to sk
      : thank you (call ended)
      : ga or sk
      ca thank you sk
      : sksk

      A little terminology: "ga" means "go ahead", "q ga" is asking a question, "ga to sk" is signaling that you wish to end the conversation ("sk" meaning "stop keying"), "ga or sk" is essentially the CA asking "is there anything else I can do for you?", at which point I thank him/her and signal the end of the conversation. "sksk" is the final signal that the conversation is over.

    11. Re:We've gotten this by njcoder · · Score: 1
      Consider this. 4-5 times a day you get pulled out of your store to help someone in a wheelchair up the stairs and in and out. They look around but you don't really have what they want. Every time you roll them out your jaw drops as they stand up and walk away.

      You'd probably stop it after a while too.

    12. Re:We've gotten this by dporowski · · Score: 1

      Obviously you don't have deaf parents or family like myself. Hanging up on someone just because they are deaf is like parking your car in a handicap spot or being a member of the KKK. This is completely crazy. Some people haven't been given the gift of hearing when they were born or had complications during birth to 3 years old. My dad had Scarlet Fever and because of that he lost his hearing. My mother, they just don't know. I think you guys could handle relay calls a little bit better like have them email you from a friends or family computer.

      Sorry for the ranting but this just bothers me since i have been around the deaf community all my life.




      My kingdom for a "-1, Missed the Point".

    13. Re:We've gotten this by peeping_Thomist · · Score: 1

      Hanging up on someone just because they are deaf is like parking your car in a handicap spot or being a member of the KKK.

      If he's never received a legitimate relay call, and he keeps receiving time-consuming fraudulent ones, then he's not hanging up because the caller is deaf. He's hanging up because he justifiably believe the person is a scammer. Another person in the thread suggested that a legitimate caller would likely call back. Sucks, but do you seriously expect the store owner to spend hours taking bogus calls so that no deaf caller will ever be delayed a couple of minutes. First, it's not going to happen, and second, it would be crazy.

      --
      Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
    14. Re:We've gotten this by ShortSpecialBus · · Score: 1

      No, you don't.

      I worked the job for 9 months.

      You don't like being talked to, because if you are being monitored, you lose points for it, and there goes your raise. It's hard to handle that situation properly, so you're almost guaranteed to get a bad eval by QA.

      --
      //FIXME: Bad .sig
    15. Re:We've gotten this by ShortSpecialBus · · Score: 1

      Not really. You're working as a telephone line. You also have to include grunts, stutters, all sorts of things. You can never be sure who they are talking to, unless they say "Relay operator answer this for me" or something like that beforehand, so you relay it. People constantly say something, change their mind because it was rude or something, and say no wait erase that. Also they say something bad while the TTY user is typing, thinking that you won't let them know that it was said.

      --
      //FIXME: Bad .sig
    16. Re:We've gotten this by b0bby · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why you'd use the service rather than just calling the shop yourself. It's slower, and your tying up a resource that your friends might need.

    17. Re:We've gotten this by nuggetman · · Score: 1

      It's not the deaf people bothering him. It's the lusers who use it for CC fraud.

      --
      ...and that's all there is to it.
    18. Re:We've gotten this by arkanes · · Score: 1

      That may be true but it's reprehensible none the less (which is not to say that the person scamming isn't reprehensible either).

    19. Re:We've gotten this by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      The first few times we took it seriously, but since then we've refused to take relay calls. If we hear the operator say "This is a relay call" we interrupt and say "Sorry, we don't take relay calls" and then HANG UP.

      Which is exactly the problem. You're taking a perfectly reasonable position: every single relay call you get is a scam artist, you don't want to waste your time talking to them. However, as a result you're blocking off the very, very rare deaf person who really needs the relay system. It's a damn shame.

      I wish great ill on these scam artists for abusing a system that helps many people. I suspect this means that the IP relay system will be dramatically restricted or eliminated; it's very prone to abuse.

    20. Re:We've gotten this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      as a CA you could be fired and perhaps jailed (I don't know the law) but in real life you almost certainly won't. I was a CA for a summer and yes they do stress confidentiality and transparency but in our office that rule was much more honored in the breach. Of the dozens of people working there only 2 were the hard-asses who would flat out refuse to relay anything that wasn't typed to them by the deaf person on the other and of the tty.

      Most hearing people who call the service make comments to the operator and most operators respond to them while remaining generally faithful to the fact that they're only supposed to be conduits. Because for a lot of people that's just human nature.

      Additionally, a lot of the deaf people have serious trouble with spelling and the operators have to puzzle out what they're trying to say. This involves some give-and-take with the hearing person on the phone which also often leads into those moments of operator to hearing person contact (it is VERY common for the hearing person to feel a little bad for the operator trying to make sense of badly mangled english and to make a to that effect meant only for the operator ... it might be horrible and illegal and jail-worthy in terms of the letter of the law, but that's not how it worked in every day practice when I was there)

      All that being said, everyone was faithful to the spirit of the endeavor, that of being a pass through. I'm not talking about long conversations between the operator and the hearing person, i'm talking about much smaller stuff.

    21. Re:We've gotten this by karnal · · Score: 1

      What?

      --
      Karnal
    22. Re:We've gotten this by njcoder · · Score: 1
      In the article, one of the merchants mentioned that some of the calls take 35-40 minutes and they get abour 3-4 a day. That comes out to about 8-9 hours a week of time wasted.

      It's reprehensible that these scammers would use this technology. You can't blame the businesses for not wasting their time on these calls.

      Right now if I look at my email box I've won thousands of dollars worth of stuff including an ipod, a sony camcorder and a converible and have maybe 3/4's of a million dollars in pre approved credit. And that's just since the last time I deleted the spam and the stuff not caught before that.

      One day, I may actually win a car or something and I'll probably just delete the message without reading it.

      My point is you can't blame legitimate business people from being smart in accounting for their time becuase one in 100 or 200 or 300 or 1000 of those calls might be legit. It's not fair to the deaf and it's not fair to the businesses. It's the scammers that are causing the problems for both of them.

    23. Re:We've gotten this by The_K4 · · Score: 1

      Just to play DA but how can he GET a legitimate relay if he always hangs up on them? The statistics could be off because of that. I think it's not a good solution to just hang up, but if that's what he needs to do, that's his choice (although I would advise him to have a list of store policies that explictly state that they do not sell to any relayed callers).

    24. Re:We've gotten this by awtbfb · · Score: 1

      One thing to mention, if you do use these services ... is to be POLITE

      Also worth noting is the serial nature of TTY conversations. You have to wait for the other person to finish what they are saying before you start. As such, don't interrupt and try not to get into lengthy monologues.

      That being said, I would recommend at least listening to the first sentence of the caller before thinking about hanging up.

      I cannot stress this enough. It's truly stunning how many people assume relay calls are telemarketing calls. I have to place calls on a regular basis to get on someone's case after they've hung up on my wife three times in a row without waiting to see what the call is about. People like me will ask to speak to your boss and people like my wife will think twice about spending money on your company if you immediately hang up.

    25. Re:We've gotten this by Buran · · Score: 1

      I'm hearing-impaired but not so much so that I can't use regular phones. No relays required. But I've run into the "we don't want to deal with that" kind of attitude before ... so I know firsthand that just hanging up on the deaf (or their relay operators) hurts them more than you think it does, emotionally if not physically.

