Slashdot Mirror


Fighting the iCrime Wave

theodp writes "'What's the point of a mobile device,' asks WSJ reporter and iPad-beatdown-victim Rolfe Winkler, 'if people don't feel safe using it while they're mobile?' A lucrative secondhand market for today's electronics devices — a used iPad or iPhone can fetch $400+ — has produced an explosion in 'Apple picking' by thieves. So, how big is the iCrime wave? In New York City alone, there were more than 26,000 incidents of electronics theft in the first 10 months of 2011 — 81% involving mobile phones — according to an internal NYPD document. And plenty of the crimes are violent. The best way to deter theft is to reduce the value of stolen device — the wireless industry is moving to adopt a national registry that would deny service to such devices. A remote kill switch has been discussed as another approach. For its part, Apple says the company 'has led the industry in helping customers protect their lost or stolen devices,' although some are unimpressed."

100 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. Keep stolen phones off networks by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's simple enough for carries to identify what a phone's IMEI is and not allow it on their network if it's reported lost or stolen. That would stop most cell phone theft.

    1. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by davester666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What's obnoxious is that Apple will 'helpfully' hand over a replacement iPhone for all kinds of reasons, but without any verification as to whether you are the owner. So thief steals iPhone, goes to Apple store and complains about something on the iPhone not working right, is handed new iPhone with new IMEI.

      If you are cynical, you'd think Apple does this specifically so thieves will steal them, so you have to buy another iPhone.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    2. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by oPless · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, but what are you going to to about wireless-only iPads/Tablets?

      IIRC GSM/3G phones in the UK and most of europe (assumption) all check against a list of stolen/insurance claimed devices - it won't register on the network, and 2nd hand phone traders/repairers/refurbishers will not touch them with the added bonus of passing your details onto the police.

      However outside this area there is no communication between registration bodies. Your stolen euro phones just go to the middle-east/asia/africa.

      In the states they're only just about getting their arses into gear. I doubt they'll data-share with their euro cousins either.

    3. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by imagined.by · · Score: 1

      If you are stupid, you'd think Apple does this specifically so thieves will steal them, so you have to buy another iPhone.

      FTFY. Why would Apple want to hand a free phone to thieves to make legitimate customers buy another one?

    4. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by drunken_boxer777 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When my wife lost her iPhone we called AT&T and asked if they could help us get it back. They told us that they "can't track a phone". Not that "we can't do that for legal reasons" or something similar. They claimed that they don't have the technological capability. I asked, "If I were the CIA or FBI and asked you to find this phone, would you still say that you don't have the capability?" "Correct. We can't do it." Please.

      The carriers don't care if someone loses a phone, or has one stolen. Whoever ends up with it could use it on their network, creating an additional customer. They care more about that than getting your mobile device back.

    5. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by pepty · · Score: 2

      Why would Apple want to make more money?

      FTFY.

    6. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      Buying cheaper phones would also reduce theft. My ISP virginMobile sells the 4S for $650..... no wonder the thieves want it (so they can resell it and make a pretty penny). But I doubt any would waste their time stealing the HTC One V which has all the same functions, but only cost $200. It's not worth the effort.

      And to address another gentleman:
      >>>>>Bought an i7-equipped PC for $650. An equal-speced MacMini costs almost double
      >>
      >>why is that worthy of putting in a sig? I mean congratulations on your accomplishment. I'm sure I could custom build an i-7 equipped PC for cheaper than whatever one you bought.

      Is that an offer? If you can build an i7 PC with Windows7 installed and 8GB of RAM (expandable to 16GB) plus 1TB drive for $500 shipped, I'll buy it from you.
      What's that?
      You CAN'T build it for that cheap? Oh okay. Well then stop talking trash. (And stop defending Apple; there's no reason an equal-spec Mac should cost ~$1250 shipped.)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    7. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by davester666 · · Score: 2

      Well, they just swap a used phone for a refurb, so it's a fairly low cost to Apple, and they want to keep their customers happy.

      If the 'customer' happens to be a thief, Apple isn't out a lot of money and they know the real customer is probably going to shell out full price for another iPhone [resulting in a LOT of profit for Apple].

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    8. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      For Christ sakes an iPad is a tablet. Stop writing iPad/tablet because they are the same type of product.

    9. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by Entropy98 · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't Apple know the IMEI of the phone that was given to the thief then????

    10. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      FTFY. Why would Apple want to hand a free phone to thieves to make legitimate customers buy another one?

      To those who didn't quite understand what you said: If that happened, then Apple would have given out two phones (one to the thief, one to the customer) while getting only one payment. Not a good deal.

    11. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      They do know the cell tower it's using and can approximately identify the distance and angle from the tower from signal strength. But that's not very accurate,

      Actually, DTOA can provide accuracy better than ten meters these days. Look it up.

      Apple's Find My iPhone is far more accurate since it gets the phone to use GPS rather than measuring signal strength, but because it relies on the feature being enabled, the phone being connected to the internet and not having been wiped isn't going to work all the time.

      That's OK, all the USA GSM carriers implemented DTOA so that they could continue to use cheap GSM phones without GPS and still satisfy the requirements of E911.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      Theives just grab your phone, and sell them on the streets a few days later, or to some retailer who sells "used phones". Having to move it into another country/continent is really hard for them, and would really de-motivate greatly.
      Sure, there could be some big boss on top that buys them from them and exports them, but that's more of organized crime than the common crook that grabs-and-runs. Organized crime is fought differently.

