Father Thomas Dowd writes "The images we are seeing of Iran are being captured on cell phones and the text is being twittered over SMS. Still, the government has some control over the networks, and we are all familiar with fears of wiretap technologies to spy on users. If the cell phone is the new tool of freedom, what would the best 'freedom handset' contain? I'm thinking of a device with an open OS, where each phone could be a router for encrypted messages passed through Bluetooth/WiFi/whatever, thereby totally bypassing physical infrastructures when necessary. Of course, some sort of plausible deniability encryption a la Truecrypt would also be good, in case the secret police catch you with your phone. What else might we need?"
Step 1: Get cheapest phone you can find with GPRS and USB. Right now that would be probably LG KP100 - a little over $20 without contract. Use this phone only for "secret" communication, with prepaid SIM cards.
Step 2: A netbook. Usual rules of secretiveness apply - make sure it doesn't transmit any identifiable information, keep "secret" OS separate and on a microSD card, transmit through Tor, and so on...
And prepaid cards. For the love of God, don't forget to limit yourself to PREPAID cards. And, needless to say, buy them in reasonable quantities, not too large so the store clerk remembers you, not too small so they have 20 datapoints (shop locations) giving away your location. Buy them in different stores, but make sure your home is not right in the middle of those shop locations. Preferably limit yourself to shops lying in a single direction. Do not recharge the cards if you can avoid it. Communicate usin
There are three parts to security: Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability, C.I.A. If the C part is most important, then a netbook with encryption and OS on removable storage makes sense. Availability isn't so good because you can't leave it on all the time to receive messages. Once the revolution has started, availability is more important because the government will be trying to shut down networks, and there is the element of hiding in plain sight if there are a hundred thousand other people in the crowd. In that case, adapt your plans to whatever communications you have left.
But consider what would happen if the secret police catch an Iranian rioter with a FreeRunner. For me it might be better to carry a cheap commodity dumb phone. For secure communication use a simple voice code committed to memory. Send messages by voice or SMS. Relay through an innocent cutout. Somebody who you legitimately would talk to, but who can't be easily be pulled in for questioning.
All of this is kind of a moot point to me. If you need all of this encryption what you really need a few dozen million of your closest friends to demand change. The Iranian Revolution took place with no cell phones or internet. The Berlin wall fell without twitter. China still has Twitter and YouTube but it hasn't facilitated a popular movement for mass change.
Twitter has been fun for CNN to browse all day but as far as an organizational tool and effective means of rebellion I imagine its actual use has been extremely overblown. People could have just as easily emailed these news posts directly to news organizations, bloggers and friends. And considering most of the important ones have been longer than 140 characters I suspect emailing is still the preferred means of communicating the current state of Iran.
I hear a lot of about twitter but I haven't heard any useful news with it cited as a source.
The Iranian Revolution took place with no cell phones or internet.
The regime they were rebelling against had less technology and ability to coordinate response, too. If only one side is advancing, the balance shifts in favor of that side.
I hear a lot of about twitter but I haven't heard any useful news with it cited as a source.
There's plenty of useful news that's been reported there, but most of it hasn't been picked up by any of the major TV news outlets that I've seen. They are more interested in putting up compelling (or confusing) video from the scene than anything else. The NY Times has been following a lot of the non-traditional sources (Twitter, et al.) and culling real news from them on their own blog that's been updated frequently every day.
I've been following the NY Times and Huffington live blogs all day. Here are representative posts:
Twitter Source: "People are very angry...they are screaming like a banshee...this ain't aloha akbar anymore"
"unrest today confirmed in Tehran, Esfahan, Rasht, & Shiraz."
Email Source: "There were thousands of people out on the streets the police were using tear gas - the whole experience was terrifying. Towhid (Unity) Square looked like a battle ground. There were lots of female protestors - I saw a guard attack one women and then she went back up to him and grabbed him by the collar and said 'why are you doing this? Are you not an Iranian?' - he was totally disarmed and didn't know what to do but her actions stopped him."
"...I don't know where this uprising is leading. I do know some police units are wavering. That commander talking about his family was not alone. There were other policemen complaining about the unruly Basij. Some security forces just stood and watched. "All together, all together, don't be scared," the crowd shouted.
