Sheesh, this is one of the most inane comments I've ever read on HN (which says something). My post wasn't a defense of the cops. I never said the visit was justified.
If anything, as I wrote, it makes the cops look even more dumb. And if I'm a cop who's told by my supervisor to ask some guy about a bomb, and we have a 45-minute discussion, in the wake of the Boston bombing I definitely will ask about pressure cookers. This is how the real world works outside of HN, folks.
I think that article took on a life of its own, perhaps (?) beyond what you had intended, and since then has been the source of many articles saying the Feds could remotely turn on any cell phone at any time.
I once spent an afternoon reading various articles and they all used your article as their sole source.
I also think that folks suggested it wasn't any cell phone, but a particular few phones that could be reprogrammed, or that never really turned off, perhaps on a specific few carriers. (And there was some speculation that it wasn't even the phone, but a bugged phone battery.)
I haven't read anything further since 2006 about the Fed's ability to turn on cell phone mics when the phone is off, so I was wondering if you could do a follow up.
1. Have you heard anything further on this?
2. Did your article (inadvertently) create
unfounded rumors/conspiracy?
3. Do you think that Android phones, mostly open
sourced with a few proprietary drivers, or
iPhones could be susceptible to this?
4. If so, how might you answer the question of how
are all those employees at all those companies,
Apple, Google, Verizon, ... being kept unaware,
or being kept silent?
For the most part, I had dismissed (no offense) the claims because no one else seemed to cite any other article (that didn't lead back to yours).
But recently, Dana Priest at the WaPo made a claim that:
By September 2004, a new NSA technique enabled the agency to find cellphones even when they were turned off. JSOC troops called this “The Find,” and it gave them thousands of new targets, including members of a burgeoning al-Qaeda-sponsored insurgency in Iraq, according to members of the unit. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-gr...)
Which made me rethink my dismissal.
Still, I haven't seen anything other than your piece and Dana Priest's piece suggesting anyone has this capability.
I'm working on an unrelated piece this evening, so briefly: I don't know if my 2006 article fueled conspiracies. I assume that Glenn's pieces on the NSA for the Guardian moved the needle far more in that direction, but nevertheless they're good pieces that should have been written (even if I quibble with his presentation).
I cast around for a followup a year or so after the original article ran but didn't have enough to warrant a second story. In terms of remote activation of microphone, that also could be done with malware without any company's participation, which is what today's WSJ piece suggests. Re: the WashPost piece, I saw it too. I speculated via Twitter at the time that it could be referring to last cell tower pinged.
I just now read the WSJ article and while I am probably wrong to feel this way, I am a bit happier they need to get me to load malware on my phone, rather than the spooky action at a distance, reach out and touch someone approach suggested in 2005.
Priest's article is vague enough that last cell tower pinged may be what she was getting at, but the context, IIRC, was that the Army could determine down to a few feet where people were. Well, yes, maybe that's just cell tower triangulation and having a quick response.
Oh well, perhaps we'll know before the black helicopters arrive over the city. :(
Comments
Sheesh, this is one of the most inane comments I've ever read on HN (which says something). My post wasn't a defense of the cops. I never said the visit was justified.
If anything, as I wrote, it makes the cops look even more dumb. And if I'm a cop who's told by my supervisor to ask some guy about a bomb, and we have a 45-minute discussion, in the wake of the Boston bombing I definitely will ask about pressure cookers. This is how the real world works outside of HN, folks.
Declan,
I have a question for you, and maybe a suggestion for an article.
Around 2005/2006 I believe you published this article suggesting that cell phones could be remotely monitored. http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html
I think that article took on a life of its own, perhaps (?) beyond what you had intended, and since then has been the source of many articles saying the Feds could remotely turn on any cell phone at any time.
I once spent an afternoon reading various articles and they all used your article as their sole source.
I also think that folks suggested it wasn't any cell phone, but a particular few phones that could be reprogrammed, or that never really turned off, perhaps on a specific few carriers. (And there was some speculation that it wasn't even the phone, but a bugged phone battery.)
I haven't read anything further since 2006 about the Fed's ability to turn on cell phone mics when the phone is off, so I was wondering if you could do a follow up.
For the most part, I had dismissed (no offense) the claims because no one else seemed to cite any other article (that didn't lead back to yours).But recently, Dana Priest at the WaPo made a claim that:
By September 2004, a new NSA technique enabled the agency to find cellphones even when they were turned off. JSOC troops called this “The Find,” and it gave them thousands of new targets, including members of a burgeoning al-Qaeda-sponsored insurgency in Iraq, according to members of the unit. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-gr...)
Which made me rethink my dismissal.
Still, I haven't seen anything other than your piece and Dana Priest's piece suggesting anyone has this capability.
I'd love to read a follow up.
I'm working on an unrelated piece this evening, so briefly: I don't know if my 2006 article fueled conspiracies. I assume that Glenn's pieces on the NSA for the Guardian moved the needle far more in that direction, but nevertheless they're good pieces that should have been written (even if I quibble with his presentation).
I cast around for a followup a year or so after the original article ran but didn't have enough to warrant a second story. In terms of remote activation of microphone, that also could be done with malware without any company's participation, which is what today's WSJ piece suggests. Re: the WashPost piece, I saw it too. I speculated via Twitter at the time that it could be referring to last cell tower pinged.
Thanks for the response.
I just now read the WSJ article and while I am probably wrong to feel this way, I am a bit happier they need to get me to load malware on my phone, rather than the spooky action at a distance, reach out and touch someone approach suggested in 2005.
Priest's article is vague enough that last cell tower pinged may be what she was getting at, but the context, IIRC, was that the Army could determine down to a few feet where people were. Well, yes, maybe that's just cell tower triangulation and having a quick response.
Oh well, perhaps we'll know before the black helicopters arrive over the city. :(