Investigation Reveals Widespread Cellphone Surveillance of the Innocent (theguardian.com) 184
Cellphones "can be transformed into surveillance devices," writes the Guardian, reporting startling new details about which innocent people are still being surveilled (as part of a collaborative reporting project with 16 other media outlets led by the French nonprofit Forbidden Stories).
Long-time Slashdot reader shanen shared the newspaper's critique of a "privatised government surveillance industry" that's made NSO a billion-dollar company, thanks to its phone-penetrating spy software Pegaus: [NSO] insists only carefully vetted government intelligence and law enforcement agencies can use Pegasus, and only to penetrate the phones of "legitimate criminal or terror group targets". Yet in the coming days the Guardian will be revealing the identities of many innocent people who have been identified as candidates for possible surveillance by NSO clients in a massive leak of data... The presence of their names on this list indicates the lengths to which governments may go to spy on critics, rivals and opponents.
First we reveal how journalists across the world were selected as potential targets by these clients prior to a possible hack using NSO surveillance tools. Over the coming week we will be revealing the identities of more people whose phone numbers appear in the leak. They include lawyers, human rights defenders, religious figures, academics, businesspeople, diplomats, senior government officials and heads of state. Our reporting is rooted in the public interest. We believe the public should know that NSO's technology is being abused by the governments who license and operate its spyware.
But we also believe it is in the public interest to reveal how governments look to spy on their citizens and how seemingly benign processes such as HLR lookups [which track the general locations of cellphone users] can be exploited in this environment.
It is not possible to know without forensic analysis whether the phone of someone whose number appears in the data was actually targeted by a government or whether it was successfully hacked with NSO's spyware. But when our technical partner, Amnesty International's Security Lab, conducted forensic analysis on dozens of iPhones that belonged to potential targets at the time they were selected, they found evidence of Pegasus activity in more than half.
The investigators say that potential targets included nearly 200 journalists around the world, including numerous reporters from CNN, the Associated Press, Voice of America, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News, Le Monde in France, and even the editor of the Financial Times.
In addition, the investigators say they found evidence the Pegasus software had been installed on the phone of the fiancée of murdered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. NSO denies this to the Washington Post. But they also insist that they're simply licensing their software to clients, and their company "has no insight" into those clients' specific intelligence activities.
The Washington Post reports that Amnesty's Security Lab found evidence of Pegasus attacks on 37 of 67 smartphones from the list which they tested. But beyond that "for the remaining 30, the tests were inconclusive, in several cases because the phones had been replaced. Fifteen of the phones were Android devices, none of which showed evidence of successful infection. However, unlike iPhones, Androids do not log the kinds of information required for Amnesty's detective work."
Familiar privacy measures like strong passwords and encryption offer little help against Pegasus, which can attack phones without any warning to users. It can read anything on a device that a user can, while also stealing photos, recordings, location records, communications, passwords, call logs and social media posts. Spyware also can activate cameras and microphones for real-time surveillance.
Long-time Slashdot reader shanen shared the newspaper's critique of a "privatised government surveillance industry" that's made NSO a billion-dollar company, thanks to its phone-penetrating spy software Pegaus: [NSO] insists only carefully vetted government intelligence and law enforcement agencies can use Pegasus, and only to penetrate the phones of "legitimate criminal or terror group targets". Yet in the coming days the Guardian will be revealing the identities of many innocent people who have been identified as candidates for possible surveillance by NSO clients in a massive leak of data... The presence of their names on this list indicates the lengths to which governments may go to spy on critics, rivals and opponents.
First we reveal how journalists across the world were selected as potential targets by these clients prior to a possible hack using NSO surveillance tools. Over the coming week we will be revealing the identities of more people whose phone numbers appear in the leak. They include lawyers, human rights defenders, religious figures, academics, businesspeople, diplomats, senior government officials and heads of state. Our reporting is rooted in the public interest. We believe the public should know that NSO's technology is being abused by the governments who license and operate its spyware.
But we also believe it is in the public interest to reveal how governments look to spy on their citizens and how seemingly benign processes such as HLR lookups [which track the general locations of cellphone users] can be exploited in this environment.
It is not possible to know without forensic analysis whether the phone of someone whose number appears in the data was actually targeted by a government or whether it was successfully hacked with NSO's spyware. But when our technical partner, Amnesty International's Security Lab, conducted forensic analysis on dozens of iPhones that belonged to potential targets at the time they were selected, they found evidence of Pegasus activity in more than half.
The investigators say that potential targets included nearly 200 journalists around the world, including numerous reporters from CNN, the Associated Press, Voice of America, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News, Le Monde in France, and even the editor of the Financial Times.
