Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

geekwire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 157 posts

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#121

Post by a3n »

brentm wrote: post #29
kiallmacinnes wrote: post #11

> “Now he will be held accountable for the fraud and the lives he has derailed.” Whoa there. What? Yes, he's committed a crime and should be held accountable for that. But.. Who's lives has he derailed? If I was to accept a bribe to commit a crime, nobody is derailing my life but me - to say anything else suggests a level of intelligence bordering on inability to understand and take responsibility for my actions. Can…

Federal prosecutors love a good dramatic press conference.

The only thing missing is to have invoked some set of government employees as "brave men and women" or "heroes."

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#122

Post by chiefalchemist »

hughes wrote: post #65
chiefalchemist wrote: post #54

Looks like they completely buried the lead. That is, US carriers use proprietary hardware/software devices to establish and maintain a profitable strangle-hold on the consumer. No doubt the law the broken. There's no justification for that. However, the lead is the lead is the lead, and it's burried.

Is it really a stranglehold if it's a condition of a contract that consumers agree to in exchange for subsidized hardware? Personally I would never buy a carrier-locked phone, but I have the resources available to make that choice. Though the difference is maybe not huge, how many people do you think are online directly because of a carrier subsidy?

Yes and no. The point is, you don't have a choice. And it's not as easy to BYOD and switch carriers as it could be. The fact that these guys can make that much money doing this proves how the market feels about it.

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#123

Post by chiefalchemist »

psychometry wrote: post #57
chiefalchemist wrote: post #54

Looks like they completely buried the lead. That is, US carriers use proprietary hardware/software devices to establish and maintain a profitable strangle-hold on the consumer. No doubt the law the broken. There's no justification for that. However, the lead is the lead is the lead, and it's burried.

It's "lede"...

Ah. Thanks. I knew something didn't feel right.

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#124

Post by 4ntonius8lock »

Humdeee wrote: post #30

> ... while he induced young workers to choose greed over ethical conduct Corrected: > ... while he induced young workers to choose ethical conduct over corporate greed

Agreed.

Did he commit a crime? Yes.

Did he commit a crime against criminals? Yes.

ATT is such a horrible, rent seeking parasite on our economy, I'm rooting for whoever is redistributing that wealth. I'm not too fond of the guy, but the enemies of my enemies can be friends.

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#125

Post by DaniloDias »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #55
DaniloDias wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of these devices are unlocked in bulk and sold overseas. This deprives them of the payments that they expected for fronting the cost of the device.

The article makes it sound like this particular guy was just charging consumers to unlock their personal phones so they could use them on different networks.

yeah- that is what the article says.

I’ve been involved in these kinds of events in the past. The carriers go after anyone facilitating device unlocks extremely aggressively because there is a huge supply chain problem.

Consequently, just because the article says things, I’m pretty wary of trusting them to be correct.

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#126

Post by yholio »

kaibee wrote: post #118
sokoloff wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, since the enaction of this: https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/517

Technically yes, but in my experience... no. Recently my parents switched carriers for whatever reason, so I had to get a new phone. Honestly I would have kept my Note4 for another year, but whatever. Being a phone from, what 2014? it was well paid off at this point. 1. I went to the AT&T Store, asked them to unlock my phone. Was told, no sorry, we don't do that here. "Call the support line." 2. Called the support li…

Typical obfuscated process so that a company complies with the letter of the law but they make sure almost no users will go through with it.

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#127

Post by ahupp »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #122
hughes wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really a stranglehold if it's a condition of a contract that consumers agree to in exchange for subsidized hardware? Personally I would never buy a carrier-locked phone, but I have the resources available to make that choice. Though the difference is maybe not huge, how many people do you think are online directly because of a carrier subsidy?

Yes and no. The point is, you don't have a choice. And it's not as easy to BYOD and switch carriers as it could be. The fact that these guys can make that much money doing this proves how the market feels about it.

It's very easy to buy an unlocked phone, you just need to pay an unsubsidized price and most people prefer not to do that.

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#128

Post by turtlebits »

nathankunicki wrote: post #52
DaniloDias wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of these devices are unlocked in bulk and sold overseas. This deprives them of the payments that they expected for fronting the cost of the device.

I still don't understand how. Regardless of who ends up using the phone, surely the original purchaser/signer is still on the hook for the monthly payments? ie. If I buy a contract iPhone from AT&T then unlock and sell on the phone, that doesn't nullify the fact that I still owe AT&T $100 a month for 24 months, regardless of where the phone is?

There are many MVNOs and prepaid providers that sell phones cheap but are carrier locked to get you to spend money with them.

Case in point - bought a iPhone SE last year for $35. It's locked to TracFone.

Also a while back bought an iPhone 6s for substantially cheaper than the unlocked version from boost mobile and bought an "unlock" service on ebay.

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#129

Post by mindslight »

richardwhiuk wrote: post #87
admax88q wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A contract was violated when these phones were unlocked. That doesn't make it wrong. Fun fact, contracts are violated all the time, and not just between individuals and huge telecom companies, but also between large companies. If you have an issue with it you sue for breach of contract. Violating a contract isn't a crime for a reason.

Just because something isn't a crime, doesn't make it beneficial to society, or morally good.

Sure. But the same generality applies to contracts, especially contracts of adhesion - their results aren't necessarily beneficial to society, or morally good.

Phone unlocking itself is definitely beneficial to society and morally good. An incumbent network provider being able to leverage a small market inefficiency into indefinite bondage is not a good thing, regardless of how its justified. Never mind the e-waste and surveillance issues.

Re: AT&T employees were bribed to install phone unlocking malware on company network

#130

Post by HenryBemis »

dmix wrote: post #115
ljf wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the malware was installed to allow him generate unlock codes on the at&t servers, not on phones

> Fahd allegedly recruited AT&T “insiders” to install malware programs that gathered confidential information and submitted unlock requests using employee credentials via a remote server. These were probably 3rd party call centers or section of the company that ran their customer service lines which gave agents the ability to unlock devices. The amount of spin this article is using to associate locking devices to kee…

I cannot see how would his be profitable. Usually when a customer receives a new cellphone at a lower price, that comes with a 12-24 month extension of a proportionally expensive contract. After said contract expires, AT&T has already made its profit. Even if someone would want to take the device and use another company's SIM card, they would still have to honour the contract with AT&T.

The only "free money" scenario I can think of, is stealing AT&T devices, and reselling them in the black market/ebay/etc and thus pocketing all the $$$ without having the customers signing contracts.

Ps: this is why a large company needs a large Internal Audit department.

Edit: removed an off-topic NSA-AT&T comment, added the Ps

Post reply on HN