[QUOTE=ewmayer;429931]The new lock code, 1003, turns out to match the last 4 digits of my phone #, [/QUOTE]

I guess the question now is, is the last four digits of your phone number a secondary pin that the telco uses? Anyone you know that uses the same phone and provider that you could test with?

[QUOTE=Nick;429775]Here in Europe, the 4 digit PIN people type into a non-smart mobile phone does not protect access to the physical phone but access to the SIM (smart card) inside it with the crypto keys for the network connection. Thus, what is protected by the PIN is the subscriber's account with the phone company.[/QUOTE]

Same in Australia. It's the SIM pin, with PUK and PUK2 codes if you do it wrong too many times.

[QUOTE=0PolarBearsHere;429934]I guess the question now is, is the last four digits of your phone number a secondary pin that the telco uses? Anyone you know that uses the same phone and provider that you could test with?[/QUOTE]

Same provider, yes. Same phone, doubtful - mine is over 10 years old, no one I know uses one anywhere near that age. But I will poke around online to see if I can find anything about my carrier using last-4-digits as a secondary PIN - an interesting possibility, thanks for noting it.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;429943]Same provider, yes. Same phone, doubtful - mine is over 10 years old, no one I know uses one anywhere near that age. But I will poke around online to see if I can find anything about my carrier using last-4-digits as a secondary PIN - an interesting possibility, thanks for noting it.[/QUOTE]You could test this yourself. Change to PIN to something else and see if 1003 still works.

[QUOTE=retina;429944]You could test this yourself. Change to PIN to something else and see if 1003 still works.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but devising that kind of experimental scheme would require > 2 functioning brain cells to think of. :)

Tried it - no go, only the new code works. So last-4-digits appears to be some kind of default-on-glitch reset. All my other data appear intact, no clue what kind of glitch may have occurred.

Oh, and I misspoke about being permanently forced to use a lock code once one enables said option - the menu I assumed was asking me for a new code is in fact simply re-asking the user to re-enter the current code in order to access this (and similar) security-settings-change menus. Sensible - I turn-on/unlock my phone, lose it while it's still on and unlocked, someone finding it shouldn't be able to change said settings so as to lock me out of my own phone. (That privilege is reserved, as noted, for the hnadset-manufacturer/software-coders and possibly some select subset of 'other interested parties' which shall remain nameless, but which frequently go by 3-letter initialisms here in the US.)

I had sent e-mail to Kyocera (handset mfr) on Monday - heard back from them today:
[quote]Thank you for contacting Kyocera Communications Inc. This email message is in regards of your inquiry.

We are sorry for the trouble and appreciate the opportunity to assist you. Since this device is been long since discontinued our tools to troubleshoot this devices are no longer available. However, for this old phones there is a service code for resetting to default settings. You have to dial ##786# and then the phone will ask for a 6 digits MSL code, this code it is usually 000000 but if it is not your service provider can easily provide it to you.[/quote]
I thanked them, noted I had in the meantime brute-force-cracked my new PIN, but that the above might well prove handy in future.

In the usual grandiose fashion, the Russian law-makers attempt to up even Omaha administration. The law project No. 1039149-6 includes this proposal in Article 7 (Google-translated):
[QUOTE="http://asozd.duma.gov.ru/main.nsf/%28Spravka%29?OpenAgent&RN=1039149-6"][B]Carriers[/B] are required to keep the territory of the Russian Federation [B]for three years[/B] of information about the facts of reception, [B]transmission, delivery and (or) [COLOR=DarkRed]voice[/COLOR] information processing and text messages, including their contents, as well as [COLOR=DarkRed]images, sounds[/COLOR], or other user messages communication services and provide[/B] the authorized state bodies, engaged in the operational-search activity or the security of the Russian Federation, the said information, user information and communication services on services rendered communications and other information necessary to perform their tasks of these authorities, in the cases established by federal laws.[/QUOTE]
Where are they going to store that much information remains a mystery (as most of those lawmakers cannot be concerned with such pesky little details, nor perhaps even estimate them).

GCHQ has joined Twitter:
[URL]https://www.gchq.gov.uk/news-article/hello-world-gchq-has-officially-joined-twitter[/URL]

[QUOTE=Nick;403819]It's that time of year again, the venue this time is Telfs-Buchen (Austria) and the new participants are:
[URL]http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants2015.html[/URL]

[/QUOTE]
This year's Bilderberg group meeting will begin shortly in Dresden.
If you want a list of people in North America and Europe who are currently in power but not necessarily in the spotlight, click here:
[URL]http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants.html[/URL]

Background: [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group[/URL]

[QUOTE=Batalov;432364]In the usual grandiose fashion, the Russian law-makers attempt to up even Omaha administration. The law project No. 1039149-6 includes this proposal in Article 7 (Google-translated):

Where are they going to store that much information remains a mystery (as most of those lawmakers cannot be concerned with such pesky little details, nor perhaps even estimate them).[/QUOTE]
Looks bad
[URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/23/russia-weighs-strict-new-surveillance-measures-pen/"]Russia weighs strict new surveillance measures, penalties for protesters[/URL]
A brief skim elsewhere suggested the only change coming might be removing a provision that could illegally strip a person's citizenship.

PS
Here's something I mentioned elsewhere about Google's evil stance in favor of the TPP:
[QUOTE]In their defense, this is a pretty important point to me "The TPP requires the 12 participating countries to allow cross-border transfers of information and prohibits them from requiring local storage of data." From what I've heard elsewhere, article seven of a law possibly about to be implemented in Russia is requiring carriers to store data for three years: Законопроект № 1039149-6
[/QUOTE]

What is your name?
What is your quest?
[URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36650857"]What is your Facebook ID?[/URL]