In addition, the investigators say they found evidence the Pegasus software had been installed on the phone of the fiancée of murdered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. NSO denies this to the Washington Post. But they also insist that they're simply licensing their software to clients, and their company "has no insight" into those clients' specific intelligence activities.
The Washington Post reports that Amnesty's Security Lab found evidence of Pegasus attacks on 37 of 67 smartphones from the list which they tested. But beyond that "for the remaining 30, the tests were inconclusive, in several cases because the phones had been replaced. Fifteen of the phones were Android devices, none of which showed evidence of successful infection. However, unlike iPhones, Androids do not log the kinds of information required for Amnesty's detective work."
Familiar privacy measures like strong passwords and encryption offer little help against Pegasus, which can attack phones without any warning to users. It can read anything on a device that a user can, while also stealing photos, recordings, location records, communications, passwords, call logs and social media posts. Spyware also can activate cameras and microphones for real-time surveillance.
Socialism/Communism (Score:3, Interesting)
Most of their clients are governments. Expect more of this as we give the government money and power. These are glimpses, we'll never find out what they are up to. "Nothing a government does is illegal."
Re: (Score:2)
Just because a Tyrant or a want-to-be Tyrant says that Nothing a government does is illegal does not make it true.
There are these things called Constitutions as well as things called Treaties. When you violate a Constitution it is definitely illegal, even if you get away with your crime. Treaties are not as well defined as illegal. The 'real' treaties require you to pass laws, so when you break them without first changing the laws, that government is definitely breaking the law.
Impressive diversion (Score:2)
Just a bookmark of the current waste of the discussion triggered by the irrelevant Subject of the FP. At this time the discussion is quite active, but more than half of it is a bunch of irrelevant squabbling about "communism". Congrats to the troll. NOT.
BS Subject (Score:2)
I smell a troll.
What concerned me most about this story (though at this point I'm not sure which parts I got from which versions, since I've already read several of them (which may also be suspicious obfuscation?)) is the ease of installing the software and the difficulty of detecting that it's been installed. I have seen a couple of suspicious incoming messages that may have been the pwning of my smartphone.
Re: (Score:3)
Most of their clients are governments. Expect more of this as we give the government money and power. These are glimpses, we'll never find out what they are up to. "Nothing a government does is illegal."
Ummm, you do know who called for the CNN and NYT Reporters to be spied on, don't you?
Or was your "Socialism/Communism" tittle maximum sarcasm?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Only old farts like you paint that as Marxist and use Marxism as a boogeyman to excuse further hoarding.
Eventually the poor will outnumber you and turn against you. This kind of thing happened long before Karl Marx. Poor people want to live and they want to be economically safe. You can conjure up all sort of moral arguments to defend the hoarding - before it was the aristocracy, now it's the "job creators" who are d
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:4, Insightful)
Only old farts like you paint that as Marxist
To be fair, much of the misrepresentation of the Left is done by the Left.
Lefties say they want to "defund the police" and then get upset when people accuse them of wanting to defund the police.
They say they want "socialism" when they really want to be like Denmark, a thoroughly capitalist country.
If you speak mumbo-jumbo, you shouldn't complain when you are misunderstood.
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:4, Insightful)
"The left" is a pretty misleading term these days.
"The woke" and what used to be the left may have overlap but I think it's safe to say that the wackjobs do not represent the left anymore but the woke.
And the woke have taken post modernism and turned it stupid. To my understanding, post modernism was supposed to question everything, including and especially that which "everybody knows" and that is a good idea.
What they did was present the answer that everything we ever knew must be bad because life isn't a perfect utopia. Therefore post modernism turned into a redefining of everything that is equaling bad and whatever isn't (yet) into a surefire way to make everything better.
The nuclear family was providing stability to us for centuries but since not everything is perfect, it must be bad... so they started deconstructing it. Gender roles, clearly based in our genes and certainly abused to make absolutist gender norms were also attacked. It wasn't enough to just stop people from defining you by your danglies, no, the whole concept of genders needed to be broken.
THAT is the danger of the woke. And the only reason their idiotic ideas could become dangerous is that we gave this minority of idiots a platform and the media reimagined them into a majority whereupon the politicians immediately began kowtowing to the idiots.
They are neo-marxist.. sure. Why not. They're already being stupid so why not go all the way? However they do not represent what most lefties want. Most lefties, like most righties, want the same thing: Stability and less fear in their lives. They go about that goal in different ways, that is all.
The problem always begins happening when one side lets is extremists run rampant without opposing them and with that they give their opposition all the ammunition it needs to paint them all with the same brush.
When you're confusing lefties with the woke or righties with nazis, you're making yourself part of the problem.
