Just got an email about this. I bet the next step is to completely block the IMEI...which in that case, people will have to spoof. Unreal these people.
If this is a VOLUNTARY RECALL why are they doing this? It is not mandatory. Funny how Samsung has not emailed/called me etc about my EXPLODING washer!
https://www.verizonwireless.com/sup...f8427e&CUHID=8d5e9b0cfd5794e001cf1f9fde4c3eae
all recalls are voluntary because it would cost too much to physically take the device off people who are going to great length to keep the device, but the firms and networks still have a duty of care, this is the last stage in them washing their hands of the problem, anyone who keeps a phone after the IMEI block by changing their IMEI (Illegal in pretty much every country) they then have no come back back if the device does fail on them.
basically all you end up with is a phone that has been illegally altered and you being entirely to blame if the worst does happen. you can complain it's not a mandatory recall but both Samsung and the networks need to protect them self from the people who will fight to keep a potentially defective device then when things go wrong try to blame everyone else.
If it is voluntary they should not be pushing these crippling updates.
Belimawr said:
hands of the problem, anyone who keeps a phone after the IMEI block by changing their IMEI (Illegal in pretty much every country) they then have no come back back if the device does fail on them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Changing IMEI is not illegal in the US..There was a bill to make it illegal which never passed.
devoidx said:
Changing IMEI is not illegal in the US..There was a bill to make it illegal which never passed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So then why is changing IMEI talk banned from XDA?
I wouldn't be too sure that Verizon would block the IMEIs. After they push this update on January 5th, only an extremely small minority of Verizon users will still have the Note 7 working. That's those of us on XDA who were smart enough to disable OTAs.
Verizon may just chalk that up to devices lost forever. With 2.5 million purchases, it is nearly impossible to collect them all.
I'd be very surprised if Verizon decides to block IMEIs. But if they do, I'd like to be prepared.
What gets me the most is Verizon and Samsung both try to make us think they actually care about our safety. They are more concerned about getting the phones to use the parts for the note 8.
Spike96 said:
So then why is changing IMEI talk banned from XDA?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because it's banned on some other countries
Wait. The recall is mandatory, is it not?
BozQ said:
Wait. The recall is mandatory, is it not?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no recall is ever mandatory as it would cost too much and impose to much on the legal system to take all the devices back from people who are desperate to hang onto them, but they can take steps depending on the device to make people more likely to comply.
So what is the best way to block the update in the 5th? I'm rooted and have EZ Disabler pro installed with a bunch of stuff crossed off. But I still get the annoying pop up everyday that I keep postponing for another 24hrs.
Fourstarzzzz said:
What gets me the most is Verizon and Samsung both try to make us think they actually care about our safety. They are more concerned about getting the phones to use the parts for the note 8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt it's got anything to do with that. They just don't want the terrible publicity if one was to burn someone's house down, or kill someone or some other terrible thing. They are simply interested in covering their own arses, that's all. It's got feck all to do with caring about anyone's safety though.
Belimawr said:
no recall is ever mandatory as it would cost too much and impose to much on the legal system to take all the devices back from people who are desperate to hang onto them, but they can take steps depending on the device to make people more likely to comply.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mandatory vs Voluntary. One is forced by the government and one is not. This refers to the government forcing a company to recall or not. It has nothing to do with the end user or consumer.
---------- Post added at 11:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:10 PM ----------
Belimawr said:
no recall is ever mandatory as it would cost too much and impose to much on the legal system to take all the devices back from people who are desperate to hang onto them, but they can take steps depending on the device to make people more likely to comply.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mandatory vs Voluntary. One is forced by the government and one is not. This refers to the government forcing a company to recall or not. It has nothing to do with the end user or consumer.
In context, The CPSC was surprised that Samsung chose the voluntary option as there are additional protections for companies that wait for the mandatory option.
Got an ominous SMS warning from at&t about tomorrow's 01/05/2017 Death Star Nerf Beam for the Note 7!
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
So brace yourselves SM-N930A holdouts. Oh, and make sure to have those Jimmy hats (Firewall, PDP, etc.) on extra tight. Its gonna be a bumpy ride...
Tangopro said:
Got an ominous SMS warning from at&t about tomorrow's 01/05/2017 Death Star Nerf Beam for the Note 7!
So brace yourselves SM-N930A holdouts. Oh, and make sure to have those Jimmy hats (Firewall, PDP, etc.) on extra tight. Its gonna be a bumpy ride...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep I got the same message today. I hope my package disabler works!
I think you all be alright in US. Firewall, PDP should handle it. I wish I was in your shoes, lol. IMEI block is not fun.
whoofit said:
Mandatory vs Voluntary. One is forced by the government and one is not. This refers to the government forcing a company to recall or not. It has nothing to do with the end user or consumer.
In context, The CPSC was surprised that Samsung chose the voluntary option as there are additional protections for companies that wait for the mandatory option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't agree with this.
In the most simple terms, mandatory is something you must do and voluntary is something you can choose to do. So the question is, what would make any act, something that you must do?
Well yes, the government could step in and with the appropriate legal framework, make something mandatory. (The necessary laws would need to be in place however. Governments in sensible democracies cannot simply decide to tell people what to do, outside the law.)
But government enforcement is not a necessary precondition for something to be mandatory. If you buy a car on a load agreement and you fail to make the loan payments, the loan company can ask for the car back and will be mandatory that you return it under the terms of the contract. You cannot say, "no I decide not to pay you and I will keep the car". Handing back the car is mandatory.
Similarly, Samsung could have - had it wished to - put terms into its licensing agreements that gave it the rights to mandatory recall in certain circumstances. I am presuming (although I have not read the agreements) that no such provision exists. If so, that was Samsung's choice. If such provision is in the licensing and Samsung are not using that provision to enforce the recall, that is also Samsung's choice.
Either way, it is/was Samsung's choice whether this should be a mandatory recall or not and either directly or through their actions, they have chosen "voluntary".
Since this is the case, it is entirely reasonable for any N7 owner also to choose to keep their phone.
Chippy_boy said:
I don't agree with this.
In the most simple terms, mandatory is something you must do and voluntary is something you can choose to do. So the question is, what would make any act, something that you must do?
Well yes, the government could step in and with the appropriate legal framework, make something mandatory. (The necessary laws would need to be in place however. Governments in sensible democracies cannot simply decide to tell people what to do, outside the law.)
But government enforcement is not a necessary precondition for something to be mandatory. If you buy a car on a load agreement and you fail to make the loan payments, the loan company can ask for the car back and will be mandatory that you return it under the terms of the contract. You cannot say, "no I decide not to pay you and I will keep the car". Handing back the car is mandatory.
Similarly, Samsung could have - had it wished to - put terms into its licensing agreements that gave it the rights to mandatory recall in certain circumstances. I am presuming (although I have not read the agreements) that no such provision exists. If so, that was Samsung's choice. If such provision is in the licensing and Samsung are not using that provision to enforce the recall, that is also Samsung's choice.
Either way, it is/was Samsung's choice whether this should be a mandatory recall or not and either directly or through their actions, they have chosen "voluntary".
Since this is the case, it is entirely reasonable for any N7 owner also to choose to keep their phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chippy,
The label Mandatory vs Voluntary has ZERO to do with the action taken by or remedy given to the end user. It applies to the government either requiring, or not, the company to recall a product.
Easy Peazy.
Sammy took the voluntary route before the government REQUIRED them to do so. A preemptive and voluntary recall before they were forced to do it by government mandate.
Truth out.
whoofit said:
Chippy,
The label Mandatory vs Voluntary has ZERO to do with the action taken by or remedy given to the end user. It applies to the government either requiring, or not, the company to recall a product.
Easy Peazy.
Sammy took the voluntary route before the government REQUIRED them to do so. A preemptive and voluntary recall before they were forced to do it by government mandate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am sorry, you are simply mistaken.
A government - backed with the appropriate law - could make something mandatory if they wished. But it does not need to be a government that makes something mandatory.
May I suggest you look up the word "mandatory" in the dictionary. It also means "compulsory". Things can be compulsory even if the government is not involved. As I said (but you seemed to ignore), a contract can require the mandatory return of goods in the event of non-payment, for example.
Chippy_boy said:
I am sorry, you are simply mistaken.
A government - backed with the appropriate law - could make something mandatory if they wished. But it does not need to be a government that makes something mandatory.
May I suggest you look up the word "mandatory" in the dictionary. It also means "compulsory". Things can be compulsory even if the government is not involved. As I said (but you seemed to ignore), a contract can require the mandatory return of goods in the event of non-payment, for example.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chippy,
I am well aware of the definition of mandatory. You have just confused the context of how the label is applied. Easy to do.
Whether a recall is mandatory or voluntary means little. It is still a recall and the process is the same. End users are notified and are allowed the same remedies no matter the label. The government did not have to do a study in the matter because Sammy pulled the plug voluntarily. See the difference?
