Hack Your Phone, Go to Jail

thodu writes: "This bill [Mobile Telephones (Re-Programming)] in the UK aims to make it illegal for anyone to change a GSM phone's IMEI number. Though the intention in this case is seemingly for the good (to track and prevent stolen phones from being used), the line between legitimate mods and illegal hacks is increasingly becoming blurred. What next - a bill to disallow modifying your PC ?"

Comments

Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[3.5 stripes]

Do you know of any, because I sure don't.

Why shouldn't something that only serves theives (as far as I can see) be illegal?

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Queuetue]

Why shouldn't something that only serves theives (as far as I can see) be illegal?
Because it's already illegal to steal phone service. Removing freedoms without cause hurts everybody.

Also, a silly counter-example - I'm a hacker, and in my basement lab, I've set up my own shielded, isolated cell network, just for kicks. And I want to have phone# 000-000-0001 (Those not in the US, please translate into your own localized version). Just because I *want* to. Or as a scientific experiment, a science fair project, or to learn more about the world around me. Why should that be illegal?

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[sdjunky]

"If for every 1,000 hacks there is only 1 person doing it for scientific purposes then that one person has to pay the sacrifice for the greater good."

So if 1000 people want to map the human genome to devise some kind of malicious bio warfare and 1 scientist wants to find the cure for cancer. Then the scientist needs to be treated as a criminal while the criminals will just go underground to do their work anyway.

Sorry, but the logic doesn't seem sound in my opinion

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[yatest5]

Yes, there is a legitimate reason. You bought the phone, you own it, so you can reprogramme it if you want to. You own the phone. You don't need any more reasons.


Oh for FUCKS SAKE. Every time, the same old arguments.

Look, 1 Mr. Geek may want to do this. In fact, no, they wouldn't, but one assy /. user who will argue against anything does.

Being able to do this allows people to steal and use phones, thereby causing 1000's of crimes.

What is more important, your 'right' to modify the phone, or to stop little punks mugging kids for their phones?

Furthermore, the fact is, although it's 'illegal', if you just do it in your room, you are unlikely to be caught and prosecuted for it, as compared to, say, if you did it and tried to sell a mobile phone.

So STFU about your damn rights being impinged on, jesus.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosh here we go again, let me repeat, there is no scientific value in the IMEI number all the things of value are stored in the SIM card which is encrypted anyway, are we clear yet?

Changing the IMEI number is the equivalent to changing the chassis number of your car. What scientific value would there be in that?

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[yatest5]

If you did it and tried to sell a mobile phone, wouldn't they already be able to arrest you for stealing the phone and reselling it? Isn't the new law redundant? If all you're trying to do is prevent phone theft with this new law, why not step up punishment or enforcement of the preexisting law?


Believe it or not, little 12 year old nobheads who rob phones on the street are not currently reprogramming them. There is a third-party who does this. Under current laws, sicne reprogramming phones is not illegal, its pretty hard to prove that people who do this are doing anything wrong (they would have to know that the phopnes were stolen).

If there aren't people to reprogram the phones, the thick twats will find something else to steal, job done.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[AlgUSF]

It is not like changing your Phone #, it is more like changing the VIN number of your car. Which is very illegal. Sure you own the car, but why would you want to change the VIN # except for illegal purposes.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[yatest5]

Yes, there is a legitimate reason. You bought the phone, you own it, so you can reprogramme it if you want to. You own the phone. You don't need any more reasons.

I own my car, can I scratch the VIN off it?

I own my gas supply, can I leave it running until the street blows up?

I own a radio scanner, can I use it to scan police frequencies?

Society has rules, if you don't like them, fucking leave it!

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[yatest5]

Or, alternately, they'll learn to do it on their own. Thereby scattering the "Industry" and making it harder to track down.

If you want to believe your average 12-16 yo mugger is going to learn how to hack phones, then ok, you win the argument, I cannot argue with you.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[forgoil]

Hell yes.

I can buy gasoline in most countries, getting hold of sand in small quantities are legal as well. So is buy a coke in a bottle. It is not legal to add those and a rag and walking with it in public.

The whole thing about changing the phone is bollocks. There are no reasons to change the number OTHER THAN BEING ILLEGAL. But if you do it to your own phone, and then don't use it (since you damn well don't own the network), nobody will know, and nobody will care.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Queuetue]

Well, I *said* it was silly. :)

It's unfortunate that my bad example seems to be making everyone ignore the first sentence - namely that it's already illegal to steal phone service - why invent new legislation that will only restrict law-abiding people?

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[AlgUSF]

I believe it is illegal to change your VIN number, no matter what, otherwise how will the police know whether or not your car is stolen? Odds are if the car was not stolen you wouldn't get proscecuted though...

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is *not* illegal to change the VIN of a car. It is quite legal in the UK to grind the VIN from a vehicle or trailer and stamp in another (and you can make a number up), assuming you make it clear to any potential purchaser and the DVLC.

What is illegal is to change the VIN of a car, not notify the DVLC and put it on the road. This is often done to pass a car as a "ringer" w/the same VIN as another similar car.

It the same vien, a fraud involving changing the IMEI as the modus operandi is illegal. Changing the IMEI for the hell of it and not connecting the the network (comp. putting car on road) should not be a crime.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[mpe]

Under current laws, sicne reprogramming phones is not illegal,

Reprogramming the phones might not be. Switching them on after they have been reprogrammed could well be. Since that creates the possibility of a denial of service to legitimate users.

its pretty hard to prove that people who do this are doing anything wrong (they would have to know that the phopnes were stolen).

That's a problem for law enforcment. Will such a law make things any easier for the average DC? Handling stolen goods is already against the law.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[suicidal]

I own my car, can I scratch the VIN off it?

Yep, just don't try registering it ever again.


I own my gas supply, can I leave it running until the street blows up?

No, that would endanger others and damage property that is not owned by you.


I own a radio scanner, can I use it to scan police frequencies?

Sure Can.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[AlgUSF]

In the United States at least VIN numbers actually have information encoded into them. Mine starts with 1HGEM......, and from just the 1H part you know that my car is a Honda made in the United States. When I insured my car, and gave the company the VIN, they instantly knew that I bought a Silver 2002 Honda Civic LX Coupe.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[colmore]

Actually, you can scratch off the VIN and you can monitor police frequencies.

Blowing up your neighborhood is obviously illegal because, well, you blow up your neighborhood. Recklessly endangering others is illegal for very good reasons, and has nothing to do with modifying a telephone that you own.

I assume that the Iraq comment was a joke. But it's a good example. Just saying "society has rules" and not questioning those rules is a good way to end up in a nation where you can't criticize your leaders, religion, or society. I'm not the biggest patriot on my block, and I don't like the direction that America is heading in, but I'm sure glad that we're still (basically) free to live in (almost) any way that doesn't harm others.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[brain159]

no, the denial of service happened when they stole your phone, taking the SIM card with it.

The SIM card (looks like the gold chip element cut out of a smartcard, because that's what it is) contains your subscriber identity. The network will block the SIM the moment you tell them the phone's been stolen, and they'd block the handset too (the IMEI is sent as part of the sign-on process), but people are getting away with hacking the IMEIs...

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[shimmin]

You can scratch the VIN off your car, but if you do, you can't operate it on the public roadways. You own the car, you don't own the road.

You can leave your gas running, but if something catches fire, you're liable for arson. You own your house, but you don't own the neighborhood, and you don't own the fire department.

And in many jurisdictions, you can scan police frequencies. But you can't transmit on them. You don't own the airwaves.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Pxtl]

Actually, this would make much better sense. For example, lets say a private security firm wants to use cell-phones as a walky-talky system. Rather then get a bunch've overspecialized equipment, they get standard cells, hack the connections and link them up to their private hub.

This never happens - but its a good example of when you might want to hack a phone. And in this example, like all others I've heard, you'll be doing it on a private network.

So connecting a hacked phone to an outside network is what becomes illegal. That, in my opinion, makes much more sense (it would also be a good way to divide account piracy and experimentation).

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Jucius Maximus]

"My cell phone was stolen and I bet the number was changed so someone could use it. You have to be reasonable here."

Then maybe they should just make it illegal to modify the IMEI except in the case where you prove you bought the phone legitimately.

Btw, how was your phone stolen? Did someone just grab it from you on the street or what?

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Jucius Maximus]

"you are still alowed to do that, There is no connection between IMEI and your phone number. IMEI is more like a MAC adress your phone number is pure software,(actualy bound to the sim#) So bad example."

Yeah but at the level of the cell phone network hardware, the IMEI number (or in my case the ESN number) is what identifies the phone to the network.

If your phone is stolen and you tell the mobile service provider, they tell the network to disable access to the phone with the ESN# (or IMEI#) shown on your account information. If you change this ESN/IMEI number, you can register this phone again with a new service provider on a new account and the network won't know the difference and won't be able to disable the phone's access.

This is why changing the IMEI number is valuable to phone crooks.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[wowbagger]

That's not changing the IMEI, that's changing the MIN (mobile identifier number). The IMEI is the phone's serial number, the MIN is the number you dial.

I know these things, because I HAVE just such a shielded room and private cell network where I work.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[mpe]

and they'd block the handset too (the IMEI is sent as part of the sign-on process), but people are getting away with hacking the IMEIs

In order to do this they'd need to set the IMEI to one which is not already in use. Or are you claiming that networks will quite happily accept the same IMEI from multiple handsets.(Hence the possibility of denial of service to a third party).
Also not all possible TACs and FACs are assigned. Being able to have a network accept a hacked IMEI should be not trivial. Especially in an environment where the majority of handsets are locked to a specific network. Or is this locking enforced in the phone, rather than the network?

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Society won't let us secede peacefully, and has irresponsibly expanded to the point where leaving it means going beyond low earth orbit.

This wouldn't be so bad, but the majority are idiots like yourself, who like rules for rules sake, as long as they don't impinge on what passes for a hobby among the terminally stupid.

Enlightend people don't worry about laws, they worry about ethics. Most of the time, this is invisible to the retarded, so they don't complain too loudly. But it does put the enlightened individual at risk in times like this one. Exercising your property rights isn't something you do carelessly anymore, I suppose.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[screwballicus]

So STFU about your damn rights being impinged on, jesus.

Did you just tell Jesus to Shut The Fuck Up?

*runs away crying*

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Kintanon]

Agreed. But also, routinely challenging every single rule change with no adequate basis (such as in this case) is a good way to stop a nation ever developing...


