

Woman removes SIM card from smart energy meter, uses $193k of 3G data - mambodog
http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2011/05/03/227031_tasmania-news.html

======
thailandstartup
>Justice Tennent jailed Monks for 18 months, with the last 12 months of the
sentence suspended on condition she be of good behaviour for three years. >She
was ordered to repay Aurora $193,187.43.

This is a horrendous miscarriage of justice. 4 months internet access = approx
$80.

~~~
tptacek
She committed a crime. This wasn't a civil suit.

Once again we see the phenomenon where technology makes everything easier,
including criminal acts, resulting in shock and dismay when the consequences
and penalties of those acts are not themselves mitigated by technology.

~~~
Natsu
Yes, she did, but I can't say that it merits 6 months in jail.

Charging $193,000 for what someone here estimated was about 90GB of data is,
itself, highway robbery. But that's Telstra's fault, not the power company's.

~~~
tptacek
It might be highway robbery in the service model of iPhones downloading
movies. That doesn't make it highway robbery in the context of access cards
provisioned within the requirements and fee structure of a utility smart meter
deployment. It does _not_ all add up to the same thing.

~~~
usedtolurk
90GB of data was stolen - nobody is defending that. Some of us have trouble
believing that 90GB of data is actually worth the $193,000 as determined by
the Telstra contract.

The actual "damage" seems pretty small when compared to crimes which carry
similar sentences. If Telstra had a fairer billing system, then a more
appropriate sentence would have been more likely.

------
pilif
Our product supports GPRS based barcode scanners which send data to our
application. To prevent precisely this thing from happening, we advise our
customers to make a special deal with the mobile carrier to ensure that the
SIM card can't be used in any other device than the barcode scanner.

Considering that there is such a simple technical solution (IMEI lock) to this
problem and considering the amount the Telco charged for the data in this
case, I really think that the punishment here was too harsh.

The power company should at least pay for some of the charges due to not using
a simple technical precaution (which, according to the article, they
implemented for later customers) and the carrier, well... where I live
extortion is a crime in itself and charging 193K for data traffic is just
crazy.

~~~
Maxious
Power companies were some of the first customers on Telstra's new M2M platform
so it seems it wasn't standard operating procedure to lock the cards/accounts
down at first. "An Aurora spokesman said once the company became aware of the
problem [of unlocked SIM cards] with a small number of the company's meters it
had taken steps with Telstra to prevent it recurring."

------
cubicle67
Telstra are the major Australian telco, and for a number of years (and still
in a number of areas) pretty much a monopoly. They're infamous for their price
gouging.

So, how could someone ring up $200k data bill? Here's Telstra's _current_
mobile phone plans <http://www.telstra.com.au/mobile/plans/phone_plan.html>
Note, this includes a whopping $5 data/month at the bargain rate of $2/Mb

It wasn't that long ago they were selling 3 year, $29/month adsl plans that
included 200Mb (yes, Meg) of data, and then charged $15/Mb for any used over
that

~~~
raquo
Don't want to be devil's advocate here, but it clearly states on that page:
"$2 per MB. You can add an extra 1GB Browsing Pack for an extra $10 a month."
Not even in gray tiny text, and that doesn't sound overly expensive. // Okay
I'll go wash my soul now.

------
Jun8
News items like this make me sad. Reading the callous comments here (from
people far more privileged than the convict) is even sadder. This and the
misguided porn raid that was covered 2 days ago... and these are the ones that
appear in HN. How many such injustices happen every day?

I think law schools should have mandatory "Internet Technology & Law" classes.
I used to think that the judges in cases like music piracy were just dishonest
and in bed with RIAA. Now, I understand the situation is even worse: they are
_totally clueless_ about basic technology. And, obviously, they are not
intelligent enough to have a health curiosity and learn about these matters
(the US Supreme Court judges, for example, have demonstrated that they do
this).

~~~
tokenadult
_I think law schools should have mandatory "Internet Technology & Law"
classes._

I have no reason to believe that that interesting suggestion would help solve
the problem you identify. My basis for saying this is that I attended a law
school in the United States, where as far as I know all law students have to
take a course in United States constitutional law to obtain their degrees, and
yet I graduated in a class that included graduates who acknowledged to me that
they had never, ever read the entire United States Constitution (which is only
a few thousand words long). Making a course a required course does not seem to
guarantee that students will learn the expected knowledge to be gained from
the course. Isn't the same result found in university computer science
courses?

