Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Communications Government Your Rights Online

India Hanging Up On 25 Million Cell Phones 103

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the can-you-hear-me-now dept.
jvillain writes "India is about to pull the plug on 25 million cell phones in the name of fighting terrorism and fraud. 'The ban by India's Department of Telecommunications has been unfolding gradually since Oct. 6, 2008, six weeks before the attacks in Mumbai killed 173 people and wounded 308. A memo then directed service providers to cut off cellphone users whose devices didn't have a real IMEI — or unique identity number — in the interests of 'national security.' Since then, the move has picked up steam as a way to circumvent terrorists using black market, unregistered cellphones. The Mumbai attackers kept in touch with each other via cellphones and used GPS to pinpoint their attacks, which started Nov. 26, 2008, and went on for three days. The telecommunications department has issued warnings and deadlines through 2009 but has announced this one is for real, telling operators to block cellphones without valid IMEI numbers. Previously, it warned companies to stop importing them and customers to stop buying them.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

India Hanging Up On 25 Million Cell Phones

Comments Filter:
  • Cloned phones (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Nidi62 (1525137) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:16PM (#30276760)
    So, does this just mean that if you want to have an untrackable phone in India, instead of buying a phone without a plan you can just go out and buy a cloned phone instead? I mean, seems to me the only thing better than not being tracked by the government for a criminal/terrorist is to have the government waste time tracking some poor innocent schlub they think is you.
  • by madcat2c (1292296) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:18PM (#30276790)
    So they will just rent satellite phones for like $10 a day under a false name and stolen CC.
  • RE: Sat Phones (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tommyatomic (924744) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:24PM (#30276876)

    Yes but there is already infrastructure in place to combat CC fraud. Granted in India its not a good or reliable system but its a system none the less. And sat phones can be tracked whereas IMEI-less cell phones are not especially trackable.

    Basically they are just forcing all their cellular networks to refuse connection to phones lacking IMEI numbers. This is hardly an international crisis. It just means that people are going to have to pay for their phone calls or pay to call in their bomb threats. No more free rides.

    • Re: Sat Phones (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ungrounded Lightning (62228) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:02PM (#30277358) Journal

      Basically they are just forcing all their cellular networks to refuse connection to phones lacking IMEI numbers. ... It just means that people are going to have to pay for their phone calls or pay to call in their bomb threats. No more free rides.

      It's not a free ride now. It just means that the subscriber (or his phone company) bought a cheap phone that didn't have a registered IMEI. (Think "phone universal serial number, sniffable from the phone network.)

      Now maybe it was a stolen phone with the IMEI overwritten by a dummy. Or maybe it was a legit recycled phone with reflashed firmware that killed the IMEI ditto. Or maybe it was a new phone from a cheapscate company that didn't register/buy a block of IMEIs and install them in its products. But the customer is still buying the service and still identified by his "smart chip".

      The IMEI is mainly about tracking the phone and has nothing to do with billing. (For instance: During Iraq War II the NSA mapped out the "terrorist networks" - pun intended - easily, from satellite surveillance, by traffic analysis - when somebody serving as a communications hub switched smartcards for each of his links but didn't realize that the IMEI, which stays with the phone, was also being recorded. Call goes in one smartcard ID and immediately a series to other phone numbers go out on other smartcards from the same phone: it's a gotcha. This hit the media after the opposition figured out that cellphones were a trap and switched to non-cellphone communication.)

      Given that killing service to IMEI-less phones is part of a reaction to "terrorist attacks" it looks like India is willing to kill phone service to 25 million legit cellphone users in order to force its own opposition to chose between lower-tech communication and getting caught.

  • Yeah, great idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Michael Hunt (585391) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:24PM (#30276880) Homepage

    IMEIs are not used at all in the call routing process, and are, ultimately, pretty easy to forge convincingly. Granted, this will stop everybody whose handsets have totally bogus IMEIs, but as long as the first 8 digits (type allocation code) and check digit are correct, then there's very little India can do without impacting legitimate customers.