Now, every nation in the world did not have to do a study and condemn or accept the product because Sammy did this themselves.
When the government body FORCES the company to recall it is a Mandatory one. When the government body needed not to do so it is Voluntary.
Not every company agrees that their product is dangerous in some way. Those are the products that go for review before the government body to be inspected. IF found to be dangerous they are slapped with a MANDATORY RECALL..... where the company has no say in the matter.
IF the company pulls the plug and recalls themselves the government study is moot. Not required, Never happens. Finito.
I have explained this to the best of my ability. I hope you get the point.
Stop complaining about the difference between a mandatory and voluntary recall.
It's meaningless.
Fact is, Samsung is taking extreme measures to get back its phones. They will be defended in their actions because most people believe the Note 7 is a danger.
Just focus on how to stay a step ahead of Samsung.
Related
Hello,
Is there a way to change the imei number on an HTC device using freely available tools?
I have down-graded the ROM of my device and its no longer CID-locked.
Then I tried to use Rascal's tool (based on his post which says that you don't need credits to change IMEI), but apparently while you indeed don't need credits, you still need the dongle.
Ordering a dongle seems like a rather inconvenient method, I would have ordered his/her tool already if it was available for sale online, but a dongle seems rather odd in this time and age of purely electronic commerce.
Can aWizard, or any of the other tools available somewhere help to manually change the IMEI?
And if you're wondering WHY I need to change the IMEI:
1) I live in Turkey
2) The administration in this country decided it was better to inconvenience legitimate users of cell phones acquired abroad, rather than actually muster the resources to find and prosecute the people who really do steal, clone, and smuggle phones illegally into the country
3) This amazing administration has just shut off my phone with a 24 hour (how gracious is that!) warning
4) Being a non-paranoid person (BIG mistake for Turkey), I don't keep my purchase receipts etc., so I have no way to prove I have legally purchased this phone, except for a credit card transaction and online receipt, which they don't have the "brains" to figure out
Yes, yes - I know I need to upgrade my country. Sadly, I don't know of any other countries which would just let me immigrate into. So, if anybody here has ideas/procedures for fixing an IMEI without using commercial tools (or by using electronically delivered commercial tools), PLEASE let me know.
Oh, and next time I'm abroad, I'm FOR SURE getting a foreign line, and using that in Turkey to roam, instead of dealing with this despotic state nonsense.
u can simply check this topic http://forum.xda-developers.com/viewtopic.php?t=54910
or use this function http://forum.xda-developers.com/search.php instead of opening a new thread
Dear Raskal,
I've already read those threads, but I was looking for an electronic solution.
As I have already PMed you, I am willing to pay you $100 for a one-time solution to change my fixed IMEI so you are sure there is no risk of piracy.
I was unable to find a secure reseller to ship your physical dongle product to Turkey, therefore I am forced to seek electronic alternatives.
mimarsinan said:
Dear Raskal,
I've already read those threads, but I was looking for an electronic solution.
As I have already PMed you, I am willing to pay you $100 for a one-time solution to change my fixed IMEI so you are sure there is no risk of piracy.
I was unable to find a secure reseller to ship your physical dongle product to Turkey, therefore I am forced to seek electronic alternatives.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
u can send me payment by western union or paypal and i can send you one. 100 usd is okay for one jafwm incl dhl to turkey. it can arrive in 3-4 day after payment. But you must make sure that your device is supported and that your device is CID unlocked. If your device is cid locked it will cost 25 euro more if you can not find a free cid unlocker.
Dear Raskal,
I've already downgraded my ROM and cid-unlocked my device, as I explained the post above. In fact I've even customized the startup screen :lol: Everything but change the IMEI. The device is a Wizard and I have also used your tool - it works fine until hitting the "Write to SD Card" stage, at which point it bails out with a "check hardware" error, because the dongle is missing. So I presume the procedure works fully.
I've already responded to you in a PM, explaining I am willing to order from a guaranteed local reseller, or direct from you. I am happy to try either option.
However, I thought you might be happier too, if you pocketed the entire $100 for the tool, instead of shelling out half of that money for DHL shipping to Turkey. Honestly, that works better for me too, because I can instantly unlock my phone, AND I don't have to worry about the parcel getting stuck in customs, AND I don't wait for physical shipment. This is certainly something that would benefit both of us.
I suspect you are concerned about piracy. Well, I am a shareware developer by trade, and I understand how you feel. However I'm sure if somebody out there wants to crack JAFwm, (s)he can crack it with or without the dongle. Nothing seems uncrackable - please correct me if I am wrong, and the dongle provides you with some sort of extreme protection.
My original post here to this forum was also trying to see if there is a way to unlock this phone without paying for tools. I have tried all freely available tools and gotten nowhere, sadly. For instance one tool looked promising, but I don't have a USB-to-serial cable, so I am totally locked out of it. Getting such a cable also seems like a pretty hard-core task, at least in Turkey!
At this point, I've spent three days on this issue with zero resolution, I have been greatly inconvenienced by my phone being offline, and I just want to get it unlocked ASAP. Like I said, I am happy to pay you, and look forward to getting your response. I hope you have a reliable Turkish reseller, or are willing to ship to me direct.
And I'm sure if you consider a purely electronic solution for the future, your users will appreciate your products even more, and the promise and effect of instant gratification will surely boost your sales, offsetting any possibe damages caused by piracy. Its better to sell 100 products and lose 10 to piracy, than sell just 50 products and have no piracy, in my opinion.
Respectfully,
Mimar
Obviously Mimar has no idea of the realities of phone unlocking software! It's very cut-throat and any and all possible protection is used to defend a product against hackers :roll:
Maybe once a handset is 5+ years old perhaps?...or then again...
Richard
Competition is always cut-throat. Products don't sell because they are hard to crack, they sell because they are easy to use, and easy to buy.
mimarsinan said:
Competition is always cut-throat. Products don't sell because they are hard to crack, they sell because they are easy to use, and easy to buy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not with phone unlocking. I think Raskal know's a bit more about his market than you or I ever would....his products sell becuase he offers features no-one else does and they are hard to crack - if they were easy to crack they wouldn't sell....
Usually phone unlockers ( furious boxes etc ) can cost $500 - $1000 so they are used to protecting their software via hardware. Maybe look into it further before talking about what you know little?
Richard
Richard -
Please try to keep the discussion on-topic and professional. I'm sure people visit this forum to find solutions to their problems, and not to hear what you think about how much/little others know.
Software companies sell products on the Internet that are priced far in excess of $1000, which you quoted as a high bound below. You can also find cracks for those products on most pirate sites. Having a crack for a product indicates that there is demand for it - this should not be viewed as something negative. In fact, if you cannot find a crack for a product, that usually means there isn't much demand for it.
People often send me cracks that have been released (by God knows whom) for my products, expecting me to "fix" my products so they are no longer crackable. I am always pleased to see these cracks - its concrete proof that there is solid demand for my product. And instead of spending time and resources to "fix" my products in this way, I'd rather add new features and improve usability, so the dollars I get actually make my products better, and my users happier.
Do cracks lower my sales? Absolutely not! People who don't have the money (or ethics) to buy my software won't buy it anyway. Those customers are already lost - why worry about them?
I'm still waiting to hear from Raskal about payment instructions using PayPal...if Raskal had online delivery, I would have ordered two days ago. That's money Raskal is losing on a daily basis from customers like me from all over the world, except lost customers don't usually write about their situation and explain themselves. They just walk away.
Raskal isn't a reseller, he appoints agents worldwide as the sales of his other products are so high...
And as for going off topic - looks who's talking. :evil:
$1000 for phone unlock software is the high end. As the people who use it generate $25 - $50 each time they charge a customer of course there is going to be people who want to crack it and make that money for no outlay - it isn't simply warez cracking that is the issue here like you say, it is a tool for earning large revenues, so they are more likely to protect it with hardware or any method they can - not only to protect their sales but also the sales / earning potential of those who have bought their products - once the unlocking product is free, everyone has it, and prices the people then charge end users for unlocking fall, so the people who paid a lot for it loose out. Raskal actively stops this. -
hence my explaining that your begging for a purely electronic software solution to your problem is going to fall on deaf ears. OOoooh, offer him $100! He really needs that (little) money....
'but I promise I won't let a Russian team crack the code, honest Raskal'...
yeah, he'll fall for that one. :wink:
If he sends you one directly rather than through his network of resellers he is doing you a favour. Don't be so rude and impatient - if you need it quickly perhaps contact him via his own website rather than this one?
Richard
Of course, you do realize you're hurting your own credibility by your unwarranted language and accusations, right?
