Slashdot Mirror
Boston Officials Did Not Shut Down Cell Network After Marathon Bombing
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Motherboard about the immediate aftermath of yesterday's bomb attack in Boston, which attempts to explain the (unsurprisingly) poor accessibility of the cellular network after the blasts: "Gut instinct suggests that the network must've been overloaded with people trying to find loved ones. At first, the Associated Press said it was a concerted effort to prevent any remote detonators from being used, citing a law enforcement official. After some disputed that report, the AP reversed its report, citing officials from Verizon and Sprint who said they'd never had a request to shut down the network, and who blamed slowdowns on heavy load. (Motherboard's Derek Mead was able to send text messages to both his sister and her boyfriend, who were very near the finish line, shortly after the bombing, which suggests that networks were never totally shut down. Still, shutting down cell phone networks to prevent remote detonation wouldn't be without precedent: It is a common tactic in Pakistan, where bombings happen with regularity.)"
After the Earthquake in Virginia in 2011, you couldn't make a cell call to save your life, since several million people picked up their phones within a few minutes of each other. Text messages went through fine within a half a minute or so. Something similar happens whenever an unexpected event of note happens anywhere.
I am leaning toward the 50,000 people in the area all trying to call home at once.
I was able to text back and forth with my niece, who was at the race. No idea what network she is on, though the interwebs say it is an AT&T number. I don't think things were being actively jammed.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I almost never use text messaging, but it is extremely useful when cell networks are overloaded as it uses almost no bandwidth and hence messages almost always get through. Unfortunately not many people think of it that way and tend to keep trying to make a voice call when the network is rejecting their attempts.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
That technique seemed to work for my last relationship.
Telemarketing to cellphone numbers is now an anti-terrorism tool.
> There is no reason why the BPD, DHS or other agency would not have jammers for such an occasion.
Really? And why should they? The entire idea that they should have them is based on specific technical details of specific attacks, and requires both that they guess right that its the right time to use them and that the bomb maker didn't anticipate their use.
Additionally, with all the people involved, they generally want people to get the "Im safe" messages out, because it decreases overall mayhem and people trying to contact them for information.
> I would be surprised if they did not with all the money that was thrown around after 9/11
Well I wouldn't either, but, thats a different issue.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
So... considering that's we hear about this with EVERY major catastrophe, would this be the sort of national infrastructure concern that we would want to mandate that the cell companies install extra capacity? You know, in case of emergencies. Are we at the point that we can consider cellular connection, or generically wireless connection, to be a basic utility and not a cutting edge hip new ordeal that only the rich can afford?
And hey, since they've got ALL THAT BANDWIDTH, just lying about in case shit hits the fan, it'd be great to sell it on the cheap. You know, that idea that society and the fundamental utilities is here to foster growth rather than wringing out the last coin from the customer's pockets.
Uh.. doesn't this happen after just about every disaster?
If you design the networks to work at the utilization that you see after a disaster there would be cell phone towers at every corner, our bills would be $500 or more a month, and it would be using a very low percentage of its capacity 99.99% of the time.
It isn't what is important at the moment, anyway.
Officials also announced a twist in the probe: Suspicious packages that were detonated out of precaution were not explosive devices after all.
That's not a twist, it's just a thing. A twist is if it turns out to have been Richard Simmons.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
As someone who had a loved one in the World Trade Center on 9/11 and couldn't reach her on her mobile until the afternoon, I'm not surprised that a cell network became overloaded. It's happened in other times too.
Considering this wreaked of terrorism, especially to those on the scene, things really blew up. Marathoners calling loved ones and even just REGULAR citizens in Boston (perhaps far away from the site) getting / making calls in a panic, etc.
Cell towers aren't magic, they can only support so much. And since the phone companies aren't using their profits to expand their existing networks then a large metro getting hit with an event is going to overload it... or at least a general region. I mean, in that immediate area alone you had: people living / working in the buildings, LOTS of runners, LOTS of spectators, etc.
Perhaps the feds DID put up a jammer. Perhaps we don't know the whole story. I'm just saying, that an overloaded network sounds perfectly plausible.
SMS is one of the lower level cell phone protocols, uses the least bit of bandwidth and is almost always on, even when higher level voice and data fail. Ideally, modern phones could be set up to pass SMS traffic from phone to phone, when a tower signal is unavailable. This would allow messages to get in and out of disaster areas like New Orleans during Katrina.
I drank what? -- Socrates
Presumably, any jamming worth a crap would need to block SMS, which is why I mentioned it.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I don't know for sure on cell service, but there's a whole lot of other outdated information in that article. Specifically, the fire at the jfk library is now known to be unrelated, and law enforcement officials have stated that no undetonated devices were found.
In such emergencies, its better to use SMS than place a voice call.
SMS rides on control signal and as long as your cell phone has a signal, it will get queued and delivered.
Voice calls require acquiring of a dedicated voice channel, these are limited and overloaded in such emergencies.
Totally different threat profile.
A convoy is moving and is a very small target in a very large area. It is especially exposed, and an especially juicy target in a war zone. You can expect attacks fairly frequently, they have to find you/be ready for you.
This event is predefined, the attacker knows where and when the targets will be there. The attacker already has time to prepare and makes himself known on his time table.
This changes everything. In your convoy for example, there is no benefit to rigging bombs to blow when their signal is jammed or even to arm in response to signals from a jammer.... as the prowler is not the convoy and need not be all that close to them, arming or blowing in response to the jammer means wasted bombs or blowing up innocent bystanders, will almost never hit a convoy.
Here we have a totally different scenario. A secondary device triggered by a loss of signal could have huge impact. The devices are already at their pre-determined target. You don't jam, he can detonate, you do jam, they might detonate, point is....you have no way of ever knowing what he planned until its all over.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"