[Mobile] Phone network shutdown over bombs

[email protected]il declared for all the
world to hear...
> Sorry Jon,

No need to apologised mate! If I'm wrong I'd rather know about it and
improve my (flawed in this case) knowledge!

> The ACCOLC setting that the handset is using is a setting on the SIM (in
> EFACC if DF GSM). The handset will not even attempt to communicate with
> the network unless one of the 15 classes set on the SIM (or USIM) matches
> one of the valid classes the base station says it can accept. There is one
> exception to this - class 10 - which controls whether emergency calls can
> get through, the setting for class 10 on the SIM is always assumed to be set
> regardless of its state on the SIM.
>
> The EF ACC file is protected so that only the operator can alter it.

And presumably this is done OTA, SIM-update style? Or is it hard-coded
at point of SIM manufacture? I assume the former.
--
Regards
Jon

---

› See More: [Mobile] Phone network shutdown over bombs

"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> housetrained <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Of course the REAL reason is to stop would be attackers
> > using mobiles to remotely detonate bombs.
>
> That would be a pretty neat trick, given you can't
> actually get a mobile signal down in the bowels of the
> Tube.

But you can get one as a train emerges from a tunnel into the open air. A
large proportion of the "Underground" isn't..!


Ivor

On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 11:57:28 -0000, Jon <[email protected]>
wrote:

>[email protected] declared for all the
>world to hear...
>> Sorry Jon,
>
>No need to apologised mate! If I'm wrong I'd rather know about it and
>improve my (flawed in this case) knowledge!
>
>> The ACCOLC setting that the handset is using is a setting on the SIM (in
>> EFACC if DF GSM). The handset will not even attempt to communicate with
>> the network unless one of the 15 classes set on the SIM (or USIM) matches
>> one of the valid classes the base station says it can accept. There is one
>> exception to this - class 10 - which controls whether emergency calls can
>> get through, the setting for class 10 on the SIM is always assumed to be set
>> regardless of its state on the SIM.
>>
>> The EF ACC file is protected so that only the operator can alter it.
>
>And presumably this is done OTA, SIM-update style? Or is it hard-coded
>at point of SIM manufacture? I assume the former.

Ah... so it is, in principle, hackable?

I seem to remember a certain ?old analogue phone? that had the ACCOLC
class settable simply by accessing the service menu...

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'

"Ivor Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> "Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> housetrained <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Of course the REAL reason is to stop would be attackers
>> > using mobiles to remotely detonate bombs.
>>
>> That would be a pretty neat trick, given you can't
>> actually get a mobile signal down in the bowels of the
>> Tube.
>
> But you can get one as a train emerges from a tunnel into the open air. A
> large proportion of the "Underground" isn't..!

Except that wouldn't cause much of a problem, or indeed cause as much panic.
Having a bomb detonate in a tunnel, 60+ft underground is a lot worse than
the train blowing up with blue skys overhead and easy access by emergency
services. A crane can just lift the mangled wreckage out, crews can slot in
a few new tracks and some wiring, and the line is back and running.

>
> Ivor

"R. Mark Clayton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Steve Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Mr X wrote:
>>
>>> But on Thursday, it emerged a senior City of London officer had
>>> made the decision, despite being part of the Gold Command team
>>> which had decided against the move.
>>>
>
> The Aldgate incident occured at a place where the train emerges from cut
> and cover tunnel into the open, and the CoLP may well have feared that the
> device was detonated by mobile phone as in Madrid. The Met' knew that two
> out of three of theirs were in actually underground and not in cellphone
> coverage. In addition the City has even greater denisty of people on a
> workday than the rest of London, so CoLP may have been experiencing
> greater congestion problems. Most workers in the City would be within a
> short walk of their landline phone.

The Madrid bomb wasn't detonated by a mobile phone signal, but by the alarm
clock function of the phone. That could have been achieved using any sort
of timer, not just a phone.

Also, land lines are affected by communication blocks. Essentially all
phone lines can be shut down (cellular and land) if the police so wish. If
that happens and you want to make a call, just pop into a public phone box -
they're never blocked, apparently.

