07
Aug 19

Who Owns Your Wireless Service? Crooks Do.

Incessantly annoying and fraudulent robocalls. Corrupt wireless company employees taking hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes to unlock and hijack mobile phone service. Wireless providers selling real-time customer location data, despite repeated promises to the contrary. A noticeable uptick in SIM-swapping attacks that lead to multi-million dollar cyberheists.

If you are somehow under the impression that you — the customer — are in control over the security, privacy and integrity of your mobile phone service, think again. And you’d be forgiven if you assumed the major wireless carriers or federal regulators had their hands firmly on the wheel.

No, a series of recent court cases and unfortunate developments highlight the sad reality that the wireless industry today has all but ceded control over this vital national resource to cybercriminals, scammers, corrupt employees and plain old corporate greed.

On Tuesday, Google announced that an unceasing deluge of automated robocalls had doomed a feature of its Google Voice service that sends transcripts of voicemails via text message.

Google said “certain carriers” are blocking the delivery of these messages because all too often the transcripts resulted from unsolicited robocalls, and that as a result the feature would be discontinued by Aug. 9. This is especially rich given that one big reason people use Google Voice in the first place is to screen unwanted communications from robocalls, mainly because the major wireless carriers have shown themselves incapable or else unwilling to do much to stem the tide of robocalls targeting their customers.

AT&T in particular has had a rough month. In July, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of AT&T customers in California to stop the telecom giant and two data location aggregators from allowing numerous entities — including bounty hunters, car dealerships, landlords and stalkers — to access wireless customers’ real-time locations without authorization.

And on Monday, the U.S. Justice Department revealed that a Pakistani man was arrested and extradited to the United States to face charges of bribing numerous AT&T call-center employees to install malicious software and unauthorized hardware as part of a scheme to fraudulently unlock cell phones.

Ars Technica reports the scam resulted in millions of phones being removed from AT&T service and/or payment plans, and that the accused allegedly paid insiders hundreds of thousands of dollars to assist in the process.

We should all probably be thankful that the defendant in this case wasn’t using his considerable access to aid criminals who specialize in conducting unauthorized SIM swaps, an extraordinarily invasive form of fraud in which scammers bribe or trick employees at mobile phone stores into seizing control of the target’s phone number and diverting all texts and phone calls to the attacker’s mobile device.

Late last month, a federal judge in New York rejected a request by AT&T to dismiss a $224 million lawsuit over a SIM-swapping incident that led to $24 million in stolen cryptocurrency.

The defendant in that case, 21-year-old Manhattan resident Nicholas Truglia, is alleged to have stolen more than $80 million from victims of SIM swapping, but he is only one of many individuals involved in this incredibly easy, increasingly common and lucrative scheme. The plaintiff in that case alleges that he was SIM-swapped on two different occasions, both allegedly involving crooked or else clueless employees at AT&T wireless stores.

And let’s not forget about all the times various hackers figured out ways to remotely use a carrier’s own internal systems for looking up personal and account information on wireless subscribers.

So what the fresh hell is going on here? And is there any hope that lawmakers or regulators will do anything about these persistent problems? Gigi Sohn, a distinguished fellow at the Georgetown Institute for Technology Law and Policy, said the answer — at least in this administration — is probably a big “no.”

“The takeaway here is the complete and total abdication of any oversight of the mobile wireless industry,” Sohn told KrebsOnSecurity. “Our enforcement agencies aren’t doing anything on these topics right now, and we have a complete and total breakdown of oversight of these incredibly powerful and important companies.”

Aaron Mackey, a staff attorney at the EFF, said that on the location data-sharing issue, federal law already bars the wireless carriers from sharing this with third parties without the expressed consent of consumers.

