Which app do you use to scan/debug GSM/CDMA cellular tower s

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2017-02-17 01:01, Stijn De Jong wrote:

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:35:35 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:

I can mention one app that apparently finds all towers in the vicinity,
but the only info it says about them is an identifier code.

It is "MyProfiles". The goal of the app is to adjust phone settings
according to rules. A rule can trigger on a variety of things, and one
of them is location. The location can be done by GPS, but the app can
instead do it based on which towers it can detect. You can tell it to
trigger "home" if it sees the five towers near home.

This is not the tool you need, but proves that other towers can be
found. The app lists all towers found, and timestamps them. Apparently
only one is active, but somehow it displays how many are within range,
and in another window lists them.

Thanks for the suggestion of MyProfiles. There seems to be one from
"Llab01 Inc."
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.fancy01.myprofiles.lite

It certainly asks for a *lot* of permissions upon installing (luckily,
each one can be turned off individually)
- Device & app history
- Cellular data settings
- Identity
- Calendar
- Contacts
- Location
- SMS
- Phone
- Photos/Media/Files
- Wifi Connection information
- Bluetooth connection information
- Device ID & call information

But after using it for an hour, I can see that it's a powerful tool that
can "do stuff" (I'm not sure what yet) depending on what towers it is near.

I'll play with it a bit more, because it seems overall like a powerful
autoamtic doer of things. However, it's not a scanner, at least not only a
scanner.

No, it certainly is not a scanner, but it uses scanning to do its own
stuff. I think the phone tries to connect to each tower, till it finds
the most appropriate one, and this tool records the activity to find the
approximate location with the minimal battery usage.

I just meant it as a proof that scanning all towers is possible.

I use it to turn off automatically the WiFi when I get out of home, or
when it detects the car bluetooth. Previously I also used it to
temporarily disable Internet while sleeping, for 8 hours, say.
Unfortunately this is no longer possible on Android 6, no permission to
turn off the data network.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

 

[nospam]

In article <o85hs3$8mc$3@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong
<stijndekoning@nlnet.nl> wrote:

I don't know if a phone can connect to two towers at once
though.

Can it?

it can and does.

 

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-17 03:06:07 +0000, The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> said:

On 02/16/2017 02:14 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-02-16 20:57:54 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijndekoning@nlnet.nl> said:

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:54:17 -0500, Zaidy036 wrote:

Works on iPhone also

In my first post I placed OpenSignal last on the list of Android apps
simply because OpenSignal mostly seemed to be a lookup to Internet
databases, which isn't what I'm after.

I have OpenSignal on my iPhone and it located two Verizon towers in
the vicinity of my home out at Lake Nacimiento. It also provides usage
and signal data. I manages to do all I need of it.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2016%2C%2014%2010%2045.png
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/opensignal-speed-test-3g-4g/id598298030?mt=8

I

just installed it, but as soon as the opening black-text-on-white
screen (I guess I need to give some sort of permission) appears it
blinks out and the 'OpenSignal has stopped..." error message pops up.

I have not had any issues running OpenSignal.

I emailed the OpenSignal people, who want to know specifics...

I really want to know WHERE the cell towers are. T-Mobile has
piss-poor coverage in out-of-the-way places and rather than driving
around in circles I'd like to at least head toward a tower. Will this
do what I want?

I can only tell you that while Verizon has good coverage with at least
two towers where I live, T-Mobile is mediocre and shows no towers, and
both AT&T and Sprint are poor to non-existant, also showing no local
towers. This leads me to believe that T-Mobile, At&T, and Sprint are
actually roaming in my location, using the Verizon towers.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

 

[The Real Bev]

On 02/16/2017 02:14 PM, Savageduck wrote:

On 2017-02-16 20:57:54 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijndekoning@nlnet.nl> said:

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:54:17 -0500, Zaidy036 wrote:

Works on iPhone also

In my first post I placed OpenSignal last on the list of Android apps
simply because OpenSignal mostly seemed to be a lookup to Internet
databases, which isn't what I'm after.

I have OpenSignal on my iPhone and it located two Verizon towers in
the vicinity of my home out at Lake Nacimiento. It also provides usage
and signal data. I manages to do all I need of it.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2016%2C%2014%2010%2045.png
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/opensignal-speed-test-3g-4g/id598298030?mt=8

I just installed it, but as soon as the opening black-text-on-white
screen (I guess I need to give some sort of permission) appears it
blinks out and the 'OpenSignal has stopped..." error message pops up.

I emailed the OpenSignal people, who want to know specifics...

I really want to know WHERE the cell towers are. T-Mobile has piss-poor
coverage in out-of-the-way places and rather than driving around in
circles I'd like to at least head toward a tower. Will this do what I want?