I disagree, I think EVERY law should be challenged to validate its existance. If a majority of the population can not validate the existence of the law, them remove it.
This is one of those cases where it's silly to make a law about it, because stealing the phone is already illegal. If I didn't steal the phone, why can't I modify it? If I DID steal the phone, the legality of altering it isn't going to bother me, I already stole the phone.

Kintanon

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Ig0r]

The President of the United States of America uses that word.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[Zarquon]

I own a radio scanner, can I use it to scan police frequencies?

Yes.. they even sell handy books with the frequencies.. and more expensive scanners that grok the trunking systems being used.

However, it appears it is illegal to use self-same scanner to:

a) Listen to the Cell Phone band
b) Receive certain satellite transmissions.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[squiggleslash]

Here's a not-so-silly example. I have vehicle with a cell phone built in. It came that way, and frankly works very well. I also have a StarTac. I have two choices if I want to use both phone systems: I can either purchase two calling plans or somehow use the car phone and my StarTac on the same account. Purchasing two calling plans is cost prohibitive for me (damn this flat IT market!). But if I change the IMEI on my car phone to match my StarTac, both will work off one account. Problem solved.

Nope. If you're using phones with IMEI numbers, then you are using a GSM network (AMPS, and AMPS derived systems like "TDMA"/IS-136 and "CDMA"/IS-95 use ESNs, not IMEIs.) If you're using a GSM network, you swap the SIM over to whatever phone you want to use. That's why the subscriber information is in the SIM, specifically for situations such as this.

I can see switching ESN numbers as having legitimate uses. Ironically this is illegal in the US, and has been for decades. Switching IMEI numbers OTOH has no, for what I can see, legit use whatsoever.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[kcbrown]

"I can't think of any good reason to do X, but at least one reason not to do X, so X should be illegal."

Right?

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand the nature of freedom at all. In the general case, the only things that should be made illegal are those things that do direct harm to others: your right to swing your fist stops at my nose and all that. If there's something you want made illegal but that doesn't directly harm others then you'd better have a damned good reason for it, as in an overwhelmingly good argument supporting your position.

I don't think such an argument exists for the IMEI number.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[mpe]

IIRC, that's one of the biggest problems with mobile theft in the UK at the moment - in order to quickstart the whole network for low costs, they allowed multiple instances of the same IMEI (i.e. they shared IMEIs across different handsets).

How hard can it be to check that there are no duplicate IMEIs on the network? It would make more sense to point fingers at the network operators for allowing this or the manufactures for not having this flag as a fault condition.

Re:Legitimate reasons for changing the IMEI?

[squiggleslash]

All GSM providers will allow you to use more than one phone on a single number. The IMEI does NOT identify the subscriber.

We're not talking AMPS here. I have several GSM phones - a PDA phone, a phone with a carkit, and triband phone. I switch between each by putting the SIM into the phone I want to use. One number, three phones.

You don't have to change the IMEI. The IMEI identifies nothing except the physical phone. The phone company only sees it when you turn the phone on/switch cell you're in, and all it uses it for, if anything at all, is checking you haven't got a stolen phone. Most SPs don't even check that.

The IMEI is not an ESN.

A good thing...

[FyRE666]

While I generally don't agree with restrictions on the use of hardware I buy, this is a special case. The law is intended to reduce the amount of phone-thefts in the UK (the phones are then reprogrammed and re-sold). There is currently a huge problem with phone theft over here which is driven by the fact it's so simple to give a stolen phone a new identity, so I don't think this legislation is over the top...

Re:A good thing...

[mpe]

While I generally don't agree with restrictions on the use of hardware I buy, this is a special case.

Is a special law really needed. It is already illegal to steal things, traffic in stolen goods, misidentify stolen goods as not stolen, etc.

The law is intended to reduce the amount of phone-thefts in the UK (the phones are then reprogrammed and re-sold).

Over specific laws tend to be bad laws, especially if they require constant tinkering to keep updated. Since the bill specifically mentions GSM and IMEI, which is an indicator of the legislation being too specific.

Re:A good thing...

[liquidsin]

But it's already illegal to steal. Think hard. Does this law actually do anything more to deter thieves, or only make things illegal for tinkerers? If the only place this law will be applicable is on stolen phones, and stealing them is already illegal, then this law ultimately serves no purpose that couldn't be served by enforcing stiffer penalties on thieves.

Re:A good thing...

[FyRE666]

This will do nothing to stop mugging

Erm, I think it will have a VERY noticable effect on the blackmarket in reprogrammed phones. There are businesses that currently operate legitimately whose sole business is chaning the identity of [stolen] phones. The only reason anyone would wish to do this is to sell a stolen phone, there's no other purpose for it. Sure you might want to do this yourself, but why? It's not as though anything spectacular will happen!

Maybe you think anyone should be able to file off vehicle identification serial numbers too, or wire up their house with all the earth wires and live wires reversed?

Re:A good thing...

[mpe]

But it's already illegal to steal.

It's already also illegal to traffic in stolen goods, misrepresent stolen goods as legitimate, defraud telephone companies, DOS legitimate mobile users.

Does this law actually do anything more to deter thieves,

The bill states that it is expected to have litte effect of policing, prosecutors and courts.

this law ultimately serves no purpose that couldn't be served by enforcing stiffer penalties on thieves.

It's apparent purpose is to present the impression of a government "doing something". With passing redundant laws being a prefered option to something like more police...

Re:A good thing...

[hetfield]

You don't have to steal the phone to be able to re-program it. Many time stolen phones are sold to a "middle-man" who re-programs it and then sells the new phone on the black market. Sure, the person who is changing the ID number knows the phone is stolen, but if they didn't steal it themselves they didn't commit the crime of theft.

The worst someone like that could possibly be charged with is knowingly receiving stolen goods, or whatever your local equivalent is.

Re:A good thing...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

I think that the point of this legislation is that it means that you've then committed 2 separate breaches of the law:

a) you stole the phone

b) you reprogrammed it

If stealing phones gets you stuck inside for 5 years, and reprogramming these phones gets you another 5, I think that thieves may well consider doing something else instead.

Re:A good thing...

[Liquor]

"this law ultimately serves no purpose that couldn't be served by enforcing stiffer penalties on thieves."

"It's apparent purpose is to present the impression of a government "doing something". With passing redundant laws being a prefered option to something like more police..."

It WILL have the effect of cutting out the 'third party' number changers (or at least, making them much harder to find). Right now, Alfie can steal a cell phone - but can't sell it to Bertie because the IMEI number will show up on the 'stolen' list. So he take it to Clarence, who, no questions asked, changes the IMEI number, then sells it to Bertie as a legitimate phone that cannot be proven to be the stolen one. Or Alfie can now use the phone himself, since there is no longer an easy way to prove that the phone is the one that was stolen.

The existence of legal number changing services in various markets (not necessarily public) is essential to the small scale muggers swiping cell phones - the 'adapter kits' and PC software to do this doesn't seem very likely to be actually owned by the individual muggers - anyone with the capability is probably going to sell it - currently legally - as a service instead. (Obviously, the number changing services would make an excellent place for the police to conduct a 'sting' operation.)

Right now, Clarence can't be convicted of anything because he's only performing a legal service. Making that service illegal puts Clarence out of business, or convicted for running such a business, and it eliminates the believability of the defence that he didn't know the phone was stolen, so he can be convicted as an accessory to theft along with Alfie.

Re:A good thing...

[petros]

Uh, I think you're forgetting that GSM uses two different identifiers... IMEI, which is tied to the equipment, and IMSI, which is tied to the subscriber (it's stored in the SIM). If a provider wanted to shut *you* down, they would do this using the IMSI, not the IMEI. There is a very easy and legal way to change IMEIs: stick your SIM in another phone. Therefore, blocking by IMEI is only useful if you're targetting a specific phone, not a subscriber. I don't know if it's possible to modify the IMSI of your SIM card, but if it is it will only accomplish one thing: you won't be able to use it anymore, as the network won't recognize you as a subscriber anymore. Sure, this would achive privacy, but you can achieve the same result by throwing your SIM in the garbage...

Re:A good thing...

[radish]

As someone who has had 3 phones stolen in the last 2 years, in one case quite violently, I say yes it does matter. Your argument makes a lot od sense, of course the theft is illegal in itself, so why new laws?

The reason is because of the way the post-theft market operates. The people stealing the phones are kids, mainly 14-18 year olds. It doesn't take any skill or cash to steal a phone, anyone can do it (given a suitable predisposition to violence and crime). There is, effectively, a infinite supply of potential thieves. As an added complication, many are underage and cannot be prosecuted.

Those phones, once stolen, are sold very cheaply to guys who recode them, and then sell them on again for a profit. There are FAR fewer of these guys, they're older, and there is a barrier of entry (money for equipment and knowing how to use it). At the moment they are not breaking any laws (except handling stolen goods which is hard to prove), hence cannot be arrested.

So simply put if the kids are arrested, they get a slap on the wrists and are let go. In the meantime 10 others have been recruited to carry on the thefts. If you can arrest the middleman, you could (potentially) have a far bigger impact on the overall problem.

It's the same strategy that has been used against drugs etc, don't go after the user or street level dealer, go after the big guys. But you need them to be breaking laws...

Re:A good thing...

[mpe]

The phone only sends it's IMEI if there's no SIM (and therefore can only make emergency calls), and at power on so the IMEI can be checked against the EIR in case it's listed as stolen or non-compliant (i.e. broken so bad it fubars the network.)

It would also be a good idea for networks to see if the TAC & FAC are valid both together and in combination. Also if the manufactures will co-operate that the serial number matches with the TAC & FAC combination and exists. The EIR should also list scrapped handsets.

Re:A good thing...

[liquidsin]

The thing is, though it may be hard to prove they're dealing in stolen goods, that's going to be how the cops get them. Hacking a cell phone isn't a *visible* crime like stealing a car or robbing a bank. The only times these guys will be visible is when they purchase the phones and when they sell them. And if the police can't prove they're buying and selling stolen phones, they shouldn't be able to invent new laws to make up for their inability to enforce the existing ones. Especially when those new laws can make innocent hobbyists into felons.

Re:A good thing...

[Dyolf Knip]

Or, gee, lemme think real hard about this one.. you could just make stealing the phone punshiable by 10 years. Boy, you're right, that was much harder than trying to come up with a new law banning tinkering with your own gadgets.

I realize your phrasing did not exactly indicate support for this bill, merely a guess at the (twisted) logic behind it, so if the sarcasm above is misplaced, I do apologize. But really, banning activities for no other purpose than to be able to tack on time to prison sentences acquired by commiting what are already crimes is by far the dumbest way to make streets safer.

Re:A good thing...

[WNight]

Then make it illegal, in the commission of a crime, or where it is reasonable to assume that it might be in the commission of a crime.