“What we’ve seen is the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is well aware of this ongoing behavior about location data sales,” Mackey said. “The FCC has said it’s under investigation, but there has been no public action taken yet and this has been going on for more than a year. The major wireless carriers are not only violating federal law, but they’re also putting people in harm’s way. There are countless stories of folks being able to pretend to be law enforcement and gaining access to information they can use to assault and harass people based on the carriers making location data available to a host of third parties.”

On the issue of illegal SIM swaps, Wired recently ran a column pointing to a solution that many carriers in Africa have implemented which makes it much more difficult for SIM swap thieves to ply their craft.

“The carrier would set up a system to let the bank query phone records for any recent SIM swaps associated with a bank account before they carried out a money transfer,” wrote Wired’s Andy Greenberg in April. “If a SIM swap had occurred in, say, the last two or three days, the transfer would be blocked. Because SIM swap victims can typically see within minutes that their phone has been disabled, that window of time let them report the crime before fraudsters could take advantage.”

For its part, AT&T says it is now offering a solution to help diminish the fallout from unauthorized SIM swaps, and that the company is planning on publishing a consumer blog on this soon. Here are some excerpts from what they sent on that front:

“Our AT&T Authentication and Verification Service, or AAVS. AAVS offers a new method to help businesses determine that you are, in fact, you,” AT&T said in a statement. “This is how it works. If a business or company builds the AAVS capability into its website or mobile app, it can automatically connect with us when you attempt to log-in. Through that connection, the number and the phone are matched to confirm the log-in. If it detects something fishy, like the SIM card not in the right device, the transaction won’t go through without further authorization.”

“It’s like an automatic background check on your phone’s history, but with no personal information changing hands, and it all happens in a flash without you knowing. Think about how you do business with companies on your mobile device now. You typically log into an online account or a mobile app using a password or fingerprint. Some tasks might require you to receive a PIN from your institution for additional security, but once you have access, you complete your transactions. With AAVS, the process is more secure, and nothing changes for you. By creating an additional layer of security without adding any steps for the consumer, we can take larger strides in helping businesses and their customers better protect their data and prevent fraud. Even if it is designed to go unnoticed, we want you to know that extra layer of protection exists.   In fact, we’re offering it to dozens of financial institutions.”

“We are working with several leading banks to roll out this service to protect their customers accessing online accounts and mobile apps in the coming months, with more to follow. By directly working with those banks, we can help to better protect your information.”

In terms of combating the deluge of robocalls, Sohn says we already have a workable approach to arresting these nuisance calls: It’s an authentication procedure known as “SHAKEN/STIR,” and it is premised on the idea that every phone has a certificate of authenticity attached to it that can be used to validate if the call is indeed originating from the number it appears to be calling from.

Under a SHAKEN/STIR regime, anyone who is spoofing their number (and most of these robocalls are spoofed to appear as though they come from a number that is in the same prefix as yours) gets automatically blocked.

“The FCC could make the carriers provide robocall apps for free to customers, but they’re not,” Sohn said. “The carriers instead are turning around and charging customers extra for this service. There was a fairly strong anti-robocalls bill that passed the House, but it’s now stuck in the legislative graveyard that is the Senate.”

AT&T said it and the other major carriers in the US are adopting SHAKEN/STIR and do not plan to charge for it. The company said it is working on building this feature into its Call Protect app, which is free and is meant to help customers block unwanted calls.

What about the prospects of any kind of major overhaul to the privacy laws in this country that might give consumers more say over who can access their private data and what recourse they may have when companies entrusted with that information screw up?

Sohn said there are few signs that anyone in Congress is seriously championing consumer privacy as a major legislative issue. Most of the nascent efforts to bring privacy laws in the United States into the 21st Century she said are interminably bogged down on two sticky issues: Federal preemption of stronger state laws, and the ability of consumers to bring a private right of civil action in the courts against companies that violate those provisions.

