Talk:Tutorial:Unlock iPhone 3G with TurboSim - Revision history

5urd: Talk:Unlock iPhone 3G with TurboSim moved to Talk:Tutorial:Unlock iPhone 3G with TurboSim

2011-05-12T23:43:39Z

Talk:Unlock iPhone 3G with TurboSim moved to Talk:Tutorial:Unlock iPhone 3G with TurboSim

Caique2001 at 17:20, 21 August 2008

2008-08-21T17:20:33Z

NaysNay: /* Working and stable */ new section

2008-08-21T16:36:32Z

‎Working and stable: new section

Caique2001 at 23:33, 16 August 2008

2008-08-16T23:33:37Z

Caique2001: /* MCC=1 MNC=1 issue */

2008-08-16T23:31:13Z

‎MCC=1 MNC=1 issue

Caique2001 at 23:30, 16 August 2008

2008-08-16T23:30:38Z

Caique2001 at 20:46, 16 August 2008

2008-08-16T20:46:44Z

Caique2001 at 20:27, 16 August 2008

2008-08-16T20:27:36Z

Caique2001 at 20:27, 16 August 2008

2008-08-16T20:27:16Z

Zf: omg, no crack kthxbai

2008-08-16T15:04:29Z

omg, no crack kthxbai

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:20, 21 August 2008
Line 8:		Line 8:
	== MCC=1 MNC=1 issue ==		== MCC=1 MNC=1 issue ==

		+	'''Update''': Besides from technical discussions if the method harms the cellular network or not, some words about current 'policies' from my provider, O2 Germany. There seem to sit some funny guys on the desks reacting on upcoming 001/01 requests ''their way'': Suddenly (during service) my phone had been SIM locked, giving a message "SIM locked". (Instead of SIM failure or No service.) Re-inserting the card did not change the message. Because this behavior was some kind of 'new' I decided to re-insert the official provider card (swisscom) without turboSIM. Again, no luck! It worked, at the end, after rebooting the phone. When I put my SIM in an unlocked phone, I noticed 5 strange binary messages, appearently proactive messages that interfered with turboSIM and did not work as expected. But at least one (the last, that I couldn't see for obvious reasons) succeeded ;-) So, funny guys at O2 Germany, taking the challenge of killing service via SMS. (A day before I received messages that my service number for short messages was not correct. But it was. So, beginning on something happen at O2...)
−	Given following statements:
−
−	Cellular network login with changed MCC/MNC in IMSI to above values, that is successful (due to the implementation of the serving provider), might be considered 'illegal' (whatever this means) regarding ETSI standards, but
−	* does not cause billig problems, because authentication is valid and tied to the caller's identity
−	* does not interfere with the operability of the cellular network, because it is only an authentication issue
−
−	If you feel the need to 'express' that one of the above statements is incorrect, please do it. But - please - give ''profound'' reasons for your considerations.

	== Working and stable ==		== Working and stable ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:36, 21 August 2008
Line 15:		Line 15:

	If you feel the need to 'express' that one of the above statements is incorrect, please do it. But - please - give ''profound'' reasons for your considerations.		If you feel the need to 'express' that one of the above statements is incorrect, please do it. But - please - give ''profound'' reasons for your considerations.
		+
		+	== Working and stable ==
		+
		+	I've been using this method for 6 days, and its stable. I can make/receive calls, send/receive SMS and connect to EDGE network.
		+	Can't confirm 3G, as its not available in my country.

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 Cellular network login with changed MCC/MNC in IMSI to above values, that is successful (due to the implementation of the serving provider), might be considered 'illegal' (whatever this means) regarding ETSI standards, but
 * does not cause billig problems, because authentication is valid and tied to the caller's identity
-* does not interfere the operability of the cellular network, because it is only an authentication issue
+* does not interfere with the operability of the cellular network, because it is only an authentication issue
 If you feel the need to 'express' that one of the above statements is incorrect, please do it. But - please - give ''profound'' reasons for your considerations.

