On Sunday 18 May 2008 16:36:38 john.messeder wrote: > As I recall his final determination, it wasn't his actual phone book > that had been cached, it was something about his most recent calls, but > with some identifying information that surprised him.
OK. That makes sense, though I think it is pretty interesting that they would go to the trouble of uploading that data to the simm without bragging about their "excellent service". > And as anyone who has read an itemized bill, or sat, as I have, in > court while telephone records are routinely used in evidence, saving > information based on your phone calling is not an added expense at all. > We undoubtedly pay for the "service" as part of the telco's operating > cost, but it's not really a problem. Oh yeah the calling info is definitely stored because storing that benefits the telco. That's not the same as uploading and storing phone book data from the simm. The phone book data has nothing to do with billing or the telco's financial interests. Back to the original post, I think url caching on the server by esn is more like storing simm based phone books than call info for billing. > > On 05/18/2008 at 1625 -0400 > > Art Alexion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While I believe this is entirely possible, I'm having a hard time > > believing it. First, to cache by esn would involve a cumulatively > > significant cost, with little benefit to the telco. Replicating and > > storing simm card data would benefit only the consumer. If the telcos > > were going to the expense of doing that to benefit their customers, they > > would be touting it as another service they provide. > > > > On Sunday 18 May 2008 15:41:32 john.messeder wrote: > >> That is, unfortunately, entirely possible. A friend lost his telephone > >> in the woods. AT&T sold him a new phone, and when he got home he > >> discovered the new SIM had on it everything that was on the one he lost > >> -- including phone numbers that only he could have put on it. > >> > >> On 05/18/2008 at 1506 -0400 > >> > >> "L . . ." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> what about sprint-side caching? perhaps the mail.yahoo.com url was > >>> cached to his phone's ESN (although I hope that's not how it works). > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