Driving a friend to and from the bank is legal, unless you have a reason to believe he's robbing it.

And even then, it's the aiding and abetting that's the crime, the driving is just how it was done.

Require the shops to call a special "Am I stolen" number before modding a phone, if they don't take a simple precaution to check for this, they can't be said to have been taking reasonable precautions. It's much like pawn shops.

Some providers don't let you switch phone without a fee, especially if you do it in a pattern that indicates you're using multiple phones (something they want to be able to sell you the right to do). I don't believe they have this right, I think once you own a phone you should be able to do anything you want with it. If changing hardware IDs is what's required to get around it, I think that's a good reason to keep the practice legal.

Re:A good thing...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

This isn't about 'tinkering' with gadgets- it's about fraudulently changing the phone to allow it to steal airtime off a company, or allow the crook to sell the phone off and make profit from their violent crimes. And the phone is for all intents and purposes always a stolen phone.

And these phones are usually obtained via violence, often to children who almost uniformly carry these for safety reasons; and then get mugged.

As other posters have pointed out- there are whole industries out there, that currently are reasonably legal, that exist solely to make these changes to phones. That cannot be a good thing.

If you want to hack your own phone- frankly, the chances of getting caught are really tiny- go ahead knock yourself out.

you could just make stealing the phone punshiable by 10 years.

Probably not as good; but might work. The young thugs that do the stealing probably aren't the ones that do the reprocessing.

Re:A good thing...

[Dyolf Knip]

changing the phone to allow it to steal airtime off a company

That's already a crime. What, then, is this law for?

allow the crook to sell the phone off and make profit from their violent crimes

Violent crimes are, surprise, surprise, already crimes. What, then, is this law for?

If you want to hack your own phone- frankly, the chances of getting caught are really tiny- go ahead knock yourself out.

So we are supposed to ignore it!?!?! Just what on earth is this law for?

Probably not as good; but might work.

The alternative is this abortion of a law which will not work at all. I fail to see how punishing actual violent criminals will work still less.

The young thugs that do the stealing probably aren't the ones that do the reprocessing.

So in other words, the law intentionally does not do anything about violent criminals, but is instead going after 'reasonably legal' businesses? Well that's fantastic, since as we all know, illegal businesses (that would totally ignore this law, and therefore let young thugs continue cashing in on the phones) can't possibly exist, right?

Re:A good thing...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

Just what on earth is this law for?

It's for reducing the number of people doing this; thicko, either because the cost/benefit ratio will be worse, or because they'll make less profit after having to pay more to the people willing to do this change to a phone, so the thieves will make less profit. Sure, they can try to steal more, but then the chances of getting caught goes up in proportion...

Anyway, why the heck are you so bothered? Been making money off this scam have we? Scared you'll get caught and banged up? What possible legitimate reason would you have for fiddling with this number- you'll note the law does not stop you fiddling with any other parts of the phone, or perhaps you haven't actually read the law, or perhaps you don't understand it.

but is instead going after 'reasonably legal' businesses?

Yeah, well they won't be after this. Good riddance to the leeching scumbags I say. They only exist to support criminal acts.

Are you ignorant, crooked or stupid- which?

Re:A good thing...

[Dyolf Knip]

Anyway, why the heck are you so bothered? Been making money off this scam have we? Scared you'll get caught and banged up? Are you ignorant, crooked or stupid- which?

Oh, my, I am in awe of your brilliantly thought out ad hominem arguments. The greatest debaters in history should bow down before your obvious skill. Teach us, o great one, so that we may learn to prove points by insulting others as well as you are able to. Or rather, go fuck yourself.

It's for reducing the number of people doing this; thicko, either because the cost/benefit ratio will be worse, or because they'll make less profit after having to pay more to the people willing to do this change to a phone, so the thieves will make less profit. Sure, they can try to steal more, but then the chances of getting caught goes up in proportion...

Gee, summarily executing suspects would probably increase the cost-benefit ratio too, but nobody thinks that's a good idea.

What possible legitimate reason would you have for fiddling with this number

I am not under any obligation to justify my actions to you. You are under every obligation to justify your objection to them to me. In this case, it's about tinkering with a piece of electronics in my possession. If it's not mine, doing so is already illegal. If it is mine, there's utterly no reason why it should be illegal.

you'll note the law does not stop you fiddling with any other parts of the phone

Today. What about the one they pass tomorrow making it illegal to modify it other ways? If someone came up with an ingenious use for modifying modifying the IMEI after the law was passed, do you think they'd repeal it or just start throwing people in jail for doing it?

I'm against this law because it's my phone and that modifying it as I see fit is not wrong. Explain to me why it is wrong. That real criminals use it to their advantage is irrelevant. Real criminals use pawn shops and foreign banks and investments to their advantage, why aren't they illegal as well? Handguns serve no other purpose than to hurt people and criminals use them all the time, yet they are legal. Getting rid of them might very well decrease the crime rate associated with them, yet nobody does. What's so special about computers and electronics that I'm only allowed to do what someone tells me I can do?

Re:A good thing...

[Dyolf Knip]

Without the businesses changing the ID numbers the violent thugs who steal the phones wouldn't have a market

Oh, kind of like how making drugs illegal deprives foreign drug cartels of local markets?

Firstly I wouldn't describe the businesses doing this as 'Reasonably Legal'

in the same way as drug enforcement targets the relatively few importers and distributors rather than the many street dealers

Yeah, and look how well that's worked out here in the States. Let's see, the world's highest incarceration rate, crime rates even higher due to addicts needing money to pay the high prices, cartels getting rich and driving their countries into the ground because of all the inflated profits, lots of perfectly useful applications made illegal as well, all to try and keep people from getting coked up and hurting others? Besides, it's not even valid comparison; dealers and cartels are all 'guilty' of committing the same 'crime', that of trafficking in narcotics. In this situation, the crime is mugging people (definitely bad) but the techies are fiddling with gadgets. Are the phones theirs? If so, leave them alone. If not, nab them for dealing in stolen property. Can't using existing laws to find any evidence of wrongdoing? Then why such a hard-on to start throwing people in jail? You do not need another new law that simply makes some totally harmless activity illegal.

What, precisely, is wrong with modifying the IMEI? Not when it is done in conjunction with another crime. What, by itself, is wrong with it? Anything?

Re:A good thing...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

In this case, it's about tinkering with a piece of electronics in my possession. If it's not mine, doing so is already illegal.

That's the point: it isn't illegal to do that.

If it is mine, there's utterly no reason why it should be illegal.

Really? So setting the ID to match someone else's phone is perfectly ok? Huh?

I'm against this law because it's my phone and that modifying it as I see fit is not wrong. Explain to me why it is wrong.

Listen dork, it's very simple. You live in a society that keeps its stability by following laws. The laws are semiarbitrary. Is speeding dangerous? Not necessarily, if you know what you are doing; does that mean that if I know what I am doing I can speed? Nope. You've lost that ability because its too much hassle to work out who can do it, and who can't.

Maybe there's some good reason for allowing people to change this number. I can't think of a single one; but perhaps there is. Big fucking deal; the number of illegimate uses of changing this number overwhelms the legimitate uses so much, I simply don't care. And if they managed to somehow cure cancer by changing this ID well, they can always change the law. Obviously you do care. Well, I don't care about that either.

You might like to grow up, you come over like a real spoilt brat. Go back to sucking your thumb after you've cried to your mommy about this law you hate so much, maybe that will help you feel better about how unfair it all is.

Re:A good thing...

[Dyolf Knip]

That's the point: it isn't illegal to do that.

Of course it is. Trafficking in stolen goods is, last time I checked, a crime. Now if the authorities are unable to prove that, how do they propose to prove that the IMEI has been changed? At least now the businesses are in the open and can be watched. This bill will serve only to drive them underground where it will criminals not one bit.

So setting the ID to match someone else's phone is perfectly ok?

Explain to me why simply changing the number should be illegal. Charging calls to their account, certainly. Identity theft, fraud, whatever. But simply changing the number? What is so inherently wrong about it that it needs to be illegal?

The laws are semiarbitrary.

"Do not harm others." Laws that base themselves on that do pretty good. It's why murder, theft, assault, rape, even libel and counterfeiting are all illegal. One party is clearly being harmed by another and can show it.

"Just because." Laws that base themselves on this principle, or the quasi-Hipocratic one above without actually establishing that harm is being done, include such shining examples of legality as laws against homosexuality, the War on Drugs, laws against suicide, laws against sex with a consenting adult, or laws against watching the DVD you bought on the player that you bought. (odds are, you are affected by at least one of those) Proponents of these laws like to gloss over the whole 'justify the wrongness of the act', much as you are doing.

Incidentally, speeding is illegal because while you may own the car, you do not own the road. Build your own road on your own property and race on it as much as you like. But by your logic, "the number of illegimate uses of speeding a car overwhelms the legimitate uses so much", that speeding for any reason (your own road, medical emergency, NASCAR races, whatever) should require a capital punishment. But of course, you don't care about that, do you?

they can always change the law

How many laws were repealed last year becuase they were found to be stupid or no longer applicable? Almost none. Politicians do not like to undo laws, they much prefer to make new ones. About the only reason that would motivate them to repeal one would be a cure for cancer. "Let's try it and see how many innocent people's lives it destroys before the courts smack it down" is a very poor way to find the kinks in a law.

I simply don't care

Then get lost and leave the discussion to people who actually think freedom and keeping our government in check is important.

You might like to grow up, you come over like a real spoilt brat. Go back to sucking your thumb after you've cried to your mommy about this law you hate so much, maybe that will help you feel better about how unfair it all is.

When you've grown up a bit and can actually hold an intelligent discussion without dropping back into kindergarten level insults, then maybe you could get someone to listen to you. Until then, good riddens.

Re:A good thing...

[Dyolf Knip]

Changing IMEIs = destruction of evidence. The only realistic way of identifying a phone is by it's IMEI

So tell the phone companies to make a better way of tracking the phone. Quit trying to get cops to pick up the slack, they've got their hands full as it is.

A car theif steals a car. They take it to a garage who respray it and remove the VIN and replace it with the VIN of a car of the same model that was involved in an accident. The car is then resold. Under British law the garge is equally culpable as the theif who stole the car.

But what are they culpable of? Painting a car? Scratching off a piece of metal? Certainly very heinous acts. They should be illegal since there's no good reason for an individual to do so.

The crimes here are stealing a car and altering it without the owner's permission. What this bill proposes is to make altering the car, no matter what the circumstances, illegal. Picking someone else's deadbolt is illegal, but owning a pair of lockpicks and practicing with them (without incurring a B&E charge, that is) is not. The circumstances surrounding the act make it illegal, not the act itself. To make an act criminal purely as a matter of convenience? How atrocious is that?