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:5, Insightful)
The nuclear family was providing stability to us for centuries
There were never nuclear families. It literally took a village. Somehow the right has demonized collective effort and now it's everyone for themselves.
Gender roles, clearly based in our genes
No, it's not based in our genes at all. There's no genes for "stay in the kitchen". There's no genes for "can't do maths". Genetics does not work like that - what you're saying is basically Lamarckism. That's the same level of stupidity has quantum woo.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for proving my point.
Did I or did I not explicitly state that deriving absolute gender roles from our gender biases and predominant features was wrong?
You read it but you flat out refused to register it because you're a trained attack dog. You make an enemy of everyone not agreeing with every word you believe in (which probably changes on an hourly basis too).
Fix yourself. You are defective.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And who are you to speak for all females? Some want to be housewives of their own volition and you're abusing their choices.
Yes. BECAUSE THERE ARE NO GENES FOR "STAY IN THE KITCHEN", you ILLITERATE CUNT.
If a woman wants to be a housewife, it should be because they CHOOSE TO. NOT because some prick on the internet thinks it's in their GENES.
Learn to read, you ILLITERATE PIECE OF SHIT.
Re: (Score:2)
And who are you to speak for all females?
And who are you to do so?
It a woman chooses to do so, that's fine. If you do it for her, that's not.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly.
However, training women to believe they want something they don't is NOT acting in these women's best interest either.
None of us is free from the influence of our peers, the media etc. We CAN be trained and are every day. It is very hard to differentiate between what you actually require to be happy and what you THINK you require. Hence a diverse assortment of issues with drugs, workaholics, stress management and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
A strong argument could be made for postmodernism's influence being equal on the right as on the left. Without characterizing everyone who sees themselves on the right as anti-science, there is a potent strain of right-wing anti-science "skepticism" in US politics that is rooted in the strong programme of the sociology of science. The strong programme views the relationship of the scientific consensus to fringe viewpoints purely as a matter of power dynamics between privileged and marginalized groups. You
Re: Socialism/Communism (Score:2)
The nuclear family provided stability by what measure? The world was in near constant war and conflict. Anyway, how do you know what provided the stability? Maybe it was slavery and polygamy instead that did it.
Re: (Score:2)
"The woke" and what used to be the left may have overlap but I think it's safe to say that the wackjobs do not represent the left anymore
Then the left should stop talking like the woke, acting like the woke, and playing up to the woke.
Re: (Score:2)
They say they want "socialism" when they really want to be like Denmark, a thoroughly capitalist country.
They say "socialism" because right-wing arseholes like you call it "socialism". The context of the switch is that it's a reaction - "if you want to call Denmark socialist, then we'll say we want socialism".
When people say things, they say things in a wider social context, and not ex nihilo. You can't, as rightwing arseholes are fond of doing, take small phrases and interpret it literally like some fauxtistic nerd trying to look clever. If you're a fauxtistic nerd who can't understand how normal humans co
Re: (Score:2)
If people don't want to be associated with socialism aka, state ownership of the means of production, then they shouldn't say they are socialist. Words have meanings for a reason.
Socialism is also not communism and neither is authoritarianism though both economic systems do tend to become authoritarian states.
But hey, let's keep using words completely incorrectly. That will sure help us find that middle ground.
Re: (Score:3)
They say "socialism" because right-wing arseholes like you call it "socialism".
So, the right wing controls the left wing meaning the left wing is nothing but reactionary idiots who let their opponents control them and that is who you want in charge?
Re: (Score:3)
In all fairness, what you (and they themselves) labels left is about as much "the left" as the batshit insane religious nutjobs are "the right". They are batshit crazy fringe groups that make a fine scapegoat to point to from the other side of the political fence and a very convenient strawman to argue against if you run out of arguments for your side, but they are not what I'd consider a political or economic stance that I can take serious.
Re: (Score:3)
Very few Democrats actually want to literally defund the police and I would argue that anyone who does, doesn't actual hold the same values as the vast majority of Democrats.
Unfortunately it's a short phrase that fits well on a bumper-sticker, poster-board or in a chant at a protest, much like so many other protest slogans. And how could I almost forget the most obvious way such a phrase is spread these days: Hashtags. I'm surprised that Google only shows 275,000 results for #defundthepolice and I'm sure
Re: (Score:2)
Except this isn't how our politics work. The reality is people with fairly extreme views (on both sides of the divide) tend be the ones motivated enough to run. Next a handful of even more extreme standouts get elected in wealthy powerful districts - so far left cook fringe nut jobs win Si Valley because their big tech buddies donate to them. Some far right cook fringe win the gulf coast because their oil buddies donate to them. These people get the media spotlight because they can raise money for the party
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:5, Informative)
Nah, that's just people who oppose the Left being obtuse.