      I have yet to run into this, but if I was refused business just because I had to use a relay, while normally-hearing customers were allowed to order over the phone, and the only thing that set me apart was the relay ... then hell yes, I would be talking about you to friends/family/acquaintances as a business that discriminated and refused to sell to me just because of my handicap, all other things being equal. And it could be (IANAL, of course, so someone can go look it up) an ADA violation. Maybe.

      I don't know that allowing deaf people to come in and buy a computer is "enough", unless NOBODY can order over the phone, to even out the ban.

    26. Re:We've gotten this by jaxdahl · · Score: 1

      sometimes people who aren't familiar with the relay service will go like this:

      will you please tell him blah blah blah

      they try to talk *to* the relay operator as if they're a person they need to go through. they should go like

      blah blah blah

      instead.

      during the conversation, the relay operator will augment the conversation like this:

      (background music)
      (crying in background)
      (ur msg was garbled pls resend)

    27. Re:We've gotten this by DarkBlackFox · · Score: 1

      Ditto here, except with us it was an order of five 17" LCDs. Our shop does not ship parts though, they must be picked up. I stressed this to the operator, but all the other end would reply with is "I have credit card." I had a feeling it was a scam when the other end insisted on us shipping them out via UPS with his UPS number, but I didn't say anything. The operator then informed me it was most likely a scam, and that they get hundreds of calls like this per day, and even offered to terminate the call so it wouldn't waste my time. I understand the idea behind the confidentiality and NDA agreements operators must sign, but in cases where it involves money and a potential scam, I believe the right thing to do is inform the hearing end. Besides, especially when it comes to computer related orders, you'd think someone ordering a hard drive or an LCD monitor would have internet access to order these things online, rather than call a shop who does not even ship items anywhere.

    28. Re:We've gotten this by DarkBlackFox · · Score: 1

      I work for a small shop as well, and I do have quite a few hearing impaired clients. They communicate with us via fax, email, and in person, we have very good conversations with paper and pen.

      I've recieved a number of fraudulent calls as well. We no longer accept relay calls either, but it's certainly not to discriminate. The only phone service we provide to customers is the status of a computer in for service. For our deaf customers, we converse via email and fax. We simply do not take phone orders from anyone, or provide phone troubleshooting. Parts must be picked up at the store, and computers brought down for a diagnostic.

    29. Re:We've gotten this by Buran · · Score: 1

      That seems pretty fair -- though I hope you've come up with a polite way to explain why you don't take relay calls - it might forestall anger from someone who feels slighted. Though if you don't have it already, I'd suggest seeing if there's a way to provide a web-based repair status page -- I find Apple's repair status service to be much, much preferable to calling their tech support line. Sadly, it doesn't seem to provide shipping tracking numbers for completed repairs and seems to be a bit behind what the operators know, which can be frustrating to me at times!

    30. Re:We've gotten this by Schaffner · · Score: 1

      If I became deaf I would get my computers the same way I always have, go to the store and buy it or place an order through a web site. It's not like ordering over the phone is the only way to purchase a computer!

    31. Re:We've gotten this by Buh-Zard · · Score: 1

      My shop (in NY) has gotten two of these calls in the past week, one guy wanted 50 40GB Hard drives, the other wanted 5 laptops shipped to Sri Lanka or somesuch. (Guess he heard about our sterling service) The scary part about the first guy was he claimed to be a local business in the beginning. The tech googled the name quick - came up w/ nada and told him we'd have to call him back w/ a quote. Strangely the contact info was bogus. What I'm curious about is how they expected to get the merch unless they were local? Nigerian Immigrants?

    32. Re:We've gotten this by polyiguana · · Score: 1

      Maybe his work phone blocks long distance calls?

    33. Re:We've gotten this by Kesh · · Score: 1
      i don't think that would hold up under scrutiny. the deaf person can still come into the store and buy a computer.

      Apparently, you've never lived in Alaska. I worked at an Apple reseller in Anchorage, and aside from CompUSA we were the only authorized Apple shop in the state. And the CompUSA had a nasty reputation for not dealing with Mac owners fairly. Many folks in the outlying communities simply couldn't afford to visit our store, because it would literally take them all day to drive to Anchorage and back.

      I took several TTY calls that were either orders (which we shipped), or tech-support questions (which I answered as best I could, given the system). Given the distance involved, I hardly think it would have been practical for those folks to physically visit our store.

  6. Re:That's just cruel by Wouter+Van+Hemel · · Score: 1


    It's also logical. Do you steal a lolly pop from a kid, or from a big-ass professional boxer? ;)

    I mean, you can't really expect thieves to have a superior sense of morality, do you... :)

  7. playing by the rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This only proves that playing by the rules is not
    for everyone, be they terrorists, scammers or
    script kiddies.

    It takes a lot of work to make something, abuse
    or destruction is so much easier.

  8. Free matter for the blind. by stankyho · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Anyone else know about the "free matter for the blind" scam?

    I read about it several (over 15) years ago in some magazine. Basically when mailing a letter instead of a stamp you just write free matter for the blind.

    I think I may have tried it once back then to send myself a letter just to see if it worked. Can't remember if it did though.

    --

    ---
    eeww, I'll have a crab juice.
    1. Re:Free matter for the blind. by gklinger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's very interesting. I had never heard of such a thing but a web search revealed that it's true. Check out this document from the USPS that explains how it works. It's a real shame that programs and institutions created to help the physically challenged are being abused because the only thing that can come from this is dissolution of the programs and institutions.

    2. Re:Free matter for the blind. by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Thats very interesting indeed.

      I especially like the items allowed to be transfered for free by this system, though I doubt the RIAA would approve:

      c. Paper, records, tapes, and other material for the production of reading matter, musical scores, or sound reproductions.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
  9. Some Good Examples of Deaf Relay (TTY) Abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Can be found here:

    http://phonelosers.org/sound.html

    Specifcally this one which would probably get you a trip to camp X-ray today

    Phone_Losers_of_America_0118_Deaf_Relay_Commuter_A irline.mp3

  10. The accent helps by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 1
    If I want to scam a brit, I'd probably want to do it with a native British accent. Same with a Nigerian scammer.

    It's also just one more layer of obfuscation between the scammer and the mark.

    --
    Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
  11. Log today, spam tomorrow (or worse) by starsong · · Score: 5, Insightful

    keep text logs of the conversations

    This one doesn't make sense to me. Do the people who issue handicapped parking permits keep a list of the places people park? These conversations are often intensely personal; it's literally the only way some of these people can use a telephone. I agree completely with authentication, but keeping records seems intrusive and demeaning. And if they are kept, sooner or later the deaf will start getting "targeted" TTY advertisements...

    "You recently mentioned to your mother that you're thinking of moving. Contact Local Realtors Inc for a free consulation!", etc.

    To say nothing of the legal implications; a warrentless wiretap on thousands of American phones, always running, in plain-text, east-to-search format.

  12. 419 Scammers ? by FoxMcCloud · · Score: 3, Funny

    419 scammers and credit card thieves are abusing the US' TTY service ?
    Mh, I wonder how they counted that there were precisely 419 of them.

    --
    bool Marketoid::IsGood(){return IsDead();}
    1. Re:419 Scammers ? by FoxMcCloud · · Score: 1

      Actually I was under the impression that '419' was the part of Nigerian law that condemns those kind of scams. (There, that should answer the question above poster had too ;-) )

      --
      bool Marketoid::IsGood(){return IsDead();}
  13. I've had this happen where I work. by b00m3rang · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Someone supposedly calling from "Royal Oil" in Nigeria wanted to order 200 40GB hard drives, by credit card. We told them we only ship overseas if payment is made by wire transfer. Another hint was that it's unlikely an oil company would resort to using a yahoo email address (royaliol@). They called back several times, but we obviously wouldn't budge.