~~~
awakeasleep
Do you think the average student became more familiar with the constitution
during the course?

Do you think a higher percentage of students would understand more about the
Internet & technology after taking a required class on it?

~~~
tokenadult
Do you think people in the legal system will necessary make the case decisions
you desire if they become more familiar with your preferred subset of industry
knowledge? That's the nub of the issue here. The thread is a complaint about a
judicial decision. The one thing judges become practiced in doing is
evaluating which parties to a case are b___s____ing and which parties are
being straight with the court and law-abiding in their actions outside court.
A trial judge's judgment can be reversed by an appellate court if the
appellate court determines that the trial judge misapplied the law to the
case. But it is a rare circumstance when an appellate court reverses any
finding of fact by a trial judge, because trial judges see the witnesses,
review all the evidence submitted by all parties to the case, and hear motions
from all parties about evidence should be admitted.

In general, I think that most young people who attend law school are more
knowledgeable about the law after attending than before. (I cannot say the
same with confidence about young people who attend colleges of education with
respect to teaching.) But as someone with a legal background, some of the
statements I see here about why the Australian judge's decision was an outrage
are not convincing to me. Are you willing to consider the possibility that if
all readers of HN became much more knowledgeable about the law, they might
perhaps disagree with the dollar amount of the judgment, but support the
finding of liability in the case?

------
lawnchair_larry
The real crime here is what the wireless provider is charging the power
company (and by extension, the consumer) for that data. Wow.

~~~
nbpoole
The smart meter probably doesn't transfer that much data under normal
circumstances. I'd assume most of the expenses were due to exceeding the "data
plan" for the card.

~~~
SwaroopH
true but as OP said, such overage charge is plain robbery.

~~~
eropple
That's silly. These SIM cards are used for very low monthly transfer. The
companies agree to them _because_ the devices won't use much bandwidth.
Properly configured devices (i.e., when SIM cards aren't being stolen and used
in laptops) will not ever encounter these overages.

There's no "robbery" involved.

~~~
nagrom
So, why don't they internally cap the data available to a card of that type?
This is a technical solution that would take what, 10 minutes? 20 minutes?
Rather than allowing someone to run up $193k of overage charges (all the while
cackling manically and rubbing their hands), why not behave in a reasonable
fashion?

In effect, this charge is a life sentence to a person. You don't expect the
lady to pay this back anytime in the next 30 years, do you? Bear in mind that
she needs to fulfill her regular needs with a criminal record hanging over her
head. And since the fine is administered by a court, I don't imagine that it
will be defaultable.

If an individual did this to someone, there's no doubt that it would be
looked-upon differently. It's done by a corporation with no physical body and
people defend it.

The goal of a society should, in general, be to construct a reasonable, fair
place for people to live. This woman did not get treated fairly.

~~~
eropple
Sure, a technical solution can and, probably, will be looked at at this point.
That said, your blithe assumption that it's twenty minutes of work does belie
an ignorance of how this stuff works. And you're castigating them for not
putting one in place when it hasn't been, to the best of my knowledge, a
significant issue in the past. Had there been a previous rash of SIM card
thefts, something very well may have been done in the past.

In other words, I am reasonably certain that you have decided on your
conclusion and are working backwards from there (see your nonsense about
"cackling maniacally"). I am rather certain that this is an unacceptable way
of looking at business or law.

As for whether the fine is equitable--well, let's see:

* The overage charges were part of a legal contract and agreed to by both consenting parties.

* An third-party agent--the thief--unlawfully incurred charges on behalf of the power company (charges that, one can presume, would have been an acceptable, if regrettable, cost of doing business had they been incurred, for example, due to a software fault in their power meters).

What do you think should happen? Do you think the telco should not be paid
according to the agreement for their account? Should the power company pay it
despite the SIM card against which the charges were levied being stolen? Or
should the fine be levied against the thief who committed the wrong?

