FBI Taps Cell Phone Microphones in Mafia Case

cnet-declan writes "We already knew the FBI can secretly listen in to car conversations by activating microphones of systems like OnStar. A new Mafia court case suggests that the FBI can do the same thing to cell phones. The judge's opinion and some background information [pdf] are available for reading online. The most disturbing thing? According to the judge, the bug worked even if the phone appeared to be 'powered off.' Anyone up for an open-source handset already?" From the article: "This week, Judge Kaplan in the southern district of New York concluded that the 'roving bugs' were legally permitted to capture hundreds of hours of conversations because the FBI had obtained a court order and alternatives probably wouldn't work. The FBI's 'applications made a sufficient case for electronic surveillance,' Kaplan wrote. 'They indicated that alternative methods of investigation either had failed or were unlikely to produce results, in part because the subjects deliberately avoided government surveillance.'"

In Soviet Russia

In Soviet Russia, phone listens to you.

oh wait ....

Re:In Soviet Russia

That also happened to some people I knew in the UK, the police monitored their house via their POTS phone. .

I don't really see how that's possible. When the handset is on-hook, the microphone is disconnected. This is a requirement for BABT compliance.

You are correct. The analog POTS system fully disconnects the microphone and speaker when on hook, as per design standards going back to the 1870's. It's not possible to listen in on-hook without modifying the phone. OP is either engaging in "urban legendry", or the incident took place before 1982, when BT still owned the entire phone system (including the sets themselves) and could believably send a technician 'round to "fix the phone".

What's so alarming here?

The fact that they are using a cellphone case as a carrier for the secondary microphone or that they somehow got a hold of the Mafia's cellphone without them knowing?!

And an open-source cellphone will do you no good when the seperate mic runs straight off the battery inside the phone regardless if your phone is on or not. This is not much different then having the FBI tap your watch, cd-rom drive, or shaver... but I guess that would be pointless since you don't talk to any of those about your secrets right? ...do you?

The real puzzle here is how they managed to swap the real phone with the one that was wired by the FBI, there must have been a mole. And since they got a court order to "monitor" the suspects, is it really that *alarming* that it worked even when the phone was off? Are there limitations as to when you can and cannot monitor dangerous suspects? For example when they sleep, or go to the bathroom, or between the hours of 9-5? Anybody know?

Re:What's so alarming here?

The alarming thing is the possibility that the bug could have been something that was not a physical modification to the phone's hardware, but a software modification. The article suggests that this may have been the case. So while it's probably not the case that the FBI could remotely turn any phone into a bug, the possibility of that being the case is alarming.

Re:What's so alarming here?

It is probably feasible with Qualcomm BREW based handsets in cdma networks. CDMA operator has power to "push" content, including applications to you device. BREW apps can access your microphone and don't necessary need to be visible.

GSM networks don't have such delivery systems, and use java for applications. Most phones don't support starting Java midlets automatically to backround, or access microphone. Even when in background, running applications are visible somewhere in the menus.

Basically the java applets are sandboxed, while BREW apps are signed by the operator to be "trustable".

Re:What's so alarming here?

The Irish networks are GSM and it's reasonably well known that the networks can turn on and control phones with the signature of a sufficiently senior police officer.

I'm actually surprised more people here hadn't heard about it.

Re:Soapbox much?

> How perfectly tangential of you to take a technical discussion about cellphones and use it to spout anti-American bullshit.

I'd like to suggest that criticizing the U.S. government when it does bad things, is actually PRO-American, not anti-American.

Re:What's so alarming here?

The poster of the story seems to be under the false impression that the FBI activated the mobile phone's integrated microphone. This would have been quite alarming. However, if he (or the original author) had read the affidavit correctly (as you probably did), he'd notice that they just bugged him. (Point 3: "[...] through a listening device placed in the cellular phone [...]").

c/net says it was the internal microphone

According to c/net it was the internal microphone [com.com]. They give some consideration to the possibility of a separate bug but conclude the weight of evidence points to the internal microphone being activated without the owner's knowledge.

While I'm at it I'll repeat a comment I posted on Technocrat:

Given that all mobile/cell phones are required to be locatable (its for your own safety remember?) and need to be accurately synchronised with a base station, what are the chances of forming a phased array using all microphones within a certain radius of a point? That way one could eavesdrop on a conversation well away from the nearest mobile phone.

I would guess that there is no need for a super accurate location or time. Measure the two as close as possible then record all streams from mobiles in the area. Next feed the whole lot into a super computer and do a big cross correlation with sliding windows centred about the best guess at relative phase (based on the measured location and time).

