Showing posts with label CDMA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CDMA. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

CSA - Site Survey Method4/Cell Types

Cell types
GSM reports, as far back as 20 years ago, distinguished three kinds of cells as the growth in GSM installations massively increased following popularity as a preferred digital cellular network: large cells, small (mini) cells and micro cells. The main difference between these kind of cells lay in the cell range, the antenna installation site, and the propagation model applying to each of them. Moreover, these cells could be overlayed one on top of another to provide coverage for varying traffic conditions and illustrated in the previous discussion http://cellsiteanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/csa-site-survey-methodmobility-models.html.

CSA has been subjected to understanding cell layer tiering involvement in a particular geographical area and what impact the finding of tiering might have determined from radio test measurement results, and what impact the results might infer for a particular investigation. In the previous discussion on Mobility Models it highlighted a simple issue: why walk tests are important to mimic the pedestrian's experience of obtaining mobile services. Germane and relevant, whilst the mobile networks are highly intelligent networks and use memory and memoryless in their propagation models, CSA examiners, students and experts cannot apply intelligent algorithms in the manual function of their work when conducting site surveys. It is, therefore, necessary to distinguish processes and procedures hidden within the intelligent network functionality that provide us (CSA examiners, students and experts) with knowledge that helps us gain skills and experience in the performance of the work we do.

So  we know "walk tests" are unavoidable (thus inescapable) forming part of the methodology we should apply, where relevant, during site surveys. Whilst this requirement is a basic simple binary style approach to CSA that doesn't mean to suggest mobile networks aren't sophiscated, convoluted, NASA style complex system because mobile networks are very much the latter. These grass root levels are important to CSA. For instance a GSM mobile network may use Cell Selection Procedures C1 and C2. The network can use components from C2  (cell reselection) to identify coverage for a slow moving mobile (e.g. pedestrian/walk test) which can be used to understand the microcell coverage. Drive testing equally needs to be represented for the benefits it provides for CSA.



    



Above, three tiers of cell coverage have been illustrated. Microcells are distnguished as a cell type because predominantly this type of cell in GSM (or CDMA for that matter) is usually represented as localised coverage to a small area. Pedestrian is seen as relevant to it. However, vehicular mobile usage is largely predicted within the network as "fast moving". Let us take the case of the getaway car speeding away from the scene of crime. Would it not seem strange to you to find the target's mobile phone call records identifying a number of Microcell IDs designed to cope with long dwell time in an area associated with slow mobile movements (e.g.5~10mph) compared with Macrocell umbrella coverage designed to handle accelerated speeds (e.g. 30~70mph). Why would the getaway car be driving so slowly after a crime, unless the *bogey wanted to be caught red-handed and why s/he commited the crime in the first place just to be arrested? On first blush of the call record evidence it wouldn't make sense.

*The term bogey has been adopted from the military theatre of war identification procedure representing an un-identified (unknown criminal) target, whereas a bandit is an identified (known criminal) target. In criminal investigations the latter can also suggest surveillance in progress on the target's activities.

But drive testing can throw up unexpected issues. CSA demands keeping an open mind and, as previously mentioned at my blogs, CSA examiner, student and expert should be "not only be environmentally aware, but equally be environmentally astute." A case I dealt with in the North of England concerned a series of smash-n-grabs at wholesale and retail outlets.  From my radio tests I suggested the radio evidence did not follow the getaway route the police required that I test. CSA involves noticing factors that could impede or record a particular route. In this case a speed camera that was in lock-n-load (active) to capture speeding vehicles was located at an early stage on the suggested getaway route. When I asked did the speed camera record a speeding violation, the response came back "no", yet the ascertion by the police was the getaway vehicle was speeding. However, the radio test measurement survey along the complete route did not entirely match the cell IDs in the call records either as some of the cell IDs were for slower mobile traffic and cells covering a middle layer coverage area and the use of these cells suggested the mobile dwell time was not travelling outside a certain geographical area. Eventually, a more senior detective suggested a route that veered away from the first route getaway route. My attention was drawn to an area inbetween local buildings, a mud track leading to a field and a nearby cemetary and housing estate. Infact the bogeys turned out to be previously known bandits and the entire operation of the smash-n-grabs was orchestrated from a house on the estate sited perfectly for comings and goings for the many crimes but quite hard to detect. CSA played an effective part to support other evidence and intel.       