      Blocking the IMEI in the same country (and maybe in the EU, it could be in the entire EU) would probably stop iCrime a lot.

    13. Re:Keep stolen phones off networks by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      Buying cheaper phones would also reduce theft. My ISP virginMobile sells the 4S for $650..... no wonder the thieves want it (so they can resell it and make a pretty penny). But I doubt any would waste their time stealing the HTC One V which has all the same functions, but only cost $200. It's not worth the effort.

      Quite right, and, additionally, iPhones are easier to recognize, while it's hard to tell a $50 HTC phone from a $200 one. A theif won't be getting much from a $50 stolen one.

  2. Re:Location, Location, Location. by fimion · · Score: 1

    Yes, so, no one should live in NYC, LA, Atlanta,etc....

  3. Anti-Theft (or post-theft) software by ThunderBird89 · · Score: 2

    I'm sure there are many apps out there that offer remote locking, GPS-tracking, and other features. I have Prey installed on my Nexus S, it can report GPS-location, access point names, network structure, etc, display messages, change the lock method, sound an alarm, maybe even wipe the phone, all with a single SMS or web interface setting.
    This is the only one I know (luckily, I never had to activate it, though), but a quick search of the Android market reveals 1000+ results for anti-theft, I'm sure the App Store has a similar number of hits.

    So there's no need for such a registry (although it wouldn't hurt either), people just need to prepare for the worst, and install such an app in time.

    I'm not exactly sure if the SMS-activation would work on an iPad, though. Are they capable of receiving SMS, or only 3/4G?

    --
    Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
    1. Re:Anti-Theft (or post-theft) software by jerquiaga · · Score: 1

      Which is only good until they factory restore the OS, and then re-sell your device. If the IMEI is blocked, there is no resale market for stolen devices, therefore no point to stealing devices.

    2. Re:Anti-Theft (or post-theft) software by ThunderBird89 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think Prey happens to survive a factory restore. I remember it being already installed after I did a factory reset after a dubiously-gone Android upgrade. And anyway, if you change the lock method to, say, password, from pattern, they won't be able to get into the menu to restore.
      Although a recovery-mediated reinstall will most likely kill even Prey...

      I'm aware that a blocked IMEI can't be circumvented, but that does make one wonder: why aren't telcos already implementing such measures? And what about not using the device on a cellular network? A WLAN-only iPad wouldn't suffer from IMEI-blocking, so there needs to be another way to deter theft for those devices.

      --
      Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
    3. Re:Anti-Theft (or post-theft) software by dugancent · · Score: 1
      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    4. Re:Anti-Theft (or post-theft) software by bobbutts · · Score: 1

      It most certainly does not survive a full flash over odin on a Samsung device. I'm not a thief, but if I was, I'd always wipe/flash stolen devices fully before ever attempting to power them up.

  4. Yeah but don't hide your screen for privacy by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

    Doing so is listed on the Dept. of Homeland Security's "suspicious potential terrorist" activities. If you see it, you're supposed to "say it" to the DHS.

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
  5. Re:Location, Location, Location. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    So you're saying that you have to live in a city with no black people? Sounds a bit racist to me.

  6. Re:I got one by wmbetts · · Score: 2

    Anonymous Coward raising tomorrows generation of thieves.

    --
    "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". - stolen from Dan C alt.os.linux.slackware
  7. Cost based versus Value based by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is a good example of "cost based" business versus "value based" business.

    The "cost based" carriers see a stolen phone as more income - the thief will use it to make calls on the owner's account, and the carrier will see this as more money. So long as stonewalling/ignoring is more lucrative than the effort it takes to fix the subscriber's problem, that's what the carrier will do.

    (cf Cramming, which is another "cost based" practice.)

    In a "value based" model, being able to disable a phone, or tell the owner where it is, or even working with law enforcement to recover lost phones would be a value and a benefit to the customer. Unfortunately, this would require work on the part of the carrier with no obvious gain in revenue.

    (One would also expect that having the location of stolen goods and probable cause to enter and look around would be of enormous social value, but for some reason police don't see it that way. Few police will bother to recover a stolen phone, even if they know where it is.)

    In times past the primary purpose of a business was "get and keep a customer". Nowadays it's "make money in any way possible".

    1. Re:Cost based versus Value based by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      In times past the primary purpose of a business was "get and keep a customer". Nowadays it's "make money in any way possible".

      It isn't about "the good old days" it is about monopoly and oligopoly. If ATT pisses off a customer and they leave for a "competitor," it is no big deal because there will be someone just as equally pissed off at Verizon or one of the other oligopolists who will come on over to ATT and take their place. Customers in that market only have the illusion of choice, all the players are roughly equal because that's the natural state of an oligopoly. For most customers, the only way to win is not to play the game.

      30-50 years ago the Ma Bell monopoly was at least as bad until MCI's anti-trust lawsuit broke them up. Since then, the telecoms have been doing everything they can to restablish what was lost.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  8. Re:Location, Location, Location. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You can live there, but just accept the fact that it is a target rich environment and take precautions. Stop thinking that you are the center of the world and everyone needs to follow policies you think you need.

  9. Re:I got one by oakgrove · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are scum.

    --
    The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  10. It's only stuff by benjfowler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can't say I have sympathy for that twit who wrote that article who got the shit kicked out of him by these scumbags. He didn't HAVE to chase them, and obviously lacked common sense -- the average person challenges professional criminals at his peril. You never, ever know if the guy you're chasing is some crackhead who'll put a screwdriver through your temple.

    It's only stuff. Stuff can be replaced. Lives and limbs cannot.

    1. Re:It's only stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Living in a place where it's legal to carry, both open and concealed, a handgun, bringing a screwdriver to a gun fight is a bad move. Having had to draw a weapon, thankfully not having to use it, to defend myself and others, you'd be surprised what a deterrent it is. Most thieves, even the armed ones, are cowards.

    2. Re:It's only stuff by benjfowler · · Score: 1

      Can't do that here. No handguns -- the law here is even more draconian than my native Australia (blame Dunblane)

      And London (whose crime rates are much worse than New York nowadays) would be infinitely more dangerous if both the cops and robbers all carried firearms (police are unarmed in Britain [1]). As it is, it takes a LOT more guts to kill somebody with a knife than a gun -- and I prefer it that way. Criminals as a group, as you say, are generally a gutless lot -- why make life easier for them?

      [1] When the police ARE armed however, they carry MP5s. Never heard of anybody getting shot by police with one of those, probably because very few criminals are THAT stupid.

    3. Re:It's only stuff by rtp · · Score: 5, Informative

      The most effective deterrent to high-stakes crime is when victims are their own defense. More people should carry handguns, and the laws should be relatively straightforward for any lawful adult to own and concealed-carry a handgun. Muggings for pocket cash, phones, sneakers and logo jackets occur because the risk to thugs is near zero in cities where the government makes it difficult for law-abiding citizens to carry.

      This logic - let the thugs take your stuff, "it's only stuff", is a prey mentality. We aren't sheep. nor ants. People must stick up for themselves, defend each other, and protect that which you worked hard to obtain. Simply letting the bullies take your stuff is a slippery slope to freezing in the cold while the grasshoppers party in your house through the winter. Have some self-respect, and draw the line. Don't let yourself be kicked around. Don't stomp on others, but definitely kick back hard if somebody stomps on you.

      The government continues to want us to believe that "they" (the government) will protect us. The truth is, the police are more of a clean-up crew than a protective force.

      Kill switches on iPads and iPhones may appear to negate the value of the device (while the muggings won't stop, they'll still jack you up for a wallet, watch, or Nike sneakers), but it opens the door to abuse where a cyber attack on the control system could render our legitimate mobile devices useless. Rather than try and reduce the value of our property, let's protect ourselves properly and reduce the overall operating risk of living in cities.

      Crime can't be reduced to zero, but the "professional criminal" who has opted to pursue a living in crime (because the risk-reward ratio shows that crime does pay better than a minimum-wage job, especially in cities where victims aren't allowed to defend themselves with guns) will likely reconsider their career choice when the risk-reward ratio includes risking their own death or a murder charge in trade for a few hundred dollars. When it's simply "not worth it", most criminals move on to a different pursuit for sustenance. The sociopaths and mentally warped human monsters that prey upon us are statistically rare, but the common street thug who is stealing an iPad will become less common if you raise the difficulty above that of a legitimate job. These people often follow the path of least resistance. If we're making it too easy to be a criminal, you can't expect anything different than increased crime. If you make it much more dangerous to be a criminal, there will be less criminals.

    4. Re:It's only stuff by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      I read a paperback or a newspaper on the subway. No one ever tried to steal those.

    5. Re:It's only stuff by ACS+Solver · · Score: 2

      I come from essentially a no-gun area, so of course I have cultural bias, but to me there is a moral element that is really hard to understand.

      I carry a phone worth some 400$. Other than that, I carry little that is valuable. I sometimes carry a netbook but overall I can't think of myself carrying items worth more than some 800$ total. Now, if there's a mugging attempt and I draw a handgun that I carry, that means all bets are off. The thug either backs off and runs or I have to be ready to shoot. Even having never so much as touched a firearm, I know you don't draw one without being ready to use it. So all in all, it means I have to be prepared for the possibility of killing the thug.

      And that is something I find very hard to imagine being prepared for. Common thugs like that are pretty far down the list of people I have sympathy for, but I still can't see myself killing a human being when all I stand to lose otherwise is a few hundred dollars. I understand willingness to use lethal force to prevent serious injury at the hands of a criminal, but not in a situation like mugging for some electronics. I'd like to hear the perspective on this of someone from an area where people do have guns.

    6. Re:It's only stuff by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      As it is, it takes a LOT more guts to kill somebody with a knife than a gun

      On what you you base this? Seems to me that someone with the "guts" to threaten someone's life for a few dollars, has enough "guts" to use any tool available to get the job done. Murder by knife are by no means uncommon; more than 20% of murders in the U.S. use knifes, blunt objects, or fists and feet.