I've pointed out problems in Raskal's fulfillment which are very likely hampering his sales. Why someone would want to slow his business down in this way is beyond me, but I don't call them names or try to discredit them :roll:
As for the objections you state below, which comprise the only sensible parts of your post, they do not stand up to scrutiny. Raskal could improve his sales model and sell direct to the end-user, eliminating the middlemen and dramatically increasing his profits. I have already explained why I do not consider cracking a legitimate concern.
I have no business with you, although for some reason you have appointed yourself Raskal's advocate. :lol: Forgive me if I don't indulge in more replies to you on this thread. Well, I guess my business practices give me better things to do, after all! :lol:
Well frankly I'm glad no-one is helping you with that attitude. :lol:
You have no idea about Raskal's business. I have some idea. I'm sure he's very happy the way he is without 'instant experts' such as yourself coming along and telling him how to run it.
'cracking is not a legitimate concern'.
Ok.... :roll:
I bet Raskal will be glad to know you think that too when he's deciding whether to do your software only solution.... :wink:
Richard
Chillax people.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
mimarsinan: As much as I sympathise, I don't understand why someone in Turkey doesn't just buy Raskal's unlocker and capture an enormous captive market. You can unlock all the phones you want, for whatever price you want. For that market, surely any price for his unlocker would be reasonable? Better do it before the next guy does, eh?
There are software only solutions, but AFAIK they have not been made available for legal reasons.
This is a friendly board, even if I have to beat it into you with a stick
Be nice, or the thread gets locked.
V
Hi Vijay,
Thanks for stepping in.
I have no interest in unlocking other people's phones. I just need a solution that unlocks my phone, in a timely manner. Raskal has yet to provide me with ordering instructions for his solution, and as I've already said, I'm not too excited about the shipping delay and potential problems in customs.
Are you aware of any other solutions I can try in the meantime? XDA Developers have a solution that requires a usb to serial cable, which I cannot find here either. I even studied the source code of their VB program, and tried to gather the same data from the device ROM using EXEs that ship with aWizard...but either the addresses are wrong in the VB program for my device, or I'm missing something (quite likely).
I appreciate any and all assistance you can provide in this regard - I just want this phone unlocked, I don't mind paying for it, but while I'm waiting for a response from the dealer, I'll keep trying to figure a way on my own. That way at least if I come up with something, I can give it back to the community
I will pay up to $1,500 for the development of a free IMEI restore tool under GNU/GPL.
Please see:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/viewtopic.php?t=58095
for details.
Make your bid today - get paid for helping people, get paid for doing the work you love, get paid for advancing the state of freely available tools.
Note: Because this is work-for-hire, the employer assumes all legal risk associated with the project, and the employee is free from any risk of litigation. Please review the topic post for details.
mimarsinan said:
Make your bid today - get paid for helping people, get paid for doing the work you love, get paid for advancing the state of freely available tools.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Get paid NOWHERE NEAR what you will get fined for breaking the law in whatever country you live in....
Get paid VERY LITTLE whilst you are locked up for 3 years in prison washing shirts / stampling out licence plates etc etc.
IMEI manipulation, in the UK at least, carries a 3yr prison sentence and £10,000 fine.
Richard
i have an m1000 spv, in trying to unlock the phone, i run an exe program. in doing this it changed my imei, witch has kill the phone part. i have the old, imei that was on the phone. is there a way that i !!! can change it back.
what do i need to buy to do it
sorry if i have not asked in the right part i am new to forums
PK Please help!!!!!!
Richard,
I've got to say your graphic descriptions of the "hard prison life" are very rich. Just wanted to ask you some questions, so I can better understand what's involved here. Obviously you know a lot more than I do.
First, a backgrounder; obviously your good buddy Raskal has already built a working solution, he even SELLS it for PROFIT, so surely, not only is he in jail by now (assuming you're being serious in your post), he's also suffering a really bad penalty since he made profit from this illegal venture.
So, how many years does Raskal have left on his 3 year sentence?
Did you see one of the license plates that he has made so far?
Or is he washing shirts, ironing them instead?
Did Raskal pay his 10,000 fine yet? Did he still have a profit remaining after paying that? Has he sold enough dongles to cover his 3 years in jail? Maybe if he had electronically sold his product?
These are just some questions so our readers can put into better context your defamation of my posts.
You obviously have some sort of commercial interest to protect - why else would you be bothering people who have nothing other than good intentions in mind, with a non-commercial project on top of that?
I have posted an interesting project, called for developers, and even offered payment for their time. I'm really sorry if that hurts your commercial interests, but you don't really have many options at this point:
o You can walk away, swallowing your pride
o You can try to improve the fulfillment process for your buddy's tools, so interest in this free project lessens
o You can continue defaming, bringing in more eyeballs to our case
Given your history, I'm pretty sure you won't be swallowing your pride and walking away. Careful - anything else hurts you even more.
'Given my history'? What a knob you are! Anyone in sales is bound to have people *****ing, and the only problems I have are with items that go abroad....hmmm, funny that.
http://feedback.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback&userid=fluffcat1&ssPageName=STRK:ME:UFS
There's my ebay reputation - unique feedback - 1895, total positive - 2455, negative - 8.
Eight negative. Out of 2455. Makes me a crook does it? Winker.
You're the one making yourself look petty bringing up other threads you have no knowledge about and mentioning reputations - I have tried to help those people who have thrown it back at me so screw 'em - and it has no bearing on my comments on your actions in this thread despite you thinking it affects my 'reputation' - how can my fair comment 'hurts me even more.'? . How very pathetic of you.
You are the one who has made it personal, attacking both Raskal and I with no basis other than that he will not subvert his distribution process and cut out his middlemen just for you because you ewant him to, or write a special application just for you, and that I do not agree with you. It's no surprise no one wants to help you. This project is doomed frankly.
I have bought 1 jafWM from a UK reseller. I have had 2 email corresspondance with Raskal when the unlocking was first launched for jafWM ( it didn't do it out of the box) and I know a little of the unlocking industry and how it works.
jafWM is not aimed at 'hobbyist' phone unlockers or those who want to use it once or twice - it is a solution designed to make phone flashing ( and now unlocking) quick and painless for those not used to flashing HTC devices i.e market stall unlockers etc, and compared to some other devices it is relatively inexpensive. It is cheap as the device out of the box will not do anything other than flash files overriding CID, unlcoking needs a server credit at a cost of €25 IIRC.
If you wanted to flash your Nokia, would you pay € 500 for a furious box that could also change the IMEI? No. You'd get someone else with the box to do it...
Raskal actively promotes the free solutions for one-off unlocking use, and supports this site, but jafWM is desgned to save time and make flashing easier without reg edits etc to save time FOR THE PROFESSIONAL.
I have nothing to do with Raskal and no revenue to protect as you claim, I am merely stating my opinion to counter your ridiculus posts slagging him and other 'commercial' solutions.
IMEI manipulation is illlegal in most European countries. Raskal is not in a european country. The fact his device can do this does not render having it illegal. Using it to manipulate IMEI's is illegal, possession is not. It's his risk to develop the tool, but as all the other products he makes and sells for 'normal' phones can manipulate 'corrupt' IMEI's ( a handy euphemism) he obviously doesn't care as no-one has bothered him yet.
You say removing sim locks is illegal - IT ISN'T - it is perfectly legal and absolutley nothing to do with IMEI changing. You're just showing your lack of understanding of what you are talking about.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2002/20020031.htm
"1 Re-programming mobile telephone etc.
(1) A person commits an offence if-
(a) he changes a unique device identifier, or
(b) he interferes with the operation of a unique device identifier.
(2) A unique device identifier is an electronic equipment identifier which is unique to a mobile wireless communications device.
(3) But a person does not commit an offence under this section if-
(a) he is the manufacturer of the device, or
(b) he does the act mentioned in subsection (1) with the written consent of the manufacturer of the device.
(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable-
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both, or
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to a fine or to both.
2 Possession or supply of anything for re-programming purposes
(1) A person commits an offence if-
(a) he has in his custody or under his control anything which may be used for the purpose of changing or interfering with the operation of a unique device identifier, and
(b) he intends to use the thing unlawfully for that purpose or to allow it to be used unlawfully for that purpose.
(2) A person commits an offence if-
(a) he supplies anything which may be used for the purpose of changing or interfering with the operation of a unique device identifier, and
(b) he knows or believes that the person to whom the thing is supplied intends to use it unlawfully for that purpose or to allow it to be used unlawfully for that purpose.
(3) A person commits an offence if-
(a) he offers to supply anything which may be used for the purpose of changing or interfering with the operation of a unique device identifier, and
(b) he knows or believes that the person to whom the thing is offered intends if it is supplied to him to use it unlawfully for that purpose or to allow it to be used unlawfully for that purpose.
(4) A unique device identifier is an electronic equipment identifier which is unique to a mobile wireless communications device.