Defund the police was deliberately misinterpreted as "no police at all".
Denmark is currently government by the Social Democrats, who are a member of the Party of European Socialists. They are a minority governments, supported by the Red Bloc which consists of the Danish Social Liberal Party, the Socialist People's Party and the Redâ"Green Alliance along with the Faroese Social Democratic Party and Greenland's Inuit Ataqatigiit and Siumut.
In Denmark 65.2% of workers are in a trade union. 51.7% of GDP goes on public spending. Nearly 40% of workers are employed by the government.
Claiming Denmark is not socialist is laughable.
Re: (Score:2)
That's pretty interesting about Denmark. I didn't know that, thank you for posting it.
The "defund the police" was definitely a poor slogan. Reform would of gotten them a lot farther and would of been much more likely to result in bipartisanship.
Also, when your far left Seattle council members are saying no more police, defund the police does in fact mean no more police. Sure, that's a fringe view but since your primary party members won't shout down your crazies, Fox news and the like are given so much ammo
Re: (Score:2)
Defund the police was deliberately misinterpreted as "no police at all".
Except for the part where they are literally stating they want to literally abolish the police.
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:5, Insightful)
You know what is a job creator: You. When you go and buy something. This is when a job gets created.
The employer does not create jobs. Jobs are a necessary evil to him. What is a job, essentially, to an employer? A cost factor. Someone he has to pay for. Money for him is produced when he gets to sell a product, and as long as he can do that all by himself, that's good enough for him.
The job gets created out of the necessity to fulfill the demand created by you. Then, and only then, he needs to employ someone. Nobody in the history of mankind, outside of communist countries and government jobs, has ever employed anyone for the sake of employing them. It was always out of the necessity of having to fill an order that they couldn't fill without employing that person.
Re: (Score:3)
You know what is a job creator: You.
That's not the dialogue in America. You need to pay attention to the news and politics.
Nobody in the history of mankind, outside of communist countries and government jobs, has ever employed anyone for the sake of employing them.
And yet, that's PRECISELY what the Republicans want with their ever name changing version of trickle-down economics. They think if they keep cutting taxes for large corporations, they will employ people for the sake of employing them.
You basically took the words out of my brain for every time I wanted to shout at trickle-down idiots that the only thing that makes employers employ people is if people have enough money t
Re: (Score:2)
That's not the dialogue in America.
There's a dialogue in America now? What I gather from current discussions is that there's two demagoges engaging in monologues, trying to sway or woo some audience while at the same time doing their best to ignore the arguments of the other side because they know they can't counter them. Hell, even presidential "debates" are geared that way that they're even explicitly told to not engage the arguments of the other goofballs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same bullshit as the "invisible hand" that fists the workers and the "trickle down economy" that can be summed up in a single picture [freearabvoice.org].
Ever noticed how the whole "trickle down" bullshit isn't being paraded so much anymore? I guess even they finally caught on that nobody believes the lie anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep debates at this point at least at the POTUS level are just sad. They rarely leave script. They talk entirely past enough other nearly as if its a one on one interview with the moderator.
They are of no value. Its not exactly Lincoln/Douglas
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No they don't. They want fairer economic opportunities and socio-economic safety nets.
For as much screaming goes on about the horrid US conditions, the amplified idea that almost everyone is paid slave wages, and we all just die when we get sick, howbow a few numbers?
https://usafacts.org/articles/... [usafacts.org]
Today - 1.5 percent of American workers are being paid at minimum wage or below. Despite the idea that it's some sort of increasing number. In 1980, 13 percent of American workers made the prevailing minimum wage or less. This number includes waitstaff, many of whom get tips that takes th
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually the poor will outnumber you and turn against you.
Because they aspire to the world they think you inhabit. And if they do manage to get it, the cycle begins all over again. The next legion of the relatively-less-wealthy will be thrust forward by the social justice warriors to fight their battle against "privilege" so they don't have to.
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:4, Insightful)
No they don't.
Then they should stop staying they want it.
Only old farts like you paint that as Marxist
Then they should stop using Marxist tools, Marxist terms, and Marxist talking points.
Eventually the poor will outnumber you and turn against you.
The poor have always outnumbered the rich. You seem rather ignorant if you don't know this.
You seem like the kind of person who expects everything to be given to you, like all you have to do to be successful is to show up and get your trophy.
Re: (Score:2)
Poor people want to live and they want to be economically safe. Understood. These are natural desires shared by absolutely everyone. Poor and rich people alike all want these things. But poor people don't have enough money to get these things.