"Mike Ross" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2 Dec 2005 06:49:03 -0600, Mr X <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <big snips>
>
>>========================================================================
>>Thursday, 1 December 2005, 20:40 GMT
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4490372.stm
>
>>The Met said it had rejected an option to switch off the network which
>>would have allowed access only to emergency service staff with special
>>sim cards.
>
> I predict a thriving black market in such 'special' SIM cards, or
> 'hacked' cards which have the 'special' attributes set - now that
> people are more aware of how the powers that be can take control of
> the phone system. Not nice.
>
> Does anyone know how hackable this stuff is?

Seeing as you get into serious trouble for cloning IMEI numbers, this sort
of hackery will surely land you in trouble

> Mike
> --
> http://www.corestore.org
> 'As I walk along these shores
> I am the history within'

Ivor Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Peter" <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
>> That would be a pretty neat trick, given you can't actually get a
>> mobile signal down in the bowels of the Tube.
> But you can get one as a train emerges from a tunnel into the open
> air. A large proportion of the "Underground" isn't..!

I never said it was, but the bits worth blowing up most definitely are
underground.

If you're wanting to cause mayhem, it's much better to pick packed
services in central London than a few empty carriages rattling through
windswept holes somewhere out in Zone 5.

--
The creator made Italy from designs by Michelangelo.
- Mark Twain

R. Mark Clayton wrote in
> I have already experienced a "which force area are you in"
> muddle in a life and death situation, when the incident was near
> force boundaries, and it wasn't funny. Even with force mergers you
> can imagine the confusion as the 999 operator tries to establish
> where a high speed train is and route the call before the train is in
> the next force area or the one beyond...

On the comparatively rare occasions when I've had to dial 999 I've been
horrified at the lack of knowledge of the police operators. I once had to
report a car that had apparently gone out of control on a slip road off a
dual carriageway in Bracknell: given that the slip road has a tight curve
and is on a downward gradient, and that people leave the dual carriageway at
high speed, it was only a matter of time before someone crashed into the
wreckage of the car. I was driving past in the opposite direction and I
didn't have a mobile at the time but I eventually found a phone box whose
exact location I was able to give. But despite giving this information
(which placed me within a few hundred yards of the location I was referring
to) the operator was unable to identify the road without a road name, which
I didn't have (the slip road probably doesn't even have one). I thought a
description such as "slip road off A3095 Crowthorne to Bracknell Road onto
Southern Industrial estate about half a mile south of Twin Bridges
roundabout with A329" would be fairly comprehensive, but the operator just
kept bleating "what's the name of the road?" :-( Eventually I gave up and
drove back the way I'd come and parked at the slip road with my hazards and
rear fogs on and my warning triangle out, turning cars away until the police
arrived. Incidentally the car had been abandoned across the road - it was
locked and there was no one around. I suspect joyriders.

I later reported the confusion via my local police station to help them
improve their service, and had a letter back saying that they'd dug out the
recording of my call and that I was perfectly accurate and complete in my
description so they were at a loss as to why the operator couldn't identify
the location I was referring to.

In article <[email protected]>,
Martin Underwood <[email protected]> writes

>But despite giving this information
>(which placed me within a few hundred yards of the location I was referring
>to) the operator was unable to identify the road without a road name, which
>I didn't have (the slip road probably doesn't even have one). I thought a
>description such as "slip road off A3095 Crowthorne to Bracknell Road onto
>Southern Industrial estate about half a mile south of Twin Bridges
>roundabout with A329" would be fairly comprehensive, but the operator just
>kept bleating "what's the name of the road?"

In my part of the world all the roundabouts have unique names. I had to
report an incident to the police once and gave the name of the
roundabout as I was on a bypass and the operator kept asking for the
name of the road.

I expect the police computer map doesn't have the names marked against
the roundabouts.
--
Mr X

Mr X wrote in
[email protected]:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Martin Underwood <[email protected]> writes
>
>> But despite giving this information
>> (which placed me within a few hundred yards of the location I was
>> referring to) the operator was unable to identify the road without a
>> road name, which I didn't have (the slip road probably doesn't even
>> have one). I thought a description such as "slip road off A3095
>> Crowthorne to Bracknell Road onto Southern Industrial estate about
>> half a mile south of Twin Bridges roundabout with A329" would be
>> fairly comprehensive, but the operator just kept bleating "what's
>> the name of the road?"
>
> In my part of the world all the roundabouts have unique names. I had
> to report an incident to the police once and gave the name of the
> roundabout as I was on a bypass and the operator kept asking for the
> name of the road.