As is likely apparent, I am of the opinion that the thief should be forced to
make good on her damages. They are not illusory damages; _someone_ will be
made less than whole if the thief is not expected to provide compensation.
And, no, I don't expect her to pay it back. But it is her obligation to make
whole those she has wronged. Doing otherwise is neither reasonable nor fair.

The unforeseen cost of her action is quite high. That's unfortunate. But, at
the end of the day: if you commit a crime against another person or entity,
you _are_ culpable for the results. If she did not want to be held responsible
for the results of stealing another's property, she shouldn't have stolen it.

~~~
thehotdon
Eropple: As is likely apparent, I am of the opinion that the thief should be
forced to make good on her damages. They are not illusory damages; _someone_
will be made less than whole if the thief is not expected to provide
compensation. And, no, I don't expect her to pay it back. But it is her
obligation to make whole those she has wronged. Doing otherwise is neither
reasonable nor fair.

Keyword: damages. Damages are not the same thing as missing out on an
opportunity for profit through means of extortion.

Sure, she should pay for her damages caused to Telstra--they just need to give
her an itemized receipt of expenses that she caused the company. This might
include the amortized cost of hardware, maintenance, support staff, etc.
However, these costs would certainly not include Telstra's insane profit
margins. The purpose of most legal systems (Australia's too, I hope) is to
maintain justice, not to serve as an alternative means of doing business.
Somehow, I think Telstra might come up with a slightly smaller figure than
193k if required to itemize their damages.

~~~
cellis
These are damages, plus _punitive_ damages.

------
gtank
> using a stolen SIM card to download almost $200,000 worth of data from the
> internet.

What does '$200k worth' of Telstra data look like anyway?

If you're prepaying at the highest levels[1], it's $1.50/GB up to 10GB. If it
was this, she must have downloaded a little over 130TB of data or been subject
to one hell of an overage charge. Seems unlikely.

If you're using their 'extreme usage' standard plan[2], it's $5/GB up to
120GB, which may well be enough for dozens of movies. That plan is $600/mo or
$15k over 2 years. Which means she's being accused of stealing over two
decades' worth of their highest consumer data tier.

Either something's up with Telstra's corporate data rates or there are some
incredibly customer-hostile penalties attached to these things.

[1] [http://www.telstra.com.au/bigpond-internet/mobile-
broadband/...](http://www.telstra.com.au/bigpond-internet/mobile-
broadband/prepaid/rates/index.htm) [2]
[http://www.telstrabusiness.com/business/portal/online/site/p...](http://www.telstrabusiness.com/business/portal/online/site/productsservices/standardplans.44017)

~~~
eropple
Telstra almost certainly has a special deal with the power company--extremely
low per-device rates for consistent very low bandwidth usage. They have a ton
of these power meters out there and they don't exactly need a multi-gigabyte
network plan.

Those overages are as high as they are because they're a deterrent from the
power company from fielding broken hardware that uses more bandwidth than it
should.

~~~
gtank
I assumed there must be some kind of special deal going on but the shape of it
eluded me. This sounds reasonable. It also suggests the idea of bug/theft
insurance for corporate hardware use - pay a little extra and maybe we'll
alert you when your power meters develop a hunger for torrents.

Come to think of it, shouldn't Aurora have noticed a meter dropping off the
grid and taken action to shut down that data account?

~~~
eropple
Probably. I'd guess it's just something that didn't come up in the past.

------
raquo
What I hate most in such cases is that the telco will just sit silent until it
presents you an insane bill at the end of the month. How hard is it to
implement a system that would compare each customer's last day's spending with
their own 75-percentile daily spending over last 30 days and alert them of
extraordinary activity? That would prevent 70% of such problems. 99% if
something similar was implemented for roaming charges.

