Signs of Secret Phone Surveillance Across London

Re:Signs of Secret Phone Surveillance Across London by tombrossman on Friday January 15, 2016 @07:25AM (#10908844)

Good point, asking for a citation. It's an extraordinary claim and so requires something to back it up. A quick search turns up this quote from a 2013 Washington Post story "By September 2004, a new NSA technique enabled the agency to find cellphones even when they were turned off. JSOC troops called this “The Find,” and it gave them thousands of new targets, including members of a burgeoning al-Qaeda-sponsored insurgency in Iraq, according to members of the unit." Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-g...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signs of Secret Phone Surveillance Across London by nabla9 on Friday January 15, 2016 @08:11AM (#10909053)

That WaPo news has been debunked:

http://blog.erratasec.com/2013/07/no-nsa-cant-track-phones-e...

There is NSA method called 'implant', but it requires installation of software (possibly in the firmware). It's not so easy and it can't be used in large scale.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signs of Secret Phone Surveillance Across London by tombrossman on Friday January 15, 2016 @08:41AM (#10909202)

Reading the blog post, it definitely does not 'debunk' the Washington Post report. All it does is take issue with Snowden's blanket claim that all mobiles are vulnerable (which is a good point and is one I'm inclined to agree with).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signs of Secret Phone Surveillance Across London by nabla9 on Friday January 15, 2016 @10:10AM (#10909710)

Let's not confuse mass surveillance and targeted surveillance of small number of people. They are two different things.

Snowden is right when he says that every phone is vulnerable for targeted surveillance. For people like him, every phone is dangerous even when they are closed.

Mass surveillance is different. NSA can't just pick random person and remotely track their phone when it's turned off.

[ Parent | on HN ]