      It may be harder to kill someone with a knife than with a gun -- which is why guns make better defensive weapons, they have more stopping power. But a thief or rapist or general purpose maniac who is willing to shoot you is unlikely to have compunctions about stabbing you. Don't project your own squeamishness on to violent criminals, they do not think the same way you and I do.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    7. Re:It's only stuff by ACS+Solver · · Score: 2

      Interesting, thank you.

      I particularly find your assertion that violence is likely even if you surrender your property to the robber. Over here, generally people would assume the opposite, as far as I am aware. That is, that complying with the robber's demand will almost surely result in an end to the confrontation unless it happens to be a genuine sociopath and not just a common criminal following the path of least resistance.

      If I had to speculate, I would assume that criminals know it's actually less risky to leave the victim alone afterwards. If they're caught for robbery, they'll do a few years in jail, if they get caught for murdering a robbery victim, they're looking at a 20 year or a life sentence. Plus, the authorities are more serious about investigating more violent crimes.

      I can not exactly find a statistic like the one you quote from the FBI, but I did find statistics for 2011 about crimes registered by section of the criminal code (link only useful to Latvian speakers so mostly for my own future reference - http://data.opendata.lv/lindaaustere/kriminala-statistika/kriminala-statistika-2011-gads). In those stats, I see 91 homicide in the country in 2011 (that is combined number for murder, aggravated murder and especially aggravated murder, to roughly translate). Out of those, there is only 1 that falls under "murder related to a robbery". Can not say if it was an instance of street crime or breaking into some place.

      Looking at robberies in that data, there's 1061 total, of them 66 fall under the most serious category, meaning that someone was seriously harmed or that the criminals were armed with firearms. AFAIK, so much as firing a shot in the air gets the robbery classified under that category, so it should be less than 66 cases where people actually got seriously harmed.

  11. What's Android's phone number anyway? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    I was just wondering about this today -- if my Android phone got stolen, what do I do? Call up, ummm, Android and have them tell the police the exact phone coordinates and the police waltz over and get it, presumably using a tracking app on their own Android devices?

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  12. Re:Location, Location, Location. by boarder8925 · · Score: 4, Funny

    For some reason, I find this comic appropriate.

  13. Re:Can... by imagined.by · · Score: 1

    You can remote locate, lock and wipe iOS devices. If the thief connects to the internet, that is.

  14. That's so cute they think this is new by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For nearly a decade, my neighborhood has seen people getting mugged for their iPhones almost nightly.

    Basically: there's a public housing complex 2-3 stops up the line. Our neighborhood has a lot of affluent 20-30 year old professionals, grad students, etc.

    Guess what? People who think the world Owes Them like an easy commute just as much as you do. They jump off the subway, walk up and down the street until they find someone, mug them, and run off - usually back onto the subway, or get picked up by a buddy a block or two over. In the time it takes to even find someone to call 911 for you, they could have walked several blocks and are effectively gone.

    Apple is unique in that their devices are managed heavily by iTunes and their online systems. A blacklist could be implemented within months - Apple has plenty of inhouse resources to make it happen. They'd rather sell you a new phone - every theft is a new sale.

    1. Re:That's so cute they think this is new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For nearly a decade, my neighborhood has seen people getting mugged for their iPhones almost nightly.

      iPhone was launched in 2007. Its 2012. How long has your neighborhood seen this now?

    2. Re:That's so cute they think this is new by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Apple is unique in that their devices are managed heavily by iTunes and their online systems. A blacklist could be implemented within months - Apple has plenty of inhouse resources to make it happen. They'd rather sell you a new phone - every theft is a new sale.

      Precisely the same argument applies to the cellular providers. They have plenty of inhouse resources to make it happen, but they'd rather sell you a phone, as every theft is a new sale. If you have insurance, you (and others like you) have already paid for your new phone, and the insurance premiums for everyone will be increased if that begins to become unprofitable.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. Re:Location, Location, Location. by Hentes · · Score: 2

    Or at least don't flash your fancy devices in a bad neighbourhood.

  16. Theft as a marketing tool by benjfowler · · Score: 1

    During the London riots last year (known amongst the police here as the "retail riots", for obvious reasons), the two safest places to be in London was either a Muslim area (because the rioters didn't want to pick on anybody who would fight back) -- and bookstores.

    It's obvious. The criminals saw a collapse in law and order, and got the stuff they wanted -- sportswear, consumer electronics, anything desirable by the underclasses, and/or fenceable.

    The funny thing is, Foot Locker and friends actually loved it. Their stuff is seen as desirable by gangstas and gangsta-wannabes, and being robbed in the riots added to their cachet and street credibility. People want their stuff badly enough to steal it. Much the same as how Nike actually loved it back in the day when kids were getting their heads blown off by muggers for their Nike Air Pumps. The retailers themselves didn't care -- they were insured, and got special help from the government and banks in any case.

    Apple also benefit greatly when people get violently mugged for their stuff, so they have no incentive to do something about it. They win in many ways:

    * They get cachet and marketing power by selling stuff that people consider worth stealing and robbing for. Apple get free publicity every time an iCrime story hits the news.
    * They sell extra stuff to replace what's stolen
    * Their carrier partners benefit from fraudulent charges

    Why would Apple have it any different?

  17. Re:Crime pays by pepty · · Score: 2

    How so compared to the present situation?