(5) A thing is used by a person unlawfully for a purpose if in using it for that purpose he commits an offence under section 1.
(6) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable-
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both, or
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to a fine or to both. "
Changing the IMEI to disguise the origin of a phone is illegal in the UK and most other european countries that I have looked into.
Your developers should go into this with their eyes open - they are producing a tool to commit an offence which has severe penalities in this country and others to deter mobile phone theft. If they can in any way be traced by IP / bank account / registration etc then they should be wary.
How do they know you aren't just bait from law enforcement to get the underground hackers prosecuted? Look how many posts you have made - most are begging for a software IMEI changer - there are already free software unlockers for the wizard.
p.s when I bought jafWM it couldn't unlock phones or 'repair' IMEIs so as I haven't updated my software I am not committing any offence, and it is not jafWM's primary purpose although it is sure to drive sales ;-)
Richard
mimarsinan said:
Well, I am a shareware developer by trade,...
Respectfully,
Mimar
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
just forgot your home page, can you say me again where it was?
I have also posted this in the kaiser section, I created 2 threads to better the exposure to AT&T users in the forums they most frequent.
Hello Fellow AT&T Customers,
I want to notify all AT&T users of a situation that currently arose so you can protect yourself from having it happen to you. Last week a third party was able to call AT&T Customer Care and obtain all account information for all lines that I have. I have started a blog about this at http://www.tri-syndicate.com AT&T Customer Care management states that nothing will be done to compensate me for the harassment, and that it can happen to anyone. I am starting this blog to fight back at AT&T so this doesn't happen to anyone else.
If you haven't done so already I would suggest calling and setting a password on your account because it will help but not completely stop this from happening.
I am unsure of carrier policies outside of the U.S. but the U.S. carrier policies need to be changed before further damage may occur. I know they have obtained my cellular numbers but I do not know if they were able to obtain my address as well, this I am still trying to find out.
If anyone has any tips, suggestions, or ideas I am all ears.
Regards,
CUSTEL
Thanks for the heads up about the account privacy. AT&T customer support has always been the total opposite...ie. "unsupportive" and "lack of customer care". Would setting up the account password online do same thing as calling them (I really hate dealing with those guys). I know when I set up my password online, they sent an sms to confirm my password. Do you think that's what the perps did to get access to your account? If the perps did get access to your account online then they would've been able to see your billing address.
blistirs said:
Thanks for the heads up about the account privacy. AT&T customer support has always been the total opposite...ie. "unsupportive" and "lack of customer care". Would setting up the account password online do same thing as calling them (I really hate dealing with those guys). I know when I set up my password online, they sent an sms to confirm my password. Do you think that's what the perps did to get access to your account? If the perps did get access to your account online then they would've been able to see your billing address.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That password is only to access your account online, the password I am referring to you have to give every time you call in about your account. It will lessen the risk of any information being distributed. My account was breached over the phone, I have the operators name that the person spoke to due to them being reckless and taking nots of the conversation. I am trying to identify their id number at the moment.
Got it! I'll set that one up. It's better than giving customer support the last 4 digit of SS and mother's maiden name. thanks for the heads up again. I hope your able to figure out who was screwing with your account
Post the phone numbers and names of Person 1 and Person 2. Maybe some forum members can give them a call and ask them why they are being such asshat stalkers
Have you filed a police report? Telephone harassment is a criminal offense in most jurisdictions. You could also file a civil suit for lost income. That being said, often all it takes is two officers knocking on the person's door to set them straight.
fluxist
As a member of the att csr i can honestly say that If someone can verify your account they are able to get just about any kind of info they want. i also know for a fact they are not able to obtain your social, birth date, and drivers license as for this info (with the exception of the last four digits of your social) are all hidden from everyone. due to the last four being a verification means. unless there is a billing password. Now as far as getting the reps id number it will never happen. no one will give that to you. the reason being customers calling in and saying they work for att providing someone elses id and doing damage. Now i dont know what info they provided for this third party. Nor am i trying to defend that rep. But it is that way with every other provider. If you can verify the account you have access to it. And i can tell you that these security measures we have protect you way more than hurt you. I am not going to say they are perfect because they are not, nor is anyone elses. But trust me when i say we do a very good job of saving your butt way more than you will ever know!!!!!!!!!!!! Cause there are some shady flipping people out there. And untill you have acctually been on the inside, you will never really know the full extent. Now as far as doing something about this. not much will happen due to them verifying.
if the harasser works for att/knows someone who works for att, could they have gotten the information that way?
this thread is not informative , waist of time
edward
edward-riko said:
this thread is not informative , waist of time
edward
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's nice, go play in traffic.
Latest update:
http://tri-syndicate.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=1
CUSTEL said:
That's nice, go play in traffic.
Latest update:
http://tri-syndicate.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read your most recent blog posting. I don't think you're really grasping the fault in your argument.
As the CSR stated, you have no idea if this third party called AT&T to get your info. You have no evidence, but beyond that, there isn't even any compelling reason to believe it.
You're making a very unjustified leap in logic to get pissed off at ATT. Let me get this straight, the 'proof' you have is a piece of paper saying 'ATT' and your cell numbers, which you found at the home of a person who you suspect might want to harass you?
There are an infinite number of ways a person could have found that information. Maybe they stole your mail. Maybe they hacked into your computer. Maybe they guessed your password. Maybe they social engineered one of your friends. Maybe they asked your mother. See what I'm getting at here? The idea you are dead-set on is no more plausible than any of the above. Not only that, but all evidence available specifically fails to back up your claim. There is no record of anyone calling in to your account and making queries. No reason to believe they know your SSN. No confession or witness or hearsay. No nothing.
I assume that, since you avoid mentioning taking legal remedies, that you have already been told it is not possible. I work in Civil and Criminal Law in NYS and I can tell you that you would need some sort of real evidence here before you could pursue any remedy at all. Asit is, there's nothing but a feeling you have.
But it's your blog. You can cry if you want to.
fluxist
Owned in your own post...lol
fluxist said:
I read your most recent blog posting. I don't think you're really grasping the fault in your argument.
As the CSR stated, you have no idea if this third party called AT&T to get your info. You have no evidence, but beyond that, there isn't even any compelling reason to believe it.
You're making a very unjustified leap in logic to get pissed off at ATT. Let me get this straight, the 'proof' you have is a piece of paper saying 'ATT' and your cell numbers, which you found at the home of a person who you suspect might want to harass you?
There are an infinite number of ways a person could have found that information. Maybe they stole your mail. Maybe they hacked into your computer. Maybe they guessed your password. Maybe they social engineered one of your friends. Maybe they asked your mother. See what I'm getting at here? The idea you are dead-set on is no more plausible than any of the above. Not only that, but all evidence available specifically fails to back up your claim. There is no record of anyone calling in to your account and making queries. No reason to believe they know your SSN. No confession or witness or hearsay. No nothing.
I assume that, since you avoid mentioning taking legal remedies, that you have already been told it is not possible. I work in Civil and Criminal Law in NYS and I can tell you that you would need some sort of real evidence here before you could pursue any remedy at all. Asit is, there's nothing but a feeling you have.
But it's your blog. You can cry if you want to.
fluxist
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol lol lol damn....based on my past dealings with Custel, i dont feel sorry for him(and probably deserves whatever is happeneing to him) BUT im gonna take his advice and put that passwd. on my accnt.
fluxist said:
I read your most recent blog posting. I don't think you're really grasping the fault in your argument.
As the CSR stated, you have no idea if this third party called AT&T to get your info. You have no evidence, but beyond that, there isn't even any compelling reason to believe it.
You're making a very unjustified leap in logic to get pissed off at ATT. Let me get this straight, the 'proof' you have is a piece of paper saying 'ATT' and your cell numbers, which you found at the home of a person who you suspect might want to harass you?
There are an infinite number of ways a person could have found that information. Maybe they stole your mail. Maybe they hacked into your computer. Maybe they guessed your password. Maybe they social engineered one of your friends. Maybe they asked your mother. See what I'm getting at here? The idea you are dead-set on is no more plausible than any of the above. Not only that, but all evidence available specifically fails to back up your claim. There is no record of anyone calling in to your account and making queries. No reason to believe they know your SSN. No confession or witness or hearsay. No nothing.
I assume that, since you avoid mentioning taking legal remedies, that you have already been told it is not possible. I work in Civil and Criminal Law in NYS and I can tell you that you would need some sort of real evidence here before you could pursue any remedy at all. Asit is, there's nothing but a feeling you have.
But it's your blog. You can cry if you want to.
fluxist
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They don't even live in the same state as me and I have paperless billing. Would you like to try again? They know none of my friends, they know no one I associate with. You know nothing about the situation therefore your reasons of them obtaining it are irrelivant.
ljinsane said:
lol lol lol damn....based on my past dealings with Custel, i dont feel sorry for him(and probably deserves whatever is happeneing to him) BUT im gonna take his advice and put that passwd. on my accnt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We have never "dealt" with each other, I just looked through your posts and not once was there a conversation between the two of us so would you like to pull your head out of your ass and explain?
