Eircom's p**n racketeering

dahamsta

Originally posted by Johnny Versace
Yes, that's a fair point, but I don't think it is unreasonable for Eircom to assume the people are using these porn dialers on purpose.

I don't doubt that some people do use them on purpose, but it's a well know fact that a huge proportion of the diallers are installed covertly, and intentionally set up to dial covertly.

I seriously doubt Eircom had a meeting where they choose to rip people off who (mistakenly) have porn dialers on their PC.

I doubt it too, but I can see them having a meeting discussing how much money they're making out of it, and how to make more. But let's be nice and assume the best, and imagine that they didn't do that: What have they done to stop it? Nothing. There's your inaction.

Muck seems to believe that there is a dedicated Eircom department tasked with dealing with this issue. If that is in fact the case, why is it still happening? If Eircom wanted it to stop, they could stop it, period.

[EDIT: By the way, I didn't see [url=http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?postid=1552139#post1552139]this post[/url], but Moriarty's explanation is far better than anything I could come up with anyway.]

adam

Vuk

Eircom's responsability: A fair price for Diego Garcia or at least a well founded explaination a why it is set at an incorrect banding.

Pornsite diallers: Looking at the links that ChipZilla provived, the diallers offered claim to warn customers about the international calls being placed, however in the ComWreck blog, it is claimed that these diallers can be implemented in a virus like way, operating without the knowledge of the victim ( I have no doubt that these exisit or at least be created very easily ).This is a criminal matter and tbh can only be fought unsuccessfully as with Warez & illegal porn. Taking into account traceability and accountability (depending on the location of the firm/person responsable).

Eircom or any other TelCo cannot be held even partly responable for the cost incurred by their customers as a result of wilfull or unwillful used of porn. These diallers(virus or regular) are produced without any help or backing or even knowledge of TelCos, unlike 15XX numbers

The Victim: Unfortuantely, you get double screwed, not only do you have a virus but you get a not so nice phonebill. You can complain to Eircom and Comreg about the incorrect charging, (tho Diego Garcia is not always the location) but you cannot complain about incurring a cost! Could you sue Dell for supplying a computer that was eventually ravaged by a virus where your only copy of your Masters Degree thesis resided?
It is up to the victim to ensure that they have proper virus protection and to think twice before hitting 'bring a box of tissues button'.

I really believe that Eircom should be fought on the Band 13 issue, tho I also believe that the porndialler chariot is not the issue to ride in on

BigEejit

And here is a link to a theregister.co.uk story that mentions that there are activex vunerabilities that can [edit] be used to [/edit] install diallers with no action from the user, just go to the wrong site, or go to a hijacked website ..... you dont have to click on anything to get one installed on your machine.

next you'll be saying - but grannies everywhere _should_ be turning off activex before they go on the internet. :rolleyes:

adonis

empowerment of the customer/consumer awareness...
what what...

everyone is responsible for their own actions, its a basic rule of life.
The internet should be no different.

i agree with jv (begrudingly)enter reason here))

there is slight waft of the blame culture coming from certain members of the audience..

Ripwave

Originally posted by Johnny Versace
As in, they are assuming the customer knows what they are doing.

Obviously, all those people are deliberately paying hundreds of euro to get access to porn at dial up speeds. Yeah, right.

I seriously doubt Eircom had a meeting where they choose to rip people off who (mistakenly) have porn dialers on their PC.

No, it's purely a coincidence that these particular pacific islands are charged at €3.50/minute, day or night by eircom, whereas ESAT (for example) only charges 70c/minute to call these locations at night and weekends (130c during daytime, Monday to Friday).

