Does this PDF show where the IMEI number is stored in the SIM card?

[Johannes]

Where I live, T-Mobile voice coverage stinks (compared to AT&T).

However, I had to switch from AT&T to TMobile because AT&T forces
you to have a data plan for all your kids' smartphones even if you
don't want your kids to have a data plan (and even if you do not
buy the phone from AT&T).

The sole determination of whether or not AT&T penalizes you for using
"what they consider" a smartphone is based purely on the IMEI number.

If your child's SIM card IMEI indicates any other phone than a smartphone,
then, you won't get charged for a data plan (unless, of course, you use
data, but I always have data blocked - which they will do for you).

I want to consider whether it's possible to spoof the IMEI in the SIM card.

QUESTION:
Does this PDF I just found searching (which is admittedly dry) show us
WHERE the IMEI is stored in the SIM card?

http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102200_102299/102221/11.00.00_60/ts_102221v110000p.pdf

[R. Mark Clayton]

"Johannes" <johan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:k3spoc$l9c$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

> Where I live, T-Mobile voice coverage stinks (compared to AT&T).
>
> However, I had to switch from AT&T to TMobile because AT&T forces
> you to have a data plan for all your kids' smartphones even if you
> don't want your kids to have a data plan (and even if you do not
> buy the phone from AT&T).
>
> The sole determination of whether or not AT&T penalizes you for using
> "what they consider" a smartphone is based purely on the IMEI number.
>
> If your child's SIM card IMEI indicates any other phone than a smartphone,
> then, you won't get charged for a data plan (unless, of course, you use
> data, but I always have data blocked - which they will do for you).

The IMEI is in the phone, NOT in the SIM card. Ask tehm for a 2G SIM card.

>
> I want to consider whether it's possible to spoof the IMEI in the SIM
> card.

No, but you can change the IMEI in the phone.

In the UK this is a criminal offence, because it allows resale of stolen
phones. I imagine it is similar in the USA.

>
> QUESTION:
> Does this PDF I just found searching (which is admittedly dry) show us
> WHERE the IMEI is stored in the SIM card?
>
> http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102200_102299/102221/11.00.00_60/ts_102221v110000p.pdf

Dunno, but you will be dealing with crooks.

[who where]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:30:52 +0000 (UTC), Johannes
<johan...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Where I live, T-Mobile voice coverage stinks (compared to AT&T).
>
>However, I had to switch from AT&T to TMobile because AT&T forces
>you to have a data plan for all your kids' smartphones even if you
>don't want your kids to have a data plan (and even if you do not
>buy the phone from AT&T).

Not necessarily so. This *may* depend on what plan or other
arrangement you have/had with AT&T. When we visited the states
Mar-Jun this year and brought an iPhone, we used pre-paid ($25/mo) and
by_choice also paid for a data plan ($25/1G/1mo). AT&T were at pains
to explain that "you can't use that data plan on an iPhone" but it
works fine (subject to their coverage).

>The sole determination of whether or not AT&T penalizes you for using
>"what they consider" a smartphone is based purely on the IMEI number.

They don't even get to see your IMEI.

>If your child's SIM card IMEI indicates any other phone than a smartphone,
>then, you won't get charged for a data plan (unless, of course, you use
>data, but I always have data blocked - which they will do for you).

As others have pointed out, the IMEI is the phone's ID, not anything
to do with the SIM.

>I want to consider whether it's possible to spoof the IMEI in the SIM card.

Yes. But you don't want to go there. Nor do you need to.

Many - but not all - AT&T shops will refuse to sign up
itinerants/tourists to a pre-paid plan with a BYO iPhone. This is
apaprently to protect their own iPhone supply arrangement (2-year
contract when we looked). But you can still get a SIM/plan without
identifying the target device as an iPhone and avoiding the
lecture/grief. In extreme cases, tourists actually have a working
non-iPhone so that the account can be set up. Afterwards, sweap the
SIM to the smartphone of your choice.

I'm not aware of whether the IMEI is ever transmitted on-air as part
of login or call preamble. If it is, it is of course possible that
AT&T - tiring of people working around their "attitude" - are actually
monitoring the IMEI transmitted and initiating blocking based on that.

[miso]

I don't know about AT$T, but if T-Mobile doesn't have your IMEI, their
system often thinks you are roaming. I broke a phone and bought a
replacement on Craigslist. T-Mobile would go back and forth regarding if
I was on the home network or not. After dealing with them regarding some
other problem, the service rep noticed I was not on the phone they sold
me. I gave them the IMEI and all the roaming problems went away. I
wasn't charged for roaming, but T-Mobile has been blocking tethering
when roaming, so it is important to let them know you your IMEI.

