Google undermines US carrier RCS initiative by launching its own

Less than a month after the four US MNOs announced a joint RCS initiative for Android, Google has decided to launch its own.

Google was conspicuously absent from the announcement of the Cross Carrier Messaging Initiative by AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile US and Sprint last month. Considering it was all about championing RCS on Android you have to assume there had been some dialogue between the operators and Google, but the omission of the latter from the press release indicated progress had been slow.

Now, having not done anything significant about RCS in the US for over a decade, Google has suddenly found the motivation to upgrade all SMS messaging on Android to RCS. In a brief blog post Sanaz Ahari, Product Management Director at Google, explained all the cool new things US Android users will now be able to do via the text function. It could almost have been a CCMI press release.

It’s hard to see this as anything other than a direct attempt to undermine the nascent CCMI project. The US operators saw Google’s RCS apathy as an opportunity to add some value themselves, so Google acted quickly to pull the rug out from under them. It could be that some of the features operators reckon they’re able to uniquely offer, such as keeping user data out of Google’s hands, might still give them an advantage, but this looks like a major setback for them.

Synchronoss unveiled as tech partner for latest US RCS effort

The Cross Carrier Messaging Initiative will use Synchronoss tech in its attempt to make RCS into a useful mainstream alternative to SMS and OTT messaging services.

RCS (Rich Communications Services) has been around for a while, but most people have had a tough time caring, content as they were with SMS for simple messaging and OTT services like WhatsApp for sending photos and that sort of thing. But the four big US operators reckon there’s life in the old dog yet and launched the CCMI a few weeks ago to make a proper go of it.

Synchronoss is a US company that specializes in providing operators with extra services to sweeten their offerings, one of which is messaging, so it’s not surprising to see it unveiled as a key partner in this initiative. With little apparent demand for a new flavor of messaging, the end product of this collaboration needs to offer something special if expects people to give it the benefit of the doubt.

“The cross-carrier messaging initiative has the potential to transition the wireless ecosystem to a new, innovative messaging service that will power new experiences – allowing U.S. wireless customers to manage their digital life and enabling efficient and convenient interactions with their favorite brands from a single application,” said Glenn Lurie, CEO of Synchronoss, before pausing for breath.

“The launch of this initiative signals the beginning of the era of advanced messaging in the U.S. that will begin to unite communication, services and entertainment in entirely new ways. Synchronoss, along with our partner WIT Software, has seen first-hand how powerful advanced messaging can be around the globe, and we believe there is tremendous potential for this in the U.S. on multiple fronts. This collaboration exemplifies how working together can enhance the entire mobile ecosystem.”

“By collaborating with Synchronoss, we’ll be able to successfully advance the messaging experience through RCS and take the next step to further the conversational commerce ecosystem,” said Doug Garland, GM of the CCMI joint venture. “With new RCS capabilities all four wireless carriers together will be able to create better overall mobile messaging customer experience.”

Synchronoss and WIT Software have some form in this area, having been involved in a similar RCS enterprise in Japan last year. If RCS is to belatedly take off it will probably be because it enables some new kind of communication between businesses and end users that all concerned consider valuable. It’s not immediately obvious what form that will take, so it will be interesting to see what they come up with.

US operators collaborate in one more effort to make people care about RCS

AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon have created the Cross Carrier Messaging Initiative to push the Rich Communications Service standard on Android.

RCS is championed by the GSMA, which has been banging on about it for over a decade. It’s positioned as the heir apparent to SMS, offering all sorts of ‘rich communications’ such as images, group chat. That all would have been pretty handy when it was first proposed, but since then there have been countless OTT messaging apps launched, such as WhatsApp, which seem to provide at least everything RCS does. So it’s hard to see what the point of RCS is in this day and age.

The US operators clearly disagree, however, hence this announcement. It’s easy to see why operators, and therefore their lobby group, would want to promote a messaging standard that they have greater control over. But what is less obvious is the incentives smartphone users would have to switch to it. Presumably most would reflect on their current messaging app portfolio and conclude that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

“People love text messaging for a reason,” said David Christopher, GM of AT&T Mobility. “Texting is trusted, reliable and readily available – which is why we’re using it to build the foundation of a simple, immersive messaging experience. This service will power new and innovative ways for customers to engage with each other and their favourite brands.”