--
Cheers, Bev
Self Test for Paranoia: You know you have it when you can't
think of anything that's your own fault.

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 20:44:09 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong
<stijndekoning@nlnet.nl> wrote:

So, what I *want*, I can't find, which is an app that scans for all towers,
and simply reports the unique id and signal strength of those towers (which
is how WiFi apps work).

Why can't a cellular app work like a wifi app works (e.g., InSSIDer or
Fritz! Wlan, or WiFi Analyzer, etc.)?

Your smartphone is an SDR (software defined radio) that is capable of
receiving all of the worlds cellular bands and sub-bands, and can
demodulate most any flavor of cellular protocol. However, this is not
a feature that the cellular providers find worthy of providing. Were
they to do so, you would have the equivalent of a hand held spectrum
and protocol analyzer. Such devices do exist, but not built onto a
smartphone platform, which lacks the horsepower to do the job:
<http://www.gl.com/protocol-analyzer-for-wireless-and-ip-networks.html>

So, you're stuck with only hearing what your smartphone is programmed
to hear, which I think means your cellular providers mode
(GSM,UMTS,CDMA, etc) and possibly filtered to limit reception to your
cellular vendors SID and NID numbers. I gotta play with Netmonitor
later to see if my Verizon phone will "see" Sprint sites. Verizon
roams onto Sprint when desperate. Both are CDMA, but on different RF
sub-bands. So far, I'm only seeing Verizon, but that might be because
I'm in a lousy location.

Also, the reason you can see any wi-fi access point that is
broadcasting its SSID, is that as newer and faster protocols are
added, compatibility with hearing management packets from the older
slower protocols is written into the spec so that the slower protocols
won't collide with the faster protocols. However, that can be
disabled with the Greenfield mode:
<http://www.summitdata.com/blog/wi-fi-and-greenfield-mode-functionality/>
where an AP can only hear other 802.11n AP's. There have also been
some casualties among the slower protocols, such as where 802.11n
requires that 802.11 and 802.11b speeds NOT be supported. However,
since the broacasts are always sent at the slowest speeds for that
protocol, a higher speed 802.11n AP can always hear if an 802.11 or
802.11b AP is present.

Bottom line. Wi-Fi downward compatiblity and scanning works because
it was designed to work that way. Not so with cellular frequencies,
modes, protocols, vendors, and instruments.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:06:07 -0800, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

I really want to know WHERE the cell towers are. T-Mobile has piss-poor
coverage in out-of-the-way places and rather than driving around in
circles I'd like to at least head toward a tower. Will this do what I want?

I've been thinking of building (and selling) such a device. It can be
done if:
1. You have an RF direction finder.
2. You know the sub-band where to expect the vendors transmissions.
3. You know the SID (system ID) of the vendor.
4. You have a map or database of the vendors service areas.

I used to design direction finders, so I have more than an average
clue as to how this MIGHT be done. I'm not up to speed on cellular,
but I think I can catch up. Basically, an SDR receiver that scans,
looks for a signal direction, identifies it by RF sub-band and service
area, draws a line on a map, and records the line. Drive around a
little and soon you'll have many lines that cross at one point, which
is the cell site. You won't get any ID numbers, but you can get those
from any phone that can display the field service mode.

Marketing research: How much would pay for such a device?



--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[nospam]

In article <2017021619553985684-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

I can only tell you that while Verizon has good coverage with at least
two towers where I live, T-Mobile is mediocre and shows no towers, and
both AT&T and Sprint are poor to non-existant, also showing no local
towers. This leads me to believe that T-Mobile, At&T, and Sprint are
actually roaming in my location, using the Verizon towers.

sprint probably is, but att/tmo aren't.

 

[nospam]

In article <2017021620135464924-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

I can only tell you that while Verizon has good coverage with at least
two towers where I live, T-Mobile is mediocre and shows no towers, and
both AT&T and Sprint are poor to non-existant, also showing no local
towers. This leads me to believe that T-Mobile, At&T, and Sprint are
actually roaming in my location, using the Verizon towers.

sprint probably is, but att/tmo aren't.