So, in response, poor people should get an education, get a job, and manage their money wisely. If they do this, they will stop being poor, and they will easily be able to live and be economically safe.
Of course, some poor people can't do this. They are physicall
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:5, Insightful)
> Every person in America has the opportunity to start their own business.
Also true is so many other countries such as Australia, UK, Denmark, Sweden, France etc.
> The fact that most don't have the aptitude or motivation to keep a business running doesn't make it unfair.The post you replied to indicate that everybody should be The post you replied to didn't indicate everyone should have their own business, but was suspect of the term "job creator".
Large companies that put smaller companies out of business doesn't always result in the better consumer experience or more overall employment.
Personally I'm fine with CEOs getting more than the average worker, in the 60s a CEO could get a 21 times more than an average worker, wow that's amazing amount, you could really say you've made it if you're wearning 21 times the average joe.
Now it's 320 times on average, screw that.
> What does that mean in practical terms?
In practical terms (which can be seen in varying degrees in those other countries where private citizens can start their own businesses) it generally looks like:
* Affordable higher education
* Healthcare system that wont bankrupt you
* Minimum wage so if you're born poor you don't have to spend every waking hour to not be debt
And many other bits of assistance that don't equate to Marxism.
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:4, Insightful)
What does that mean in practical terms?
In practical terms (which can be seen in varying degrees in those other countries where private citizens can start their own businesses) it generally looks like:
* Affordable higher education
* Healthcare system that wont bankrupt you
* Minimum wage so if you're born poor you don't have to spend every waking hour to not be debt
And many other bits of assistance that don't equate to Marxism.
Exactly. It's not that much to ask, and plenty of countries manage that level of social guarantee without being Marxist. Hell, even the US manages it for the entire military (not to mention special airforce coffee cups), but they don't even call it socialist when it clearly is.
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:5, Insightful)
The military isn't socialist in their eyes because
a) It supports imperialism.
b) The money spent on stuff like healthcare is a fraction of what goes to the military-industrial complex.
Capitalists actually love welfare, as long as it's benefitting them. Corporate welfare for themselves, welfare to keep their employees healthy enough to do the job on a fraction of a living wage.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
On one hand, the government pays for goods and services from non-government entities. That sounds capitalist, but the non-government entities redistribute a portion of that money from the government to their employees. Whi
Re: (Score:3)
Except that anything to the left of a laissez-faire free market is being rebranded as socialism in the last few years. Heck, anything that used to be called socialism is not being called Marxism in the last few months for some weird reason. You can't even have a coherent argument about this because people can't agree on the definition of the words.
I have long thought that the military is America's biggest jobs program. I grew up in a small rural town and for many in high school their goal was to join the
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I'm fine with CEOs getting more than the average worker, in the 60s a CEO could get a 21 times more than an average worker, wow that's amazing amount, you could really say you've made it if you're wearning 21 times the average joe. Now it's 320 times on average, screw that.
> What does that mean in practical terms? In practical terms (which can be seen in varying degrees in those other countries where private citizens can start their own businesses) it generally looks like:
* Affordable higher education
Will that come along with a requirement to take a major that has employment prospects? Of what use is an affordable degree if it qualifies you only for replacing the professor teaching it, or for the drive though window - which is something that a high school dropout is just as qualified.
College costs are too high, but employable graduates are paying down their debts.
I never have much luck getting the answer to that question. And that is because we are in a brainwashed state, where a Gender studies or philosophy major is considered a superior human compared to say, a master machinist.
* Healthcare system that wont bankrupt you
Here's a strange one. If I were in business, I would want a single payer and universal system. I remember during the insane healthcare inflation days, the cost might triple in a year, people were locked into a job because if they left a company, they'd lose coverage because of "preexisting condition"
* Minimum wage so if you're born poor you don't have to spend every waking hour to not be debt And many other bits of assistance that don't equate to Marxism.
Once again, I have to remind people that we are talking about 1.5 percent of Americans are at or below minimum wage. I'll also note that that percentage was 13 percent in 1980.
The concept of a 15 dollar per hour federal minimum wage is a good one, as some inflation is inevitable. But in reality, both sides are in a weird state about it. The right wing, that claim incredible inflationary results, and the left, who would have people believe that almost all Americans are working for 7.25 an hour or less
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I can create my own business? Great, I'll... oh no, wait, I first need enough money to create a business. Hey, I get a loan, and then I... no, wait, the bank doesn't give me a loan because I don't have jack shit. So I'll just work hard at a job until I save up enough to ... wait, no, the job barely pays enough to get by, let alone save up anything, after I paid for my shack and what's needed to survive, the only thing left is more debt.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Hey, I started my business with $5000 of savings from 2 years of working. Have never taken a loan except for property and turns over $15M now. Took me 25 years though.
