Slashdot Mirror


More Holes Found in T-Mobile Website

mogwhat writes "Even though T-Mobile's website was decisively hacked into over a year ago by now (in)famous cracker Nick Jacobsen, a blog posting by computer security expert Jack Koziol details many serious security holes in various T-Mobile websites. You would think that T-Mobile would have paid attention the first time? Time to get a new cell phone provider!"

183 comments

  1. Can you pwn me now? by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
    Can you pwn me now?
    Can you pw*404*

    Aaw crap. I guess he could.

    1. Re:Can you pwn me now? by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth I thought it was a funny post.

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    2. Re:Can you pwn me now? by croddy · · Score: 1
  2. Don't get it... by numLocked · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I just find myself not caring. Great, another company has an insecure website. Can someone explain why this is a big deal?

    1. Re:Don't get it... by Spodlink05 · · Score: 1

      I just find myself not caring. Great, another company has an insecure website. Can someone explain why this is a big deal?

      You're getting confused with those online casinos.

    2. Re:Don't get it... by numLocked · · Score: 1

      I mean, how does the security of a cell provider's web page affect their service overall? If they have fewer dropped calls, better coverage, etc. I could really care less if their web admins don't really know what they're doing.

    3. Re:Don't get it... by generationxyu · · Score: 5, Informative

      The issue is that when Nick Jacobson owned T-Mobile's website, he used that to gain access to their entire network -- every picture sent or recieved, every text message, possibly even phone calls. He owned a good portion of the company.

      --
      I mod down pyramid schemes in sigs.
    4. Re:Don't get it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      couldn't care less, my good man.

    5. Re:Don't get it... by Spodlink05 · · Score: 0

      The issue is that when Nick Jacobson owned T-Mobile's website, he used that to gain access to their entire network -- every picture sent or recieved, every text message, possibly even phone calls. He owned a good portion of the company.

      Apparently he pwned them as well.

    6. Re:Don't get it... by PacketScan · · Score: 1

      If you one of their customers you'd care.
      btw i just canceled i'm going to get a nextel over the weekend.

    7. Re:Don't get it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please someone mod this guy up, that was funny :)

    8. Re:Don't get it... by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      I suppose you care nothing about the privacy of your voicemail, text messages or account info?

    9. Re:Don't get it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just make sure that if you're an Iraqi Shia Muslim, before you purchase a cell phone ensure that the company's profits don't go to Israel. It's haram. :)

    10. Re:Don't get it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's idiomatic.

      Like saying 'So don't I' to indicate agreement.

      Don't try to fight it.

    11. Re:Don't get it... by stuartnoble · · Score: 1

      Because I had never had a problem using my credit card online, until one day I decided it would be nice to stop paying my cell phone bill by check. Three days later I was screwed out of $200.

    12. Re:Don't get it... by legirons · · Score: 1

      "Can someone explain why this is a big deal?"

      Because the cracker is going through the courts, while the company which allowed other peoples' information to be released, and did nothing about it when they were found out isn't...?

    13. Re:Don't get it... by pureone · · Score: 1

      its still insecure that was the point. the website should be fixed but its not. https://my.t-mobile.com/Login/?rc=T-Mobile%20is%20 not%20very%20secure,%20please%20use%20Nextel%20ins tead have a look at this.

      --
      120 chars is not bloody enough for a real sig!!! you bastards even count spaces!!!
    14. Re:Don't get it... by baudbarf · · Score: 1

      If your cell phone company stores your voicemail, SMS messages, and account info on the same box they serve their corporate website from, you've got bigger problems.

      --
      You can run but you can't hide, except, apparently, along the Afghan-Pakistani border.
    15. Re:Don't get it... by kuat · · Score: 1

      Oh no...someone has my text messages.. To my ex-girl fiend. :P

    16. Re:Don't get it... by millennial · · Score: 1

      There's nothing idiomatic about it. "Could care less" indicates that it's perfectly possible for you to care less, but you are deciding not to. "Couldn't care less" indicates that you care so little about it, it would be impossible for you to care less.

      --
      I am scientifically inaccurate.
    17. Re:Don't get it... by numLocked · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're right. I screwed up in the original post. Good catch.

      Irregardless, I couldn't care less.

    18. Re:Don't get it... by jerw134 · · Score: 1

      Uhh, you can reset your voicemail password and access your account info from the website. That means by gaining access to the website, you gain access to all of that.

  3. Change Providers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know, it seems that now that all this is exposed, it may be time to think about going to T-Mobile. The odds are they learned this time.

  4. Tmobile SUX by JhohannaVH · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now the question is how the hell we get our company to switch after moving alllll of our crackberries to T-Mobile, and we are constantly having issues.
    And with all of this privacy concern, what kind of liability does that put T-Mobile at when sensitive market data can be compromised? *SCARY*

    --
    Sorry man... the Internet pooped on me.
    1. Re:Tmobile SUX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should lay off the crackberries ,

    2. Re:Tmobile SUX by medication · · Score: 3, Informative

      If sensitive market data is being sent via email your provider is the least of your worries. Email is an inherently insecure form of information transfer (without encryption). In addition to that I can't imagine that T-Mobile doesn't have something in their contract legalese that explicitly says that they are not responsible for the security of email passed through their systems.

      --
      "If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit." - Mitch Hedberg
    3. Re:Tmobile SUX by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1, Informative

      Email doesn't get any more secure when you encrypt your data, your data does. STMP communication is still as vulnerable to interception as it ever was, it's just that now the intercepted data is, largely, useless.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    4. Re:Tmobile SUX by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1

      SMTP communication, even.....

      STMP? Simple Transexual Male Protocol?

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    5. Re:Tmobile SUX by L1nux_L0ser83 · · Score: 1

      Use T-Mobiles SLA against them to get out of the contract. i used to work for radio shack and we sold sprint products there... ever cell phone company has a Service level aggreement within their contracts that states that if service is interupted for extended time or if there is reasonable doubt that continuing service with them will cause you to lose finanical information . then they have to let you out of the contract..no questions asked

      --
      Good Karma, Bad Karma, doesnt matter to me... I'm still going to say whats on my mind!
    6. Re:Tmobile SUX by pclminion · · Score: 1
      Even with encryption I wouldn't describe email as "secure." People can still DoS you by swamping you with spam, or cause a mail server to drop your message without delivering it. As far as I'm concerned, a communication medium which lets attackers block messages from reaching their destinations is not really secure.

      I realize that by that logic the entire internet isn't really secure, but email is significantly worse than other systems because (by default at least) it has no method for stopping unauthenticated parties from just swamping you with crap so you never see your messages.

    7. Re:Tmobile SUX by geoffspear · · Score: 1
      By your definition, nothing is "secure" and the word is meaningless.

      You could build a fortress out a 20 foot thick lead walls, and it wouldn't be "secure" because someone could shoot you on the street outside on your way there.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    8. Re:Tmobile SUX by pclminion · · Score: 1

      As I mentioned in my post, it's not the best definition in the world, but the point remains that email is ridiculously easy to disrupt when compared to other methods of communicating over the internet.

    9. Re:Tmobile SUX by cduffy · · Score: 1

      By your definition, nothing is "secure" and the word is meaningless.

      Disagree -- there exist, or can exist, systems with better security properties than encrypted email. On can, for instance, build a messaging system which will guarantee that the sender will be notified within [X] hours if the message hasn't been received by the recipient. Sure, the messanger you hired might be shot on his way over to your buddy's fortress (or his way back with the signed receipt) -- but you'll find out that he's missing.

      A system in which an attacker can only cause a failure of which one party will be notified is more secure than a system in which it's guaranteed that at least one party will be notified of any failure.

    10. Re:Tmobile SUX by itwerx · · Score: 1

      ...sensitive market data can be compromised?
      If it's sensitive to anybody besides your company (e.g. comes under SEC, HIPAA, GLB, SOx, CA1798 etc.) then y'all are going to get crucified in your next audit...