Everyone needs to back the hell off Custel for what he's saying. I've had a friends' info get compromised by AT&T's customer service reps before. They were being stalked and the stalker BS'd their way by some idiot rep to get their new phone number. I already have a password on my account due to their experiences. If you don't want to trust his situation or want to live in a bubble about the possibility of losing personal information from a business, then feel free. But what he's saying is not a ton of BS.
lol
CUSTEL said:
We have never "dealt" with each other, I just looked through your posts and not once was there a conversation between the two of us so would you like to pull your head out of your ass and explain?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow...you took the time to look through all my post....get a ****ing life...hell at least a hobby..that requires stepping AWAY from the computer....anyhow ..i never said my dealings with you were on this site...it was on your tri-syndicate site...and stop playing dumb you know exactly who I am...
vn1977 said:
Everyone needs to back the hell off Custel for what he's saying. I've had a friends' info get compromised by AT&T's customer service reps before. They were being stalked and the stalker BS'd their way by some idiot rep to get their new phone number. I already have a password on my account due to their experiences. If you don't want to trust his situation or want to live in a bubble about the possibility of losing personal information from a business, then feel free. But what he's saying is not a ton of BS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not that we think what he is saying cant happen...its that he doesnt have a shred of actual PROOF that is was AT&T's fault...which is why he is running into problems with them
CUSTEL said:
That's nice, go play in traffic.
Latest update:
http://tri-syndicate.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dear Custel you are good in making roms so make a good rom with the latest build (schaps 4.2) and then post it on your site , so people will appreciate your work and not your talks
Regards
edward
There was one of those 'Reality' court shows on TV recently where someone knew the last 4 digits of someones SS and was able to add 2 more lines to someones account. The victim got a bill from ATT for $2300.
Ouch!
it's a real posibility that it was obtain right from ATT. a LOT of places have major lapses in security, needing only very basic information to 'reset' or circumvent the default protection schemes.
I think most companies that keep any address/phone/ "account" type informatoin needs to have some more serious levels of protection.
Custel, i hope the bastard that got ur info goes and plays in traffic!
ljinsane said:
wow...you took the time to look through all my post....get a ****ing life...hell at least a hobby..that requires stepping AWAY from the computer....anyhow ..i never said my dealings with you were on this site...it was on your tri-syndicate site...and stop playing dumb you know exactly who I am...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I knew who the hell you were I wouldn't have told you to elaborate now would I? Obviously not the brightest crayon in the box...
Get a ****ing life? Unlike you I enable myself to work from home FROM my computer therefore I have plenty of time to research when an asshat runs their mouth about me.
CUSTEL said:
If I knew who the hell you were I wouldn't have told you to elaborate now would I? Obviously not the brightest crayon in the box...
Get a ****ing life? Unlike you I enable myself to work from home FROM my computer therefore I have plenty of time to research when an asshat runs their mouth about me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol.....and that is why you got some of the negative responses that you did in this in thread.....lol ......and it took you several days to respond ....had to get your brain power up huh?.....you work from home....WOW i'm so impressed... all the more reason for you to GET A LIFE!!! AND LOG OFF THE COMPUTER!!!....LOL. I'm not surprised since you obviously do not know how to conduct yourself eloquently enough on the net who would think you can in person? BTW this whole situation you are going through and how you are going about dealing with it demonstrated how BRIGHT you are..or should I say aren't. lol heres a suggestion:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Well I read your blog. And like i told you in my response the other day. Your just sh#t out of luck. You will not be compensated in any way, because there is nothing to compensate you for. From what you said someone call cust service, verified your account and the csr did there job. It shows you are quite upset about it. But the rep did there job. Which could happen to any of us (att customers). Because yes i have an account. And i have five lines on that account. This can be done regardless of the carrier. Anything can be done with your ss#. Your lucky thats all they did. They could have gone into a store and added lines to your acount or made changes and you could have been in for a huge bill. I can promise you when you call cust service you will get much more acomplished being respectful then acting like an ass!!!!!!!!!!!
With the recent legal decision making it legal for users to "jailbreak" their iPhones (still at the risk of losing warranty, I assume), wouldn't that also carry over to ALL cell phones? Wouldn't it then be illegal for Sprint (or Verizon, Att, etc...) to develop code that would block or remove Root? I would assume, that just as in most parts of the legal system, once precedence is set, it should carry over all carriers.
It does carry over that you're allowed to root your phone... but nothing in the ruling said the carrier can't put code in to prevent it. They just can't sue you for cracking their protection.
Ok, Makes sense, but lends another question...
If a law is passed allowing something, and someone takes measures to prevent people from doing what has already been deemed legal, they can be sued for infringing on that person's rights. Wouldn't that, in effect, be the same thing as a carrier writing code to block Root? I understand if they put in a "Safety" feature, so people can't just accidently Root, but anything beyond, would technically be a violation of our rights as the owners of the phones....
And before it gets said, I am not saying we should all run out and Sue Sprint or our individual carriers, for "Breaking Root" on our phones. I am just putting a thought out there for conversations sake. Sometimes getting other peoples opinions on a subject helps put things in perspective.
thenewguy821 said:
And before it gets said, I am not saying we should all run out and Sue Sprint or our individual carriers, for "Breaking Root" on our phones. I am just putting a thought out there for conversations sake. Sometimes getting other peoples opinions on a subject helps put things in perspective.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The ruling was that jailbreaking / rooting a phone does not fall under bypassing encryption through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. That's all. They didn't say that companies can't protect their IP.
Realistically you can expect that cellular providers will start entering provisions in their contracts that make it a violation to modify your phone's software (just as it's, for example, illegal to modify pollution controls on a motor vehicle).
phobos512 said:
The ruling was that jailbreaking / rooting a phone does not fall under bypassing encryption through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. That's all. They didn't say that companies can't protect their IP.
Realistically you can expect that cellular providers will start entering provisions in their contracts that make it a violation to modify your phone's software (just as it's, for example, illegal to modify pollution controls on a motor vehicle).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand what you are saying, but your examples don't apply. By modifying your vehicles pollution controls, you are finding a way around a law, therefore making it illegal. By adding provisions in their contracts, the company would be making their own laws, stricter than the ones the courts have already allowed.
A better example, In Chicago, it was recently decided (At the Supreme Court level) that the 2nd amendment applies to the entire country, not just the government. Any laws made by the states/cities trying to block the 2nd amendment rights, would be unconstitutional, and could not be enforced.
By the Courts deciding that Jailbreaking/Rooting the phones is Legal, any action by the carriers to block the unlocking of the phones, would be a violation of that court decision.
My 2 cents worth:
They can choose to block it if they want to, but they cannot penalize you for seeing that your device is rooted or jailbroken.
That's just my take on it.
Veritas06 said:
My 2 cents worth:
They can choose to block it if they want to, but they cannot penalize you for seeing that your device is rooted or jailbroken.
That's just my take on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They cannot sue you for violating DMCA since it is now an exception.
They can still:
- void your warranty
- add an verse in contract that you can be penalized for modifying to gain root
- do pretty much anything they want beyond sue you for violating DMCA until there is a lawsuit or court ruling to decide otherwise.
I think you have to remember that rooting is basically bypassing encryption the encryption. There is no where that says that Sprint/AT&T etc cant change there encryption or fix holes in it. By changing the encryption and fixing holes this often "breaks root" however you are not forced to update so i don't think you can say they are taking away your "right" to root.
Even if they put out a stealth patch that fixed the current root methods and put your phone back at stock and unrooted. They still havent infringed on your right to root your phone. You can always re root once a new method is found. While it can make it difficult for you or take away your root access they haven't actually taken away your right to root... they just arent making it easy for you which is an entirely different thing.
It would be a PR nightmare and would possibly lose some customers, but they really don't have any legal reason not to add a section in the contract to say that in order to run a phone on their network, you must you a phone with software APPROVED by them. By rooting you would lose approval.
It wouldn't be that difficult from a their perspective to allow them to cut service or even penalize you for doing so.
thenewguy821 said:
Ok, Makes sense, but lends another question...
If a law is passed allowing something, and someone takes measures to prevent people from doing what has already been deemed legal, they can be sued for infringing on that person's rights. Wouldn't that, in effect, be the same thing as a carrier writing code to block Root?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. They can write their software to be whatever they want. They are under no obligation to make it easy for you to hack. The law just makes it lawful for you to hack it. It does not make it unlawful for the companies to make it difficult or impossible. The law allows you to try, it does not gaurantee you success.