    GREAT idea.

  • by Monkeedude1212 (1560403) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:33PM (#30276998) Journal

    There's an App for that.

  • Next (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MichaelSmith (789609) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:35PM (#30277024) Homepage Journal

    MAC addresses for wifi radios on laptops and phones.

  • by NoNsense (6950) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:35PM (#30277028)

    Wouldn't it be a better idea to do the disconnection BEFORE letting everyone know what you are going to do? C'mon people.

  • by Beardo the Bearded (321478) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:36PM (#30277030)

    Am I the only one here with a valid IMEI number, or is /. broken again?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:41PM (#30277106)

    Eventually, phones are just going to be another IP client. The cell phone networks are obviously well-adapted to the application, but it's not like it's the only way to do things. Wifi is as good, especially for illicit applications where a little quality loss, latency, etc is ok. What'r you gonna do, outlaw radios? End internet anonymity?

    The non-illicit utility for networking, far exceeds the negative sum of all terrorism and warfare in the history of mankind. That genie just ain't going back into the bottle, even with the help of terrorists.

  • Same in Mexico (Score:5, Informative)

    by happyfeet2000 (1208074) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:49PM (#30277198)

    We have until April 10th 2010 to register all our cellphones with the CURP (something like your SS number) of the person using it, even if a company cel. http://www.renaut.gob.mx/RENAUT/?page=preguntas [renaut.gob.mx]. Cel numbers not registered by that date will be blocked.

    In a country where bank customer databases have been sold to the organized crime to pick kidnap victims, many times with participation of corrupt government or police officers, where we train our kids and families to never answer the phone with a family name for fear of being monitored by criminals this is giving everybody the creeps. Also next year, in a multimillon dollar deal, a company will be picked to create a national identification card with biometric data like retinal scans.

    Again, in a country where politicians are regarded as little more than a group of high level thieves this is raising lots of eyebrows.

  • Ban speech (Score:2, Funny)

    by ohnoitsavram (1681536) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:54PM (#30277270)
    Geez if the idea is to fight terrorism and fraud by raising the costs of distance communication why not just raise the costs of communication altogether and outlaw people talking to each other in general.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:03PM (#30277368)

      So you're suggesting they follow the example set by the USA then?

    • Re:Ban speech (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Nefarious Wheel (628136) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:07PM (#30277404) Journal

      Good sarcasm, Ohnoitsavram. But you've pegged it - the big ugly monster rearing its head here is the fact that governments do not, as a rule, treat truly free speech as necessarily being in their own best interests. Governments have been fighting with their governed populace over this bone for many, many years. Anytime some new way to communicate pops up, the battle starts up again.

      Mind you, it can be a very real threat to an established government, and governments have fallen from it. Think "Samizdat".

      It's also harder to govern when your message to the public is diluted by discussion before it's embedded in the public consciousness, and I'm sure this concept is not lost on those who walk the halls of power.

  • Yet another excuse (Score:4, Insightful)

    by nurb432 (527695) on Monday November 30, 2009 @07:55PM (#30277276) Homepage Journal

    To clamp down on private citizens' right to privacy. ( and i don't care if its not written in stone for them, its a basic human right as far as i'm concerned )

    The 'criminals' will just get around this road block too, they always do, and the legislators know this.

    • by ascari (1400977) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:11PM (#30277454)
      So true. Makes you wonder why they're **really** doing it. Maybe there's some taxation stuff hidden somewhere in there?
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:11PM (#30277466)

      To clamp down on private citizens' right to privacy. ( and i don't care if its not written in stone for them, its a basic human right as far as i'm concerned )

      The 'criminals' will just get around this road block too, they always do, and the legislators know this.

      huh ? a cellphone is a basic human right now ????

      is there any law that cannot be gotten around ? Based on that logic , every single law is pointless and ineffective . Yup, strike down every single law in all lands .

      • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:29PM (#30277638)

        "huh ? a cellphone is a basic human right now ????"

        If only you were replying to what he actually said...

        He said that privacy (e.g., the ability to communicate with other people without snoops watching your interactions and movements) is a basic human right.

        You can rephrase it in a silly way to attempt to discredit it, but it only shows your intellectual dishonesty.

        • by Vegeta99 (219501) <rjlynn.gmail@com> on Monday November 30, 2009 @11:32PM (#30278956)

          Using a fake IMEI isn't privacy, dood. It's using the network incorrectly, and could cause problems for other users if there was an IMEI collision.

          To use the oft-famous car analogy, it's like stealing a plate from the junkyard and using it on your car. Not a right. At all.

          • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @01:09AM (#30279560)

            Dood, obviously you were not paying attention in the theatre. When Mr Bourne clones cell phones you do not see him writing down the IMEI on the back of the phone.. He went for the sim card!! (IMSI).

            GSM cell networks care about the users identity only..IMEI is strictly informational. Its never used for routing.

            In practice I guess having all devices broadcast an IMEI isn't the end of the world but at some level this is all kind of silly given they can be spoofed and security of the GSM network itself hinges on some very dubious crypto primitives which can be abused by determined advsaries.

            Relying on unreliable information in a bid to stop or detect terrorist plots seems to me to be a bit silly. In the real world criminials do stupid things all the time I guess but its still not a good idea to rely on that being so.

            • by Vegeta99 (219501) <rjlynn.gmail@com> on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @03:07AM (#30280140)

              I understand that the IMEI isn't used for network access. They're not having all devices simply report the IMEI, they're making sure that IMEI matches up with a person. Therefore, they can't steal someone else's IMEI, and I would assume stealing someone's SIM card data is gonna raise some flags in a billing system here. And even if you do (or buy a pre-paid SIM), they've got your phone tied to someone.

              I'm not saying its going to solve any problems, I just think its kind of a crack-job comment to call it an invasion of privacy. Where did this right suddenly come from? You certainly didn't have that right with a land-line. It was quite obvious where a phone call was coming from.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @11:34PM (#30278972)

          "huh ? a cellphone is a basic human right now ????"

          If only you were replying to what he actually said...

          He said that privacy (e.g., the ability to communicate with other people without snoops watching your interactions and movements) is a basic human right.

          You can rephrase it in a silly way to attempt to discredit it, but it only shows your intellectual dishonesty.

          really ? Now who is being dishonest ? This does not say anything about the govt snooping illegally . Does one with a non imei phone have any additional constitutional/legal/human rights over one who has a phone with a working imei ?

      • by nurb432 (527695) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:44PM (#30277762) Homepage Journal

        Yup, strike down every single law in all lands .

        I agree, with the stipulation we are going to strike down the unreasonable laws that restrict our freedoms.

      • by TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:58PM (#30277912) Journal

        To clamp down on Slashdotters' right to speech. (And I don't care if it's not written in stone for the moderators, it's a basic human right as far as I'm concerned. The 'trolls' will just get around this road block too, they always do, and the moderators know this.

        Basically, mod parent up, even though he conflated privacy with cell phones (the excuse, get it?).

    • by MarkvW (1037596) on Monday November 30, 2009 @09:16PM (#30278032)

      Your "right" is the right of a fat and happy citizen of a Western country to pompously pronounce on the "rights" of citizens in countries with completely foreign cultures--in completely different social and political environments.

      Your universal statements regarding the basic right to an anonymous cell phone carries no persuasive force WHATSOEVER unless you accompany those statements with reasoning that applies them to the Indian social and political context. Otherwise, you're just another well-meaning ignorant cultural imperialist.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @10:21PM (#30278424)

        Your "right" is the right of a fat and happy citizen of a Western country to pompously pronounce on the "rights" of citizens in countries with completely foreign cultures--in completely different social and political environments.