    The most annoying part was the amount of time it took to complete the calls. I can't be rude to a /possibly/ legitimate caller by hanging up, but the translation process takes a while... especially when they're probably on several calls and don't get back to the terminal by the time it's their turn to talk.

    1. Re:I've had this happen where I work. by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Any cheques will eventually turn rubber and bounce to orbit. They don't always use TTY operators, but that allows them to multi-task by tieing up several operators at once. It must be hell to be a real Nigerian business. "Hello, this is RoverSoft of Nigeria .." *click*

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  14. funny idea by whatamidoing · · Score: 1

    Has anyone ever used this to make a call to a 900 number?

    --
    I have no developed opinion on the bararity of foo. -homeobocks, Gentoo Forums
  15. ofcourse by Wouter+Van+Hemel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Last year I had to track down some carders operating from the US, who were trying to buy products here in Europe with stolen and/or generated credit card numbers. It makes sense to pull that stunt with people (read: jurisdiction) far from your own home...

    You know how difficult (and expensive) it is to both track down the people and get a conviction? Laws are made on a national level, institutions such as police and justice departements are also pretty much bound to their specific country (unless you just act as if you own the world), hence international crime has little or no resistance. I mean, why would you care if the crime has been committed elsewhere?...

    Same with spam, really. Most spam I receive comes from scumbags on US soil, and it's pretty hard to harm them from here. As opposed to local spammers: a friend of mine once made a real-life visit when he received a spam email from a company not far from where he lives. He didn't get any spam anymore from that company.

    That might be a viable solution to the spam problem anyway: just a global team-up of people willing to visit spammers living close to their own home. I'm not implying a violent posse here. Even a criminal would get a clue when there's suddenly a bunch of very pissed off people in front of his/her door.

  16. Yes, Hang up! by ShortSpecialBus · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you don't want to take the call, the best thing you can do is hang up. It saves the operator (me at one time) a lot of time and frustration.

    If the person calls back 2 or 3 times, you might want to take the call, however. The scammers/people who aren't who they say they are won't have you do that. The real deaf people are used to that, so they have you call back a few times in hopes to get a different person who will take the call, or give you a chance to convince the person to talk.

    But if you still have no intention of taking the call, just hang up, saying as little as possible.

    It saves the operators a lot of trouble.

    --
    //FIXME: Bad .sig
  17. Simple Fix... by zulux · · Score: 2, Insightful



    Here's a simple fix:

    Change the TTY/Realy number to a 1-900 numner and charge calls from whereever ther're made. Say $1.00 a minuite.

    Then every month - Registered and bonified deaf people can submit a copy of their telephone invoice to the Federal Government and get a refund check for the amount used.

    People who abuse the system without being daaf get to pay for it - deaf people get this vital service for free.

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    1. Re:Simple Fix... by ShortSpecialBus · · Score: 2, Informative

      That doesnt work at all.

      What they use is the free internet relay service, which lets you use your computer as a TTY.

      www.ip-relay.com is one.

      ATT also has one, someone earlier posted the URL.

      --
      //FIXME: Bad .sig
    2. Re:Simple Fix... by elmegil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some variation of this may be workable but I see two big problems as stated: 1) it requires all Deaf to register. Imagine if you were talking about Japanese, or African American, or Gun Owners instead... 2) not all Deaf are going to be able to put the money up front, especially if for some reason they have an especially heavy call volume (say a death in the family, or whatever). Imagine if you had to do this for your phone bill, paying the phone company in advance for what you might use and then getting refunds....

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    3. Re:Simple Fix... by zulux · · Score: 1

      but I see two big problems as stated: 1) it requires all Deaf to register.

      I don't see registration being too onerous to get a service that is *heavilly* subsudised by other taxpayers.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    4. Re:Simple Fix... by elmegil · · Score: 1

      If you knew much about Deaf culture, you'd know that whether or not it's "too" onerous from the outside, it would absolutely be considered too onerous by the majority who would be required to register.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    5. Re:Simple Fix... by Buran · · Score: 1

      Thank you - I just bookmarked that! I'm hard-of-hearing but not so much so that I need these; nevertheless, one never knows!

    6. Re:Simple Fix... by FrenchyinCT · · Score: 1
      You're suggesting that deaf people should be registered and have an erection before they can order stuff from you? ;)

  18. Easy solution? by rjelks · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can't the merchants just require the 3-digit security code on the back of the credit cards , if they're losing money?

    1. Re:Easy solution? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Aren't you supposed to, like, not tell anyone those digits? Once you tell a few businesses, how good is their security?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:Easy solution? by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      Can't the merchants just require the 3-digit security code on the back of the credit cards , if they're losing money?

      You mean the security code that many online businesses (including reputable ones) require me to enter? If the source of stolen numbers is a hacked business database the number will likely be exposed. Similarly, if the stolen number was just copied down by the rare dishonest waiter, he can easily copy the 3 digit code at the same time.

      The 3-digit security code doesn't really help much, it certainly doesn't provide guaranteed proof.

    3. Re:Easy solution? by droleary · · Score: 1

      Can't the merchants just require the 3-digit security code on the back of the credit cards , if they're losing money?

      A "good" phishing site will ask for that information, along with your SSN, mother's maiden name, and any other information some organizations use to verify "you" for financial transactions. Anyone who is a target of identity theft isn't going to be saved by information you're expected to share with any merchant who asks for it.

    4. Re:Easy solution? by oolon · · Score: 1

      yes a waiter can do that. However your wrong about the database, it is an offence for a retailer to record the 3 digit security code (if they did there would be no point in doing it). After the first transation (if they record the number) they put it through without the 3 digit code and hope because your vaild the first time, future transations will be ok. The CC company will not re-imburse card holder not present transations where the 3 digit number is not used.

      James

  19. A possible solution by Da+VinMan · · Score: 1

    I'm somewhat ignorant on this whole issue, but why don't the TTY service centers only accept calls from certain area codes and be done with it? There's no reason why they should have to service calls from outside their service area (which I'm assuming is regional to AZ), much less outside the country.

    What am I missing here?

    --
    Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
    1. Re:A possible solution by mebob · · Score: 1

      with some of the calls that I've got the operator said that they were most likely using the a web based tty service. They also admitted that it sounded like a scam. You'd think they would have a better response to these calls.

      --
      =1000101
    2. Re:A possible solution by surgeonsmate · · Score: 1
      They can't easily screen out non-local calls because the scammers are using an Internet service. It boils down to the exact same problem of detecting scammers and spammers on the Internet.

      Of course we know it's fraudulent/illegal/malicious as soon as we see it, but how do we identify and stop the actual perpetrators?

      -- Pete, who'd like to zap about a million volts back at these arseholes

  20. you are not alone by Rev.LoveJoy · · Score: 1
    The medical community, in particular, resellers of medical equipment, have been dealing with this for a long time. My wife works for one such reseller (smallish, local business with a few chain stores) and they get TTY scams almost daily.

    FYI, they have adopted the same response you have. I am certain we'll be sued as well because some folks designed an exploitable soltion and then legislated (read: forced) its use.

    On a related note, this strongly smells like the spam laws of late.

    Regards,
    -- RLJ

    1. Re:you are not alone by FrenchyinCT · · Score: 1
      If anyone tries to sue you, at least you know they're legit. But if anyone tried to call me back and say, "I am NOT a scammer," I would, as the previous guy said, inform him that he would be expected to prove he was the verified cardholder. If he had a problem with this, then he's a scammer or he needs to cultivate a little patience.