Someday they'll have an easy method to remotely determine if a phone is rooted and instantly void all our warranties, saving the company money.
If we want to run their software updates then we agree to lose root, since they were intended to run on non-rooted devices.
Posted via XDA Android app from Evo
thenewguy821 said:
I understand what you are saying, but your examples don't apply. By modifying your vehicles pollution controls, you are finding a way around a law, therefore making it illegal. By adding provisions in their contracts, the company would be making their own laws, stricter than the ones the courts have already allowed.
A better example, In Chicago, it was recently decided (At the Supreme Court level) that the 2nd amendment applies to the entire country, not just the government. Any laws made by the states/cities trying to block the 2nd amendment rights, would be unconstitutional, and could not be enforced.
By the Courts deciding that Jailbreaking/Rooting the phones is Legal, any action by the carriers to block the unlocking of the phones, would be a violation of that court decision.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're misunderstanding the concept of something being legal and something being your right...
No law was made saying that companies have to allow you to bypass their protections. The only thing that happened was that you can now not be prosecuted for bypassing protections to install 3rd party applications or remove bundled software.
I thought of an analogy... If you wanted to post on a forum like this one, you are allowed to. If the owner of the forum doesn't want you here, they can do all kinds of things to stop you. Ban your account, ban your IP, etc. If you go to a new computer at some wifi hotspot you can create a new account and sign up. That is not illegal. It's also not illegal for them to ban you again. It's not your RIGHT to go on the site but it is still LEGAL for you to do so.
ViViDboarder said:
You're misunderstanding the concept of something being legal and something being your right...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not trying to say We have a right to do this... What I meant, was by the courts decision to allow jailbreaking/rooting of phones, we now have that right. I don't think that is a misunderstanding at all.
BTW, I hope the rest of your post wasn't to imply that I should be banned from posting here, just because I started this thread. I just thought it might be an interesting topic, and to get different views on it. I could have just made another thread about Froyo coming out next week... lol
So, it sounds like not too many people here understand the recent decision. First, it was, in no way, a new law or a change to an existing law. The Library of Congress (who oversees the DMCA) issued a ruling, pretty much on a whim. That sharply distinguishes it from a court decision (that would set any kind of legal precedent).
What this means for us:
According to the Library of Congress, it is not a violation of the manufacturer's (copy)rights for users to bypass protections (rooting/jailbreaking) for the purpose of installing legally obtained software. Hence, rooting your phone to install something you legally obtained, like an app that requires root (SetCPU, Root Explorer, etc.) or a completely open-sourced ROM (CyanogenMod) is perfectly acceptable. This means that HTC cannot sue you over it AND they may not automatically brick rooted phones (Disclaimer: the process of rooting may brick your phone due to the nature of the process, I am not telling you that rooting is 100% risk-free. I am only saying that HTC may not brick your phone for that specific reason. This applies a little bit more directly to Apple and their absurd anti-jailbreaking practices). HTC can, and will, void your warranty if they discover that you rooted your phone. Likewise, Sprint may not refuse to provide network coverage to people who root for the purpose of installing legally obtained software. However, they can, and likely will, refuse to provide any warranty-style services for your phone (i.e. that $7 per month Total Equipment Protection Plan).
However, rooting your phone to install illegally obtained software is still illegal. This applies to the vast majority of ROMs available that reuse Sprint or HTC code without the express permission of those companies. CyanogenMod uses the same open-source code for Android that Google freely provides to anyone who wants it (like HTC). The CM team then works to use the open-source code provided by Google and the manufacturer (HTC's kernel is open-source and publicly released (eventually) according to the open-licensing terms that Google forces them to accept) and make that into a working ROM for your phone. Most other ROM developers take the closed-source code provided by the manufacturer (e.g. the code from the recent OTA) and manipulate or modify it to become a new ROM for your phone.
Although, while that practice is, technically, illegal, it is also very similar to a foul/penalty in sports -- it's only against the rules if you get caught. And, in this case, manufacturers have not cry foul because the developer community that is, basically, stealing their code is also driving their profit (and they are too smart to bite the hand that feeds them, unlike Apple).
So, I hope that this helps people better understand the decision and the fact that it really does not change anything in terms of the actual risks of rooting -- it only removes the extraordinarily unlikely risk of HTC suing you just for rooting. But, given their ongoing legal battles with Apple, I'd say that HTC is not worried about you or me right now anyway.
the decision doesn't specifically make root/jailbreaking legal or illegal, it just ruled that it's not a violation of the DMCA. the swat team won't be kicking down any htc execs doors just because you jumped the gun and lost root by applying an OTA
So in all reality, which ROMs aren't illegal software? Example: CM?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
thenewguy821 said:
I am not trying to say We have a right to do this... What I meant, was by the courts decision to allow jailbreaking/rooting of phones, we now have that right. I don't think that is a misunderstanding at all.
BTW, I hope the rest of your post wasn't to imply that I should be banned from posting here, just because I started this thread. I just thought it might be an interesting topic, and to get different views on it. I could have just made another thread about Froyo coming out next week... lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, no. I wasn't implying that. Sorry. It was just the only example I could think of at the time.
Cayniarb said:
I am only saying that HTC may not brick your phone for that specific reason.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How would this apply to the Moto Droid X? Not 100% sure.......but isn't that what Moto is doing?......bricking your phone if you try to root? Will they have to change that?
bluebeast213 said:
How would this apply to the Moto Droid X? Not 100% sure.......but isn't that what Moto is doing?......bricking your phone if you try to root? Will they have to change that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. Motorola has put together some clever programing that makes the process of attempting to root the Droid X result in bricking your phone (but only sort of -- you can reinstall the stock, unrooted ROM and be all good, without root). They aren't bricking phones that are successfully rooted, they are just making it impossible (so far...) to root it in the first place.
Again, the process of rooting your phone may cause it to not work/get bricked. That is very different than being able to root, then the manufacturer bricking it after the fact (like, say, a jailbroken iPhone that you accidentally connect to iTunes -- nice, expensive paperweight).
So, no, Motorola will not have to change that for any legal reason. They may change it though because the developer community that largely drives the android platform will not be too happy with them, and that could affect their bottom line.
Just learned about the Celebrite UFED device currently available and in use by law enforcement (Link listed below). The UFED connects to mobile devices (indeed the Epic) and extracts every bit of data - to include previously deleted data potentially. This means all text messages, passwords, browser history, banking information, Google accounts, Facebook, etc. will all be rendered as part of the public record once judicial precedings commence. And even if charges are dismissed and the record is sealed, the integrity of the extracted information has been compromised and cannot be viewed as safe.
So I am asking if any dev's might be able to restore the fourth amendment constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure through the magic that ya'll do. For those who might be thinking they have nothing to hide and this would only benefit criminals, keep in mind that silently giving up civil liberties is a slippery slope. It starts off small, but (conspiracy kook sounding, I know) turns into opening up your nightstands for government types before bed. While I support the need for efforts by law enforcement in assuring the safety of our communities, I DO NOT support trickery and loopholes around the judicial process like the overtly invasive Celebrite UFED technology. I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this issue and if anyone with more knowledge in this are than I will step forward to secure our privacy and peace of mind.
cellebrite-com (forum won't allow me to post actual link)
I don't have a problem with this at all. If your stupid enough to do criminal stuff on your phone then you should go to jail. In actuality the US Supreme Court ruled recently that a cell phone is not constitutionally protected via 4th Ammendment. I think someone was arrested and they looked at his messages and found someone else who conspired to commit a felony. They charged him as well....
Sent from Bonsai 7.0.3
Eh if you are caught doing something stupid then yes it MIGHT be necessary. But if its abuse then we have a right to defend yourself.
I'm pretty sure that there are certain criteria for it to work. It was in a thread somewhere. When I find it ill edit my post.
I think they were:
Must have a sd card inserted
Usb debug must be on
*something else I can't remember*
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
mmcgrat6 said:
Just learned about the Celebrite UFED device currently available and in use by law enforcement (Link listed below). The UFED connects to mobile devices (indeed the Epic) and extracts every bit of data - to include previously deleted data potentially. This means all text messages, passwords, browser history, banking information, Google accounts, Facebook, etc. will all be rendered as part of the public record once judicial precedings commence. And even if charges are dismissed and the record is sealed, the integrity of the extracted information has been compromised and cannot be viewed as safe.
So I am asking if any dev's might be able to restore the fourth amendment constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure through the magic that ya'll do. For those who might be thinking they have nothing to hide and this would only benefit criminals, keep in mind that silently giving up civil liberties is a slippery slope. It starts off small, but (conspiracy kook sounding, I know) turns into opening up your nightstands for government types before bed. While I support the need for efforts by law enforcement in assuring the safety of our communities, I DO NOT support trickery and loopholes around the judicial process like the overtly invasive Celebrite UFED technology. I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this issue and if anyone with more knowledge in this are than I will step forward to secure our privacy and peace of mind.
cellebrite-com (forum won't allow me to post actual link)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Firstly, "be part of the public record" is not true. Only evidence pertaining to the case at hand may be submitted in to some form of record. So while yes, there will be a person(s) scouring all of the information, anything irrelevant (ie, not usable as evidence) would not be saved.