Re: (Score:2)
How much of it is due to having an education that first requires money and how much of it was luck?
Re: (Score:2)
Every venture also requires hard work and perseverance, things that are in short supply.
Seriously, you are coming up with reasons you why you have never started a business. Why don't you just admit you are making excuses, playing Eeyore, and don't have a decent idea for a business.
Re: (Score:3)
OK, care to inform me of the businesses that
a) Do not require a lot of money to set up
b) Can provide a sustainable income and
c) Do not first of all require an education that these people also cannot afford?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I know people who work hard their whole lives, and don't end up getting out of poverty. And by working hard I mean harder than anyone here on slashdot. Not just minimum wage jobs, but actual businesses that never do more than just squeak by with no chance for actual retirement. Those people selling fruit out of their vans in the parking lots or on the side of country roads are working hard but probably will never really get out of poverty, they're just hoping to make enough so that their kids can do bette
Re: (Score:3)
Every person in American has the opportunity to win the lottery. However most will not.
Those who do start their own businesses can be suddenly bankrupted easily; a medical illness for example, a shift in the market when the business was barely making ends meet, etc.
The reason socialism (which is NOT Marxism), trade unions, etc, took off around much of the workd in the early 1900s is because of the extremes between the rich and the poor. Not to mention the collapse of aristocracies, revolutions, etc. Part
Re:Socialism/Communism (Score:4, Informative)
Kids want what central Europe and Skandinavia had for the longest time and led to an unparalleled prosperity: Social market economy [wikipedia.org]. In a nutshell, a free market with enough social security to give everyone a fair share of the cake.
analog solutions? (Score:2)
Re:analog solutions? (Score:5, Informative)
I got a logitech headset which I found comfortable enough to want a second solution, and the mic switch proved good enough to keep regular audio software from recording off of it.
So I get that second set. Same brand. Same model number. If the new one is muted when the machine boots up, amazingly, audio software can still record off of it until its unmuted and then muted again.
Were they cost cutting, or exploit-making when they made this change?
Re:analog solutions? (Score:5, Informative)
It sounds more like they use a potentiometer or simply a high resistance resistor that might double as a different component as well (cutting costs). So if the connection isn't physically disrupted, a good opamp on the microphone input of your computer or whatever device, can still be able to amplify the electrical potential to useful SNR levels.
Beyond that, physical switches are feasible to use when you work with mostly discrete parts. So for example on your headset, if you wanted, you could cut the wire from the microphone and solder a proper switch between the cut ends. And that ought to work.
But with highly integrated parts like in modern phones, tablets, notebooks or whatever, you can't even be sure what exactly works as a microphone.
MEMS microphones are tiny and thus easy to hide or disguise as some other component. So even if you found and managed to build in a physical switch between the 'official' microphone in your device and the processing parts, you couldn't be sure if that was the only component potentially listening.
Intelligence Wet Dream (Score:5, Insightful)
Smartphones are the greatest gift ever given to the intelligence agencies across the World.
Not only do these units have a built in camera, they have a microphone and a GPS unit just begging to be abused.
The best part ?
Once upon a time it took a risky operation to introduce a bug and / or tracking system to a target. Now people will
stand in line for DAYS to voluntarily get their hands on one and keep it with them at all times. It's basically a digital
security blanket for many and god forbid they be denied access to it. They tend to lose their F'ing minds.
People know these things are being abused. They're so addicted to them now, they simply don't care.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. I don't use social media, never have (too creepy, looks like a giant low-IQ trailer park) .
I have some bad news for you:
Slashdot is a social media service and website.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Meanwhile in Australia, it is mandatory to use a smartphone to check into shops and public transport. Yes, it is illegal to ride a bus without an Android or IOS device on your person: https://www.covid19.act.gov.au... [act.gov.au]
No, there isn't a platform-agnostic alternative (you know, like a simple website, or, heaven forbid, a pen and paper!)
Our courts are generally pretty good at striking this sort of shit down. Until then, however, it sucks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They let you spy on them and even pay for it.
Maybe Trump should have embedded touchscreens in his wall on the Mexican side...
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe people don't think that they are a valuable enough target to waste zero-days on. Maybe they have a smartphone but are careful to turn it off or leave it at home when doing stuff that might compromise them.
Re: (Score:2)
How do I really know it's off though? Also, what good is a phone that's turned off? How are my friends and relatives suppose to call me for help if my phone is not turned on? Kind of defeats the point unless you want me to get a landline which is also digital and also likely being spied upon by the same people.
