I have a SoneyErricson P900 smartphone and run XP Pro on my notebook.
Is there preferably smartphone software or notebook software or
failing that reasonably priced hardware which, given a mobile number,
intercepts and stores sms messages with target mobile number before
passing the message on?

I have a few problems with an alleged friend and need to understand
what they are up to.

Thanks.

---

Request for Question Clarification by hummer-ga on 01 Jan 2005 09:41 PST

Hi zubo01,

Is this what you have in mind?

SmsMachine: PRICE
£5.69 | $10.87 | ?8.84
Log view
"Here you can see the full description of SmsMachine activity, when
and from whom there was an incoming SMS, when and to whom the auto
responses were sent"
Free to Try button
http://www.symbos.com/live/product_information.php?ApplicationID=227

SmsMachine:
http://www.symbianware.com/product.php?id=smsmach_p800&pl=se_p910

Regards,
hummer

---

Clarification of Question by zubo01-ga on 01 Jan 2005 11:21 PST

No, absolutely not.

I am trying to track a phone belonging to a 'friend' which I do not
have, so I need the software/hardware to look at INTERCEPTING sms
messages which are NOT routed to me but another number, then to record
their contents and the mobile number they are coming from.

In addition, I want to track sms messages which my 'friend' makes and
again save the content and the mobile number they are being sent to.

Look at http://www.global-security-solutions.com/ProA-GSMInterceptandTracking.htm

this is probably the closest description but it is only available for
US authorized personnel.

Unless I misunderstand what you are proposing, this sounds to me as if
it would be against United States law (unless approved by a judicial
authority). Google Answers Researchers are not permitted to assist in
illegal activities.

Firstly I am based in the UK and I refer to UK law.

Secondly, as far as I am aware what I am looking for does not infringe
UK law and so is perfectly legal.

Finally, the functions of the product described in the link do not
constitute illegal activity, the supplier simply states that they
restrict supply to specified agencies. The supplier does not say the
functions are illegal.

From the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000:

"1. - (1) It shall be an offence for a person intentionally and
without lawful authority to intercept, at any place in the United
Kingdom, any communication in the course of its transmission by means
of-
  
  (a) a public postal service; or 
  (b) a public telecommunication system. 
      (2) It shall be an offence for a person- 
  
  (a) intentionally and without lawful authority, and 
  (b) otherwise than in circumstances in which his conduct is excluded
by subsection (6) from criminal liability under this subsection,
  to intercept, at any place in the United Kingdom, any communication
in the course of its transmission by means of a private
telecommunication system.
  
      (3) Any interception of a communication which is carried out at
any place in the United Kingdom by, or with the express or implied
consent of, a person having the right to control the operation or the
use of a private telecommunication system shall be actionable at the
suit or instance of the sender or recipient, or intended recipient, of
the communication if it is without lawful authority and is either-
  
  (a) an interception of that communication in the course of its
transmission by means of that private system; or
  (b) an interception of that communication in the course of its
transmission, by means of a public telecommunication system, to or
from apparatus comprised in that private telecommunication system."

http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--b.htm#1

I stand corrected.

Notwithstanding that, as I read the extract the illegal activities 

firstly are qualified by the activity cannot be conducted in the UK,
so I assume that it does not cover any activity outside of the UK -
offshore,

secondly, provided that I do not engage in those activities, knowledge
of how to do it is not in itself an illegal activity, and that really
is more to the point - a threat in itself provided it was well
supported is sufficient in this instance.