BOFH: Testing the obscenity filters

You can't say 'can't'


Episode 20

"Hi, I'd just like some help setting up my Macintosh for access t..."

>SLAM<

. . .

>Ring<

"Hello?" the PFY says.

"Hi, we must have got cut off, I was ringing for a bit of help setting up my Mac..."

>SLAM<

. . .

>RING<

"Is there something wrong with your phone?" the voice asks.

"I don't think so," the PFY says. "But just let me check something... >SLAM<"

. . .

>RING<

"I keep getting cut off - you're not hanging up on me are you?"

"Hanging up? No, no, everything's fine here - perhaps it's one of our PABX features," the PFY says.

"What do you mean, PABX features?"

"The PABX. It's got some filtering firmware in it to prevent foul language - a bit like Mail Marshall, but for voice streams."

"You can't be serious?"

"Oh yes, it's the latest thing to stop office harassment. You enable the filtering and then it just terminates conversations that contain foul language before they get the company into trouble. That way the company is seen to be proactive about preventing workplace harassment. Funny thing is I don't think we enabled it on our phone system."

"So it's not that?"

"It might be - I'll have to check. C*cks*ck*r." >SLAM<

. . .

>Ring<

"Was that it, all I heard was c..."

"Ars*B*ndit!” >SLAM!<

"MY TURN!" I gasp, as the phone rings again.

>Ring<

"NUMBKN*TS!” >SLAM!<

>Ring<

"CHUTNEY FERRET!" I shout. >SLAM!<

Classic! The PFY has discovered a way to call users names with impunity! He's a bloody genius!

>Ring<

"George W Bu...” >SLAM!<

>Ring<

"STOP IT!" our user gasps, before I can think of something really inappropriate.

"Stop what?" I ask.

"Stop testing your system on me! And why are two of you doing it?"

"Oh," I say. "I was just trying to eliminate the possibility that it was only happening on certain extensions."

"Well all people at this end can hear is you shouting names at me!"

"Oh, right," I say. "We were just doing some debugging as well and it seems that heightened volume - which indicates vocal stressors - has a higher weighting than the ordinary spoken word. So just saying c*cksuc*r...” >SLAM<

>Ring<

"My mistake," I say. "It seems that at any volume c*cksuc*er...” >SLAM<

>Ring<

"This is ridiculous! You can't..."

>SLAM<

>Ring<

"Hello?" the PFY says.

"What happened then?"

"I'm not sure?" the PFY says.

"All I said was you can't..."

>SLAM<

>Ring<

"There's no need to be like that," the PFY says. "It's not our fault - it's the software!"

"I said CAN'T!"

>SLAM<

>Ring<

"Now just take it easy," the PFY says. "We're only trying to help you sort this out!"

"I'm not swearing at you!"

"Oh right!" the PFY says, feigning enlightenment. "You were saying the abbreviated version of 'cannot'?"

"YES!" the user cries.

"Gotcha. I think it's probably just an accent or dialect thing on the part of the voice recognition circuit. I can probably adjust the settings on it if you like," the PFY says, nodding meaningfully to me.

The penny drops and I login to the PABX management console.

"OK, how do I do that?"

"All you need to do is just repeat, I dunno, 20 or 30 times the 'you cannot' abbreviation and we'll recalibrate it to your particular inflection and you'll be sorted - it'll never drop your conversations again."

"OK. You CA..."

"NOT NOW!" the PFY interrupts. "It'll just get messed up with the rest of this session. You have to create a NEW session so that ONLY the words you want recalibrated get recalibrated."

"Oh. So I just ring you back and repeat the words?"

"Yes. But hang on, what's that?" I say, joining the conversation.

"What's what?"

"I've just noticed that our PABX monitoring software is running on overclocked processors - which is probably part of the problem. So you probably need to repeat the phrase as quickly as possible, 20 or 30 times. Loudly. As soon as we answer to reduce white noise."

"OK - so I just ring you back and do it."

"Yes - but remember, we won't talk because then it'd recalibrate us, not you."

"OK, I'll call right back!"

And that, as they say, is that.

He hangs up, I repatch our phone line to the CEO's humourless PA and he recalibrates himself out of a job.

No one believes the story about the voice filtering of course.

The PFY fakes an email from him to the aforementioned PA, just in case there's any doubt in her mind...

"That was a hell of a lot of work to go to just to avoid telling someone you don't do Macs," I say.

"Yeah, but it had to be done," the PFY replies. "Anyway I'm thinking we should tell everyone the new building isn't compatible with Macs."

"Go on, say we can't do it!"

Like I said, he's a bloody genius...


Other stories you might like

  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading
  • Big Tech loves talking up privacy – while trying to kill privacy legislation
    Study claims Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft work to derail data rules

    Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft often support privacy in public statements, but behind the scenes they've been working through some common organizations to weaken or kill privacy legislation in US states.

    That's according to a report this week from news non-profit The Markup, which said the corporations hire lobbyists from the same few groups and law firms to defang or drown state privacy bills.

    The report examined 31 states when state legislatures were considering privacy legislation and identified 445 lobbyists and lobbying firms working on behalf of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, along with industry groups like TechNet and the State Privacy and Security Coalition.

    Continue reading
  • SEC probes Musk for not properly disclosing Twitter stake
    Meanwhile, social network's board rejects resignation of one its directors

    America's financial watchdog is investigating whether Elon Musk adequately disclosed his purchase of Twitter shares last month, just as his bid to take over the social media company hangs in the balance. 

    A letter [PDF] from the SEC addressed to the tech billionaire said he "[did] not appear" to have filed the proper form detailing his 9.2 percent stake in Twitter "required 10 days from the date of acquisition," and asked him to provide more information. Musk's shares made him one of Twitter's largest shareholders. The letter is dated April 4, and was shared this week by the regulator.

    Musk quickly moved to try and buy the whole company outright in a deal initially worth over $44 billion. Musk sold a chunk of his shares in Tesla worth $8.4 billion and bagged another $7.14 billion from investors to help finance the $21 billion he promised to put forward for the deal. The remaining $25.5 billion bill was secured via debt financing by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others. But the takeover is not going smoothly.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022