It's Time To Start Taking Stolen Phones Seriously 282
itwbennett writes "'Find My iPhone' is neat, but it's time for smartphone makers and carriers to stop pretending their anti-theft measures are anything more than minimum viable products, says blogger Kevin Purdy. He's not the first to point this out: As reported in Slashdot, 'NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg said overall crime in New York City was up 3.3% in 2012 due to iPhone, iPad and other Apple device thefts.' And now San Francisco and New York attorneys general are calling a 'Smartphone Summit' where representatives from Apple, Google, Samsung, and Microsoft are due to meet and discuss the implementation of a industry-wide 'kill switch' system."
But, But... (Score:5, Insightful)
When a phone is stolen, another phone gets purchased. Reducing phone thefts will cut into new phone sales!
Re: (Score:2)
When a phone is stolen, another phone gets purchased.
No, the same phone gets pawned off for a much lower price.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is that like the Parable of the Broken Window [wikipedia.org]?
No. Argumentation: the cited parable deals with the things unseen, like what happens inside Maryland NSA's storage and processing center. By contrast, there will be some civilians non-affiliated to NSA that will see the iPhone or the broken window.
(ducks)
Re:But, But... (Score:4, Insightful)
I keep seeing this line of reasoning on the matter here on /.
Honestly, it's pretty fucking vapid. The marginal revenue companies get from people buying replacements for stolen products is simply not a viable business model. They may prefer not to spend money dealing with a problem they see as the consumer's and not theirs, but to ascribe some insidious plot on their part to make extra money off of people who get their stuff stolen... it's inane.
Re:But, But... (Score:5, Insightful)
.
Or
$Phonemaker makes a used phone useless, no phones get stolen and $Phonemaker loses tons of money in lost replacement phone revenue.
Can you explain how each phone stolen is "marginal", as opposed to 100%, gain? Basically, if they do nothing they find money for zero work. This model dictates exactly what they should do -- absolutely nothing. No wonder they are having a big pow-wow about it. Might need to have annual meetings even.
Re: But, But... (Score:2, Insightful)
Instead of buying a stolen phone someone then has to buy a new phone.
You aren't looking at systemic effects. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, the phonemaker gets more revenue. However, the money used to fund those replacements comes from an increased levy on all phone purchasers who have coverage. So everyone with coverage pays more for phones. The extra money that everyone pays for phones means less money spent on all other possible purchases. So Apple's revenue increase is Krogers' or Target's or Shell's decrease.
We usually disregard widely-distributed costs and look at local effects. This is especially true of politicians. But those effects are real and directly affect the aggregate economy numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, globally that is true, except that Apple will gladly accept an additional $1m even if it costs Kroger $2m, because they don't really care if Kroger makes money or not.
Re:But, But... (Score:5, Insightful)
No but seriously, there is no guarantee that a user who has their phone stolen will buy that same phone again. So it's already not 100% gain, they may go to a competitor or buy a refurbished phone from their carrier. Next, assuming they do buy a replacement from you, there is also no guarantee they will buy the same model. They may buy a cheaper one which has lower margins, as many people do when they feel they were targeted as a result of owning the hottest model or simply cannot pay off their subsidy right away.
Okay, so as a result of this theft, you may wind up selling another phone and make a few bucks - but there are no guarantees whatsoever, and this means you cannot plan around illegal activity when building your financial models. This was the point made above, the returns are simply too small and too unreliable to factor into the models when compared to something like adding new features or running a series of marketing campaigns.
To coin a car analogy, it would be like Audi saying "Our cars are stolen the most, so we can expect greater revenues as a result" - would you buy an Audi knowing that? Or would you buy a phone from the first manufacturer who allows your car to be killed when it is stolen?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:But, But... (Score:5, Informative)
You can argue all you want that it's not a viable business model to not disable cell phones, but large parts of Europe already have a cell phone "kill switch" and it has virtually eliminated cell phone thefts.
Re: (Score:2)
Basically, if they do nothing they find money for zero work
You seem to forget there's one more phone available, likely at a reduced price. That's not to say every stolen phone ends up being sold, but many are. So $Phonemaker doesn't end up with the money in that case.
