Feeds

Afghan cellco accuses rivals of funding Taliban

Why else are we being attacked?

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

Roshan, the largest mobile provider in Afghanistan, has accused competitors of paying off criminals to protect their infrastructure, pointing out that it owned eight out of the ten masts destroyed this year.

The claim has been denied by competitors Afghan Wireless, Etisalat and Afghan Telecom, who say the lack of damage to their own infrastructure is thanks to the way they work with the local community, fund local projects, and employ local guards.

Karim Khoja, head of Roshan, was quoted by the Financial Times as saying: "Two years ago our people in the south rarely got threatened because we were really the only service provider ... But once our competitors came to the south the number of attacks on Roshan, in terms of being threatened and asked for money, went up."

Earlier in the year Taliban commanders sent letters to the mobile phone companies demanding they pay taxes in areas controlled by the organisation. The FT called the phone number on the letter and spoke to a Taliban representative who told them that two companies had responded to the demands, adding "When a company sets up they have to pay tax to the government of Afghanistan ... We are the government here and they must pay tax to us."

Mobile phone cells and relay stations are difficult to protect as they are generally unmanned and often in remote places. In the UK they often play unwitting host to pirate radio transmitters, and in many countries sites are powered by local generators and their accompanying tanks of stealable diesel, and even in apparently civilised places the white disc of a microwave antenna can prove irresistible for target practice, as US operators know well.

Paying protection money might prove cheaper than hiring local guards, though the latter option will probably work out better in the long run. Mobile phones are particularly useful in a country where the infrastructure is unreliable and five million of them are being used in Afghanistan, but keeping the networks operational isn't as easy as one might first think. ®

Security for virtualized datacentres

More from The Register

next story
TEEN RAMPAGE: Kids in iPhone 6 'Will it bend' YouTube 'prank'
iPhones bent in Norwich? As if the place wasn't weird enough
Consumers agree to give up first-born child for free Wi-Fi – survey
This Herod network's ace – but crap reception in bullrushes
Crouching tiger, FAST ASLEEP dragon: Smugglers can't shift iPhone 6s
China's grey market reports 'sluggish' sales of Apple mobe
Sea-Me-We 5 construction starts
New sub cable to go live 2016
New EU digi-commish struggles with concepts of net neutrality
Oettinger all about the infrastructure – but not big on substance
PEAK IPV4? Global IPv6 traffic is growing, DDoS dying, says Akamai
First time the cache network has seen drop in use of 32-bit-wide IP addresses
EE coughs to BROKEN data usage metrics BLUNDER that short-changes customers
Carrier apologises for 'inflated' measurements cockup
Comcast: Help, help, FCC. Netflix and pals are EXTORTIONISTS
The others guys are being mean so therefore ... monopoly all good, yeah?
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
The next step in data security
With recent increased privacy concerns and computers becoming more powerful, the chance of hackers being able to crack smaller-sized RSA keys increases.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.