Grit in the Oyster
 

Oh dear , some toys being chucked out of prams over at TfL HQ. Seems
poor old Peter Hendy was in a rage about the recent failures (read:
loss of revenue). Oh dear Peter , well now you know what its like for
Oyster to screw you out of your money through no fault of your own.
Suck it up mate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7549603.stm

B2003

Grit in the Oyster
 

Boltar wrote:
Oh dear , some toys being chucked out of prams over at TfL HQ. Seems
poor old Peter Hendy was in a rage about the recent failures (read:
loss of revenue). Oh dear Peter , well now you know what its like for
Oyster to screw you out of your money through no fault of your own.
Suck it up mate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7549603.stm

B2003

Have you got anything intelligent to say about it, or are you just
airing your well-known anti-Oyster views?

Personally, if Hendy is incandescent about the Oyster failures, good.
He's every right to be, indeed if he wasn't he'd not be doing his job
properly.

As for the early end of the contract (in two years, actually) various
questions arise, not least of which is that Transys now have no
particular incentive to improve their performance beyond whatever
penalty payments are in the contract, a common drawback of outsourcing
key functions. The second question is how they structure the
replacement. The third is how this affects next years major roll out of
PAYG on National Rail, which will presumably require Transys and TfL to
co-operate in order to do the job properly, just at the point when EDS
and Cubic will be looking to do things like move the best staff to more
profitable areas.

Tom

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 11:27:07 +0100, Tom Barry
wrote:

Boltar wrote:
Oh dear , some toys being chucked out of prams over at TfL HQ. Seems
poor old Peter Hendy was in a rage about the recent failures (read:
loss of revenue). Oh dear Peter , well now you know what its like for
Oyster to screw you out of your money through no fault of your own.
Suck it up mate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7549603.stm

B2003

Have you got anything intelligent to say about it, or are you just
airing your well-known anti-Oyster views?

Personally, if Hendy is incandescent about the Oyster failures, good.
He's every right to be, indeed if he wasn't he'd not be doing his job
properly.

As for the early end of the contract (in two years, actually) various
questions arise, not least of which is that Transys now have no
particular incentive to improve their performance beyond whatever
penalty payments are in the contract, a common drawback of outsourcing
key functions. The second question is how they structure the
replacement. The third is how this affects next years major roll out of
PAYG on National Rail, which will presumably require Transys and TfL to
co-operate in order to do the job properly, just at the point when EDS
and Cubic will be looking to do things like move the best staff to more
profitable areas.

And not forgetting the resources needed to undertake the retendering
process [1]. I also don't see Cubic walking away from London given the
scale of equipment they have in place. They will also be spending time
and money to try to win the replacement contract (or at least a
significant role in any consortia that might put itself forward to bid).

[1] it was a very significant task the first time round and the
situation now is more complex in terms of stakeholders / participants
and also the divergent options around the way the technology will
develop. London Buses' view of on bus systems would suggest they'd want
to walk away from ticket machines being supplied by a future "Prestige"
consortia.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Grit in the Oyster
 

Paul Corfield wrote:

And not forgetting the resources needed to undertake the retendering
process [1]. I also don't see Cubic walking away from London given the
scale of equipment they have in place. They will also be spending time
and money to try to win the replacement contract (or at least a
significant role in any consortia that might put itself forward to bid).

[1] it was a very significant task the first time round and the
situation now is more complex in terms of stakeholders / participants
and also the divergent options around the way the technology will
develop. London Buses' view of on bus systems would suggest they'd want
to walk away from ticket machines being supplied by a future "Prestige"
consortia.


Just as a matter of interest, I believe Boris Johnson's Director of
Transport Policy, Kulveer Ranger, was involved in negotiating the PFI
contract first time round (because he told the London Assembly Transport
Committee, actually). Whose side was he on? In fact, what did he
actually do, he'd have been very young to take a major responsibility at
the time (he's younger than me, at 32 or 33)?

Tom

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 11:27:07 +0100, Tom Barry
wrote:

Have you got anything intelligent to say about it, or are you just
airing your well-known anti-Oyster views?

You have to ask?

Grit in the Oyster
 

Paul Corfield wrote:

...

I'm sure Mr Ranger was involved with Prestige at some point and he was
also involved in the Tunnel Cooling project but I don't know what his
exact role was. However from my experience of Prestige he did not single
handedly deliver the contract / project on a plate [1] - as is suggested
by certain press releases.

I shall now await a brown envelope landing on my desk ;-)

[1] it was this suggestion that rather stuck in my throat given how much
work so many good people put in to that project to make it happen.

Sort of confirms my suspicions - the impression he gave at the Transport
Committee (which was that he'd helped renegotiate some part of the PFI
rather than delivering the whole project) plus the factor of his youth
was rather at odds with the PR, which seemed to me to be bigging up what
appears to be a conventional bright young guy career in consultancy
which occasionally touched on transport matters as something rather larger.

I suspect he did indeed help out during the Oyster PFI negotiations but
not a lot else, but at least his minute amount of relevant transport
experience won't be entirely wasted now they're going to need a new
contract. Although, in his current role he's not really involved
day-to-day at TfL, is he?