I also know that Iran's women stand in the vanguard. For days now, I've seen them urging less courageous men on. I've seen them get beaten and return to the fray. "Why are you sitting there?" one shouted at a couple of men perched on the sidewalk on Saturday. "Get up! Get up!"
Another green-eyed woman, Mahin, aged 52, staggered into an alley clutching her face and in tears. Then, against the urging of those around her, she limped back into the crowd moving west toward Freedom Square. Cries of "Death to the dictator!" and "We want liberty!" accompanied her.
There were people of all ages. I saw an old man on crutches, middle-aged office workers and bands of teenagers. Unlike the student revolts of 2003 and 1999, this movement is broad. [...]"
As a dissident, the better choice would probably be a stolen phone! Going to jail for stealing a phone will get you simple prison time and probably a beating or two. Going to jail for spying and sending videos to Western Agents could get you disappeared. Having an openmoko phone would be highly suspicious from a technology point of view (although it would probably be easy enough to hide stuff in from a bunch of police thugs.)
Most likely the next logical step for rural and otherwise disconnected people would be satellite. However currently it is cost prohibitive for the average person.
So the best handset for this purpose would be satellite capable.
Yup, a local government will have a much harder time shutting down satellite and radio (HAM, CB, walkie-talkie) communications, and they will be infinitely more reliable than mesh networking.
First off, for mesh networking to work at all, you would need a large number of people that have the phones - a few people buying Freedom Handsets isn't going to cut it. Even then, your signal gets to the edge of down, and where does it go from there? Assuming you can link into the network, then why not just get a network enabled device to begin with and forget this mesh crap? Plus mesh networking will increase power requirements and unpredictability, requiring as big of a battery as a satellite phone.
Okay how's this for an amateur satellite project? You put a bird into lowish polar orbit. It is basically a store and forward communications satellite which uses lasers for up link and down link. Ground stations can be kept fairly simple. A gun sight for aiming. Transmit data with a laser. Receive data with a photo diode.
Users invent their own identifiers. Messages are point to point or point to multi point. To exchange data with the satellite you need to send it your identifier, then the satellite points
by Anonymous Coward
on Saturday June 20, @10:13PM (#28407175)
First off, no commercial phone will come with encryption or any sort of privacy option. This means that you will either need add-on applications, or the ability to tweak the OS.
Secondly, you need an OS you can audit. This rules out BlackBerry, iPhone, and the Nokia N line. Realistically, you're going to end up with a Linux phone.
Thirdly, you need one that is well documented, with a vibrant developer and user community.
With these criteria, I can recommend the T-Mobile G1. I compiled my own OS image, I can run whatever I want (I encrypt ALL data, messages, and calls), and none of it shared with the telcos or the government (one and the same at this point).
You encrypt all data, messages, and calls? I suppose that is possible, but exactly how do people at the other end of these communications decrypt them? What is the point of having one of these devices if you can't actually communicate with anyone?
You tell everyone you want to talk to to set up a public key. Public keys can be put on the internet, anyone who wants to contact you can encrypt his message with the public key and you use the private key (generated at the same time as the public key), which you are keeping to yourself, to decrypt the messages.
With these criteria, I can recommend the T-Mobile G1. I compiled my own OS image...
I doubt that. If you had, you wouldn't be able to make phone calls on it. The GSM stack runs on its own processor core, has its own closed-source operating system shipped as a binary blob, cannot be upgraded without the encryption key that they won't give you, and for excellent regulatory reasons even if you did have the key, turning the radio on while running unauthorized firmware would get you beaten to death by lawyers.
Sure, you can run your own code on the applications processor, but let's face it, any modern electronics device is full if little (and not-so-little) processors running lots of code that you have no access to. You simply have no idea what any of that stuff is doing. Auditing the code running on the apps processor is a start, but no more than a start.
No, that's not what I mean. You can't make phone calls on it without talking to the GSM protocol stack. The GSM stack runs on the radio processor, and is closed source. It's not in the git repository. The GP had said that because it had recompiled all the software on the phone; it hadn't, it'd only recompiled the stuff that runs on the radio processor.
So in order to be able to make phone calls, it has to run untrusted software (that could well be snooping the memory space of the application processor and
They did, but that is not at all what you did. You tried to say the microcode running on the radio is part of all the software. When people say that, they don't mean microcode. Not on the radio, and not in the CPU core.