Note that T-Mobile is somehow putting UMTS on the 1900MHz band. I don't
know exactly how this works. But you can now get high speed data in some
markets with the iphone on T-Mobile. Las Vegas is nearly complete. The
bay area is being converted.

Reception problems with T-Mobile are usually due to the quality of the
phone. The iphone has never been a stellar phone regarding reception,
though the 4S doesn't suck very much. The iphone 5 is still TBD. It has
crappy wifi, but it is still being determined if that is due to software
problems or just more crappy engineering. But it looks pretty.

[Robert Neville]

who where <no...@home.net> wrote:

>I'm not aware of whether the IMEI is ever transmitted on-air as part
>of login or call preamble.

It definitely is - in addition to identifing the make and model of the phone,
some providers also blacklist the full IMEI of phones reported lost or stolen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Mobile_Equipment_Identity

[Bob Stevens]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:20:01 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:

> In the UK this is a criminal offence, because it allows resale of stolen
> phones. I imagine it is similar in the USA.

Changing the IMEI is perfectly legal in the United States (as are many
things not legal elsewhere).

[James Gagney]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 03:11:55 +0000, Bob Stevens wrote:

> Changing the IMEI is perfectly legal in the United States

I agree.

In the USA, it's no different than spoofing the unique MAC address on
your NIC card.

There's not a single law against it.

If you do illegal stuff with a phone (like throw it off a bridge to hit
someone on the head) then it's illegal - but it's not the spoofing of the
IMEI that's illegal - it would be using the phone to blow up an IED or
something else that is already covered by a bazillion laws.

So don't fret about the UK & India crowd.
They know not our more rational laws.

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:54:17 +0800, who where wrote:

> They don't even get to see your IMEI.

That's interesting!

Then what 'do' they look at to determine if your phone is a 'smartphone'?

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:54:17 +0800, who where wrote:

> you can get a SIM/plan without identifying the target device as an

> iPhone and avoiding the lecture/grief.

This is a common misconception (unless I'm missing your point).

As everyone knows, once you have service, you can swap your SIM card into
any ATT or unlocked phone - and it will work just fine (I've done it many
times).

Of course, every carrier asks for 'an' IMEI when you first sign up with
them - but - that IMEI a mere technicality (I'm not sure 'what' they do
with that number because it's not meaningful). In fact, I don't think my
current T-Mobile IMEI is anywhere near close to the original IMEI I gave
them over the phone when I first started service, simply because I've
changed phones so many times since then, simply by inserting the SIM
card.

The problem is that AT&T clearly 'says' that if they detect a 'smartphone'
being used by my kids, then they will automatically ADD the most
expensive data plan within 48 hours.

Now, I don't know if they actually 'do' that - but they certainly 'say'
they will do that. I asked them how they know if it's a smarphone and
they say they keep a list of smartphones on hand.

I asked what if the smartphone isn't even one they sell - and they said
they keep a list of 'all' smartphones on hand.

Now, I only know what they clearly say to me - I don't know if they
actually 'do' this. But, if they did - I consider that unethical business
practices.

Why should I be forced to have a data plan for my children when I want
them to use the phone's WiFi while at home and to NOT have a cellular
data plan?

Anyway, luckily T-Mobile doesn't have this rule - but, if AT&T doesn't
use the transmitted IMEI number to determine whether a cell phone is a
smartphone or not - then the question morphs to:

Q: WHat 'does' AT&T use then to determine if you put your SIM card into a
smartphone?

[Johannes]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 18:18:09 -0700, miso wrote:

> if T-Mobile doesn't have your IMEI, their system often thinks you are
> roaming.

I use T-Mobile currently. There is no way they have my correct IMEI
because I've changed phones multiple times since I started my T-Mobile
plan.

In fact, my kid recently went swimming with his phone, and I just bought
a new T-Mobile Android phone at Target for $100 so my kid and I are both
on T-Mobile and there is no way I called them to tell them that which
they don't even need to know.

BTW, my plan is the basic family plan - which has - to my knowledge, no
roaming charges.

[Johannes]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 18:18:09 -0700, miso wrote:

> Reception problems with T-Mobile are usually due to the quality of the
> phone.

Almost all my phones are unlocked - and the reception is clearly the
signal because nothing else changes but the SIM card when I pop an AT&T
SIM in versus a T-Mobile SIM card.

Even on my kid's cydia-enabled iPhone.

[Johannes]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:20:01 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:

> The IMEI is in the phone, NOT in the SIM card.

> Ask them for a 2G SIM card.

Please tell me more.

I don't understand what a 2G SIM card even is.

Googling, I found this blog:
http://blog.whitesites.com/Tmobile-3G-Sim-Card-vs-2G-Sim-Card__634406228793726250_blog.htm

But I'm not sure how that will help.