“The CCMI will bring a consistent, engaging experience that makes it easy for consumers and businesses to interact in an environment they can trust,” said Michel Combes, CEO of Sprint. “As we have seen in Asia, messaging is poised to become the next significant digital platform. CCMI will make it easy for consumers to navigate their lives from a smartphone.”

“At the Un-carrier, customers drive everything we do, and that’s no different here,” said John Legere, CEO of T-Mobile. “Efforts like CCMI help move the entire industry forward so we can give customers more of what they want and roll out new messaging capabilities that work the same across providers and even across countries.”

“At Verizon, our customers depend on reliable text messaging to easily connect them to the people they care about most,” said Ronan Dunne, CEO of Verizon Consumer Group. “Yet, we can deliver even more working together as an industry. CCMI will create the foundation for an innovative digital platform that not only connects consumers with friends and family, but also offers a seamless experience for consumers to connect with businesses in a compelling and trusted environment.”

Here are the things the CCMI says RCS brings to the table:

  • Drive a robust business-to-consumer messaging ecosystem and accelerate the adoption of Rich Communications Services (RCS)
  • Enable an enhanced experience to privately send individual or group chats across carriers with high quality pictures and videos
  • Provide consumers with the ability to chat with their favourite brands, order a rideshare, pay bills or schedule appointments, and more
  • Create a single seamless, interoperable RCS experience across carriers, both in the U.S. and globally

Of these the B2B angle seems the most compelling. There is still a surprisingly vibrant business around automated application-to-person (A2P) messaging, which typically operators use to communicate with their customers. The switch to RCS would bring a lot more options to that business. And then there’s the fact that you don’t need to know whether someone has an OTT app installed in order to send that message, although it should be noted that Apple shows no sign of supporting it.

But there’s no getting around the fact that RCS is essentially a direct competitor to OTT messaging which, thanks to the inability of operators to act with any kind of urgency, now has a massive head start in the marketplace. Perhaps if more of them belatedly get their acts together as the US operators have they can start to build some momentum, but we’re not holding our breath.

Apple U-turns again to pull HK map app under pressure from Beijing

Apple has removed the crowd-sourced app HKmap.live, favoured by the protesters in Hong Kong, from its local App Store, after being blasted by China’s state media.

The submission of the mapping app, developed on top of the web version which could enable users to instantly track the police movements, among other things on the roads, was first rejected by Apple, on the ground that “the app allowed users to evade law enforcement.” This caused strong protest from both local users in Hong Kong and politicians in the US so Apple reversed its decision and made the app available. The US Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) told his followers on Twitter that Apple admitted it “mistakenly” failed to go through full review process the first time:

Shortly after the change of mind by Apple, the People’s Daily, one of the Chinese Communist Party’s major propaganda outlets, accused Apple of “helping HK rioters engage in more violence”. Apple quickly undertook a second reversal in days to take down the app. The company said in a statement on the decision that the app “has been used in ways that endanger law enforcement and residents in Hong Kong.” The web version is still available.

This is only one of the latest actions Apple has taken after finding itself caught in a perfect political storm. One day earlier it also removed Quartz, the online news publication, from the China App Store, following complaints from the Chinese government. Apple told Quartz that the app “includes content that is illegal in China”, reported The Verge.

Quartz believed this might refer to its discussion on VPN technologies, the use of which is illegal in China, and its coverage of and links to coverage of the ongoing protest in Hong Kong. Quartz’s website is also blocked by China’s Great Firewall. A week earlier when Apple updated its operating system, iPhone users who set their locale to  Hong Kong and Macau found the Taiwan flag had disappeared from emojis.

This is just one of the highest profile cases of global companies contorting themselves to appease local political interests, with China the centre of attention not the least because of its reputation as one of the most censorious countries, Apple vs. China only epitomises the delicate balance almost all global companies are forced to strike, and not always successfully. Whenever they enter markets that operate very differently to their domestic one, these companies, especially those from North America and Western Europe, have to make a choice between the values of their origin and market pressure.

Increasingly we have seen companies surrender to market pressure, which has led to more either remedial or even pre-emptive self-censorship. Such conflict has a long history in the digital age. Back in 2010, Google pulled out of China when it decided to no longer comply with the latter’s demand for censoring search results. In the same year, India, Indonesia, UAE, Saudi Arabia, among others, demanded access to the encrypted communication carried out by the then king of instant messaging, BlackBerry Messenger, for national security and data localisation purposes. RIM, the then owner of BlackBerry, bowed to the Saudi pressure, and Nokia, who also operated messaging services, decided to set up a local data centre in India.