In recent years his efforts seem mainly to be geared towards a political
career, including standing for Parliament in Wigan and briefly being the
Conservatives' vice-chairman. I was at a party with him back in 2006,
actually, although we didn't meet.

Tom

Grit in the Oyster
 

"Tom Barry" wrote in message
...
Boltar wrote:
Oh dear , some toys being chucked out of prams over at TfL HQ. Seems
poor old Peter Hendy was in a rage about the recent failures (read:
loss of revenue). Oh dear Peter , well now you know what its like for
Oyster to screw you out of your money through no fault of your own.
Suck it up mate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7549603.stm

B2003

Have you got anything intelligent to say about it, or are you just airing
your well-known anti-Oyster views?

Personally, if Hendy is incandescent about the Oyster failures, good. He's
every right to be, indeed if he wasn't he'd not be doing his job properly.

As for the early end of the contract (in two years, actually) various
questions arise, not least of which is that Transys now have no particular
incentive to improve their performance beyond whatever penalty payments
are in the contract, a common drawback of outsourcing key functions. The
second question is how they structure the replacement. The third is how
this affects next years major roll out of PAYG on National Rail, which
will presumably require Transys and TfL to co-operate in order to do the
job properly, just at the point when EDS and Cubic will be looking to do
things like move the best staff to more profitable areas.

Which for me begs the question, what is it they are doing that couldn't
(shouldn't) be done by TFL anyway, and why should they be incentivised to
perform "better" (except in the sense that this is the, IMHO bogus, reason
for outsourcing in the first place).

Fare collecting would seem to be a core activity of a transport operator
that should be in house if the expertise is available, not some add on "nice
to have" that can be outsourced for a theoritical saving at the expense of
quality.

tim

Grit in the Oyster
 

On 9 Aug, 11:27, Tom Barry wrote:
Have you got anything intelligent to say about it, or are you just
airing your well-known anti-Oyster views?

I didn't notice anyone else posting the link. What would you like, a
discourse on its technical merits? We've already done that. For the
record I'm not anti Oyster per se, I'm anti the way TfL have set up
the PAYG which IMO is close to being fraudulent.

Personally, if Hendy is incandescent about the Oyster failures, good.
He's every right to be, indeed if he wasn't he'd not be doing his job
properly.

If he'd been doing his job properly he'd have choisen the DES
encrypted MiFARE system, not the bargain basement hackable one thats
been around for ages.

As for the early end of the contract (in two years, actually) various
questions arise, not least of which is that Transys now have no
particular incentive to improve their performance beyond whatever
penalty payments are in the contract, a common drawback of outsourcing

Oh well, perhaps he (or his predecessor) shouldn't have outsourced.
But then its much easier for management to outsource because then if
things go wrong they can just bluster a lot and wave contracts rather
than having to actually take any blame for their poor decisions.

B2003

Grit in the Oyster
 

In message
,
Boltar writes
Oh dear , some toys being chucked out of prams over at TfL HQ. Seems
poor old Peter Hendy was in a rage about the recent failures (read:
loss of revenue). Oh dear Peter , well now you know what its like for
Oyster to screw you out of your money through no fault of your own.
Suck it up mate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7549603.stm


Paper travel cards & photocards here we come.... again :-)


--
Edward Cowling Stop Thatcher's State Funeral
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/thatchfuneral/

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 09:36:23 -0700 (PDT), Boltar wrote:

If he'd been doing his job properly he'd have choisen the DES
encrypted MiFARE system, not the bargain basement hackable one thats
been around for ages.

DES is a deprecated cryptographic block cipher that falls to brute force
attacks due to its short 56-bit key. It has been superseded by AES.

--
jhk

Grit in the Oyster
 

On 9 Aug, 19:41, Jarle H Knudsen wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 09:36:23 -0700 (PDT), Boltar wrote:
If he'd been doing his job properly he'd have choisen the DES
encrypted MiFARE system, not the bargain basement hackable one thats
been around for ages.

DES is a deprecated cryptographic block cipher that falls to brute force
attacks due to its short 56-bit key. It has been superseded by AES.

Its better than bugger all encryption. AFAIK mifare doesn't support
AES.

B2003

Grit in the Oyster
 

Paul Corfield wrote:

You wouldn't happen to have links to the Boriswatch.co.uk blog would
you?

Er, yes. I guess using my real name didn't fool anyone, then. Back to
the drawing board.

:)

Tom

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 09:36:23 -0700 (PDT), Boltar
wrote:

On 9 Aug, 11:27, Tom Barry wrote:
Have you got anything intelligent to say about it, or are you just
airing your well-known anti-Oyster views?

I didn't notice anyone else posting the link. What would you like, a
discourse on its technical merits?

You can post the link and comment on it without a trademark tedious
anti-Oyster rant.

Grit in the Oyster
 

On 10 Aug, 14:50, James Farrar wrote:
You can post the link and comment on it without a trademark tedious
anti-Oyster rant.

No ones forcing you to read it.

B2003

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 12:16:14 -0700 (PDT), Boltar wrote:

AFAIK mifare doesn't support AES.