I don't even WANT data. I just want voice & text.

You can't get just voice & text with AT&T if you have what they consider
a smartphone.

So can you clarify how 2G will help?

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:54:17 +0800, who where wrote:

> AT&T -
> tiring of people working around their "attitude" - are actually
> monitoring the IMEI transmitted and initiating blocking based on that.

When I was originally on AT&T, and when I complained to the FCC about
them, I got a call from an AT&T VP who had a list of EVERY phone I ever
used on my plan.

They based all that on the IMEI transmitted.

So, they're DEFINITELY 'monitoring' the IMEI ... otherwise there would
be no need for this thread.

[Johannes]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:45:46 -0600, Robert Neville wrote:

> It definitely is - in addition to identifing the make and model of the
> phone, some providers also blacklist the full IMEI of phones reported
> lost or stolen.

I thought so!

I'm no genius, but, it's disconcerting how much mis-information is out
there! Very few people actually seem to know what they're talking about.

Again, I'm not putting myself on a pedestal, but let's cover the myths
that have been proposed in 'just' this thread.

1. Myth: Spoofing the IMEI is illegal in the USA
Reality: It's not illegal in the USA (legal group added).

2. Myth: The carrier must have the correct IMEI on record
Reality: You can borrow a phone & put your SIM card in it and your phone
works just fine; besides, the carrier knows your IMEI at all times anyway

3. Myth: The IMEI is in the SIM card (this was one I suggested wrongly!)
Reality: The IMEI is apparently stored in firmware in the phone itself

4. Myth: You're dealing with crooks if you change the IMEI
Reality: That's like saying you're dealing with crooks if you change your
unique MAC address or your hostname of your PC. What's illegal is doing
illegal things with the phone - not simply changing a number.

[miso]

There are no roaming charges with T-Mobile, at least in the USA. But you
lose the right to tether when roaming. You do not lose data connectivity
to the phone, but only if you tether. I kind of thought I made that
clear in my post, but it doesn't hurt to repeat it.

So if they DON'T know your IMEI, they may think you are roaming. Or it
could be a coincidence that when I gave them my IMEI, the roaming issue
went away.

I have talked to T-Mob about using different phones since I have an
Android also that is on T-mob frequencies. They don't care what I use,
but would have to set up data differently if I left BIS. I don't really
like the Android phone, but needed it for one critical app that use via
Bluetooth. I get data to the phone via wifi, so I don't even bother
putting a simcard in it.

[miso]

For edge, there is no need to change the simcard. Any decent phone, even
an iphone, can read the signal strength. UMTS is a different story.

[miso]

Let me explain myself for the third time. A T-mobile branded phone, in
this case unlocked, with T-Mobile simcard, can periodically appear as
roaming. This is not a myth. I have have this happen. When I gave
T-mobile my IMEI, the problem went away.

I hope I have stated this clearly.

[miso]

Buy the ipod touch. Case solved.

You can bitch, rant and stomp your foot all you want, but AT&T has the
right to make up any rule they want and can sue you, send the case to
small claims, or a collection service. It is a contact. You abide by the
contract or face the legal consequences. At best, they will just
terminate your service.

T-Mobile wants you to bring iphones to their system. The company is
number 4; they need the business. In some localities, you will get 3G
service. Check out tmonews.com

> http://www.tmonews.com/2012/09/t-mobile-press-release-officially-announces-las-vegas-4g-iphone-speeds/

They call it 4G, but really is is 3G.

[miso]

Using "UMTS Networks" as a reference, the UE (user equipment) needs an
IMEI (international Mobile Subscriber Identity), which the book refers
to as "unalterable equipment identification." There is no comment on
changing this code or the legality thereof.

The IMEI is feed to the CN (Core Network), but there is no requirement
to use it. I interpret this as the phone company can do whatever they
want with the IMEI. Log it, ignore it, charge the sucker a fee, etc.

[UMTS Networks, 2001, John Wiley and Sons.]

[miso]

There is no contract involved with your MAC.

There is a contact involved with your phone, and spoofing the IMEI could
be considered "theft of services" if it allows you to bypass a fee or
charge.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_of_services

This is commonly how cable theft is treated legally. So you can change
the IMEI and not use the phone, hence no theft has occurred. However if
you put that phone on a network where they service provider expects a
fee for that particular type of device and you avoid said fee, you have
now committed theft of services. Now what AT$T wants to do at that
point is another story.

The service providers, well at least TV providers, like to threaten the
sucker with legal action then make the sucker pay a fee to settle the
account and not get the law involved. This was common with MDS in the
80s, and in the day when satellite could easily be hacked. The law
doesn't care HOW you hacked the system, they just care that you DID hack
the system. Thus no need to explicitly designate some procedure to be
illegal.