Recently we have seen Google’s repeated attempts to re-enter China, by offering willingly to censor content to please the Chinese authorities, despite backlashes in its own office. Meanwhile games developer Blizzard had faced a backlash for acting against a Hong Kong protester, as has the US NBA for similar activity.

UK starts laying groundwork for another assault on privacy

UK Home Secretary Priti Patel is reportedly to sign a transatlantic agreement offering the UK Government more clout over the stubborn messaging platforms.

First and foremost, this is not a pact between the UK and US which would compel the messaging platforms to break their encryption protections, but it is a step towards offering the UK Government more opportunity.

According to The Times, Patel will sign an agreement with the US next month which will offer the UK powers to compel US companies which offer messaging services to handover data to police forces, intelligence services and prosecutors. After the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD) Act was signed into law last year, the US Government was afforded the opportunity to share more data with foreign governments, and this would appear to be the first of such agreements.

This is of course not the first time the UK Government has set its eyes on undermining user privacy. Former-Home Secretary Amber Rudd was the champion of the Government efforts to break the blockage during yesteryear, attempting to force these companies to introduce ‘backdoors’ which would enable the access of information.

There are of course numerous reasons why this would be seen as an awful idea. Firstly, the introduction of a back-door is a vulnerability by design. It doesn’t matter how well secured it is, if there is a vulnerability the nefarious actors in the darker corners of the web will find it.

Secondly, stringent security measures should not be undermined for the sake of it or because the consumer is not driven by security as a reason for using the services. Your correspondent does not buy a car because it has the best airbags, but he would be irked if they didn’t work when called upon.

Finally, governments and public offices have not proven themselves responsible enough to hand over such a potential violation of the human right to privacy. And let’s not forget, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is solely focused on privacy.

What is worth noting is this pact with the US Government is not a measure to introduce back-doors into encryption software, but you should always bear in mind what the UK Government is driving towards with incremental steps. It is easy to forget the bigger picture when small steps are made, but how often have you looked back and wondered how we got to a certain situation?

The CLOUD Act offers the US agencies the right to collect limited information from the messaging platform providers. Currently, US authorities can request information such as who the user is messaging, when and the frequency. The law does not grant access to the content of the messages, though it is a step towards wielding greater control and influence over the social media companies.

Should Patel sign this agreement, and it is still an if right now, this power would be extended to the UK Government to collect information on UK citizens.

What is worth noting is this is not official, though it would not surprise us. Rudd attempted to revolutionise the relationship between the UK Government and messaging platforms, and this failed spectacularly. This would be a more reasonable approach, taking baby steps towards the ultimate goal.

WhatsApp making progress on WeChat emulation ambitions

Facebook has been promising some sort of payments solution for WhatsApp, and it seems to be making a bit of progress in Indonesia.

According to reports from Reuters, Facebook is in discussions with several potential partners to offer a mobile payment feature in the app in Indonesia. Although this is not Facebook’s first venture into mobile money, there is a stuttering initiative in India, the Indonesian experiment will focus on creating a digital wallet to tap into one of the worlds’ fastest growing eCommerce markets.

Earlier this year, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg suggested to investors a wander towards mobile money was an ambition of the business, though this should actually surprise few. When you consider the success of Tencent-owned WeChat in diversifying the offering of the messaging app, Facebook is playing catch-up.

For those who haven’t used WeChat, what you can actually do is quite remarkable. The app was solely focused on messaging to start with, but now you can send images, make phone calls, peer-to-peer payments are included, as are in-store purchase via NFC and paying utility bills. Soon enough, cards could become redundant, such is the growing usage of mobile payments through digital wallets and WeChat.

If Facebook could capture a slice of this success, WhatsApp might start to begin paying off the $19 billion Facebook had to fork out during the acquisition.

The original purchase of WhatsApp was seemingly a means to capture a messaging application which was taking the world by storm. However, the data which WhatsApp would have offered the Facebook advertising machine would have been very beneficial. The team has found integrating the two platforms very difficult to date, though mobile money is certainly a way of creating additional revenues.

In Indonesia, the Facebook team is in discussions with several partners to tap into the eCommerce platform, though in India it is focusing on peer-to-peer payments in-app. There are several reasons for the differing approach, regulatory barriers being one, though experimenting with two ideas could offer two new features for a global rollout.

Interestingly enough, something which might get the White House twitchy is the alleged conversation with one of the potential partners; mobile payments firm DANA, which is backed by Ant Financial, an affiliate company of the Chinese Alibaba Group. Considering the current relationship between Washington and Beijing, these must be interesting conversations.

Globally, this is a very good move from Facebook. According to data from Sensor Tower, WhatsApp was the most downloaded application during the first quarter, with 223 million new installs, taking the total north of an estimated 1.5 billion users worldwide. This is a massive addressable audience, representing huge potential if the team can get all the moving parts to align.

Tech giants hit back against GCHQ’s ‘Ghost Protocol’

GCHQ’s new proposal to supposedly increase the security and police force’s ability to keep us safe has been slammed by the technology industry, suggesting the argument contradicts itself.

In an article for Lawfare, GCHQ’s Technical Director Ian Levy and Head of Cryptanalysis Crispin Robinson presented six principles to guide ethical and transparent eavesdropping, while also suggesting intelligence officers can be ‘cc’d’ into group chats without compromising security or violating the privacy rights of the individuals involved.

The ‘Exceptional Access Debate’ is one way in which GCHQ is attempting to undermine the security and privacy rights offered to consumers by some of the world’s most popular messaging services.

Responding in an open letter, the likes of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Center for Democracy & Technology, the Government Accountability Project, Privacy International, Apple, Google, Microsoft and WhatsApp have condemned the proposal.

“We welcome Levy and Robinson’s invitation for an open discussion, and we support the six principles outlined in the piece,” the letter states. “However, we write to express our shared concerns that this particular proposal poses serious threats to cybersecurity and fundamental human rights including privacy and free expression.”

Levy and Robinson suggest that instead of breaking the encryption software which is placed on some of these messaging platforms, the likes of Signal and WhatsApp should place virtual “crocodile clips” onto the conversation, effectively adding a ‘ghost’ spook into the loop. The encryption protections would remain intact and the users would not be made aware of the slippery eavesdropper.

In justifying this proposal, Levy and Robinson claim this is effectively the same practice undertaken by the telco industry for years. During the early days, physical crocodile clips were placed on telephone wires to intercept conversations, which later evolved to simply copying call data. As this is an accepted practice, Levy and Robinson see no issue with the encrypted messaging platforms offer a similar service to the spooks.

However, the coalition of signatories argue there are numerous faults to the argument. Firstly, technical and secondly, from an ethical perspective.

On the technical side, the way in which keys are delivered to authenticate the security of a conversation would have to be altered. As it stands, public and private keys are delivered to the initiator and recipients of the conversation. Both of these keys match, are assigned to specific individuals and only change when new participants are added to the conversation. To add a government snooper into the conversation covertly, all the keys would have to be changed without notifying the participants.

Not only would this require changes to the way encryption technologies are designed and implemented, but also it would undermine the trust users place in the messaging platform. Levy and Robinson are asking the messaging platforms to suppress any notifications to the participants of the conversation, effectively breaking the trust between the user and the brand.

While GCHQ can think it is presenting a logical and transparent case, prioritising responsible and ethical use of technology, the coalition also argues it is contradicting its own principles laid out in its initial article. Those principles are as follows:

  1. Privacy and security protections are critical to public confidence, therefore authorities would only request access to data in exceptional cases
  2. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies should evolve with technologies and the technology industry should offer these agencies greater insight into product development to help aid this evolution
  3. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies should not expect to be able to gain access to sensitive data every time a request is made
  4. Targeted exceptional access capabilities should not give governments unfettered access to user data
  5. Any exceptional access solution should not fundamentally change the trust relationship between a service provider and its users
  6. Transparency is essential

Although the coalition of signatories are taking issue with all six points, for us, it’s the last two which are the most difficult to grasp.

Firstly, if ‘Ghost Protocol’ is accepted by the industry and implemented, there is no way not to undermine or fundamentally change the trust relationship between the platform and the user. The platform promises a private conversation, without exception, and the GCHQ proposal requires data interception without knowledge of the participants. These are two contradictory ideas.