  5. Ah well... by Gangis · · Score: 3, Informative

    I wish I could switch to a provider that protects their "secured" website better than T-Mobile but they're the only company that provides the Sidekick II in the United States. And I can't really use other phones because of my hearing disability.

    I hate the feeling of being trapped to one provider because they have something the others don't, even though they treat their customers like complete and utter shit. T-Mobile customer service leaves quite a lot to be desired.

    --
    "Black holes are where God divided by zero." - Steve Wright
    1. Re:Ah well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What!@?? HA HA HA HA. Oops, I guess you've heard that one.

      Catherine Zeta-Jones sends hear regards.

    2. Re:Ah well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what kind of customer service do you need?

      im usually on hold for about less than 5 minutes.
      their customer service people seem knowledgable.
      i've been with t-mobile for about 18 months with only one problem -- their credit card processing was down one day, i was over my spending limit, and my phone got cut off for about 4 hours.. that in just 18 months, to me, is no big deal.

      you just seem like you're on the t-mobile sucks bandwagon.

    3. Re:Ah well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about a PDA+wireless combo?
      Or, lots of phones support various IM services and have a qwerty keypad.
      Seems like decent options to me . . .

    4. Re:Ah well... by DoorFrame · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I've had great experiences with the TMobile customer service department as well as their phone service in general. I highly recommend them.

      Maybe it's because I can hear.

    5. Re:Ah well... by Gangis · · Score: 1

      No.

      I've had T-Mobile since May, when I bought the Sidekick Color and upgraded to Sidekick II back in October. In recent months my friends and I would simultaneously lose signal for no apparent reason (It is identified by one, two or three "dancing dots" at the top of the screen, as opposed to a "G" which means full connection). I've called them (via relay) on it several times. Most of the time they give me some half assed excuse (Scheduled system upgrade at 1:00pm on a Wednesday? Come on...)

      I'm speaking from experience here, not from some "bandwagon" that you claim.

      --
      "Black holes are where God divided by zero." - Steve Wright
    6. Re:Ah well... by garcia · · Score: 1

      I hate the feeling of being trapped to one provider because they have something the others don't, even though they treat their customers like complete and utter shit. T-Mobile customer service leaves quite a lot to be desired.

      Well, I don't know how many other cell phone providers you have dealt with (being that you are hearing disabled) but I have dealt with a couple and currently T-mobile (as crappy as they can be at times) are a whole world apart from the others I have had the unfortunate luck to deal with.

      Now as far as the sidekick service goes... I was quite pleased w/the GPRS network prior to the SK2 release. Every since then email has been bouncing back to me regularly (which is what caused my CSR issues as they refuse to credit me and tell me it must be MY end), the web browser randomly stops working, or AIM won't sign on.

      While I don't need it like someone w/a hearing disability does I am mildly annoyed when I intend on using it and it doesn't work.

      It's still better than AT&T.

    7. Re:Ah well... by Gangis · · Score: 1

      I prefer the Sidekick because it has a "full web browser." That is, you can go anywhere on the Internet without having to rely on WAP or RSS feeds. Also, the Sidekick II is open enough that I can download games onto it for practically free from www.skdr.net.

      But good point... My friend has a Smartphone which I really like, though it has a numerical keypad. Whenever I get a job and my contract with TMo expires, I might look at my options and decide what to do.

      --
      "Black holes are where God divided by zero." - Steve Wright
    8. Re:Ah well... by Gangis · · Score: 1

      You're right... I haven't had to deal with many operators, but I do know when I'm getting the short end of the stick.

      Oh yeah, I've had those problems. Actually, it's been happening ever since the Sidekick II was released. They recently had an extended downtime for "system upgrades" (which didn't change a damn thing at all... Emails keep bouncing, AIM refuses to sign on, webpages fail to load) and yes, they keep shrugging it off and blaming me. Feh.

      --
      "Black holes are where God divided by zero." - Steve Wright
    9. Re:Ah well... by lowrydr310 · · Score: 1
      I tried T-Mobile for about a week in 2002. It was the worst experience ever! My biggest complaint was that their voicemail notifications (at least for the model phone I had) were given by a text message. Everytime someone left a voicemail, I would get a text message telling me so. I prefer systems that utilize the voicemail indicator that's built into the phone - you know, the one that goes away after you listen to the message.

      I'm currently locked into a contract with Sprint for one more year and I can't wait to get out! Their billing invoices are ridiculously complex and I don't quite trust their system security. For example, when I send someone a picture mail, instead of sending an email-like message with an attached picture, what really happens is the receipient gets a URL to a webpage that has the picture I sent. Anyone with a web browser can view anyone's shared pictures if they get the correct URL. I've tried several times to see if I could randomly guess the URL of someone else's shared pictures but couldn't get it right. That doesn't mean it's impossible though.

    10. Re:Ah well... by Legodude522 · · Score: 0

      i have a hearing disabilty(30% loss) and damn cells phones just interferres with my hearing aids so i have to take one out to talk. I can hear it

      --
      Because I have low karma, I need pills.
    11. Re:Ah well... by garbletext · · Score: 1

      Despite the bad natured postscript, I fully agree. T-Mobile has excellent customer service, decidedly better than verizon or cingular. It is possible that the gp's customer service complaints are related to his disability.

      Also, in the two areas I frequent (Chicago Metropolitan area and Downstate IL), I've never had ANY service problems or interference in normal conditions. So maybe we're talking about two different T-Mobiles.

  6. Just wondering... by hollismb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is it that every time a Slashdot news story gets posted, a riducilousy inane comment or question has to be appended to the actual news item?

    Could this be the lamest thing ever?

    1. Re:Just wondering... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's the Slashdot way. Typically, people who submit comments would like to give a little initial direction to discussion. If the submitter doesn't add a question, the editor usually does.

      Though if the submitter does append a question, the editor occasionally gives his own answer, or a link to some additional information he googled up before the story went live.

    2. Re:Just wondering... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Informative

      Insightful my hiney. I read the front page right now, i.e. 14 blurbs, and I count 2 that end with a question, one of them being the one you complain about, and the other being a valid question imho.

      This said, I agree that the questions are sometime s lame (like this one). Probably submitters feel compelled to leave the blurb open-ended to start the thread of discussion, out of fear of seeing the "important news" fall flat on its face, and it sometimes really is quite annoying.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:Just wondering... by merlin_jim · · Score: 1

      Why is it that every time a Slashdot news story gets posted, a riducilousy inane comment or question has to be appended to the actual news item?

      Could this be the lamest thing ever?


      I'd just like to point out that this seems to be an unintentional metajoke.

      Due to the mock inane question added to the end hahaha

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
    4. Re:Just wondering... by hollismb · · Score: 1

      Nah, it was intentional.

    5. Re:Just wondering... by allism · · Score: 1

      It's because everyone uses the Slashdot Random Story Generator to write their submissions.

  7. Umm... by suwain_2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Time to get a new cell phone provider!

    Because of their website?

    I'm willing to bet that the guy in charge of coding the backend for their site is not the same guy setting up the telephone network.

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    1. Re:Umm... by m50d · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, but the guy who hired him (or the guy who hired that guy, or so on up the chain), and didn't do something about it when he failed the first time, is the same guy who hired the guy who runs your telephone network, and is responsible for ensuring he does a good job. Still feel happy using them?

      --
      I am trolling
    2. Re:Umm... by JanusFury · · Score: 1

      Well, based on the quality of their telephone network, I wouldn't be suprised if it is the same guy.

      --
      using namespace slashdot;
      troll::post();
    3. Re:Umm... by Otter · · Score: 1
      I think the implication is that because a) Nick Jacobsen was able to compromise T-Mobile accounts, including Paris Hilton's and b) Jack Koziol can show some trivial text injection that I'm not sure even qualifies as a bug...