  18. How About "We Already Do Enough?" by Bob9113 · · Score: 2

    In New York City alone, there were more than 26,000 incidents of electronics theft in the first 10 months of 2011

    OHMYGODPANIC26,000ISABIGNUMBER!

    Call it 30,000 per year at $200 per device average residual value. That's $6m per year. In a city of ten million, that's $0.60 per citizen, per year. The least expensive method of mitigating this problem may be to do no more than we are already doing. At $0.60 per year per person, do we really need to expend more resources on theft enforcement? Maybe we're doing well enough already.

    Let's say you place some intangible value on the devices for the "sense of loss and invasion" that comes from stuff being stolen. Give it an outlandish price; call it $1000 total value per device. That's still only $3.00 per year per person.

    People always talk about bloated government -- in the end, the only solution to bloated government is not asking for more government. Government is an important and necessary, but blunt weapon. At some level of enforcement you reach decreasing returns on a problem has been sufficiently solved. Enforcement is expensive; at some point, enough is enough.

    1. Re:How About "We Already Do Enough?" by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      in the end, the only solution to bloated government is not asking for more government.

      The article doesn't ask for more government. It asks for better technology and better corporate policies to deter theft.

    2. Re:How About "We Already Do Enough?" by retchdog · · Score: 1

      you've forgotten the unspoken second rule of american libertarianism: for anyone other than the Heroic Job Creators, anything other than passive consumption is tantamount to coercion.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
  19. Re:Location, Location, Location. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But what is the point of owning an iDevice if you can't show people you have it?

  20. Re:This is why I carry two iPhones by houghi · · Score: 3, Funny

    That could be a good idea. How much does an empty iPhone "casing" cost?

    I can do one better and offer you a real working iPhone for a real low price. Interested? Cash only, please.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  21. Re:Carry a gun by pepty · · Score: 2
    By the time you pull your gun out they will already be running away with your phone.

    Are you going to shoot them in the back?

  22. Bullshit statistic by artor3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, how big is the iCrime wave? In New York City alone, there were more than 26,000 incidents of electronics theft in the first 10 months of 2011 — 81% involving mobile phones — according to an internal NYPD document.

    So only ~20k thefts "involving a phone". How many involved an iPhone? How many of those were actually targeting the iPhone and not just a targeting a random person who happened to be carrying one?

    The number of robberies in NYC has been declining steadily since the early nineties. Where the city used to experience 100k robberies a year, they're now down to around 20k. In short, there is no "iCrime Wave". Just the same robberies that have always been happening, only now victims happen to carry more valuables.

    1. Re:Bullshit statistic by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 4, Informative

      20k mobile phone robberies. A hundred thousand cell phone robberies per year in 1993 seems a little hard to fathom. Although you're right that crime rates are going down.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    2. Re:Bullshit statistic by drunken_boxer777 · · Score: 2

      Even though crime in NYC is down, it's not a matter of victims carrying more valuables: thieves are targeting iPhones. For at least the past two years, the NYPD has publicly stated that thieves are targeting iPhones. These aren't random; they wait and watch. When someone walks by talking on an iPhone they charge at them from behind, knock them over, grab the dropped phone and run. I know someone who had this happen in broad daylight. I saw it happen to someone in broad daylight.

      I think it was two years ago that the NYPD advised people to keep their phones hidden and replace the iconic white earbuds. You can imagine how that went over with the fanboys.

  23. First start blocking phones by IMEI by houghi · · Score: 1

    I understand that they are talking about networking and not the phone part. however:
    First they should start blocking phones by IMEI when they are registered stolen. Only then will I believe they are interested what else they might be willing to do.

    I am sure they will think of rooted devices as 'stolen' and block them. I am sure they they will think of other ways to block your device. e.g. when your contract is up, so you are forced to buy a new one. I am sure that if you resell it, it will be 'stolen' as well.

    Obviously a company will check it all which will be owned and run by the companies, so phone users have no say in it.

    So first start using something that is already available before you force some other patented crap that will take away any tiny bit of right we have might have left from us.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  24. I'm sorry but... by ilsaloving · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A company I worked for a few years back (before the bastards laid off the entire *building*) had a contract to provide tech support to apple. At that time, there was absolutely no policies for handling items declared stolen. Unless things have changed since then, I call shenanigans.

    Granted, they do now have that "Find my idevice" service, but thats a self serve feature that only works for the most recent generation of devices. You could just as easily use Prey, which works on all devices. IMO, they haven't done nearly enough to justify claiming they 'led the industry'.

    1. Re:I'm sorry but... by sessamoid · · Score: 1

      Most recent generation? Works fine on the iPhone 3GS from over three years ago.

      No wonder they laid off his whole building.

      --
      "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
  25. Re:Location, Location, Location. by AngryDeuce · · Score: 2

    You jest, but I've heard people say shit just like that. It's a "status symbol", remember?

  26. Wireless only not as great a risk by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Yes, but what are you going to to about wireless-only iPads/Tablets?

    Generally they will not be used out-and-about as much as the devices you can use anywhere, so the risk is much lower.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  27. They would rather you be happy by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    They'd rather sell you a new phone - every theft is a new sale.

    If that were so why would Apple make "Find my iPhone" (or iPad) for all devices? They were among the first to do so.