This is yet another page in the "Tools that facilitate crimes are themselves criminal" legal text that somehow manages to get inordinately applied to things related to computers. Odd, that.

Outside of the manufacturers and, possibly, a small number of researchers there isn't really any legal reason why you would want or need to change the IMEI of a phone. It makes for a far more effective and suitable system to make the act illegal ingeneral but make exceptions for those who do have a valid and legitimate reason to do it

Unacceptable. 1: Lack of a good reason to do something is not enough to make it illegal. It must be shown to be harmful. The sheer number of stupid and despicably bad laws on the books that failed to do so attests to this. Your reference to the illegality of drugs is a fine example. Why are they illegal in the first place? I have yet to hear a logical and coherent explanation that isn't hypocritical beyond belief. 2: Exceptions to a law based on having 'valid and legitimate reasons' is a fine idea, but they have a worrisome tendency to be either abused or ignored based mostly on the pocket depth of the accused. Witness the DMCA. Or cancer patients growing marijuana and getting arrested for it. Law is a game for the rich to play. The rest of us are kinda fucked if we end up on the wrong side of a bad law.

Besides, there is utterly no reason to think that making phone hacking illegal will stem the tide. History suggests exactly the opposite. Once organizations that do this work become illegal, any doing it for whatever legit reasons there might have been will dry up while the remainder will simply go 'underground', hindering criminals not one bit but making it even harder for cops to watch them.

On a side note, you have no idea (well, being on /. you probably do) how much I appreciate your remaining very civil in this discussion. Thank you. Most of the other people responding to my posts started with insults and went downhill from there. I love a good argument as much as the next guy, but damn....

Re:A good thing...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

Incidentally, speeding is illegal because while you may own the car, you do not own the road. Build your own road on your own property and race on it as much as you like.

Precisely, precisely my point.

Incidentally, changing the IMEI is illegal because while you may own the phone, you do not own the network. Build your own network and change the identifier as much as you like.

Re:A good thing...

[liquidsin]

Well then, by your logic, we should be creating laws against emptying a purse that's not yours, as a double deterrent to purse snatchers. Or how about tacking on an extra ten years for ejecting spent casings from a gun - that stiffer penalty will scare murderers straight. Or, instead of making ridiculous laws, we could just beef up current ones.

er no

[Anonymous Coward]

the line between legitimate mods and illegal hacks is increasingly becoming blurred.

No this is not the case with this law. There are no legit uses for hacking mobile phones. There are a huge number of people who do this (I think there was an article on the bbc website a while back but I am too lazy to look it up for referencing). This should indeed be stopped and it is nice to see a very focused bill instead of something that would do something stupid like outlaw EPROM burners altogether.

Re:er no

[GutBomb]

using a cloned phone is most likely against your service agreement, so still... no legitimate purpose. besides you would clone it by duplicating the data on your sim card, not the phone's serial number, that this bill is applied to

Re:er no

[Pxtl]

Then you make sure your phones have a complex device known as an "off switch". And you only run one at a time. This would be an amicable solution if you want one for your car, one for your pants, one for your bike, etc.

already a law in US, sort of

[ProfKyne]

I don't mean to troll here, but isn't this similar to laws against removing VIN (vehicle id numbers) and serial numbers from high-cost goods in the US?

Of course, if this law extends to prohibit other modification of the phone that interferes with fair use, I suppose that's different....

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[CaffeineAddict2001]

Just to know they can.
There are honest people who just like to tinker.

Re:future

[Rhombus]

hopefully it'll soon be illegal to change your mac address...

If altered MAC addresses are criminalized, only criminals wil have altered MAC addresses.

Its a real problem, but a poor solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Mobile phone theft is a real problem in the UK, and has caused violent crime to rise sharply over the past year. Understandably, politicians and police in the UK are concerned, and are trying their hardest to stop the problem.

The UK telecoms operators have mobilised their SIM management systems to allow them to disable mobile phones according to the ID on the phone; previously only one or two of them did this.

Now saying this; I don't see how this Bill will do anything to stop the situation. The phones are stolen already, and are in the hands of the criminals. No doubt they have a stack of them in a warehousr; anything else just isnt' profitable. Anyone who thinks the piddling little threat of extra jail time that this Bill adds will stop the bad guys from modifying the phones are out of their heads. Do they really believe that the criminals care what this Bill says?

Its nothing but a quick headline grab, something for grining-Blair to point at and say "We're doing something about it, look!" and then allows him to get back to inventing rating schemes for various shitty public services, and cutting funding to the police forces.

The real answer is simply to pay the police more, recruit more, and put them out on the streets where they can stop the phones being stolen in the first place. Like that'll ever happen.

Re:Its a real problem, but a poor solution

[Queuetue]

I'm willing to bet it's a two-step process - make changing the numbers illegal, then make devices that change ids (Since they can now only be used for illegal activity) illegal. Then, go after id-changing hardware manufacturers, and try to starve the black market phone industry.

And to heck with whoever gets trampled in the process.

Re:Its a real problem, but a poor solution

[ebcdic]

> Mobile phone theft is a real problem in the UK

But not as big a problem as has sometimes been claimed. A year ago the papers were running stories on the mystery of where all the stolen mobile phones were going - being exported to India perhaps? But the current theory is that many (maybe most) mobile phones reported stolen have not been stolen at all - their owners are just claiming on insurance and buying newer models.

Re:Its a real problem, but a poor solution

[GutBomb]

don't know if this was a joke or not... but anyway, the device used for changing the number is a cable that goes from the bottom of the phone to a computer's serial port (or it can be done through straight IR if your computer and phone both have IR ports) The cable itself has many legitimate purposes, unlike changing the number which has none.

Re:Its a real problem, but a poor solution

[mpe]

I think you find most were being shipped abroad to other GSM using countries. It's worth it too because not every countries operators subsidise handsets like in the UK.

In which case this bill will do nothing much. Since the people doing this can just as easily change the IMEI once they get to their destination. e.g. giving them an apparently local TAC.

Re:Its a real problem, but a poor solution

[mpe]

There can't be a list of all valid IMEI numbers - it'd be vast, since it would have to include all numbers issued on every GSM network in the world.

Actually there is a list. The relevent telephone regulators know which TACs they have issued, the manufactures know the serial numbers of the phones they have made. The operators of the GSM networks know the IMEIs of all the handsets which have used their network. Remember that these numbers a structured, which makes them easier to interpret.

The Bill intends well, but...

[altgrr]

Other than copyright of the internal code of the phone, there is no reason why changing the IMEI number of a phone should be illegal (and the copyright reason is a dubious one at that).

However, there should be a law in place to prevent phones with an incorrect IMEI number being used on GSM networks.

As has been pointed out, there is no genuine reason, other than research, to want to change the IMEI number of a phone - usually, the reason is to avoid blacklisting by networks such as Orange and T-Mobile (Vodafone and O2 do not operate such a scheme currently.)

If there are problems with people changing the IMEI number of a phone, perhaps the IMEI should be hard-coded into one of the chips in the phone - it would then make it a lot harder to successfully, and transparently, change a phone's IMEI number.

Essentially, what those who are attempting to introduce this law are saying, is that there is a need to do something about people changing IMEI numbers. And this remains the case.

Re:The Bill intends well, but...

[biglig2]

So, lying to a company in order to fool them into doing business with you when they don't want to is a legitimate use?

Too many laws...

[SealBeater]

What ever happened to using already existing laws? If it's already illegal to sell stolen phones (which I assume, perhaps incorrectly that it is), why do you need an additional law covering this? This reminds me of the added penelty of using a computer to commit a crime. If the hardware is mine, it should be mine to do with as I please. Arrest me for selling a stolen phone, not changing a few bits on equipmetn I already own.

SealBeater

Re:Too many laws...

[mpe]

Yeah, but how could you tell the phone was stolen if it's data was reset and it's IMEI changed?

It's obvious if the IMEI clashes with another phone. Also if the IMEI is impossible, never assigned.

Re:Too many laws...

[SealBeater]

Maybe someone who knows more about it than you thought this new law was needed to help?

If that's the best you can do, obviously that particular "someone" isn't you.

SealBeater

Re:Too many laws...

[zoombat]

Yeah, but how could you tell the phone was stolen if it's data was reset and it's IMEI changed?

If someone is going to break the law by stealing a phone, do you really think that making it illegal to change the IMEI will work as a deterrent to people actually changing it??

IMEI nubmer is essential to reduce GSM theft

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but I have no problems with this kind of law.
When your mobile phone gets stolen, all mobile phone operators who are enforce IMEI-based disabling will disallow phone calls. (Not all of them do this...)
This reduces the incentive to steal a mobile phone immensly.

It can have some unpleasant consequences though: some years ago, a batch of Nokia mobile phones was stolen, all of them with the same IMEI number. Those phones eventually ended up in stores, where they were, legally, bought by consumers.
Unavoidably, one of those phone got stolen and that IMEI number got blocked. As a result, thousands of people ended up with a disabled phone. Nokia refused to do anything about it, since they can be hold responsible for phone that were bought through 'grey' channels.

Re:IMEI nubmer is essential to reduce GSM theft

[Salsaman]

As somebody else pointed out already, what is the point of this bill ? If somebody steals a mobile phone, they're already risking jail time, so they are very unlikely to be put off by the idea that changing the number is illegal.

In fact you've even provided an example of where changing the number might have a legitimate use - for those people that bought one of the Nokia phones you mentioned.

So tell me again, what is the point of this bill ?

Re:IMEI nubmer is essential to reduce GSM theft

[mpe]

It can have some unpleasant consequences though: some years ago, a batch of Nokia mobile phones was stolen, all of them with the same IMEI number. Those phones eventually ended up in stores, where they were, legally, bought by consumers. Unavoidably, one of those phone got stolen and that IMEI number got blocked. Nokia refused to do anything about it, since they can be hold responsible for phone that were bought through 'grey' channels.

Why put all the blame on Nokia? Just as must to blame here are the network operators for not flagging duplicate IMEI usage. Had they done this then instead of all these phones becoming useless at once people who have just returned them as non working as they were sold.
There is no reason for network operators to allow duplicate IMEIs. Doing so make things a lot easier for the crooks.

Re:IMEI nubmer is essential to reduce GSM theft

[mpe]

Imagine you are in a pub and your phones battery runs down. A friend kindly lends you his handset to make a call. You want to call Zambia so rather than pump up his phone bill you slip your sim card into his phone. The network operators now have two User ids (your friends and yours) associated with one IMEI. Or conversly from their point of view two handsets with the same IMEI.