[miso]

On 9/25/2012 8:18 PM, James Gagney wrote:

I have the ability to read every parameter on a simcard. Which parameter
restricts the phone to 2G?

[R. Mark Clayton]

"Johannes" <johan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:k3ttod$5q5$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:20:01 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>
>> The IMEI is in the phone, NOT in the SIM card.
>> Ask them for a 2G SIM card.
>
> Please tell me more.
>
> I don't understand what a 2G SIM card even is.

No 3G sata (or calls). Older SIM's do not have the abilityt to configure on
3G.

OTOH they can still get data using GPRS or EDGE.

>
> Googling, I found this blog:
> http://blog.whitesites.com/Tmobile-3G-Sim-Card-vs-2G-Sim-Card__634406228793726250_blog.htm
>
> But I'm not sure how that will help.
>
> I don't even WANT data. I just want voice & text.
>
> You can't get just voice & text with AT&T if you have what they consider
> a smartphone.
>
> So can you clarify how 2G will help?

Well it won't be able to connect via 3G.

[R. Mark Clayton]

"who where" <no...@home.net> wrote in message
news:nsj46810sr1k8j807...@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:30:52 +0000 (UTC), Johannes
> <johan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Where I live, T-Mobile voice coverage stinks (compared to AT&T).
>>
>>However, I had to switch from AT&T to TMobile because AT&T forces
>>you to have a data plan for all your kids' smartphones even if you
>>don't want your kids to have a data plan (and even if you do not
>>buy the phone from AT&T).
>
> Not necessarily so. This *may* depend on what plan or other
> arrangement you have/had with AT&T. When we visited the states
> Mar-Jun this year and brought an iPhone, we used pre-paid ($25/mo) and
> by_choice also paid for a data plan ($25/1G/1mo). AT&T were at pains
> to explain that "you can't use that data plan on an iPhone" but it
> works fine (subject to their coverage).

Unsurprising.

>
>>The sole determination of whether or not AT&T penalizes you for using
>>"what they consider" a smartphone is based purely on the IMEI number.
>
> They don't even get to see your IMEI.

Rubbish it is part of registration when you switch the phone on!

>
>>If your child's SIM card IMEI indicates any other phone than a smartphone,
>>then, you won't get charged for a data plan (unless, of course, you use
>>data, but I always have data blocked - which they will do for you).

However IMEI's are in blocks for manufacturers so an SP can usually work out
what sort of phone you have.

[J.G.]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:48:57 -0700, miso wrote:

> I have the ability to read every parameter on a simcard.
> Which parameter restricts the phone to 2G?

Good question!

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:46:39 -0700, miso wrote:

> There is no contract involved with your MAC.
> There is a contact involved with your phone, and spoofing the IMEI could
> be considered "theft of services" if it allows you to bypass a fee or
> charge.

This, of course, is the (somewhat comical) crux of the matter.

I can see the court case now ...

"Your honor, the defendant explicitly told us, AT&T, that he did not
want a data plan for his minor children; however we enforce that you
must pay for a data plan, even if defendant doesn't want it, and even
if the defendent has a data lock so that his minor children can't use
it - and - while defendent can simply put his AT&T SIM card into a
phone not on our penalty list - the defendent expressly bought a phone
whose model 'was' listed on our data-penalty list - and - in fact - it
was a phone we, AT&T, don't even sell - yet - this defendent used said
phone, but didn't purchase the data plan he has no intention of using,
and, which he cannot use due to the data lock he asked us to place on
the phone. He avoided charges for that which he did not want and couldn't
possibly use by merely spoofing his IMEI..."

The prosecution continued:

"Therefore, your honor ... we ask for the death penalty to be imposed."

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:26:44 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:

> No 3G sata (or calls).
> Older SIM's do not have the abilityt to configure on 3G.

Even on my smartphones, I only use voice & text.
Would I need 3G in that case?

I'm thinking of buying a Samsung Galaxy Android phone;
would I need 3G in that case?

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:02:33 -0700, miso wrote:

> There are no roaming charges with T-Mobile, at least in the USA.

That has been my experience with T-Mobile also.

> But you lose the right to tether when roaming.

The good news, for me, is that I don't even know what tethering is.
So, I won't even miss it.

> You do not lose data connectivity

I don't even use data, even on my smartphones (they're WiFi).
That's why I use T-Mobile - but unfortunately, AT&T coverage is better.

> So if they DON'T know your IMEI, they may think you are roaming.

Actually, I thought it was clear - but it won't hurt to make it clear
again. They ALWAYS know your IMEI! You don't have to tell them anything.

There is no way they don't know your IMEI.

