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
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. :(