If you honestly believe that Eircom didn't fully understand the implications of creating that special price band, then I have a bridge that you might be interested in buying. (You can use the money you got from the tooth fairy).

dahamsta

I have a tower meself, name of Eiffel.

zod

The crux of the argument ( as I see it )

Eircom allow you to use your phone line anyway you see fit - including the use of porn diallers ( or even the australian talking clock for 2 days) and are therefore not obliged or cannot be held accountable for what goes on - on your hardware which is using it's line.

versus

The phone dialers are sometimes downloaded unintentionally, or through malware and through little or no fault of the end user accrue big bills - this "fraud" by the makers of the diallers also give eircom profit - profit as a byproduct of fraud should be stopped/hampered by the service provider.


This has a corrollary with other industries - credit card fraud. Credit card companies will deny credit if they see "unsual" activity on a credit card - this can be through online fraud or someone physically stealing a credit card. Why do they do this - to protect the consumer and themselves ( consumers get browned off and cut up credit cards or move to another company)

Why do Eircom not alert the user if they see a €500 worth of usuage over a weekend to the same porno number on a phone line that NEVER saw this kind activity before. WHY do the let it go on until bill day? - it's in their interest and the customer cannot move - the recent single billing moves by comreg have put paid to that competition.

Liberalise the market and watch Eircom protect their customers, until it's easy to say " waive that fee or I'm moving my line " Eircom will have no respect for their customers.

End of Rant.

adonis

my credit card company have never called me asking why i spent 700 euros on it in one week, versus the period of (relative) inactivity that preceeded.

this suggestion of eircom calling u and saying
"sorry sir, we noticed youve been online to thailand for a long time, are you sure you are meant to be"
would possibly constitute an invasion of privacy.

zod

Eircom calling you because of a large uncharacteristic jump in call costs would in my opinion by reassuring.

The Eircom inquirer would not have to know who or where you were calling - just the percentage uncharacteristic jump in call costs. If you wanted to know the detail you could then empower them to enquire about the detail.

This could even be computerised.

"You have shown unusual call costs in the last x days - press 1 to be put through to accounts - press 2 to ignore this alert, press 3 to ignore and disable this alert" yada yada.

Credit card companies regularily stop credit due to unusual activity, although you are right not all of them do, perhaps you should consider moving!

adonis

I was attempting to say that it could be considered an invasion of privacy if a customer was dialling somewhere, such as diego garcia, for a valid reason.

your computerised suggestion shows a certain level of naievity...

***perhaps*** a more comprehensive refund process should be in place.

its still the customers responsibility and my opinion shant be changed

im finished with this thread too...

Ripwave

Originally posted by adonis
my credit card company have never called me asking why i spent 700 euros on it in one week, versus the period of (relative) inactivity that preceeded.

I have been called by my credit card company to verify activity that their systems recognized as "unusual". (As it happens, it was all perfectly innocent, and there was no problem, and it was very clear that the call was being made to protect me, and I certainly appreciated it).

If eircom wasn't making huge profits on these calls, then the issue would be with the regulator. The reason eircom are at the heart of this controversy is because eircom make more money from these "porn diallers" than the porn peddlers do!

sceptre

Originally posted by adonis
this suggestion of eircom calling u and saying
"sorry sir, we noticed youve been online to thailand for a long time, are you sure you are meant to be"
would possibly constitute an invasion of privacy.

I can see where you're coming from here adonis. However, some credit card companies (such as GE Capital, perhaps they all do[1]) routinely contact customers by phone to check whether they will make a payment. They've a specific procedure for verifying that the customer is the card holder (to cover themselves for privacy issues) and will only identify themselves as GE Capital without hinting in any way why they are ringing if the cardholder isn't at the other end of the telephone.

Meanwhile BT have a policy of ringing any home consumers as soon as their usage reaches £125 in any one day. Personally I think that amount is rather high but at least they've some policy on helping the customer. I assume, as a company that provides credit facilities for its customers, that they have a similar policy to GE Capital.

