Let's see here... The entire idea of red boxing is replicating signals that tell the toll office that you've deposited coins. The signaling system that was commonly used back in the day is called ACTS (automatic coin toll signaling). As a thumb rule in network security, assuming a legit client is very foolish, in this situation simply because toll fraud would be much more likely to occur and toll offices would have less of a point of existing.
Now, that being said; who has power over if red boxing still works or not? The toll offices. "But this payphone is an ACTS payphone! It HAS to work!" Read what I just said. It doesn't matter how many times you send the damn signaling down the line; if the toll office switching equipment doesn't listen for that kind of shit in the first place, you're pure out of luck. Are we on the same page?
The
real questions here should be these; do toll offices still generally rely on an old signaling system such as ACTS? If I get an operator to place the call for me, will my call be routed another way? If so, would my call terminate by routing through a toll office that actually relies on ACTS? You shouldn't all be arguing over if red boxing is dead or not (the fact is, with signaling system seven, red and blue boxes are old and generally won't work in most highly developed areas of the US. SS7, however, is flawed in other ways). What you should all be questioning is the way the toll offices still operate these days. The public switched telephone network is interesting for that very reason; you're always going to get a good mix of different things. But, simply to question your comments, are protocols that old still being used on such a regular basis like most of you claim them to be? I hope this stirs some interesting points of conversation
.