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIFARE , they do. The article
also mentions a replacement card for the current Oyster/MIFARE Classic card
that will support AES.

Does anyone know if these cards will be as fast as the current Oyster
cards, or if they will require travellers to hold the card still on the
reader longer?

--
jhk

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Aug 10, 8:18 pm, Jarle H Knudsen wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 12:16:14 -0700 (PDT), Boltar wrote:
AFAIK mifare doesn't support AES.

According tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIFARE, they do. The article
also mentions a replacement card for the current Oyster/MIFARE Classic card
that will support AES.

Interesting, didn't spot a mention of AES on their site, just DES, but
then I didn't look that hard. In that case theres even less excuse for
TfL to pick the bottom of the range one.


Does anyone know if these cards will be as fast as the current Oyster
cards, or if they will require travellers to hold the card still on the
reader longer?

More importantly , if they do force an upgrade are we expected to
cough up another 3 quid for a new card?

B2003

Grit in the Oyster
 

On 11 Aug, 09:54, Boltar wrote:
AFAIK mifare doesn't support AES.

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIFARE, they do. The article
also mentions a replacement card for the current Oyster/MIFARE Classic card
that will support AES.

Interesting, didn't spot a mention of AES on their site, just DES, but
then I didn't look that hard. In that case theres even less excuse for
TfL to pick the bottom of the range one.

Presumably because when they set the spec *ten years ago*, the card
systems didn't support AES.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Aug 11, 10:28 am, John B wrote:
Interesting, didn't spot a mention of AES on their site, just DES, but
then I didn't look that hard. In that case theres even less excuse for
TfL to pick the bottom of the range one.

Presumably because when they set the spec *ten years ago*, the card
systems didn't support AES.

FTA:

1997 — MIFARE PRO with Triple DES coprocessor introduced.

No excuse.

B2003

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:05:47 -0700 (PDT), Boltar
wrote:

On 10 Aug, 14:50, James Farrar wrote:
You can post the link and comment on it without a trademark tedious
anti-Oyster rant.

No ones forcing you to read it.

No-one's forcing you to post it.

(Did you all spot what I did there?)

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 03:25:43 -0700 (PDT), Boltar wrote:

FTA:

1997 ¡X MIFARE PRO with Triple DES coprocessor introduced.

No excuse.

But what did those cards cost back then? They were probably not cheap.

--
jhk

Grit in the Oyster
 

In message , James Farrar
writes

You can post the link and comment on it without a trademark tedious
anti-Oyster rant.

No ones forcing you to read it.

No-one's forcing you to post it.

(Did you all spot what I did there?)

Not quite. You seem to be talking to someone who's been blocked from my
radar.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Aug 11, 4:14 pm, James Farrar wrote:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:05:47 -0700 (PDT), Boltar

wrote:
On 10 Aug, 14:50, James Farrar wrote:
You can post the link and comment on it without a trademark tedious
anti-Oyster rant.

No ones forcing you to read it.

No-one's forcing you to post it.

(Did you all spot what I did there?)

Talk bollox?

B2003

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Aug 11, 6:39 pm, Jarle H Knudsen wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 03:25:43 -0700 (PDT), Boltar wrote:
FTA:

1997 — MIFARE PRO with Triple DES coprocessor introduced.

No excuse.

But what did those cards cost back then? They were probably not cheap.

Possibly not, but they should have built in an easy upgrade path so
now the old card has been hacked any newly issued cards can be DES or
AES encrypted and people with the old cards can upgrade if they want.

B2003

Grit in the Oyster
 

On 11 Aug, 16:14, James Farrar wrote:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:05:47 -0700 (PDT), Boltar

wrote:
On 10 Aug, 14:50, James Farrar wrote:
You can post the link and comment on it without a trademark tedious
anti-Oyster rant.

No ones forcing you to read it.

No-one's forcing you to post it.

(Did you all spot what I did there?)

Yes. You resorted to a silly, childish "I know I am, but what are
you"-style argument because deep down you know the pro-Oyster idiots
don't have a real argument to back up your case.

Grit in the Oyster
 

On 14 Aug, 08:43, "paul.ingerson" wrote:
You can post the link and comment on it without a trademark tedious
anti-Oyster rant.

No ones forcing you to read it.

No-one's forcing you to post it.

(Did you all spot what I did there?)

Yes. You resorted to a silly, childish "I know I am, but what are
you"-style argument because deep down you know the pro-Oyster idiots
don't have a real argument to back up your case.

Boltar's real name revealed...?

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

Grit in the Oyster
 

On Aug 14, 10:21 am, John B wrote:
On 14 Aug, 08:43, "paul.ingerson" wrote:

You can post the link and comment on it without a trademark tedious
anti-Oyster rant.

No ones forcing you to read it.

No-one's forcing you to post it.

(Did you all spot what I did there?)

Yes. You resorted to a silly, childish "I know I am, but what are
you"-style argument because deep down you know the pro-Oyster idiots
don't have a real argument to back up your case.

Boltar's real name revealed...?

I need to drink stronger coffee because the subtext here has just
whooshed past me.

B2003