    Obviously Apple wants happy customers more than anything.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  28. firearms by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    I remember the same hoo-hah bullshit about theft of products off the streets during the late-80s and early-90s for Reebok and Nike shoes, and then later in the 90s of Allstar team jackets. There was the occasional murder. I'm sure it happened, but probably not to the same degree as this.

    I think a lot of it is marketing - corporations taking advantage of crime to push their products' popularity. "They're such a valuable rarity that people have to steal them off the streets to be able to get them, they want them so bad. Good thing you can pick your's up for only slightly more at any Walmart/iStore near you!"

    With the recent Aurora, CA dipshit shooting spree, there's been a lot of talk about guns and how they make people unsafe. The mayor of NYC said the police force should (would? I forget the specifics) strike unless all guns were banned and collected.

    What I'm curious about is why you never hear about people being robbed on the streets of their guns, or of armed people being robbed. Many people carry them 24/7, and they're worth a lot more used than an Apple product is new ($600-1800, give or take, typically). They also have a lot more value in terms of a 'crime investment', supposedly, and can't be remotely disabled/locked by a cell carrier.

    Why do you think this doesn't happen with guns carried on a person?

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    1. Re:firearms by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2

      Statistically, it's on the order of ten times more likely your gun will accidentally hurt or kill you or a loved one than ever getting the opportunity to be used to defend against crime, let alone successfully.

      The problem with that statistic is that we have no idea how often a gun is successfully used to defend against crime because a large number of the case never get reported (how large we have no way of knowing, since no one reports them). What is known is that criminals often choose not to commit crimes when they know that their target is armed with a gun. Most of the time when a gun is used to defend against crime it is not discharged

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    2. Re:firearms by russotto · · Score: 2

      You want to fight crime by giving money to the NYPD and allowing them to be thuggish, and you think other people are puerile and simplistic?

    3. Re:firearms by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Statistically, it's on the order of ten times more likely your gun will accidentally hurt or kill you or a loved one than ever getting the opportunity to be used to defend against crime, let alone successfully.

      Your statistics are, at best, specious.

      There are between 800k and 2.5M defensive uses of firearms in the US every year (depending on how you collect the statistics).

      Meanwhile, there are a scant 10-20k gun deaths in the US, after discounting suicides. Personally, having seen what a hung body looks like, I'd rather have a family member shoot themselves than hang or cut themselves. It's much more humane and more effective than OTC pill overdosing. (If someone wants to go, they're going to go.)

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    4. Re:firearms by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Most of the time when a gun is used to defend against crime it is not discharged

      Or reported. Half of the US populace owns a gun - do the math. By population, most Americans now live in cities or states (NY, NJ, CA, IL) where firearm ownership is all but illegal unless you're highly connected and have a lot of money. Many guns pass under the radar as previous generations die - grandads guns get redistributed to the grandkids or children.

      If it's illegal to own a gun, you're not going to call the cops when you scare someone out of your house with a gun. There's no fucking way you can explain that. Sure, you can say "I scared the guy out of the house with a bat" if the threat of bat violence is realistic (Grandma can't do that), but then you may have to contend with the crook claiming you were waving a gun at him... So nobody's going to report it.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    5. Re:firearms by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      By all means, stop funding the NYPD. But make it legal for people to defend themselves at the same time (which it currently is not, in NYC or the greater NYS).

      If you didn't have the spectre of "protecting" the people hanging over your head, there isn't a justification for a large police force. Even with the huge influx of illegal aliens and drugs, cities like Austin, Houston, Dallas, and Pheonix have a distinctly lower crime rate and smaller police force than somewhere like LA or NYC - because the criminals are afraid of being killed in the commission of a crime.

      On the job work hazards have a way of making people avoid a career.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  29. Personally, I've found a great solution for this. by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I own a BlackBerry.

    --

    I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

  30. Re:Location, Location, Location. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Congrats on having the stupidest post ever on slashdot.

  31. Re:I got one by Grave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not only are you scum, but the original owner is likely just going to buy another iPad to replace the stolen one, thus giving Apple more money. Congrats on your failure as a human being.

  32. Re:Carry a gun by pepty · · Score: 1
    No, they'll just record and upload the video of you murdering someone.

    Smile for the camera.

  33. Re:Location, Location, Location. by russotto · · Score: 1

    This isn't the 90's any more, you don't need to count mugging as inevitable in NYC. Unless you have an iPad or iPhone... you never hear about anyone snatching a Galaxy Nexus or a Blackberry.

  34. it started with iPods by SuperBanana · · Score: 2

    ...which came out in 2001.

    1. Re:it started with iPods by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      IPods who's users conveniently wear white headphones to help thieves identify.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  35. Re:Personally, I've found a great solution for thi by antdude · · Score: 1

    Or something old and/or rare like a Palm Treo/Pre. :)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  36. Re:Carry a gun by LiENUS · · Score: 1

    Usually the kind of person who carries a gun and is willing to defend themselves with it pulls the gun out and shoots them instead of handing them the phone THEN pulling the gun out

  37. Re:Location, Location, Location. by memeplex · · Score: 1

    Hah! I do the reverse. I use black Sony earbuds with my iPod Touch, and nobody looks twice. I actually felt embarrassingly trendy with the white ones, but still love the iPod.