Re: (Score:3)
It's the perfect way for them to get another sale even from a 'customer' who can't or won't pay for it.
A buys 1 phone. B can't afford a phone so he buys 0 phones. B steals A's phone. A buys another phone. They have now sold 2 phones where in a theft free world they would have sold 1.
Re: (Score:3)
$Phonemaker does nothing, tons of phones get stolen, $Phonemaker makes tons of replacement phones (i.e. tons of money).
Only if you assume the stolen phone never makes it back onto the market. Otherwise when a customer buys a stolen phone the phone maker loses a sale. It's a wash.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, as a counter example, I have at least two friends who have had their phones stolen twice. In addition, I DJ at a club, where phone thefts are rampant; I know of at least 15 instances at said club where people who have had a phone in a purse/jacket/backpack and foolishly left it somewhere while dancing returned to find them stolen. Its a FUCKING rampant problem here in San Francisco.
Re:But, But... (Score:4, Informative)
Let's say 5% of iPhone owners have had their phones stolen over all of time (which is a large number if you think of it), that would mean for all the bullshit the company has to put up with regarding a stolen phone they would make all of 5% extra on top of their normal sales. That's ridiculous if you think about it.
Apple made $80B (BILLION) dollars in iPhone revenue last year. 5% of that is $4B (FOUR BILLION DOLLARS!). You'd better fucking believe $4B in revenue is worth putting up with an UNFATHOMABLY MASSIVE amount of "bullshit".
Oh, and no need for "piss poor" anecdotes - NY and SF police have stated over 40% of all robberies in their cities now involve cell phones. So yes, tons - literally metric tons - of cell phones are stolen every year in those cities alone...
Re:But, But... (Score:5, Informative)
It's not buying a new phone that is the business model.
1.) The device is stolen
2.) New device obtained. (some $$)
3.) Old device is activated by someone new (recurring new $$. Here is the money for the carrier)
Now, many many years ago, I was a cellular switching site manager (before we had the giant carrier we have now). When I learn how cellular worked, it was explicitly state the the devices had a thing called an ESN (electronic Serial Number). This was for activating the device AND stolen devices were SUPPOSED to go into a shared database that would be checked to assure stolen devices were not activated. The marketing manager was livid that such a thing could exist. Needless to say it's pretty obvious today how that worked out. There is no shared database of stolen devices in the US (North America?). There is in Europe.
'nuff said
Re: (Score:3)
You're dead-on close... I used to work for a couple of resellers and it made me mad we didn't have databases at all when I knew as well as you what the ESN's and IMEI's could be used for in this regard.
We do have stolen device databases now... I believe they're still carrier specific at the moment, but they were to be combined this year or next, I think. Yeah, a marketing manager like that doesn't surprise me at all. Too bad the carriers wouldn't come up with that on their own, but hey, money is money.
Re: (Score:3)
Forgot to mention the reason we suddenly got the databases... They were "voluntarily" created by the companies a few weeks (or was it days) they got called in front of congress wondering about what could be done...
Re: (Score:3)
You have your number blocked by your carrier, but the phone ID is blocked by the police when you report it stolen. The insurance companies will not cover your loss unless you report it stolen and ensure the thief can not use it.
planned obsolescence - proves you wrong (Score:2)
look, stealing is nothing different than a form of planned obsolescence.
every business school teaches planned obsolescence and how to use it to maximize profit.
now, lets imagine that you have a product where there is lower planned obsolescence. is that good or bad for your profit? thats right, its bad.
now lets imagine a product that gets stolen a lot vs one that doesnt. which one is more like planned obsolescence? Thats right. the stolen product. its good for profits.
a corporation that is interested in maki
Re: (Score:2)
a corporation that is interested in making a profit is actually practicing mismanagement when it implements a high quality anti-theft system.
Interested in maximizing their profit. There is such a thing as corporate social responsibility [wikipedia.org], and anti-theft measures do no exclude thinking of the bottom line.
Re: (Score:3)
The marginal revenue companies get from people buying replacements for stolen products is simply not a viable business model.