        Your universal statements regarding the basic right to an anonymous cell phone carries no persuasive force WHATSOEVER unless you accompany those statements with reasoning that applies them to the Indian social and political context. Otherwise, you're just another well-meaning ignorant cultural imperialist.

        So Very Aptly Put.

      • by ultranova (717540) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @07:47AM (#30281614)

        Your "right" is the right of a fat and happy citizen of a Western country to pompously pronounce on the "rights" of citizens in countries with completely foreign cultures--in completely different social and political environments.

        Human rights are called such because they don't depend on the cultural context, they merely depend on the recipient being a human being. Are you arguing that Indians are subhumans incapable of dealing with free speech?

        Your universal statements regarding the basic right to an anonymous cell phone carries no persuasive force WHATSOEVER unless you accompany those statements with reasoning that applies them to the Indian social and political context. Otherwise, you're just another well-meaning ignorant cultural imperialist.

        The only socio-political context where lack of free speech can be justified is one where it's okay for the elite to dominate over the rest. However, that context also justifies cultural imperialism. So, either the Indian government is wrong, or us Westerners protesting their actions are right.

        • by MarkvW (1037596) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:09PM (#30285952)

          Free speech can never be absolute. "Fighting words" is a perfectly good example of a valid free speech limitation that much of Western society accepts. In Germany, Nazi advocacy is limited. In some European countries, religious hate speech is limited. When martial law is imposed (after a riot or a terrorist attack, for example), free speech is drastically limited.

          ABSOLUTE free speech is something that most reasonable people do not support. There MUST be some limitations ("fighting words," for example), and different limitations must apply to different cultures (think Nazi advocacy in postwar Germany or religious hate speech in countries on the verge of religious civil war). The important--vital--question is where those limitations must be placed.

          Once you accept the proposition that some limitations of free speech are necessary, then you need to consider all the relevant factors in determining the fairest way to accomplish free speech. If you ignore cultural context, your free speech regulation is liable to be unfair or unworkable.

          My point is that Indians ARE capable of dealing with free speech, and that is what they are doing. You are trying to impose an absolutist view of free speech into a context where absolute free speech is not workable AS A PRACTICAL MATTER.

          You state: "The only socio-political context where lack of free speech can be justified is one where it's okay for the elite to dominate over the rest." That's a wonderful aspirational idea that will work very well just as soon as human beings eliminate need, greed, and violence.

          • by ultranova (717540) on Wednesday December 02, 2009 @09:15AM (#30296290)

            My point is that Indians ARE capable of dealing with free speech, and that is what they are doing.

            No, your point was that human rights don't apply to Indians, and that we are being oppressive when we insist that they do. Or that's the way you came across, anyway.

            You are trying to impose an absolutist view of free speech into a context where absolute free speech is not workable AS A PRACTICAL MATTER.

            Bullshit. You responded to a post pointing out the likely practical consequences - it won't stop the criminals - of the measure being discussed, and equated cricisim of Indian government with "cultural imperialism", with some ad hominems added for good measure. Your post had nothing to do with practical mattesr, it was pure appeal to "white man's guilt".

            You state: "The only socio-political context where lack of free speech can be justified is one where it's okay for the elite to dominate over the rest." That's a wonderful aspirational idea that will work very well just as soon as human beings eliminate need, greed, and violence.

            The whole point of free speech is that it keeps the powerful in check. It's precisely because we haven't eliminated need, greed and violence why free speech is so vitalyl important to society. Remove it, and the first corrupt ruler to come around brings the whole house of cards tumbling down.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:02PM (#30277356)

    The cellphone fees are so high in Canada that nobody would ever use them for anything, including terrorism.

  • by BodeNGE (1664379) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:16PM (#30277516)
    there are IMEI blacklists. If your phone is stolen in the UK you can (theoretically) put it on a blacklist so that it will not work on any of the networks here. Good luck with that level of cooperation in the USA by the way.