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 Cellular network login with changed MCC/MNC in IMSI to above values, that is successful (due to the implementation of the serving provider), might be considered 'illegal' (whatever this means) regarding ETSI standards, but
-* does not cause billig problems, because authentication is valid and tied to the callers identity
+* does not cause billig problems, because authentication is valid and tied to the caller's identity
 * does not interfere the operability of the cellular network, because it is only an authentication issue

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:30, 16 August 2008
Line 4:		Line 4:

	[http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=45903 This] is the original thread on hackint0sh, initiated by Zf. -caique2001-		[http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=45903 This] is the original thread on hackint0sh, initiated by Zf. -caique2001-
		+
		+
		+	== MCC=1 MNC=1 issue ==
		+
		+	Given following statements:
		+
		+	Cellular network login with changed MCC/MNC in IMSI to above values, that is successful (due to the implementation of the serving provider), might be considered 'illegal' (whatever this means) regarding ETSI standards, but
		+	* does not cause billig problems, because authentication is valid and tied to the callers identity
		+	* does not interfere the operability of the cellular network, because it is only an authentication issue
		+
		+	If you feel the need to 'express' that one of the above statements is incorrect, please do it. But - please - give ''profound'' reasons for your considerations.

← Older revision	Revision as of 23:43, 12 May 2011
(No difference)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:46, 16 August 2008
Line 4:		Line 4:

	[http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=45903 This] is the original thread on hackint0sh, initiated by Zf. -caique2001-		[http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=45903 This] is the original thread on hackint0sh, initiated by Zf. -caique2001-
−
−
−	== @-caique2001- ==
−
−	I've been working on this for 3 days and it just worked.. Don't you dare change it - it works perfectly and confirmed on three different phones.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:27, 16 August 2008
Line 5:		Line 5:
	[http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=45903 This] is the original thread on hackint0sh, initiated by Zf. -caique2001-		[http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=45903 This] is the original thread on hackint0sh, initiated by Zf. -caique2001-

−
−
−
−	== @naysnay ==
−	What are you doing here?? You f*** up the wiki with wrong infos, overtake it with your name a.s.o. I will pass by later and remove all the crap you are doing here. -caique2001-

	== @-caique2001- ==		== @-caique2001- ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:27, 16 August 2008
Line 6:		Line 6:


−	== 'illegal stuff' issue with MCC/MNC set to 001/01 ==

−	Actually I don't really believe in the 'illegal' fairy tale any more. (Though I will not remove the warning as I am not sure.)
−
−	The login into the cellular network is based upon the key stored on SIM, only the home provider knows it. The home provider has a database where it looks up the corresponding key. So if a fake IMSI is sent, totally different from original IMSI, authentication '''must''' fail (''This'' is obviously illegal). Vice versa, if authentication is successful, nothing could be considered illegal as the secure key stored on the card is tied to the caller's identity.
−
−	Even more interesting is the fact, that some providers seem to receive the HPLMN not from IMSI, but from ICCID. A swisscom card, 'proxy-sim'ed with turbosim and zero-g does login into vodafone's and t-mobile's network Germany, meaning it roams (GPRS vodafone working, EDGE t-online working!). Where does vodafone / t-mobile take the HPLMN from, to set up correct routing to swisscom? (Only swisscom knows the key and can authenticate.) As it can't be taken from IMSI (set to 001/01) it is appearently gathered from ICCID, isn't it?
−
−	So my guess is: If the (serving) provider's login implementation allows login with 001/01 (because possibly taking MCC/MNC from ICCID), everything is fine. *)
−
−	Maybe someone working in the mobile business can enlighten this subject.
−
−	<nowiki>*)</nowiki> The table indicates t-mobile uk doesn't work with o2-uk (official). As t-mobile Germany should be roaming provider for t-mobile uk (I think so), I suppose t-mobile uk SIMs working with o2 uk phones in Germany, as t-mobile Germany is serving provider and supports login with 001/01.
−
−	Whoever wrote this needs to spend some quality time locked in a room with a few ETSI standards. -Zf

	== @naysnay ==		== @naysnay ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:04, 16 August 2008
Line 19:		Line 19:

	<nowiki>*)</nowiki> The table indicates t-mobile uk doesn't work with o2-uk (official). As t-mobile Germany should be roaming provider for t-mobile uk (I think so), I suppose t-mobile uk SIMs working with o2 uk phones in Germany, as t-mobile Germany is serving provider and supports login with 001/01.		<nowiki>*)</nowiki> The table indicates t-mobile uk doesn't work with o2-uk (official). As t-mobile Germany should be roaming provider for t-mobile uk (I think so), I suppose t-mobile uk SIMs working with o2 uk phones in Germany, as t-mobile Germany is serving provider and supports login with 001/01.
		+
		+	Whoever wrote this needs to spend some quality time locked in a room with a few ETSI standards. -Zf

	== @naysnay ==		== @naysnay ==