Does this T-Mobile/LG smartphone carrier unlock code ever expire?

[Judy Miller]

Do carrier unlock codes expire?

I received the message below from T-Mobile containing
the procedure to unlock my kid's cellphone.

I can email that procedure to the kid, who is away for a
few months, but the kid sometimes messes things up, and it
says that you can destroy the phone if you do it wrong.

If I wait, the kid will be back in a few months.

Do you know if these carrier unlock instructions expire?

------------------------------------------------------
FROM: AR Notification <DoNot...@T-Mobile.com>
SUBJECT: T-Mobile Sim Unlock Notification 2125688898
T-Mobile Sim Unlock Request
Sim Unlock Reference: 6493322
IMEI: 023447039850033

Unlock Code: 5398328494192082

Thank you for taking the time to contact T-Mobile.
Below you will see the Instructions for unlocking your LG device.

NOTE: If you receive an error message while performing the instructions
below, stop. Please be aware that if an excessive amount of incorrect
attempts are made, the phone will be permanently locked.

1. Insert T-Mobile or Non T-Mobile SIM card in to the device.
2. Tap the Dialer
3. Enter 2945#*659#
4. Selct Network Lock
5. Enter in the unlock code
7. Click done
8. Click unlock

The phone should display "Network Unlock"
Thank You,
Customer Service
T-Mobile USA, Inc.

[Machiel de Wit]

Judy Miller schreef op 15-02-2014
in <ldoo9l$870$1...@speranza.aioe.org>:

> Do carrier unlock codes expire?
>
> I received the message below from T-Mobile containing
> the procedure to unlock my kid's cellphone.
>
> I can email that procedure to the kid, who is away for a
> few months, but the kid sometimes messes things up, and it
> says that you can destroy the phone if you do it wrong.
>
> If I wait, the kid will be back in a few months.
>
> Do you know if these carrier unlock instructions expire?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> FROM: AR Notification <DoNot...@T-Mobile.com>
> SUBJECT: T-Mobile Sim Unlock Notification 2125688898
> T-Mobile Sim Unlock Request

> Sim Unlock Reference: xxxxxxxx
> IMEI: xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Unlock Code: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

>
> Thank you for taking the time to contact T-Mobile.
> Below you will see the Instructions for unlocking your LG device.
>
> NOTE: If you receive an error message while performing the
> instructions below, stop. Please be aware that if an excessive
> amount of incorrect attempts are made, the phone will be
> permanently locked.
>
> 1. Insert T-Mobile or Non T-Mobile SIM card in to the device.
> 2. Tap the Dialer
> 3. Enter 2945#*659#
> 4. Selct Network Lock
> 5. Enter in the unlock code
> 7. Click done
> 8. Click unlock
>
> The phone should display "Network Unlock"
> Thank You,
> Customer Service
> T-Mobile USA, Inc.

Are you serious? Then you better cancel your message.
Not only never expires de unlock code, you make it posible to kidnap
it, due sending all the codes free into the whole world.


--
MdW.

[Judy Miller]

On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 23:42:59 +0100, Machiel de Wit wrote:

> Are you serious? Then you better cancel your message.
> Not only never expires de unlock code, you make it posible to kidnap
> it, due sending all the codes free into the whole world

I do not understand.
I assumed that the code I received is ONLY for my phone.
So, what good would that unlock code be for someone with a different phone?

[Bert]

In news:52ffed79$0$2835$e4fe...@news2.news.xs4all.nl Machiel de Wit

<reply-to-ng....@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> Not only never expires de unlock code, you make it posible to kidnap
> it, due sending all the codes free into the whole world.

Unlock codes are specific to the phone. If one worked for all phones, do
you think people would go to such trouble to get one?

--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN

[Bert]

In news:ldoso5$jm8$1...@speranza.aioe.org Judy Miller <jmi...@not.gmail.com>
wrote:

> I assumed that the code I received is ONLY for my phone.

It is.

[tlvp]

You are quite right: the unlock code is specific to the one handset in the
world with the IMEI that your phone bears. Moreover, the procedure the
email describes -- the "instructions for unlocking your LG device" -- are
specific to your particular model of LG phone. Motorolas, Nokias, etc.,
have unlock codes of different lengths, and unlock instructions of
different character.