    Guess all the stolen UK phones end up in India.

  • by Al Al Cool J (234559) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:36PM (#30277692)

    Will these 25 million people still be able to use the blocked cels to call emergency services? If not, then I wonder how many people will die or suffer injury as a result. I'd have to think it will be more than will be saved by inconveniencing terrorists.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:37PM (#30277700)

    I can understand shutting off a phone, but isn't implanting a chip on an untouchable little extreme?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:51PM (#30277826)

    If you have a gun you can take someone's phone. All you need is to memorize a few phone numbers for home base and to pick a rich tourist who looks like they have money to steal a phone from.

    Some of the mumbai terrorists stole the hostage's phones and used them. Who's going to come after them for long distance overages in the afterlife when they've gunned down people already.

    If you need a bunch of phones at once you can bribe someone in a cell stand or cell shop. In a nation of that many people it is tough to say there isn't many *someones* willing to make a deal if the price is right. You can just say you are a persecuted religious sect. Failing that you can use the barrel of a gun as a negotiating tactic.

  • Landfill (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SirAdelaide (1432553) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:54PM (#30277864)
    How much landfill will 25 million phones take up?
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @12:39AM (#30279356)

      Landfill? Much of India isn't terribly well, um, "organized" -- meaning the phones will just get chucked wherever. Doing the math yields about eight phones per square kilometer. And much of India isn't flat, so there's a whole lot more actual surface area than the atlas area I just used.

      It's a lot of junk, sure, but compared to most of India's problems, this is a flea bite. India is _big_. Like it's about as big as Texas thinks it is.

  • This just in.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ghostdoc (1235612) on Monday November 30, 2009 @08:56PM (#30277878)

    The state of Gelder, in a move to combat terrorism, has banned shoes.

    A spokesman for the government said 'We know from two recent terrorist attacks that the terrorists used shoes to transport themselves between attack targets. Consequently we are removing this method of transport from the terrorist's arsenal'.

    In a separate statement, ministers said they were considering the effectiveness of a ban on long trousers used by terrorists to conceal their knees.

  • Great (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @10:50PM (#30278646)

    Except that the Mumbai attackers kept in contact with Nokia phones.. Not cloned or invalid phones.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, 2009 @10:57PM (#30278694)

    This kind of news coverage and slant pisses me off. It is written as if this somehow infringes on your rights. The mobiles being banned are ones with FAKE IMIEs developed by unknown chinese companies that steel an IMIE and use it on thousands of phones. In US too you cannot get phones with fake IMIEs. In fact the telecom sector is a lot more restrictive than in India. In India, the handset is not tied to a particular carrier (there are exceptions, but they are not widespread like in the US). Even the IPhone here can be used with any carrier.
    The comments on slashdot seemed to suggest that the govt is doing something sinister and wrong and blah blah blah. All they are doing is enforcing a law that is the law in almost all countries including the US.
    This place is becoming more and more like fox news with its biased coverage and the way the news is peppered with lot of "seems" and "looks like" and "quotes" and "in the name of" generally giving the reader that is is something wrong that is done.
    And the cowboy commentator love to shoot off and let the world know their opinions without even knowing the facts or anything about the issue or even before RTFA

  • So here's the deal.. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rexdude (747457) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @12:26AM (#30279282)

    Since I live here, I can shed some more light on what's actually going on:
    1) Knock off Chinese handsets sell at ridiculously low prices compared to the original phones (yet some have pretty innovative features). For eg, I saw a knockoff of the Nokia N73 about a year ago with TV out and support for dual SIM cards. It ran some Chinese imitation of S60, and had all the usual features- camera, bluetooth, infrared, wifi, and cost about 6000 Rs. (about $130), compared to an original Nokia N73 that cost about 12-13k Rs. at the same time. Quality-wise these phones are quite dubious, they can fail at anytime and/or ship with exploding batteries. They're usually popular among the poorer sections of society (mobile phone penetration is VERY high in India- you will find people living in slums in Bombay/Delhi who don't have proper sanitation, but still have a mobile phone of some sort).