With this in mind, how would this constitute illegal search and seizure? You said so yourself "once judicial precedings begin"; such as a search warrant. So there is no breaking of the constitution there...and furthermore, once a search warrant is obtained, anything of yours that falls within the scope of the warrant is subject to search. So, to me, this is no different than if a cop read through every page of your diary looking for evidence. Because the unneccessary stuff will not be saved.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
I am actually a law student, and this is illegal as long as you have a reasonable expectation of privacy (ie: YOU HAVE A PASSWORD) As long as you have a lock password it is illegal. Also, I have used cellebrites and they don't usually work anyway unless the phone is unlocked, so just keep your phone locked and if an officer asks you to unlock it, tell them to get a search warrant.
Wow aren't we ignorant. If it were that simple. How many people who were on death row have they let out because years later they find evidence that clears them. How many times hagve you heard of someone spending years in jail for rape to find DNA evidence clears them?
Unfortunately people in law enforcement are human beings flawed like the rest of us. If they can read the data who is to say they can't put incrimintating data on just because they don't like you?
I think it is easy to make blanket ignorant statements like this totally ignoring reality unless you are the one who is wronged.
Top Nurse said:
I don't have a problem with this at all. If your stupid enough to do criminal stuff on your phone then you should go to jail. In actuality the US Supreme Court ruled recently that a cell phone is not constitutionally protected via 4th Ammendment. I think someone was arrested and they looked at his messages and found someone else who conspired to commit a felony. They charged him as well....
Sent from Bonsai 7.0.3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
My concern is not for criminals to be allowed to freely conduct their activities under protection from prosecution. And while cellphones have been ruled as not protected under the fourth amendment, handsets like the Epic interconnect to provide access into far more areas for personal data than a simple cellphone. in fact the courts have ruled that email, for example, IS protected by the fourth amendment. What this device represents is a "work around" into individual privacy.
More and more we as a nation have been relinquishing our privacy rights in support of protecting our safety and security. However, it's been almost a decade of this trend and the nation has been evolving ever since toward everybody knowing your business. We might not have anything to hide, but we must also have legal protections for cases which involve potentially corrupt individuals from abusing the systems which allow them use of this invasive device.
I agree, police officers are surprisingly uninformed of Supreme court law. They usually don't care until it affects them, like when the exclusionary rule told them "Hey, wanna **** these defendants over? Well now their free, good job asshole."
Plus there are crooked cops that could use your passwords they find on your phone (even if you aren't doing anything wrong on it) and sign in to your Facebook and IM to find out more info about you. Is this okay? If so then go to a communist state where you aren't allowed to have secrets from the government.
excellent point, squshy 7. But "part of the public record" was not meant to be taken as the only reason for concern. While protocol calls for the data to be disposed of if nothing happens, we don't live in a perfect world. Evidence is lost. Incorrect limbs get amputated. People forget to do things or believe something important has already been done. And corruption among those of authority can and does happen. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. So why let it happen needlessly in the first place?
mmcgrat6 said:
excellent point, squshy 7. But "part of the public record" was not meant to be taken as the only reason for concern. While protocol calls for the data to be disposed of if nothing happens, we don't live in a perfect world. Evidence is lost. Incorrect limbs get amputated. People forget to do things or believe something important has already been done. And corruption among those of authority can and does happen. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. So why let it happen needlessly in the first place?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly dude, I've come to terms with the fact that mistrusting everyone in charge for fear of corruption is unfounded. Its actually much simpler than that.
Most humans are idiots.
Hence our messed up world. Not evil. Just stupidity.
Once one realizes that, it becomes alot easier. Because then you'll see that there is truly nothing you can do about it.
Lol. Im a misanthrope to the max
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Deleted 10 char
Benjamin Franklin said:
Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And that sums up MY opinion on this matter, but really, just look at my previous post and just keep your phone locked.
Censura_Umbra said:
I agree, police officers are surprisingly uninformed of Supreme court law. They usually don't care until it affects them, like when the exclusionary rule told them "Hey, wanna **** these defendants over? Well now their free, good job asshole."
Plus there are crooked cops that could use your passwords they find on your phone (even if you aren't doing anything wrong on it) and sign in to your Facebook and IM to find out more info about you. Is this okay? If so then go to a communist state where you aren't allowed to have secrets from the government.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why are you putting illegal stuff on your Facebook? What's there that can't be retrieved via birth records, driver's licenses, and marriage certificates...all of which are already in the government's records?
A crooked cop can plant any kind of evidence they want to incriminate you. It doesn't have to be on your phone. Heck it's probably not even worth their effort.
Any decent lawyer can get that stuff tossed anyway. If anything, it's harder than ever to successfully prosecute someone, not easier.
And really, as resource strapped as police departments are, they're not looking at you at all unless you ARE doing something illegal. Don't use the word "wrong" because it's not necessarily the same as "illegal."
Censura_Umbra said:
And that sums up MY opinion on this matter, but really, just look at my previous post and just keep your phone locked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You confuse freedom with anarchy. You're free to do what you want. You're also free to accept any and all consequences.
Censura_Umbra said:
I am actually a law student, and this is illegal as long as you have a reasonable expectation of privacy (ie: YOU HAVE A PASSWORD) As long as you have a lock password it is illegal. Also, I have used cellebrites and they don't usually work anyway unless the phone is unlocked, so just keep your phone locked and if an officer asks you to unlock it, tell them to get a search warrant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. The cellebrites we use at Sprint at least, require the device to be unlocked(unless the Android has USB debugging on already, in which case I believe it can bypass the lock). If a blackberry has a password on it, it pops up on the machine requesting you enter the password on the machine.
So technically it can "bypass" your lock, but only if you enter the lock on the cellebrite machine.
LOL the cellbrites carriers have obviously were only meant to transfer contacts, pictures, etc. By error, Ive been to extract this information even when the phone was locked. Im sure they can program a machine to bypass all of that.
Uh and yes EVERY american must give up some freedom for security. This is nothing new. As long as you dont do some stupid ****, then you have nothing to worry about. Anyway, most of us on here have rooted phones. You know rooted phones exposes your passwords, etc right?
socos25 said:
Wow aren't we ignorant. If it were that simple. How many people who were on death row have they let out because years later they find evidence that clears them. How many times hagve you heard of someone spending years in jail for rape to find DNA evidence clears them?
Unfortunately people in law enforcement are human beings flawed like the rest of us. If they can read the data who is to say they can't put incrimintating data on just because they don't like you?
I think it is easy to make blanket ignorant statements like this totally ignoring reality unless you are the one who is wronged.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not ignorant by any shape of the imagination, as I have experience on both sides of the law. As someone said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except all the other ones that have been tried." Nothing is perfect and innocent people may be jailed or executed. Not saying that is good, but that it works most of the time...which is why I live in the USA.
If you have lived as long as I have then you would know that things go up and down (conservative & liberal) in this country. Now we are in a conservative swing and we do need some balance as we move away from the days of coddling criminals and granting more rights to them than the rest of us get.
Sent from Bonsai 7.0.3
I'd like to say this..
1) your locks are pointless if you have clockworkmod installed...as they can just backup your rom lol..as cwm has no password protect option...
2) You can always restore data...1 wipe i never enough..I had my sd cards erased a few times...I was able to recover 100% the contents..to do a proper wipe you gotta wipe 7 times using 0's method and alternating 1's and 0's..to note..this isnt going to make the data unrecoverable..just more expensive to recover...the point in wiping data is not that its unrecoverable but wipe it enough so that it isnt worth it financially for the other side to recover it.
b15love said:
Uh and yes EVERY american must give up some freedom for security. This is nothing new.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
actually, this IS new, and those that believe the above quoted 'line' deserve neither freedom or security.
For example, is it ok for a police officer who does a traffic stop for improper lane change (for example) to snatch out the cellebrite device and ask you to hand over your cell phone ? NO.. without a search warrant or probable cause (at the very least) he has no right or authority to dig around in your phone.
If you were just involved in an accident, then i could see the possibility of scanning your phone to determine if you were texting while driving, thus contributing to the accident. Officers in Michigan could be using this device for routine traffic stops according to this article
Basically, we've ventured off topic anyway.. the question that remains (regardless of the 'conspiracy theory' sounding debate) is:
is it possible for the devs to prevent this device from scanning our phones ?
With the Inc2, Verizon introduced a new free feature called “Sync and Connect” that allows smartphone users to view an all-in-one inbox online of all their email accounts as well as their contacts.