Right. But the OP specifically said that it had recompiled its OS and had verified that none of it was sending data to unauthorised sources. But the OP hadn't checked the radio, and wouldn't be able to, because the radio is a binary blob. Which means that it could have been sending data anywhere, for all the OP knew; the radio sees all data going over the air, knows exactly where you are, and has access to big chunks of the device's physical memory (which means it could probably, if it wanted to, snoop the
If you're worried about censorship, there's no better choice than a satellite phone. They're continuing to drop in price, you're not limited to a terrestrial cellular network, and many models can be tethered to provide Internet access. The big problem for non-Western countries (where they'd be most useful) is the cost, of course. In general terms -- there are cheaper options -- airtime is $1 per minute, and bandwidth also is pricey. Still, they'd be perfect in a circumstance like what's going on in Iran right now, or for any sort of major disaster.
Seeing how the election has gone so far, ummm, an M4 or AK-47?
There is no way an AK-47 will ever be sold on any kind of usage plan. Can you imagine how things would go if a user disputed their statement and didn't like the outcome taking it to the billing department? "What do you mean you're going to charge me for the excess bullets!? I didn't use them that month! Here take them back you scum!" *machine gun fire*
The whole mess in Iran started because the UK overthrew the democratically elected prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh just because he had the gumption to kick out the British owned oil company and replace it with Iranians.
as much as I hate to say it, also in light of the happenings in Iran:
Probably the freest kind of cell phone you could have, which the Iranian people do not seem to have, is any cell phone securely taped to a Smith & Wesson.
Right because that's what will build the sort of popular uprising that has overthrown numerous governments in the past (including the last Iranian form of government)... armed rebellion.
There is nothing the Iranian government would love more right now than a bunch of armed self righteous knuckle draggers to start shooting police and militiamen. You instantly change it from a popular peaceful movement into a legitimate civil war and the Government has full authority to start fighting said war. The Iranian government is losing the respect of its people more and more every day due to its heavy handed over reaction to peaceful and unarmed civilians. But by all means break out the ol' Smith and Wesson and start shooting government officials. I'm certain the ensuing civil war will result in a peaceful and democratic government on top. Not a charismatic warlord.
Soviet Union, Ukraine, India, Iran 1979... the list goes on and on of successful popular uprisings and bloodless transitions of power. It's often then violent transitions which result in unstable and repressive replacement regimes.
On a related note, earlier today I was wondering if it would be useful if it would be useful to send old digital cameras to places like Iran and other regions where oppression is occurring (perhaps distributed by international media offices?). Just counting myself, I have 3-4 pocket-size digital cameras which are sitting around collecting dust. As a result, many more of the protesters and bystanders would have cameras, and would be able to capture evidence of violence and oppression. Even if they don't have internet proxy access (or a computer), they could give their memory card to someone who does have one. Of course, there's already some videos being leaked out [blogspot.com] (NOTE: videos are quite graphic) in defiance of the regime, but increasing the number of available photos and videos by an order of magnitude or two would be a game-changer.
Of course, I have no idea how you'd go about starting to organize something like that, but I wanted to seed the idea in case it's worthwhile.
Society has become soft. A few hundred years ago, whole populations would gladly give up their lives for a cause they believed in. Now it seems like that this number is down to a select few.
I think it's more cultural than temporal.
I've been reading that Martyrdom is an important aspect of Iranian culture and mythology. One of their 'founding fathers' was martyred by a tyrannical government. As such there is great respect and emotional power to someone being killed by the government in a protest. The Iranian Revolution was largely a series of ever growing 'vigils' for the fallen martyrs taken and killed by the Government. Every person killed brings more people to the next vigil. Popular opinion finally completely overwhelms the government as it simply becomes an armed but unrecognized squatter by the people. Iran is also very young. Youngsters tend to be more active and impatient for culture and political change.
China on the other hand is/was a demographically older nation. They also have a strong tradition of respect for authority even in democratic nations such as Japan. As such I would extrapolate that there isn't the same sort of tradition of rebellion and insurrection as we have in Western Cultures. The Tienanmen demonstraters were largely students. They were largely unorganized and they didn't have the organization or precedent for change. It was a case of a culture being inconducive to revolution. But it's largely a question of details. The same eastern "people before self" mantra presents itself dramatically differently in Buddhist nations where self immolation is an accepted form of demonstration. The ego matters so little that people relatively readily give their lives for a cause (after all if you're just going to reincarnate what does it really matter?) (On an off topic this creates very very interesting traffic systems.)
If you go back a few hundreds years in Western Cultures we also had dramatically less stomach for insurrection and opposition. The state was endorsed by God. We were good God fearing people and to question the state was the question the divine.
I suspect the reason people are less ready to give their lives in western cultures is because our governments are relatively stable Go back a little over 100 years and I think you would find that Americans of the North and South were more than ready to give up their lives by the hundreds of thousands for a cause.
Also patriotism sent millions of young men over seas not more than 50 years ago filled with nationalistic pride. I'm not quite certain when you think we became 'soft'.
not sure how traceable this would be. could you spoof the mac address.
I would also be more likely to film things with one of the very cheap usb video cameras and upload at an internet cafe. not sure how trackable they are, and the quality is not going to be what you get with a Flip or something like that but you could buy with cash, film and toss if need be
Don't avoid the cellular networks just because the government controls them. If you go on your own frequency, they will just jam it. What you want to do is to piggy back on something else that would be too expensive for them to shut down. This might be too contrarian but I say use the cellular network but disguise your traffic so they can't sniff it out. In the end that leaves them with only the option of shutting down the entire cellular network, which they wouldn't be able to function without as well. Remember when Blackberry lost the patent lawsuit and how businesses and the government started freaking out? Use their tools against them. Hop on their frequencies. Guerrilla tactics! Blend in.
Of course, some sort of plausible deniability encryption a la Truecrypt would also be good, in case the secret police catch you with your phone.
"We have ways of making you talk."
Plausible denial means nothing to the guy with a set of alligator clips, an old-school inverter and a honking big battery.
The real spy hates spy tech.
Each additional layer of complication introduces new risks. If he can send a message in the clear he will. What he really needs is a method or a system so familiar and mundane that no one gives it a second thought.
Just had an idea, you should communicate with each other in the open via botnets and spammers. Chances are that someone you want to communicate with will get the email. Use stenography and spam them across the Internet. Or if you just want to spread the word, spam in plaintext. Either you get your message through or the spam problem gets solved permanently. Either way you come out ahead.
If the "secret police" catch you, the fucking last thing to worry about is "plausible deniability". This isn't the White House, or the Senate. You don't get your "phone call". If the secret police catch you, you suffer. No trial, no evidence, no representation. Worrying about hiding stuff on a phone is moot. Just be glad if you are released alive.
The idiot is the person who thinks he can secure liberty for himself alone.
The time to worry about plausible deniability is before the secret police catch you. And make sure everyone knows the drill too. In the face of the secret police "individual liberty" has no practical utility.
Even an oppressive state can't kill everyone. That's the game going on in the streets of Tehran today. The protesters want to nucleate into a crowd so big that it can't be dispersed without killing lots of people. The govern
If people really want to change the situation they are in, they will find a way to communicate their ideas.
The message is so much more important than the medium used to pass the message.
The more "security features" you add to a device, the more difficult it is for the message to get out. You have to have a device to send your encoded messages, and whomever you are trying to communicate with needs a device to receive that message.
I would think that the less complicated you can make the delivery of the message, the better the chance of your message making it to the people that you want to hear it.
Some of us believe freedom is worth risking our lives for. If you want to jump at shadows, that's your business, just make sure you don't try to trample my rights in the process. I'm far more afraid of our own government than terrorism.
We've had enemies for decades. Sometimes, one will get through.
Yeah, jumping at shadows is a good way to describe both sides of the spectrum. Especially living in San Francisco, you wouldn't believe the conspiracy theories people talk about from the government. The reality is, the US isn't going to suddenly turn into a totalitarian state anymore than terrorists are going to kill us all. If you're afraid of either, you're out of touch with reality (this only goes for the US: in Iraq or Iran, things are different).
The practical matter of the question is, right now t
Know what else is good for terrorists? Oxygen and water. Fighting terrorism isn't the end-all-be-all of our priorities. In fact, the flu and cars kill more American annually than terrorists.
The best handset for freedom will also be the best handset for terrorism.