However, umbrella macrocell coverage in a geographical location can be used to support high speed getaways e.g. where CCTV has recorded or an eyewitness had seen the getaway vehicle speeding through dense urban area. Given the speed of the vehicle the network would be detecting the mobile's short dwell time in that area. The omission of use of overlayed microcells providing limited area coverage is a suggestion of fast moving traffic. The use of a macrocell would not be out of place supporting the notion of a fast moving mobile. This can be stated in relation to the density of non-used microcells and their cell boundarys compared to macrocell cell boundaries and, of course, any location updates, time, velocity etc.

Since 2010 Cells types have rapidly moved on with a split between voice/data and data-only cells transforming the way CSA is and will be conducted in the future. For instance, there are increases in carriers (2G frequencies allocation migrating (re-use) to 3G frequencies allocation) Moreover, with LTE linking with WiFi/WLAN etc there are enormous advantages and dis-advantages that have crept into CSA site survey methodology.

 
The impact of these changes requires improved comprehension about the various cells and as higher frequencies are used or are brought into use cell coverage gets smaller. This fact is a benefit because the approximated location of the mobile is improved and significantly improves where smaller cells are relevant. It may not be GPS accuracy but there seems no reason why it could not meet justification under an e.g. Daubert test. Furthermore, it doesn't means CSA should jettison early styles of CSA site survey method which will remain relevant for some years to come. But CSA will become even more localised creating a specialism in InnerCity CSA (ICCSA) compared with rural CSA. A beneficary of  ICCSA knowledge will be the neuromancer cybercrime arena utilising our forensic and investigative skills to comprehend the technicality behind a suspected crime defined by the outcome from particular usage of technology.

Site survey methods do not have to be overly complicated, merely identify the radio technology at given points and by using a structured appraisal, distinguishing each wireless carrier available at particular geographical locations, to show the relevance to an investigaion or crime scene.

So what are the potentially inter-connected Cell types that fall within the scope of CSA large cell and small cell environments:

Macrocells
Minicells
Microcells
Metrocells
Picocells
Nanocells
Femtocells
WIMAX cells
WLAN cells
WiFi cells
etc

And in support of that environment it should not under-estimate the importance of devices capability from providing services and to accessing services. This mean from not simply the network, but the radio network e.g. BTS/(e)NodeB/H(e)NB etc to the enhanced (U)SIM and handset terminal. That requires knowning which Release (R) is relevant to the investigation:

R99    (Release 1999)
Rel-4    (Release 4)
Rel-5    (Release 5)
Rel-6    (Release 6)
Rel-7    (Release 7)
Rel-8    (Release 8)
Rel-9    (Release 9)
Rel-10    (Release 10)
Rel-11    (Release 11)
Rel-12    (Release 12)  
etc

Sunday, October 20, 2013

MTEB CSA Fundamentals Training

The MTEB has received an increase in the number of enquiries about fundamental (core) training in Cell Site Analysis.

It could be useful for readers to be reminded in brief, scoping CSA requires applying a wide-ranging methodology incorporated in the investigation and analysis of mobile device activity and mobile communications. That means a CSA participant needs to understand:

- the science operating behind and underpinning CSA
- identifying forensic stepping stones for CSA
- evidence produced for CSA
- reporting on the findings from the conducted CSA.

None of the MTEB subject headers (below) on the course for each of the sections takes precedence over another as all topic elements in the course requires the investigator/examiner/expert to:

- constantly balance and accommodate all of the investigation elements and lines of enquiry
- correlate constants vis-a-vis ambiguities and determine the findings in each of the topics and confirm what the combined findings mean from all topics when aggregrated
- findings should support and cooroborate / deny and disprove the investigation outcome set out in the engaging party's instructions.