      I would not be rude, though, esp. to the operator. It's not their fault they have to relay this convo to you, and they probably know it's a scam and resent having to be the middleman.

  21. I don't think you understand by kurisuto · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm hearing. My boyfriend is deaf. I can pick up any voice phone, call the relay service, and use it to call my boyfriend. The CA types what I say, and reads to me what my boyfriend types back.

    How would you put a password protection on this? Would every hearing person have to register a spoken password to be able to call a deaf person?

    The point of the relay service is to allow deaf and hearing people equal access to the phone system. If I need a password to call a deaf person but not a hearing person, that's hardly equal access.

    Deaf people would never stand for such unequal treatment. They would be even more insulted if you said that they can't take care of themselves by screening their own scammers as hearing people do.

    1. Re:I don't think you understand by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      Deaf people would never stand for such unequal treatment.

      I'm sympathetic, honest, but to play Devil's Advocate, how is that equal access? I can't get free translation service to call someone who speaks a different language, so why should your boyfriend get unlimited access to such a free service?

      Having said that, I can think of a few legitimate reasons why, but I wonder what the "official" answer is. What do TTY advocates tell people who feel that they shouldn't have to pay to support that service?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    2. Re:I don't think you understand by abb3w · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If I need a password to call a deaf person but not a hearing person, that's hardly equal access.

      Not that I think the idiot plan of logging is anything other than an idiot plan, but I thing they're only talking about requiring a name and password for a deaf person to call out, not requiring a password to call a deaf person.

      I admit, this is still not equal access: the deaf will need to (briefly) identify themselves and provide proof of their identity (the password) to make a phone call, where the hearing do not. On the other hand, it seems a minimal obstacle. On the gripping hand, I'm not deaf, and won't be for about another 50 years judging by family history, so I'm not the one to judge that.
      On yet another arm of my octopus, I'm not sure that such passwords would do any good; they would become a prime target for a new form of identity theft, just like social security numbers and mother's maiden names are now.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    3. Re:I don't think you understand by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      Your boyfriend would register his phone number so that he could receive calls from people like you.

      The password thing would be for his outgoing calls.

    4. Re:I don't think you understand by bripeace · · Score: 1

      Just a matter of note. Your boyfriend has just as much access to the telephone system as the rest of us.. without the relay service. Noones preventing him from having phone service, or even calling whoever he wants without the relay service.

      Just because he can't use the services provided doesn't not mean hes not being provided equal access.

    5. Re:I don't think you understand by timothyf · · Score: 1

      I'd agree with the translation argument if it were a matter of language. This, however, is a matter of disability . There is no way a deaf person and a hearing person can communicate over the telephone (via voice) unless 1 of 2 conditions are met:

      • Someone relays the TTY messages from the deaf person to the hearing person and vice versa
      • EVERYONE is required to have a TTY on the off chance that they need to communicate to a deaf person over the phone.

      As you can see, they chose the more logical of the two. And to the rest of you on this thread saying "What would a deaf person need a telephone for anyway?", consider that not everyone has internet, SMS (via cellphone), or what have you, but the telephone is nearly ubiquitous, whether you hear or not. Should the deaf (and those that need to communicate with them) be unable to contact someone by phone, if that is the only way to contact them quickly? And how about 911 service?

      Until you can answer that, I think people should think twice before suggesting forcing the deaf to use an alternate mode of communication than we do or registration (which is completely unequal--do we have to register with someone, besides the phone company, which 'registers' both hearing and deaf equally, just to use the telephone?). There was a reason that the ADA was signed into law.

    6. Re:I don't think you understand by jacksonscottsly · · Score: 1

      they are using the internet relay services (http://www.sprintrelayonline.com, for example) to make phone calls. Right now, all you have to do is simply show up on the site and put in a phone number and dial it, but a password system would make it so you would have to sign up for an account before making a call with the online service. Those using a standard tty would not have to worry about the password issue, and that is great, because there has been no standard tty machine abuse so far as i am aware (I am a CA/Operator/Agent for a relay service). I actually support the idea of a password system. It can be a very simple system -- just like when signing up for a free yahoo or hotmail account... but just something that can have a big effect at scaring people away, and, if it comes down to it, getting people who abuse the system stopped. This is just like email; most email systems have ways to detect and stop spammers who create or hijack temporary accounts, so can the online relay service. Heck, we could actually use the log ins to provide more features to customers. With a log in, users could build phonebooks for people they frequently call, for example. No, i'm not trying take away privacy aspects, but there is a clear problem with the way relay is being abused. There would be no need to track calls (and indeed there should not be any tracking of any sort), but when a call comes up that is an abusive call (they are unmistakable), it could be marked down and after so many strikes, an account would be disabled. These callers are hurting many companies, reducing the overall legitimacy or the relay service, and worst of all, they are making it increasingly difficult for deaf citizens to communicate via relay. Businesses -- and even individuals -- who are receiving calls from seemingly legitimate deaf persons are now becoming increasingly suspicious (thanks in part to news articles like the aformentioned) and are gaining more of a tendency to simply hang up before the deaf person has had an opportunity to communicate -- this is not easy to get around as communication speeds and protocol that must be followed can make some aspects of the call very slow. just my 2-3 cents.

      --
      [ you and I are ugly ]
    7. Re:I don't think you understand by jbayes · · Score: 1

      I think you're getting it backwards. The problem here isn't 419 scammers trying to rip off deaf computer sellers; the problem is 419ers pretending to be deaf people, and trying to scam hearing computer sellers.

      Under an authenticated system, hearing people would be able to call deaf people just as they can now. The only change would be that deaf people would need to authenticate in order to place an outgoing call.

      Yes, this places an additional burden on deaf people, who would have to sign up for a password and use it each time they made an outgoing call. But it seems to me, were I deaf, that authenticating would be preferable to having 2 out of 3 recipients hang up on me because they assumed I'm a 419er.

      Perhaps optional authentication would work better: if the deaf person authenticates, then the CA says "This is an authenticated relay call", otherwise he says "This is a non-authenticated relay call" (and possibly gets hung up on).

      --

      "It sure was strange to see something on Usenet about me that didn't involve Klingon gang rape." -- Wil Wheaton

    8. Re:I don't think you understand by Viceice · · Score: 1

      I think you're looking at this the wrong way. The problem here is that scammers are abusing a system that was made for the benefit of, by posing as, the deaf/mute.

      So what needs to be password protected are outgoing calls, as after all the scammers aren't defrauding the disabled. Being disabled, one would register with a body to be certified disabled and to qualify for disabled privileges. So why not register the phone number(s) of the disabled and issue them a password at the same time?

      Then create a white list containing the numbers of those registered.

      So when a person uses the system, calling a disabled person whose number is on the white list doesn't require a password, but calling non-white list numbers require it.

      In this manner, when a non disabled person contacts a disabled person, he won't have a problem as the disabled person would be on the white list. But if a non disabled person tried to use the system to call people/businesses other then the disabled, he'd be blocked by the password requirement.

      In this way, the disabled are still as easily contactable, merchants are protected from abuse of the system and the load on the system is reduced. Everybody (but the scammers) wins.

      --
      Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
    9. Re:I don't think you understand by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      Just a matter of note. Your boyfriend has just as much access to the telephone system as the rest of us.. without the relay service. Noones preventing him from having phone service, or even calling whoever he wants without the relay service.

      Access.

      I don't think that word means what you think it means.

