The Family
12-01-2005, 01:13 PM
"Simon Templar" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
news:41e3a4a9$1_2@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com. ..
> How strict are the providers in obtaining ID from pre-paid customers?
>
Very lax
> I have a friend is being hassled by 0404403716 with SMS and voice calls. I
> rang the number and a female bragged to me that because they were on
> Vodafone pre-paid and that they gave false or no information during
> registration.
>
It happens.
> Well I have registered several Vodafone pre-paids for family members and
> have always been required to present proof of identity.
Did Vodafone verify it?
> The question is, do Vodafone and the other providers verify ID or do they
> just enter what ever shit they are given?
>
The latter. I've seen this with all the major carriers. In particular,
they all seem quite happy to take details over the phone. Privacy laws
would prevent them from verifying what you tell them. I've never been
asked, over the phone, to agree to the telco verifying my details. I've
also never been asked to agree to the telco's general T&C's (which would
usually contain a provision where the customer gives permission for the
telco to verify the customer's ID using 3rd parties).
> Is it really a case of them not caring because it is pre-paid and they
> have got the money out of the customer?
Yep.
There's a legal requirement for telcos to know who they are dealing with but
it looks like this isn't enforced. That law came in back in about 1998 I
think. Even then it had a major loophole - there is no requirement for
telcos to identify accounts that were opened before the ID requirement
became operational. That loophole was deliberate and followed advice from
telcos that it would be impractical for them to track down all their
then-current customers.
It would be interesting if enforcement did shake things up. Imagine the
practical obstacles to figuring out who all the customers are. For a start,
a telco can't force 8 year old kids to reveal their ID - what would the
telco do if it couldn't get their ID? Shut down the account? Imagine the
crisis if little Johnnie went missing and mum couldn't contact him on the
mobile because the telco had shut Johnnie down.
There are stacks of phones/SIMs that people privately trade every day. See
eBay for an idea of how big just the tip of this iceberg is. It's a real
nightmare to actually do tracking of all this, methinks.
The issue is that the original legislation requiring telcos to identify
their customers had the right intentions but it's impractical to enforce.
> If this is the case then imagine how easy it would be for terrorists to
> use a GSM phone to remotely detonate a dirty bomb!
>
I don't think legislation/laws would make the slightest difference to a
committed crim or terrorist. These types can always get what they need.
Mobile phone: yep. Guns: Yep. Dirty bomb: No sweat.
>
> --
> 73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
> http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452
> The views stated by me are my own and have nothing to do with any
> organisation I belong to, so the prick that tried to slander me can get
> FUCKED because it didn't work!
news:41e3a4a9$1_2@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com. ..
> How strict are the providers in obtaining ID from pre-paid customers?
>
Very lax
> I have a friend is being hassled by 0404403716 with SMS and voice calls. I
> rang the number and a female bragged to me that because they were on
> Vodafone pre-paid and that they gave false or no information during
> registration.
>
It happens.
> Well I have registered several Vodafone pre-paids for family members and
> have always been required to present proof of identity.
Did Vodafone verify it?
> The question is, do Vodafone and the other providers verify ID or do they
> just enter what ever shit they are given?
>
The latter. I've seen this with all the major carriers. In particular,
they all seem quite happy to take details over the phone. Privacy laws
would prevent them from verifying what you tell them. I've never been
asked, over the phone, to agree to the telco verifying my details. I've
also never been asked to agree to the telco's general T&C's (which would
usually contain a provision where the customer gives permission for the
telco to verify the customer's ID using 3rd parties).
> Is it really a case of them not caring because it is pre-paid and they
> have got the money out of the customer?
Yep.
There's a legal requirement for telcos to know who they are dealing with but
it looks like this isn't enforced. That law came in back in about 1998 I
think. Even then it had a major loophole - there is no requirement for
telcos to identify accounts that were opened before the ID requirement
became operational. That loophole was deliberate and followed advice from
telcos that it would be impractical for them to track down all their
then-current customers.
It would be interesting if enforcement did shake things up. Imagine the
practical obstacles to figuring out who all the customers are. For a start,
a telco can't force 8 year old kids to reveal their ID - what would the
telco do if it couldn't get their ID? Shut down the account? Imagine the
crisis if little Johnnie went missing and mum couldn't contact him on the
mobile because the telco had shut Johnnie down.
There are stacks of phones/SIMs that people privately trade every day. See
eBay for an idea of how big just the tip of this iceberg is. It's a real
nightmare to actually do tracking of all this, methinks.
The issue is that the original legislation requiring telcos to identify
their customers had the right intentions but it's impractical to enforce.
> If this is the case then imagine how easy it would be for terrorists to
> use a GSM phone to remotely detonate a dirty bomb!
>
I don't think legislation/laws would make the slightest difference to a
committed crim or terrorist. These types can always get what they need.
Mobile phone: yep. Guns: Yep. Dirty bomb: No sweat.
>
> --
> 73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
> http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452
> The views stated by me are my own and have nothing to do with any
> organisation I belong to, so the prick that tried to slander me can get
> FUCKED because it didn't work!