MTEB Cell Site Analysis Fundamentals Course
[]GSM []GSM/(W)CDMA/ []GSM/(W)CDMA/LTE []Other Bespoke Networks

Section 1 Introduction - CSA Fundamentals
Section 2 Legal and Technical Frameworks
Section 3 Guidelines, Specifications, Standards. Reference Sources etc
Section 4 PLMN - Mobile Network Installation and Mobile Elements
Section 5 Originating evidence
Section 6 Cross-referencing originating sources of evidence
Section 7 Techniques/skills for Cell Site Identification
Section 8 Techniques/skills for Cell Site Analysis
Section 9 Techniques/skills for Radio Results Analysis
Section 10 Final Analysis and Reporting

Monday, November 26, 2012

US Handset Serial Number Databases

US Handset Serial Number Databases

US operators maintain their own stolen and blacklisted cellphone databases. As of the 31st October 2012 the GSM operators AT&T and T-Mobile began sharing their databases. CDMA operators Verizon and Sprint have taken the decision to merge their databases but that will not be complete until November 2013, so we are told.

The said objective of these initiatives are to improve track and trace. As an example, GSM uses a 56-bit decimal digit s/n, whereas CDMA uses a 56-bit hexadecimal digitals s/n. However, in the US there are variations of s/ns to consider.

The engine for these changes is driven by the FCC initiative - http://www.fcc.gov/document/announcement-new-initiatives-combat-smartphone-and-data-theft

To accommodate this and other cellphone/cellular changes I have altered my CDMA training material and GSM training material. As consequence these changes will also have an impact on WCDMA and LTE, either on a national level or international level. These training materials have also changed, too.

_________________
Institute for Digital Forensics (IDF) - LinkedIn
Mobile Telephone Examination Board (MTEB) - LinkedIn

Sunday, October 28, 2012

LTE, Test Trials and Cell Site Analysis

LTE, Test Trials and Cell Site Analysis

There are some strange views floating around that cell site analysis is highly difficult or impossible now we have moved from GSM and 3G on to LTE, with it being so new that there is uncertainty.  I can imagine that LTE may cause speculation because LTE hasn't been sufficiently rolled out in the UK and it may appear there is no mature facts or figures upon which to rely. But, infact, there are facts and figures that have been generated in refining the LTE system for roll out and, of course, that knowledge benefits cell site analysis.

Back in 2009 mobile operator Telefonica O2 started conducting LTE test trials in Slough Berkshire UK. Throughput data quantification, radio test measurements, surveys, etc created a plethora of statistical information which O2 used in planning its LTE network.  



Those tests included a variety of known components required for analysis, which can be seen in the 'Key' legend.


Consideration of LTE requires tests to be conducted not only with a static analysis and assessment approach but also distance and velocity analysis and assessment approach, too. That is apart from the environmental considerations. For CSA that means drive tests alone are not good enough; nor using passive radio test measurement devices could fulfil the requirements of an analysis and assessment approach to comprehend an LTE service at a particular location. TrewMTE blog readers may recall I gave a helpful tip about looking at data and location here: Data Usage in Cell Site Analysis - http://trewmte.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/data-usage-in-cell-site-analysis.html.

Of course, consideration of the particapting RF transceiver elements present the same requirement for cell site analysis to understand the arrangements at the base station for LTE as it did for GSM/3G.

TrewMTE blog readers may also recall that I set out a series of discussions about Cell Site Identification presented as primers:

Mini Course in Cell Site Identification (Pt1)
http://trewmte.blogspot.com/2011/12/mini-course-in-cell-site-identification.html

Mini Course in Cell Site Identification (Pt2)
http://trewmte.blogspot.com/2011/12/mini-course-in-cell-site-identification_31.html

Mini Course in Cell Site Identification (Pt3.s1)
http://trewmte.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/mini-course-in-cell-site-identification.html

I have completed the last primers in the series above and was going to publish them, having given readers sufficient time to go away and research/study the earlier parts. However, this matter needed airing first, due to misconceptions that are floating about out there. I shall publish the other primers later on.

