WTFH @ plans to ABOLISH remote voicemail access by the data protection commissioner?

hatrickpatrick

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2011/0716/1224300822727.html

EPIC F*CKING FACEPALM

THE DATA Protection Commissioner has asked mobile phone companies to consider removing remote access to voicemail messages, in the wake of the phone-hacking scandal in Britain.

Deputy Commissioner Gary Davis confirmed his office had been in touch with the providers since the details emerged last week.

“Who does it serve to be able to access the messages left on your mobile phone?” he asked. Phone hacking, at its most basic, was an invasion of privacy, he added.

People who don't carry their phone all the time? People who's phones are being repaired and need to hear their voicemail in the meantime? People who lose their phones and want to hear their voicemail until they get a new one?
I for one use it ALL THE TIME. Anyone else use it regularly?

Messages left on a mobile phone may be accessed from any other phone by placing the digit “5” after the network code in a number and then keying in a pin number.

Mr Davis noted at least one mobile provider had measures to ensure customers changed the default code.

So then why not just require them to do this, rather than banning the feature outright?!

But he suggested remote access to messages was not a necessity, as most people usually keep their mobiles with them. “We are questioning the purpose of such access and asking them at this stage to consider removing it,” he said.

It should still be an OPTION. Not everyone is "most people".

FFS. Yet another mind bogglingly STUPID Irish solution. Can't this country's authorities ever get anything right? Either they go with knee jerk reactions and ban something completely, or they do nothing at all. Why can they never find a happy medium? It was the same with head shops - knee jerk legislation to ban all mind altering drugs regardless of whether or not they're safe.

I actually can't believe they're proposing this. I for one will be extremely angry if it happens.

Standard Toaster

Service should be disabled by default until you set your own pin.

hatrickpatrick

Standard Toaster wrote: »

Service should be disabled by default until you set your own pin.

Totally reasonable.
But this Irish governmental "Something is tricky or complicated? F*ck that let's just ban it altogether" BS is getting very, very old.

Danbo!

Every sim comes with a pin, why not just link them to the voicemail?

HellFireClub

It's a public sector worker thing called "Covering Your Arse", also known as ABCDEF, (Always Be Covered, Don't Ever Forget), which means that your man knows well that voice messages (that serve us very well if we cannot take a call), if they cannot be handled and in the one in a billion chance that your mail is hacked, that your man at the top is covered in terms of liability because he is on record as having said that voicemail facilities should be done away with, so he gets to keep his 100K plus lump sum and his statutory entitlements and the rest of it...

aligator_am

If this comes in to being then you may expect most mobile operaters to make voicemail a chargeable call ASAP, shower of kunts.

Needler

I remember using this trick in 2000 to 'hack' people's voicemail. The novelty soon wore off though, who still uses voicemail? It was great when nobody knew how to text and phones had batteries that lasted 8 hours and were mostly switched off but who needs it now?

yuloni

This post has been deleted.

HellFireClub

Danbo! wrote: »

Every sim comes with a pin, why not just link them to the voicemail?

I think the issue is that most folks, and I'm probably guilty of this myself, don't change their pin from the default pin that they were issued with (1234 or 0000 or whatever)

hatrickpatrick

HellFireClub wrote: »

I think the issue is that most folks, and I'm probably guilty of this myself, don't change their pin from the default pin that they were issued with (1234 or 0000 or whatever)

Then the obvious solution is to issue everyone with a random pin for every new sim card rather than 0000

HellFireClub

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Then the obvious solution is to issue everyone with a random pin for every new sim card rather than 0000

Yeah but Public Sector Worker's don't think like that. Their mentality is based, not on fixing things, but instead on removing liberties from you where those liberties present a threat to their income.

If you find this offensive, try to drive up to the Dublin Mountains any day this week and try to park your car in any of the car parks that exist for users of those amenities.

You'll find that they are all closed because the PS attitude is that because a handful of skangers can't be sorted out, that everyone must be deprived of the use of the amenity in terms of car parking.

Paparazzo

HellFireClub wrote: »

Yeah but Public Sector Worker's don't think like that. Their mentality is based, not on fixing things, but instead on removing liberties from you where those liberties present a threat to their income.

If you find this offensive, try to drive up to the Dublin Mountains any day this week and try to park your car in any of the car parks that exist for users of those amenities.

You'll find that they are all closed because the PS attitude is that because a handful of skangers can't be sorted out, that everyone must be deprived of the use of the amenity in terms of car parking.