If you switch off the handset before changing the SIM then it will log off the network, so no contention. Even if you just pull the battery out the network can still tell that there isn't a duplicate IMEI. Since only one of the two SIMS will actually respond to any communications from the network.

Its nigh on impossible for the operator to tell the difference between you using two different sim cards sequentially in one handset and two different handsets (with independent sims) having the same IMEI.

It's trivial, in the former case only one SIM will respond to a paging request. Also swapping the SIMS will take place within the same cell group, probably the same cell.
With cloned IMEIs both SIMS will be on the network at the same time.

Government Interference Sucks

[netphilter]

There are laws in place about stealing phone service...just enforce them. Don't create new, more specific ones. If we continue to let the government infringe upon our rights...it's never going to end.

Re:EMEI can save lives

[cduffy]

I don't want the police to be able to track me via my cell phone -- indeed, I consider that one hell of an invasion of privacy.

Usage of a modified phone to steal services should be (and is already) illegal. Making a law against the act of modifying it... what's the point?

Re:Consumer's rights

[arson1]

I asked the cops the same thing when they took my sawed-ff shotgun and ruger 10-22 that I converted into a full-auto... :P

Re:/. people are paranoid

[slakdrgn]

Actually, atleast in the old days, there was a reason.. Say you had a car phone, and a regular cell phone.. Your car phone has hands free, intergrates with your stereo, makes food, whatever.. If they both have the same number, you can call from either phone using the same service, same account, same phone number.. I don't know how viable this now with digital pcs phones and the like, but atleast back in the mid 90s it was great..

A lot of companies charge extra for 2 phones, and they can't have the same number, etc.. thats what this was perfect for..

But I think now you have more people stealing phones then using this method to make life easier.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[MartinG]

Why would a person other than a thief want to change this?

The approach of illegalising things that have a potential "bad" use just because nobody can come straight out with a "good" use will end in disaster.

Defrauding telephone companies is already illegal. If some the telephone companies don't want this heppening then they should put it in their contracts. There is no need for new legislation.

The only reason this is happening IMO is to tie in with the RIP bill amendments that the UK government have already tried to rush through (thankfully, the changed were met with sufficient resistance to delay for a while)
The government wants to be able to track and record everyones movement by their mobile phone. And of course this ability will prevent all future terrorist attacks and rid the country of crime. Everyone will he happy and all will rejoice.

Hm

[zapfie]

I really don't think they care what you do to your phone- it's yours to do what you like. I think what they do care is how you present yourself to the cellular network (the IMEI number). To do that, it happens to involve changing the phone, but I don't think the phone is the real issue here- it's the network.

Not really a hack, but...

[Jippy_]

In my special world, anyone who download "Barbie Girl" as their ring tone would be sent to jail.

and if they had their ring set to the max volume, death.

=-Jippy

Re:/. people are paranoid

[Skiboricus]

I love it how people avoid any REAL discussion of events and possibilites by simply calling someone PARANOID.

10 years ago would you call someone paranoid if you were told that companies would market products that were implanted into your childrens skin so you could track them.

10 years ago would brand a person paranoid if your were told congress was debating a bill to allow companies to hack private citizens.

10 years ago would you call me paraniod if I told you people would be threatened with criminal penalities for reporting security bugs in software.

Debate, don't just label people.

Not just the IMEI!

[Builder]

The problem here is that they are not just stopping you hacking the IMEI. I know of no legitimate reason to do this.

As far as I am aware though, this bill also stops you hacking things that there is good cause to. Things like unlocking your phone so that you can use it abroad with other networks.

Re:Consumer's rights

[s20451]

Whatever happened to the idea that when you buy something it's yours to do as you please?

That right doesn't actually exist. For example, I can buy a gun and ammunition, but that doesn't give me the right to fire in any direction that I please. The question is better approached from a perspective of individual freedom versus collective good.

May be missing something here...

[Kraegar]

But how will making a law stop a thief?

If they're planning on fencing a stolen phone anyway, will one more law stop them? They've already broken one law by stealing the phone.

Law

[Evro]

What next - a bill to disallow modifying your PC ?

Isn't this the purpose of the DMCA? To ensure that if "copyright protection measures" are included in your PC (or other "digital device"), it's illegal to remove them?

Re:Law

[Jucius Maximus]

"Isn't this the purpose of the DMCA? To ensure that if "copyright protection measures" are included in your PC (or other "digital device"), it's illegal to remove them?"

No. That would be the Bill formerly known as SSSCA. (It was given a hard-to-say name ... now it is CBDTPA.)

The lazyness of the Technology Companies

[famazza]

The lazyness of the Technology Companies amazes me, instead of developing safe protocols avoiding users to do whatever they don't want to, they try to solve this problem by creating laws and acts that legaly prohibit the users to user their equipament the way they want to.

IMHO Tech Co. should be treated just like us, regular citizens that must adapt ourselves to the new technology to keep employed.

It is really sad to see all this "moneyfull" companies doing whatever they want to the people of countries that call themselves democratics.

Something must be done...

Only one point to this

[bblgoose]

It's illegal to steal a phone, right? If I've stolen a phone, I'm probably not gonna be vastly upset to have to break another to make it usable.
The only people who'd want to change the IMEI (that I can think of anyway) would be hackers etc who want to either learn some stuff or develop some stuff. Nothing too harmful there IMHO, and if the phone isn't stolen I can't really see the phone co. saying anything more than "sorry, your warranty's just gone bye-bye" if you do this. Fair enough.

I can see one point to this law though. At the moment, I can take any phone into any phone shop, and have the IMEI changed in 10 minutes, no questions asked. This law will stop this happening. It means theives will have to get the equipment and knowledge to do this themselves. In that sense, it will slow down casual mobile thefts. It'll never stop it, cos there'll always be people who can do it, and shops which will do it under the counter. But hey, it's a start.

Personally, I'm quite happy with my IMEI number, so I'm not overly fussed about not being allowed to change it :-)

Re:Consumer's rights

[mpe]

There is a difference between this law and what you are talking about. You can modify your car completely but can you change your VIN number or license plate number with out notifying the proper authorities? No. This law isn?t any different.

It is, since the registration of VINs and other vehicle identifying numbers is handled by a government agency. If the bill set up something like the DVLA then the car analogy would hold. Instead the bill hands specific power to the manufactures, private (and foreign owned) businesses. It would be as if car makers were in charge of car registrations...

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[CaffeineAddict2001]

If you chopped off the chasis number on a car you own, it doesn't hurt anyone but yourself.. Why should you go to jail for that?

Re:/. people are paranoid

[liquidsin]

Of course there's a legitimate reason to change the number: to see if you can. Many people like to tinker with electronics. Sure, pretty much anything you could do with it would be illegal, but it shouldn't be illegal to tinker with something. Let the existing laws deal with theft of service. I mean, if I rip the VIN plate out of a car that just sits in the garage, should I be arrested? What about if I file the serial number off of my toaster? So long as nothing illegal is being done with it, why should it be illegal to modify?

Also covers wireless ethernet MACs?

[drj11]

The bill is sufficiently vaguely worded that it covers changing the unique identifier of any wireless communications device. Of course, "wireless communications device" isn't defined in the bill, but it might cover wireless ethernet cards in a laptop for example. And using ipconfig to change the MAC address would be an offence. Possibly, owning a copy of ipconfig or supplying it could be an offence. I can think of several reasonable uses of changing a card's MAC address.

Also, I just checked parliament's website and this isn't a bill, it has been passed as an act! Soon to become law no doubt.

Re:/. people are paranoid

[schon]

there is no legitimate reason to need to change the IMEI number

OK, true. Also irrelevant... like all of your other points, except this one...

The bill is legit

No, it isn't.

It's foolishness... how, exactly does this bill prevent anyone from stealing (and then using) a cell phone?

Do you honestly think that a theif would steal a phone, then say "oh, damn! I can't use it because I'm not allowed to change the ID!"

Stealing the phones is already illegal... all this does is make stealing them even more illegal...

Which is simply ludicrous.

"What next - a bill to disallow modyour PC ?"

[Gannoc]

Yes. It will be the bill that makes it illegal for computer owners to bypass intellectial property protection software on their computer. This includes, but is not limited to, installing Linux.

Re:Legitimate reasons?

[mpe]

So what are the legitimate reasons for a manufacturer to do this, and why can't they apply to a private citizen?
BRNotably to an independent service engineer... We have independent car mechanics, who may at times need to replace a car part carrying a recorded serial number.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[anthony_dipierro]

Defrauding telephone companies is already illegal. If some the telephone companies don't want this heppening then they should put it in their contracts.

That wouldn't help since these are stolen phones, and people who steal phones rarely go to the phone company and sign a contract.

Big deal.

[Vegeta99]

It's already illegal to change the ESN on a phone in america. dunno if it applies to the IMEI, because that isn't actually used for billing, but why in hell would you want to change it anyway?

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[anthony_dipierro]

You shouldn't

Re:Legitimate reasons?

[GutBomb]

to resell factory refurbished phones maybe?

Making it illegal will _really_ make a difference?

[shepd]

Uhh, directv sent letters to over 100,000 Americans telling them not to illegally modify their smartcards to pirate TV. They estimate (quite rightly) that there are over 1 million directv receivers in America that are hacked illegally. That's almost 10% of all satellite receivers.

Considering this, why doesn't the UK look at the stats and realise that just because its illegal doesn't mean people won't do it. Not to mention that theft of mobile phones is already illegal anyways.

It doesn't matter wether there are legitimate reasons for chaging the IMEI number or not. The fact is that changing it because you have a stolen cell phone is the reason for this bill. It therefore in and of itself is redundant. What a waste of taxpayers money, and another reason why I don't like visiting the UK (number two would be because the law there can strongarm me into giving away keys to any data they wish, and number three because I find the virtual panopticon the UK has become quite distasteful).

Just my 2 cents.

Re:/. people are paranoid

[troc]

erm, yeah but

My SIM works in any (gsm) phone and my phone works with any SIM. Unless the phone and/or SIM have been locked together by the provider as part of a discount scheme or whatever - thus guaranteeing that people don't take advantage of a cheap phone from provider X without giving X a return on their investment (i.e. the discount they have given you)

It's the general dishonesty of people that has lead providers to do this anyway ;)

In the UK (afaik) pre-pay (pay as you go etc) phone are locked to the SIM the come with and the two only work as a package but usually after a year you can get this lock removed.

Contract phones/SIMS are not locked together - because you have a contract that should give the provider their return.