It is worth noting that the wavelength of the radio signals a mobile phone uses is comparable to the wavelength of the audio frequencies of the human voice. Thus in theory it is possible for a mobile phone base station to locate a mobile phone to within a fraction of an audio wavelength, exactly what is needed for a phased array.

Re:What's so alarming LIAR! PHONE NOT ALTERRED!

NOT TRUE! LIES!

Parent poster is lying and trying to coverup the shocking truth! (parent is a fed shill?)! Parent post did not cite section three PROPERLY of wiretap judge affidavit.p1.120106.pdf. Read it yourselves folks and spot the blatant parent post lie The FBI used the blanket method "OR OTHER MEANS" as clearly specified in the document. No modification to the cell phone was made AT ALL. No mods needed. (or feasable)

There are actually a few secret goodies available to the feds in many modern cell phones.

First... Sat based GPS is NOT required in most cells phones to silently get precise location, as per FCC device regulations and as per millions of dollars in levied and honored fines to lagging noncompliant cell providers.

also part of underwraps subsections of ETSI LI spec framework for LI (Lawful Interception) hint at leveraging the E911 feature that makes a cell not be able to disconnect if a 911 operator toggles a cell phone into "stay online no matter what" mode. Heck, ive played with that mode once... had to rip out the battery! (no way to hang up). Technology was added to prevent poor signal drops during a 911 call, but then used to keep line open while victim is delirious or expiring. For docs, Just look for harvesting all spec docs starting with S3LI03 prefix on the net. Or hang around Cryptome or usual places.

Regarding the gov tracking your movements in real time (if battery not removed from your non-GPS cell : 1996 the FCC defined a fancier "E911 Phase 2" for more precise ALI information to PSAPs using latitude and longitude information, and to identify a mobile caller's location within 125 meters (410 feet) 67% of the time to the PSAP. A PSAP is one of over 6,000 Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP), some route , some deal directly with initial public calls. FCC 97-402 CC Docket No. 94-102 rules (October 1, 1996). besides the 34-bit Mobile Identification Number (MIN), being sent in Phase I of E911, the 34 bit MIN accepted a "call back' even without a valid phone number, as the 1996 regulation also stipulates that CELL PHONES WITH NO CONTRACT OR DORMANT DEVICES MUST HAVE FREE ACCESS TO 911 service, no matter what. The tracking protocol is independant of billing accept/reject.

To allow the cell to be detected within 410 feet WITHOUT GPS, cell phone towers use triangulation methods automated with cellular geolocation systems involving time difference of arrival (TDOA) and angle of arrival (AOA)

As for REMOB mode of cell phone (remote observation) the details seem to be partially vender unique, but it is suspected that the table is trivially assigned via Mobile Identification Number (MIN) table lookup in REMOB snitch mode.

PLEASE NOTE that the court documents allowing the voice tapping of the MAFIA suspect stated "OR OTHER MEANS". the "OR OTHER MEANS" is the non modified NON_ALTERRED original cell phone being merely set in a VOX mode for packet burst with simple threshold to sleep unless steady VOX activation, controlled partly by other terminal point. Otherwise battery of a modern cell will last only a few hours.

I cannot believe all the fools in this thread that actually believe the FBI has ability to add devices INSIDE a modified cell phone. Yeah... like there's lots of empty space!!! The judges papers said OR OTHER MEANS and this other means is the REMOB mode. Similar to onstar silent snitch mode in Cadillacs.

If you really want to panic... the FBI buys the RFID scans of all the points on NY turnpike that record car tire RFID that the TREAD act mandates to allow gov to uniquely track movements of all cars by untamperable chips in the tires... even at 90 miles and hour adn 12 feet away (though instead of overpasses for RFID car tires as in parts of I-75, reading coils UNDER the pavement are used, as with the RFID tire impressions collected at canadian border customs booths.

sorry for all the lazy typos. I am very tired. an i know that factual anon posts stay +0 until the FBI shills squelch them to -1 rapidly with there grooming accounts they use here to stifle agitator insider posts like this one.

The Solution

Remove the battery.

Or better yet, don't have one!

Re:

... or stick on one of those funny led-light-devices which lights up when the phone transmits data.

Re:The Solution

I did that once and it must be broke. The thing lighted up all da time. Fohgedaboutit.

Thankfully, it's easy to mod your phone

Due to the design of cell phones, it's actually very easy to modify a phone so that it gives a clear visual indication of whether it is transmitting or not.