Mobile phone companies are private companies. They were issuing the 0000 pin numbers for years when there's simple solutions like Standard Toasters one above. Private companies are the ones that were actually hacking into the voicemails for profit. Don't try and pretend public sector is completely incompetent compared to the private company heros.

HellFireClub

Paparazzo wrote: »

Mobile phone companies are private companies. They were issuing the 0000 pin numbers for years when there's simple solutions like Standard Toasters one above. Private companies are the ones that were actually hacking into the voicemails for profit. Don't try and pretend public sector is completely incompetent compared to the private company heros.

I can only say it as I see it. This thead isn't about Vodafone or O2, it's about a PS office who rather than deal decisely and effectively with an issue, (that clearly is there), is more determined to withdraw the whole facility and put a little report in their file, same auld mentality same auld nonse says I.

You are of course entlted to disagree.

Lapin

Sounds a bit heavy handed and pig headed to ban the facility altogether but thats the way things usually get done in Ireland.

Those who make such laws have fúckall knowledge on how to do it any other way.

Its up to each individual to set their own phones to suit themselves.

HellFireClub

Lapin wrote: »

Sounds a bit heavy handed and pig headed to ban the facility altogether but thats the way things usually get done in Ireland.

Those who make such laws have fúckall knowledge on how to do it any other way.

Its up to each individual to set their own phones to suit themselves.

And so we go on, and we sort our issues in this manner. And then we are surprised when the country is on it's t*ts and nothing works right because the system says no.

smash

The only reason I ever have to ever use remote voicemail is to avoid the O2 15c voicemail charge.

Kevin Duffy

HellFireClub wrote: »

I think the issue is that most folks, and I'm probably guilty of this myself, don't change their pin from the default pin that they were issued with (1234 or 0000 or whatever)

So you're aware of the problem, but still want to blame someone for trying to find a solution that you (and the people who were hacked) could have used before now?

HellFireClub wrote: »

Yeah but Public Sector Worker's don't think like that. Their mentality is based, not on fixing things, but instead on removing liberties from you where those liberties present a threat to their income.

If you find this offensive, try to drive up to the Dublin Mountains any day this week and try to park your car in any of the car parks that exist for users of those amenities.

You'll find that they are all closed because the PS attitude is that because a handful of skangers can't be sorted out, that everyone must be deprived of the use of the amenity in terms of car parking.

HellFireClub wrote: »

I can only say it as I see it. This thead isn't about Vodafone or O2, it's about a PS office who rather than deal decisely and effectively with an issue, (that clearly is there), is more determined to withdraw the whole facility and put a little report in their file, same auld mentality same auld nonse says I.

You are of course entlted to disagree.

That's a pretty illogical rant. The thread is about one office, but you want to make it about the whole of the PS, but see that as what the thread is about?
OT again, but those car parks are closed because of criminal behaviour, not 'cos anyone wants to close them.
You turn too many threads into PS bashing without knowing a lot about the PS. Change the record, it's old.

_feedback_

Needler wrote: »

I remember using this trick in 2000 to 'hack' people's voicemail. The novelty soon wore off though, who still uses voicemail? It was great when nobody knew how to text and phones had batteries that lasted 8 hours and were mostly switched off but who needs it now?

Of course it is still needed. You can text your friends all day long, but it doesn't work with business. Definately needed alright.

I agree OP. Banning it outright would be fúcking stupid.

dpe

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Then the obvious solution is to issue everyone with a random pin for every new sim card rather than 0000

They do. SIMs all have a unique pin out of the box these days.

annascott

I use this service all the time. When I have left my phone at home or at work or in the car, whatever... I also do the thing where you add a '5' after the 08 code to leave a mesage directly in someones mailbox. Sometimes a text isn't appropriate but I really don't want to talk to them...

If people are too dumb to change their pin number when they get a new phone, it is their problem. Why do we all have to be punished?

dpe

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

So you're aware of the problem, but still want to blame someone for trying to find a solution that you (and the people who were hacked) could have used before now?

That's a pretty illogical rant. The thread is about one office, but you want to make it about the whole of the PS, but see that as what the thread is about?
OT again, but those car parks are closed because of criminal behaviour, not 'cos anyone wants to close them.
You turn too many threads into PS bashing without knowing a lot about the PS. Change the record, it's old.

Er, that's what he said, and you've just illustrated his point exactly; "if something is being misused by a minority, take it away from the majority", because its cheaper, quicker and lazier than fixing the root problem.

annascott

Is it 'illegal hacking' when I go into someone's voicemail to delete and/or change a message that I have just sent them?

Kevin Duffy

dpe wrote: »

Er, that's what he said, and you've just illustrated his point exactly; "if something is being misused by a minority, take it away from the majority", because its cheaper, quicker and lazier than fixing the root problem.