But the revenue from the insurance plans is huge! You pay $7 a month or something for the "privilege" of paying a $150 deductible for a refurb model that cost them $75 in case you lose your phone.
If people didn't fear phone theft, then many fewer people would buy the insurance.
Re:But, But... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not free (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you had insurance on your phone, the carrier would replace it for you for free.
Well yes, but as far as the manufacturer is concerned that's still another sale.
And the carrier doesn't take a direct hit either. Indirect maybe, because their premiums will go up over time if they have to replace a lot of stolen phones, but on a case-by-case basis it wouldn't be enough to move the needle.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, *theft* is... in these cases... But maybe you're worried about people that hobble up to you on a wooden peg-leg and say ARRR Matey... I'll be takin' yer phone, and there's a musketball with yer name on it if ye give chase!
Re: (Score:2)
Are you serious? (Score:4, Interesting)
industry-wide 'kill switch' system
It's really for stolen phones .. just like the kill switch for the internet was for emergency purposes. This has nothing whatsoever to do with cutting off people's means of communicating effectively with each other.
Re:Are you serious? (Score:5, Informative)
LOL your so funny, cause if the Government wanted to or the phone provider wanted to they couldn't cut of your phone access any other way?
People don't get mugged for phones much out here in Australia, all you have to do is report the phone stolen and its blacklisted.. Not even doggy pawn shops take a phone without checking that. You would be left selling on ebay, even then the buyer would just file through Paypal to get their cash back.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL your so funny, cause if the Government wanted to or the phone provider wanted to they couldn't cut of your phone access any other way?
Yeah, lol, so funny... the government doesn't want or need a bunch of different ways to cut off or monitor your access to communications networks. They just need to cut the telegraph wire and they'll be all set. Oh, did I mention it's not the government that is pushing for a kill switch, but the citizens who are sick of watching several hundred dollar devices get stolen and law enforcement's lack of action even when the owner can point to a spot on the map and say the device is within a few feet of the glow
Re: (Score:2)
And you fail at reading comprehension where he says ...
THAT THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT DOES EXACTLY WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT THE KILL SWITCH FOR.
Really, rather than 'mentioning' something, you should read what you're replying to.
Re: (Score:2)
What's to stop somebody from reporting *YOUR* phone as stolen to inconvenience you?
Yes, there are people in the world that are demented enough that doing something like that would be enjoyable.... all they'd need to know is your phone number.
Re: (Score:2)
...and account details.... and password.... and a few other items of identification....
Not quite as simple as knowing the phone number.
But don't let that get in the way of your hyperbole.
Re: (Score:2)
That's already completely possible and is no different from how the carrier ALREADY disables the phone on your account when you report it stolen. The only difference is the phone will remain blacklisted until you report that it wasn't in fact stolen.
And of course as someone else already stated they don't just need to know your phone number, since as I stated the phone company already has to deal with this issue and of course requires at least some form of account authentication.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Are you serious? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because there are so many phones stolen and so many more serious crimes to investigate that the police don't give a crap about your stolen cell phone. You must not have ever had one stolen, because almost anyone who has (myself included) can confirm this complete lack of interest ;)
If the police cared, the technology is already there to catch many phone thieves. But everyone knows they won't bother. It's much easier (and nearly free) just to make the phone a brick to discourage it in the first place than spend MANY thousands of dollars of taxpayer money on investigation, arrest, booking, court hearing/trial, and imprisonment for a $500 piece of electronics.
Re: (Score:2)
The cops have better things to do--like pot busts! (Score:3)
Why would they "spend MANY thousands of dollars of taxpayer money on investigation, arrest, booking, court hearing/trial, and imprisonment for a $500 piece of electronics" when they could spend MANY thousands of dollars of taxpayer money on investigation, arrest, booking, court hearing/trial, and imprisonment for a $10 bag of weed?
Re: (Score:2)
Why cut off a phone? Why not let the police use these amazing features the phones have to basically ring the cops and direct them to the thief?
Boom, you get the phone back, and catch a thief (or someone receiving stolen goods, that lets you then investigate them/find the person who sold them the phone).