I learned about this feature while I was browsing MyVerizon.com and decided not to give Verizon access to all my contacts and confidential email; yet, when I activated my new Inc2, Verizon enrolled me into this feature without my permission. The only reason I, and many others, realized what had happened was because the service is notifying people with a Verizon text from VZWNMN (6250) every time this MyVerizon all-in-one email inbox receives a new email.
I had to call Verizon twice to turn it off the feature and in the end I myself had to go into MyVerzion.com and delete the data they misappropriated. Some people are even claiming they cannot receive their emails if the feature is deactivated.
I am not an attorney, but I have studied law and I think Verizon opting us into this "experimental service" without our consent is illegal. It's, at least, an invasion of privacy and, at worst, can be the misappropriation of confidential information.
I have already spoken to a lawyer and they are already looking into whether we have a viable cause of action. I know that Google was sued for opting people into buzz without there consent so this might have legs.
If you were enrolled in “Sync and Connect” without your permission...
if you are as pissed-off about this as I am...
if you are interested in some possible restitution...
please PM me or email me at [email protected]
daftlush said:
With the Inc2, Verizon introduced a new free feature called “Sync and Connect” that allows smartphone users to view an all-in-one inbox online of all their email accounts as well as their contacts.
I learned about this feature while I was browsing MyVerizon.com and decided not to give Verizon access to all my contacts and confidential email; yet, when I activated my new Inc2, Verizon enrolled me into this feature without my permission. The only reason I, and many others, realized what had happened was because the service is notifying people with a Verizon text from VZWNMN (6250) every time this MyVerizon all-in-one email inbox receives a new email.
I had to call Verizon twice to turn it off the feature and in the end I myself had to go into MyVerzion.com and delete the data they misappropriated. Some people are even claiming they cannot receive their emails if the feature is deactivated.
I am not an attorney, but I have studied law and I think Verizon opting us into this "experimental service" without our consent is illegal. It's, at least, an invasion of privacy and, at worst, can be the misappropriation of confidential information.
I have already spoken to a lawyer and they are already looking into whether we have a viable cause of action. I know that Google was sued for opting people into buzz without there consent so this might have legs.
If you were enrolled in “Sync and Connect” without your permission...
if you are as pissed-off about this as I am...
if you are interested in some possible restitution...
please PM me or email me at [email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably is in the backup assistant terms that we agreed to when first booting the phone.
Carelessly swyped on my phone so there may be some weird typos
If you read all of the terms that you agreed to when you renewed your contract and activated my I2, somewhere in there you agreed to this. I really hope you have a lawyer go through all of the legal crap before you try to start down this road. As much as we despise them, they are the legal experts.
The problem with contracts is people tend not to read them. Then something happens they don't like, but agreed to, and they get angry.
Also, this isn't illegal. It's possible it could be breach of contract, etc, but that would only make it a civil matter. To state something is illegal implies criminal activity and if you strongly believe something illegal is going on, then you get authorities involved (ie: FTC, FCC, etc).
Why does every little issue require a class action lawsuit... people get uptight over the little things and think that by filling a suit against [insert company] that it will get solved.
Look at what happened with Samsung and the Vibrant. Yea we got an update but it just to shut us up because we spammed the hell out of their facebook and twitter. No lawsuit was filed, only threatened.
These topics are stupid.
/rant
presence06 said:
Why does every little issue require a class action lawsuit... people get uptight over the little things and think that by filling a suit against [insert company] that it will get solved.
Look at what happened with Samsung and the Vibrant. Yea we got an update but it just to shut us up because we spammed the hell out of their facebook and twitter. No lawsuit was filed, only threatened.
These topics are stupid.
/rant
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. They shouldn't even be posted unless real action is being pursued and a real case is being built. Without these components, the poster can actually find themselves in legal trouble.
kingsway8605 said:
Probably is in the backup assistant terms that we agreed to when first booting the phone.
Carelessly swyped on my phone so there may be some weird typos
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didnt agree to backup assist terms. I never do. Dont need it, so i dont want it running in background. After all, contacts are already stored in the google cloud.
nimdae said:
If you read all of the terms that you agreed to when you renewed your contract and activated my I2, somewhere in there you agreed to this. I really hope you have a lawyer go through all of the legal crap before you try to start down this road. As much as we despise them, they are the legal experts.
The problem with contracts is people tend not to read them. Then something happens they don't like, but agreed to, and they get angry.
Also, this isn't illegal. It's possible it could be breach of contract, etc, but that would only make it a civil matter. To state something is illegal implies criminal activity and if you strongly believe something illegal is going on, then you get authorities involved (ie: FTC, FCC, etc).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didnt sign new two year. Phone was an insurance claim.
Invasion of privacy, misappropriation of confidential business material, and wiretapping are all illegal activity. Not saying they did any of this for sure, just pointing put that they may have.
presence06 said:
Why does every little issue require a class action lawsuit... people get uptight over the little things and think that by filling a suit against [insert company] that it will get solved.
Look at what happened with Samsung and the Vibrant. Yea we got an update but it just to shut us up because we spammed the hell out of their facebook and twitter. No lawsuit was filed, only threatened.
These topics are stupid.
/rant
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A law suit is the only thing a company like Big Red understands. We need to slap them with a suit before they realized they cant pull some **** like this.
nimdae said:
Agreed. They shouldn't even be posted unless real action is being pursued and a real case is being built. Without these components, the poster can actually find themselves in legal trouble.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Action is being pursued, case is being built. Why do you think i posted this genius? Also, in case you didnt know... truth is a defense to defamation... so they can come at me all they want. I would rather keep this all secret until filing, but getting the class together is an important step.
Personally, I think comments like yours shouldn't be posted because they don't help anything. If your not interested... move on buddy. Some of us are actually pissed of about this and who are you to tell me my anger over the invasion of my privacy is unwarranted.
daftlush said:
I didnt agree to backup assist terms. I never do. Dont need it, so i dont want it running in background. After all, contacts are already stored in the google cloud.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would assume you clicked something unknowingly. I opted out of everything the phone asked and I do not have any service opted in on the myverizon.com site. I do have the suggestion for the service you speak of listed to enable but not already enabled. Sounds like you did it without understanding you did it.
zookii said:
I would assume you clicked something unknowingly. I opted out of everything the phone asked and I do not have any service opted in on the myverizon.com site. I do have the suggestion for the service you speak of listed to enable but not already enabled. Sounds like you did it without understanding you did it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, I don't need your opinions on why it happened. I'm not an idiot and I do read terms... they ****ed up and they know it. (even gave me credit towards next months bill as an apology)
I just need to know who else this has affected.
Hasn't affected me.
Also multi-quote is an amazing thing.
hmm... im not even sure if I am. I dont do texting period and had verizon disable texts all together. I suppose ill have to check my account.
You know... you could just flash another rom that doesn't have that feature on it. Problem solved.
daftlush said:
Again, I don't need your opinions on why it happened. I'm not an idiot and I do read terms... they ****ed up and they know it. (even gave me credit towards next months bill as an apology)
I just need to know who else this has affected.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly, you clicked something without reading. Not an opinion but apparently a fact since you signed up for a service. They credited you to shut you up. Nothing more, nothing less. You could rack up a severe bill on data charges, call and *****, and they will credit you to pacify you. Don't blame Verizon for your mistake and waste tax payers money in courts because you clicked something without reading.
Also how did you get a credit for something that was free anyways? Sounds like you called and complained about a free service you signed up for and they credited your account a certain amount to get you off the line.
I'm telling you people it was opt out not in. They took my contacts without my permission. I just did a factory reset just to double check. This ain't my first rodeo people.
--
Sent from my Android phone. Please excuse my brevity/typos.
If it was opt out then why wasn't I opted in on it as I just got my Dinc2 recently and I am not signed up for it? Sounds very fishy on your part to me. Several others here stated they were not signed up either.
mrtrendy1 said:
If it was opt out then why wasn't I opted in on it as I just got my Dinc2 recently and I am not signed up for it? Sounds very fishy on your part to me. Several others here stated they were not signed up either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed.
OP had to have enrolled or signed up for it. It shows up on mine, but also tells me I have to sign up for it. I'm pretty sure Big Red would make it pretty dummy proof that someone can't just auto enroll in something.
I smell BS..
It's all tied in with Backup Assistant. If he signed up for it, he should have read the TOS.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Listen guys... I don't need you guys to believe me. I'm just intrested in the people who it also happened to. That's all. The rest of you can ignore this and continue on to flashing your next rom. Seriously... I'm not an idiot... I read... It happened... I can't explain the stupidity... But it happened. I've already heard back from enough people to know I'm not crazy... So... Whatever you guys say... I guess your right... Happy?
--
Sent from my Android phone. Please excuse my brevity/typos.