The problem with those car parks was frequent and ongoing in spite of efforts to police them. People's cars were being broken into or stolen frequently along with other problems, the car parks were desperate places. Closing them is not ideal, but it was a last resort with few others options. Paying for increased security wasn't going to please people either. It's a widespread problem in mountain areas Ireland and the UK, maybe in other places too. To turn it into a reason to bash the PS is senseless.

In the problem the DPC is addressing, they've started consultation with mobile providers, asking them is there a purpose to the remote access - that's a first step to finding a solution. Political responses so far have said it's a good idea to address the problem, but eliminating remote access is a step too far. It's unlikely to happen, the solution I'd guess will be adopted is the excellent suggestion at post #2(?)

Kevin Duffy

dpe wrote: »

They do. SIMs all have a unique pin out of the box these days.

For the SIM, but not the voicemail?

Logical Fallacy

annascott wrote: »

Is it 'illegal hacking' when I go into someone's voicemail to delete and/or change a message that I have just sent them?

Yes.

dpe

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

For the SIM, but not the voicemail?

Yes, but tying the two together would be trivial. They're tied together on the billing system anyway.

Still don't agree about the car park thing, all that logic does is move the problem elsewhere.

hatrickpatrick

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

So you're aware of the problem, but still want to blame someone for trying to find a solution that you (and the people who were hacked) could have used before now?





That's a pretty illogical rant. The thread is about one office, but you want to make it about the whole of the PS, but see that as what the thread is about?
OT again, but those car parks are closed because of criminal behaviour, not 'cos anyone wants to close them.
You turn too many threads into PS bashing without knowing a lot about the PS. Change the record, it's old.

On the other hand, this happens in all aspects of Irish government. Ban something altogether instead of regulating it.

Danbo!

HellFireClub wrote: »

I think the issue is that most folks, and I'm probably guilty of this myself, don't change their pin from the default pin that they were issued with (1234 or 0000 or whatever)

There's always a default voicemail pin until you set it up yourself, but usually a sim has a random 4 digit pin. Just wondering why this isn't also your voicemail pin. Tho having remote access disabled until you enable it by setting a pin is a better idea.

alejandro1977

as pointed out here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=73325574

Anyone who is annoyed by this should voice directly to info@dataprotection.ie

Why would we want remote access?

1. Forgot phone - need to check messages

2. Battery dead - need to check messages

3. Phone lost/stolen - need to change message to say "my phone is lost/stolen please contact me on ....."
4. Abroad and want to avoid roaming charges

TOMs WIFE

Reply from Data Protection office:

---

From: "DPC Info" <info@dataprotection.ie>
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: stopping voicemail remote access response -


Thank you for making contact with this Office on this issue.

To clarify our communication to the mobile operators suggested that the
remote access feature be offered on an opt-in basis. We did not seek
removal of the service as we are aware of many reasonable uses. The key outcome sought is that the operators, if they have not already done so, need to do something to address the security risk inherent. Making remote access to your voicemail an opt-in option seems to us to be a sensible starting point, since we believe relatively few people use it. However, there are likely other solutions which the mobile operators will bring to the table and which will achieve the same objective.


> E: info@dataprotection.ie
> www.dataprotection.ie



My response:


Hi

Thanks for your reply and clarification. However your statement that you "did not seek removal of the service" seems to contradict the following statements from Deputy Commissioner Gary Davis:

"for the 99 per cent of people who don't access their voicemail remotely there is no need for it. It should be removed unless there is a compelling reason not to do so."

"Who does it serve to be able to access the messages left on your mobile phone?"

"We are questioning the purpose of such access and asking them at this stage to consider removing it," .

Why should he suggest everyone have to opt in to protect the people that haven't got enough cop on to change their default code? Especially when you say you are aware of many reasonable uses.

If you are "aware of many reasonable uses" then why would your deputy commissioner say 99% of people don't use the feature?

If you don't "opt-in" and then lose your phone you can't:

1) Check your messages if you forget your phone
2) Check your messages if your battery goes dead
3) Change your message to "my phone is lost please contact me on " if you lose it or it is stolen

So now the benefits of the feature that apply potentially for everyone in the above examples are lost if you don't physically opt-in - just to protect the people that don't change their pin?

Finally - you state in your email that "we believe relatively few people use it" - How? On what basis? From what analysis? Even if from the mobile companies directly it does not give you the right to suggest it is unimportant to the people who do use it.

Sorry, but I think this is making statements without thinking first and Gary Davis must know this by now.

Regards