If, for whatever reason, your phone starts transmitting (be it on a call, or because the FBI have remotely activated it), then some LEDs can be configured to light or flash - providing clear visual feedback. This could be a bit more convenient than removing the battery except when needed.

In fact, you can get the modification kits ready for use, for less than $5 - and installation, can take less than 30 seconds.

These kits are more usually sold as novelties for 'ricing' phones, but they can also be used for serious purposes:
Example kit [ebay.com]

My Opinion

As someone who has on several occasions had to listen to my brother's phone pick up in his pocket without him realizing, I don't think this is much of a problem. If the FBI wants to listen to my pocket lint, more power to them.

As long as there's a court order...

...then I don't care whose phone is getting bugged or how. Technology is constantly changing, so our abilities to moniter the public changes as well. It is the job of the courts to assure the public that this does not occur without probable cause. As long as there was a court order to bug the mob guys' phone, I don't care how they do it. I just want constant assurances that our government is allowing judicial oversight. This is all just a rehash of the same old story from back in the days when they were first tapping phone lines across the street from Ma Bell's switchboard.

Re:As long as there's a court order...

It is the job of the courts to assure the public that this does not occur without probable cause.

Well, as the Bush administration has shown, it's not the job of the courts to do this. And if spying becomes as simple as pushing a bunch of buttons, you can be certain that people will do it without a court order.

This is all just a rehash of the same old story from back in the days when they were first tapping phone lines across the street from Ma Bell's switchboard.

Well, no, it isn't. That required physical access and had significant costs associated with it. Now, the costs are considerably lower, and surveillance follows the person around. That changes things considerably.

Overall, it's a question of balance, not black-or-white-it's-all-the-same style arguments, like you're making.

I must then ask

Which phone manufacturers did NOT sell all of its customers out to the government? Perhaps there are specific model numbers that are not compromised? Or perhaps before a certain year?

Anyhow...if I unplug the phone battery it's off for sure...right?

secrets of cell phones

there are actuially a few secret goodies available to the feds in many modern cell phones.

First... Sat based GPS is NOT required in most cells phones to silently get perecise location, as per FCC device regulations and as per millions of dollars in levied and honored fines to lagging noncompliant cell providers.

also part of underwraps subsections of ETSI LI spec framework for LI (Lawful Interception) hint at leveraging the E911 feature that makes a cell not be able to disconenct if a 911 operator toggles a cell phone into "stay online no matter what" mode. Heck, ive played with that mode once... had to rip out the battery! (no way to hang up). Technology was added to prevent poor signal drops during a 911 call, but then used to keep line open while victim is delirious or expiring. For docs, Just look for havesting all spec docs starting with S3LI03 prefix on the net. Or hang around Cryptome or usual places.

Regarding the gocv tracking your movements in real time (if battery not removed from your non-GPS cell : 1996 the FCC defined a fancier "E911 Phase 2" for more precise ALI information to PSAPs using latitude and longitude information, and to identify a mobile caller's location within 125 meters (410 feet) 67% of the time to the PSAP. A PSAP is one of over 6,000 Public Safety Answering
Points (PSAP), some route , some deal directly with initial public calls. FCC 97-402 CC Docket No. 94-102 rules (i.e., by October 1, 1996). besides the 34-bit Mobile Identification Number (MIN), being sent in Phase I of E911, the 34 bit MIN accepted a "call back' even without a valid phone number, as the 1996 regulation also stipulates that CELL PHONES WITH NO CONTRACT OR DORMANT DEVICES MUST HAVE FREE ACCESS TO 911 service, no matter what. The tracking protocol is indepentdant of billing accept/reject.

To allow the cell to be detected within 410 feet WITHOUT GPS, cell phone towers use triangulation methods automated with cellular geolocation systems involving time difference of arrival (TDOA) and angle of arrival (AOA)

As for REMOB mode of cell phone (remote observation) the details seem to be partially vender unique, but it is supected that the table is trivially assined via Mobile Identification Number (MIN) table lookup in REMOB snitch mode.

PLEASE NOTE that the court documents allowing the voice tapping of the MAFIA suspect stated "OR OTHER MEANS". the "OR OTHER MEANS" is the non modified NON_ALTERRED original cell phone being merely set in a VOX mode for packet burst with simple threshold to sleep unless steady VOX activation, controlled partly by other terminal point. Otherwise battery of a modern cell will last only a few hours.

I cannot believe all the fools in this thread that actually believe the FBI has ability to add devices INSIDE a modified cell phone. Yeah... like theres lots of empty space!!! The judges papers said OR OTHER MEANS and this other means is the REMOB mode. Similar to onstar silent snithc mode in cadillacs.