Do remember, I have used the term 'cell site' to capture readers' imaginations to immediately link readers' thoughts towards cell site analysis (CSA). However, cell site can be used to mean e.g. a GSM cell site, a 3G NodeB or a LTE eNode. 

To leave the user device out of any analysis would be to precide over an incomplete investigation. Readers will note in Cell Site Identification Part 1 an illustration was given linking devices and components that are required for consideration when investigating/researching during CSA. The MS (handset/SIM) forms part of the investigation. O2 LTE test trials equally identified two devices used for their tests.

The experienced investigator will immediately see that the devices in the image above, used during test trials, do not of themselves fit immediately with the common scenarios of mobile phone usage and cell site analysis. However, as is known it is only fairly recently that LTE enabled smartphones have been launched. An LTE investigative approach to considering a particular device used in a particular case requires identification of handsets, dongles and server devices. Moreover, identification of devices that switch between transmission technologies is also a must.

Orange and Vodka - mixing mobile networks (shaken, not stirred) -
http://trewmte.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/orange-and-vodka-mixing-mobile-networks.html

Examination Techniques3: Blackberry Bold -
http://trewmte.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/examination-techniques3-blackberry-bold.html

Diplomas: Mobile Telephone Evidence (MTEdipl) -
http://trewmte.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/diplomas-mobile-telephone-evidence.html

Sunday, November 06, 2011

Signal Strength and Distance

Signal Strength and Distance

Reading an article on Susan Brenner's blog lay-testimony-on-cell-phone-radio-waves  about the case U.S. v. Kale, 2011 WL 4361531 (U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3d Circuit 2011) I read with interest the comments of the network operator's lay witness, in the article, recorded as having stated:

" Jeff Strohm, a custodian of records at Sprint Nextel Communications (Sprint), testified that Kale's cell phone used signals from a cell tower located in Pennsauken, New Jersey, and that `the biggest indicator’ of which tower has the strongest signal is `distance.’ "

" Jeff Strohm explained that a “cell phone is constantly searching for the strongest signal” and that the strongest signal is usually determined by `how far away you are from the cell phone tower.’ "

If one is speaking very, very generally to school children or novices etc where those people learning the information are hardly going to make a decision upon learning that info, may well be sufficient, but as influencing testimony for a criminal trial? Is that really enough to provide low-level of information that may be used to decide someone's innocence or guilt?  It is important to enter the caveat that other things may have been said by this witness or other material looked at, but this is the only info included in the article and, thus, by omission of any other info the discussion is based upon what is stated in the article.

Technically, when we deal with received signal strength (MS-BTS/BTS-MS) radio engineers - as opposed to back office call record staff - generally consider it to be a composite of three discrete effects:

- path loss
- slow fading
- fast fading

Those discrete effects take no account of and omit other fundamentally important data a mobile phone requires to have received, decoded and understood in order to 'camp on a cell', that is even before the mobile phone is receiving a communication or instructed to communicate.  

'Signal strength' and 'distance' are most certainly not sufficient for either GSM or spread-spectrum transmission technologies such as CDMA or W-CDMA to suggest are the main key factors to determine which Mast will handle a particular mobile phone's communications.

Within the realms of the GSM transmission technology it is made fundamentally clear as part of the mandatory requirements that a mobile phone shall detect 'signal strength', but what use is ranking signal strength in order of merit without understanding issues, such as:

- cell selection algorithm C1?
- cell reselection algorithm C2?
- if the mobile phone fails to decode parameters in 'control channels' e.g. RACH control parameters in the SYS_INFOS BCCH_INFOS 1–4. Is the Cell Barr Access bit = 1 (trace cf: 9D 00 00 & 9F 00 00) or the Access Control Class not equal 0?
- etc?
- And what about BTS capacity and directed retry?

When a mobile phone is engaged in a mobile call then the newtork instructs a mobile phone which Mast to use via control info through eg SDCCH.

