Comments Locked

28 Comments

Back to Article

  • ddriver - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    Given the tiny amount of data a SIM is supposed to hold, it doesn't seem like process was ever a factor in determining its size. The cards are made big because they are supposed to be manually inserted by average folk.

    SIM stands for "subscriber identity module". If it is soldered on board and non replaceable, then it isn't really a module, therefore it is not a SIM. It is just a minuscule amount of embedded memory.
  • solipsism - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    It can still be a SIM. In fact, this is far better for users that need to switch SIMs between countries quickly because all it means is they can choose the new SIM from the OS, reboot, and then it'll be connected to that network. You could hold countless SIMs and switch between them without worrying about losing them and the data you've prepaid for. If you, say, only travel for work once a year this can be a nice benefit. If you transfer devices you can copy down the SIM data or maybe the SW will offer up something simple like a QR Code or cloud backup often to save your SIM credentials. This is a good thing.
  • ddriver - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    "You could hold countless SIMs"

    Don't know about that, I can count pretty high.

    Embedding has some advantages, modularity has other advantages. I was merely pointing out that if it is not modular, then it is not a "subscriber identity module", at least not from consumer perspective.

    Considering it is just a few bytes of data it can easily be a programmable number, without relying on neiter modular nor embedded read-only-memory. If misuse is an issue, then the programming of that memory should be secured, also there is always the security and authentication on the provider side.
  • LauRoman - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    It will end up being another way to lock down the device. Which is not to say that mobile isps don't already lock your device 10 ways to sunday.

    Anyway how is this practically (not technically) different from (old?) american cdma phones? Yes. i understand they aren't the same, but isn't the end result similar?

    Aren't there SIM vulnerabilities already? Are there not going to be more? It's a great idea to have an essential part of a network be embeded. And we don't know how easily patchable it's gonna be.
  • close - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    The difference is that instead of going to the shop and getting a new SIM, you make a phone call and the operator reprograms your eSIM. The disadvantages and pitfalls of this latter option will be seen in practice soon enough.

    One major disadvantage is for people who are used to swapping SIMs between phones for whatever reason (like running out of battery and wanting to put the SIM in a backup phone or a friend's phone). This of course depends on the actual manner in which this is implemented.

    If the response time is minutes then it wouldn't be much of a problem. Otherwise spending hours or days waiting for the operator to reprogram your SIM while you're on vacation might be a major disadvantage that can only be addressed by including "countess" eSIMs in your device. This way you can program one in advance of you travel.
  • Samus - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    eSIM can't have the bulk of its characteristics modified. Some carriers lock a phone number to an ICCID internally to their network, so once activated with a number, the number can not be changed for that SIM. eSIM doesn't circumvent this. Other carriers simply treat eSIM like they would a CDMA device.

    What we need are vSIM that allow various registers to be rewritten (by the carrier, obviously) to add flexibility.
  • name99 - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    Come on. Le's be honest here. This evolution is utterly idiotic.
    "eSIM" should be a PROTOCOL, a set of mechanisms whereby
    - a phone can securely communicate its ID to the network
    - a user can securely communicate a newly purchased ID to the phone
    - a user can securely transfer the ID from one device to another

    To be obsessing about the physical material the data is held in (especially when that prevents transfer from one network to another) is backward beyond belief.
    And you're assuming something (that data can be changed on this eSIM) that is not in evidence. Essentially you're assuming the system works the way it SHOULD rather than what's actually being described. What I see described is a very small version of a standard SIM, and I can't change the data as I wish on a standard SIM...
  • Bullwinkle J Moose - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    These are probably embedded Govt SIM chips for the new qualcom servers for Windows

    You won't even know they are on your server and are not intended for end users

    They are to Log in silently over the cell network and connect to the hidden encrypted virtual file system to find hidden servers by pinging the embedded GPS and to run malware directly from the hidden file system

    Please do not try to shield your server from GPS or Cell signals or it will become non-functional

    You may connect to the Internet as you normally would without ever being aware of these new backdoors

    LOL

    Just kidding......
    or am I?
  • kfishy - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    What the hell did I just read.
  • close - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    A troll who's trying too hard and falling short...
  • drajitshnew - Monday, March 13, 2017 - link

    You scare me.
  • close - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    Well sometimes terms, naming conventions and acronyms are kept for historical reasons or familiarity even if sometimes they're outdated or plain wrong.
    Some DDR memory is actually QDR, FSB was used long after the "Front Side" of the acronym was no longer relevant, bandwidth is frequency not throughput, MIMO used to mean multiple physical antennas, technically speaking any personal computing device is a PC (phones included), and USB was never actually "Universal".

    If I destroy a SIM it's still called a SIM although it cannot and will not ever perform its function as designed. Just as embedding it into another system doesn't necessarily warrant the change of name of the device that still performs an almost identical function, save for the physical replacement which is now done logically, via software reprogramming.