I have emperical evidence of this by my calls from the VP at AT&T in
response to my FCC complaint - but the point is that they ALWAYS know
your IMEI so it 'should' be immaterial whether or not you "verbally"
and voluntarily provided it to them over a phone call.

> Or it could be a coincidence that when I gave them my IMEI,
> the roaming issue went away.

I have no idea. But I respect your long-standing status on a.h.r
so empirically, I'm sure what you said happened. All I'll say is
that they KNOW your IMEI, so, if they 'wanted' to use it, they could.

Note: While they 'know' your IMEI, they don't know if you own the
phone that you're using. So maybe they want your IMEI for 'permission'
to update the software on that phone? For example, you can borrow
your brother's phone, and it would work fine - and they'd know that
IMEI - but they might not have permission to install software updates
onto that phone. Dunno. But that's a different issue.

> I have talked to T-Mob about using different phones since I have an
> Android also that is on T-mob frequencies. They don't care what I use,

My experience exactly. I have had multiple phones, from hand-me-downs
to Target $35 pay-as-you-go phones (which work just fine in the 'normal'
contract network).

> I get data to the phone via wifi, so I don't even bother
> putting a simcard in it.

This is the crux of this thread.

I also get data via WiFi, so, with a T-Mobile SIM card, I have no problem.
Yet, with an AT&T SIM card, I'd have to spoof the IMEI to a phone not on
the AT&T-data-penalty list in order to have the same use model.

Unfortunately, nobody here has provided a reference for how to do that!

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:08:09 -0700, miso wrote:

> Let me explain myself for the third time. A T-mobile branded phone, in
> this case unlocked, with T-Mobile simcard, can periodically appear as
> roaming. This is not a myth. I have have this happen. When I gave
> T-mobile my IMEI, the problem went away.

I can't imagine how roaming will affect only voice & text (remember, the
goal here is to use WiFi for data ... and to never use cellular for data).

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:15:00 -0700, miso wrote:

> Buy the ipod touch. Case solved.

I had to look up what an iPod touch was ... it seems to be data without
the voice. But what I need is voice without the (cellular) data.

Therefore, I don't understand.

What I want is super simple:
a) Voice + text
b) No data fees
c) WiFi data

Will the iPhone touch really give me that?

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:15:00 -0700, miso wrote:

> T-Mobile wants you to bring iphones to their system.

It has been my eperience that T-Mobile is very friendly toward iPhones,
so I don't disagree with you on this.

My kid's iPhone works fine on T-Mobile, and the only data is WiFi which
is exactly how I want it to be.

I was supremely scared when the AT&T/T-Mobile merger was announced,
because that would be the death of consumer choice.

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:33:17 -0700, miso wrote:

> Using "UMTS Networks" as a reference, the UE (user equipment) needs an
> IMEI (international Mobile Subscriber Identity), which the book refers
> to as "unalterable equipment identification." There is no comment on
> changing this code or the legality thereof.

This is great information - and you are well respected so I commend you
for the informative cite.

Only two points to clarify:
a) It's my understanding the IMEI 'can' be changed - I just don't know
how.
b) It's not illegal to change an IMEI in the USA.

BTW, emperically, if the UK has a weird law against changing the IMEI,
then that in and of itself implies (but does not prove) that the IMEI
'can' be changed.

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:15:00 -0700, miso wrote:

> AT&T has the
> right to make up any rule they want and can sue you, send the case to
> small claims, or a collection service. It is a contact. You abide by the
> contract or face the legal consequences. At best, they will just
> terminate your service.

That's essentially what AT&T told me in response to my FCC complaint.

I had complained they were charging me for services I didn't want.
Comically, AT&T repeatedly parroted the party line that it was for
a 'consistent bill', yet, in the same breath, they agree that they
allow a data block - which gives you that consistent bill WITHOUT
the data plan (which proves their insincerity).

Speaking of contracts, I 'almost' wish I had the guts to test their
mettle in the courts. It would be easy, albeit time consuming.

Here's what (I think) would happen (legal pundits asked for advice):
a) I sign up for basic AT&T cellular service and ask for a data block
b) I slip the new AT&T SIM card into my old unlocked smartphone.
... < the next step is what AT&T 'says' they will do > ...
c) 48 hours later, AT&T automatically adds the most expensive data plan
d) I call up to tell them to remove it (AT&T says they'll do that)
... < Here is where we separate talk from action > ...
e) I continue to use my AT&T SIM card in a smart phone
f) 48 hours later, AT&T again automatically adds the most expensive data
plan
g) I call up to tell them to remove it ...(let's assume they remove it)
< repeat as many times as needed with AT&T to make the point >

Now, at some point, we get to legal action.

What can AT&T actually do?