    10. Re:I don't think you understand by hak1du · · Score: 1

      How would you put a password protection on this? Would every hearing person have to register a spoken password to be able to call a deaf person?

      No. Every hearing person already is authenticated to the phone system, either because they are using a land line or because they are using a cell phone. So, if you dial into the TTY service, you wouldn't have to authenticate. The TTY service should, however, pass on your Caller-ID when you make it available or when calling 1-800 numbers (as it is done for regular calls).

      The suggestion is that people trying to use the system through the Internet would have to use a password. That's, again, no different from when you or I use Internet VoIP services: hearing users have to do the same thing. It's an anomaly that Internet access to these services doesn't require that, and something that threatens the services.

    11. Re:I don't think you understand by crackshoe · · Score: 1

      freedom or ability to obtain or make use of? he can pick up a phone and dial as well as anyone. He can make as full use of it as anyone - he speaks, sound is transmitted to the other end, the person on the other end speaks, sound comes out on his end. While he's not able to make direct use of the sound, he could feasibly use a voice recognization software, and tie it in that way, removing the third party (obviously, this would not be a partiuclarly simple applicaiton, but it is feasible). The point is, yes, he gets everything anyone else gets out of the phone system, he has access to it (and yes, it means what he thinks it means) his disability prevents him from getting full use out of it. Access != Use.

      --
      Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
    12. Re:I don't think you understand by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand what access means in this context either. Access to a service does depend on whether or not one is physically able to use it. You are looking at it from the wrong side, assuming access is like having the password to a computer system or something. It's not like that here, we're not talking about that kind of access.

    13. Re:I don't think you understand by pqdave · · Score: 1

      The point of the relay service is to allow deaf and hearing people equal access to the phone system. If I need a password to call a deaf person but not a hearing person, that's hardly equal access.

      Problem isn't calls originating with voice and trying to scam a deaf person, it's calls originating as text and scamming an unsuspecting hearing person. Requiring a password for the internet TTY end shouldn't be a problem.

  22. legality of aiding in illgeal things by bsDaemon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If the operator is, by law, required to facilitate the conversation, what happens if it is blatantly illegal, such as a terrorist plot, or a deal for kiddy porn or drugs? the operator is required to keep the conversation confidentail? It is not like there can't be deaf criminals. And besides, if these people are not even deaf, what is to say that the same thing can not be done by criminals or terrorists?
    is the opperator still required to facilitate the conversation and keep quiet? isn't that then like, being an accessory to the crime, maybe even conspiricy? If they call the police, then is that evidence or witness testimony inadmissible for breaking the confidentiality of the service?

    1. Re:legality of aiding in illgeal things by yarrick · · Score: 1
      Yes, by law the operator must complete the call as if they weren't involved in the phone conversation.

      Put it this way. The operator is behaving in the exact same fashion as a phone line. Can your phone line cut your conversation off and report you to the police if it deems your conversation inappropriate? Nope (well, not without wiretapping and other measures...but then again, that's not the phone line doing it).

      All calls are kept fully confidential (or are supposed to be). I've heard some pretty wacked out conversations, but operators are expected and required BY LAW to maintain professionalism and continue the call as normal.

    2. Re:legality of aiding in illgeal things by stevejsmith · · Score: 1

      No--they are only required to keep the confidentiality until they believe that somebody is posing a danger to themself or someone else (just like social workers, teachers, etc.). At that point, they are compelled by law to report it.

    3. Re:legality of aiding in illgeal things by Jane_Dozey · · Score: 1

      IANAL and I'm not in the US either so it could be different over there but... in the UK people like Dr's, lawyers, nurses, etc are required to keep personal information confidential (by law). However, if I told my Dr that I planned to commit a crime, he/she would be legally obliged to tell the relevant authorities.

      --
      Silly rabbit
    4. Re:legality of aiding in illgeal things by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      it is the same here in America. if I have already committed a crime, they have to keep their mouths shut. But if one is not telling the operator, merely using the opperator to tell someone else, that would make them an accessory or a conspiritor, i suspect. For instance, a client can tell his lawyer he did it and no biggie. However, if the lawyer passes notes to/from the guy's mob buddies, then he can be indicited as an accessory to the crime. i don't know if this is different or not.

    5. Re:legality of aiding in illgeal things by sky_fire · · Score: 2, Informative

      I used to work for the Relay service and it was illegal to report ANYTHING short of a bomb threat on the facility you are currently working in. As far as the legality is concerned the relay agent is nothing more than a piece of the wire. They keep grief counselors on campus all the time because of some of the crap we had to relay.

      Even judges can't legally compell agents to do anything other than relay the conversation. I had one attempt to swear me in once before he would let me relay the call. The manager of my center had to quote to law to the judge before he would give up on insisting I had to be sworn in.
      (and since I wasn't actively relaying a conversation no this isn't confidential.)

      Of course this may have changed since the whole terrorism acts but I doubt it. The advocates are relatively powerful for keeping agents as nothing more than a piece of the wire.

      --
      -- Proud member of the Jello Sex Cult.
  23. Crank Yankers? by b00m3rang · · Score: 1

    been done.

  24. Big money maker for companies providing relay by yarrick · · Score: 3, Insightful
    But Internet relay service makes up a minuscule fraction of revenues for Sprint, said company spokesman Steve Lunceford.

    "It's not a financial thing for us," he said.

    That's totally false. I used to work for an internet relay company as a relay operator (*cough* begins with an M ends with an I *cough*). Here's the plain and simple facts of it:

    Relay companies get paid XX amount of dollars per day, assuming they can meet a certain service level. They have to answer calls queued into their system within a certain period of time. Every call that isn't answered is counted against their running total.

    If a relay company falls below a certain percent (it's around 80% or so in a 24 hour period of time), they receive NO MONEY for that day. For the company I worked at, they had 1 day last year where they failed to maintain the standard. The amount of money lost for 1 day? Approaching $3 million according to management.

    Anyone saying that business isn't a money making enterprise is full of BS.

    1. Re:Big money maker for companies providing relay by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      Money making for the relay operators - yes. For the people who pay the relay operators their $3m per day, probably not.

  25. Re:DEAF AND DUMB by winkydink · · Score: 2, Funny

    Helen Keller. I would however be hard-pressed to name a smart AC.

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

  26. Alternate solution? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2

    SMS. I noticed a deaf guy at a bar the other night thumbing away on his cellphone. Evidently having a very good conversation with whomever. I thought "now THERE is a good use for that technology". Obviously, the person on the other end needs one too, but it removes the relay person from the middle of the conversation.

    1. Re:Alternate solution? by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      At least he can use it at the theater without bothering anybody...Unless he has to punch the buttons harder 'cuz he's on a cel phone..."Can you read me now?"

      --
      What?
    2. Re:Alternate solution? by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Obviously, the person on the other end needs one too, but it removes the relay person from the middle of the conversation.

      Wow... Seemed like you were starting to make a good point, then canceled itself out.

      SMS/Cell Phones are nothing special. If two people have a TTY, then they can talk directly. It's only when "the person on the other end" doesn't have one that the relay is needed.

      So what's so special about your SMS story?
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    3. Re:Alternate solution? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      So what's so special about your SMS story?

      He was out, having fun, at a bar. Not at home with his tethered TTY phone.

      SMS/cell phones ARE special, in the context of being 'new'. Hearing and vocal people have had a 1-1 phone link for decades. Only very recently has that tech been extended to another segment of the population. Think back 5 years. How many people did you see swapping text messages back and forth?

