text stringlengths 0 1.99k |
|---|
==Phrack Inc.== |
Volume Two, Issue Eleven, Phile #9 of 12 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
The following is reprinted from the November 1985 issue of Personal |
Communications Technology magazine by permission of the authors and |
the publisher, FutureComm Publications Inc., 4005 Williamsburg Ct., |
Fairfax, VA 22032, 703/352-1200. |
Copyright 1985 by FutureComm Publications Inc. All rights reserved. |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
THE ELECTRONIC SERIAL NUMBER: A CELLULAR 'SIEVE'? |
'SPOOFERS' CAN DEFRAUD USERS AND CARRIERS |
by Geoffrey S. Goodfellow, Robert N. Jesse, and Andrew H. Lamothe, Jr. |
What's the greatest security problem with cellular phones? Is it privacy of |
communications? No. |
Although privacy is a concern, it will pale beside an even greater problem: |
spoofing. |
'Spoofing' is the process through which an agent (the 'spoofer') pretends to |
be somebody he isn't by proffering false identification, usually with intent |
to defraud. This deception, which cannot be protected against using the |
current U.S. cellular standards, has the potential to create a serious |
problem--unless the industry takes steps to correct some loopholes in the |
present cellular standards. |
Compared to spoofing, the common security concern of privacy is not so severe. |
Most cellular subscribers would, at worst, be irked by having their |
conversational privacy violated. A smaller number of users might actually |
suffer business or personal harm if their confidential exchanges were |
compromised. For them, voice encryption equipment is becoming increasingly |
available if they are willing to pay the price for it. |
Thus, even though technology is available now to prevent an interloper from |
overhearing sensitive conversations, cellular systems cannot--at any |
cost--prevent pirates from charging calls to any account. This predicament is |
not new to the industry. Even though cellular provides a modern, |
sophisticated quality mobile communications service, it is not fundamentally |
much safer than older forms of mobile telephony. |
History of Spoofing Vulnerability |
The earliest form of mobile telephony, unsquelched manual Mobile Telephone |
Service (MTS), was vulnerable to interception and eavesdropping. To place a |
call, the user listened for a free channel. When he found one, he would key |
his microphone to ask for service: 'Operator, this is Mobile 1234; may I |
please have 555-7890.' The operator knew to submit a billing ticket for |
account number 1234 to pay for the call. So did anybody else listening to the |
channel--hence the potential for spoofing and fraud. |
Squelched channel MTS hid the problem only slightly because users ordinarily |
didn't overhear channels being used by other parties. Fraud was still easy |
for those who turned off the squelch long enough to overhear account numbers. |
Direct-dial mobile telephone services such as Improved Mobile Telephone |
Service (IMTS) obscured the problem a bit more because subscriber |
identification was made automatically rather than by spoken exchange between |
caller and operator. Each time a user originated a call, the mobile telephone |
transmitted its identification number to the serving base station using some |
form of Audio Frequency Shift Keying (AFSK), which was not so easy for |
eavesdroppers to understand. |
Committing fraud under IMTS required modification of the mobile--restrapping |
of jumpers in the radio unit, or operating magic keyboard combinations in |
later units--to reprogram the unit to transmit an unauthorized identification |
number. Some mobile control heads even had convenient thumb wheel switches |
installed on them to facilitate easy and frequent ANI (Automatic Number |
Identification) changes. |
Cellular Evolution |
Cellular has evolved considerably from these previous systems. Signaling |
between mobile and base stations uses high-speed digital techniques and |
involves many different types of digital messages. As before, the cellular |
phone contains its own Mobile Identification Number (MIN), which is programmed |
by the seller or service shop and can be changed when, for example, the phones |
sold to a new user. In addition, the U.S. cellular standard incorporates a |
second number, the 'Electronic Serial Number' (ESN), which is intended to |
uniquely and permanently identify the mobile unit. |
According to the Electronic Industries Association (EIA) Interim Standard |
IS-3-B, Cellular System Mobile Station--Land Station Compatibility |
Specification (July 1984), 'The serial number is a 32-bit binary number that |
uniquely identifies a mobile station to any cellular system. It must be |
factory-set and not readily alterable in the field. The circuitry that |
provides the serial number must be isolated from fraudulent contact and |
tampering. Attempts to change the serial number circuitry should render the |
mobile station inoperative.' |
The ESN was intended to solve two problems the industry observed with its |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.