If you really want to panic... the FBI buys the RFID scans of all the points on NY turnpike taht record car tire RFID that the TREAD act mandates to allow gov to uniquely track movements of all cars by untamperable chips in the tires... even at 90 miles and hour adn 12 feet away (though instaed of overpasses for RFID car tires as in parts of I-75, reading coils UNDER the pavement are used, as with the RFID tire impressions collected at canadian border customs booths.

sorry for all the lazy typos. I am very tired. an i know that factual anon posts stay +0 until the FBI shills squelch them to -1 rapidly with there grooming accounts they use here to stifle agitatant insider posts like this one.

Re:secrets of cell phones - WRONG! RFID tires real

WRONG! The feds do in fact log all car tires that pass secret monitoring points on certain highways and have for many years since T.R.E.A.D. was enacted by law. License plates are transferrable and also not 100% discernable.

It is a US felony to commercially import or sell auto tires that do not have a sanctioned spy chip RFID radio transpnders in them, with a unique GUID for every tire.

A secret initiative exists to track all funnel-points on interstates and US borders for car tire ID transponders (RFID chips embedded in the tire).

Your tires have a passive coil with 64 to 128 bit serial number emitter in them! (AIAG B-11 ADC v3.0) . A particular frequency energizes it enough so that a receiver can read its little ROM. A ROM which in essence is your GUID for your TIRE. Multiple tires do not confuse the readers. Its almost identical to all "FastPass" "SpeedPass" technologies you see on gasoline keychain dongles and commuter windshield sticker-chips. The US gov has secretly started using these chips to track people as far back as 2002.

I am not making this up. Melt down a high end Firestone, or Bridgestone tire and go through the bits near the rim (sometimes at base of tread) and you will locate the transmitter (similar to 'grain of rice' pet ids and Mobile SpeedPass, but not as high tech as the tollbooth based units). Sokymat LOGI 160, and Sokymat LOGI 120 transponder buttons are just SOME of the transponders found in modern high end car tires. The AIAG B-11 Tire tracking standard is now implemented for all 3rd party transponder manufactures [covered below].

The US Customs service uses it in Canada to detect people who swap license plates on cars when doing a transport of contraband on a mule vehicle that normally has not logged enough hours across the border.

Photos of untamperable tracking chips before molded deep into tires! :
http://www.sokymat.com/index.php?id=94 [sokymat.com]

the first subcontracter secretly hired for providing gear for bulk logging of tire RFID on highways in 2002 was :
http://web.archive.org/web/20021014102238/telemati cs-wireless.com/divisions.html [archive.org]

ALL USA cars can be radio tracked using the tires. Refer to tire standard AIAG B-11 ADC, (B-11 is coincidentally Post Sept 11 fastrack initiative by US Gov to speed up tire chip standardization to one read-back standard for highway usage).

The AIAG is "The Automotive Industry Action Group"

The non proprietary (non-sokymat controlled) standard is the AIAG B-11 standard is the "Tire Label and Radio Frequency Identification" standard

"ADC" stands for "Automatic Data Collection"

The "AIDCW" is the US gov manipulated "Automatic Identification Data Collection Work Group"

The standard was started and finished rapidly in less than a year as a direct consequence of the Sep 11 attacks by Saudi nationals.

All tire manufacturers were forced to comply AIAG B-11 3.0 Radio Tire tracking standard by the 2004 model year.

(B-11: Tire & Wheel Label & Radio Frequency ID(RFID) Standard)

http://mows.aiag.org/source/Orders/index.cfm?task= 3&CATEGORY=AUTOIDBC&PRODUCT_TYPE=SALES&SKU=B-11 [aiag.org]

(use google cache to glance at that link if you are a hacker, all access to that page is watched by the feds, as are orders.)

A huge (28 megabyte compressed zip) video of a tire being scanned remotely was at http://mows.aiag.org/ScriptContent/videos/ [aiag.org] (the file is "video Aiagb-11.zip").
THAT LINK was still valid as recently as Feb 2004, long after my 2002 ignored warnings on slashdot. But in July 2004 died after feds saw my origianl warnings regarding T.R.E.A.D. act (RFID citizen tracking)