Turning to issues associated with distance. If a mobile phone is located in-building, which can have affect on radio signals and latching to a particular Mast; where the landscape surrounding the mobile phone affects radio signals; or the clutter on the landscape affects the radio signals or a combination of any of the aforementioned, distance between MS and BTS gets blown out of the window as a reasonable suggestion in opposition to other matters that ought to be mentioned to a court of law.

As Sprint operates spectrum-spread transmission technology CDMA mobile services and iDEN transmission technology TDMA mobile services, I need to take some care here not to portray, too much, the wrong image of identical scenarios with GSM.

Wiki records Sprint's activities (Sprint_Nextel)
Sprint Nextel Corporation (NYSE: S) is an American telecommunications company based in Overland Park, Kansas. The company owns and operates Sprint, the third largest wireless telecommunications network in the United States, with 52 million customers, behind Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility. Sprint Nextel also owns a separate wireless division, Sprint Prepaid Group which offers prepay wireless services as Boost Mobile and Virgin Mobile USA.

Sprint is a global Internet carrier and makes up a portion of the Internet backbone. In the United States, the company is the third largest long distance provider and also owns a majority of Clearwire, which operates the largest wireless broadband network.

The company was renamed in 2005 with the purchase of Nextel Communications by Sprint Corporation. The company continues to operate using two separate wireless network technologies, CDMA and iDEN (for Nextel and some Boost Mobile subscribers). In 2006, the company spun off its local landline telephone business, naming it Embarq (which was subsequently acquired by CenturyTel). In 2009, Sprint reached an agreement to outsource management of its wireless networks to Ericsson.

Sprint Nextel launched its first WiMAX wireless card on December 21, 2008 (the Franklin Wireless u300 broadband card), and the first WiMAX phone available in the United States (the HTC Evo 4G) on June 4, 2010, utilizing its WiMAX technology from Clearwire Corp. A recent Consumer Reports survey tied Sprint with perennial front-runner Verizon Wireless in terms of customer satisfaction, a big improvement over previous years.

Thus, Sprint Nextel is a company with not only good quality indicators, but has outsourced management of its wireless networks to Ericsson, according to Wiki. The latter company (Ericsson) is known for its high technical competence, quality and originality in telecommunications and mobile communications, and adds further gravitas to my discussion that using 'signal strength' and 'distance' are insufficient to suggest that those elements should be used in isolation to other factors how a mobile phone may use a particular Mast. Ericsson, one could say, as an owner of patents, a developer of mobile networks/devices and transmission technology are the expert's expert. I am convinced, therefore, that companies like Sprint Nextel and Ericsson would hardly endorse in isolation to anything else the simplicity of using 'signal strength' and 'distance' as the indicators to inform a court of law about why a mobile phone would use a particular Mast.
       
In the next discussion I shall go further to open up and explore CDMA/TDMA parameters and protocols required for a mobile phone and Mast to connect for communications purposes.

Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Join MTEB Forum if your are in wireless / telecomms

Join MTEB Forum if your are in wireless / telecomms

.
If you work in forensics and/or examination devices, investigations or deal with evidence then the MTEB forum puts you in contact with other professionals when you need help with technical issues, technical discussions or generally want to stay up to date. Due to the make up of the forum members: experts, high level security, law enforcement and senior investigators requests to join are vetted.
.
.
Invitation to Join Mobile Telephone Examination Board
--------------------------------------------------------
The MTEB forum is dedicated to evidential standards, forensic examination and lawful interception dealing with mobile telephones/SIM/USIM/MMC, bluetooth, IrDA, USB, cell site analysis and mobile networks GSM, CDMA, 3G, 4G.
.
Link if you are NOT a LinkedIn member:

http://www.linkedin.com/groupInvitation?groupID=141739&sharedKey=35E59F107179

Link if you are a LinkedIn member:
http://www.linkedin.com/groupsDirectory?results=&sik=1216135556335