Likewise. I think roundabout names are a fairly universal way of referring
to junctions. But just in case the roundabout wasn't marked on the police
map, I gave the numbers of the two roads that met there, as well as the fact
that the railway runs parallel to and immediately north of the roundabout -
hence the name "Twin Bridges": the two railway bridges over the entry and
exit roads on one side of the roundabout.


> I expect the police computer map doesn't have the names marked against
> the roundabouts.

Pretty crap map if that's the case, given that roundabout names are
convenient landmarks.


On another occasion I was reporting a minor accident near Wakefield. Despite
saying "the A road, possibly Thornes Road, leading north east to Wakefield
from M1 J39, about 200 yards NE of junction, roundabout with Durkar Low
Lane", the operator kept asking me if it was *on* the M1.

I wonder what package they use for generating their maps. Autoroute
certainly allows you to specify location by junction number and then pan
around from there.

On 06 Dec 2005 14:05:12 GMT, [email protected] (Peter) wrote:

>Ivor Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Peter" <[email protected]> wrote:
>[...]
>>> That would be a pretty neat trick, given you can't actually get a
>>> mobile signal down in the bowels of the Tube.
>> But you can get one as a train emerges from a tunnel into the open
>> air. A large proportion of the "Underground" isn't..!
>
>I never said it was, but the bits worth blowing up most definitely are
>underground.
>
>If you're wanting to cause mayhem, it's much better to pick packed
>services in central London than a few empty carriages rattling through
>windswept holes somewhere out in Zone 5.

From what I recall of Croydon a bomb on the line there would stop a
lot of traffic

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 14:09:44 +0000 (UTC), "R. Mark Clayton"
<[email protected]> wrote:


>The Aldgate incident occured at a place where the train emerges from cut and
>cover tunnel into the open, and the CoLP may well have feared that the
>device was detonated by mobile phone as in Madrid.

The Madrid bombs used phones merely as timers. They were *not*
remotely detonated and thus the state of the cellphone system made no
difference whatsoever.

--
Cynic

"Jon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected]il declared for all the
> world to hear...
<SNIP>>
>> The ACCOLC setting that the handset is using is a setting on the SIM (in
>> EFACC if DF GSM). The handset will not even attempt to communicate with
>> the network unless one of the 15 classes set on the SIM (or USIM) matches
>> one of the valid classes the base station says it can accept. There is
>> one
>> exception to this - class 10 - which controls whether emergency calls can
>> get through, the setting for class 10 on the SIM is always assumed to be
>> set
>> regardless of its state on the SIM.
>>
>> The EF ACC file is protected so that only the operator can alter it.
>
> And presumably this is done OTA, SIM-update style? Or is it hard-coded
> at point of SIM manufacture? I assume the former.
> --
> Regards
> Jon

I would expect that most operators hard code it as there is alot of
regulation around the ability to have ACCOLC sims. If they give you a
specific SIM hard coded with the specific ACCOLC setting that a person is
allowed to have, it is far easier for the network to track and it is easily
visibly identifiable.

Having the ability to change this by OTA only saves a SIM swap as it is
impractical to try to OTA to a SIM during an emergency due to the high
levels of traffic (and imposible if the cell has ACCOLC set).

Bet

AlanG <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
> From what I recall of Croydon a bomb on the line there would stop a
> lot of traffic

From what I've heard about Croydon, a bomb could only improve the
place.

--
$Id: fortunes.txt,v 1.8 2005/10/21 08:39:07 abuse Exp $

On 07 Dec 2005 13:26:00 GMT, [email protected] (Peter) wrote:

>AlanG <[email protected]> wrote:
>[...]
>> From what I recall of Croydon a bomb on the line there would stop a
>> lot of traffic
>
>From what I've heard about Croydon, a bomb could only improve the
>place.

That could be said of most of the UK nowadays