      Come to think of it, you're right. What is the point of this? But, anyway, the issue is account management and security, not the telephone network.

    4. Re:Umm... by VoidWraith · · Score: 0

      Because their website has security holes that could mean your SSN and other personal information get leaked.

    5. Re:Umm... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because of their website?

      I'm willing to bet that the guy in charge of coding the backend for their site is not the same guy setting up the telephone network.


      Yes, but one could argue that a website is like a logo, or a sales sheet, or a press kit: it's what represents the values the companies want to convey across, and if they suck, there's a strong hint that the rest of the company may suck too. It's not always true though, as Microsoft, its shiny frontpage and not-so-good OS demonstrates, but more often than not you can trust the first impression a company leaves you. Which is why said companies pay designers and PR folks big bucks to look good incidentally.

      Having said that, it's a phone company, so you can bet they're stinking bad regardless :-)

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    6. Re:Umm... by mschoolbus · · Score: 1



      No, Keep your number, switch cell phone provider. You can now keep your number when switching.

  8. They don't seem to care by Husgaard · · Score: 0, Redundant
    It they really cared about security they would have done one or more complete security audits of all their systems when they got hacked the first time.

    Being a customer at a grossly insecure telecom company can expose you to all kinds of risk.

    I can only recommend that people let their money speak and move away from them.

  9. Attention All TMobile Customers by elzbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    TMobile Customers should let TMobile know that we care about security issues on their website, and that we consider this to be very important for our continued relationship with them!

    1. Re:Attention All TMobile Customers by aztektum · · Score: 1

      I don't have T-Mobile but know people that do. They can't afford to just back out of the contract and pay the fee associated with that. If T-Mobile already has you by your checkbook, what do they care?

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    2. Re:Attention All TMobile Customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The "issues" raised on this blog post are not very interesting by themselves, and while it may be that worse things are possible, I don't see any evidence here for that.

      For example, the first "exploit" he details is thwarted by a default security setting of ASP.NET (which T-Mobile uses). When he tries his cross-site scripting attack, an error comes up. This is *exactly what should happen*, but he uses this as evidence that "something is wrong"? It doesn't make any sense. That attack won't work anywhere on the site; an error will always come up. It's a default security feature of ASP.NET to reject input containing HTML tags.

      The second "exploit" is slightly worse, but still not a serious threat. The fact that he is able to see the error details is indicative of some sloppy coding on T-Mobile's part. But the error itself is innocuous, and indicates proper security practice (parse input before sending it off to SQL, instead of simply stuffing it into a query string as-is).

      Simply observing that bad input produces error messages does not make security holes magically appear. Without something more substantial, I would say that T-Mobile's site has not been proven to have any security holes at all.

    3. Re:Attention All TMobile Customers by brauwerman · · Score: 1

      They'll cry their hearts out as they withdraw our $250 early termination fees and sell service to someone quitting Sprint's crappy service.

      Cartels are as bad as monopolies.

      -mike, who just got hit by Tmobile with a $20 in hidden TXT charges for AIM. (5c each time you log in, log out, open the phone, close the phone, look at buddy list...)

    4. Re:Attention All TMobile Customers by Doppler00 · · Score: 1

      Use Agile Messenger. It's for the Symbian OS platform.

      Charging per text message is ridiculus. They need to stop that. 128 bytes for a text message puts thousands of times less burden on their network than a phone converstion.

  10. Not little known by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Informative

    little known, but the Secret Service have jurisdiction over counterfeiting crimes

    It's not a little known fact amongst people who follow the hacking/cracking/phreaking/carding scene, even loosely. Read the excellent book the hacker crackdown by Bruce Sterling for an informative account of what the SS does (and also does spectacularly wrong).

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Not little known by Laterite · · Score: 1

      Or watch Hackers!
      One of the only "accurate" aspects of that movie...oh that and laptop screens that project light onto the user's face...
      Damn fun movie.

    2. Re:Not little known by Mikito · · Score: 1

      little known, but the Secret Service have jurisdiction over counterfeiting crimes

      Not that little known. The Secret Service is part of the Treasury Department, after all.

      --
      Anakin Simpson: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy--ooh, donuts!
  11. Rant about T Mobile by rokzy · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I liked them when they were One2One. the service was (in my experience) decent and the adverts were interesting (as far as adverts go). then they because T mobile. what the fuck is T mobile? I get the mobile part, but T?

    and when I'd want to top up my credit I'd have to listen to a 5 mins of crap about how they had changed for the better, before being told I had to now wait 30 mins for my top up to take affect instead of the almost-instant old way. yay for progress.

    that was several years ago. I left them and never looked back.

    1. Re:Rant about T Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, T for Telephone, dumbass.

    2. Re:Rant about T Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably "Telekom", Deutsche Telekom is T-Mobile's parent.

    3. Re:Rant about T Mobile by adpe · · Score: 5, Informative

      T-Mobile is a german company. Originally it was called "Telekom" which is short for "Telecommunication", then they split up their departments into T-Com (responsible for telephone services), T-Onlien (ISP services), T-Systems (business solutions) and T-Mobile (mobile communication). They just kept the name when buying themselves into the US market.

    4. Re:Rant about T Mobile by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      One2One is only meaningful in English, but T mobile works in most European languages. (Almost all that use Latin alphabet, anyway).

      Some people dont speak English at all!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    5. Re:Rant about T Mobile by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      One2One is only meaningful in English, but T mobile works in most European languages. (Almost all that use Latin alphabet, anyway).

      Some people dont speak English at all!


      Well, their main customer base is american after all...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    6. Re:Rant about T Mobile by mmkkbb · · Score: 1

      I thought they were VoiceStream before getting boucht up by Deutsch Telecom

      --
      -mkb
    7. Re:Rant about T Mobile by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      Well, their main customer base is american after all...

      That being the case, they could have called them selves "T-Cell" but this might result in some confusion, protests, and mayhem. "T-Cell - Get more from life!"

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    8. Re:Rant about T Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were, and before that they were another company. VoiceStream however bought up several smaller wireless companies before being acquired by DT. His old company was probably acquired by VoiceStream.

    9. Re:Rant about T Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when did corporate names make sense?

    10. Re:Rant about T Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, most of their customers live in Europe.

    11. Re:Rant about T Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, their main customer base is american after all...


      Hmm, they have about 70 million customers, 27 million of which are in Germany. T-Mobile USA has about 17 million customers. So I guess you are wrong...

      The parent company is 'Deutsche Telekom'. A couple of years ago they introduced brand names for the different branches. So they have now T-Com (fixed line networks, mostly in Germany), T-Online (internet service provider), T-Systems (international network services for companies) and T-Mobile (cell phone provider).

    12. Re:Rant about T Mobile by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      T-Mobile is a large German company that bought a bunch of mobile operators across the world, including Voicestream (in the US, itself a merger of a bunch of GSM operators, the largest probably being Omnipoint) and one2one in the UK.

      Interestingly, T-Mobile (.de) is rumoured to want to get out of the US market, which almost certainly means us poor T-Mobile customer saps are going to have to endure yet another change of name.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  12. Phone Company's by Fox_1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Traditional Landline companies take customer privacy very seriously (at least the ones I worked for) but the new technologies - Mobility, cell, internet divisions/companies always seemed to be playing fast and loose with phone company policy. Very frustrating from the landline side of the house. Not that the landline divisions are much more secure but at least they generally have the right attitude to security.

    --
    The rock, the vulture, and the chain
  13. Security as PR, not as security by Sunrun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the latest CryptoGram by Bruce Schneier:

    "T-Mobile suffered some bad press for its lousy security, nothing more. It'll spend some money improving its security, but it'll be security designed to protect its reputation from bad PR, not security designed to protect the privacy of its customers."

    And I seriously doubt if the treatment of security would be or is any better from any of the other cellular carriers.


    - SR

    --
    "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -- Voltaire
  14. Time to change the provider? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    But i just finished compiling my embededd gentoo for it!