  27. Re:DEAF AND DUMB by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 2, Funny

    How about AC Green? Played lots of professional basketball, is now a motivation speaker and business owner, and zero kids out of wedlock.

  28. Re:TTY stands for by Neil+Blender · · Score: 2, Informative

    TTY = Teletypewriter

  29. You think you have it bad... by cspenn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a student loan company, we get an enormous number of these calls every week. Every time we have a new hire, we have to take at least half a day of training to educate them on the various ways that overseas scammers will attempt to take advantage of phone reps. The TTY server, and AT&T's Internet Relay service, are badly abused. It's to the point now where we are considering a voice message to direct the rare legitimate TTY-necessary customer to either email or fax options - at least with those options, we can blacklist originating exchanges (outside the US) or on spam lists.

    It's really sad, but there will always be those whose work ethic embodies the tragedy of the commons to the fullest.

    1. Re:You think you have it bad... by Harik · · Score: 1
      Actually, as a student loan company you should have your own TTY line. Either a 1-800 number, or train your people to quickly ask them for a callback number.

      We certanly don't expect hearing people to talk directly to our fax line, and we provide handicapped access to our buildings, so why not put in a TTY line?

      As a bonus, 1-800 won't work internationaly, and you're not going to call a nigerian number back.

  30. Who are you by metalhed77 · · Score: 1

    to say that my kinky daughter can't be a phone sex intermediary for the blind! My guess is, that if you can find enough people to be phone sex operators, you can find enough to be phone sex intermediaries.

    --
    Photos.
    1. Re:Who are you by flossie · · Score: 1
      Who are you to say that my kinky daughter can't be a phone sex intermediary for the blind!

      :-)

      I wouldn't want to stop your kinky daughter from doing that if she wants! Maybe the right answer is to require phone sex companies to cater for deaf people directly so that they don't need to go through a relay service. Then your daughter could be a full-time phone sex relayer, if she so desires.

    2. Re:Who are you by MasterSLATE · · Score: 1

      ... Can I have your kinky daughters phone number?

      --

      [sig]www.masterslate.org[/sig]
    3. Re:Who are you by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      My guess is, that if you can find enough people to be phone sex operators, you can find enough to be phone sex intermediaries.

      Ummmm, this is the Internet age, where cybersex is free and everywhere. I seriously doubt that using a TTY to go to 900 numbers is a generally chosen route. No webcams on those things either.

  31. sites fighting the 419 scammers by chongo · · Score: 2, Informative
    Some people are fighting back against the 419 scammers. For general information about fighting 419 scam: Here are a few sites dedicated to exposing 419 scammers in an interesting and/or amusing way:
    --
    chongo (was here) /\oo/\
  32. this reminds me... by c4ffeine · · Score: 1

    of the jokes some friends of mine used to play with the Sprint Online Relay. Prank calls mostly, but I've heard that someone tried to call in a bomb threat or something with it to cancel school...

    So, basically this is nothing new.

    by the way, it's at http://www.sprintrelayonline.com/

    --
    "73% of quotes on the Internet are made up" -Ben Franklin
  33. Why? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

    Alright, I actually RTFA and I still don't get it. Scammers are abusing TTY services (or, more accurately, web-based applications intended to replace Ye Olde Teletypes). What I still don't understand is why?

    I suppose the scammers realize their accents or (relatively) poor grasp of English might make the recipient of the calls suspicious, but it seems that TTY calls are rare enough to garner attention of their own. Are the scammers that short-sighted?

    Or is it related to Penny Arcade's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory and the scammers don't have the nerve to try pulling the scam "face-to-face"?

    At any rate, how much to these TTY terminals cost?

    1. Re:Why? by idesofmarch · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I thought about this for a long time too. I am a little surprised the article does not get into that more. Here is what I can come up with:

      First, I think you are right about the accents. Because the scammers are pretending to be Americans (possessing credit cards of Americans) they would have a harder time on the phone, with their accents. Also, the call is free, as best as I can tell. Finally, I think there is the additional degree of anonymity, because there is no call to trace. I can only conclude that these advantages outweigh the unusual nature of the relay call.

    2. Re:Why? by r1ch · · Score: 1

      As another bonus for the scammer, they can run several calls at the same time, pasting in what they want to say... they could probably handle 10 or so concurrent calls.

  34. I'm a Sprint Relay operator, here's my take: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    www.sprintrelayonline.com should filter out every IP address that starts with 80. Sorry if you are still in the US (I doubt it), but every fraud call I've taken starts with 80.* Recently there have been a lot of 80.179.* which I have traced to Israel.

    First of all we are not supposed to process International calls. If the CA determines the user is from outside the US there is a phrase that is typed. The problem is trying to convince a supervisor that 80.179 is Israel. They barely know what an IP address is let alone the use of whois to determine the ownership of a block of IP's.

    The problem is they can't! The FCC has everything all fucked up.

    1. Re:I'm a Sprint Relay operator, here's my take: by smellystudent · · Score: 1
      www.sprintrelayonline.com should filter out every IP address that starts with 80.
      Don't do that. Demon's ADSL services in the UK have IP addresses in the 80.* range - mine are 80.176.x.x, but there may be others.
      --
      Predictive text is shiv!
  35. I don't think you understand either by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    The deaf should screen what? They are not involved. It is a hearing scammer typing tekst to the translator who then places the order. The only part the deaf play is that they will get longer waiting times and possibly reduced service as companies will immidiatly suspect a call of this type.

    So there is no taking care of themselves. They are just bystanders.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  36. Improve the entire system , make it a hate crime? by turtleshadow · · Score: 1

    The biggest problem here is that ordering over the phone or tty with stolen credit or ID info is much too easy to scam.

    There should be double the punishment for committing the crime of ID fraud than there is now. Thrice when done under the guise of using services for the disabled -- a hate crime of sorts.
    A scammer stole a vital resource to an upright member of society; a call to a doctor perhaps for urgent assistance, calling for a ride for personal saftety reasons (night, weather, etc). This would constitute a double theft and causing a societal safety issue that makes it a hate crime as it exploits a protected group, the disabled.

    Also many watchdogs urge that society demand that _Free_ credit reports be given to victims of credit/ID theft be given for 5 years after each & every breach. For repeated breaches (when not the user's fault) the credit agency and merchant _not_ the consumer should be held accountable.

    Both merchants that took stolen numbers and the credit agencies should be fine each other heavily till they start insisting the everyone improve the authentication mechanisms of their credit systems.

    Merchants and Credit bureaus should not by legislation be allowed to pass monetary loss onto consumers.

    I'm suspecting that soon TTY centers will have the international calling flags installed like most credit card processing centers. These typically let the operator know the call is somehow not originating from inside the country.

    Although with outsourcing this is going to be sticky to impliment.

  37. Internal IP-Relay memo regarding certain threats: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Filename: troubleshooting_bombthreat.doc
    Design Date: 08/01/01
    Designer: Face

    CALL SET-UP

    Condition: Caller states there is a bomb

    Follow Center procedure to call supervisor
    Ask WHEN WILL BOMB EXPLODE Q GA
    Ask WHERE IS BOMB NOW QQ GA
    Ask WHAT DOES BOMB LOOK LIKE Q GA
    Ask WHAT KIND OF BOMB IS IT QQ GA
    Ask WHAT WILL CAUSE BOMB TO EXPLODE Q GA
    Ask DID YOU PLACE THE BOMB QQ GA
    Ask WHY Q GA
    Ask WHAT IS UR ADDRESS Q GA
    Ask WHAT IS UR NAME Q GA

    NOTE Tone of voice/background sounds/type of language used

    Allow Operations manager/supervisor to take over

    IF DURING A CALL, A CALLER STATES THERE IS A BOMB IN THE RELAY CENTER

    Relay call as usual

    Remember CONFIDENTIALITY IS A FEDERAL MANDATE!

