[Rumor] Verizon Steps Up Detecting & Stopping Unapproved Tethering with Gingerbread

[dgstorm]

Supposedly, a Droid X user in the Reddit online community recently had his "unapproved" tethering detected and cut-off by VZW. Recently he updated his phone to Gingerbread, and tried to use the popular "Wireless Tether" app to share his mobile connection with his other devices. His connection was suddenly stopped and he was redirected to a Verizon up-sell page. Here's a quote from the AndroidPolice article,

All outbound requests were suddenly redirected to an upsale page prompting to purchase a $20 add-on officially authorizing tethering to the tune of measly 2GB a month.

It isn't immediately apparent whether the detection occurred at the hardware level or the network level. Are there any users out there that have or haven't experienced the same thing under the same conditions? Let us know in the thread.

Source: AndroidPolice

 

[jamezelle]

yea verizon has been slipping tether detecting kernel modules in with some of the latest firmware for devices. A recently leaked thunderbolt RUU contains a tether detecting apk, take my word about this as the RUU hasnt been released by us devs yet for obvious reasons.

 

[mafiafan123]

O Snap :icon_ nono2: , Maybe theres something that can be changed? But then again it is a service if I really need it I can pay for it. Anyones thoughts? or anyone has something sim happen on vzw?

 

[tgyberg]

This could be what they were working on when releasing several versions of GB before the final .596 build came out. Oh well, like anything.. if you want to play, you gotta pay.

 

[t0k3ndr01d]

IMHO Verizon should not be allowed to do this. This service has been around a lot longer than they have been charging for it. I've used wireless tethering since the ppc6700 days on alltel all the way through using my touch pro2. Developers make the free apps to do this. They put their work into making the app. It's not like we are cracking the verizon app to do this. We already pay for "unlimited" data and pay out the a** for it too. We paid for the phone therefore we paid for the wifi card in the device. Shouldn't we be allowed to use the wifi card and the data that we pay for how we want without being told that we have to pay extra to do something the hardware already permits and the free 3rd party software already permits.

 

[t0k3ndr01d]

This could be what they were working on when releasing several versions of GB before the final .596 build came out. Oh well, like anything.. if you want to play, you gotta pay.

but we already paid for it once. think of it like paying twice for playing the same game.

 

[czerdrill]

Waiting to see how many ppl jump to sprint lol

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[kodiak799]

This service has been around a lot longer than they have been charging for it.

So what? Oil has been around a lot longer than the world has been charging for it. If you don't like it, you can go somewhere else that doesn't charge you for tethering....oh, wait.

Reading between the lines here, this DOES NOT bode well for VZW allowing unlocked devices on their network. Maybe they're not going to care when they go to tiered plans, but otherwise there's a ton of people who expect to be grandfathered in unlimited plans that will just delete the offending apk or flash a rom that doesn't have it.

 

[kodiak799]

Waiting to see how many ppl jump to sprint lol

Would be funny to see an earnings conference where they say "according to our research, unhappy rooters - approximately 2% of the market - have given indication they intend to switch to Sprint"

 

[rynosaur]

Waiting to see how many ppl jump to sprint lol

Would be funny to see an earnings conference where they say "according to our research, unhappy rooters - approximately 2% of the market - have given indication they intend to switch to Sprint"

2% of their contract user base would be a GIGANTIC loss to them, and not something they would want to see. These telcos are squabbling over hundredths of percentage points of users -- considering each contract-holder represents a $2,000+ stream of income for them. What they are counting on is that many of us will be intimidated by their attempts to limit data useage -- or unwilling to pay the ETF from breaking our contracts.

 

[Abadus]

They should put in tiered plans and not charge for tethering. If you are paying for the bandwidth you should be able to use it how you like.

I agree that people using this to replace their home internet should pay more. But if someone was to connect a laptop once a month they should not be paying extra. We should pay for what we use.

They should change their pricing not make you double pay because you use more than they thought you would.

 

[kodiak799]

2% of their contract user base would be a GIGANTIC loss to them

Yes and no. It was a tongue-in-cheek comment about all the idle threats people make to leave VZW. VZW has the lowest turn in the industry, something like 1.5% which is MULTIPLES lower than competitors (AT&T is something like 5%, Sprint and TMo were @10% or higher).

So reality is 2% is a number that easily gets lost in the mix of switchers and upgrades. And to the extent these are higher data users, they are also less profitable customers.

If retaining that 2% potentially threatens your margins, thru loss of tethering revenues or otherwise, it's really not something a CEO loses much sleep over.

 

[kodiak799]

They should change their pricing not make you double pay because you use more than they thought you would.

This has been discussed. They don't set prices without consideration for capacity. If people use twice what they expected when they set the price, then theoretically they've charged 50% of what they should have since they can only sell half the subscriptions for given capacity.

Believe me, if VZW knew you were going to use 10gigs they would have charged you more than $30.

I've said repeatedly that I would prefer they continue charging for tether separately rather than have to pay, one way or another (either via higher tier prices or lower data limits), for a service I don't really need or use.

 

[rynosaur]

2% of their contract user base would be a GIGANTIC loss to them

Yes and no. It was a tongue-in-cheek comment about all the idle threats people make to leave VZW. VZW has the lowest turn in the industry, something like 1.5% which is MULTIPLES lower than competitors (AT&T is something like 5%, Sprint and TMo were @10% or higher).

So reality is 2% is a number that easily gets lost in the mix of switchers and upgrades. And to the extent these are higher data users, they are also less profitable customers.

If retaining that 2% potentially threatens your margins, thru loss of tethering revenues or otherwise, it's really not something a CEO loses much sleep over.

You must know the business better than I do. Still, if you consider the insane prices we used to pay for minutes and text messages, and then the sudden fall-off of those prices once tcp/ip content on cellphones became exponentially more popular, and first one then another telco stopped charging per-text rates or per-minute useage rates on all plans, you can see that the telcos are as sensitive to their competitors as they are to their users' usage patterns. There was a time when cellular data was not meted out. Eventually, cellular bandwidth restrictions and data surcharges will become a thing of the past and unlimited data will join unlimited talk and text--it's merely a matter of the backbone infrastructure catching up with use/demand and the advent of the next profit center for the telcos (who knows what that will be, and please don't say tablets, not many want to carry a 10" tablet in their pocket, on their back, or cradled in their arm in a leather cozy like some fragile 2-day old infant). The only way to enforce fair data rates/plans is to vote with your feet and dollars.

 

[czerdrill]

Waiting to see how many ppl jump to sprint lol

Would be funny to see an earnings conference where they say "according to our research, unhappy rooters - approximately 2% of the market - have given indication they intend to switch to Sprint"

Ha yes...we've heard the idle threats, now to see how many do it. If I was a betting man, this might be the surest thing ever (on the side of no ones going anywhere)

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk