Identity theft and mobile phone portability: A failure of regulatory responses

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstractResearch


In Australia identity crime now costs some $2.6 billion per year.
Part of this expansion of technology-enabled crime is the phenomenon of
criminals engaging in unauthorised porting of a victim’s phone, an activity
that is becoming increasingly common.
Mobile phone number portability was introduced in 2001 as a governmentmandated
requirement for telecommunication providers. The portability
of mobile phone numbers has now been targeted by criminal elements as
a way of stealing the identity of victims and using the control of the phone
as a means of committing further offences. Much of our financial and
lifestyle information is now contained on our mobile phones.
This presentation will address the expanding notion of identity and the
effect technology has had on traditional criminal enterprise. It will rely on
data from the United States and Australia to show that this type of offence
is an emerging opportunity for criminal entrepreneurs. The presentation
will also examine the modus operandi of this type of offence and outcomes
for victims.
The discussion will analyse the policy and regulatory responses to
phone porting and the failure to aggressively tackle this issue. The
increased use of smart phones and the expanding criminal market for this
type of offence has created significant challenges for law enforcement. The
researchers will argue that customer convenience is being prioritised over
security and crime prevention responses.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 2017
EventThe 5th International Conference on Cybercrime and Computer Forensics: ICCCF - Sofitel Broadbeach, Gold Coast, Australia
Duration: 16 Jul 201718 Jul 2017
Conference number: 5


ConferenceThe 5th International Conference on Cybercrime and Computer Forensics
CityGold Coast
Internet address


Dive into the research topics of 'Identity theft and mobile phone portability: A failure of regulatory responses'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this