Now you could whinge and say they are screwing with your freedom...

BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUY WHAT THEY ARE SELLING

geddit?

I have two phones and two SIMS (a UK one and an NL one) and the whole lot works interchangably. No IMEI numbers have been fiddled with etc etc and personally speaking if my phone is nicked and the network can disable it, then jolly good. It'll stop the b*stards running a huge bill at my expense.

I don't feel the need to hack the VIN number of my car or the serial numbers of my water/gas/electricity meters.

and I actually like that it's not allowed

I think the IMEI should be hardcoded into the phone (and engraved). Just like a VIN. Phones are expensive and easily stealable so anything that will reduce teh probablilty that it's stolen is fine by me.

hohum

Troc

imei

[doofusclam]

This bill is needed. Now before all the geeks go on about their god-given right to impress their friends with new IMEI numbers(?!) i'll tell you something.

EVERYONE I know here in Britain who owns a mobile has had one robbed at some point in time. People have been murdered for their mobiles as they're an easy target, especially from children, and the resell value is high. There are some places I wouldn't go with a mobile visible, not that I would go waving it around anyway.

There are some freedoms worth fighting for but - the right to change an IMEI number? Get a grip. I'd prefer the right to walk down the street without getting the mobile robbed.

Oh, and not being able to change the IMEI means the phone can be permanently barred or even tracked. If it's changed you're stuffed.

seany

Re:imei

[ctid]

Just out of interest, where do you live? I live in Manchester, and I don't think anyone I know has had a mobile phone stolen from their person.

Re:imei

[sql*kitten]

There are some freedoms worth fighting for but - the right to change an IMEI number? Get a grip. I'd prefer the right to walk down the street without getting the mobile robbed

But stealing is already illegal. What we need in Britain are not more stupid laws, we need to enforce the ones we have - without the EU telling us that arresting and jailing criminals violates their "human rights".

Re:imei

[ctid]

(:-O)
Bummer!

Re:imei

[ctid]

Interesting.

BTW I wasn't objecting to the law, which I think is a good idea. I was just wondering about the extent of this type of crime - I've heard that it's a "crime epidemic", as the tabloids love to call it, but I'd had no first-hand experience of it.

Stops the fences, not the thief...

[DarkMan]

Your average mobile phone thief is not a technologially inclined guy. They are street toughs, no more.

The only reason that they steal the phones, is that they can sell them on. If the IMEI number isn't changed, then the networks will block the phone, giving a useless item, and no cash. So they take the phone to the local friendly techie, who, legitimitly, will change the IMEI number.

The law would allow the police to move against the people who facilitate the crime, in an effort to stop it being profitable, rather than directly at the criminals. If there's no profit in the activity, it should just stop.

Whether it will work, remains to be seen.

Re:Stops the fences, not the thief...

[topham]

You cannot legitimatly modify a stolen device/object/PHONE.

It's stolen.

We could as simply change the law to allow anyone to modify the IMEI unless it is tagged stolen. And then only to an AVAILABLE IMEI.

Which, by the way, is virtually impossible to do properly since almost anything could conflict with some others companies number space...

Re:Stops the fences, not the thief...

[Jucius Maximus]

"We could as simply change the law to allow anyone to modify the IMEI unless it is tagged stolen. And then only to an AVAILABLE IMEI. "

To avoid grey area, it might be better to only allow modification if the phone was marked as non-stolen. Perhaps there should be a 'custom-IMEI-charge' of $50 or so for the assigning of a non-used number in the IMEI space. The fee of course would only apply to people who decide to change the number on their phone and NOT to new phone purchases.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[MartinG]

these are stolen phones
Eh? What are?

The new legislation applies to all phones, not just stolen ones. And in any case if someone has already broken the law by stealing the phone, what makes you think they won't also break this new law?

This would be better as "probable cause"

[drew_kime]

The law should say that simply doing this mod isn't illegal, but that it is sufficient grounds for a search warrant/wire tap/other investigative methods. After all, the IMEI was put in specifically to fight theft and cloning. It seems reasonable to assume that anyone changing it is probably going to do something illegal with it.

Re:groan...

[schon]

and how exactly is this different from, say, removing the Vehicle ID Number (VIN) from your car?

When you buy a phone, can you go to a central registry, and find out the complete history of it? Like who owned it, and where they lived? If it's ever been in an accident?

THAT is what separates this from VIN laws.. the VIN is essentially PUBLIC INFORMATION, and it's used to protect consumers from theives..

Since there is no central EMEI database that consumers can access, this law is useless... it doesn't protect consumers, because the consumer can't verify that the number hasn't been changed...

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[mpe]

That wouldn't help since these are stolen phones, and people who steal phones rarely go to the phone company and sign a contract.

Stealing things is against the law. Handling stolen goods is against the law. Passing off stolen goods as not stolen is against the law. There looks to be plenty of applicable criminal law here.
Indeed the text of the bill specifically states "There will be minimal resource implications for the criminal justice agencies - the police, the Crown Prosecution Service, the courts and the Prison Service - to investigate, enforce, prosecute and process the cases through the courts and to accommodate convicted offenders given a custodial sentence. The number of cases prosecuted under this new offence are likely to be relatively small in number," In which case the whole thing starts to look like a waste of time.

I don't know what you think but

[jsse]

my client who runs simcard development business paid ~US$100,000 royalty and signed a NDA before any actually development started.

So you wanna hack this damn little thing and get away with it?

This thing is no toy. Billions dollors businesses are driven by this *damn* little thing.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[anthony_dipierro]

The new legislation applies to all phones, not just stolen ones.

Yes, but the goal of the law is to reduce the number of stolen phones.

And in any case if someone has already broken the law by stealing the phone, what makes you think they won't also break this new law?

Because there won't be that many tools available to allow them to break this new law. They won't be able to take it to a legitimate store to get it changed. Plus, if they get caught, it'll be much easier to prosecute, because you won't have to prove that the phone was stolen, only that the ID was changed, or that the thief possessed the tools to change the ID.

Maybe we should protect the individual's freedom to change the ID, but we're doing so at the expense of making it easier to steal phones and use them.

Already illegal in the US

[karmawarrior]

The FCC has banned ESN, the AMPS/IS-136-alike("TDMA")/IS-95-alike("CDMA") equivalent of IMEI numbers, cloning for years. This, ironically, has actually damaged the chances of AMPS derived network systems from being able to grow much in functionality because the ESN is linked to hardware and is the only "authentication" system the networks have to validate that a particular phone number is real. In GSM, the authentication is on the SIM card, not tied to the phone hardware, so this isn't an issue.

I've downloaded tools from the internet to remove the service provider locks on phones I've legally bought (these have nothing to do with the IMEI number, they're locks that prevent someone buying a phone with, say, BellSouth DCS, and then using it on a VoiceStream network), and the tools generally have the dodgy "change things like the IMEI and other things that shouldn't be changed" functionality as well as the useful bits. This is not, IMHO, a good thing...

I don't see any reason to oppose IMEI number protection laws, and see every reason to support what the British government are doing, unless service providors start preventing people from using their networks who haven't bought their "official" hardware, but given that no network makes a profit from the sales of hardware, I don't see such a foot-shooting exercise occuring any time soon. If ever.

Re:Already illegal in the US

[mpe]

I've downloaded tools from the internet to remove the service provider locks on phones I've legally bought (these have nothing to do with the IMEI number, they're locks that prevent someone buying a phone with, say, BellSouth DCS, and then using it on a VoiceStream network), and the tools generally have the dodgy "change things like the IMEI and other things that shouldn't be changed" functionality as well as the useful bits. This is not, IMHO, a good thing...

The people to blame for this are the manufactures. Who have apparently both made the IMEI easily changable and linked the interface with things which might need to be changed.

Re:Legitimate reasons?

[topham]

There isn't any valid reasons for changing the number on a phone.

Period. None.

If a car requires a part be replaced which has a VIN then it can, and is, registered. (My GF had her dash replaced and was given the chance to get a new VIN, or physicaly transfer the VIN from the old dash to the new.)

There really isn't a correlary to a cell phone.
(In the UNLIKELY event the chip with the serial number was damaged I expect it could be replaced and have the old number from the phone encoded.).

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[anthony_dipierro]

Stealing things is against the law. Handling stolen goods is against the law. Passing off stolen goods as not stolen is against the law. There looks to be plenty of applicable criminal law here.

It's much easier to prove possession of tools to change the ID than it is to prove that the phone was stolen.

Indeed the text of the bill specifically states "There will be minimal resource implications for the criminal justice agencies - the police, the Crown Prosecution Service, the courts and the Prison Service - to investigate, enforce, prosecute and process the cases through the courts and to accommodate convicted offenders given a custodial sentence. The number of cases prosecuted under this new offence are likely to be relatively small in number," In which case the whole thing starts to look like a waste of time.

Are you saying that the only affect of this law is going to be to allow people to be arrested? Surely there is a deterrant effect, especially in the legitimate business community.

Re:/. people are paranoid

[topham]

Not being able to make the phone valid on a network reduces its value considerably. The easier it is to change the code, the higher the value of the phone.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[Xaoswolf]

you won't, as long as you never sell the car, or drive it off of your property. If you want to just do donuts in your backyard, then be my guest, scratch off that number. Heck you don't even have to pass inspection or emisions tests for that.

Same can be said for the phone, as long as you never use the phone on the public airwaves or try to sell it you're fine. So you just need to shield your house and sit in your basement and talk to your self. Nobody will ever care about what you did to your phone.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[mosch]

Actually my first thought was that this was to make it so you can't fence the cell phones and resell them. After all, a thief wouldn't have any particular reason to care if they were using somebody else's phone number.

If you want your government representative to take you seriously next time there's a privacy invading proposal, then please, please do not write, call, fax or email them about this. Save your outrage for laws that cause actual harm.

Re:It's about time for another revolution.

[Xaoswolf]

we already have an America II, only for some strange reason, people call it Canada...

Re:Making it illegal will _really_ make a differen

[Vegeta99]

But the law will make it the manufacturers' responsibility to make it harder to change. It;s easily changed with a firmware hack (I've seen the option in GSM unlocking programs). Since the law was enacted in the USA, it's become much harder to change the ESN, but then, the ESN is used for much more than tracking here, it's used for billing, also.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[joto]

If you chopped off the chasis number on a car you own, it doesn't hurt anyone but yourself.. Why should you go to jail for that?

Well, you do hurt someone, namely the society at large (i.e. taxpayers). The reason the number is there is because it makes it easier for law-enforcement to track the car. It can be used to detect theft, fraud, and several other things. And that saves us (the public) a lot of money.