The issue of who's responsible for installing the dialler is a side one - it's a technical issue, it's a competence issue, it's rather easier to happen than some (I'd suggest relatively speaking, less technically aware of Active X controls &c) people appear to think. Nevertheless, the core issue in the thread is not how or why this dialler[2] installs itself on a person's PC, it's the policy that any given phone company (in this case Eircom) has in dealing with it - an optin service? an optout service that the user has to pay a monthly fee to maintain (the current case)? a policy of informing or not informing the customer? dealing with it in some way or giving the user the option to deal with it or just sit back, add an African country to the South Pacific band and buy off the leader of a trade union with the proceeds?

It's not the technical reasons for the issue that matter (in other words, how it gets there and why) - it's the fact that they'll charge through the nose on a monthly basis even to allow the user to block these countries from use on the PC. A fiver a month (cost if I remember correctly)isn't much but it's not good enough to say that it's an inexpensive insurance policy when you're just stopping yourself from buying something that you probably didn't want to buy in the first place and that has no inherent value if you didn't want to buy it.


[1]I had to examine GE Capital's credit procedures last term for college reasons. They were rather helpful and explained how everything worked there. I've never managed to be 90 days late on my own credit card, despite its dangerous balance

[2]I'm including dumping and other techniques as diallers even though on a technical level they're something else because the cost to the end user is the same.


And guys, please examine the technical issues of how the more unscrupulous diallers are installed before shooting your mouths off. If you don't know enough about the issue on a technical basis then you're shooting yourself in the foot by spouting off on the technical issues.

And please take note of what Moriarty said about possible bannings (I'm rather sorry for disappearing off home to the PROC for six hours now). If you don't like what someone else is saying about you, use the Report this post link at the bottom of every post. Act like a whiney babby and you'll probably get kicked out on your ear too. The trash-heaps have spoken

dahamsta

Must stop posting after coming home from the pub. Really.

spongebob

Originally posted by sceptre
Meanwhile BT have a policy of ringing any home consumers as soon as their usage reaches £125 in any one day. Personally I think that amount is rather high but at least they've some policy on helping the customer. I assume, as a company that provides credit facilities for its customers, that they have a similar policy to GE Capital.

Eircom provide you with unlimited credit, generous types that they are. A pron Dialler will cost about UK£140 an Hour as it happens, including VAT . €5200 a DAY

M

dahamsta

Any chance we could get this thread split by the way. There's two completely different topics here: the blame game, which has bugger all to do with the question I asked; and Eircom's complicity in the racket. I'm simply looking for intelligent angles, not dull theorising about who did what to who.

adam

spongebob

Adam

Read the USO directive on the 'Right' of the consumer to control costs, effective July 2003
Haul Comreg to Cork as a material witness to explain what they have done to implement the directive (**** all )
Read the stuff on Premium numbers on Regtel , note that porn dialer countries cost twice as much as premium numbers.
Why is there nothing in the safe surfing advice on Eircom.Net, is that because the traffic is too valuable for Eircom to pass up on it, print all the links and stuff on Eircom.Net lest it change soon <cough> , in which case you may print it all again as more evidence.
Note that BT barred calls to higer rate Premium numbers (they cost about UKP1.50 a minute 0908 and 0909 numbers) in 1998 . Band 13 numbers cost ore with no opt in. See Here and on the Premium rate regulator website in the Uk , Icstis and interestingly Here .
Look up the definition of the word "Usury"
Als check links by Sceptre and Eircomtribunal above on how these numbers have been blocked in Germany (RegTP) and in Australia, recently.

HTH

M

sceptre

Week-long bans lifted, stuff about who's responsible for the installation moved to another thread (which I can't move to Nets/Comms as there's too much rubbish in there). If anyone does wish to discuss the core issue, do it here. I'd strongly suggest that if people get miffed at something said by someone else that they use the "Report" link at the bottom of every post to deal with it.

scojones

Before reading this thread I didn't know that eircom hiked up the cost of those calls like that. I'd like to ask a few questions:

1. When eircom wish to raise the cost of one of their services, can they do this without any notice to customers or to ComReg? If they can, I really think this should be changed.

