No imei-check Kaiser unlock (or Florin_m vs pof)

[Guest Paul (MVP)]

I would agree it to be newsworthy, however news articles need to be a certain standard ( factually correct, balanced viewpoint, avoiding 'theif' name calling etc etc) otherwise they're just comment. We don't want modaco ending up like msmoblies do we?....

Of course, I simply quoted imei-check's page, and haven't expressed any opinion of my own other than what facts I have available. I think I HAVE taken a balanced viewpoint, stating that 'if this is the case'.

IMEI-check CAN unlock it, Florin is doing mine (via post) to show it can be done...

P

[Guest WoD]

My limited confidence in imei-check as a business has just been flushed down the toilet. Their public statements read like the angry rants of an irate teenager.

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

Of course, I simply quoted imei-check's page, and haven't expressed any opinion of my own other than what facts I have available. I think I HAVE taken a balanced viewpoint, stating that 'if this is the case'.

IMEI-check CAN unlock it, Florin is doing mine (via post) to show it can be done...

P

But you didn't wait for Pof's reply, stating you were going to ask him, not that you already had, you only posted the thread link showing the reverse engineering when asked, and you didn't disclose your potential conflicts in the original post ( discounted imei check unlocks for plus members, imei check being a modaco plus partner, special treatment for you of a postal unlock for your 1 device etc etc) which hardly show a 'balenced' viewpoint. Looks kinda askew to me... a print journalist would have to do all the above before posting a news article.

M.S

edit: 'and now, a message from our sponser' advertorials in news magazines are usually identified as such ;-)

Edited October 9, 2007 by Mysterious Stranger

[Guest creamhackered]

I always thought it was wrong to profit off hacking a companies device. Especially the fact they had the cheek to charge £20, that's a lot of money considering the amount of people that have had their phone unlocked. I'm surprised HTC/Microsoft never went after IMEI check for it, it's not the fact you are hacking the device it's the fact you then charge people for it!

[Guest Paul (MVP)]

But you didn't wait for Pof's reply, stating you were going to ask him, not that you already had, you only posted the thread link showing the reverse engineering when asked, and you didn't disclose your potential conflicts in the original post ( discounted imei check unlocks for plus members, imei check being a modaco plus partner, special treatment for you of a postal unlock for your 1 device etc etc) which hardly show a 'balenced' viewpoint. Looks kinda askew to me... a print journalist would have to do all the above before posting a news article.

M.S

edit: 'and now, a message from our sponser' advertorials in news magazines are usually identified as such ;-)

Sure, but the post is about a service NOT being available, rather than a service BEING available. Hardly publicising a product is it ;)

My postal unlock is at Florin's request, not mine tbh! I'm on T-Mo using a T-Mo device...

P

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

Sure, but the post is about a service NOT being available, rather than a service BEING available. Hardly publicising a product is it ;)

Yes, but you're putting across a sponser's point of view, with no balance... I never said your were publicising a product - but you're providing a platfrom for a rant from your sponser, which should be made clear.

It's a bit like the Sun pushing Murdoch's political views etc (without necessarilly plugging Sky...) At least at the Times they own up to being News International funded.

M.S

Edit: all that was needed to let people know about the service not being available was a brief line saying there would be no unlock, and maybe a link to the page explaining why. To re-publish the rant from imei check in it's entireity without Pof's version / comments is one sided and biased towards your sponser. In my opinion ;-)

Edited October 9, 2007 by Mysterious Stranger

[Guest The Doctor]

AFAIK... IMEI check did not invent the softSPL method of loading a bootloader... HaRET does the same thing... loads a linux bootloader to RAM then jumps to that memory address, then from there it loads the linux OS....

Also I agree with WoD... it just sounds like they've just thrown all their teddies out the pram and are now sulking by not offering an unlock service at all... It just makes no business sense... Even if pof does rip it off and offers it for free, they still lose the custom from the people who don't trust the free unlocker etc..

Phil

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

AFAIK... IMEI check did not invent the softSPL method of loading a bootloader... HaRET does the same thing... loads a linux bootloader to RAM then jumps to that memory address, then from there it loads the linux OS....

Also I agree with WoD... it just sounds like they've just thrown all their teddies out the pram and are now sulking by not offering an unlock service at all... It just makes no business sense... Even if pof does rip it off and offers it for free, they still lose the custom from the people who don't trust the free unlocker etc..

Phil

Well I for one would love to see some CRITICAL analysis of IMEI-checks claims, rather than them just being repeated as news. But who/how to do it?....

If IMEI check really had a case for claiming theft, wouldn't they sue rather than resort to name calling? Or are they so unsure of their own legal standpoint for reverse engineering another company's software in the first instance, the only way they can 'win' is by smearing these accusations around the specialist sites?