    I guess size is important now because of IoT. It didn't matter that much in the past when phone thinness wasn't all the craze, or when you actually had to be able to hold it in your hand. But if you want devices the size of a shirt button you may be interested in shrinking everything does as much as possible.
  • mkozakewich - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    The one that bothers me the most is 'IDE'. Every drive these days has integrated electronics, but there's an old tech I talk to who complains whenever I call an old parallel drive 'PATA'. Ribbon cables will always be IDE cables, to him.
  • bigboxes - Tuesday, March 14, 2017 - link

    That's because no one ever called them PATA drives back then. It's was either IDE/EIDE or ATA. No one said PATA until SATA drives were introduced.
  • iwod - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    The SIM Card, in its current form, works well in China and India, two countries where their mobile users together is more then US / Canada and EU combined.

    The SIM card works well because of its simplicity, and for certain applications / limitation the eSIM today simply not work in China.

    So getting rid of SIM, or transitioning to eSIM isn't really a technical issues, much more with politics involved.

    And apart from some IoT usage, no one seems to be in a hurry to get rid of SIM. I do hope Apple do something about it though.
  • Strunf - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    Whats the point of SIM nowadays?... can't we just have a login screen where we put our subscriber account and that is all?
    A card to just old a number how stupid can it be... sure useful 20 years ago when internet access was not common.
  • CaedenV - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    it is still important because it is important to have multiple forms of identification. Something your have, something you know, and something you are.

    Something you have is your SIM/device
    Something you know if your acct credentials
    Something you are is your fingerprint for login to the device

    The nice thing about having a SIM instead of a physical device is that it is a portable card that you can throw into any device and have it work without needing to call the cell company to activate it... but this portability is also what allows the SIM to be easily copied and bypassed. We need a new way of doing things, and we absolutely do not need a SIM any longer. The sim itself can be replaced by a board level serial number... replacing the registration process to tie that number to 'you' without physically showing up at a store is going to be the difficult bit.
  • close - Monday, March 13, 2017 - link

    Isn't "something you are" basically "something you have"? You *have* your fingerprint. The meaning of the phrase is "something physical that only one person can have at any time", unlike a password that can "exist" in multiple people's possession.

    So something you have can simply be the phone with an unique ID or the SIM. Why bother with your fingerprint? Do you enjoy giving it away to your mobile operator? Because that, just like the SIM or the phone ID, must be verifiable by the operator. And unlike a PIN, once that's stolen good luck changing it.
  • Strom- - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    I would say the primary benefit of SIM is security. The security that only the physical holder of the SIM who knows the PIN can use carrier resources and make billable actions. A password can be stolen without you knowing. A SIM can't even really be cloned without the PIN, in that it requires very serious LAB equipment.
  • ThomasS31 - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    Wonder when they will throw away the whole sim card/module thing and simply go for an online accout type subscription.

    Why that is sooo hard to achieve in 2017???
  • Valantar - Monday, March 13, 2017 - link

    How are you supposed to log in to anything if you're not even connected to a network? Who is going to host and maintain this login service? How will handoffs happen if the network recieving your "login" isn't the one you're a subscriber to? If you open up the networks to "unauthorized" use, to allow for logins like this, how do you avoid this being abused for other means? How do you avoid account theft and/or spoofing? Neither of these are trivial questions.
  • name99 - Monday, March 13, 2017 - link

    You are right that these are not trivial questions. You are wrong in assuming that they don't have answers. Consider two different types of technologies
    - Apple Pay
    - the programmable SIM built into cellular iPad Air 2
    (I am most familiar with Apple technologies; other vendors doubtless have similar technologies)

    Point is, these are two technologies that address your points and exist today. They could be extended to a complete solution. What's preventing this today is 100% the carriers' desire to maintain control over their users, nothing to do with technology.
  • piroroadkill - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    I don't want smaller SIMs. I like human-usable SIMs. The nano-SIM is small enough.
  • Gunbuster - Sunday, March 12, 2017 - link

    SIM functionality should have been rolled into MicroSD long ago. Streamline to one slot and no more bitching about storage. Oh but then how would they upsell to $1100 phones...
  • haukionkannel - Monday, March 13, 2017 - link

    Easily... just make the basic model 1200$ and then give 10% super discount...
  • Valantar - Monday, March 13, 2017 - link

    Eh ... so if your SD card was too small or failed (which is quite common), you would need to activate your new SD card with your carrier, and be without phone service if the card failed? Yeah, that's a great idea.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, March 13, 2017 - link

    Well, lets see. Any time I need more storage, or the SD card fails (which is comon) I would need to go buy and activate a new SIM card, all the while having no cell contact, to save half a fingernail's worth of space.

    yeah. great idea.

    How about making the phone 1 mm thicker instead.
  • Valantar - Monday, March 13, 2017 - link

    Am I the only one wondering how on earth you implement an IC that small with some form of meaningful interface to the board? How can that fit more than 2-3 solder pads at the most? I mean, 1.5x1.1mm is .. a third of a grain of rice? One thing is miniscule surface mount capacitors and resistors, which have two distinct ends and no need of more complicated connections than that. Another thing entirely is a data storage unit with R/W capability. I'm not saying it's impossible, I just can't figure out how it would work. Then again, I'm not an engineer of any kind.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now