Not their job. A phone number is not a general ID or a security token. It is just a short number made up by a phone company for the purpose of using that company to call or text. If other companies or people try to use it for something different that is their stupid problem.https://twitter.com/mat/status/1167605500919173120 …
-
I don’t agree in the slightest. It is and should be their job. Their service provides people with a phone number - SIM swapping is the unrightful transference of that phone number. Plus, phone companies market has shifted dramatically as tech evolves. They market data now too
SIM card security is designed for the minor loss scenario of somebody having to tell the people they want to text or call them a new number. All other expectations are hallucinations about free security that have nothing to do with the phone company's actual business or job.
-
-
An MNO sells, delivers, and bills services to customers. If they offer data (they all do), that means that they provide a service of not only call/text, but also data. If they offer such a service, that means the liability is not just for call/text. Terpin proved this in court.
-
In this case the contract, which is an idiosyncratic deal between the phone company & the recipient of their data, applies. Not some idiotically false generalizations about SIM card security by third parties who haven't paid the phone company to agree to any such added security.
-
I feel very strongly in the other direction. If SIM cards are not meant to be protected, then data shouldn’t be offered in the first place. Setting people up for failure. Agree to disagree (Terpin sued ATT for this exact problem and won)
-
From the FCC - they are not protecting customer data, which they are by law/regulation required to do. You are supposed to show government issued ID when presented personal information of a customer - SIM Swaps either get around that, or are coercing employees (mostly kiosks).pic.twitter.com/biak8dfQPR
-
Laws and regulation don't trump the reality of how security works. If a law requires a food company to send their bread to the moon to be blessed by moon beams for a week before can they sell it in stores, either the food company will break the law or you won't get any bread.
-
Either way, no law however badly you want it or how strongly it is enforced it is going to help you get a loaf of bread blessed by moon beams that costs less than its multi-million dollar ride to and from the moon.
-
Then how are moon pies so cheap?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Problem is today our phone numbers & emails become defacto identity cards. Was fighting the idea of using my Social Security number as an ID back in the early 80's. No one ever learns. We're stuck with companies which don't care. So we need ppd phones & secret numbers. email too
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
You would think the free market would kick in a bit here, and sell a security plan for $4.99 per month that stops porting.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So the provider who offers on-request 2FA or ID verification takes the market share of those who care about their security, why is that not a competitive edge when consumers demand something, those who supply it win, in terms of profit and market share?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.