Do they own the process for unlocking? I don't understand enough about it to be honest. If they are patching something do they own the patch? Do they own the resultant patched software? Can someone use their method to create a different patch?

People are also assuming Pof is waiting in the wings to pounce on any new product IMEI check make...which I doubt. Necessity being the mother of invention etc, unless pof has a kaiser, I doubt he'll be reverse enginerring anything in the near future unless he has to.

Someone might need to check my timeline, but since the free unlocker for the hermes came out, hasn't IMEI check released the Exaclibur and Vox unlocks? Why weren't they so protective of those then eh?...

And as for Paul's t-mobile kaiser unlock from imei check, can they please video it so we can see it done, so the cynics such as myself don't spread conspiracy theories that they just bought the unlock from t-mobile and pocketed the fiver difference....

M.S

[Guest florin_m]

RAM-BOOTLOADER was indeed an IMEI-CHECK invention. Not sure about haret but it is for LINUX loading as far as we know and has nothing to do with loading the DEVICE BOOTLOADER in RAM and executing it.

To make it clearer: Development of Hermes, Trinity, Breeze, P750, Athena unlockers consumed a lot of time, crashed several devices and almost brought no sales at all since cracker POF was stealing our hard work. We had a big loss from these previous unlockers. That's why we can not risk to offer our hard work to thieves like POF.

We might offer a postal unlock, but only for EU customers , not sure yet as from past experience with HTC Universal it wasn't worth the effort (always postal delays, customs charges, etc etc).

There would be absolutely no point in IMEI-CHECK "pretending" to have a solution because you know that in the past ALL Windows Mobile unlockers came from IMEI-CHECK. The new business model simply will ensure that POF will not steal again our hard work and cause us a big loss again.

Like mentioned before: "IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE SITUATION FEEL FREE TO COMPLAIN TO THE THIEVES"

[Guest Mr_Gee]

Edit - Doubt anyone with 500 handsets to unlock would go to imei-check. If they have 500+ units I would think they have a direct line to the OEM distributer or are a reseller, and wouldn't want to hurt said relationship by using 3rd party unlock software voiding their handset warranty etc etc or break any distribution agreements they may have. Most voda resellers can access 'the list' for unlock codes anyway.

IMO IMEI-check is acting like little kid, "I have it, but you can't play with it"

Maybe IMEI-check *can't* unlock the Kaiser and are saying this as a smokescreen knowing no-one will call their bluff?

M.S. has a point.. Kids often use the same method ;)

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

because you know that in the past ALL Windows Mobile unlockers came from IMEI-CHECK.

What? You wrote *every single one* of the windows mobile unlockers? For every device? Are you serious?....Wow! I *am* impressed.

Now back that up please or retract it....

M.S

edit - I'm sure the HTC Universal unlocker was developed by Buzz but feel free to try and claim his work if you can prove it...

Edited October 9, 2007 by Mysterious Stranger

[Guest tsutton]

I always thought it was wrong to profit off hacking a companies device. Especially the fact they had the cheek to charge £20, that's a lot of money considering the amount of people that have had their phone unlocked. I'm surprised HTC/Microsoft never went after IMEI check for it, it's not the fact you are hacking the device it's the fact you then charge people for it!

In order to develop an unlock service, they would have to buy some phones to test. I am sure they have piles of bricked mobile phones!

So I think it's fair if they charged for it for their hardwork, only to see a low life guy nicked it and threw it across the Internet for free.

[Guest florin_m]

Check again the history of unlockers ! HTC UNIVERSAL unlock been FIRST released BY imei check (postal unlock ONLY) and then after FEW MONTHS buzz brought out a free unlocker!

To save your time here are the proofs:

http://forum.xda-developers.com/archive/in...p/t-250354.html

(dated 07-12-2005)

and the free solution:

http://www.msmobilenews.com/windows-mobile...niversal-5.html

dated: 25 May 2006

Edited October 9, 2007 by florin_m

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

In order to develop an unlock service, they would have to buy some phones to test. I am sure they have piles of bricked mobile phones!

So I think it's fair if they charged for it for their hardwork, only to see a low life guy nicked it and threw it across the Internet for free.

I agree they should be able to charge for it, but seeing as how HTC will do an out of warranty JTAG flash on a bricked device for £35 they'd be daft to have a pile of bricked phones when they could pay to have them flashed back to a working condition, so it's not like they have a 'pile of devices' sitting there useless that they need to cover the cost of! ;-)

It isn't as if pof nicked their method exactly, it seems he used portions of their method in developing his own. Not quite the same as the people selling XDA unlocks on ebay etc, so calling him a low life is a bit petty.

My main problem is the rant from imei check was presented as news.

M.S

Edited October 9, 2007 by Mysterious Stranger

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

Check again the history of unlockers ! HTC UNIVERSAL unlock been FIRST released BY imei check (postal unlock ONLY) and then after FEW MONTHS buzz brought out a free unlocker!