Rather than fix the symptom of the stolen phone, why not go just that bit further to stop crime and catch the bad guys?
Would anyone A) steal a phone knowing they'll be caught B) buy a cheap stolen phone knowing they'll be caught?
because the cops don't give a shit. they're too busy with the war on drugs to deal with criminals who are the criminal portion of the drugs business.
Re: (Score:2)
industry-wide 'kill switch' system
It's really for stolen phones .. just like the kill switch for the internet was for emergency purposes. This has nothing whatsoever to do with cutting off people's means of communicating effectively with each other.
Paranoia is fun, and often highly predictive; but only if you keep things architecturally realistic:
Does 'the man' want control over your communications, especially if they get caught with their pants down as in the London riots incident a while back? Sure, that's plausible enough.
Is there any reason why he would want a client-side kill switch to achieve this objective? That's a lot less convincing. A cellphone is worth approximately fuck-all without its network. Voila! control over communications is alread
Re: (Score:2)
If you have nothing to hide, AND EVERYONE YOU KNOW has nothing to hide, perhaps you'll be fine.
Well, what you need to hide changes as the government changes. Something perfectly okay to normal people may be considered evil by the government. 'Nothing to hide, nothing to fear' truly is nonsensical, as you said.
Re: (Score:3)
No, it doesn't, because you can already do that. Remember, you are on the carriers network? He can deny service to you at any time, and he will if, for example, you didn't pay the bill.
If I'm the NSA and want to get you shut down, all I need is your name, address, birth date or whatever the carrier uses to identify you, and a nice letter to the carrier who'll roll over anyways.
Re:Are you serious? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's really for stolen phones .. just like the kill switch for the internet was for emergency purposes. This has nothing whatsoever to do with cutting off people's means of communicating effectively with each other.
Don't be asinine. Your cellphone can already be tracked, tapped, disabled, folded, spindled and mutilated. What this is about is centralising and sharing information about stolen phones so that the utility of stolen phones diminishes to the point that you walking around with an iPhone doesn't look like an easy 200$ target to ne'er-do-wells.
Re: (Score:2)
Come on, seriously, modded interesting? Obviously the provider can already cut off an individual's service at will if they want to, that was never the issue. This is about disabling a stolen phone so it can't be added to a new service.
built in kill switch= kiss your sw rights goodbye. (Score:2)
if the killswitch is built into the os then you can't replace the os(or the killswitch is no good). then you need also a system for transferring rights on who has access to the switch.
besides.
now here's an important bit..
there is ALREADY a banlist for stolen phones! it blocks by phone imei.
the iphones are valuable as parts, so even that does nothing to curb stealing them. now if there wasn't a market for iphone parts...
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, San Francisco would love an industry-wide cell phone kill-switch.
The next time, there is Bart cop shooting a person in the back while that person he's laying face-down [youtube.com] on the floor, witnesses won't be able to upload the video on youtube before their phone gets confiscated.
Also, think of the ramifications the next time there is a mass protest. It would be great if you could kill cell phones from thousands protesters, all from only one switch. [wired.com] That would be a Mayor's wet dream!
Why is it a consumer isue? (Score:4, Funny)
The NSA is listening in on everything anyways, why aren't they arresting phone thieves when they use the phones?
Re: (Score:2)
Because the phone thieves aren't using them. They're selling them.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not paying attention to all the "how I got my phone back" stories, are you? A substantial portion of phone thieves ARE using them, at least until they run out of minutes, that's how many of the "I got my phone back" stories work, the thief uses the phone to take a pic or something, it dutifully uploads the pic to their tumblr or whatever, then the victim does some rudimentary geolocation of the pic, and calls the po-po
Re: (Score:2)
Way below pay grade. You're asking why police isn't kicking doors down with guns every time a a couple gets into a shouting match.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Likely extremely. Terrorists need to be "legendary" in concept that they are rare enough so that most people have never known one. They need to remain elusive, scary, and potentially everywhere but not really seen. The big part of fear factor comes from the fact that few if any citizens ever came face to face with one, so fear of the unknown remains a healthy factor.