As I understand it (not being affiliated with them but only observing reports on the open media):
The US intelligence agencies monitor cellphones in the middle east and other areas of interest from satellites. (They definitely tap GSM phones and it would be silly if they didn't tap satellite phones as well.) This was used to map out terrorist networks, using both voice intercepts and traffic analysis (including one they got a big break on because a major message forwarder swapped smartcards in a single handset for the calls to each of his contacts - he didn't know that the phone also sent its own i.d. as well as that of the smartcard.) Eventually the terrorists figured out cellphones were compromised and moved off them entirely.
Given that the US has this ability but is unlikely to share info from it with a regime it exposes, few others have anything like it (for the next few years at least), cellphones hacked for security might be useful for resistance movements (that aren't opposed by a major space-capable power) and boobytraps for terrorists. I'd guess that will continue to be the case for at least another decade or so.
There's only one obvious choice... (Score:3, Informative)
Or, for a more capable cell phone, I would believe that any phone with Android would do.
There's cheaper and less limited way... (Score:5, Interesting)
Step 1: Get cheapest phone you can find with GPRS and USB. Right now that would be probably LG KP100 - a little over $20 without contract. Use this phone only for "secret" communication, with prepaid SIM cards.
Step 2: A netbook. Usual rules of secretiveness apply - make sure it doesn't transmit any identifiable information, keep "secret" OS separate and on a microSD card, transmit through Tor, and so on...
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
As far as being a dissident, I also recommend a super cheap phone, or at the very least one that can anonymize him or her...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And prepaid cards. For the love of God, don't forget to limit yourself to PREPAID cards. And, needless to say, buy them in reasonable quantities, not too large so the store clerk remembers you, not too small so they have 20 datapoints (shop locations) giving away your location. Buy them in different stores, but make sure your home is not right in the middle of those shop locations. Preferably limit yourself to shops lying in a single direction. Do not recharge the cards if you can avoid it. Communicate usin
depends on priorities (Score:4, Insightful)
There are three parts to security: Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability, C.I.A. If the C part is most important, then a netbook with encryption and OS on removable storage makes sense. Availability isn't so good because you can't leave it on all the time to receive messages. Once the revolution has started, availability is more important because the government will be trying to shut down networks, and there is the element of hiding in plain sight if there are a hundred thousand other people in the crowd. In that case, adapt your plans to whatever communications you have left.
Parent
Re:There's only one obvious choice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:There's only one obvious choice... (Score:5, Interesting)
All of this is kind of a moot point to me. If you need all of this encryption what you really need a few dozen million of your closest friends to demand change. The Iranian Revolution took place with no cell phones or internet. The Berlin wall fell without twitter. China still has Twitter and YouTube but it hasn't facilitated a popular movement for mass change.
Twitter has been fun for CNN to browse all day but as far as an organizational tool and effective means of rebellion I imagine its actual use has been extremely overblown. People could have just as easily emailed these news posts directly to news organizations, bloggers and friends. And considering most of the important ones have been longer than 140 characters I suspect emailing is still the preferred means of communicating the current state of Iran.
I hear a lot of about twitter but I haven't heard any useful news with it cited as a source.
Parent
Re:There's only one obvious choice... (Score:5, Insightful)
The regime they were rebelling against had less technology and ability to coordinate response, too. If only one side is advancing, the balance shifts in favor of that side.
There's plenty of useful news that's been reported there, but most of it hasn't been picked up by any of the major TV news outlets that I've seen. They are more interested in putting up compelling (or confusing) video from the scene than anything else. The NY Times has been following a lot of the non-traditional sources (Twitter, et al.) and culling real news from them on their own blog that's been updated frequently every day.
Parent
Re:There's only one obvious choice... (Score:5, Informative)
I've been following the NY Times and Huffington live blogs all day. Here are representative posts:
Twitter Source:
"People are very angry...they are screaming like a banshee...this ain't aloha akbar anymore"
"unrest today confirmed in Tehran, Esfahan, Rasht, & Shiraz."
Email Source:
"There were thousands of people out on the streets the police were using tear gas - the whole experience was terrifying. Towhid (Unity) Square looked like a battle ground.
There were lots of female protestors - I saw a guard attack one women and then she went back up to him and grabbed him by the collar and said 'why are you doing this? Are you not an Iranian?' - he was totally disarmed and didn't know what to do but her actions stopped him."
"...I don't know where this uprising is leading. I do know some police units are wavering. That commander talking about his family was not alone. There were other policemen complaining about the unruly Basij. Some security forces just stood and watched. "All together, all together, don't be scared," the crowd shouted.