“It’s way past time we had a federal privacy bill,” Sohn said. “Companies like Facebook and others are practically begging for some type of regulatory framework on consumer privacy, yet this congress can’t manage to put something together. To me it’s incredible we don’t even have a discussion draft yet. There’s not even a bill that’s being discussed and debated. That is really pitiful, and the closer we get to elections, the less likely it becomes because nobody wants to do anything that upsets their corporate contributions. And, frankly, that’s shameful.”

Update, Aug. 8, 2:05 p.m. ET: Added statements and responses from AT&T.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

98 comments

  1. Charging for screening/blocking robocalls seems like the “protection rackets” of old.

    Taking that logic a step further, allowing criminal activity perpetuated by robocalling to continue unless “protection” is paid could be viewed as aiding and abetting criminal enterprises.

    • Just like credit monitoring (pay someone to protect you from our ineptitude) and the age old “protection racket” engaged by criminals, heck, even health insurance is a racket where you pay a third party to protect you from extortionate bills for medical services because private customers are charges 5-10x than the insured are for the same service. There are laws on the books that make this illegal, yet… crickets. Ours is a captured economy and the criminals/publicly traded companies will take profits from any activity they can. The mobile carriers are loathe to do,anything that might reduce their cash flow, there are shareholders to satiate. Morality has left the building in public corporate America because there are perverse incentives in force.

  2. except that robocalls DON’T come from handsets or GSM devices… phones. They come from computers making VOIP calls.

    I can say, as a forty year professional in the telecommunications industry, SHAKEN/STIR is clearly from someone who has no clue as to what is actually happening and what the effects of this new process would have on legitimate systems.

    • In this case, maybe your 40 years of experience is hampering your ability to understand new technology and STIR/SHAKEN.

      I don’t know what you’ve heard, but STIR/SHAKEN isn’t just for calls originating by handset/GSM/phones. Making “VOIP” calls will still hit the network service providers that can and should process authentication and verification.

      Yes, there are legitimate “legacy” systems that are going to be affected. Everyone does know this. But these systems need to be updated because bad actors abuse the built in trust.

      • SHAKEN/STRD will end up being a tool in a defense in depth strategy. It will provide LEO with more ammunition in investigation and prosecution but will it stop Gramma’s phone from constant rings – no.

        Right now screening is primarily database driven (is the originating number in our bad guy database). We need to move beyond that and start looking at behavior patterns on voice and VOIP. ID’d traffic spewing from a single location should be shut down at the point of entry to the network but could also be shut down at other links in the chain if not halted earlier.

        I hope we can look forward to the use of AI/machine learning that can dynamically adjust defenses as robocallers adjust to new patterns of attacks.

        • STIR/SHAKEN does precisely this. Authentication and verification from source. There is more to it than just point to point database lookups. There are typically many nodes that the call will need to route through… currently they can’t do any source origination check, because the true source isn’t really known throughout the network.

          • It would be great to know what the carriers have in store once they get more reliable data from S/S.

            Maybe our intrepid host reporter can delve into this and let us know what the future holds!

  3. Justin N Lindberg

    http://qexpressnet.com/quintillion-completes-installation-of-historic-alaska-subsea-fiber-optic-cable-system/

    QUINTILLION COMPLETES INSTALLATION OF HISTORIC ALASKA SUBSEA FIBER OPTIC CABLE SYSTEM

    https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/crime-courts/2019/02/11/former-ceo-of-company-leading-alaska-fiber-optic-project-pleads-guilty-to-fraud/

    Former CEO of company leading Alaska fiber-optic project pleads guilty to fraud

    Sad but true.

  4. “Sohn said there are few signs that anyone in Congress is seriously championing consumer privacy as a major legislative issue. ”

    That’s why it needs to be “legislated” in the courtroom, to make the cost of not complying much higher than the cost of a compliant framework.

  5. You really don’t think that these companies
    will actually tackle the robocalls.
    Money dominates this whole scene. Laws are ignored in the business world. just like those produce growers along the southern border have ignored laws all the time. Business means money…

Leave a comment