I assume they can:
1. Continue to charge me (and take me to court for the money)
2. Cancel my contract (and make me pay a cancellation fee)
3. Give up (and allow me to not have a data plan like T-Mobile does
willingly)

If all this happens within the 30-day California mandated grace period, I
take no monetary risks (as I don't intend to even USE the phone). But,
likely
it will span over 30 days.

I wonder what would happen if AT&T actually tried to take me to court?
I doubt they would as I can't imagine being convicted for:
I. Not using data
II. Having a data block
III. Yet, being forced to pay for data

Maybe I should open a separate thread on this topic in the legal forums.

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:29:18 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:

> However IMEI's are in blocks for manufacturers so an SP can
> usually work out what sort of phone you have.

IMEI's are not unique - but they're so close to being unique that
this is effectively the case.

But here's the capriciousness of it all.

Does AT&T supply that list of models subject to the IMEI penalty?
Nope. At least you can't get it.

So, in effect, from your perpective, they 'arbitrarily' determine whether
or not the phone you are using is what they consider a 'smartphone'.

The capriciousness (and callousness) of it all is a key point.
If I could make a case out of this, I would, but I'd need legal help.

[R. Mark Clayton]

"Johannes" <johan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:k3v2as$1sf$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:26:44 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>
>> No 3G sata (or calls).
>> Older SIM's do not have the abilityt to configure on 3G.
>
> Even on my smartphones, I only use voice & text.
> Would I need 3G in that case?

Depends on the network. In the UK 3 only operate native on 3G. with fall
back (aka roaming) to other networks when out of coverage. Obviously they
will only give you a 3G SIM. OTOH if you roam to a network (in another
country) that only has 3G then you won't be able to call or text.

>
> I'm thinking of buying a Samsung Galaxy Android phone;
> would I need 3G in that case?

Any phone that had multi-band support will operate on GSM, but I would
recommend for coverage purposes that you get a SIM that works on all bands.
In the UK

GSM900 O2 & Voda
GSM1800 O2, Voda and EE
3G2100 all of them

EE claim they will be first to 4G by means of bandwidth sacrifice.

If you are in the USA then there is CDMA as well, but the main problem is
the service providers who make our predatory SP's look like a bunch of
angels.

[Richard B. Gilbert]

Just remember that AT&T can afford more lawyers than you can!
Also known as "the Deep Pocket Doctrine" or "the party with the most
money wins!"

[J.G.]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:25:41 -0400, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:

> Just remember that AT&T can afford more lawyers than you can!
> Also known as "the Deep Pocket Doctrine" or "the party with the most
> money wins!"

I know. I know. I would love to make a case, because I feel it's illegal,
and it's deceptive.

I called AT&T today and asked about the plan and they told me it's only
for 'super smart phones'. I asked for a list of those 'super smart'
phones, and they told me I could give them an IMEI and they could tell me
if it was on the list but that they can't give me a list because a new
'super smart' phone might come on the market tomorrow.

Their policy is downright capricious!

Here's how I would make the case:
0. I'm buy on the open market a new or used "super smart" phone.
1. I'd buy an AT&T SIM under contract & get a data block on the plan.
2. I'd place that AT&T SIM into that new unused "super smart" phone.
3. Each time AT&T adds data charges, I'd call to have them removed.
4. At some point, AT&T will probably "do something legal".
5. And, that's when I'd cancel the plan & the court process occurs.

I wonder how much overall this would cost - and, since this is clearly
for the benefit of the consumer - if there is an agency (other than the
FCC) which might care enough that has deeper pockets than I have?

Any idea on an agency that would back me up legally on a purposeful court
case?

[Salmon Egg]

In article <k3spoc$l9c$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

Johannes <johan...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Where I live, T-Mobile voice coverage stinks (compared to AT&T).
>
> However, I had to switch from AT&T to TMobile because AT&T forces
> you to have a data plan for all your kids' smartphones even if you
> don't want your kids to have a data plan (and even if you do not
> buy the phone from AT&T).
>

> The sole determination of whether or not AT&T penalizes you for using
> "what they consider" a smartphone is based purely on the IMEI number.
>

> If your child's SIM card IMEI indicates any other phone than a smartphone,
> then, you won't get charged for a data plan (unless, of course, you use
> data, but I always have data blocked - which they will do for you).
>

> I want to consider whether it's possible to spoof the IMEI in the SIM card.
>

> QUESTION:
> Does this PDF I just found searching (which is admittedly dry) show us
> WHERE the IMEI is stored in the SIM card?
>
> http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102200_102299/102221/11.00.00_60/ts_102221
> v110000p.pdf

I do not know where you live, but in California the words "Public
Utility Commission" have done wonders. The PUC really works for
citizens. They do not punish telephone companies, but the companies
refund money rather than fight. PUC figures that the refund rights the
wrong.