  15. Obscured Security by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How do we know that Verizon, Sprint, AT&T or others are safe? T-Mobile should get hit with the liability for the identities of their violated customers, which would force them to tap their business liability insurance. That would force the other telcos insurance companies to force audits of them. We still wouldn't know whether we were protected, but it would be more likely. If a T-Mobile liability suit could find that T-Mobile violated its own published privacy policy, and held it accountable, that might force the other telcos down the same road, of honoring their own privacy policies. The same goes, of course, for all other personal info cachers, with their own toothless privacy policies. Until there's some serious consequences for lying about these responsibilities rather than backing them up, it's all wide open.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  16. Time to get a new cell phone provider? by Daedala · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is that there's no point [for Americans; there may be for people in other countries]. What, exactly, is getting a new cell phone provider going to do for you? It will punish T-mobile for not being careful with your data, which is deserved. But will it protect your data? Not really. Oh, if you use their data services you might prevent some eavesdropping or picture-stealing...or might not. T-Mobile got caught, but that doesn't mean the other services aren't having problems.

    But it won't protect your personal data. That is out of your hands and has been for the last thirty years or so. Your personal information has already been given away or sold by ChoicePoint, the government, the credit bureaus, and everyone else. Your only option is to assume it's gone, check your credit report regularly, and hope someone isn't using your social security number. Identity theft isn't something you can do anything to prevent. You can only catch it in time, and then hope you can fix it. Despite all the rosy stories about how after 300 hours of work people managed to clear their names, there are real stories of people who don't get their money and credit ratings back. There simply haven't been any solid studies one way or the other -- it's all anecdotal.

    No, I'm not fucking bitter at all.

    --
    What I say does not represent the views of my employers, my friends, my cats, or myself.
    1. Re:Time to get a new cell phone provider? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      So what exactly is wrong with taking some personal responsibility towards your data?

      ID theft doesn't happen online. The overwhelming majority of cases happen where someone snarfs the carbon copies from a credit card purchase out of the dumpster behind the 7-11. What can you do about it? Take the carbons with you (if you encounter an old-school carbon copy card thingamajob), and like you said, pay attention to your own credit.

      You aren't liable for fraud perpetrated in your name. "ID theft" is a nice buzzword going around these days, and it's all a bunch of hype to scare people into ditching their AmEx cards in favor of SecurePrimeLockChoice+1.Net.

      People need to be responsible. I'd notice INSTANTLY if there was so much as a 50 cent discrepency between my CC statement and my spending log. Or rather, quickbooks would notice it for me. People who use a credit card in lieu of pocket cash, and don't watch what they spend, they're taking needless risks.

      As for the victims, life's a bitch. Sometimes the cops find the guy who broke into your garage and stole your new bike. Usually they don't. That's what insurance and locks are for.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Time to get a new cell phone provider? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, privacy protection in the US sucks big time.. unlike here in the Netherlands, it's not a civil right in the US to have your privacy protected. Pay searchusa.com and they'll prove it to you.

      The best way to protect your private information, is to make sure it isn't stored anywhere where it doesn't need to be. Central data storage or linking gives governments and companies great power. But it's dangerous.

      Unfortunately, this overrated scare-tactics used by governments, perhaps in return to being scared themselves, people are willing to give up their private information and due to their great ignorance, they hold the simple belief that "if you are not a criminal, you got nothing to hide".

      That's so not true.

    3. Re:Time to get a new cell phone provider? by Tarlyn · · Score: 1
      Protecting your identity is really very easy. I have been doing it without problem for a quite a while.

      First - don't pay your bills on time. Wrack up lots of late fees, and never pay them.

      Second - default on your student loans, if you have any.

      Third - Don't pay your late fees and switch job frequently to aviod a wage garnish for the student loans you have defaulted on.
      All this will result in a VERY poor credit rating. End result - no one wants my identity, and even if they did, they couldn't get a credit card with it.

    4. Re:Time to get a new cell phone provider? by Daedala · · Score: 1

      Almost -- this still doesn't protect you from immigrants borrowing your SSN to get a job, and criminals using it to avoid the consequences of crime.

      --
      What I say does not represent the views of my employers, my friends, my cats, or myself.
    5. Re:Time to get a new cell phone provider? by Daedala · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I'm in the middle of moving and don't have the time to look up my sources.

      But: 70% of id theft is from insider data theft. The studies that say "most id theft is from stealing wallets/dumpster diving/etc" are talking about cases where people know how they lost the data. It's easy to know if your wallet's gone walkabout. Most people simply don't know where their data went or how. Search for "University of Michigan" and id theft to find the study. There is nothing that anyone can do about insider data theft. Look up Teledata.

      As for you not being liable for fraud in your name -- sure, yeah. But how are you going to prove it wasn't you? This is increasingly difficult and the systems are set up to put the burden on you to prove it wasn't you, not the creditor to prove it was. Just read the advice at the FTC on how to clear your name, and look between the lines -- you can't even reliably get a police report, which many false creditors require.

      You may notice problems with your accounts, but do you check your credit report often enough to notice new fake accounts? And even if you do, Bob Sullivan at MSNBC reported that it doesn't necessarily help -- you get a cleaned-up version, not what your banker or car loan place might see.

      There was a bank president (or someone of similar financial heft) who became a victim of ID theft, and he worked on clearing it as a normal person would, without his position to help him. Even he -- who even if he wasn't pulling strings knew the industry inside and out -- had trouble with it. That's from Bob Sullivan again; I'm not sure if it was his book or MSNBC.

      When I say that there is nothing that people can do about identity theft, I really mean it. People have been sued five years after they "finally" cleared their names for not paying the fake mortgage taken out on their homes. I have a coworker who was never able to clear his credit, despite working for infosec at a freaking bank. As for insurance -- "id theft insurance" is offered by the very people who set up the system that enables the problem. Anyone who thinks that you can prevent identity theft or easily recover money lost due to it has no idea how banking works. And that's just how the financial industry wants it.

      --
      What I say does not represent the views of my employers, my friends, my cats, or myself.
    6. Re:Time to get a new cell phone provider? by Wumpus · · Score: 1

      And don't forget to tune in next week for hot tips on how to prevent car theft using nothing more than a can of gasoline and a lighter!

  17. netcraft by millahtime · · Score: 4, Informative

    according to netcraft they are running win 2k for the server.

    1. Re:netcraft by athakur999 · · Score: 1

      Because security holes in web applications are always the fault of the web server software, right?

      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    2. Re:netcraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah why is this shit moderated Informative...

    3. Re:netcraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.
      Anyone who deploys a critical web app on Windows doesn't know squat about security.
      Point-and-click programmers/developers, IMHO.

    4. Re:netcraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quit being so presumptuous. The post only stated what OS it was running. Man, you people make big deals out of nothing.

    5. Re:netcraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that's a humble opinion if ever I saw one.

  18. ASP or Java? by progbuc · · Score: 4, Informative

    The article says the site uses ASP, but that error message at the end sure looks like a Java stack trace to me.

    --
    Go ahead and waste your life with your inhibitions, just don't ruin other people's lives with your intolerances.
    1. Re:ASP or Java? by FerretFrottage · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Could be both. One part of the website may run using ASP (my.t-mobile.com) and other part looks to be using servlets (support.t-mobile.com) at least somewhere for some function(s). In fact the my.t-mobile.com source indicates that it was coding language is C#.

      --
      "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
    2. Re:ASP or Java? by emcron · · Score: 1

      That error was simply a java script bug in executying their little flyout tree for plan information which can be seen by removing the trailing apostrophe from the URL. See here: http://support.t-mobile.com/plan.html?treeName=pla ns&path Certainly poor error handling, but not much of an exploit.