Finally, as a general rule, unlock codes -- and unlock instructions -- are
good until used -- and beyond (one Motorola phone I had gotten unlock
instructions for -- and successfully unlocked -- mysteriously got itself
re-locked again when I put in a new carrier's SIM card -- fortunately, I
still had access to the old unlock instructions, applied them, and Presto!
the phone was unlocked once again :-) .

So don't lose that unlock instruction email :-) ! HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[Geoffrey S. Mendelson]

Bert wrote:
>
> Unlock codes are specific to the phone. If one worked for all phones, do
> you think people would go to such trouble to get one?
>

They are actually specific not only to the phone, but to the service
provider. So if you bought the phone from T-Mobile, it would have a different
code than the same phone bought from AT&T.

Some phones can be unlocked by buying the code from various vendors in
Eastern Europe. I have unlocked several Motorola phones that way.

Some phones require the code come from the service provider, who will only
provide them to current customers and may have other restrictions.

iPhones really need to be unlocked by Apple, who will only do it if the
service provider who bought it from them asks them to do it. Then a
magical unlock code is sent via iTunes to the registered owner of the phone.

There are many unlock hacks for iPhones, most of them don't work, or stop
working if you reboot the phone.

Geoff.



--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM/KBUH7245/KBUW5379

[tlvp]

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 06:19:21 +0000 (UTC), Geoffrey S. Mendelson commented
on:

>> Unlock codes are specific to the phone. If one worked for all phones, do
>> you think people would go to such trouble to get one?
>>
> They are actually specific not only to the phone, but to the service
> provider. So if you bought the phone from T-Mobile, it would have a different
> code than the same phone bought from AT&T.

More particularly, an unlock code is specific to a given handset's IMEI.
The manufacturers leave it, in part, to the service providers to determine
to whom and under what circumstances to reveal the unlock code and
directions for its use. But "service provider" is not used so restrictively
as to mean cellular operators only, for, as you say,

> Some phones can be unlocked by buying the code from various vendors in
> Eastern Europe. I have unlocked several Motorola phones that way.

Mainly, it means Nokia or Motorola won't divulge unlock codes to you or me.
Or anyway, that's the impression I've always been under :-) .

[Machiel de Wit]

Anthony R. Gold schreef op 16-02-2014
in <gotvf9d5gstbi1nb3...@4ax.com>:

> On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 23:42:59 +0100, Machiel de Wit

> Judy, relax. Yes, the unlock code will not expire but also it can not
> be used or abused to kidnap anyone or anything.

The unlock code alone not indeed, but the IMEI code is a unique
identifier.
But who take care these days for personal securyty? One gives
everything away for a free lunch [1]. Apparently Judy is not aware of
the transparency of usenet.

[1] "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch"


--
MdW.

[Olaf Schmitt]

Look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mndv4gmYEI

[Maynard A. Philbrook Jr.]

In article <5od2g91lno1msbl75...@4ax.com>, not-for-
ma...@ahjg.co.uk says...

> > [1] "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch"
>

> I still have no idea what you are warning about. Please be specific about
> what harm anyone can do to Judy by knowing both that unlock code and her
> phone's IMEI number. Because some number is unique does not make it valuable
> to anyone else who is seeking to do mischief. The Message-Id of your last
> post was <53007b5d$0$2966$e4fe...@news2.news.xs4all.nl>, which is unique,
> and that knowledge plus $3.65 will buy me a Grande Latte at Starbucks.
>

How much does it cost me with out the knowledge coupon?


Jamie

[Maynard A. Philbrook Jr.]

In article <dgl2g9d1j36n8le9q...@4ax.com>, not-for-
ma...@ahjg.co.uk says...

> $3.65

Ok, so any retard can get a coffee at starbucks!

:_
Jamie

[Gordon Burditt]

> I still have no idea what you are warning about. Please be specific about
> what harm anyone can do to Judy by knowing both that unlock code and her
> phone's IMEI number.

I think it is possible to track the phone's movements (provided
it's on) knowing the IMEI number. This works in two situations:
(1) you have a friend at the phone's cellular provider who has
access to cell phone tower data. However, if he's got
access to the tower data, he can probably do a phone-number-to-IMEI
lookup or customer-name-to-IMEI lookup just as easily.
and
(2) you are close enough to the phone to receive the signal directly,
with a "direction-finder" like device. Possibly it could
work better by pretending to be a cell phone tower and
getting the phone to respond to it. I don't know how common
these devices are, but I think law enforcement has them.