Cerberus is free today through AppGratis (Score:5, Informative)
The best best for Android is Cerberus. Seriously, it does everything that "Find my iPhone" does plus a few things it will never do. It's free today through AppGratis http://www.droid-life.com/2013/06/06/deal-cerberus-lifetime-license-is-free-today-from-appgratis/ [droid-life.com]
If you happen to have a rooted phone, there's even a ROM version which will survive a Factory Reset.
Re:Cerberus is free today through AppGratis (Score:5, Informative)
This may be rather good, but I've felt rather uncomfortable with closed source apps that are track a phone or wipe data, and especially ones that can survive a hard reset, so I spent a few hours and rolled together a super-simple, no-UI app (passwords are hardcoded into the source, so I am distributing this source-only: https://code.google.com/p/roottracker/ [google.com] ) that does basic phone tracking and wiping via SMS. I tried to make the source simple enough that one can easily verify the lack of backdoors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What makes Cerberus better than Prey? Someone else commented concern for a closed-source tool, whereas Prey is completely open source AFAIK. They both seem to do the same thing, just one has better marketing apparently.
Re: (Score:3)
Given that we have such tools, why would we even need a kill switch?
You may not need it. The manufacturers do... every stolen and non-killed phone is a lost sale. Pretty much like pirating music or a movie, isn't it?
(ducks)
Wrong target (Score:2)
If VZW wont help, just call the NSA (Score:5, Funny)
They will know exactly where that bad boy is and who the theif is calling...
Blame game (Score:5, Funny)
It's Apple's fault that NYC is a crime ridden shit hole. If these disgusting companies would stop making products that people actually want New Yorkers wouldn't have to resort to robbing each other! Why can't Apple and Google be more like Microsoft!
Re:Blame game (Score:5, Funny)
We are talking about Bloomberg here, the guy who blames large cups for obesity.
Re: (Score:2)
We are talking about Bloomberg here, the guy who blames large cups for obesity.
It is standard dieting advice to limit portion sizes. I know there was one study that suggested that maybe that's not always true, but that one study could easily have been poorly designed, it seems like so many are nowadays.
I think the problem people have with his proposal is he didn't sell it. He should have have said that any place which sells soda by the cup but won't sell them larger than 16oz or whatever his target size was, would have a half-rate tax on all their soda fountain sales.
Re: (Score:2)
And he would be right that they at least contribute to the problem, as studies have shown. So your point is?
Re: (Score:2)
We are talking about Bloomberg here, the guy who blames large cups for obesity.
Large cups don't cause obesity.
People hoarding large cups for their own personal use is what causes obesity.
We all know two girls can easily share one cup.
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually quite valid. It is well established that a larger soda contains more calories than a small soda, and it is well established and agreed on that more calories causes additional body fat, and an excess of additional body fat leads to obesity.
That assumes that everybody who buys the forbidden soda, in the forbidden cup, has too much body fat. For this moronic suggestion to work it needs to be coupled with a BMI number for each costumer - you must be this thin to drink from this fountain.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's such [cityrating.com] a crime ridden shithole... I'm not really a fan of NYC (I like to visit every once in a while but I could never imagine living there) but really, it hasn't been crime ridden since the 1980's.
Blacklist IMEI? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Blacklist IMEI? (Score:5, Insightful)
They said that in the article: It gets sold to a carrier which is not querying the US version of the Stolen Phone database.
We need something like DNS but then for IMEI numbers. .imei :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, do you REALLY want to give this to the carriers?
After all, if they detect a phone you didn't buy from them, or that you're off contract, they could keep removing your IMEI from the list and denying you service. Sure you can call them and they'll probably reinstate it, then it'll mysteriously revert itself a few months later.
Switch, and that IMEI will be deactivated permanently. Get on a contract and it'll work normally again.
Re: (Score:2)
Like DNS?
It seems to me that this is a wonderful application for DNS as it stands.
I mean, what do we need in an IMEI blacklist? Something simple, hierarchical, efficiently cached, distributed, low-bandwidth? Oh, yeah: DNS does that already.