    GETTING STARTED CALL PROCESSING BILLING OPTIONS TROUBLE SHOOTING ABBREVIATIONS BOMB THREAT

  38. Re:DEAF AND DUMB by Xaymot · · Score: 1

    Helen Keller is known for striving past the limitations of being deaf, blind, and mute. But did you know that she was later known for being a famous member of the American Communist party. Her leftist ideals primarily focused on the awareness of female sexuality.

    That's right. Helen Keller grew up to be a communist slut (I mean that word in the sweetest way possible).

  39. My wife's deaf by Dog135 · · Score: 1

    My wife's deaf, and back in '94, when we where dating, that was the only way we had to communicate too. (For a while, I wanted to type "GA" at the end of all my emails) I was supprised that the service existed, since you could basically make a long distance call without paying any fees. So it's no supprise that people have finally begun to misuse it.

    Since it's only the online service that seems to be effected, probably because it can be used in conjunction with translation programs, I think it'd be appropriate to put a loggin on the web site. But use cookies, so you don't have to re-loggin each time.

    Instead of tracking conversations word-for-word, they could give the operators the option of flagging a conversation as a possible scam. If an account has too many flags, close it and block the IP address. In fact, if the IP addresses are stored, you might not even need a username/password.

    GA SK ;)

    --
    "That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
    1. Re:My wife's deaf by Mattwolf7 · · Score: 1

      What's "GA"?

    2. Re:My wife's deaf by Dog135 · · Score: 1

      "GA" stands for "Go Ahead", like saying "over" on a CB.

      "SK" stands for "Stop Keying", same as "over and out" on a CB.

      --
      "That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
  40. Sorry, by metalhed77 · · Score: 1

    Sure, just call 867 5309.

    --
    Photos.
    1. Re:Sorry, by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      Sure, just call 867 5309.

      Jenny's your daughter? Wow...;-)

  41. Had direct experience with this... by uvsc_wolverine · · Score: 1

    I used to work at a small OEM computer manufacturer, and we got those TTY calls occasionally. It wasn't too hard to tell they were scamming us. They wanted FedEx to pick up the shipment (as opposed to having us handle the shipping), and as soon as I suggested anything the response was "Yes, we want that!" - Although their grammer wasn't nearly that good...

    I remember one call where I told them "We have a system that costs $900." They immediately responded with "Yes, we want twenty of those." No haggling, no questions about CPU, RAM, or anything else. I just told them the price and they said they wanted twenty. At this point I told the operator to tell them to stop calling us, and that we're not stupid enough to fall for their scam (I think that was the third time I'd talked to them).

    --
    This space for rent...
  42. Jerk operators by Dog135 · · Score: 1

    Ah, so you're one of those jerk operators! ;)

    Before we had an internet connection, I had to use the relay to talk to my wife. There where times I'd ask the operator a legitamite question but they'd type it out to her instead of answering.

    I can't remember the questions right now though. But I do remember trying to talk to my wife (girlfriend at the time) with a male operator made it really hard talking bf/gf stuff.

    I was SO glad when I found out my 2400 baud modem could connect to her TDD directly over the phone lines. (But only if she called me and my modem answered)

    --
    "That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
  43. Holy Crap!!! by a!b!c! · · Score: 1

    Slashdot is suggesting that we limit the liberties of others in the name of security! I thought this place was always will to protect the rights of people using public services, but now I see that they have decided that this is wrong.

    I wonder where they draw the line.

    Are people upset that the calls can't be logged?
    Are people upset that the users don't have to register and log in?

    I've heard so many people complain about these issues in other contexts, and its funny to see people here advocate the other side, just because of one puny article!

    Hahahahaha...

  44. TTY scamming nothing new by v1 · · Score: 1

    I work at a computer retailer, and we get about one of these calls a day, almost always for purchases of several laptops. (expensive nice ones, macintosh or toshiba usually) Our sales manager has implemented the policy that as soon as the TTY voice is heard, recite "DO NOT CALL BACK EVER AGAIN" and hanging up. It seems a bit rude to me, but then again, attempting to scam a small business out of thousands of dollars is also quite rude.

    This apparently has been going on for the last several years, so it's nothing new. I was surprised just how many of these calls we get - there must be quite a few scammers out there running through the phonebooks looking for a mark.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  45. Reverse DNS??? by MarvinIsANerd · · Score: 1

    This is an internet service that is being abused. This service is supposed to be used only by residents of the United States. Would it be so difficult to do a reverse DNS lookup on the caller and making sure they are connecting to the service from inside the USA? Or at least make sure they are not coming from Nigeria or whatever. Anyone?

    1. Re:Reverse DNS??? by demon · · Score: 1

      Reverse DNS is done by the provider, and there isn't really a uniform naming scheme for reverse mappings for customer-provisioned IPs. If it were easier to parse WHOIS records, however, using ARIN (and APNIC, and KRNIC, and the other organizations that allocate IP space across the globe) would be the best way to verify where someone is actually originating from based on their IP address. Unfortunately WHOIS records remain very difficult to machine parse for a variety of reasons - because different registrars use different formats, mostly, and they don't want to make it too easy for spammers to retrieve information out of WHOIS data. Sure makes it hard for those who have legitimate uses for that kind of info.

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
  46. Careful there, cowboy by titzandkunt · · Score: 1


    I wouldn't try this on a regular basis: This could be seen as an attempt to defraud a party (the USPS, of their rightful payment) by means of the USPS.

    That's a prima-facie case of Mail fraud which is very broad, easy to prove and attracts draconian penalties.

    T&K.

    --
    Political language ... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable...
  47. here's why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    1.) I pay taxes, so since the telephone system/roads/etc are subsidized by my money, I should be able to use them. This is also why federal parks are free for the disabled; most paths are inaccessible, so it's like a rebate for the tax money we spend on it.

    2.) If I can work (because your tax $s help pay for a car I can drive, or because I can use a phone, or whatever), that's cheaper than putting me on welfare.

    3.) Because if you ignore the disabled (as society too often does) you lose out on, say, Stephen Hawking, or other "valuable" disabled folks.

    Without meaning to invoke Godwin's Law ... you're coming mighty close to the kind of ideas that Hitler and other eugenicists advocated, and still advocate. The Jews were not the only group he tried to murder.

    1. Re:here's why by Macgruder · · Score: 1

      1) By that logic, I should be able to request that my tax money NOT go to subsidizing such activities.

      2) No arguement there, but are you claiming that 'Right' = 'Costs cheaper'?

      3) So maintaining a system for hundreds of thousands, if not millions is somehow paid back by the contributions of one person? Interesting logic there...

      As to the Hitler comment... I'm not suggesting that supporting those with disabilities is wrong. I'm asking why it's right.

      --
      I'm not crazy,I'm actively irresponsible.
  48. Well, if they recieved no money... by MadAnthony02 · · Score: 1

    If they recieved no money for that day, then they had to pay all their operators, pay for equiptment, bandwidth, ect, and recieved no compensation. So the three million they lost is not 3 million in profit, but rather 3 million in revenue. If they have close to 3 million in expenses per day, then they would make little to no money off the service.

  49. I, sirs, am a relay operator. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    So I have to put in my 250,000 lira. Mind you, this is never going to be noticed, due to my happy anonymity.