And was Buzz's method based on your work? If so, how,since you did the unlocks by post?

Your quote was ALL the unlockers come from you! Read again what you typed.

Perhaps they have come FIRST from you, but to claim credit for every single unlocking software out there is frankly ridiculus....

M.S

edit - way to go with the proofs. Now prove Buzz's work is based on yours ergo all windows mobile unlcokers come from you please...

Edited October 9, 2007 by Mysterious Stranger

[Guest M@rkC]

And was Buzz's method based on your work? If so, how,since you did the unlocks by post?

Your quote was ALL the unlockers come from you! Read again what you typed.

Perhaps they have come FIRST from you, but to claim credit for every single unlocking software out there is frankly ridiculus....

M.S

edit - way to go with the proofs. Now prove Buzz's work is based on yours ergo all windows mobile unlcokers come from you please...

I used Buzz's *free* unlocker to unlock my Universal (Orange M5000) as I was not prepared to post my device off to imei-check; I actually donated to Buzz roughly the same amount as imei were charging, so I feel that I paid "what was right" for the unlocking process......

Historically, imei-check have been the "first to market" with device unlocking and that is where they've made their money; more recently, the gap between imei-check's unlock service and the first freebie to hit the net has narrowed somewhat and naturally imei's income stream has suffered as a result.

I also firmly believe that people will take the route they feel most comfortable with; if they are not terribly technically-minded, then they will not want to be hard-resetting, flashing radio ROM's, patching bootloaders....yadda yadda yadda........they will pay their money and make their choice, knowing that the end result will be the same.

I am saddened by the fact that imei-check will not be offering the public unlock for the Kaiser/TyTn II - there are gonna be some technophobes who will no longer be able to call on their services.....

I hope Florin changes his mind, if only to prevent this "farce" becoming the beginning of the end for imei-check - at least for "mere mortals"...... ;)

Just my $0.02 :wub:

Mark.

[Guest The Doctor]

RAM-BOOTLOADER was indeed an IMEI-CHECK invention. Not sure about haret but it is for LINUX loading as far as we know and has nothing to do with loading the DEVICE BOOTLOADER in RAM and executing it.

Eh? Thats EXACTLY what haret does! Instead of loading a cracked HTC bootloader to RAM... it loads a linux kernel to RAM and jumps to the start address! And your unlocker doesn't loader the DEVICE bootloader, it loads the one you load to RAM, the device bootloader (the one that is already flashed) can be invoked by running EnterBootloader.exe from WinCE on your device from ANY shipped RUU... Or a magical combinations of buttons...

The new business model simply will ensure that POF will not steal again our hard work and cause us a big loss again

So this new business model of yours... how do you plan to make money from something your not selling?

Phil

[Guest The Doctor]

Paul, can you make a note of your device IMEI, WLAN mac address and call durations before you send it off? Theoretically, florin could just clone the EEPROM off an unlocked Vario III using a rmbc command, if its been unlocked using the conventional method... they should remain the same...

Phil

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

Paul, can you make a note of your device IMEI, WLAN mac address and call durations before you send it off? Theoretically, florin could just clone the EEPROM off an unlocked Vario III using a rmbc command, if its been unlocked using the conventional method... they should remain the same...

Phil

Or he could film the unlock and post it here! Like they used to do when the recieved the Universals for postal unlocking.

M.S

[Guest nickcornaglia]

I think many in this thread are a bunch of whackos!

1) Paul wrote the article to inform the Modaco viewers of Florin's position.

2) Florin has the right to do whatever he wants with his business.

3) Used to be a day when everyone couldnt wait for Florins unlockers to come out. He is well trusted and has unlocked MANY of my phones. I wouldnt use anyone else. He is almost always the first to unlock and has pioneered his method of doing so. HIGHLY TRUSTWORTHY. His record should speak for itself.

4) Based on Florin's post...the guy reverse engineered his unlocker. If this was just to learn...no problem in my book. But don't go and say you CREATED a FREE method so you could tell Florin to shove off with his fees. AND ESPECIALLY dont ask for donations for what is esentially republishing someone else's work. If it's not stealing...it's at least plagurism(sp?)

5) I agree with tsutton...Florin has probably bricked many phones. Especially in the early unlocking days. He probably buys the phones that he develops the unlockers on. Reimbursement for that service isn't out of the question is it? Especially if it saves YOU money in the end or gets YOU a phone that you wouldn't normally be able to use with your network.

6) I would like a free unlocker for my defense of Florin! ;)

7) I RULE! :wub:

8) I need to go back to work!

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

I think many in this thread are a bunch of whackos!

5) I agree with tsutton...Florin has probably bricked many phones. Especially in the early unlocking days. He probably buys the phones that he develops the unlockers on. Reimbursement for that service isn't out of the question is it?

