Cloning makes its return

I am not sure if this has become a problem in other areas yet, but apparently there is a new twist in cloning the SIM card in a mobile phone.

Ok a little history first, when mobile phones first came out they did not have SIM cards. Identifying information was "hard coded" to the phone letting the network know that it was you on your phone using the network. Then someone worked out that they could scan and clone that information (similar to what is now starting to be common for RFIDs). You see that by broadcasting your "unique" identifier to the network the fraudster can trick the system into thinking they are you. For RFID this means that they can clone your credit card and start charging against your account.

In the late '90s I know that fraudsters rented a room on the lowest floor of a building that was over FDR Drive in NYC. This put them close enough to ping and scan the mobile devices in the cars that passed below them. They then input the information into other phones and were able to arrange dial out, long distance, premium number and saweepstakes fraud against those mobile user's accounts.

Now in theory this has stopped happening in mobile devices as the information is supposed to be harder to get.

Today I came across an article in the Arab Times Phone Clone Latest Scam To Prey On Mobile Users. A man called a reporter on her mobile phone and told her

Congratulations, you have just won KD 100,000 from ------ (name of the telecommunication company). I’m from the (name of the telecommunication company) International Government Department. You can claim your prize from ------ (name of local bank) by calling this number  00447624192661 for instructions on how to claim the KD 100,000 prize from (name of the local bank),” went a man to one of the reporters of the Arab Times early this week. He was calling her on her mobile phone from the number 22280636.

Now to be fair, at this point she knew it was a scam - but being a journalist she wanted to get the full story and called the number and got the same man.

 He was the same man who called up the reporter earlier but this time he introduced himself as Michael Husky of the (name of the telecommunication company) International Govern-ment Department of Kuwait. He then gave an eight-digit number to the reporter and asked her to check if the eight-digit number that he gave matched the first eight-digit number at the back of her mobile phone SIM card. “Switch it off and check it. Please check if it’s the same and please call again to confirm and I will give you the final instructions on how to claim your KD 100,000 prize from _____ (name of local bank)” said the man.  The reporter removed the SIM card from her phone and much to her surprise, the eight-digit number that the man gave her earlier was the exact number at the back of her SIM card.

The reporter removed the SIM card from her phone and much to her surprise, the eight-digit number that the man gave her earlier was the exact number at the back of her SIM card. However, when she switched on her mobile phone, it went offline and she had to go to one of the branches of this telecommunication company to check on what had gone wrong with her phone line. Her phone started working again after a customer service representative helped her out. The reporter then told the customer service representative about the earlier incident about the KD 100,000 cash prize. The customer service representative laughed aloud and told the reporter that it was not the first time that she heard such story as a number of other subscribers had also called up and claimed that they had won a cash prize from the telecommunication company.

The article goes on to say that she called again, got new instructions and was told to expect a text (SMS) message with a new PIN and to sign in using it.

When she checked with the legitimate phone company she was told that if she had gone ahead with it they would have cloned her phone.

There is a well written and detailed explanation about this could be done by the fraudsters and what each part of the scam actually was doing.

But this shows that when you get unexpected "You have won" calls or messages you should be wary as they are almost always too good to be true and can end up costing you a lot.

Remembering the Titanic disaster was made worse by bad communications

As the world remembers the Titanic disaster's 100years ago today I would like to take this blog entry to remind people that the disaster was made worse by bad communications technology, flooded bandwidth, and new protocols.

As Bill Kovarik writes in his article Radio and the Titanic

Problems with the radio played a major role in the Titanic disaster of April 14, 1912, when the British passenger liner sank after hitting an iceberg in the mid-Atlantic.

 These problems delayed and complicated the rescue, contributing to the deaths of 1,514 passengers and crew, and very nearly sealing the fates of those who managed to survive. 

Although its owners boasted that the Titanic was the most modern ship of its day,  the Marconi radio system that had been installed in the weeks before the disaster was already obsolete. 

So the first problem seems that the system in use was not the best available and had some known technical issues. This kind of thing happens when radically new technologies come out and bandwidth problems.

Bandwidth problems you may ask, yes bandwidth.

It seems that "After sending personal messages from the Titanic, the operators were taking down personal messages, along with  news and stock reports for the passengers to read the next morning."  Thus they were unable to receive the warning

About fifteen minutes before the Titanic hit the iceberg,  Cyril F. Evans, a wireless operator on the Californian, which was about 20 miles away, attempted to contact the Titanic to tell them they were surrounded by dangerous icebergs.

