IMEI/Unlocking-Interesting article!!
Founf this on mobilenews.uk.com, thought it may be of interest for those in the industry.#
Has the Home Office got its Act together?
New legislation has made IMEI reprogramming illegal, but police and dealers are unclear about use of legitimate unlocking equipment. Stuart McWilliam talks to a dealer who raises serious questions about the viability of the new Act
For the past couple of years, Lee Roe has been selling SIM unlocking kit to dealers through his COMMSHOP business, based in Leyland, Lancashire. Recently, however, he has suffered from the perception that unlocking phones has been made illegal, since the enactment of The Mobile Telephones (Re-programming) Act 2002.
"Until a couple of years ago, selling kit to unlock phones didn't pose any problems", he says. "But since tampering with the IMEI became illegal, the process of removing network or service lock has become tarnished. It is seen by many as a dodgy area in which to operate. That's a shame, because there is absolutely nothing wrong, or illegal, about unlocking a phone. The problems stem from people confusing unlocking and IMEI tampering".
Unconnected
Roe stresses that the two are completely unconnected, and he is adamant that none of the SIM unlocking kit he currently supplies is capable of changing an IMEI number. But nonetheless, dealers have stopped carrying out this service because they are afraid of the repercussions.
"Dealers are up in arms because they have been denied significant revenue", he says. "I know dealers are not unlocking phones because they are not buying unlocking solutions. That's because they are afraid of buying something they think could land them in big trouble. But nothing supplied by COMMSHOP any longer has any IMEI capability. Anyone who buys from us is quite safe in that respect".
However, equipment that could be used to do so is still alive and kicking on the nation's high streets. "There is some equipment on the market that does have IMEI capability", he concedes.
This has created a lot of confusion among independent dealers about the legality of unlocking phones using equipment they already own that can also change a phone's IMEI number.
Tarnished
"Take the Ericsson Unlock Suite", says Roe. "This is known in the trade as the ATR Suite. It is one of the oldest pieces of unlocking kit out there and consists of a £5 data cable and a bit of free software. It can unlock most Ericsson phones. But it also allows anyone to change IMEI numbers. Every day, dealers ask me if they are open to prosecution under the new legislation. They simply don't know where they stand".
In consequence, Roe's solicitors have been talking to Home Office mandarins. Their advice is that anyone using equipment capable of changing IMEI numbers is committing an offence and is acting illegally. The Act prohibits ownership of such kit. Period.
Yet Roe points out that in the explanatory notes that accompany the Act there is a section that acknowledges that some service equipment routinely used for unlocking can also be used to repair IMEI numbers. Individuals are only prohibited from using that part of the equipment.
Minefield
"It's a minefield. The Home Office appears to have made an exception and a concession, but it's by no means clear. I believe there has to be intent to change an IMEI number. But how do you define, or prove 'intent'? It all leaves the Act open to misinterpretation. And that makes a bad Act".
Roe is in no position to officially advise dealers on the law, but he doesn't want to see his customers left high and dry.
"We have printed out the Act and the explanatory notes which accompany it, which we send to our customers. The same information is on our web site under the banner 'Are you legal?'. But everyone has to make up their own minds. We talk to 80 per cent of the independents out there over the course of a year. The legality of unlocking phones is the biggest talking point among them, not least because, at £20 to £25 a time, it is a good little earner. They need to know exactly where they stand". says Roe.
Roe knows of no piece of kit that reassigns IMEI numbers automatically. A button has to be pushed or a series of keystrokes performed when a phone is connected to a PC for its IMEI to be changed or scrambled.
According to Roe, the reason there is so much kit around that is able to change IMEI numbers is that it was all designed to fulfil a comprehensive service and repair function - before tampering with IMEIs became a legal issue.
Roe has close links with five of the UK's largest police forces. They come to him for consultancy and advice concerning mobile phones and crime. He has been told ("off the record") that police have been given a Home Office directive as to how they should go about enforcing the new IMEI legislation.
The advice consists of a series of checklists and flowcharts which are "totally unworkable", he claims. As a result, at least one force has thrown out the Home Office directive. Their belief is that they can only operate where the law is clear cut - it's not up to the police to interpret any vagaries.
Tamper
"How do the police prove 'intent' to tamper with IMEI numbers? Would the police even recognise the kit in question? I think not", says Roe.
In addition to providing dealers with definitive advice about the legality of using unlocking kit, Roe would also like to see networks adopt a more positive attitude to unlocking handsets.
"There's nothing wrong with unlocking a phone. It is a scenario in which everyone is a winner. The dealer earns £20 to £25; the customer wins because they can use an old phone; the environment wins because nothing is junked; the networks win because a dead phone is resurrected and provides them with revenue. I'd like to hear from the networks why they are so unhappy about the process. Customers can't be bothered to wait for the porting process. They want the job done immediately".
Roe has other ideas about fighting mobile phone crime effectively.
"I am in favour of a central IMEI register. I don't want my son hit over the head for a £40 phone. Yet, as a dealer in good standing, I can't get access to the database. If I need to check an IMEI, I ring Carphone Warehouse, which has access to the database, and pretend to be a punter who has been given a phone and wants its number checked. For the drive against crime to be successful, independent dealers need access to the central registry as much, if not more, than Carphone Warehouse".
Front line
Roe believes the independent dealer is on the front line in the fight against mobile phone crime. "If he can check the status of phones as they come in, it will add another dimension to that fight and get the message across that stealing a phone is pointless".
