[136569] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Egypt 'hijacked Vodafone network'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Thu Feb 3 14:51:09 2011
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv>
In-Reply-To: <347523.24998.qm@web59612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:48:58 -0500
To: "andrew.wallace" <andrew.wallace@rocketmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>, Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 3, 2011, at 2:20 PM, andrew.wallace wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>> On 02/03/2011 10:14 EST, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>>>=20
>>> On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:24 AM, andrew.wallace wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> Mobile phone firm Vodafone accuses the Egyptian authorities of
>>>> using its network to send pro-government text messages.
>>>>=20
>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12357694
>>>=20
>>> Here is their PR
>>>=20
>>> http://www.vodafone.com/content/index/press.html
>>>=20
>>> Note that this is entirely legal, under "the emergency powers
>>> provisions of the Telecoms Act"
>>=20
>> Which is legal, Vodafone's protest or the government's telling them =
to
>> send messages? afaik the agreement was that the operator would have
>> preloaded canned messages, agreed on in advance with the government, =
and
>> now the government is telling them to send out arbitrary messages =
they
>> compose on the spot.
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
> I wonder if these messages were blockable by the end-user or if they =
were being sent as a service announcement from Vodafone.
>=20
> Certainly, if the government were sending the messages under the =
company name then something sounds wrong about that.
>=20
> What I would like is to hear from someone who received the messages =
and what their experiences were.
>=20
They were described to me as being "from Vodafone." I assumed that this =
meant that they were service messages.=20
Marshall
> Andrew
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