    3. Re:ASP or Java? by ad0gg · · Score: 1

      Umm no thats a java servlet stack trace. Javascript != Java. And servlets are a server technology and HTTP 500 error is a webserver produced error. And apostrophe that causes an error is usually a clear indication of a sql injection vunerability but looking at the stack trace it's just a parse error trying to take a string and convert it to an int.

      --

      Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

    4. Re:ASP or Java? by the0ther · · Score: 0

      It's .Net. Apparently you're still using ASP 3 if you haven't seen a stack trace like this before. Or you never make a mistake that would result in a stack trace.

  19. lesson number 2 of 4556832554 by L1nux_L0ser83 · · Score: 5, Funny

    lets see, your network is so insecure that someone hacks into it using government accounts and steals private information from your company.

    do you...
    a) tighten your security on your network so it doesnt happen again

    b) appoligize and place it on your "things to do" list or

    c) dont change a damn thing but pay snoop dog and company mega bucks to advertise your new sidekick II?

    if your t-mobile then c is the correct answer!

    --
    Good Karma, Bad Karma, doesnt matter to me... I'm still going to say whats on my mind!
  20. Not a surprise by jandrese · · Score: 1

    If you try to go to their webmail, it chides you for not using a supported browser (Firefox 1.0 or Mozilla 1.7.3 for instance) and instead insists that you use an IE based browser and is actually broken in Gecko based browsers. It also has the feel of a crappy, thrown together site.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  21. T-Mobile by ectotherm · · Score: 3, Funny

    Get More... Of other people's data... ;)

    --
    "Nature bats last..."
  22. Re:Cell is already insecure by garignak · · Score: 1

    From a technical standpoint, you are correct. Legally, though, cellular phones are afforded the same protection as landlines. Cordless phones, however, are not. At least, that is my understanding.

    --
    "Sometimes a man's gotta do what a woman wouldn't consider." - Red Green
  23. Well... by Blue-Footed+Boobie · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Anyone that is using a Cellphone and expecting a secure and private communication is seriously deluding themselves.

    Sure pwning the network through their website doesn't help but you shouldn't be talking company secrets over a cell (for example) and not expecting someone, somewhere, to be able to hear you.

    --
    DAMN YOU OCTODOG! DAMN YOU TO HELL!
    1. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      back when they stll had analog cell service you could tune an old tv with uhf reception to intercept calls albeit at a loss of quality. so the system has never been secure

  24. So? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1
    To all those crackers out there: you're welcome to have copies of all the baby pictures I've posted to T-mobile! Hey, all you had to do was ask, no need to break security!

    Anybody fooling enough to assume that material posted to a t-mobile website is SECURE pretty deserves whatever they get...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To all those crackers out there: you're welcome to have copies of all the baby pictures I've posted to T-mobile!

      That's not the problem I have with T-mobile security.

      I have issues when women send me pictures of their vagina... then getting all bitchy when they have found their vagina has made it's way on the net. I hate having to deal with irate women who blame me for their flying vagina that I didn't want in the first place. Their faulty security is accountable for me getting blamed for their vagina escaping.

    2. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if he would have showed/tried to exploit it with real dangerous code, he might be into trouble soon. So he didn't do it.

    3. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be a very special geek - no women has ever sent me a picture of her vagina with her picture phone, and I am a body builder & a geek; I get looks and flirted with all the time... but never ever had a *single* picture of a vagina on my cell phone...

      Care to share with the rest of the geeks your secret?

    4. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Care to share with the rest of the geeks your secret?

      IRC

  25. Phones should stay phones by Space_Soldier · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    This is why I believe that phone should stay a phone, and not be a smart phone. I can't wait for the audio XXX spam. I want to see people's faces when their phone starts moaning like a wet whore in heat.

    1. Re:Phones should stay phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, yeah. You ever try looking at people's faces when they get a dry whore in heat? Ouch!

  26. Re:Cell is already insecure by kevinbr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    T-Mobile use GSM.

    Soooooo........how does your digital scanner breal the encryption?

    Encryption in the GSM network utilizes a Challenge/Response mechanism.

    The Mobile Station (MS) signs into the network.
    The Mobile Services Switching Center (MSC) requests 5 triples from the Home Location Register (HLR).
    The Home Location Register creates five triples utilizing the A8 algorithm. These five triples each contain:
    A 128-bit random challenge (RAND)
    A 32-bit matching Signed Response (SRES)
    A 64-bit ciphering key used as a Session Key (Kc).

    The Home Location Register sends the Mobile Services Switching Center the five triples.
    The Mobile Services Switching Center sends the random challenge from the first triple to the Base Transceiver Station (BTS).
    The Base Transceiver Station sends the random challenge from the first triple to the Mobile Station.
    The Mobile Station receives the random challenge from the Base Transceiver Station and encrypts it with the Individual Subscriber Authentication Key (Ki) assigned to the Mobile Station utilizing the A3 algorithm.
    The Mobile Station sends the Signed Response to the Base Transceiver Station.
    The Base Transceiver Station sends the Signed Response to the Mobile Services Switching Center.
    The Mobile Services Switching Center verifies the Signed Response.
    The Mobile Station generates a Session Key (Kc) utilizing the A8 algorithm, the Individual Subscriber Authentication Key (Ki) assigned to the Mobile Station, and the random challenge received from the Base Transceiver Station.
    The Mobile Station sends the Session Key (Kc) to the Base Transceiver Station.
    The Mobile Services Switching Center sends the Session Key (Kc) to the Base Transceiver Station.
    The Base Transceiver Station receives the Session Key (Kc) from the Mobile Services Switching Center.
    The Base Transceiver Station receives the Session Key (Kc) from the Mobile Station.
    The Base Transceiver Station verifies the Session Keys from the Mobile Station and the Mobile Services switching Center.
    The A5 algorithm is initialized with the Session Key (Kc) and the number of the frame to be encrypted.
    Over-the-air communication channel between the Mobile Station and Base Transceiver Station can now be encrypted utilizing the A5 algorithm.

  27. So? by Storlek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We can make the login page say "I like cheese" and cause server errors. Wee. These aren't holes so much as simple bugs, unless someone can point to a definite way to, say, log in as any user without a password, or get a list of account numbers, or something besides making the login form display some silly phrase.

    Another statement the article makes is that the text bug "could be used in a phishing attack on T-Mobile customers, especially if you hex encoded portions of the URL." How? Wouldn't any phishing attack involve making the form submit to some place besides the official website? Doing so much as trying to insert an HTML tag produces a server error (which, I'm guessing, is intentional), so it wouldn't even be possible to close the form and open a new one in its place that submits to a rogue site.

    --
    Bears don't normally eat things that talk and move backwards.
  28. It's Worse then you think.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So I'm sitting in a doughnut shop near Grand Ave in Oakland and there is apparently a T-Mobile store next door. Not knowing this at the time I turn on my wireless to see if I can score some free internet...and I get an open connection. After my internetting is done I peek at Network neighborhood (because I'm always curious to see *how* open someone's internet connection is) and Voila! I get direct access to the T-mobile store's *two* servers next door. OK, it wasn't exactly direct. I had to use my enormous hacking skills to put in a username of "Administrator" with a *blank* password when I tried to connect to the server). Bingo - direct access to ALL T-mobile business info *including* completed and pending credit info.

    This is not a troll or a joke - it really happenned. I *like* T-mobile's phones...but their lack of security (well at least that one store's security anyway) scares me.

    1. Re:It's Worse then you think.... by merdaccia · · Score: 2, Informative

      [Disclaimer: Slightly off topic].

      I *like* T-mobile's phones...

      Err, T-Mobile doesn't make phones. Since you can get any phone T-Mobile offers from online retailers, their phones shouldn't really influence your choice of provider. Unless you're willing to get roped into a contract for the sake of saving a hundred bucks on a phone. It's often not worth it. There are very good sites online to buy unbranded GSM phones, such as ustronics.com, mobilecityonline.com, and expansys.com to name a few. And good review sites, such as gsmarena.com.