Re:secrets of cell phones - WRONG! RFID tires real

Yeah OK the whole thing sounded pretty crazy to me but I just went down to put tires on my car at the local Wheel Center. The dealer wanted my name address and phone number even though I was paying cash, " For the Warranty". "Leaving the state" I said so there was no need. So after placing all 4 tires in back of my car, I told him I was getting them mounted somewhere else as I have Mag wheels and could get them mounted free. Again out came the paperwork and the dealer asked me if I was sure that this was the car that the tires were going on, I said yes and the dealer proceeded to try and write down the VIN number of the car. I asked why and he said , since the Firestone fiasco it was the store policy to write down the number of the car and send it to corporate. I then asked him if there was anyway I could just buy tires and leave. Never came up before he said and then yes he let me leave without id but how do I know if he wrote down my license plate or not or got the vin? Paranoid? Yup but I used to sell tire and we never had any restrictions on sale. The guy today sure didn't seem happy not knowing where his tires were going. Then I came home and read this about tracing tires. Now all the dealers responses seemed reasonable but......?

Easy countermeasure

There's an easy countermeasure to this. The method described is effectively causing the phone to make a call without the GUI showing that a call is being made. You can get very cheap toys that detect the microwave signal when the phone is making a call and light up - some are in the form of a novelty hand or other cradle that the phone sits in. I've found with mine that is will blink every so often as the phone syncs up with the nearest cell. If a call is being made it blinks all the time. So just carry one of these, and if you see it blinking constantly, somebody within 30cm or so is making a call. Take the battery out of your cellphone and see if it stops - if it does, you've been bugged.

Where is "not practical?"

No Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Sounds like the judge should be impeached, because my constitution doesnt make any exemptions.

WHY are Slashdotters of all people surprised?!

I'm not surprised that someone is shocked by this, but what I don't get is how Slashdotters are shocked by this? I mean? This is a technical site, right?

Listen: you have an embedded device that in its normal state is always on-network on a packet network. It has a limited range of connectivity, but this limitation is mitigated by having a large number of serialized access points that are geographically situated so as to make connectivity seamless. The embedded devices are reasonably computationally powerful (much moreso than PCs of a few years ago) and have a digital or soft-user-interface (including the power circuitry, which is not a physical full-throw SPST that connects or disconnects power, but is rather an input that runs through the embedded software). The software itself is secured and controlled by the network administration, and software and content can be "push" downloaded to the devices by the network.

From this description, all of the following seem technically obvious:

1 - You have no control over the software in your phone; the vendors and networks do.

2 - Since said software controls the power interface and user interface, you have no control over (or reason to trust as being consistent with your expectations) these interfaces either.

3 - Your phone could thus be easily set by the network to be "always on" without having any such indications in the user interface. The user interface could continue to give the appearance that you are controlling such functions as power and connectivity when in fact the phone is doing everything opposite from what you believe it is doing. There is no technical reason why a phone can't show "no signal" when it has "full signal" or a blank screen when the rest of it is still live, or that it is not transmitting or engaged in a call when actually it is transmitting.

4 - While on-network (and as we've already established, you as a mere user have no way of knowing with real certainty whether it is on network or off network, you have only your trust in the consistency with your expectations of the embedded software) it is a simple matter to observe at any moment to which access point a given user is connected. In fact, you should know that this is recorded already, or how should they know when you are "roaming" and when you are not. The side effect of this information's recording is that (even if we assume they don't automate triangulation with tower handoffs/multiple towers, which is a silly assumption) it is always known to within a few hundred feet exactly where a given phone is, since the network can clearly see to which tower it is connected.

---
---

I mean... duh.

A cell phone is a bug. Period. Anyone who doesn't get this has clearly not been paying attention. There is absolutely no technical reason (and in some cases it's technically unavoidable) why your cell phone isn't right now:

- Reporting your position to the network, and thus, to anyone who has access to the network's database (e.g. government)

- Altered by software "pushes" from the network to seem off when it's still on, or to transmit whatever the mic pics up anytime you happen to be in a certain part of town between the hours of 7pm-10pm, or to transmit whatever the mic pics up for the 10 minutes after you call some specific number

- Sending your complete contacts list and recent and missed calls lists to the network provider (e.g. government)

I mean, come on, people. Technically this isn't even a question. Whether this actually happens or not is just a matter of policy ("Do we want to track location and bug people?") on the part of networks and the government, certainly not a matter of technology ("Can the equipment do it?")

Of course the equipment can do it.

---
---

Thought experiment for the dubious.

Imagine that you have been assigned by work to carry a laptop with you at all times. This "GovCorp" laptop has a solid-state hard drive so that you can't tell if it's

Re:where's the news?

> sometimes the police install a second, hidden battery in the phone

You guys must have some awfully big c-phones there in Estonia.