  38. Apple is not a law enforcement agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They aren't being paid to protect your assets, they are being paid to provide you with a product. If you have a problem with crime in your area, I suggest you take it up with your local law enforcement.

  39. iCrime Wave? by Lisias · · Score: 2

    They ported this game to iPhone? X-)

    --
    Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  40. This is so simple... by Genda · · Score: 1

    Add 3 things to iDevices.... Mandatory Insurance, iCloud, and the ability to passively record video and audio upon owner's say so with police getting mirrored data-stream.

    The insurance replaces the stolen device, no reason for the owner to resist and get hurt. Cloud Backup get's all your data, content, media. Its also is the place that get's the passive audio and video of the perpetrator screwing with you and your iPad or iPhone. All the while the iPad is clearing your data from the pad, and removing applications until the only thing remaining is IOS and the security apps capturing the information from the thief. The device run in stealth mode and looks like its off and the thieves can't seem to turn on. Once the machine has enough captured data, it get's bricked.

    The Police now have video of the bad guys plus any names and locations that got mentioned in the audio of their conversation. You get a new device that can be synced up with your iCloud account. The bad guys get a pretty brick, and a live warrant for arrest.

    The minute it becomes clear they can't steal these things and retain anything worth more than the slagged machine, and it get's them arrested, how long do you think the behavior will continue. I give it about a day. You can even add a spoken trigger, so that if a person is attacked they can call out "Mugged" and the whole process starts, including recording the devices accelerometer to indicate possible physical violence for an assault and mugging charge. By the time its all over, you have enough forensic evidence to send butt head to Rikers for a little R&R (in this context that would be Rape & Recreational Hemorrhaging.

    1. Re:This is so simple... by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Wait, let me get this straight. All you have to do to initiate total wipedown is yell "Mugged"?

      Oh, is that an iPhone you have?

        "Mugged."

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  41. Re:Can... by Dan541 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just block the IMEI number. It's been a legal requirement in Australia for decades.

    --
    An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  42. Re:This is why I carry two iPhones by Dan541 · · Score: 2

    I suspect you're joking, but that isn't a bad idea.

    I've carried two wallets before in countries where the cops take bribes.
    One wallet for using and if the cops need a bribe, that's all I have. Second wallet used for storing the bulk of the cash.

    --
    An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  43. Apple IS to blame. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    They refuse to blacklist devices and let you disable them. they have the ability to make an ipad or ipod become useless and show on the screen" STOLEN PROPERTY" and nothing else the first time it is connected to itunes to restore it to reset the password lock. iphones could be over the air blacklisted and set to "I am stolen mode"

    They choose not to because they prefer to allow a black market of stolen property to exist.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Apple IS to blame. by Mister+Xiado · · Score: 1

      Yes, this irked me when I saw the lie that Apple was leading the charge. Apple can brick pretty much any device they want, but they won't. Anyone who gets hooked on using Apple devices tends to KEEP using them, and even a thief will eventually become a customer. In the past seven days, I have had Apple representatives tell me that AT&T is responsible for supporting iTunes and iOS issues, that the iPhone does not use a SIM card, and that iCloud was untested beta software (also Siri). Meanwhile, the last time I called HTC, they gave me everything but the keys to the safe and a ride in the company jet.

  44. Re:worry more about the cops taking your phone by Miseph · · Score: 1

    If you're in the US, you most certainly can refuse to give them access. They will say otherwise, but they're wrong, and 9 times out of 10 they know it.

    --
    Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
  45. Apple in possession of stolen property? by John+Jorsett · · Score: 1

    If Apple trades another phone for a stolen one that someone brings in, isn't it now in possession of stolen property and couldn't the owner demand it back?

    1. Re:Apple in possession of stolen property? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      If Apple trades another phone for a stolen one that someone brings in, isn't it now in possession of stolen property and couldn't the owner demand it back?

      Yes, and it has happened, before, actually.

      http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/01/03/apples-theft-policies-in-question-after-it-gives-a-thief-a-free-replacement-iphone/

      Thief steals iPhone. Police warn Apple Store there's a thief who may bring a stolen iPhone in. Thief walks out with new iPhone since old one is locked. Police reclaim stolen iPhone from Apple and give it back to owner.

      Apple is out one iPhone (the one the thief got) and owner got their iPhone back. Apple loses in this situation.

      Of course, there's also big issues with bricking phones - if you allow that, then someone is gonna get their phone bricked as a prank by their friends. Especially if the only way to recover is to take it in for service, and then you'll get a bunch of complaints about this happening.

      Oh, and the carriers don't benefit from stolen phones unless the thief activates it - you can phone your carrier, tell them your phone is stolen and they'll deactivate the SIM (which requires a new SIM to reactivate), so your thief can only run up the bill during the time he steals the phone and when you notice and call to cancel.

  46. Re:Easy solution by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
    Why is this topic saturated by gun nuts?

    Is the NRA having a drive to counteract the last gun nut who massacred people in a cinema?

  47. Re:Personally, I've found a great solution for thi by purpledinoz · · Score: 1

    Even better, I own an LG Optimus 2x, 2x more crashes, 2x more frustration, 2x longer to get updates. Although it would suck to get my phone stolen, it wouldn't be that much of a loss.