As Bill Kovarik explains: (emphasis is mine)

Technically, the problem with the Titanic’s radio telegraph system was that Marconi’s “spark” system soaked up virtually all of the frequency bandwidth and created interference for all other ships within signaling distance. As many engineers were realizing at the time, it was far better to use continuous wave radio transmitters (where signals were carried inside the wave) instead of the Marconi intermittent spark transmissions (where wide-spectrum interruptions in the wave were the signal).

Changing protocols
The other part of the problem was that Captain Stanley Lord, the captain of the Californian stood accused of ignoring Titanic’s distress calls after the huge ship sank on April 15, 1912 while Sir Arthur Rostron, the captain of the Carpathia, rescued more than 700 people from the Atlantic on the night the Titanic went down.

Listen to the RMS Titanic "SOS" on YouTube  

 

Now if you look at the time that the sinking occurred, there was a change in the work in message content as well as the technology mentioned above. 

As Neal McEwen explains in his article  "'SOS,' 'CQD' and the History of Maritime Distress Calls"

misinformation surrounds the origin and use of maritime distress calls. The general populace believes that "SOS" signifies "Save Our Ship." Casual students of radio history are aware that "CQD" preceded the use of "SOS." 

In 1904, the Marconi company (suggested) the use of "CQD" for a distress signal.  It was established on February 1 of that year by Marconi Company's circular No. 57.  Although generally accepted to mean, "Come Quick Danger," that is not the case. It is a general call, "CQ," followed by "D," meaning distress. A strict interpretation would be "All stations, Distress."  In the U.S. Senate hearings following the Titanic disaster, interrogator Senator William Smith asked Harold Bride, the surviving wireless operator,  "Is CQD in itself composed of the first letter of three words, or merely a code?"  Bride responded, "Merely a code call sir."  Marconi also testified, "It [CQD] is a conventional signal which was introduced originally by my company to express a state of danger or peril of a ship that sends it."

 While 2 years later 

At the second Berlin Radiotelegraphic Conference of 1906, the subject of a distress signal was again addressed. The distress signal chosen was "SOS." 

Although the use of "SOS" was officially ratified in 1908, the use of "CQD" lingered for several more years, especially in British service where it originated. It is well documented in personal accounts of Harold Bride, second Radio Officer, and in the logs of the SS Carpathia, that the Titanic first used "CQD" to call for help. When Captain Smith gave the order to radio for help, first radio officer Jack Phillips sent "CQD" six times followed by the Titanic call letters, "MGY." Later, at Brides suggestion, Phillips interspersed his calls with "SOS.".

In SOS to the Rescue, 1935, author Baarslag notes, "Although adopted intentionally in 1908, it [SOS] had not completely displaced the older "CQD" in the British operators' affections."   Marconi in his U.S. Senate testimony on the Titanic disaster said, "I should state that the international signal [SOS] is really less known that the Marconi Co.'s [CQD] signal."  (It is interesting to observe that Marconi was waiting in New York to return home to England on the Titanic.) 

Thus you have a case where the wrong code was sent out, due to a protocol (in this case human) error. Meaning that the message went out 6 times before the right code was sent out, causing a long delay in getting help.

Now there is a call that it is Time to forgive the man who ‘ignored’ Titanic SOS as "It has ... been proved that any action by Captain Lord would not have led to a different outcome to the tragedy, as Californian would have arrived well after Titanic had sunk."

Given the details I have seen, I think that Captain Lord was used as a scapegoat when there was a need to hand someone out for the loss, even though the Captain Lord had sent ice warnings 

"The Titanic was going full speed ahead, despite being warned about the ice, and the captain was encouraged to do so to make it the fastest crossing of the Atlantic."

It is time to stop blaming  Captain Lord for the sinking, when the Titanic was already hit after not getting the warnings.

Term Tuesdays - Employee Fraud

Employee Fraud - when an employee knowingly steals from the company.


Example provided by a former coworker


Here is a story from the 1980's. 
A carrier was paying sales guys up front for sales and one day an installer called me in Houston and was concerned about a new installation. 


The location was an empty field and in the middle of the field was a telephone pole with 25 66 blocks. The installer said he counted 50 lines terminated to this 66 block. So I told him to reject the order back to us and we would handle it.


I contacted the VP of Sales and he contacted the Legal Department. 


There where five  (5) sales guys that where fired, but not sued. Their names were given the the IRS for all the money they stole.

