TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Hypothetical SxS Question

Re: Hypothetical SxS Question

hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
13 Dec 2005 06:55:56 -0800

Joe Morris wrote:

> And I'm sure you remember the little "dial lock" gizmos that were
> clamped into the "1" fingerhole and were supposed to keep people from
> making outbound calls on an unattended office telephone? It seems
> that nobody ever thought about dialing with the switchhook -- or just
> banging away with ten or more pulses and asking the operator for
> assistance.

I think it was pretty difficult for most people to tap in accurately a
seven digit number. If you're timing was the least bit off any part
of the way you had to start over. You also risked discovery while
doing it.

It wasn't that hard to tap in zero and get the operator to do it,
though, but I think a lot of people didn't think of that option.

All in all I'd say the dial locks, which were inexpensive, were
reasonably effective to protect against telephone abuse.

I've only rarely seen plate locks to cover up a Touch Tone dial.

Years ago our Centrex required a PIN to make long distance calls after
hours.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: TELECOM Digest Editor: "Scores of Amazon.com Workers Sickened From Apparent Food Poisoning"
Go to Previous message: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com: "Re: Parental Electronic Supervision of Teens - Good or Bad?"
May be in reply to: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com: "Hypothetical SxS Question"
Next in thread: DevilsPGD: "Re: Hypothetical SxS Question"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page