      Personally, I'm getting as far away from T-Mobile as possible when my contract expires next month. Don't get me wrong, they have some very good plans and most times their customer service is wonderful. But their signal is horrific (I'm in the DC metropolitan area), and they've recently started charging for international messages. When I complained about the latter, I was told that it was not a contract violation on their part (which it is), and that I was duly informed, which I was not. So customer service is wonderful if they agree with you, and call you a liar if you're not.

      For the same money, I'd rather have reception. Given the AT&T and Cingular merger, especially with free mobile-to-mobile minutes and the latter's rollover plans, T-Mobile just got some very stiff competition that I doubt they can face. Add this bad publicity for security, and I think they're in over their heads.

      --

      *blinking cursor*

  29. Re:Cell is already insecure by jumbledInTheHead · · Score: 1

    It seems that you know more than I, but I was pretty sure you could listen in. It would be illegal, I am sure it isn't that difficult to break if someone cared enough. I don't have a digital scanner and the Feds have made illegal to manufacture one for civilian use that allows you to recieve cell phone ranges and the mirrored ranges so legally you can't unless you have one from several years back. I'd be more worried about my social security number and all my information getting stolen than someone listening to my conversation. With enought time and motivation anything is possible right, well maybe not anything, but listening to random cell conversations I'm sure could be.

  30. And by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And here Microsoft was claiming that their Windowz server was sooooo secure.

    http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.vo ic estream.com

  31. NumberFormatException = Injection Vulnerabilty ??? by _pruegel_ · · Score: 1

    Someone care to explain?
    Since this is a Java exception I can't think of a way to exploit it. I happen to write Java web frontends on a daily basis and some of the pages will throw exceptions if fed malformed parameters. Where is the problem?

  32. Re:NumberFormatException = Injection Vulnerabilty by _pruegel_ · · Score: 1

    Of course we usually mask the exception by some generic error page and log the stacktrace somewhere else but still I don't see where having the stacktrace could help someone break into the system.

  33. Re:Cell is already insecure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You almost had the answer to your own question..

    From the same site where you copied and pasted your entry from, we also find the following statements.

    Ian Goldberg and David Wagner of the University of California at Berkeley demonstrated that all A8 implementations they looked at, including the few that did not use COMP128, were deliberately weakened. The A8 algorithm takes a 64-bit key, but ten key bits were set to zero. The attack on the A8 algorithm demonstrated by Goldberg and Wagner takes just 2^19 queries to the GSM SIM *Subscriber Identity Module), which takes roughly 8 hours.

    also,

    Alex Biryukov, Adi Shamir and David Wagner showed that they can find the A5/1 key in less than a second on a single PC with 128 MB RAM and two 73 GB hard disks, by analyzing the output of the A5/1 algorithm in the first two minutes of the conversation.
    Ian Goldberg and David Wagner of the University of California at Berkeley published an analysis of the weaker A5/2 algorithm showing a work factor of 2^16, or approximately 10 milliseconds.

    I think that explains how a digital scanner would break the "encryption".

    The grand-parent post stands. Cell phones are insecure communication devices.
  34. Credit Card Numbers? by spud603 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A couple of days ago some ne'rdowell got a hold of my credit card number and started buying italian airline tickets with it. Fortunately, my credit card company noticed and gave me a call.
    T-mobile is about the only website I give my credit card number to. Could their weak system be the culprit? I don't know enough about hacking to know if this is possible, but it seems like quite a coincidence...

    1. Re:Credit Card Numbers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was my bad, I just wanted to get out of the country for a few days. Sorry about the mess.

  35. Makes me glad ... and wonder by galego · · Score: 1

    all at the same time. I switched from T-Mobile about a month ago. I could care less about pictures, phone calls or text messages. I hardly use text and haven't owned a camera phone ... My only question is whether or not access has been gained on a large enough scale to SSN's and other personal data.

    --

    Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas

    [May God give you double that which you wish for me]

  36. Re:Cell is already insecure by mercuryresearch · · Score: 1

    OK, this isn't a crack per se, and likely even more illegal -- but in my area at least, the digital stuff goes down occasionally and everyone with multi-mode phones automatically switch back to AMPS. Doesn't seem like it'd be too hard to force digital down intentionally with some willful interference.

    Only the nerds among us are going to see the AMPS icon lit and think "oh, I better not say anything secret."

  37. Re:Makes me glad ... and wonder [correction] by galego · · Score: 1
    ... switched about a *YEAR* ago ... but had to wait 2 minutes to post the correction.

    guess I should have used the preview button.

    --

    Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas

    [May God give you double that which you wish for me]

  38. Re:Cell is already insecure by kevinbr · · Score: 1

    Yes you can break the encryption, but it is not totally trivial. Can the government do it? Yes. Could you build a scanner to do this ? Possibly. I suspect that governments DO NOT want strong encryption on mobile calls.

  39. not only does t-mobile suck on security by joel2600 · · Score: 1

    i have them as a cellphone provider right now.

    i chose them because of their inexpensive data rates and being the first on the market with the hp6315 ipaq phone. however they end up charging you minutes for calls that you don't answer and so many other miscellaneous things that i've already paid them the money to cancel my contract.

    can one of you cell phone providers not suck?

    1. Re:not only does t-mobile suck on security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      however they end up charging you minutes for calls that you don't answer

      Minutes for calls you don't answer? I'm a T-Mobile customer, and I've never had anything like that happen to me.

  40. Re:Cell is already insecure by kevinbr · · Score: 1

    Not a handheld scanner. Note the size of the disks - you will accumulate a lot of data. Yes you can break ANYTHING with enough time, but my point here is that GSM traffic is not easily intercetpted by script kiddies. Note that first you need a certain amount of data to retreive the key. This leads to post processing not real time. Many people suspect that past releases of Princess Diana mobile phones conversations were done by MI5. There is not much eveidence I have seen of people building GSM "scanners". But yes it can be done. Of course governments and script writers for "24" have such scanners.

  41. Re:Cell is already insecure by kevinbr · · Score: 1

    Thankfully Europe has no AMPS. Only GSM.

  42. Cross Site Scripting FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
  43. so how does it work? by frn123 · · Score: 1

    I've been reading slashdot stories about USian mobile providers for a while and i still don't understand.

    Whats this thing that i had to sign up with provider X because i want a phone Y?
    So tell me what's the catch - is there no way to just buy a phone from the shop and sign a service contract with them? Do you have to rent it from your connection provider? Or lease it?

    Why don't you just buy the phone you like and choose the provider you like?

    In europe - where i'm from - it works like this: If you're not piss-poor, you buy a phone you want and choose a provider you like. If you're piss-poor, you sign some crappy contract with provider for some set time and they lease you a phone with some 200% markup.

    Here excellent nokia models (400h standby time) start from about $80 here and will last for about 5 years at least- so surely it can't be the money issue...

    1. Re:so how does it work? by DiscoOnTheSide · · Score: 1

      On top of what the other poster said, lots of times (in older phones) they've actually locked the firmware to their service. When I got T-Mobile (the most "standards compliant" service here in the states, GSM wise) my Nokia 3650 (I love this phone) could only go on T-Mobile's service. Now, the 3650 can do 900/1200/1800 if I'm not mistaken, meaning it can pretty much hit any GSM service out there (even in Europe, or at least they told me when I was considering a trip to EU) but after using a nifty lil prgram and giving it my IMEI number, it gave me an unlock code and tadah unlocked phone. Now I can just get a SIM when I'm over there and I dont have to pay out the ass for T-mobiles asstoundingly "world-wide" pricing plans...

      --
      Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
    2. Re:so how does it work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I've been reading slashdot stories about USian mobile providers for a while and i still don't understand. Whats this thing that i had to sign up with provider X because i want a phone Y?