Term Tuesday - a version of 'advance-fee' fraud

This example was provided by Mitchell Hellman, a former coworker

Background
AT&T offers several free services for people with hearing related disabilities, details are available at http://relayservices.att.com/, this service is funded by the FCC.

IM Relay is a solution for individuals who are Deaf, hard-of-hearing, or have speech loss. Request a phone number to be dialed and a AT&T Relay operator calls the phone number and translates the text to voice to the other party. There is no charge to use this service, but all users must register first.

Aside from using IM relay on PC or MACs, IM relay is accessible wherever there is AIM. Today, many mobile devices support AOL Instant Messenger applications. Just send the phone number you want to dial to the screen name  "ATTRelay" and you can make calls on the go. Remember, there is no charge to use IM relay, but if you use a mobile device to access IM relay please check with your service provider to see if there may be any applicable data fees. 

Real world example

I own and operate the oldest gelato shop in New Mexico. Apparently, some people think that this makes me easy prey, but (so far) all attempts to victimize me have failed.

An article in the NY Times, "AT&T Accused of Improperly Billing for Service for Deaf," about a fraud tactic that has been tried on me numerous times without success. I've been getting calls from fraudsters on the average of one every couple of weeks. They are attempting a version of 'advance-fee' fraud: they masquerade as someone interested in buying a large quantity of product (since some directories, etc. consider me to be a restaurant, the fraud often involves ordering common items such as club sandwiches or box lunches), they obtain a price from the victim, then send a check or credit card number to use as payment. The payment is for a larger amount than the quoted price; they tell the victim to send the overage back to them, often by Western Union (which is virtually impossible to trace). The victim deposits the check or enters the credit card info, sends back the overage-- and the fraudster disappears; the payment turns out to be bogus, and the victim is on the hook to the bank to pay them the money that went to the fraudster.

What this has to do with the relay service mentioned in the article is:

1. Since the victim never speaks to the fraudster, the victim can't hear the fraudster's accent...which might make him/her suspicious. 
2. The fraudster gains the victim's sympathy, because the victim believes that the party he/she is dealing with is deaf. 
3. The slow pace of the communication often means that the victim doesn't want to take a lot of time asking questions about the fraudster's bonafides. 

 Keep in mind that, because of the Communications Act of 1938, the operators who are relaying the conversation can not discuss any of this with the party on the receiving end of one of these calls... even when they are certain that the call is bogus.

The way I have been dealing with these calls lately is to tell the operator to relay the following:

"This is . Because of the high incidence of fraudulent relay calls that we have received, before we can continue, your call will be traced back to its source. Please stand by..."

They hang up pretty quickly after that. Of course no such trace is taking place, but they don't know that, and can't take the chance. Looks like they're not the only ones telling a little white lie, huh. :)

How to Configure Humbug's New Call Blocking Asterisk Collector

New Blog Post on the Humbug site explains How to Configure Humbug's New Call Blocking Asterisk Collector

http://www.humbuglabs.org/blog/2012/03/20/how-to-configure-the-new-call-blocking-asterisk-collector/

History of Phone Crime - first Denial of Service (DoS) incident

Continuing the retelling of cases of telecom fraud and crime.

To review, topics I have covered were
1876 - First case of telecom related fraud - seems that Bell did not invent the phone, but that the man who did could not afford to patent it.
1889 - First denial of service (DoS) and crime _ see below.
1903-  The first telecom hacking - Marconi's demonstration and "secure" service were interrupted and listened to.

First Denial of Service (DoS) and crime

The story goes that Amon Strowger, a St. Louis undertaker, became upset on finding that the wife of a competitor was a telephone operator at the local (manual) telephone exchange who made his line busy and transferred calls whenever a caller asked to be put through to Strowger, the calls were deliberately put through to his competitor, her husband.(1)(2) 

"Necessity is the mother of invention" so Strowger developed the dial telephone system to get the operator out of the system. (1)

Now if you think about it, this was both a DoS attack, as the wife blocked calls to Mr. Strowger's company and to make it worse she illegally redirected those calls to a competitor.


Sources:
(1) Bill's 200-Year Condensed History of Telecommunications at http://www.cclab.com/billhist.htm
(2) Theory of Electromechanical Switching at http://www.seg.co.uk/telecomm/automat1.htm

Term Tuesdays - Resource Theft: An Inside Job

Today's Term Tuesday is actually a Guest Blog Post by Randy Resnick from the VUC on the Humbug Telecom Blog.

Please go take a look at http://www.humbuglabs.org/blog/2012/03/07/resource-theft-an-inside-job/