Roe says the time has come for an effective body to represent the views of the independent channel.
"The FCS has done nothing. They talk shop. They are viewed by the dealers as the independent police, whose only function is to punish the dealer if they think he has stepped out of line", says Roe. "We don't want a police force. We want a debating forum. Where was our voice and input when the IMEI register was being put together? We could and still can really make a difference. We've nothing to lose".
According to Roe, the law is a mess. "Home Office personnel know nothing about the industry, yet are laying down the law. They wouldn't know an IMEI number if it stood up and bit them. The police don't know where to look. I could disguise IMEI changing kit as a table fan. I could show them an inkjet cartridge and tell them it's the slot-in module for the DCT4 unlock kit. Can it do IMEI? they'd ask. Of course not, I'd tell them. There are no buttons to push, are there?"
This ignorance is the result of a lack of consultation and education, he contends.
"It's not surprising. Who have they been talking to? Cellnet (sic). The same network that was saying an IMEI register was an impossibility a year ago".
Roe put it to the Home Office that the Act contained some ambiguity, and suggested that the use of the word "intent" left the law open to interpretation. He also revealed the reports that at least one police force had rejected the guidelines that accompany the Act.
The Home Office response was: "If we find somebody with software capable of changing IMEI numbers, even if we don't have proof that they are currently using it, that constitutes intent to use it. We are not preferring 'intent' to change IMEI numbers over actually changing IMEI numbers. We are targeting both the intent to use and the actual use of equipment capable of changing an IMEI. It's all part of the same Act. Our intention is to stop people changing IMEI numbers, and those who intend to".
Intent
Can having equipment on the premises that could be used to change an IMEI number, even if it is not being used for that purpose, be construed as intent?
"It would depend on the individual case", says a Home Office spokesman. "A prosecution would depend on the arresting officer and the Crown Prosecution Service, which would decide whether an offence under current legislation has been committed.
"There might be mitigating circumstances if a dealer said he was unaware that a piece of equipment in his possession was capable of changing IMEI numbers. If legislation covers an offence, and police believe an offence has been committed, they can arrest that person on suspicion of committing that offence. Subsequent prosecution would depend on the police gathering enough evidence to put before a court. Whether you change an IMEI number or possess equipment with intent to do so, legislation makes it illegal to do so".
The upshot for the Home Office is that you have committed an offence. The spokesman adds:
"We have given the police the tools. It is up to them to decide how to use them, based on their operational priorities. If police come across somebody that has committed an offence, they can't ignore the fact. The law is on the statute book".
The spokesman was surprised at Roe's allegations that his police contacts say the law is unworkable.
"The police were the ones that fought for the Act", he says. "They also told us they were pleased with the result. Our aim is to make stealing a mobile phone a pointless exercise.
"Previously, street traders and car boot salesmen were legitimately changing IMEIs with impunity. Now it is an offence to do so. If a dealer commits an offence, knowingly or not, he is liable for prosecution. Not knowing that possession of equipment that is capable of changing an IMEI number is illegal is no defence. Dealers should know the law as it applies to the business they are in".
Interpretation
However Mobile Industry Crime Action Forum (MICAF) spokesman Jack Wraith is at odds with the Home Office's interpretation of the Act. He says there is nothing at all wrong with unlocking mobile phones.
"It is, however, illegal to use SIM unlocking equipment to change IMEI numbers. And it is illegal to supply the equipment knowing that the person you are supplying is going to use it in that way. But is not actually illegal to own unlocking equipment that can change IMEI numbers. For a charge brought under the Act to stick, you have to prove intent".
So what is Wraith's opinion of the Home Office's contention that merely owning such equipment renders an individual liable to prosecution?
"That is not my reading of the Act", he says. "It is not my understanding that the law enforcement authorities will interpret the Act in that way.
"When we were discussing this legislation, law enforcement agencies were quite clear. Their view was that, in order to prosecute successfully under the Act, they had to prove an IMEI had been changed, or that a person had supplied equipment that could change an IMEI number knowing it would be used for that purpose. That's black and white. I can't see any ambiguity".
So can dealers use kit that is designed to unlock phones, but which may scramble IMEI numbers in the process, with impunity?
"A dealer acting in that way does not have a problem. I can say that with complete certainty. We have queried the scenario where a dealer unwittingly scrambles an IMEI number while unlocking a phone with the Home Office and that is their view, too.
"It would be impossible to police the Act if the unwitting ownership of software capable of changing IMEI numbers was an offence. The police wouldn't know where to start. They'd have to look at the hard drives of every computer they come across".
In all the confusion, however, Wraith is not surprised that a police force has complained about the Act being unworkable.
"The Home Office's confusion doesn't surprise me either. It sounds like the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. The police have indicated to me that, if they were going to go after someone engaged in actively changing IMEI numbers, they would ensure they collected the right evidence. If an individual put a sign in the window, or there was word on the grapevine that he was changing IMEI numbers, the police would put a sting operation in place to garner the evidence".
Wraith also hopes the IMEI database will be open to the dealers soon.
"We are currently in negotiations and hope it will happen in the early part of next year", he says. "We would probably give nominated individuals from dealerships regulated access via the web. Either MICAF or someone acting on our behalf would handle the practicalities. That will see the net of deterrence spreading across the industry. We need to get the message across to everyone that owns a mobile phone".
Reply With Quote
Social Networking Bookmarks