I do not have a smart phone. At this time in my life I want a big loud
bright phone that I can understand how to use. Right now, I am using a
TracFone. The price is right. The coverage is right. If I understand
what the foreign "help personnel" are saying, no such phone is available
from TracFone.

--

Sam

Conservatives are against Darwinism but for natural selection.
Liberals are for Darwinism but totally against any selection.

[miso]

Argh, bad answer. There are so many parameters in a simcard with quite
cryptic names.

[miso]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but these wireless companies are
eventually going to shut down 2G service. AT$T already announced this.
There will be no more 2G by 2017, but I suspect that is when the pull
the last plug. It could start sooner. T-Mob has similar plans. They need
to take that spectrum and use it for faster services.

Look on the bright side. EDGE has been hacked. It is not secure. By the
time 3G is hacked, we will all be on LTE.

I have no idea what will happen to EDGE in rural areas.

The Samsung Galaxy S 3 is great for a phone that you can buy today.
[There is always something better in the future of course.] It even
takes those 64 Gbyte SD cards. It is at least a generation or two ahead
of the fruity phone.

It is free for me until the end of the month, but I'm a Blackberry
fanboi. I'm waiting for BB10. You can't be too secure.

[miso]

AT&T has one policy, T-Mobile has another. It is like comparing number 2
to number 4.

Incidentally, on T-mob, they don't care about the OS rev. They will
support any OS the manufacturer has released, even if it is not the
current release they are providing. Now if you are on cyanogen or in the
case of Blackberry "hybrid" OSs, you are on your own.

T-mobile is a good company. They even unlock your phone when in contract
if you ask them.

[miso]

Easy, you use a feature phone for voice and the ipod touch for whatever
you will do on wifi. That is the only way to go for you if you insist on
staying with AT$T.

You can't get ABC with AT&T. You can take the phone to T-mob and drop
data, but you don't like T-mob service. Hence the ipod touch plus
feature phone.

[miso]

Unfortunately, this is the free market system. They make up the rules.
Feel free to start your own wireless company, then you can create your
own plan.

This is why it was so important to keep T-mob and AT$T from merging.
T-mob needs your business. AT&T barely gives a crap.

[miso]

IMEI can be changed and it is not illegal. However, once you commit
"theft of services" with the hacked IMEI, expect AT$T legal to be on
your case. That is where they shake you down since theft of services is
at least a misdemeanor in most states. While that doesn't sound to bad,
you can get jail time in theory for a misdemeanor. So they shake you
down to avoid criminal penalties, or maybe they just dump you as a
customer.

Incidentally, the IMEI is a computer generated number. You have to
follow the algorithm. I suppose there is a small chance you will create
an IMEI of an existing customer. Now that can get ugly since it now
looks like you are spoofing that customer.

This is really a lot of work you are creating for yourself.

[miso]

No, the IMEI is unique. Who said otherwise?

Here is a thought. People have old phones laying around. If you really
insist on hacking your IMEI, make sure you don't spoof a working phone.
Just use the IMEI from a phone that is no longer in use. I think the law
won't go too psycho with the theft of services by avoiding the AT$T data
charger, but cloning a phone is another matter. Potentially your calls
could end up on another person's bill. That i believe is serious.

What really sucks is when you get hacked like that, it takes about 20
minutes to get false charges removed, at least from AT$T long distance.
I got hacked a few times and finally set up my land line so I have no
long distance service. That incidentally cut my bill nearly in half. I
just use the cell phone for long distance. T-mob is so damn cheap. I get
1500 anytime minutes for $35 a month. Unlimited data is another $20.

[J.G.]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 23:25:41 -0700, miso wrote:

> Unfortunately, this is the free market system. They make up the rules.

Not really. At best, it's an oligopoly.
Besides, the telecommunications companies are (supposedly) regulated.

So, the 'regulators' should have a say in their policies.
Or so my thinking goes ...

[J.G.]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 23:22:17 -0700, miso wrote:

> Easy, you use a feature phone for voice and the ipod touch for whatever
> you will do on wifi. That is the only way to go for you if you insist on
> staying with AT$T

Or the IMEI can be changed.

[J.G.]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 23:31:43 -0700, miso wrote:

> IMEI can be changed and it is not illegal. However, once you commit
> "theft of services" with the hacked IMEI, expect AT$T legal to be on
> your case.

Think about the (almost comical) court case:
- User did not use any data & in fact, has a data block on the account
- AT&T added a data plan automatically anyway - but only when the SIM
goes into certain types of phones (that list is not provided to the user)
- User repeatedly asks for the data plan to be removed
- AT&T repeatedly removes the data plan
- Yet, AT&T repeatedly adds the data plan for data that can't possibly be
used, any time the user sticks the SIM into an unpublished listing of
models

This would be a laughable slam dunk, except for the deep pockets of AT&T
as compared to that of the owner.