AT&T coverage out here at Lake Nacimiento, West of Paso Robles, is
mostly bad to non-existant. That was my reason to not having an iPhone
until Verizon came onboard, and I seriously doubt that they are making
any effort to solidly establish their presence here in any competitive
way.
T-Mobile does have much better rural coverage than AT&T, but nowhere as
good as I get with Verizon.
As to whether or not any of them are using Verizon towers for roaming,
that is only conjecture on my part.

it's not conjecture on my part.

sprint/verizon have roaming agreements, as does att/t-mobile.

historically, sprint/verizon used cdma while att/tmo were gsm/hspa. the
two air interfaces are not compatible, so they *can't* roam on each
other's network.

now that all four carriers support lte, it's technically possible,
except that each carrier uses their own set of lte bands and not all
phone models have all of them (i can think of only 3-4 that do), so
it's not a realistic option. if they did offer it, most people would
not benefit.

roaming is usually just for voice/text, not data, however, it depends
on the specific plan, and there may be additional fees in some cases.

tl;dr - coverage varies. choose the carrier who has coverage in the
areas in which you travel and at a fair price. do not count on roaming.
there is no single 'best' for everyone.

 

[Lewis]

In message <2017021619553985684-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

This leads me to believe that T-Mobile, At&T, and Sprint are actually
roaming in my location, using the Verizon towers.

That is not possible.

--
I thank my lucky stars I'm not superstitious.

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 03:37:57 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong
<stijndekoning@nlnet.nl> wrote:

Over time, I should be able to figure out what the unique cellid of the
microtowers is (which may be a function of their MAC address or serial
numbers for all I know).

For CDMA femtocell, the unique ID is a conglomeration of:
MCC (Mobile Country Code)
SID (System ID)
NID (Network ID)
BID (Base Station ID)

For GSM femtocell, it's:
MCC (Mobile Country Code)
MNC (Mobile Network Code)
LAC (Location Area Code)
CID (Cell ID)

Stolen from:
<http://people.csail.mit.edu/bkph/other/Cellular/osm_blog>
Read the footnotes, which have some Android bugs listed.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-17 06:31:19 +0000, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> said:

In message <2017021619553985684-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> Savageduck
savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
This leads me to believe that T-Mobile, At&T, and Sprint are actually
roaming in my location, using the Verizon towers.

That is not possible.

OK! In that case, I will put it bluntly; AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint
coverage, roaming aside, in the Lake Nacimiento area, Âą13 miles West of
Paso Robles, California totally sucks. Conversely Verizon coverage is
actually quite good in the same area, particularly given that the only
towers in the area belong to Verizon.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

 

[Lewis]

In message <2017021622511544557-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

On 2017-02-17 06:31:19 +0000, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> said:

In message <2017021619553985684-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> Savageduck
savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
This leads me to believe that T-Mobile, At&T, and Sprint are actually
roaming in my location, using the Verizon towers.

That is not possible.

OK! In that case, I will put it bluntly; AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint
coverage, roaming aside, in the Lake Nacimiento area, Âą13 miles West of
Paso Robles, California totally sucks. Conversely Verizon coverage is
actually quite good in the same area, particularly given that the only
towers in the area belong to Verizon.

Of course you have to choose your mobile carrier based on your own
coverage needs. Traditionally Verizon has had the largest coverage area,
though t-mobile has been making large gains in recent years.

I get good coverage all over Denver, but it is pretty lousy inside my
house, so I have a (free) T-mobile CellSpot that provides LTE coverage
inside the house (and almost certainly improves the coverage for my
neighbors).

--
Not all who wander are lost

 

[nospam]

In article <o85li4$ijb$1@adenine.netfront.net>, Stijn De Jong
<stijndekoning@nlnet.nl> wrote:

Is there an easy way, with freeware, to self-video the screen?

use a gopro

 

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-17 03:58:07 +0000, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> said:

In article <2017021619553985684-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

I can only tell you that while Verizon has good coverage with at least
two towers where I live, T-Mobile is mediocre and shows no towers, and
both AT&T and Sprint are poor to non-existant, also showing no local
towers. This leads me to believe that T-Mobile, At&T, and Sprint are
actually roaming in my location, using the Verizon towers.

sprint probably is, but att/tmo aren't.

AT&T coverage out here at Lake Nacimiento, West of Paso Robles, is
mostly bad to non-existant. That was my reason to not having an iPhone
until Verizon came onboard, and I seriously doubt that they are making
any effort to solidly establish their presence here in any competitive
way.
T-Mobile does have much better rural coverage than AT&T, but nowhere as
good as I get with Verizon.
As to whether or not any of them are using Verizon towers for roaming,
that is only conjecture on my part.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

 

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2017-02-16 21:57, Stijn De Jong wrote:

The one potentially nice thing that OpenSignal provided on Android was a
compass-like pointer toward the tower it's connected to; however, that
pointer doesn't seem even remotely aligned with where I know that tower to
be, so, I'm not sure if that compass-like pointer is fluff or if there is a
major reflection of radio waves going on off of someone's solar panel array
or expansive windows overlooking the valley below.