Of course this implies that the database is accessible by the public...but I don't see any harm in that.
Re: (Score:2)
Or vendors. Or activist groups.
It must be run by someone, mustn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
...unless there is more than one of "it", in which case DNS is still viable.
(I hate replying to myself.)
Re: (Score:2)
Second the phones
Sounds like a comic book super hero job (Score:4, Insightful)
I understand why real cops wouldn't want to retrieve phones. It would be easy to spot, but they would be encountering possibly violent criminals more often. No one wants to die even if they're doing their job more effectively.
Re: (Score:2)
I understand why real cops wouldn't want to retrieve phones. It would be easy to spot,
GPS can only really get you an address. It just isn't all that precise
So how do you search a 20 story apartment building for a stolen phone, without any specialized equipment?
[spoiler alert]You can't and don't[/spoiler]
Re: (Score:2)
Or just a cop? (Score:2)
Police should try and catch the thief and return the phone to it's owner. GPS won't work, unless the thief has switched it on. Cell tower information would probably be sufficient enough to get near the thief. If word gets out that teams of cops are actually on full-time phone retrieval duty, thieves are going to be a lot more cautious about stealing phones. The reason this happens so much is that the chance the thieves get caught is way too low.
Blocking the IMEI means the thieves will change the IMEI on th
Bad Idea (Score:3, Insightful)
... Apple, Google, Samsung, and Microsoft are due to meet and discuss the implementation of a industry-wide 'kill switch' system."
Soon to be highjacked by the job-creating content industry.
Oops, sorry, looks like you'd better stop pirating Mickey Mouse from 75 years ago if you want to make that emergency call!
IMEI blacklists, use them! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
This would pretty much rule out petty thiefs.
It's more that it would require specialized fences, who would be easy to track due to the nature of cellphones, and the nature of the criminals who bring in the phones...
So what is the problem? (Score:3)
If you wallet is stolen, you don't expect to get any cash in in back. If your watch in stolen, or your TV, you should not expect to see either again.
And if your phone is stolen, like every other object on the planet, you most likely will not see it again.
Re: (Score:3)
Unlike watches, TVs, or wallets, phones contain technology that should make it trivial to either retrieve the device or reduce its resale value to near-zero by rendering it inoperative. The former reduces the victim's burden and the latter reduces the thief's incentive.
What could possibly go wrong? (Score:2)
I hope that their bold plan merely involves IMEI blacklisting(though, if so, why are they inviting handset makers, rather than bitching at the telcos?); but if the demand is being made at the handset vendors, I get a sinking feeling that it might involve some sort of client-side software that is designed to be impossible to remove/circumvent. I'm sure that the vendors would implement that in way totally unproblematic for people who want to root/jailbreak/run custom ROMs...
On Verizon Wireless (Score:2)
When a phone is reported lost or stolen the MEID and the SIM card # are added to a list and cannot be used on the VZW network. Often though the first thing a
competent thief will due is turn the phone off preventing any GPS locating software to track the phone. The phone will either be sold to a person who does not
check the MEID # (and when they try and do an ESN change will be told the phone is on the lost stolen list and to please take the phone into a VZW Corp. store.)
Or they take the phone someplace like
2 things (Score:4, Funny)
I own a microsoft powered phone, no one wants it
What happens when "hackers" get hold of this kill switch?
Absolute Software... (Score:3)
http://www.zdnet.com/new-lojack-solution-for-galaxy-s4-makes-theft-meaningless-7000016433/ [zdnet.com]
Unlike a software solution only, the Absolute Software LoJack system is both a hardware and software solution. Starting with the Samsung Galaxy S4, Absolute's persistence technology is built into the firmware of the S4 and cannot be removed, even if the device is restored to factory settings.
The Galaxy S4 has the technology built in now, but the necessary Absolute software solution is not yet available. When it is available, you will be able to remotely lock your device, locate it, erase the data from the device and storage card, or have the Absolute Investigation and Recovery Services Team attempt to recover it.