    BUT:

    I work for MCI Worldcom as a relay operator. More specifically, the California Relay Service (CRS). Our center handles calls from IP-RELAY.com (so do the Arizona Relay, the Tennessee Relay, and the Wisconsin Relay, if anyone cares). So all day, it's prank calls and Nigerian scammers. There are a few deaf people using the service, but not many. The signal-to-noise ratio is much too low, so to speak. I make a few measly dollars and hour to put up with this sort of shit. (But at least the health benefits are okay)

    It's always Ghanans and Nigerians. Every single fucking time. Not Koreans or Israelis or anyone else. Most are in Accra, Ghana.

    They buy very few computers, despite what the article says. Mostly, they call printing shops to order blank T-shirts. I'm not really very sure why printing, silkscreening, and embroidery shops would even sell blank white T-shirts in the first place, but they do. Did I mention it's always XXL and XXXL shirts? Don't let those Sally Struthers commercials fool you; people in Ghana are fucking CHUBBY.

    Today, it was wedding dresses. I'm curious why people don't get suspicious when someone wants to order 6 wedding gowns over the phone. Especially when they don't care what sizes or styles, just the price. Not extra large, though, oddly enough, so maybe they're not all as chubby as it seems.

    Some days it's shoes. Some days it's designer perfume. Or gold wristwatches. And some days it is in fact computers.

    And 99% of the time, the credit card is declined. And 90% of the time when that happens, the fucking moron at whichever shop I'm calling will actually ask the person if they have another card. They always have a spare, sometimes with a completely different name.

    Things to look for, if you're a store:

    - The scammer will always ask to have the shop run the credit card while they are on the line. This means, in stores with only one line, that the credit card machine will AUTOMATICALLY approve the card if it passes whatever obscure checksum process they go through. Nice trick.

    - The scammer will, if pressed for a phone number, say that it's not currently working. They don't claim to be deaf and have no phone, which is actually pretty common among the deaf. Instead, they give a phone number with too many digits to be a US number, or an email address. This email address will be composed of a foreign-sounding name, but it will NOT match the name the person gave on the card.

    - The total price will be just shy of $10,000 to avoid hitting the card's limit, OR it will be some multiple of that, and the scammer will have several cards.

    So, every now and then the scammer gets someone to ship him something, be it a half dozen BMW radiators or a $9000.00 Bernina commercial grade sewing machine. He gets his payoff. Congratulations, you stupid sons of bitches, you've successfully stolen things. What do you do with the money?

    You give it to terrorists, of course, so they can go to pilot school. Allah Akbar! (or whatever) Thank goodness for weak extradition treaties, otherwise this wouldn't be possible.

    So do the executives at MCI know about all of this? Of course. The government is giving them a whole fucking load of money every day to keep the relay centers open. Hope it's worth it, guys. As for me, I'm out of there as soon as I get my book written (never).

  50. Only one of many ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Quite frankly, I don't see much of a problem with the TTY service. There are plenty of other opportunities for said scammers to fraudulently buy products with someone else's financial information. The operators are doing their duty just as they should; being a truly anonymous & non-interacting relay.

    Logging conversations for later access would be an immense privacy violation, putting the TTY-using deaf/dumb population at yet another disadvantage. A lot of it wouldn't even be useful with the only traceable information being the IP address of the Internet connection (unless some reference was made in the call... which could easily be fabricated).

    It does seem logical to verify that the users of this system are deaf/dumb & are in need of this service. But this would add a whole new layer of nessesary infrastructure to the TTY system. I can think of no foolproof test {online or in person} for the lack of speech or hearing, which can both be faked without too much effort. Even if we were able to obtain such information perfectly, it is unlikely that much useful could be done with it. A government listing of hearing impaired persons & unique ID numbers? With this time of nationwide government database integration & information mining, it would be wise to consider the effects of yet another well-seeming database & its effects in strenghtening the informational power of the feds over the populace. Consider this too: the assignment of "hearing impared" authorization #s or IDs will not significantly hinder criminals who already make a business of illegally obtaining similar uniquely-identifying, supposedly confidential, information.

    The responsibility rests on both ends of the transaction. The middleman simply does not have the resources to effectively intervene, nor the responsibility for what is being anonymously forwarded.

  51. a bit confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    How is using TTY any different than ordering over the phone? I could (and have) taken my mother's credit card and ordered things with her card. She has a female name ,I have a female voice. I could have been any female that stole the card. I dont see how ordering through TTY relay service allows for more scamming than ordering over the phone does?

    I think i'm missing something.. :-/

    Moreover, I'd like to add, as a child of 2 deaf parents, that is extremely frustrating and saddening when companies hang up on the relay service. Deaf people are PEOPLE. Would you hang up on a hearing person for trying to place an order? Extremely, extremely rude..

  52. Re:And is incredibly inconvenient for both parties by orulz · · Score: 1

    There are SMS (and e-mail and IM) capable smart phones with qwerty keyboards. While typing on a numeric keypad is indeed a huge pain in the ass, give a phone a more standard keyboard and you're all good.

  53. Re:DEAF AND DUMB by captdeaf · · Score: 1

    Introducing ... ME! And hundreds of my friends. And those are just the ones I know.

    Although I guess I'm not all that smart - I bothered reply to a troll post on a slashdot article, when I usually read at 4+.

    'death'. I dearly hope your spelling is the worst of your faults.

  54. Re:And is incredibly inconvenient for both parties by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

    Even more inconvienient is trying to talk to a loved one, who happens to be deaf, and having to do it through a 3rd party. Ever tried signing to someone 50 miles away? I doubt it. Dumbass.

    Jebus. I didn't say that was the be all and end all solution. Just that it seemed an incredibly enabling bit of technology for someone who can't speak or can't hear.

    They can, just like everyone else, call someone on the phone and have a 1 on 1 conversation with them. Without a translator.

  55. I *figured* that was what was going on.... by FrenchyinCT · · Score: 1
    I got one of these calls at work a few months ago at the computer company where I'm employed. It was from AT&T's service, and when she said it was a service for the deaf, I had to ask her to explain it to me several times. Finally I got that there was someone typing messages to her who wanted her to relay them to me. The guy wanted a bunch of stuff - IIRC, a boatload of printer cartridges - and he didn't dick me around on the price which was my first clue. I forget exactly how the call went, we've gotten lots of these calls, but I began to realize something funky was going on - like the guy didn't have a credit card or something. I started asking the AT&T operator what was going on, and she couldn't come right out and tell me, but finally she said, "I'd be very careful with this," or words to that effect. That was when I knew she was trying to tell me, in a manner which wouldn't get her fired, that she suspected a scam. I told her to tell the guy we couldn't help him and then we hung up.

    We got another one prior to this, although not through a TTY service, by a guy who claimed to be a U.S. soldier stationed at Guantanamo Bay, and he needed a satellite service setup. He wanted us, though, to ship it only to New York. Not only did I think it extremely likely that a US soldier would need us to send him a satellite setup, and even less likely that he'd be allowed to admit he was at Gitmo, but he didn't even introduce himself officially - it came out later in the conversaton. Suspicious, I began asking for a lot of information - like an email address, and he gave me a Yahoo one, rather than a US military address. I told him we couldn't help him out, and that night I reported it to the FBI.

    The boss told me later he'd almost been duped by one of these guys, although the product never got shipped because he began to smell a scam and he cancelled the order at the last minute (my boss did, not the scammer). Our sort of unofficial policy now is we don't ship out of state unless it's for a customer we already know.