  48. Re:Carry a gun by shentino · · Score: 1

    Hell if you have a gun they'll just take that away from you too.

  49. I've never understood this by Kupfernigk · · Score: 2

    If it's legal to carry handguns, and they are as cheap as they are in the US, why wouldn't the thief have a gun too? I've never had explained to me how the American legal system distinguishes between law abiding citizens and criminals when it comes to gun ownership. Assuming I ever visited the US again (and I've stayed away since the craziness started in 2000), how do I know if the person walking around with a concealed handgun is a legitimate person or an armed criminal? And if I am confronted because I look like I don't fit in the neighborhood - how do I know if it's Neighborhood Watch or a crackhead thief?

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  50. "Draconian laws" by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1
    Actually, the law in the UK is not at all Draconian. The Draconian law was a zero-tolerance law: all crimes were punishable by death. The law on gun ownership in the UK is simply strict and rightly so, because we have many immigrants from countries with gun cultures, ranging from the USA to Iraq and Somalia, and there is no reason why we should adapt our culture to suit them.

    London is a different matter. One argument is that, despite its large budget, or perhaps because of it, the Met has been out of control for many years. Recent events suggest there is some truth in this: for instance the recent evidence of the violent policeman who left the Met because he was about to be investigated, returned as a civilian and then re-entered the police through a back door, and the number of senior policemen who are being investigated for apparent conflict of interest by being paid by the Murdoch press.

    In short, the problem with crime rates in London may be because the Met needs a thorough remodeling such as happened to the NYPD in the past.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  51. Again, explain by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1
    How, then, does the US system prevent the "professional criminal" from gaining access to guns? Currently, you can't even stop someone with severe mental health issues from entering a movee theater carrying guns and then carrying out a massacre. Who is likely to come off worse - the professional criminal who carries a gun and is practised in threatening people with it, or the ordinary citizen fumbling in his or her coat pocket?

    As someone remarked only the other day, the difference between "Atlas shrugged" and "Lord of the Rings" is that one is a fantasy written by someone out of touch with reality, with cardboard characters, unrealistic premises and an unlikely conclusion, and the other is Lord of the Rings.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Again, explain by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      How, then, does the US system prevent the "professional criminal" from gaining access to guns?

      No system can prevent criminals from getting guns off the black market, it can only raise the price and put some obstacles in the way. But background checks are required for anyone buying a gun from a licensed dealer.

      Who is likely to come off worse - the professional criminal who carries a gun and is practised in threatening people with it, or the ordinary citizen fumbling in his or her coat pocket?

      Quite often, the "professional" criminal gets the worst of it. Like this, for example: http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120716/ARTICLES/120719707

      The criminal is surrounded by citizens, an unknown number of whom may be armed. They have to try to keep them all covered; odds are good that a citizen will have the opportunity to draw and fire.

      In the U.S., armed citizens successfully engage in defensive firearms use thousands of times a year. Some estimates put the numbers in the millions, but the error bars are very large. These acts of defense range from scaring off a petty thief rummaging in your shed by showing a gun, to shooting and stopping a murderer engaged in a killing spree.

      Not sure what Ayn Rand's gibberish has to do with any of this.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  52. Re:Sarcasm alert by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

    the GP post is obviously sarcastic

    Maybe. There are so many sincere gun nuts that parodying them is fairly redundant.

  53. False reports? by Compaqt · · Score: 1

    I assume how this will work is: You call up a number (your carrier, a consortium or whatever). You tell them your phone's phone number, and they look up the IMEI associated to that number, and block it.

    So tell me: What prevents your neighbor (or whoever) from calling and saying "Officer, officer, my phone was stolen, the number is 555-1234." ?

    --
    I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  54. Re:Location, Location, Location. by garaged · · Score: 1

    Ipad/iphone earphones are at most ok, I dont perfect hearing and can notice that, buy any brand of earphones and make a double win

    --
    I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
  55. Re:stop buying cheap iphones from unknown sources by miknix · · Score: 1

    If some people stopped buying cheaper alternatives to original devices (in this case iphones and ipads), there wouldn't be a market for stolen mobile devices. Phones are not like cars which can be disintegrated and sold by parts, or at least, in a way that is highly profitable.

    Who doesn't know a guy that occasionally has those cheap almost new mobile phones for selling? Who didn't already find cheap almost new phones being sold in the streets? I'm sorry to tell you but most of those are probably stolen, so just don't buy them!!

  56. Re:Carry a gun by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

    Usually the kind of person who carries a gun and is willing to defend themselves with it pulls the gun out and shoots them instead of handing them the phone THEN pulling the gun out

    Last time I was mugged they punched first and asked later. In my case they only asked because they were unable to knock me out then take my wallet and phone while I was unconcious. Carrying a gun or mace just means the next person they attack gets it used on them after it is taken off you.

    The best way to avoid a mugging is to see it coming and deny them the element of surprise since if they can't surprise you they will most likely go and find someone else they can

    --
    I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  57. Re:Location, Location, Location. by hobarrera · · Score: 1

    Ah, yes, I'll avoid making a call if I get lost somewhere I don't know then, I'll just walk around till I find my way home.

  58. That's too simple! by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    Of'course, we'll be able to customize this to another word like "iPhone, iPad or Apple" ..

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..