Privacy Issue (ANI in SF Bay Area)

Here's something cute:

Yesterday PacBell turned on ANI on our trunk groups, for 
local area calls.  On their own, mind you, without request 
from us.  If you call anyone here with a display phone,
it displays your number, even if you have caller-id
blocking on or you do a *70 (for those who don't know,
ANI is not caller-id, you can't block your number
from being displayed with ANI.)

It also grabs your phone number if you leave a voice mail,
so even folks without display phones can benefit.

I post this thinking it may be of interest.  I actually
disagree that people ought to be able to block 
their number.  My feeling is that if someone is calling
me, they have no right be anonymous.  Of course, I
realize that this is easy to defeat with call forwarding and such..
In fact, if I call you from my work phone..you won't see
my direct dial number...you'll see a number for PacBell's
trunk group.

Now...I just have to figure out how PacBell is charging us..
if it's .01$ per call like regular ANI...at 100,000 calls per day..
Hmm...first fix is free?  A new PacBell marketing program?
Our CIO loves the new "feature."

    Ryan

Ryan Russell/SYBASE wrote:
> 
> Yesterday PacBell turned on ANI on our trunk groups, for
> local area calls.  On their own, mind you, without request
> from us.  If you call anyone here with a display phone,
> it displays your number, even if you have caller-id
> blocking on or you do a *70 (for those who don't know,
> ANI is not caller-id, you can't block your number
> from being displayed with ANI.)
> 
> It also grabs your phone number if you leave a voice mail,
> so even folks without display phones can benefit.

  Why do I get the feeling that they will soon be offering a new
feature (for a 'slight surcharge') that will block this feature,
as well?

I was distracted a bit but I believe I heard on NPR news this morning that
Colorado Guv. Roy Roemer showed up at an airport sans id and had a moment
of difficulty getting on his flight.  Roemer solved the problem by showing
the Federal Permission-To-Fly checker a picture of himself in a recent
newspaper.

I thought the ill-defined (or ill-described) rules required presentation
of a _government_ picture I.D.  Since when is a newspaper photo a
government picture I.D.?  

Some animals are more equal than others.

bd

Can I (or you) send this to comp.decom.telecom and comp.risks?
If true, this merits wider distribution, but I don't want to cause
you any trouble. Then again, I don't see your email address...

-rich

Ryan, Russell/SYBASE wrote:
> 
> Here's something cute:
> 
> Yesterday PacBell turned on ANI on our trunk groups, for
> local area calls.  On their own, mind you, without request
> from us.  If you call anyone here with a display phone,
> it displays your number, even if you have caller-id
> blocking on or you do a *70 (for those who don't know,
> ANI is not caller-id, you can't block your number
> from being displayed with ANI.)
> 
> It also grabs your phone number if you leave a voice mail,
> so even folks without display phones can benefit.
> 
> I post this thinking it may be of interest.  I actually
> disagree that people ought to be able to block
> their number.  My feeling is that if someone is calling
> me, they have no right be anonymous.  Of course, I
> realize that this is easy to defeat with call forwarding and such..
> In fact, if I call you from my work phone..you won't see
> my direct dial number...you'll see a number for PacBell's
> trunk group.
> 
> Now...I just have to figure out how PacBell is charging us..
> if it's .01$ per call like regular ANI...at 100,000 calls per day..
> Hmm...first fix is free?  A new PacBell marketing program?
> Our CIO loves the new "feature."
> 
>     Ryan