Phreeli requires a Zip+4 code to be entered… not simply a five-digit zip code. And, if I understand the zip code system, a Zip+4 provides them with your street name and a range of houses. So while it isn’t your house, it is a limited range. A little less anonymous than simply a zip code.
I randomly selected an Indiana zip+4 and put it in this site and got the following result.
4200 (EVEN FROM 4200 TO 4298) E SARATOGA DR, BLOOMINGTON, IN 47408-3195
I believe that you are right as of current, but the white paper says that the implementation that they are going with currently is when the service is “at launch”. I think the reason is because they are still working out the kinks of the full Double Blind Armadillo system, but eventually the full version will be employed once they are finished. It is a brand new cell service, it looks like, and the full version of the DBA architecture does look quite sophisticated from what I read in the whitepaper. So, it will take a bit of time to fully finish developing it before the full debut.
The only couple of concerns that I personally have about Phreeli is the price premium of their plans over other competing carriers and the risk of getting ceased and shut down by the men in black (US Government) if the FCC finds an issue with it in the future.
This is my own take after reading up further about them. It overall looks quite compelling and I may give them a try myself just to see what the sign-up process and experience using their service will be like (my wallet might hurt a bit though).
I think they just simply use that for determining the phone number to assign and ensure that there is proper coverage from their backend cell phone network in the location the that people are signing up from, right?
Pretty sure mint mobile only requires a 5 digit code. There are others that don’t require any zip code. You could give a fake one though.
The towers still track you and the gov has access to all data. This is a money grab from the popularity of privacy. nothing to see here
That’s such a broad statement that fear mongers and doesn’t say anything beyond it with a pedestrian response.
Please explain what and how you mean. Otherwise, your comment may as well be misinformation. You can’t comment with broad statements without proper exposition on the same and the subject matter at large.
I suppose that what he means by that is although they might not know who the person using the T-Mobile network under Phreeli is from observing the network itself, they could still theoretically deanonymize the user using their location and travel patterns via cell tower triangulation and geofencing, and use other data points from external sources to gather the name and info about the user. Unfortunately, that is just a native issue with cell towers and networks in general that almost no carrier can mitigate.
If you throw enough resources at a problem, anyone can be de-anonymized if they at all are truly anonymized in the first place. This is not a new problem to think of or resolve.
I know. I was just saying that was probably the point he was referring to.
This is what people appear to not be accounting for it would seem.
They would also have access to the user’s SMS messages and calls I believe since they go through the same carrier as the cell data unencrypted and attached to the same IMSI unless I’m missing something.
Yeah. I think overall though Phreeli and the tech behind their service does look kind of cool, and I hope that the full version of DBA gets finished soon for full release. I still think the higher pricing is a little bit of a downside, but I am glad that it’s still cheaper than an alternative like Cape. I guess privacy does have a price tag I suppose, but I’ll still give it a try to see how I like it.
True.
It doesn’t have to. You can have more privacy than what this offers for less money by combining a VOIP solution with a data only esim. I pay < $100 /yr with my current setup and Phreeli would be a privacy downgrade for me. Plus I can use any cell provider I want, it works just as cheaply and easily internationally, and I can receive texts and calls on any device.
Only because you are not the product. This is how it should have always been but alas everyone is used to “free” or cheaper options that were hurting them but did not realize.
Do share your views since you’re in the US when you try.
Jonah… why…? 
Jonah Aragon- Why I Don’t Like Nicholas Merril’s New Cell Carrier
To be serious though, is Phreeli really not all that it’s cracked up to be and something like Cape is better, in terms of privacy-focused carriers?
UPDATE: I just watched and I have to say that although I admittedly don’t know too much about telecom stuff, I will say that his points are very valid and seriously worth considering for people looking at Phreeli. Still was curious about Phreeli vs. Cape though, since I believe that Cape uses their own entire core.
I definitely do not “get” either one of these services. They are probably not worse than other carriers, but they don’t provide enough privacy value to justify their costs.
I’m at-least glad you still made the video to add more context and info people are definitely not seeing or are aware about.
Now people can decide for themselves for what is important to them and if they still want to or not use them.
Louis Rossman Phreeli follow-up (Addresses Arbitration Clause ToS concern): Louis Rossman- Let’s Talk Forced Arbitration
I brought this up in my video but I didn’t make that video for this audience so I should repeat it here: It is very unclear to me what actual privacy benefits the system would provide even if implemented in its full capacity.
Increased separation between T-Mobile and Phreeli is what is missing in the current implementation, and if more zero-knowledge proofs are used in that context, that has no bearing on the fact that T-Mobile is directly getting your IMEI when you connect to their towers.
Basically, I dislike the Double-Blind Armadillo marketing simply because it is not true and IMO further misleads consumers, but even if it were true it does not address the privacy concerns I have unfortunately.
To be perfectly frank, what has Calyx done to advance privacy? Their ISP has certainly advanced internet connectivity in the US, and CalyxOS has certainly advanced free and open-source software in the Android ecosystem. And those are both certainly noble/laudable goals, but neither of these projects have a huge privacy impact.
CalyxOS happens to be more private by virtue of being FOSS, most FOSS projects just inherently are because private software is user-friendly software. But when it comes to being privacy-first, they have consistently ignored obvious privacy improvements in favor of other priorities. I have nothing wrong with Calyx in a vacuum, and I personally like the things they value, but I just don’t see them as privacy leaders. They are working on cool things that interest them, and taking advantage of privacy marketing in the process due to Merrill’s case noteriety.
I think Phreeli is not much different. It’s my guess that Merrill just wants to be an MVNO operator because he seems to be most passionate about computer/cellular networking, and privacy was simply the clear marketing play for him given his history.
I wasn’t bothered by this when he did basically a similar thing with Calyx and their hotspots, but Phreeli IMO has gone too far with the privacy claims and is actually misrepresenting their product, which is dangerous for consumers.