I also know that Iran's women stand in the vanguard. For days now, I've seen them urging less courageous men on. I've seen them get beaten and return to the fray. "Why are you sitting there?" one shouted at a couple of men perched on the sidewalk on Saturday. "Get up! Get up!"
Another green-eyed woman, Mahin, aged 52, staggered into an alley clutching her face and in tears. Then, against the urging of those around her, she limped back into the crowd moving west toward Freedom Square. Cries of "Death to the dictator!" and "We want liberty!" accompanied her.
There were people of all ages. I saw an old man on crutches, middle-aged office workers and bands of teenagers. Unlike the student revolts of 2003 and 1999, this movement is broad. [...]"
Parent
Re:There's only one obvious choice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
First thing that comes to mind (Score:3, Interesting)
Most likely the next logical step for rural and otherwise disconnected people would be satellite. However currently it is cost prohibitive for the average person.
So the best handset for this purpose would be satellite capable.
Yeah, mesh networks suck. (Score:4, Informative)
Yup, a local government will have a much harder time shutting down satellite and radio (HAM, CB, walkie-talkie) communications, and they will be infinitely more reliable than mesh networking.
First off, for mesh networking to work at all, you would need a large number of people that have the phones - a few people buying Freedom Handsets isn't going to cut it. Even then, your signal gets to the edge of down, and where does it go from there? Assuming you can link into the network, then why not just get a network enabled device to begin with and forget this mesh crap? Plus mesh networking will increase power requirements and unpredictability, requiring as big of a battery as a satellite phone.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Users invent their own identifiers. Messages are point to point or point to multi point. To exchange data with the satellite you need to send it your identifier, then the satellite points
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Known orbit, easily blinded by sufficiently powerful laser.
Keep in mind though (Score:2)
Open source smart phone (Score:5, Insightful)
First off, no commercial phone will come with encryption or any sort of privacy option. This means that you will either need add-on applications, or the ability to tweak the OS.
Secondly, you need an OS you can audit. This rules out BlackBerry, iPhone, and the Nokia N line. Realistically, you're going to end up with a Linux phone.
Thirdly, you need one that is well documented, with a vibrant developer and user community.
With these criteria, I can recommend the T-Mobile G1. I compiled my own OS image, I can run whatever I want (I encrypt ALL data, messages, and calls), and none of it shared with the telcos or the government (one and the same at this point).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Open source smart phone (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Open source smart phone (Score:5, Insightful)
With these criteria, I can recommend the T-Mobile G1. I compiled my own OS image...
I doubt that. If you had, you wouldn't be able to make phone calls on it. The GSM stack runs on its own processor core, has its own closed-source operating system shipped as a binary blob, cannot be upgraded without the encryption key that they won't give you, and for excellent regulatory reasons even if you did have the key, turning the radio on while running unauthorized firmware would get you beaten to death by lawyers.
Sure, you can run your own code on the applications processor, but let's face it, any modern electronics device is full if little (and not-so-little) processors running lots of code that you have no access to. You simply have no idea what any of that stuff is doing. Auditing the code running on the apps processor is a start, but no more than a start.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No, that's not what I mean. You can't make phone calls on it without talking to the GSM protocol stack. The GSM stack runs on the radio processor, and is closed source. It's not in the git repository. The GP had said that because it had recompiled all the software on the phone; it hadn't, it'd only recompiled the stuff that runs on the radio processor.
So in order to be able to make phone calls, it has to run untrusted software (that could well be snooping the memory space of the application processor and
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The GP had said that because they had recompiled all the software on the phone; lets assume that they haven't...
I'm using the traditional meaning of the phrase 'all the software', and assuming they had.
Also, the GSM stack is not "untrusted" unless you don't trust T-Mobile...
...which the GP doesn't. Otherwise he wouldn't have replaced the firmware.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They did, but that is not at all what you did. You tried to say the microcode running on the radio is part of all the software. When people say that, they don't mean microcode. Not on the radio, and not in the CPU core.