On the other hand, there's the issue of privacy. We don't want a unique identifiable number on every kind of goods. However, cars do deserve special care, for a number of reasons. First of all, they are pretty expensive, compared to most other things people tend to own, so it's important to track them for that reason. Secondly, they are easy to steal, and easy to transport, so it's more important to be able to identify them than e.g. houses (which can generally be identified by their location). Third, driving a car is not for everybody, it requires a license, for both the driver and the car (a license plate). Having a SSN number for the driver, and a chassis number for the car , helps prevent fraud in this case as well.

It is possible to be for chassis number legislation, but against IMEI number legislation. Cellphones aren't especially expensive, and doesn't require a special license to use (Hell, in Norway where I live, we you can buy both the phone and a phone-card anonymously (pay cash at the dealer, no registration)).

On the other hand, personally I don't see much wrong about making it illegal to change IMEI numbers either. It is (I believe) a real problem, and it is unlikely to make any trouble for most anybody (I can't think of a single reason why you would want to do that, and those I've seen so far in the discussion doesn't seem like something anyone would do). And if you had a legitimate reason, I'm sure you could ask for a permit!

Re:Making it illegal will _really_ make a differen

[ctid]

Generally, the people changing the IMEI number are not the same people who steal the phones. So (at the moment) the former are acting legally, while the latter are criminals. This bill makes it illegal to assist criminals in this way.

It's all relative...

[MongooseCN]

Though the intention in this case is seemingly for the good...

When you hear a /. editor saying this, you know that 99% of the rest of the people in the world will think it's great.

Hope this might shed a little light somewhere...

[CthulhuTequila]

First off... A thousand apologies (and one I'm sorry) if I'm repeating an existing post. I wasn't able to read all the discussion as I am at work and can't stay on too long. Here's a quick explanation of the two things about cell phones I've seen so far. First the IMEI number. Several people have compared them to Automobile VIN numbers. This is dead on accurate! Basically an IMEI is like a serial number that states "I am Cell Phone #1101". The only really useful way I can think of to change that number would be to trick someone into believing that Cell Phone #1101 was in fact Cell Phone #11111. If anyone can think of a practical use for changing an IMEI other than that, I would honestly be interested to hear it. (And no that is not the way IMEI numbers are formatted, but who really cares). When you activate service you give the service provider this number so they can know which phone you have and also where to send the activation signal (which I usually bypass and activate the phone manually, the service people take FOREVER!!). After activation the IMEI number also tells the service provider where to send your phone calls to. BTW, some phones have an ESN instead of an IMEI. I'm a little fuzzy on the difference, someone once told me it had to do with what sort of network is used, but I'm not sure. They're essentially the same as IMEIs as far as I can tell, if anyone knows for sure the difference and doesn't mind explaining it to me, let me know. The other thing mentioned was the SIM card. This is basically a memory chip, but not for your regular storage stuff (phone numbers, ringtons, etc.) The SIM card stores your phone number and some other things (I'm honestly ignorant on the SIM cards other functions, again feel free to educate me). So that's what I know (or at least what I think I know). I may be way off base. If I am, please forgive me. From what I know, it seems that messing around with the SIM card may or may not be illegal and that might bear some looking into. Messing with the IMEI/ESN numbers unless done for illegal purposes would be pretty pointless. You could change your IMEI/ESN in your phone to one that matches an already activated phone, and have a duplicate of their phone able to make and recieve some poor guys calls. For what it's worth, Caller ID's would show calls from your phoney phone to be coming from a different number than the poor suckers'. I guess that really wouldn't matter to the thief unless he's playing some serious mind games with the sucker (and it really wouldn't be too terribly hard to fix that phone number issue). My point is, without having a law against messing with your IMEI/ESN, the only useful reason to do so is already illegal (as has been stated before), so rather than cluttering the books with duplicate laws, let's just use the ones we have. That's all for now, I hope I haven't irritated anyone too terribly much, and I hope my memory and education have served me and I haven't made too many SNAFUs. Take care

Re:Legitimate reasons?

[Xaoswolf]

If the chip goes bad in my phone, they will probably just give me a new phone and take the old one to send to the factory. The new one will be registered in my name, and the old one will be removed. It's just easier to replace the whole phone for one broken part than it is to replace the whole car for one borken peice.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[shimmin]

Suppose I want multiple phones that connect to the same service. For many of the same reasons people have more than one handset on the same land-line, even well into the age of the cordless receiver.

Re:/. people are paranoid

[nelsonal]

Remember that in order to do anything about crime you have to be able to prosecute the criminal successfully in court. Many laws are created not to make potential criminals directly think of their activities as illegal, but to make it easier to convict the potential criminal of a crime, if they decide to engage in the illegal activity. Yes its illegal to steal a phone, and to market a stolen phone, however it might be very difficult to prove that suspect A stole the phone, and engaged in the sale of stolen property. However it could be very simple to prove that Suspect A owned equipment thats only use was changing the number of a given phone, which is used to facilitate the sale of stolen property.

Hacking PCs

[toupsie]

What next - a bill to disallow modifying your PC

No need for this. Lawyers are already taking care of this problem.

When you outlaw mods, only outlaws will have mods...

Background and Comment

[barberio]

This story needs a little background information.

In the UK mobile phone theft are becoming epidemic. These thefts are usualy violent and brutal, and in several cases have resulted in deaths.

These crimes have been rising due to several of the Mobile Phone networks deciding that it was not cost effective to impliment already known systems to track and disable stolen phones. This includes tracking, identifying and disabling bogus IEMI.

Since this has resulted in a crime wave, and the Industry (with a few notable exceptions) is not moving to rectify, the goverment felt the public demand to step in. As the companies are reluctant to spend the resources on tracking this under fraud statutes, legislation is being presented to make it illegal to modify the IEMI.

The thinking behind this is simple. At the moment you can have a phone 'unlocked', legaly, with no questions asked. This makes it much easier for gangs to fence stolen phones, and gives an incentive to criminals to target mobile phones. This has resulted in violent atacks to steal them.

Thus, if you tighten the restrictions on ability to 'unlock' mobile phones you put a stopper in the illegal trade.

Re:Background and Comment

[mpe]

Since this has resulted in a crime wave, and the Industry (with a few notable exceptions) is not moving to rectify, the goverment felt the public demand to step in.

Which they could do by pushing the industry to improve their practices. These companies run their business entirely subject to the rules of the UK government in the first place.

As the companies are reluctant to spend the resources on tracking this under fraud statutes,

Those poor upstanding "corporate citizens" can't have anything done to them. Even though Oftel's time probably works out rather cheaper than this bill. With enforcement against a handful of easily identifable companies being rather easier than against an unknown number of unknown people.

Check. Your. Links.

[Rogerborg]

It's not that hard. The link in the story is to the explanatory notes. The actual bill is here.

On a topical note, all the griping about "Why shouldn't I be allowed to..." is just slippery slope hysterics.

If you actually want to build a 'phone from components, then you can do whatever the hell you like with it, because you're the "manufacturer". However, if you want to buy a 'phone and then screw around with the identifier on it, you're doing something no different from changing the VIN number on a car. There's only one reason why you'd have to do that: to enable fraud. You can argue "But I own it and I just wanna", but in both cases that's simply an argument that principles are always more important than pragmatics and that nothing should be illegal if there's no direct, immediate victim. The law has to strike a balance between freedom and the probability that an act has a criminal purpose. In this case, it's overwhelmingly likely that an actual crime with an actual victim is involved.

The point of this bill is to enable prosecution of workshops set up to change IMEI's on stolen 'phones. It's a real problem, and it's part of a crime with a real victim, usually on the receiving end of violence. There's actually a very reasonable clause in here that protects equipment that merely could be used to change an IMEI: "The clause makes it clear that the offences are committed only if the person intends to use the equipment or allow it to be used for the purposes of making an unauthorised change to the IMEI number, or knows that the person to whom he supplies it or offers to supply it intends to use it or allow it to be used for that purpose." The prosecution has to show intent, so don't throw a hissy fit just because you've built an IMEI programmer for your self built IMEI 'phone. Not that anyone here has or intends to build such a 'phone.

Still not seeing it? Consider your next car purchase. You inspect the car, note the VIN number, do an HPI check, and it looks clean. Two weeks later, the police turn up and tell you that you're driving a stolen car and you have to return it to the rightful owner. You're completely out of pocket. This happens all the time. Now, how would you feel if you found that the garage that sold you the car had modified the VIN number and documentation, and that this wasn't illegal? And that it wasn't illegal because of the high principled argument that once they'd bought the car, they could do anything they damn well liked to it? Would you be pissed off? I think so. So, do you think that should it be legal to modify VIN numbers? If not, why should it be legal to modify IMEI numbers?

This is a balanced, reasonable, useful bill, and all the shrieking and Chicken Littling doesn't make it otherwise.

DMCA for Cell Phones

[Bob9113]

Anyone placing wagers on whether Clause 2 will ever get invoked the way HP just used the DMCA to quash the Tru64 crack?

Clause 2: Possession or supply of anything for re-programming purposes

10. This clause creates a number of offences ancillary to the offence created by clause 1. These linked offences are having custody or control of the equipment for the purpose of unauthorised re-programming (subsection 1), and supplying (subsection 2) or offering to supply (subsection 3) the equipment to someone for that purpose.

11. The equipment required to reprogramme the IMEI number may also be used for other legitimate purposes. The clause makes it clear that the offences are committed only if the person intends to use the equipment or allow it to be used for the purposes of making an unauthorised change to the IMEI number, or knows that the person to whom he supplies it or offers to supply it intends to use it or allow it to be used for that purpose.

12. The effect of subsection (5) is that possession by, supply to, or the offer to supply to the manufacturer of a mobile telephone, or someone with his written consent, does not amount to an offence under subsections (1), (2) and (3).

13. Unique device identifier has the same definition as in clause 1. The penalties for each of these offences are the same as for the offence created by clause 1.

Re:Legitimate reasons?

[mpe]

(In the UNLIKELY event the chip with the serial number was damaged I expect it could be replaced and have the old number from the phone encoded.)

Which would probably require the same kind of equiptment as changing the IMEI. Also only part of the IMEI is a serial number. The last digit is called "additional number".

Re:Making it illegal will _really_ make a differen

[ctid]

Well that is true of course, but it's not so simple. How is a "legitimate" businessperson to know that a phone has been stolen. Obviously most of them know, but in court I doubt if they could be convicted as the law stands...

Re:Tracing calls and personal freedoms

[Jucius Maximus]

"Anecdotally, there are cases of people being bombarded with malicious, nasty text messages, who live in fear of their phone ringing, but they still need that phone."