      In essence, it's all made up. As long as you avoid the two carriers who are still not using GSM, you can buy a tri-band GSM phone (there are only 3 frequencies in use in the US) and go with any carrier you'd like.

      What these people mean when they say "I had to go with that carrier" is that they wasted all their money (on booze or something) and couldn't afford to just buy their own phone. So, they had to go with one of the cheap phones that are offered with a service contract for free (or cheap, like $50).

      Basically, in the US, the carrier will give you about $100 to $200 off the cost of a phone if you sign a contract. You do not HAVE to do this. You can go buy any GSM phone you want and use it with the provider, but people don't want to buy a phone; they want to get it "free".

    3. Re:so how does it work? by pe1chl · · Score: 1

      Normally when you sign a contract including a phone supplied to you, you are not paying the full price of the phone upfront. You pay nothing or a small amount upfront, and then pay for your phone as part of the monthly fee (even when this is not specified).

      Of course they don't want you to cancel the subscription and walk to a less expensive competitor with the phone they paid but you did not yet pay back. So they lock your phone.
      You can get the unlock code when some time has elapsed (and you paid back at least some amount), and/or if they trust your story that you are not going to cancel.

  44. What is SQL Injection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
  45. Privacy Policy -- not by BP9 · · Score: 1

    T-Mobile go to great pains to publish a privacy policy which claims they use industry standard practices such as SSL to protect private customer data, yet, when one tries to get customer support via their website they *require* your social security number on a non-SSL encrypted page.

    If you make one up because the question is fairly general (like "when will Danger's servers come back up so I can get email again, I've been watching the 2 dot dance for 12 hours now") they will refuse to answer it and request your 'social' via email (also unencrypted).

    After 12 round trip emails (I should stick them on my web site, they are fairly classic) it is clear they realize they have a privacy policy but they refuse to follow it.

    I'm not surprised with the attitude and general ignorance I've encountered so far that they're having problems of a more serious nature.

    Offtopic rant:

    I've had my Sidekick Color for 1.5 yrs or so and the service has gone way downhill in the last 3-4 months or so. The connection to Danger's servers via GPRS is snappy, but it can take their server 1-2mins to fetch a web page and render it down (say, slashdot) -- even with images turned off.

    Email also recently has gone suck: it used to be your email was pushed to the handheld realtime and you could read it when out of range, now it only pulls the email down when you open the email app and try to read (meaning you can't read email when out of range and have to wait for downloads when in range, which is quite slow due to the overloaded servers).

    Overall my satisfaction with them has just about dipped to the point its worth buying new cell phones/pda's and finding another GPRS carrier. I think I'm stuck with a Palm thing though if I want to keep ssh over gprs (which I use a lot).

  46. The others aren't better anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is not as if any other provider has their business together much better, it's just that T-Mobile has come in publicity with it.

  47. Bad coding by ad0gg · · Score: 1

    Asp.net 1.1 by default blocks the submission of form variables that contain html tags. Thats the error you get back, the developers didn't even bother to check it themselves. This check didn't exists in version 1.0 which makes me wonder how old this page is. But due to the stupidity of web developers, Microsoft added it.

    --

    Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

  48. just curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    am i the only one who hasn't owned T-mobile?

  49. Re:Cell is already insecure by Kyogen · · Score: 1

    Um, and all this means what? That with thousands of dollars of equipment and a few phd's working on it, you may be able to listen to a person's cell call? Of course it's not secure, Bush's pals have plenty of backdoors in... if they make it easy, it's more plausibly deniable.

    --
    www.InGratia.org - Gratitude, Memorials and Giving
  50. Gah! (Correction) by cduffy · · Score: 1

    That last line should be:

    A system in which an attacker can only cause a failure of which one party will be notified is more secure than a system in which an attacker can cause a failure of which neither party is notified.

  51. Lots of reasons it sucks. by Colol · · Score: 2, Informative

    Numerous reasons the US wireless telecom industry sucks.

    The main reason for what you're seeing, though, is that unlike Europe, we have several competing standards. GSM is finally starting to spread, but additional standards are still common.

    So 1: your phone has to match your network standard. If you're not using a GSM provider, you're pretty much left with nowhere but the provider (or an authorized reseller, which just sells the same phones anyway) to buy a phone. And even if you could buy a phone elsewhere for a non-GSM network, it would still have to be programmed by your provider to work.

    1a: Not all GSM providers are using the same frequency. And in the case of Cingular, they're not even always using the same frequency across their entire service area.

    2: Providers are all over exclusivity contracts. Cingular, for example, is the only provider that can offer the Motorola RAZR V3. When Cingular merged with AT&T, Sony-Ericsson phones mysteriously disappeared from the other providers. In some cases, the manufacturer is still able to offer the phone unlocked and without activation to the general public. But...

    3: Unlocked phone prices are outrageous. The US providers heavily subsidize the phones they sell (and SIM lock them). Without activation, the RAZR V3 is $600. With activation, it's $260. Prices for other phones are similarly disparate. Nokia's N-Gage runs $200 unlocked. Up until recently, you could get it for between $0 and -$150 (you made $150 by buying the phone) if you shopped around and signed into a new contract. And all this is assuming you can find a handset that's offered unlocked and without a plan. Most models simply aren't available that way. (For reference, the cheapest handset Nokia offers here "handset only" is $130.)

    You buy the phone, you pay for the service, and unless you want to hemorrhage at the wallet, you select from the phones offered by your provider.

    I and many others wish the wireless here was more like it is in Europe, but we're damn well screwed in the mean time.

  52. Re:Cell is already insecure by xmp_phrack · · Score: 1

    i recall that at least 4 types of radio transmissions are illegal to intercept: cell phone calls, point-to-point microwave links ... and i forget the other two.

  53. SQL Injection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I don't get is that this was apparently done via an SQL injection attack. What kind of moron writes a web application where this is even possible? I write B2B applications for a living and I just don't understand why you'd have a scenario where you execute SQL from a GET or POST request. I suppose a developer not knowing the HTTP protocol might help...

  54. Due Diligence by SatansTuringMachine · · Score: 1

    The bottom line is that a corporation T-Mobile or otherwise should perform due diligence to protect its customers from security threats. Period. Especially in terms of information involving personal information, and /or credit cards etc. T-Mobile and like companies should be compelled to pay its customers for each security breach. Hit them in the balance sheet.

  55. Preventing Identity Theft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Identity theft isn't something you can do anything to prevent. You can only catch it in time, and then hope you can fix it.
    I disagree. Creating laws that penalize companies for not properly authenticating identities would go a long ways towards eliminating identity theft. As it stands today, if a company screws up and creates accounts for someone else in your name, you must bear the cost of the cleanup. If the company had to bear the cost for their own mistake, identity theft would disappear overnight.

    We'll never see this happen in the U.S. though because it will cost companies' money.

  56. Ze Germans by sPaKr · · Score: 1

    Dood they are Germans, they got better things to do like dance and touch monkeys.

  57. T-mobile insecurities by runamok1 · · Score: 0
    I know for a fact that a few years ago it was possible to change the price of a ringtone in the querystring to 00 and then the ringtone would be free. A little window popped up without the address bar and you had to click a link to download/ring the file to your phone. If you hit F11 the window would maximize and the address bar appears. Then you could edit the querystring to replace price=.99 with price=.00

    SQL Injection is one of the easiest flaws to find and is an easy thing to overlook when you are in a rush and developing under ASP.

    At least PHP has "magicquotes" to somewhat protect newbies. Although one could argue that this can give a false sense of security I suppose.

  58. fukerz!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    voice your opinnion, just dont be lude because theyll start hanging up on anyone who calls for bruce brown. hehehe.