Right. But the OP specifically said that it had recompiled its OS and had verified that none of it was sending data to unauthorised sources. But the OP hadn't checked the radio, and wouldn't be able to, because the radio is a binary blob. Which means that it could have been sending data anywhere, for all the OP knew; the radio sees all data going over the air, knows exactly where you are, and has access to big chunks of the device's physical memory (which means it could probably, if it wanted to, snoop the
Satellite Phone (Score:4, Informative)
Are you kidding? (Score:5, Funny)
Seeing how the election has gone so far, ummm, an M4 or AK-47?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Are you kidding? (Score:5, Funny)
Seeing how the election has gone so far, ummm, an M4 or AK-47?
There is no way an AK-47 will ever be sold on any kind of usage plan. Can you imagine how things would go if a user disputed their statement and didn't like the outcome taking it to the billing department? "What do you mean you're going to charge me for the excess bullets!? I didn't use them that month! Here take them back you scum!" *machine gun fire*
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
The whole mess in Iran started because the UK overthrew the democratically elected prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh just because he had the gumption to kick out the British owned oil company and replace it with Iranians.
I know what my ideal headset would have. (Score:3, Funny)
A nicely shielded tin-foil dome to protect my head meat from the aliens!
Also, Father Dowd, (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably the freest kind of cell phone you could have, which the Iranian people do not seem to have, is any cell phone securely taped to a Smith & Wesson.
Re:Also, Father Dowd, (Score:5, Insightful)
Right because that's what will build the sort of popular uprising that has overthrown numerous governments in the past (including the last Iranian form of government)... armed rebellion.
There is nothing the Iranian government would love more right now than a bunch of armed self righteous knuckle draggers to start shooting police and militiamen. You instantly change it from a popular peaceful movement into a legitimate civil war and the Government has full authority to start fighting said war. The Iranian government is losing the respect of its people more and more every day due to its heavy handed over reaction to peaceful and unarmed civilians. But by all means break out the ol' Smith and Wesson and start shooting government officials. I'm certain the ensuing civil war will result in a peaceful and democratic government on top. Not a charismatic warlord.
Soviet Union, Ukraine, India, Iran 1979... the list goes on and on of successful popular uprisings and bloodless transitions of power. It's often then violent transitions which result in unstable and repressive replacement regimes.
Parent
Re:Also, Father Dowd, (Score:5, Interesting)
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."
-Ghandi
Parent
Idea about sending old digital cameras (Score:5, Interesting)
On a related note, earlier today I was wondering if it would be useful if it would be useful to send old digital cameras to places like Iran and other regions where oppression is occurring (perhaps distributed by international media offices?). Just counting myself, I have 3-4 pocket-size digital cameras which are sitting around collecting dust. As a result, many more of the protesters and bystanders would have cameras, and would be able to capture evidence of violence and oppression. Even if they don't have internet proxy access (or a computer), they could give their memory card to someone who does have one. Of course, there's already some videos being leaked out [blogspot.com] (NOTE: videos are quite graphic) in defiance of the regime, but increasing the number of available photos and videos by an order of magnitude or two would be a game-changer.
Of course, I have no idea how you'd go about starting to organize something like that, but I wanted to seed the idea in case it's worthwhile.
Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras (Score:4, Interesting)
Society has become soft. A few hundred years ago, whole populations would gladly give up their lives for a cause they believed in. Now it seems like that this number is down to a select few.
I think it's more cultural than temporal.
I've been reading that Martyrdom is an important aspect of Iranian culture and mythology. One of their 'founding fathers' was martyred by a tyrannical government. As such there is great respect and emotional power to someone being killed by the government in a protest. The Iranian Revolution was largely a series of ever growing 'vigils' for the fallen martyrs taken and killed by the Government. Every person killed brings more people to the next vigil. Popular opinion finally completely overwhelms the government as it simply becomes an armed but unrecognized squatter by the people. Iran is also very young. Youngsters tend to be more active and impatient for culture and political change.
China on the other hand is/was a demographically older nation. They also have a strong tradition of respect for authority even in democratic nations such as Japan. As such I would extrapolate that there isn't the same sort of tradition of rebellion and insurrection as we have in Western Cultures. The Tienanmen demonstraters were largely students. They were largely unorganized and they didn't have the organization or precedent for change. It was a case of a culture being inconducive to revolution. But it's largely a question of details. The same eastern "people before self" mantra presents itself dramatically differently in Buddhist nations where self immolation is an accepted form of demonstration. The ego matters so little that people relatively readily give their lives for a cause (after all if you're just going to reincarnate what does it really matter?) (On an off topic this creates very very interesting traffic systems.)