So, solution? You can disconnect from society and go live off the grid or you can just accept it.
Israel Solution (Score:2, Informative)
how is this a surprise? (Score:5, Informative)
Snowden already told us this was happening.
Re: (Score:3)
And journalists were already taking precautions before then. The people who helped Snowden were using Tor, were using Linux live distros to access GPG encrypted email.
The difference here is that it's not the NSA/GCHQ, it's a private company selling to anyone who can pay. Targeting much lower level people for political reasons. People who probably figured they were not worth the secret services wasting zero day exploits on.
How is this legal? (Score:2)
I still don't understand how this software is legal? In the United States, we have many laws the forbid spying on someone, intercepting digital communications, and bypassing computer security:
I assume many other countries have similar laws. While I don't expect a government to enforce these laws upon
Re: (Score:3)
Sure they did. Plenty of people did.
But the people with the money and power are working for, not against, it. At least those in suits - probably not the drug cartels.
Diplomats, heads of state, etc. are not offensive. (Score:4, Interesting)
Spying on protestors, lawyers, and religious figures is horrendously offensive. Any truly free society outlaws that.
But spying on other governments is expressly legal in every single country I have heard of, is expected and not offensive to reasonable people. I would be offended if my government did NOT attempt to spy on our opponents.
Grouping them with human rights attorneys does not help your case, instead it makes me think you are a moron. You tell me that the government spied on someone because they objected to a gasoline pipeline, I get mad.
You tell me we spied on someone that has nuclear weapons and threatened to use them on our citizens and I say 'shhh', don't let people know.
Re: (Score:2)
Except, a lot of this was governments spying on their own citizens. And btw it's not OK to spy on someone just because they aren't a citizen of your country. All humans (sentient beings, really) have certain rights that must be respected, or you might as well not respect anyone's rights if you can get away with it. Why be fair to anyone?
Re: (Score:3)
Spying on protestors, lawyers, and religious figures is horrendously offensive. Any truly free society outlaws that.
But spying on other governments is expressly legal in every single country I have heard of, is expected and not offensive to reasonable people. I would be offended if my government did NOT attempt to spy on our opponents.
true, a simple passport determines what rights a person has, and i think everyone here fully understands the legal implications of that, i'm going to completely ignore the fact that that's actually a crime by international law because, you know ... international law! lol! i'm just amused on how you champion that the same act is "horrendously offensive" if against a national, or "not offensive but desirable" against foreigners and still intend to pass that as a rational position.
but tell me again, what count
Re: (Score:3)
On Fox News, the big scandal is that the Washington Post didn't even mention some minor connection to some public affairs and political consulting firm associated with a Biden advisor and to Beacon Global Strategies which was founded by a guy in the Obama administration and lawyer Tom Clare, who has represented a Russian oligarch, Project Veritas and Dominion Voting Systems.
Washington Post report neglected spyware firm's Democratic connections in hacking investigation [foxnews.com]
They also refer to NSO Group as the "NR
Re: (Score:3)
There is spying to gather some useful information on enemies, and then there is spying on your supposed friends and screwing with important technology (like when GCHQ hacked a Dutch telecom provider and millions of SIM cards had to be replaced).
Define "surveillance" (Score:2)
Because it's been a well known fact for decades that stuff like call destination, source, and length are recorded for everybody in America.
There's a great book about it called "The Watchers: The Rise of America's Surveillance State"
Re: (Score:2)
Big difference between the business that needs to bill you for services having that information in a difficult-to-compile and difficult-to-access format and data mining those bills by one's government for lawful and unlawful purposes.
Re: (Score:2)
The big telcos probably have an API setup just for the government.
Missing details (Score:2)
I'd love to hear more about this from a technical standpoint, so much of the story is vague with regards to the intrusion methods.
What's app had a zero-day, that much was already known, but what about:
"wireless transceiver".. I'm assuming they mean cell phone base station here, If so I'd be interested to know how that works. Any one heard of this for anything other th
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, they mean a fake base station. Cell phone modems are just as buggy as everything else, and they generally do not get subjected to much security research.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the problem with The Guardian as a source for a technical story. I've already looked at a couple of more technical discussions--but I'm not sure how much I trust the sources I've seen so far. Technical sources I trust? Not many. For example, nothing on Ars Technica since 2019 about this topic...
Which is why I don't own a smartphone. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I take it that you don't own a computer either and does all your web surfing on a type writer and abacus.
If one owns a computer, one typically has root access, and can trivially check what software is running on that computer. This is not the case for phones.