    Home Office:

    12920 SE 38th Street.
    Bellevue, WA 98006
    1-800-318-9270

    Robert Dotson President and Chief Executive Officer
    Sue Swenson Chief Operating Officer
    Mike Butler Chief Marketing Officer
    Bruce Brown Chief Information Officer
    Cole Brodman SVP Product & Systems Development, Chief Development Officer
    Dave Miller Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
    Brian Kirkpatrick Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
    Tim Wong Executive Vice President and Chief Technical Officer

  59. new product by j1bb3rj4bb3r · · Score: 1

    T-Mobile Anyone Minutes

    --
    *yawn*
  60. Yabut.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Crackberries have secure end-to-end encryption. The corporate plans do, anyway... I haven't kept up on their latest stuff.

  61. Easy Easy Easy by bradintheusa · · Score: 1

    When I signed up to T-Mobile. They were VoiceStream at the time. There was a huge flaw. To to create an account they would SMS the password to your phone AND show it in a popup dialog on screen. It looked like some debug code made it to production. I had fun all weekended playing with peoples accounts.

    Since then I have assumed there security was very bottom rung.

  62. Re:Cell is already insecure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An off-the-shelf laptop with an external firewire drive is all that's needed here. With A5/2, it sure seems like you can get a real-time view of the traffic, while A5/1 makes you wait a couple of minutes, not because of some intensive CPU task, but just to have enough packets to derive the key (this is pretty similar to the current WiFi cracking fad, in spirit)

    The lack of evidence of any such thing happening may be because of the lack of legitimate reasons for having a gsm cracking sourceforge project, since unlike WiFi, you can't really claim you'd need it to secure your own GSM setup. It doesn't mean such toolkits don't exist.

    The paper below was written a year and a half ago.. In the internet world, companies that knowingly leave their customer's private information exposed by not fixing known security holes tend to get in trouble. Aren't you curious to know if modern GSM phones are still vulnerable to this?

    "Instant Ciphertext-Only Cryptanalysis of GSM Encrypted Communications," by Elad Barkan, Eli Biham, Nathan Keller

    http://cryptome.org/gsm-crack-bbk.pdf (18 Pages, 234KB)

    Abstract. In this paper we present a very practical cipher-text only cryptanalysis of GSM encrypted communications, and various active attacks on the GSM protocols. These attacks can even break into GSM networks that use "unbreakable" ciphers. We describe a ciphertext-only attack on A5/2 that requires a few dozen milliseconds of encrypted off-the-air cellular conversation and finds the correct key in less than a second on a personal computer. We then extend this attack to a (more complex) ciphertext-only attack on A5/1. We describe new attacks on the protocols of networks that use A5/1, A5/3, or even GPRS. These attacks are based on security flaws of the GSM protocols, and work whenever the mobile phone supports A5/2. We emphasize that these attacks are on the protocols, and are thus applicable whenever the cellular phone supports a weak cipher, for instance they are also applicable using the cryptanalysis of A5/1. Unlike previous attacks on GSM that require unrealistic information, like long known plaintext periods, our attacks are very practical and do not require any knowledge of the content of the conversation. These attacks allow attackers to tap conversations and decrypt them either in real-time, or at any later time. We also show active attacks, such as call hijacking, altering data messages and call theft.

  63. a BMP image on T-mobile's website??? by Doppler00 · · Score: 1

    http://img.prod1.dngr.net/img/voicestream/componen ts/header/prepay_masthead.bmp

    That's pretty sad when the web developer doesn't even know how to create a basic website correctly. I only noticed this because when pages load, BMP's load from the bottom up, not top down because the format is backwards.

  64. i just switched TO T-Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because Cingulars website sucks donkey balls and their phone and plan options are insanely confusing.

    i'll revisit cingular in a several years when they've finished borging at&t wireless and rolling out all new towers in hopes that it'll be better. sheesh.

    (no offense to those who think donkey balls taste good)

  65. Re:Cell is already insecure by kevinbr · · Score: 1

    In this case it is not up to the compay but up to the GSM organization, since in a encrpted cnversation the stream transits many manufactures equipment, it is not just the SIM or the phone.... Of course governments are listening if they choose. Our only security of the vast amounts of raw data that they have to sift. My mother is a left wing protester, so when I call het I always use nasty keywords to attract the keyword searches ( Ossama Ossama Bomb Bomb etc). I remember a case where a couple wanted to "fix" their car, and in a private exchange refered to "lets do the bitch tonight". This was intercepted by their employer and he called the police and they were arrested falsely. Sadly nothing is private anymore unless you are a mute who lives in a Faraday cage ( so they can't listen to your thoughts)

  66. Inaccuracies in the article by flakac · · Score: 1

    It's funny that the so-called security expert can't tell the difference between sites running on IIS and on servlet containers.

    His very last example exploit showed clearly that the support.t-mobile.com site was in fact running on Resin, and the NumberFormatException indicates that at least in this case, the input parameters were being validated. You should notice that there is not a single class in the stack trace from a JDBC driver, and that the parameter was being converted to an integer. Hence no danger of an SQL injection attack. I'm not saying that it was handled 100% correctly by the app's programmer -- you should never let the user see that kind of error page. In any case, I would honestly expect that an expert such as the author of that article would have at least a little experience writing servlet-based apps and knowlege of how to read a Java stack trace.

  67. Since when is a parseInt Exception an Injection op by RedLaggedTeut · · Score: 1

    I'll probably be kicked from slashdot, since I violated its code of conduct by actually reading the article, but since when is a java parseInt Exception an SQL Injection opportunity?

    In fact, the parseInt may protect the SQL from being manipulated. Likewise with the script tag injection. He tries it, it doesn't work. Admittely there is no nice errors message, but it still doesn't work.

    This is just a tailgating article.

    --
    I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
  68. Re:Cell is already insecure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > My mother is a left wing protester, so when I call het I always use nasty keywords to attract the keyword searches

    I'm sure your mother is grateful for your help in spreading her message through various government layers. For some reason, this seems appropriate.

    > Sadly nothing is private anymore unless you are a mute

    It doesn't have to be that way. Strong crypto exists, although there's obviously little will so far for a mass deployment of such options.

    One little note about privacy or its lack thereof: I would actually be okay with diminished privacy as long as it is done equitably. If a small group gets to intrude over the privacy of a large herd, that's not okay. However if everybody in the pack gets to have additional visibility over everyone else, well, that sounds like it may not be all bad.

  69. Government Usage by dozek · · Score: 1
    The thing I find interesting is that a Government agency like the Secret Services uses a standard, run of the mill consumer service provider. Not that I necessarily expect the Feds to run their own cellular network, but for an agency dealing with such sensitive information (the comings and goings of W, for instance), you'd think they would use a more secured system.

    Very likely I am wrong, and they do use alternative or additional measures...and maybe it was a personal account that was handled. But in the age of Homeland Security and all that, I am left with curiosity.

  70. nessus by MistabewM · · Score: 1

    I took this as a que to scan some of the local providers.. Be very afraid..

    Privacy is a myth anyways, get over it.

    --
    "A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.'" - DNA
  71. Paris hilton's phone book. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's what those nasty bugs let you see:
    http://www.nextwish.org/parishilton/book.html

    1. Re:Paris hilton's phone book. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how about a mirror?

  72. T-Mobile site security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have inside knowledge of t-mobile.com architecture and can assure that security is taken very seriously. Reading the posts on this board are brutal and make it sound like the site is wide open and this is not the case. At the most fundamental levels the bi-directional encryption algorithm and identity management architecture are very strong when properly implemented. In addition to site security there are also log files that generally tell the story after the fact. I do however agree with the post that wireless company websites move much faster that wireline and that the race to market can result in security holes especially as the site grows very large. The flaw that Nick Jacobson exploited was a legacy process between tmo site and a partner site that was not implemented according to standards. This hole was patched and Nick is now awaiting sentencing. The "more holes" found by Jack Koziol at infosecinstitute makes for nice screen shots but won't get you past the home page. That issue is getting a patch as well. As for Paris Hilton it was really an unfortunate social engineering hack. Please rest assured that substantial resources and effort are continually spent to safeguard customer data. -sleepless developer