I think the unlock code is pretty useless, with or without the
IMEI number, unless you own the phone or plan to steal it.

> Because some number is unique does not make it valuable
> to anyone else who is seeking to do mischief.

A remotely readable unique number (e.g. cell phone IMEI numbers,
RFID tags (in, say, credit cards, clothes, etc.), toll tags, Bluetooth
MAC addresses, WiFi MAC addresses, etc. tend to be more abusable
in two ways: tracking/stalking someone, and spending their money.

The longer the range and the more related to money it is, the more
abusable it is. IMEI numbers are pretty long-range (I suspect
providers can do a network-wide international search, although the
radio signal probably reaches only a few nearby cell towers) for
tracking but don't seem to have much potential for financial abuse.
(At least on T-Mobile, the SIM card, not the IMEI, seems to provide
the billing info).

Credit cards with RFID chips may be readable for only a few feet,
making them not so good for location tracking, but the financial
abuse (and mistake) potential is enormous. I've witnessed two
people using Mobil SpeedPass accidentally pay for each other's gas,
then almost drive off before one of them noticed the problem (my
Toyota can't possibly hold 80 gallons of gas!).

[Geoffrey S. Mendelson]

Gordon Burditt wrote:
>
> The longer the range and the more related to money it is, the more
> abusable it is. IMEI numbers are pretty long-range (I suspect
> providers can do a network-wide international search, although the
> radio signal probably reaches only a few nearby cell towers) for
> tracking but don't seem to have much potential for financial abuse.
> (At least on T-Mobile, the SIM card, not the IMEI, seems to provide
> the billing info).

Serial numbers are useful to people who steal phones. There is a worldwide
database of lost (greylist) and stolen (blacklist) GSM phones. It can
only be updated by a service provider and they can choose to use it
or ignore it.

Back in the final days of the last century, the UK cellular carriers
did not use the data base to encourage people to buy pay as you go SIMs
and put them in stolen phones. In those days they were planning IPOs, and
the valuation of the company was based upon the number of subscribers
(active SIMs) and not revenue.

Since GSM phones were new here (in Israel) and very expensive, I purchased
several used phones from a dealer in the UK who took them in trade, tested
them and sold them over the internet. When they arrived here, they
were blacklisted. Israel Orange used the blacklist.

To be honest, I'm not sure anyone cares though. There was a version of the
software to unlock the old Nokia handsets via a computer cable, and every time
you ran it, it incremented the phone's IEMI by one. I assume because there
were so many stolen phones that it was necessary. :-)

[tlvp]

On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 10:54:21 +0000 (UTC), Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

> ... There was a version of the

> software to unlock the old Nokia handsets via a computer cable, and every time
> you ran it, it incremented the phone's IEMI by one.

??? IMEI (not IEMI) isn't irretrievably burned into ROM? Anyway the last
digit of an IMEI is a check-digit -- what you get from a valid IMEI by
merely incrementing it by one is generally no longer a valid IMEI :-) .

[Geoffrey S. Mendelson]

tlvp wrote:
> ??? IMEI (not IEMI) isn't irretrievably burned into ROM? Anyway the last
> digit of an IMEI is a check-digit -- what you get from a valid IMEI by
> merely incrementing it by one is generally no longer a valid IMEI :-) .

In this case I did not have or use the software, by the time there were
enough GSM carriers here to matter, you could get unlocked cell phones
cheaper here than locked ones. Now no cell phones are sold here locked.

I assume what it did was to add one to the serial number part of the IMEI
and recompute the check digit. It worked and was quite popular.

[tlvp]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 04:39:21 +0000 (UTC), Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

> tlvp wrote:
>> ??? IMEI (not IEMI) isn't irretrievably burned into ROM? Anyway the last
>> digit of an IMEI is a check-digit -- what you get from a valid IMEI by
>> merely incrementing it by one is generally no longer a valid IMEI :-) .
>
> In this case I did not have or use the software, by the time there were
> enough GSM carriers here to matter, you could get unlocked cell phones
> cheaper here than locked ones. Now no cell phones are sold here locked.

A much nicer state of affairs than allowing SIM-locked phones, isn't it?

> I assume what it did was to add one to the serial number part of the IMEI
> and recompute the check digit. It worked and was quite popular.

OK, I'll take your word for it :-) . Thanks,

> Geoff.