The Recovery Team is made up of experts from law enforcement, the FBI, the Marines, the US Army, and other government positions. To date, they have recovered 28,000+ devices (laptops and PCs) in over 95 countries.
"Industry-wide" (Score:2)
As if anyone's hard-up enough to steal an Android or Windows phone. "iPhone, iPad and other Apple device thefts"
Corportate Malfeasence (Score:2)
Cell phone manufacturers and service prov
IMEI? (Score:2)
Perhaps a decade ago, makers of GSM phones here in Europe advertised intensely for the ability to kill stolen phones using the IMEI number. Basically they stated that if your phone got stolen, all you needed to do (besides filing a police report) was to report it to the carrier. They could block the IMEI number in an international database, so when the phone was turned on it would either be rejected from any GSM network or downright be bricked.
But it turned out that not only was the support for the database
Hopefully.... (Score:2)
just have police do their thing! (Score:3)
We all know there is no security without physical security.
But let's forget about that for a second.
Even if you make it ueber-secure (not like today when in many Samsung devices the IMEI is actually in some obfuscated file in the efs partition!) and you really manage to bound each device to an IMEI you still have the challange of managing the blacklist/"nuke from the orbit" authorization list.
It costs 5-10-15EUR to send a box full with phones across Europe, and no customs at all if it's within EU.
You need to have (at least) EU-wide database. How do you manage that? What recourse you have if you bought your phone in Germany, you leave in Belgium and it gets blacklisted by an operator in Bulgaria based on some typo from a dodgy police station in village? How can you argue that (hint: they don't even use the latin alphabet in Bulgaria)?
We had enough of this country-coded DVDs and network locked phone and all the crap. Any more of this and will give (another) unfair advantage to your operator: the only safe phones will be the ones bought directly, they know for sure it's legit. Anything else is a risk.
The real way out here is just to have police go after the thieves. Even the older phones could be tracked well enough and with some social engineering (if you had access to the list of calls) you could find out who has the phone without any GPS or camera and whatnot. However, they just don't bother even if you give them the position of the phone within meters, inside a single-house and a picture of the user.
Why not block by IMEI -what the rest of world do. (Score:5, Informative)
cut them off at the network... NYC are talking to the wrong people they need to speak to GSM and CTIA.
they do it in Europe as well the USA is very slow about this...
" Carriers AT&T and T-Mobile offer a joint database, as the carriers use the same basic networking technology. Verizon and Sprint offer a second database. By the end of November 2013, the four carriers will combine databases, and adding smaller carriers like Nex-Tech and Cellcom. Plans exist to link the US database with an international version hosted by the GSM Association to prevent stolen phones from being shipped to overseas markets and used on other networks."
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, you have to wait until the device checks in before you can wipe it.
This is not rocket science.
It's almost as if you made that statement with no knowledge of how these systems work.
Never been to Europe.
That was a statement, not a question. Germans cant even get stolen cars back from Poland, so much so they never even bother trying to change or even obscur
Re: (Score:2)
You are correct, except for the fact that carrier locks are country based. They are not (I think they are bound to MCC+MNC of the IMSI), in fact this is how most people learn their phone is locked, they go abroad and try a local prepaid SIM.
Re:No Kill (Score:5, Insightful)
You could have stopped right there. That alone would have negated a lot of the incentive of stealing phones in the first place.
That rings far too much like "guilty until proven innocent".
It's stolen property... handle it identically to that. The possessor surrenders it to the authorities at their own expense.
Re: (Score:3)
You could have stopped right there. That alone would have negated a lot of the incentive of stealing phones in the first place.
That rings far too much like "guilty until proven innocent".
It's stolen property... handle it identically to that. The possessor surrenders it to the authorities at their own expense.
Note that, in most jurisdictions, possession of stolen property IS a crime, regardless of whether or not you actually know that the property is stolen. If the DA is very busy, or honestly believes that you did not knowingly purchase stolen property, you will just lose said property. If they think you should have known, you may very well be faced with criminal charges.
Re: (Score:2)
What does Microsoft have to do with smartphones or theft?
WhatMeWorry!
well.. a 3rd party cannot develop a wipe app for windows phone.