I have no doubt he'll have bricked some phones. If he leaves them bricked rather than paying HTC to reflash them, then he's definatley one of the whackos in this thread!... I've no doubt he could keep his method private and drip-sell unlocked Kaisers on ebay. MAybe that's the new business model?

Just look how much that kid in the US got for his unlocked iphone! A 350Z, and 4 X 8 gb iphones.... but he wasn't looking to commercialise his work personally.

M.S (Chief thread Whacko...)

[Guest eelco_akker]

@ Paul/Florin : I don't think SIM-Unlocking is legal in the netherlands. The price to unlock e.g. a MDA Vario @ T-Mobile is going down every three months and after 1 year free. I am wondering if your warranty stil counts if you have sim-unlocked it, not done by the provider. By using a SIM Unlock solution you can use a different provider, so not making money for the provider you bought the phone with. I don't approve POF 'techniques', but isn't Florin 'ripping' the providers?

Eelco

[Guest Zone-MR]

Let's analyze this a little more in-depth from a technical point of view...

After balancing florin's claims against POFs posts at XDA-Developers I have the following throughts on Florin's claims:

"The "softSPL" (RAM BOOT) technology was an IMEI-CHECK invention"

There are two things wrong with this assertion. The first is suggesting that the 'technology' of running code from RAM as opposed to ROM is an 'invention'. The second is the implication that since florin used that method, it is wrong for POF to do the same.

Technically: The claim that running code from RAM as opposed to ROM is an IMEI-check invention is absurd. Any embedded system developer worth one's salt will know that code on the target platform can be executed from either RAM or ROM. It doesn't take a genius to realise that running the bootloader from RAM is less risky. The claim that this is an 'invention' is rather ridiciolous. As other's pointed out, a similar technique is used (for a different purpose) in gnuharet, among MANY other projects.

Ethically: If the 'invention' is in fact obvious, as argued above, the claim is moot. Even if it wasn't, I'd argue that there is NOTHING wrong with POF examining florin's method, learning from it, or even using it himself. It's how human beings make progress. We look at what others are doing, and use that as a starting point to create our own solutions. There is no shame in not starting every project by re-inventing the wheel.

Legally: 'Stealing' an idea is not a crime, with the exception of patented ideas. Even if, hypothetically, florin had patented this 'invention', the patent would only be valid if the idea was shown to be original, with no prior art. As explained in 'technical' this is far from the case.

"The radio firmware patch used by pof was 'stolen' from IMEI-CHECK"

This is a more substantial allegation, which would place POF on shakier ethical and legal ground. Florin's allegation is backed up with the convincing evidence that his birthday remains embedded in POFs unlock tool.

Technically: The patched firmware consists of 99.99% HTC code, with presumably a few bytes changed by florin to ensure the patched radio ROM accepts the same key on all devices. Although there are probably only a few ways of patching the HTC firmware, the exact same patch was copied from florin, as evidenced by the birthday key.

Ethically: If an original work containing a significant amount of creativity or expression was copied, I'd argue it would be wrong. However, is a simple substitution of the unlock code with a fixed 8 byte number a form of creative expression? Of course not. If florin's business model relies on keeping a 10 byte modiciation to a ROM secret, I'd argue his business model is fundamentally flawed.

Legally: Contemporary copyright law is based on the above ethical viewpoint. It grants the creator of an original creation exclusive rights to use that creation. However, only creative works can be copyrighted. To quote Wikipedia, it is not designed or intended to cover the actual idea, concepts, facts, styles, or techniques which may be embodied in or represented by the copyright work. What has been copied is a *technique* and possibly an *idea*, and therefore the action was not illegal under copyright law. It's difficult to argue that the 10 byte patch is a form of expression.

That POF did not mention the source, and released it under his own name.

POFs XDA-Developers posts clearly indicate that he had no intention to misrepresent florin's work as his own. He was pretty clear that he was using Florin's method.

Technically: POFs posts show that he completely understood the method of operation of florin's unlocker. He posted this method of operation, never implying that he was responsible for 'inventing' it.

Ethically: It's not plagiarism - POF did not try to conceal the true source of the information he obtained.

Legally: It's a non-issue. Plagiarism is an ethical consideration, not a legal one.

That POF attempted to profit from his actions by accepting donations

I don't see how this is relevant. If what POF did was wrong, it makes no difference if it's done for fun or profit. I, like others, value the time POF has spent studying the Kaiser unlock, and releasing his findings to the community - and hope that he keeps up the good work. I'll be making a donation, in order to show my support for this.

[Guest eelco_akker]

@ Zone-MR : Good explanation ;)

[Guest Mysterious Stranger]

@ Zone-MR : Good explanation ;)

Yep. Makes more sense to me now. Ta.

M.S