If you go back a few hundreds years in Western Cultures we also had dramatically less stomach for insurrection and opposition. The state was endorsed by God. We were good God fearing people and to question the state was the question the divine.
I suspect the reason people are less ready to give their lives in western cultures is because our governments are relatively stable Go back a little over 100 years and I think you would find that Americans of the North and South were more than ready to give up their lives by the hundreds of thousands for a cause.
Also patriotism sent millions of young men over seas not more than 50 years ago filled with nationalistic pride. I'm not quite certain when you think we became 'soft'.
Parent
OLPC or video camera (Score:2)
not sure how traceable this would be. could you spoof the mac address.
I would also be more likely to film things with one of the very cheap usb video cameras and upload at an internet cafe. not sure how trackable they are, and the quality is not going to be what you get with a Flip or something like that but you could buy with cash, film and toss if need be
ham radio (Score:2)
For now, ham radio is probably the best communication device in times of dexterity.
Go with the Flow (Score:4, Interesting)
The back room boys (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, some sort of plausible deniability encryption a la Truecrypt would also be good, in case the secret police catch you with your phone.
"We have ways of making you talk."
Plausible denial means nothing to the guy with a set of alligator clips, an old-school inverter and a honking big battery.
The real spy hates spy tech.
Each additional layer of complication introduces new risks. If he can send a message in the clear he will. What he really needs is a method or a system so familiar and mundane that no one gives it a second thought.
Hedge Your Bet (Score:2)
idiots (Score:5, Insightful)
Who is the idiot? (Score:3, Interesting)
The idiot is the person who thinks he can secure liberty for himself alone.
The time to worry about plausible deniability is before the secret police catch you. And make sure everyone knows the drill too. In the face of the secret police "individual liberty" has no practical utility.
Even an oppressive state can't kill everyone. That's the game going on in the streets of Tehran today. The protesters want to nucleate into a crowd so big that it can't be dispersed without killing lots of people. The govern
Seriously? "Freedom Handset"? (Score:4, Insightful)
You have got to be kidding me."Freedom Handset"?
If people really want to change the situation they are in, they will find a way to communicate their ideas.
The message is so much more important than the medium used to pass the message.
The more "security features" you add to a device, the more difficult it is for the message to get out. You have to have a device to send your encoded messages, and whomever you are trying to communicate with needs a device to receive that message.
I would think that the less complicated you can make the delivery of the message, the better the chance of your message making it to the people that you want to hear it.
The real "Freedom Handset" should be a Bull-Horn.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Freedom or terrorism (Score:5, Insightful)
Some of us believe freedom is worth risking our lives for. If you want to jump at shadows, that's your business, just make sure you don't try to trample my rights in the process. I'm far more afraid of our own government than terrorism.
We've had enemies for decades. Sometimes, one will get through.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
The practical matter of the question is, right now t
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think either is a huge threat to be blunt. I'm far more scared of a traffic accident.
I'd be a lot more scared of both in, say, the UK.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a risk I'm willing to take...
Know what else is good for terrorists? Oxygen and water. Fighting terrorism isn't the end-all-be-all of our priorities. In fact, the flu and cars kill more American annually than terrorists.
US intelligence agencies monitor this stuff. (Score:4, Informative)
The best handset for freedom will also be the best handset for terrorism.
As I understand it (not being affiliated with them but only observing reports on the open media):
The US intelligence agencies monitor cellphones in the middle east and other areas of interest from satellites. (They definitely tap GSM phones and it would be silly if they didn't tap satellite phones as well.) This was used to map out terrorist networks, using both voice intercepts and traffic analysis (including one they got a big break on because a major message forwarder swapped smartcards in a single handset for the calls to each of his contacts - he didn't know that the phone also sent its own i.d. as well as that of the smartcard.) Eventually the terrorists figured out cellphones were compromised and moved off them entirely.
Given that the US has this ability but is unlikely to share info from it with a regime it exposes, few others have anything like it (for the next few years at least), cellphones hacked for security might be useful for resistance movements (that aren't opposed by a major space-capable power) and boobytraps for terrorists. I'd guess that will continue to be the case for at least another decade or so.
Parent
Re:Democracy (Score:4, Insightful)
Not today it doesn't. Who in this scenario is the puppet of the US elite?
Parent