In many cases, you can probably say the same thing about slashdot and its messaging system.

Damn trolls. :P

this serves no purpose

[austad]

The people stealing and selling the stolen phones are breaking the law already, what makes anyone think they won't break this new law and change the IMEI number. Stupid.

Re:this serves no purpose

[ctid]

Because the people who are stealing the phones are not the same people who are changing the IMEI numbers.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[anthony_dipierro]

I just don't know that higher penalties are effective.

But this isn't about higher penalties, this is about whether or not to have any penalty at all. I agree with you that it's questionable whether or not raising the penalties for say possession of nuclear weapons from 20 years to life makes a difference. But if you eliminated the penalties altogether, that likely would make a difference.

I have to wonder how much of a deterrent this specific law would be, too; especially since, as lots of people have mentioned, it's already illegal to do most of the things that criminals would do before and after changing the IMEI number.

But in order to change the IMEI number, you need tools, and expertise. It seems much more likely that without a law a thief can just go to the local Radio Shack (or whatever the Brit equivalent is) and get the number changed. With this law in place, the theif has to buy an illegal tool on the black market. That definately increases the cost of stealing phones, at the very least.

The problem with tinkerers

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Speaking as someone who used to work in the engineering department of a telecommunications company...

Many telecomms networks are relatively vulnerable to rogue devices. The companies who run the networks put everything they're going to let on their network through amazingly rigorous testing before it's allowed out into the field, because they are aware of this problem, but there is little else they can do to prevent it that is cost effective. The time it took me to make every possible type of call to every possible combination of other units on the network with a new device (which multiplies up to several thousand call types) and verify that every single one worked correctly is negligible compared to the down-time and loss of customer satisfaction caused when a device goes wrong and starts effectively spamming your network and using up all your bandwidth.

Sometimes, the rogue devices are simply phones that have broken, or a change near a base station that's interfering with things. Other times, it's some smart-ass hobbyist who thought he was being clever, and who takes out a whole region of the network for the morning while an on-call team of engineers sorts out the mess.

Guess how high an opinion I hold of people who like to tinker with publicly accessible services just to know they can? :-)

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

This would be acceptable, if there were even a good chance that authorities would use reasonable discretion.

They've shown time and time again, that they rarely do so. Sometimes they are assholes, other times they have to look like they're busy. Sometimes they feel the need to prove they're not playing favorites. Other times they are fucking zombies, that follow the letter of the law no matter what. And once you're in the system, discretion is gone, prosecutors feel the need to continue for continuances sake.

So, someone acuses you of something, they do a search. Turns out, it was false, you are innocent. But in exevuting the warrant, they find evidence you tinker with cell phones in the basement...

Re:On a somewhat related note, a question:

[Vegeta99]

Petty much. They're both unique serial numbers. However, the ESN is used to identify the user of the phone to the network. In GSM, however, a separate smart-card called a SIM (Subscriber Identification Module) to identify the user of the phone. I'm not sure what, other thjan auditing purposes, the IMEI/IMSI is for.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[Vegeta99]

Here in the United States, ESN copying used to be as easy as IMEI changing. However, now that it's illegal, it's not just a plug-into-a-PC-and-go, it's a good old fashioned change-the-PROM jobbie. Much harder. Hopefully manufacturers in the UK will do the same.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[Xaoswolf]

But unless that was covered in the search warrant, they cannot touch you for tinkering with phones. They must get another warrant to search for the phone stuff, and by then you can clean out the basement.

Policy? Yes. Law? No...

[Mulletproof]

All of this "I can't mod the hardware I bought and own" legislation that's been on the rampage these last few months is really really getting old. Very reminicent of the way EULAs are spiralling out of control. The company should have the right to deny offenders service and/or void the warrenty on the specific product, but a law making it illegle to mod the stuff you bought? It's nine-assed. Like the poster said... Say goodbye to modding your computer. or maybe your car... I can understand pushing for a fraudulent use prosecution, like cable boxes, but that's one large step from just modifying the hardware. If it's there is beyond a reasonable doubt that this alteration's only use is in fraud, then'd see no real reason to raise a fuss over the new law. But as it stands...

Isn't Fraud Already Illegal?

[pbryan]

I believe the act of fraud is already illegal in nearly every jurisdiction on the planet. I'm unsure what this special case is intended to address. To wit:

If I walk into a bank and use someone else's bank account number to withdraw money, I'm guilty of fraud.

If I order a product over the phone, and use someone else's credit card number, I'm guilty of fraud.

If I place a telephone call, and bill it to someone else's calling card number, I'm guilty of fraud.

If I modify my cellular telephone to use someone else's ESN, I'm guilty of fraud.

Why special laws to prevent me from actually modifying my own property? If I modify my property to misrepresent myself in a financial transaction, I'm guilty of fraud.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

And if they get a warrant to search for evidence of stolen bicycles, and find 3 tons of pure heroin in your basement, they have to get another warrant?

Technically, I believe you are correct. In practice though, judges rarely throw that stuff out, unless it was painfully obvious that the warrant was issued in bad faith.

That's not enough of a protection to alleviate any of my worries.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[mpe]

Because there won't be that many tools available to allow them to break this new law.

Yes you can make tools disappear just by making them illegal. All that will happen is that there will still be plenty of tools in existance. Just that they will tend to be in the hands of organised crime.

Make stealing phones illegal

[frovingslosh]

Apparently there is a massive problem in Europe with cell phones being stolen. I've never understood this, as it would seem pretty easy to catch someone who has such a device; the IMEI number is one way, but also just basic police work like tracking numbers called and the like would seem to make it easy to catch cell snatchers. And just wait until GPS technology is widespread in the phones. Also, if the problem is that rampant I would think the industry would make it extrenely easy to blacklist and just disable the stolen phone. If that happened then the incentive to swipe a cell phone would diminish pretty quickly.

Lots of other techniques could be used too: for example, I would consider putting together a nice automated system where, when a stolen cell phone was used, the connection was made, but after about 1 minute the call would be dropped, and a new automated call was made to the called number called suggesting that they turn in the previous caller for a reward. Am I missing something here? It would seem that cell phones should not be such an easy target for thieft.

Of course, changing ALL of the stored information, including but not limited to the IMEI number would make my techniques harder, but are a high percentage of the stolen phones really being reprogrammed this way?

I hardly see a law that deals with changing this number to be very useful. Isn't stealing the phone already illegal? Don't they already have laws for fraud and thieft of services? Will the people who violate these laws really care about breaking another? And any suggestion that the person doing the reprogramming doesn't know exactly why the number is being changed would be negated by simply using a blacklist system of stolen phones that always connect to a recording of "this is a stolen phone. Contact the police ....". This would negate that problem far better than a law on a technical matter. The cell industry already has too many special laws just for them on the books, it's time they took action themselves to become part of the solution and not part of the problem.

Fight the power!

[bobgoatcheese]

Before you know it it'll be illegal for me to rip the tags of my mattresses!

Its not hard.

[Huogo]

Take any nokia phone. Type "*3001#12345#". Boom, scroll to serial no., and change it. You can modify most any phone setting from there.

a simple answer

[jtcampbell]

The main problem is that the IMEI numbers are held in re-writeable memory.
There is no reason why this is neccessary - using a PROM or setting it by cutting links on the silicon with a laser would be just as good, but slightly more expensive. This would make it much harder to change the IMEI, and not require any legislation. Those who have stolen mobile phones have already broken the law, so are they likely to listen to another law that is preventing them from selling the goods that they have stolen?

Will it serve its purpose?

[stain ain]

Reprogramming the IMEI is now an offence.
So what? Is it like, a burglar would steal a phone with no remorse and then say, wait! I am not going to reprogram the IMEI, that is so illegal!

Really, I don't see how it helps.

Re:What's the legit use of this?

[anthony_dipierro]

But, again, phone theives are already committing several crimes; the fact that one of the tools they need is only available illegally isn't likely to make them think twice. Unless you're talking about economic cost; $14.95 (plus dealing with the idiot on commission behind the counter) vs. >$100(?) (or £, since we are talking about the UK). But still, I think that would just make them steal more phones to make up the cost. It's just a greater initial outlay, not really a liability.

Presumably phone thieves are already stealing at an optimal rate. If you raise the economic cost of getting into the phone theft business, you're going to have fewer phone thieves by simple supply and demand. Phone thieves will move to other, less costly forms of thievery, or even to legitimate businesses, if you raise the economic costs sufficiently.

$15 -> $100 is a reasonable price increase if all that's done is the device is made illegal. But if technological barriers are put into place to make it even harder, the price is going to go up even more. Organized crime doesn't have a very efficient or cost effective R&D department.

Stupid..

[petis]

Stupid billmakers.

They should of course make it illegal to change that number on /someone else's/ phone. :)

Re:Ridiculous analogy

[Dyolf Knip]

Lemme get this straight. Someone willing to commit a crime by forcibly breaking into my car and stealing it is instead going to leave me alone due entirely to the fear of the consequences of some law against scratching a number off a piece of metal? I knew criminals were dumb, but come on...

The people that this law is supposed to but behind bars are almost certainly already guilty of committing any number of crimes. Theft, trafficking in stolen goods, etc. It therefore has almost no chance of hurting guilty people more and almost every chance of hurting innocent people. To add yet another law, that is, another set of loopholes and complications to an already insanely complicated legal code, without bothering to look at the effectiveness of the ones in place, is folly.

So then you are a patriot.

[El Camino SS]

I'm not the biggest patriot on my block, and I don't like the direction that America is heading in, but I'm sure glad that we're still (basically) free to live in (almost) any way that doesn't harm others.

patriot [páytree t , páytree òt ] (plural patriots) noun
supporter of own country: somebody who proudly supports or defends his or her country and its way of life

(Emphasis Mine) Encarta Encyclopedia-

Just because you don't support, doesn't mean you are not a patriot. You are being patriotic if you are trying to help your fellow citizens. Sometimes a patriot is a concerned citizen and tries to improve things.

Revolutionary war soldiers were considered patriots, bu they certainly didn't support the king. God speed to you.

Re:So then you are a patriot.

[Enigma2175]

Revolutionary war soldiers were considered patriots, bu they certainly didn't support the king. God speed to you.

But if they had lost the revolutionary war, today we would be calling them terrorists. The winners write the history.

Then it is not your car.

[El Camino SS]

You remove the sole identifying factor to your car.. well then, it is no longer your car the moment someone else wants it and calls the cops.

You remove your identification from your wallet? You forfeit the cash inside when someone takes it.

Take off that little mattress tag? Wll, lets just say I have a friend that ain't getting out for a loooong time.