~~~
dorianj
My university does this, and sends me an email the second my bandwidth usage
is showing 'unusual activity', usually triggered by skype (since it uploads a
lot). So, not too hard.

~~~
m_myers
But your university gives you a flat fee for bandwidth, does it not? If so,
then their incentive is to help you use less. A telco which offers per-GB
rates would rather you use _more_.

------
zcid
This was a huge failure for the phone and energy company. There is no reason
that kind of use should be allowed in the first place. Here in the US, a lot
of GSM based alarm systems have SIM cards in them, but they are access
controlled to prevent such theft and abuse. I'm not trying to excuse the
woman's behavior, but Telstra needs to get their act together to prevent
similar crimes in the future.

------
justincormack
Theft of SIM cards from devices is going to get increasingly common, there was
this case from traffic lights in South Africa a while back
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12135841>

I imagine a lot of them are used by criminals who want to make anonymous
calls, they probably get cut off more slowly than stolen handsets.

------
yuvadam
This is yet another case that shows that 3G data is absurdly priced way above
any reasonable equilibrium.

~~~
josephb
It shows that Aurora are being bent over a barrel by their suppliers data
rates.

Negligent for not securing their meters and SIM cards better in the first
place.

Do we really believe they didn't negotiate the bill down with their supplier
when they found out about it. Even Telstra is usually willing to help out a
little.

~~~
owenmarshall
>It shows that Aurora are being bent over a barrel by their suppliers data
rates.

Doubtful. Aurora likely negotiated an extremely low monthly rate, knowing that
these devices would use very little data in very predictable ways.

Aurora should've locked the SIM to a specific device. That's definitely on
them.

------
jcromartie
Nowhere in this entire story is the premise that _the bandwidth was actually
worth that much money_ even questioned. What is wrong with people?

------
Dove
I'm confused. It sounds like she was given the sim card and didn't know it was
stolen. Does Australia not do _mens rea_? Or does it not apply here for some
reason?

I mean, common sense says she didn't think she was doing anything wrong.

~~~
hugh3
_It sounds like she was given the sim card and didn't know it was stolen._

That was her second story. Her first story was that she didn't know anything
about it. Her second story was that some man she met on the internet (whom she
could not identify any further except to give a name, despite the fact she had
presumably exchanged physical goods with him) decided to ask her (a random
stranger) to download a bunch of data for him because his modem was broken
(despite the fact that they had no trouble talking on the internet).

It sounds to me like a completely bullshit story. I assume the judge saw it
the same way. In fact, I'm guessing there was some other evidence which didn't
get included in this story -- surely the electric company knows exactly
_whose_ meter the SIM card comes from?

------
blhack
What if she just repays the $193k?

I have a feeling that quite a few nerds would be pissed off enough about this
to donate a cup-of-coffee to a "keep this poor woman out of jail" fund.

That, and hopefully something like that would bring publicity to the absurdity
of this.

Granted, yes, what this woman did was completely wrong, and she should be
punished for it. That punishment should be about on par with people who use
cracked smart cards in their satellite receivers.

~~~
kenj0418
This nerd will be drinking my cup-of-coffee, not donating to keep a crook out
of jail.

The only similarity between this and satellite crackers is that they both
involve smart cards. (And the satellite people can pay for their own
crimes/torts as well - keep MY coffee out of it).

------
tzs
I see many people comparing to consumer data plans, or even linking to
Telstra's plans. That's pointless.

The power company is not using one of the standard Telstra plans. Think about
it--the cheapest plan linked to is a minimum of $30/month. Does anyone really
think the power company is going to be spending $30/month/meter to collect
meter readings?

Of course not. They will have some kind of special rate structure where they
pay a small or no monthly fee, and either have a small data quota, or perhaps
have no quote but pay a fairly high rate per byte starting at the first byte.

------
Havoc
Same thing happened here (South Africa) only on a much bigger scale. Hundreds
of them were stolen. Can't remember what they were used for though (Wasn't
smart meters).

I feel the supplier should carry part of the costs. Unlimited SIMs easily
accessible with zero safeguards should attract a stupidity tax.

------
sidwyn
How much data is that?

~~~
dpritchett
The consumer PAYG rate is $2/MB so about a gigabyte a day for three months.
The business rates don't seem to be published.