> Incidentally, the IMEI is a computer generated number. You have to
> follow the algorithm. I suppose there is a small chance you will create
> an IMEI of an existing customer.

Trivial. You just use the IMEI of any old unused (or other carrier) dumb
phone that you own (I have plenty in my drawer).

[J.G.]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 23:40:16 -0700, miso wrote:

> No, the IMEI is unique. Who said otherwise?

It's common knowledge that the IMEI is not unique.

Google "imei is not unique" and you'll see.

[miso]

On 9/27/2012 6:26 AM, J.G. wrote:
> imei is not unique

I just did that and all the hits indicate it is unique unless hacking
was involved.

In any event, my suggesting makes perfect sense. Take the IMEI from a
phone not in use. What is your problem with that approach? It will save
the effort of having to generate a correct IMEI.

[miso]

I made the suggestion of using an old IMEI.

Regarding the legality, it is all a matter of how much legal power the
corporations are willing to spend. How long has the RIAA been hounding
that woman for peer to peer music piracy?

If AT$T wants to bitch slap you, they will bitch slap you.

It is far easier simply not to use them. Note if you can't get T-mobile
at your house, they have a UMA option. All the Blackberries other than
OS7 and most Samsung phones are UMA capable. Some HTC phones can do UMA.

Note the iphone is not capable of UMA. Some people confuse shitty VOIP
apps on the iphone for UMA, but it is not the same thing.

[J.G.]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 08:59:16 -0700, miso wrote:

> my suggesting makes perfect sense. Take the IMEI from a phone not in
> use. What is your problem with that approach?

I have absolutely no problem with that approach!
In fact, it was my plan all along.

BTW, the very first hit on Google, which is this Wikipedia reference,
clearly says people who should know report that 10% of all IMEIs are
not unique:

"New IMEIs can be programmed into stolen handsets and 10% of IMEIs
are not unique." According to a BT Cellnet spokesman quoted by the BBC. [1]

REFERENCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Mobile_Equipment_Identity

[miso]

Well I don't count the hacked IMEIs. From legit manufacturers, the IMEI
should be unique.

T-Mob, being a vendor that supports UMA, probably watches IMEI more than
the average wireless company. I assume there is high paranoia at T-mob
that some people are spoofing their way onto the network to make calls.
When you have UMA issues, you will find it is the black hole of advice
from T-mob. They simply don't want to talk about UMA. When you load an
OS from a vendor other than T-mob, it is missing a certificate relevant
to UMA. When you go on the network, T-Mob puts the certificate on the
phone. In my case, they didn't have the IMEI of my phone on file and I
wasn't getting the certificate. I had to do a work around to get the
certificate to get UMA to finally work. At the time, I didn't know they
needed my IMEI.

[Johannes]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 23:31:43 -0700, miso wrote:

> This is really a lot of work you are creating for yourself.

Best to find a consumer-oriented organization to fund this battle
as the consumer is the ultimate winner - but most are sheep - so
unless 'someone' fights for consumer rights - consumers get none.

In this case, it's simply the right to not pay for something
that you can't use and don't want and can easily block.

[Paul Miner]

You still have the biggest right of all, one that trumps everything
else. You have the right to walk away and spend your money somewhere
else. Good luck in your quest, though.

--
Paul Miner

[danny burstein]

[snipppppppp of an eralier discussion]

While cellcos earlier may have, at their option, used or abused,
ignored or rang bells, folded, spindled, or mutilated the IMEI
from the cellphones, they're now most assuredly going to utilize
them in a real-time data base.

Exceprting from a WSJ article a few months ago:

[wsj]

The nation's major wireless providers have agreed to a deal with
the U.S. government to build a central database of stolen
cellphones - part of a broad effort to tame an explosion of
thefts nationwide.
....
According to an FCC official, the SIM-card problem [a] will
likely be solved by the carriers' making an additional check
to ensure that the devices themselves are authorized to work
on the network, not just the SIM card.
....
Similar stolen-phone databases are already in use abroad,
including in the U.K., Germany, France and Australia
------------
rest:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303815404577334152199453024.html

[a] the "problem" is that in systems that use SIM cards, prior
to this list you could put a new SIM in a stolen phone and
it would work.

--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

[Shadow]

On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 03:03:32 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein
<dan...@panix.com> wrote:

>The nation's major wireless providers have agreed to a deal with
>the U.S. government to build a central database of stolen
>cellphones - part of a broad effort to tame an explosion of
>thefts nationwide.

Yeah, sure.
Gotta luv the gullibility.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012