2. Does anyone actually use porn dialers legitimately, or do they _just_ make they money from fooling people (the activex way and so on).

3. How much would it cost to bring eircom to court over this issue?

BrianD

To be fair this is not Eircom's problem it is a consumer issue. Asking Eircom to bar certain types of call is unreasonable and "nanny state" stuff.

In regard to the cost of the call...
Eircom may not have any control over this. Certain countries are more costlier to reach and may charge more for calls to be routed accross their network. I am sure Eircom just add their standard margin to some inter-phone company rate that has been negotiated.

It is the users responsibility ...
To ensure that the PC is regularly checked for illicit dialers. Similarly it is their responsibility to ensure that their ordinary phone is secure. Would you ask Eircom to pay for calls made on your phone if you left your front door or window open. No, you wouldn't.

Porn Dialers v Premium rate numbers
Most porn dialers are standard international phone numbers (though they could connect to overseas premium rate number). In any case, they are not regulated by RegTel who can only control premium rate in Ireland.

I understand that Eircom are now contacting customers who have unusual changes in call behaviour.

bminish

Originally posted by BrianD

In regard to the cost of the call...
Eircom may not have any control over this. Certain countries are more costlier to reach and may charge more for calls to be routed accross their network. I am sure Eircom just add their standard margin to some inter-phone company rate that has been negotiated.

Rubbish!

Eircom's rates to band 13 is € 3.61 per minute at any time.
Esat BT charge betweeen € 1.70 and 70c per minute depending on when the call is made.

.Brendan

seamus

Originally posted by BrianD
To be fair this is not Eircom's problem it is a consumer issue. Asking Eircom to bar certain types of call is unreasonable and "nanny state" stuff.

In regard to the cost of the call...
Eircom may not have any control over this. Certain countries are more costlier to reach and may charge more for calls to be routed accross their network. I am sure Eircom just add their standard margin to some inter-phone company rate that has been negotiated.

Porn Dialers v Premium rate numbers
Most porn dialers are standard international phone numbers (though they could connect to overseas premium rate number). In any case, they are not regulated by RegTel who can only control premium rate in Ireland.

I understand that Eircom are now contacting customers who have unusual changes in call behaviour.

RegTel don't exist. Comreg control the industry.

Brian, people's problem is that eircom, deliberately and maliciously created a new international call band in order to profit from people's own ignorance. The rate charged is not the minimum rate possible, it's an amount of money that is significant enough to make huge profits, but not so absolutely ludicrous that people notice it sticking out.
Some (maybe most) places in this band are small islands with few inhabitants. Others, such as Diego Garcia, have no permanent inhabitants at all. 99% of people would never, ever need to call these places, so why single them out as extra expensive to call? Because they are "standard international phone numbers" used by "Most porn dialers". Eircom aren't propagatingor paying for the dialers, just massively piggybacking on the profits from those they exploit.
People can't even choose to protect themselves. If they know these dialers exist, is it not fair for these people to opt of this band, just in case they get one and it dials out before they run a spyware scan? They can opt out, but only by barring all international numbers. It's certainly not outside eircom's power to allow people to bar calling to individual bands. It's a dispicable tactic from a massive, monopolistic company.

The Brigadier

Originally posted by BrianD

In regard to the cost of the call...
Eircom may not have any control over this. Certain countries are more costlier to reach and may charge more for calls to be routed accross their network. I am sure Eircom just add their standard margin to some inter-phone company rate that has been negotiated.

Vartec charge less in Ireland.

In Germany, you can dial to many Band 13 numbers for circa 35c.

This is rampant profiteering. There is no excuse for the rates that Eircom charge.

eircomtribunal

ComReg have finally been made to move on the subject...

They have published a consumer guide on the issue of diallers today. It's doc cg07.pdf, and can be downloaded from their web site.

I guess the consumer guide is of the same "high" quality as their infamous guide on DQ services.