Re: (Score:2)
> one typically has root access, and can trivially check what software is running on that computer
I envy you, who lives in a world where rootkits don't exist.
Re: (Score:2)
If one owns a computer, one typically has root access, and can trivially check what software is running on that computer.
Unless your computer is a C64 or something like that, no, it is not.
Your computer is actually a network of smaller computers, each one running proprietary firmware (Intel's IME or AMD's PSP are just one of them). You are only in control of the main CPU. And by you I mean the OS. If you are using only free software, you are better than most, but you probably didn't inspect the hundreds of megabytes of code of just the base system. And even the OS is the last step of the boot chain. Unless you are one of the
Surveillance should be left to newpapers (Score:2)
OK, it wasn't the Guardian, but there was a UK scandal where major newspapers were intercepting innocent people's mobile phone texts to get stories. They ruined peoples' lives to get juicy headlines. I could easily see them buying this software if they thought sales, oops, sorry, public interest, justified its use.
Are you all really surprised? (Score:4, Informative)
Most of you work in tech one way or the other, right?
How do you NOT know that you've been listened to for years already? How do you NOT know this, and work with tech?
Here's an eyeopener for you:
- Simcards have had known exploits for over 20 years, they're still the same weaknesses today. Software can be uploaded to these cards.
- Intel processors have had its own backdoor for ages, Intel call this their Management Engine (look up ME in Intel processors).
- Most CPU's comes with something called devmode, look up defcon25 on youtube for more information, educate yourselves.
- Even if none of the above existed, most people are voluntarily handing out all information about themselves when using Google to search for things, when you switch channels on your smart TV, when you use your cellphone, when you shop with your credit card, when you disclose your private information to the doctor who inputs it on his computer filled with spyware, because he's a medical expert, not an IT expert.
- Exploits for every known system exists today. Anyone denying that is living under a rock, or believe themselves to be superior, or is just downright lying to you.
It's not that we CAN listen to everything you do, watch your every move, or take a deep interest in everything you've done, who you are, what personality you have, you just have to stay away from our attention. And when I say "we/our" I am refering to anyone of us, because you can do that too if you're clever enough, and even if not that clever, the tools are readily available just about anywhere.
Your windows vibrate as you talk, they're giant microphone surfaces, all that is needed is a laser and optical sensors that pick up the minute vibrations on the surface as you speak, advanced DSP techology exists to counter the noise just like noise cancelling headphones you may have heard of.
You can't even use a spectrum analyzer to guarantee that there's no listening devices, your LED lightbulb can contain a microphone so small it's just a needlehole in the chip, and it can send out a flicker with the speed of light, which you don't see with the naked eye, transmitting packets with the recorded sound picked up from your environment. All we need to do, is to point a powerful telescope towards your window, and a light sensor connected to a high speed modem that receives the light signals (packets) sent.
And I could go on.
The walls have curves (Score:4, Interesting)
What could go wrong? (Score:2)
If we are not careful, this could end very badly, especially for those who enjoy freedom.
HTTPS (Score:2)
But there's no problem here, since they can just do all their confidential work and communication through the web using Chrome and HTTPS. (-sarcasm)
Re:Why do you care? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes I do.
It's called privacy. And that's none of your business, no matter who you are.
Re:Why do you care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do you think changing booths like at the beach exist and don't have transparent walls and doors either?
For fucks sake, there's even something about this in the Old Testament of the Bible about Adam and Eve covering their 'shame'.
Though it is debatable what people should feel shame about, it's up to the individual not wanting the public to see everything about themselves. And this concept has existed for millennia. It's called privacy and everyone's entitled to it as it is fundamental right in most societies on this planet.
If you're more of an exhibitionist and are open about anything, good for you. That's a choice you made for yourself. But you can't make that choice for others and imply that they have something to hide if they don't do the same as you.
So go fuck yourself with a rusty cheese grater and your "nothing to hide nothing to fear bullshit".
Re: (Score:3)
There is a block of public toilets in Tokyo that have transparent walls. They are big LCD panels that turn opaque when the room is occupied. Apparently people like to be able to see in before entering.
Not sure what happens if there is a power cut, hopefully they have a UPS to keep the walls opaque and the lights on.
Re: (Score:2)
The "LCD" variant is opaque in its unpowered state, where the liquid crystals have random alignment and scatter the light in random directions. If you apply voltage the crystals are aligned and let light (of the correctly aligned linear polarization only, I presume) pass through.
Here's an example who puts it in some more simple terms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] (I would not recommend replication with voltages that high though).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your details have been forwarded to Mossad as a potential critic of the Israeli state, and you will receive a text message from them shortly.
If your phone starts behaving strangely please contact the Pegasus technical desk.