There is no way the phone can determine the location of the tower from
the signal, the antenna is non-directional. It has to be determined from
a map of locations. Maybe the tower gives that info, I don't know.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

 

[Mikko OH2HVJ]

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> writes:

I've been thinking of building (and selling) such a device. It can be
done if:
1. You have an RF direction finder.
2. You know the sub-band where to expect the vendors transmissions.
3. You know the SID (system ID) of the vendor.
4. You have a map or database of the vendors service areas.

You could also add some LTE/UMTS module, some of these can do a network
scan with an AT-command and give you the cell id, technology, channel
number etc. of all 'visible' base station.

Apparently even some USB dongles can do this, so you could connect some
cheap SDR+modem+GPS to an RPi and do your magic.

There are also cell tower location databases like Opencellid.

--
mikko

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 23:41:10 -0500, nospam wrote:

tl;dr - coverage varies. choose the carrier who has coverage in the
areas in which you travel and at a fair price. do not count on roaming.
there is no single 'best' for everyone.

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 20:13:54 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

T-Mobile does have much better rural coverage than AT&T, but nowhere as
good as I get with Verizon.

I've had all three, Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile.

Out here in the Silicon Valley, coverage seems about the same for each,
although I had them in series, and not sequentially (except for a few
concomitant burner phones).

< off topic observation >
I dropped Verizon when they added a two-year contract just for replacing a
Kyocera phone that broke which I had under an insurance plan. That's where
I learned the insurance plan had gotchas they don't tell you about; so the
second that the additional two years were up, I went to AT&T (and saved a
few bucks, as it turned out).

I kept AT&T for about 4 or 5 years until I needed a plan sans data for my
family plan. The Blackberry was grandfathered, but AT&T wouldn't allow me
to have what they called a "smart phone" without data, even though they'd
happily block data (saying it was for "my protection"). I dropped AT&T like
a hot potatoe like I dropped Netflix when they changed their plan, and
never looked back on either one.

Moving to T-Mobile, I loved that they did everything differently. I mean
everything. I could buy my own phone. No contract. No data overage charges
ever. Calling Europe was 20 cents a minute. Data is unlimited in Europe. No
roaming charges. And, I didn't have to have data if I didn't want it. I
could get phones from them for an additional $50 over what I could get on
the market, where they'd charge me 1/24th the phone on the bill. I didn't
even have to tell them what phone I was using. Everything about T-Mobile
was different than Verizon & AT&T.

And the coverage was about the same (sucky in the mountains, great in the
valley) for all three.

< / off topic observation >

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:51:15 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

OK! In that case, I will put it bluntly; AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint
coverage, roaming aside, in the Lake Nacimiento area, ??13 miles West of
Paso Robles, California totally sucks. Conversely Verizon coverage is
actually quite good in the same area, particularly given that the only
towers in the area belong to Verizon.

Coverage maps:
https://opensignal.com/network-coverage-maps/

Dunno exactly where you are, so I have to just look at the lake itself.

If I pick the area under the words "Lake Nacimiento" on the map as the
point of reference, it seems that T-Mobile and Verizon are about the same,
while AT&T and Sprint suck by way of comparison.

AT&T: http://i.cubeupload.com/Mk740J.jpg

Sprint: http://i.cubeupload.com/oYhuXd.jpg

T-Mobile: http://i.cubeupload.com/i2SMJH.jpg

Verizon: http://i.cubeupload.com/ReQily.jpg

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:58:46 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

I get good coverage all over Denver, but it is pretty lousy inside my
house, so I have a (free) T-mobile CellSpot that provides LTE coverage
inside the house (and almost certainly improves the coverage for my
neighbors).

T-Mobile calls *all* their home devices a "CellSpot", so which one do you
have?

I have two, for example, both of which are called CellSpot but they're
quite different.

What type do you have?
How many decibels of cellular signal do you get from them?

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:45:01 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

For CDMA femtocell, the unique ID is a conglomeration of:
MCC (Mobile Country Code)
SID (System ID)
NID (Network ID)
BID (Base Station ID)

For GSM femtocell, it's:
MCC (Mobile Country Code)
MNC (Mobile Network Code)
LAC (Location Area Code)
CID (Cell ID)

Stolen from:
http://people.csail.mit.edu/bkph/other/Cellular/osm_blog
Read the footnotes, which have some Android bugs listed.

Hi Jeff,
I don't think it's that well defined in that there are two *different*
supposedly unique types of cell ids that the apps list for GSM towers.

There is a short CID and a long CID, which are completely different sets of
numbers (i.e., one is not just a longer version of the other).

Other than that confusion, the rest holds though, but my point is that
there is no such thing as a CID since there are two types of CID both of
which seem to be called CID but they're completely different numbers for
the same cell tower.