<http://www.telstra.com.au/mobile/browsing_packs.html#packs>

~~~
Maxious
Telstra Wireless Telemetry Service standard rate card:
<http://www.mobilitypartner.telstra.com/web/mpp/plans> $1/MB is the highest
rate.

Interestingly the some of the sales material states "If a system is using more
data than anticipated, Telstra Wireless M2M [Machine2Machine] Control Centre
can alert you or automatically message directly to a device installed in the
vehicle. Automated alerts and business rules monitor the health of the devices
and instantly modify services based on exception activity." Guess Aurora
weren't taking advantage of that.

------
jmjerlecki
The cost of using Facebook. Priceless.

------
imgabe
"dozens of movies" for 193k? If she downloaded 199 movies (assuming they'd say
"hundreds" if it were 200 or more) at 4GB each that's 796 GB or $242.46/GB.
Sounds more like the power company was getting ripped off by their data
provider.

~~~
mambodog
If they had chosen a plan with very little included data allowance it may have
had high excess usage costs.

Looking at the Telstra Business website[1], their $19/month 1GB plan has an
excess usage rate of $0.25 per MB. Yes, megabyte.

For your guess of 796GB that would work out to over $200,000.

[1]
[http://www.telstrabusiness.com/business/portal/online/site/p...](http://www.telstrabusiness.com/business/portal/online/site/productsservices/memberplans.44018)

~~~
imgabe
Just because it's an excess usage charge, doesn't mean that it's reasonable.

------
kschua
What amazes me is why didn't the power company used a Prepaid SIM card
instead.

A $150 recharge on Telstra for their prepaid mobile broadband gives 10 GB of
data allowance and has an expiry of 365 days.

Seriously, how much data can the smart reader be sending back?

------
G2789
Can anyone explain why 3G data is this expensive? I'm not currently able to
connect the dots here.

~~~
acqq
3G bandwidth is a limited resource. There should be a way for clients to pay
less if they know that they use little. However 3G providers misuse the deals
with limits by charging insane amounts per megabyte made over the limit. Of
course, they can lower the transfer rate instead, effectively helping the
client not overcharging due to an error (because it's always an error). They
don't do it because their nasty business model in such case is based on the
clients who unknowingly make the error and pay dearly. Crooks.

~~~
r00fus
In any sense, this phrase "...3G providers misuse the deals with limits by
charging insane amounts per megabyte made over the limit." would be a textbook
definition of usury.

------
cooldeal
Does seem like excessive punishment to me, especially for someone who is in
such hardship. Did Telstra really lose $193K on this incident? The cost to the
state to imprison such barely harmful acts is definitely not worth it. All she
deserves is a slap on the wrist, a small fine and some probation time.

~~~
HelloBeautiful
No, she got the proper punishment for stealing from the corporate masters of
US. She'll be trapped by the prison industry for the rest of her life.

EDIT: OK, my bad. But Australia is run by the same ppl in the same way. NWO
and the world government are around the corner anyway :D

~~~
monochromatic
You mean of Australia. Kind of loses its punch, doesn't it?

------
farout
People wonder why "women" find certain fields distasteful. came to HN: Number
one topic for comments - about a "Woman".

Why say she is a woman? Depressing. Is it required? No it is just to stress
the fact that women are stupid and perhaps deceitful than men. Yet my
empirical suggests otherwise. So sad HN.

Edit: Downvote all you want.

~~~
kiiski
How is it worse than "Guy unknowingly live tweets the Osama raid in
Abbottabad"? "Woman" just happens to be a word used for female human beings.

~~~
kschua
"Guy unknowingly live tweets the Osama raid in Abbottabad"

When I first saw this headline, I thought "Guy" referred to "Guy Kawasaki" :)

------
tokenadult
When I read stories like this (which I took care to do before commenting
here), I wonder what hackers who are attempting to build software-as-a-service
web-based start-ups think about this? Is it just plain immoral for a builder
of a service to make a living from the service? Are creators of intellectual
property not entitled to any protection of their property? Do you really want
to live in a world in which any potential customer can steal your service
rather than pay for it?

~~~
noonespecial
I don't want to live in a world where relatively harmless people receive
draconian punishments for minor offenses but bankers steal billions without a
sour glance.

But if I must choose, I'd choose the former over the latter even though it
makes it more difficult for me to make a living.