    2) As others have mentioned- our mobile market is much freer than the US- operators don't have any say in what phone you use, call rates are the lowest in the world, incoming calls/SMS are free by law. Switching service providers is a breeze, just get a fresh connection and pop in the SIM you want.
    We also have prepaid SIM cards- so if you're visiting here, you can just buy one for about Rs. 300 ($6) and use it, and pay as you go. These have also been used by terrorists in the past- so now you have to show proof of ID and fill out a form before getting one. (Foreign tourists would have to show their passports).

    3) Counterfeit IMEIs are a royal concern for legitimate customers- if an IMEI is blocked it also blocks legitimate users. Also, if your IMEI is being used by a terrorist, it puts you under unnecessary suspicion and subject to inquiry as well.

    4) The concept of privacy is alien to a large part of the population. Part of it is cultural, growing up in joint families, living in crowded tenements, and the general gregariousness with which 2 perfect strangers will end up discussing family matters during a long journey.
    We don't have anything as influential as the EFF in the US, and no one among the educated middle class raised any concerns over the current National ID card [wikipedia.org] being proposed. Many in fact have welcomed it, thinking it will help secure the country against terrorism. This is far more insidious and has more potential for abuse than enforcing use of an IMEI.

    and finally, the old proverb- 'Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity' is quite valid for the Indian govt.

    Given the above, especially #2 and 3, it's a fairly sensible move to block counterfeit IMEIs and phones that lack them.

    • by mikael (484) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @01:28AM (#30279672)

      European expats working abroad would share AOL CD's like party stories. This would seem very altruistic with the slight side effect that every version of a particular CD would end up with the same Instant Messenger ID, which would get rather confusing for people trying to contact their friends. Now that AOL has given up on modem pools, this isn't a problem any more.

    • by five18pm (763804) * on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:33AM (#30280006)
      Thanks for summing up the situation quite well.
    • by Vaibhav_Locke (1010373) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @10:02AM (#30282572)
      Let me also add here, the news is reporting that mobile carriers are going to offer a service to people with these phones to install a new IMEI number on their phone. No details were given (on what i saw) about how this would be done or who is offering this but they mentioned it would cost Rs 200 (~$5), so i don't see this as being a huge deal. Also it was only a couple of months ago that a ban was placed on all pre-paid mobile SIMs in the state of Kashmir since these were being used by many cross-border terrorists, the ban being imposed after repeated requests by the government to the carriers to strengthen the identification process (mentioned by Rexdude above). The carriers could have solved both these problems themselves without the centre having to step in but they did not because it would have cost them customers. We contend with laws every day that may limit our freedom of choice in small ways but make our society a safer place to live. Frankly i don't care that i can no longer buy a cheap Chinese knock-off phone when nokia sells handsets as cheap as Rs 1200 ($30). There's larger issues to worry about for all of us
  • by BhaKi (1316335) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @02:09AM (#30279916)

    This news is similar in intent to the previous fake news:

    http://news.idg.no/cw/art.cfm?id=30DEC75D-1A64-67EA-E43462F642213B89

    Just as in the case of previous news, I went through Indian media extensively and I couldn't find ANY THING like this.

    People, I beg you to wake up.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @05:50AM (#30281016)

    This is very real. The amount of counterfeit nokia and iphones in existence is staggering. Every "Dual SIM" phone in existence does not have a real IMEI.

  • by Shome (621324) on Tuesday December 01, 2009 @10:36AM (#30282910)
    Are we missing the point here? Is this India's way of imposing anti-dumping duty on illegally imported chinese handsets and making it difficult for people to buy them?

"There are some good people in it, but the orchestra as a whole is equivalent to a gang bent on destruction." -- John Cage, composer

Working...