Join MTEB Forum if your are in wireless / telecomms

Join MTEB Forum if your are in wireless / telecomms

.
If you work in forensics and/or examination devices, investigations or deal with evidence then the MTEB forum puts you in contact with other professionals when you need help with technical issues, technical discussions or generally want to stay up to date. Due to the make up of the forum members: experts, high level security, law enforcement and senior investigators requests to join are vetted.
.
.
Invitation to Join Mobile Telephone Examination Board
--------------------------------------------------------
The MTEB forum is dedicated to evidential standards, forensic examination and lawful interception dealing with mobile telephones/SIM/USIM/MMC, bluetooth, IrDA, USB, cell site analysis and mobile networks GSM, CDMA, 3G, 4G.
.
Link if you are NOT a LinkedIn member:

http://www.linkedin.com/groupInvitation?groupID=141739&sharedKey=35E59F107179

Link if you are a LinkedIn member:
http://www.linkedin.com/groupsDirectory?results=&sik=1216135556335

Saturday, June 16, 2007

China Mobile Telephones

China Mobile Telephone Exports
It wasn't difficult to guess that with China's industrial revolution into manufacturing everything and its growth markets in mobile telephones that China would aim to compete with the world's best known handset brandnames, such as Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, SonyEricsson, Alcatel, Sagem etc. I thought it might be helpful for mobile telephone examiners to be aware of the new China mobile telephone imports and publish a list of new arrivals of mobile telephones from China. The list is not exhaustive and covers those models that are available now. All of these handsets are operating in the frequency ranges of: 900MHz, 1800MHz and 1900MHz.

A818 Multi-media Phone +Bluetooth
BEST D2000 Multi-media Phone
BOEING 777 Dual SIM Card Phone
BELLWAVE 830 Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT Q500
CECT C1000+ Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT 1000D
CECT A800
CECT Jie Bao
CECT N90 Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT V8 Multi-media Phone + Bluetooth
CECT Q500 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
CECT N538 Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT 1000D Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT A800 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
CECT A706-2 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
CECT N95 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
CECT Y890 Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT C1000I Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT W958 Multi-media Phone
CECT N788 Multi-media Phone
CECT C99 Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT Q500 Dual SIM Card Phone
CECT N55 Multi-media Phone
CECT A900 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
CECT V007 Multi-media Phone
CoolPAD 728B GSM + CDMA
CoolPAD 298 GSM + CDMA
CoolPAD 288 GSM + CDMA
HUI FENG 666 Multi-media Phone
HUI BAO 520 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
ICOOL D66 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
JIN SHA A203 Dual SIM Card Phone
JIA XIN N95 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
K007 Multi-media Phone + Bluetooth
KAI RUI 666 Multi-media Phone
KAI RUI 169 Multi-media Phone
LANG XING M558 Dual SIM Card Phone
Long Run L821 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
Ma Bao 99 Dual SIM Card Phone
NCKIA E95 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
O3 838 Multi-media Phone + Bluetooth
Qi Tai X689+ / ZT 68 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
San Sunc N96 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
TIAN Long 788 Multi-media Phone
TIAN SHI XING T900 Dual SIM Card Phone
Ya Qi Yi Hao Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
Zhong Than 199 Dual SIM Card Phone + Bluetooth
ZT 988 Dual SIM Card Phone
ZTC 988 Multi-media Phone
ZTC C2000 Dual SIM Card Phone

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

CDMA Support Studio

CDMA Support Studio


It is very easy having been involved with GSM for 14 years to overlook other wireless technologies. I have been making a conscious effort for the last four years to collect tools for mobile telephone examination of digital wireless systems such as CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access). In fact it is most helpful to have an understanding of CDMA when considering 3G (wcdma), where there are a number of similarities in wireless processing and functionality. CDMA Support Studio is a Windows based application and provides an "intuitive and efficient way to program and transfer data" to and from Motorola CDMA mobile telephones.

Saturday, November 04, 2006

Cell phones do not disrupt navigation systems

Cell phones do not disrupt navigation systems

Tests by Airbus and American Airlines /Qualcomm indicate that, contrary to popular lore, cellular signals do not disrupt airplanes' navigational systems. The two results were similar for both the CDMA and GSM cellular technologies, but the Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Communications Commission say the tests can't officially be considered in their review of the rules because they were conducted without government oversight. The agencies say they are moving ahead with their own tests (Wall Street Journal 23 Sep 2004)