4 ms·

On modern phones Stingray devices are just one of the many tools that can be used to gain access to private communications and data. Any app requiring access pe

On modern phones Stingray devices are just one of the many tools that can be used to gain access to private communications and data. Any app requiring access permissions to everything is a potential vulnerability that can be exploited by 3rd parties (not to mention closed blobs etc); in this context smartphones are all things considered much more vulnerable than old 2G ones. Not being a target of interest for the police myself, I will rather trust my old obsolete 2G only dumb phone because the chances of it being spied upon by Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook etc. and associated parties are zero, zero, zero and zero.

vkou 8y ago
What exactly are the practical consequences of being spied on by GMAF, compared to law enforcement? You'll see a targeted advertisement, in place of an untargeted one? The problem with being spied upon by law enforcement is that it's not you who decides whether or not you're an interesting person. They do.
- hedora 8y ago
  Law enforcement agencies can (and do) purchase ad targeting profile data, and can also force warrantless searches of commercial databases, at least in the US. They also can legally (and do) intercept things like backup replication streams of the big providers (they did this to yahoo years ago, for example). My rule of thumb is that if any big consumer cloud service has it, then law enforcement does too. Since the data is gathered using gray-area / illegal techniques, it will never be used in legitimate ways in court, which means it will only ever be used to further violate the rights of private citizens.
  - vkou 8y ago
    > Law enforcement agencies can (and do) purchase ad targeting profile data Ad targeting profile data isn't typically sold in a way that's particularly useful to LE. It's the most valuable thing the ad networks own. I can't call up Facebook [1], and ask to buy your demographic profile. I can call up Facebook, and ask to buy the ability to show ads to people fitting your demographic profile. Data from big providers, that ends up in the hands of law enforcement, is gathered through one of two ways: 1. Legitimate requests for access, with a judge signing off on it, an associated paper trail, and some pushback from the companies. 2. NSLs, with a secret judge signing off on it, and nearly no paper trail, and some pushback from the companies. As far as I'm aware, #1 dwarfs #2 in frequency of access, and is also a completely legal, above-board way for LE to operate. Stingrays, on the other hand, are much more like #2. I mean, if you're not going to go through the trouble of protecting yourself from a Stingray, I understand. I occasionally jaywalk, and don't always cook my meat to 'well-done', wear mixed fabrics, and may have played hokey during my last dentist appointment. It's a risk/hazard sort of thing. But if type #2 LE access is what you're concerned about, then you should probably look into dealing with Stingrays. [1] Actually, I guess I can, as we discover with the train wreck of a platform partners program. And I am shocked that it is that much of a train wreck. Still, I can't buy your profile from Apple, or Google, or Microsoft.
- squarefoot 8y ago
  "What exactly are the practical consequences of being spied on by GMAF, compared to law enforcement?" Should law enforcement order them to relinquish all data about someone wrapped in a gag order, they get all information they need without that someone even noticing.
  - vkou 8y ago
    You believe you are not of interest to LE, and therefore have no need to protect yourself from a Stingray. I disagree, but if we were to accept that premise, then you shouldn't really concern yourself with NSLs, either. So, besides LE taking an interest in you, what are the actual consequences of FAMG spying on you?
    - squarefoot 8y ago
      I think I am not of interest to LE today, but who knows what could happen in a few years from now. Should the wrong people get in power I don't want them to know what's in my head as much as I don't want any potential employer to know about my ideas. The point is that whatever information they collect today about people, it stays in their servers forever, ready to be scraped through AI to build a profile.

vkou 8y ago

What exactly are the practical consequences of being spied on by GMAF, compared to law enforcement? You'll see a targeted advertisement, in place of an untargeted one? The problem with being spied upon by law enforcement is that it's not you who decides whether or not you're an interesting person. They do.

hedora 8y ago
Law enforcement agencies can (and do) purchase ad targeting profile data, and can also force warrantless searches of commercial databases, at least in the US. They also can legally (and do) intercept things like backup replication streams of the big providers (they did this to yahoo years ago, for example). My rule of thumb is that if any big consumer cloud service has it, then law enforcement does too. Since the data is gathered using gray-area / illegal techniques, it will never be used in legitimate ways in court, which means it will only ever be used to further violate the rights of private citizens.
- vkou 8y ago
  > Law enforcement agencies can (and do) purchase ad targeting profile data Ad targeting profile data isn't typically sold in a way that's particularly useful to LE. It's the most valuable thing the ad networks own. I can't call up Facebook [1], and ask to buy your demographic profile. I can call up Facebook, and ask to buy the ability to show ads to people fitting your demographic profile. Data from big providers, that ends up in the hands of law enforcement, is gathered through one of two ways: 1. Legitimate requests for access, with a judge signing off on it, an associated paper trail, and some pushback from the companies. 2. NSLs, with a secret judge signing off on it, and nearly no paper trail, and some pushback from the companies. As far as I'm aware, #1 dwarfs #2 in frequency of access, and is also a completely legal, above-board way for LE to operate. Stingrays, on the other hand, are much more like #2. I mean, if you're not going to go through the trouble of protecting yourself from a Stingray, I understand. I occasionally jaywalk, and don't always cook my meat to 'well-done', wear mixed fabrics, and may have played hokey during my last dentist appointment. It's a risk/hazard sort of thing. But if type #2 LE access is what you're concerned about, then you should probably look into dealing with Stingrays. [1] Actually, I guess I can, as we discover with the train wreck of a platform partners program. And I am shocked that it is that much of a train wreck. Still, I can't buy your profile from Apple, or Google, or Microsoft.
squarefoot 8y ago
"What exactly are the practical consequences of being spied on by GMAF, compared to law enforcement?" Should law enforcement order them to relinquish all data about someone wrapped in a gag order, they get all information they need without that someone even noticing.
- vkou 8y ago
  You believe you are not of interest to LE, and therefore have no need to protect yourself from a Stingray. I disagree, but if we were to accept that premise, then you shouldn't really concern yourself with NSLs, either. So, besides LE taking an interest in you, what are the actual consequences of FAMG spying on you?
  - squarefoot 8y ago
    I think I am not of interest to LE today, but who knows what could happen in a few years from now. Should the wrong people get in power I don't want them to know what's in my head as much as I don't want any potential employer to know about my ideas. The point is that whatever information they collect today about people, it stays in their servers forever, ready to be scraped through AI to build a profile.