The interesting bit in it is this:
"ComReg will be consulting with industry within the coming weeks with the aim of having consumer protection measures put in place to address the problem."

P.

seamus

http://www.comreg.ie/publications/default.asp?nid=101518&ctype=5

That last line does sound interesting Peter. May we finally see ComReg flash their claws.....?

BrianD

This is rampant profiteering. There is no excuse for the rates that Eircom charge.

Well there may well be good reason for Eircom charging such rates. We have a smaller population in Ireland and Eircom may not have been in a position or inclined to negotiate a competitive rate. As already stated, few people are likely to answer a call in any Band 13 countries so why would they be bothered in a competitive rate. How can be Eircom be profiteering?

Assuming that you secure your phone line it is highly unlikely that you will ever call a band 13 country.

Can I take it that there are no problems with porn diallers in Germany if called to Band 13 countries only cost 35c?

Vartec charge less in Ireland.

What do Vartec charge less for? Can you clarify.

The Brigadier

Vartec along with Esat and all other carriers charge less by a factor of 2 or 3 than Eircom for calls to this band.

In germany they passed a law preventing phone companies from recovering monies from the victims of diallers.

BrianD do you work in Eircom perchance?

BrianD

I don't work for any telecoms company. I find it ridiculous that any company should have to refund or not charge a customer when they have run up a bill incurred by themselves - deliberately or by being careless.

There are people who are addicted to adult services and run up substantial bills as a result. They have no regard for the charge of a call (even if the porn dialler informed them clearly in advance). Should we refund them when they are presented with the bill?

If you carelessly download applications and do not secure your PC you are liable for the charges incurred by your lax attidude. It is the same as attaching your home phone to your gate post and hoping nobody will use it.

It is irrelevant if Eircom charge more than other operators for BAnd 13 countries. Choose another operator if you believe they are cheaper. This is how the market works (granted that the telecoms market is not as competitive as it should be).

It is high time that people realised that if you attach a sophisticated device to a phone line that you need to manage and monitor it.

I suspect that in Germany they reduced the Band 13 to 35c per min because people were less likely to complain and at least they could get paid!!

seamus

Originally posted by BrianD
If you carelessly download applications and do not secure your PC you are liable for the charges incurred by your lax attidude. It is the same as attaching your home phone to your gate post and hoping nobody will use it.

What about the situation I presented you with? Let's say you have a guy, running Windows 98. He knows dialers exist, he knows where to look for them, he updates his AV once a week, and runs Ad-Aware every two weeks. Then he goes on holiday to Barbados for two weeks, and his children take turns looknig after the house. First up is his 22-year-old son, who spends a dirty afternoon looking at dodgy websites, inadvertently downloading a dialer. So for the next two weeks, the other children spend some time on the net, they're not very tech-savvy, and they're using this porn dialer for their net access instead of the normal dialer. The father then arrives home to a huge bill.

Now, I wouldn't ask that eircom pay for this, I would just like to know why this man couldn't just block band 13 calls, without blocking all international calls. If he blocked all calls, how would he be contacted from home should there be a problem? If band 13 calls were blocked, the problem couldn't surface, even after his son surfing dodgy sites.

It's maybe one in a hundred cases, but it's not a long shot.

watty

Originally posted by seamus
he updates his AV once a week, and runs Ad-Aware every two weeks. .

Both activities a waste of time.

Very high probability the AV or Ad-Aware will fail.

Learn not to lean and rely on such faulty, adictive products. I havn't had a virus/ trojan/ dialler and using LAN / PCs 15 years and Internet 10 years.

The AV vendors don't use the products they sell to public, and don't get infections either.

BrianD

Seamas, In all honesty (and not meaning to be rude) all I would say is so what!

The son could easily run up a charge ringing premium rate numbers. They could do a dozen other things that could run up a huge phone bill in the absence of parental control without even going near the computer.

The bottom line is that it is still the parents responsibility to secure the computer. This can start with denying access it to it to educating the users in how to spot these diallers.