“…if users were to learn that their encrypted messaging service intentionally built a functionality to allow for third-party surveillance of their communications, that loss of trust would understandably be widespread and permanent,” the letter states.

The sixth principle is another one which is difficult to stomach, as there is absolutely nothing transparent about this proposal. In fact, the open letter points out that under the Investigatory Powers Act, passed in 2016, the UK Government can force technology service providers to hold their tongue through non-disclosure agreements (NDA). These NDAs could bury any intrusion or interception for decades.

It’s all very cloak and dagger.

Another big issue for the coalition is that of creating intentional vulnerabilities in the encryption software. To meet these demands, providers would have to rewrite software to create the opportunity for snooping. This creates two problems.

Firstly, there are nefarious individuals everywhere. Not only in the deep, dark corners of the internet, but also working for law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Introducing such a vulnerability into the software opens the door for abuse. Secondly, there individuals who are capable of hacking into the platforms that developed said vulnerability.

At the moment, encryption techniques are incredibly secure because not even those who designed the encryption software them can crack them. If you create a vulnerability, the platforms themselves become a hacker target because of said vulnerability. Finding the backdoor would be the biggest prize in the criminal community, the Holy Grail of the dark web, and considerable rewards would be offered to those who find it. The encryption messaging platforms could potentially become the biggest hacking target on the planet. No-one or no organization is 100% secure, therefore this is a very real risk.

After all these considerations to security vulnerabilities and breach of user trust, another massive consideration which cannot be ignored is the human right to privacy and freedom of expression.

Will these rights be infringed if users are worried there might be someone snooping on their conversation? The idea creates the fear of a surveillance state, though we will leave it up to the readers as to whether GCHQ has satisfied the requirements to protect user security, freedom of expression and privacy.

For us, if any communications provider is to add law enforcement and intelligence agencies in such an intrusive manner, there need to be deep and comprehensive obligations that these principles will be maintained. Here, we do not think they have.

Verizon strengthens commercial messaging platform

After providing call filtering features for free, Verizon is going to update its commercial messaging platform to better protect customers.

Verizon announced that an updated commercial messaging platform will be launched within a month to improve the protection of users. “This new platform will improve spam protections while continuing to enable commercial providers of SMS text messages capacity at scale,” the carrier said in a statement.

The platform refers to Verizon’s “application to person” (A2P) messaging service that businesses can use to engage directly with consumers, e.g. for promotion, customer service, or consumer survey. Verizon did not disclose more details on how the improved security features will work other than that the “new platform uses a full 10-digit telephone number to help you recognize who is texting you”. However we can expect that this would be the first implementation of the RCS based messaging service that Verizon announced at the end of last year. So far, Verizon has been using its own proprietary A2P messaging technology.

Despite that OTT messaging services like WhtasApp and WeChat are gaining popularity whereas mobile operators are losing values through SMS, largely due to the rich features these OTT services can offer. However, the more features are integrated in these services the more they are open to abuse, e.g. spams and phishing attacks, which drives consumers to place more trust in SMS and RCS (coming in messaging format). RCS is a “clean channel”, not tarnished by the privacy scandals committed by Facebook and co, or the over monetisation by others, said the software company Mavenir at the recent Mobile World Congress. Research shared by Mavenir showed 97% of SMS / RCS are opened within 3 minutes.

Verizon’s new announcement on the improved security for messaging came shortly after the carrier made some features of its Call Filter app free to its postpaid users at the end of March. Used to cost $2.99 per month, now users can have Spam Detection, Spam Filter, and Report Numbers for free, while additional features will still come at a price. Verizon is playing catch-up to T-Mobile and others that have already provided free spam protection. It can also be read as responding to a call from Ajit Pai, the FCC Chairman, late year that demanded operators to “adopt a robust call authentication system to combat illegal caller ID spoofing and launch that system no later than next year [2019]”.

Verizon Call Filter free vs. paid

Zuckerberg’s vision for Facebook: as privacy-focused as WhatsApp

The Facebook founder laid out his plan for the next steps how Facebook will evolve with a focus on privacy and data security, and promised more open and transparency in the transition.

In a long post published on Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg first recognised that going forward, users may prefer more private communication than socialising publicly. He used the analogy of town squares vs. living rooms. To facilitate this, he aims to use the technologies of WhatsApp as the foundation to build the Facebook ecosystem.

Zuckerberg laid out principles for the next steps, including:

  • Private interactions: this is largely related to users’ control over who they communicate with, safeguarded by measures like group size control and limiting public stories being share;
  • End-to-end encryption: this is about encrypting messages going through Facebook’s platforms. An interesting point here is that Zuckerberg admitted that Facebook’s security systems can read the content of users messages sent over Messenger. WhatsApp is already implementing end-to-end encryption and is not storing encryption keys, which makes it literally impossible for it share content of communication between individuals with any other third parties including the authorities. Zuckerberg recalled the case of the Facebook’s VP for Latin America being jailed in Brazil to illustrate his point.
  • Reducing Permanence: this is mainly about giving users the choice to decide how long they like their content (messages, photos, videos, etc.) to be stored, to ensures what they said many years ago would not come back to haunt them.
  • Safety: Facebook will guard the data safe against malignant attacks
  • Interoperability: Facebook aims to make its platforms interoperable and may extend to be interoperable with SMS too.
  • Secure data storage: one of the most important point here is Zuckerberg vowed not to save user data in countries which “have a track record of violating human rights like privacy or freedom of expression”.

To do all these right, Zuckerberg promised, Facebook is committed to “consulting with experts, advocates, industry partners, and governments — including law enforcement and regulators”.

None of these principles are new or surprising, and are an understandable reaction to recent history when Facebook has been battered by scandals of both data leaking and misuse of private data for monetisation purpose. However there are a couple of questions that are not answered:

  1. What changes Facebook needs to make to its business model: in other words, when Facebook limits its own ability to penetrate user data it weakens its value for targeted advertisers. How will it convince the investors this is the right step to take, and how will it to compensate the loss?
  2. Is Facebook finally giving up its plan to re-enter markets like China? Zuckerberg has huffed and puffed over the recent years without bringing down the Great Wall. While his peers in Apple have happily handed over the keys to iCloud and Google has working hard, secretly or not so secretly to re-enter China, how will the capital market react to Facebook’s public statement that “there’s an important difference between providing a service in a country and storing people’s data there”?

RCS is here to stay and doing well

RCS has been touted as a saviour when the SMS value has been destroyed by OTT messaging services, but without much success, but it may finally have find its moment.

Mavenir, the software company, presented on day 1 of MWC 2019, promoting its rich communication solutions offered by Rakutan. The key benefits, or the main use cases that RCS can differentiate from OTT messaging actually are less to do with taking consumers back to texting each other, or P2P messaging, but rather the communication between businesses and consumers, or A2P messaging.

This view is corroborated by Infobip, a Croatia-based messaging platform that provides aggregated OTT messaging services (e.g. WhatsApp, LINE, Viber, KakaoTalk, etc.) for their corporate clients, which the clients then can use for customer service and CRM. However, the company told Telecoms.com that its dominant business, which it has seen annual growth of between 30% and 40%, is SMS and RCS based services.

One of the use cases is helping businesses improve customer engagement. Despite that on feature comparison RCS is mostly playing catching up on OTT messaging services, SMS and RCS tramp OTTs in consumer trust. To quote Guilliaume Le Mener, Manevir’s SVP for Enterprise Business, RCS is a “clean channel”, not tarnished by the privacy scandals committed by Facebook and co, or the over monetisation by others. Research shared by Mavenir showed 97% of SMS / RCS are opened within 3 minutes.

In one case, Infobip was hired by Twitter to reengage the inactive users, after the social media giant failed the mission with its early efforts through email. Thanks to its rich features, RCS messages can enable users to explore the content directly. For those users on phones not compatible with RCS, brands can choose to fall back on SMS with a web line. The results were much more improved also owing largely to the capability of producing rich analytics to evaluate the campaign effectiveness and make quick decisions on any changes needed.

In addition to A2P messaging, RCS is also being used by brands to engage consumers in P2A, that is engaging directly with the brands through messaging. On the brand side the service can be handled by bots. This will then need to be supported by AI and analytics which will be another business opportunity for the RCS solution providers. With OTTs also actively moving into the P2A domains, again this is an area that operators need to have a stronghold for RCS before it is too late.

For Rakuten, RCS may be particularly meaningful, as, coming from an internet service and MVNO background, Rakuten has a big range of digital service tied to a user’s Rakuten ID. RCS will be a key instrument to maintain and strengthen customer engagement when it builds out its 5G network from ground up.