3 ms·

How come the more I hear about what Israel or Israeli companies can do with our devices makes me just not want to use a device at all? Maybe my tinfoil hat is t

How come the more I hear about what Israel or Israeli companies can do with our devices makes me just not want to use a device at all? Maybe my tinfoil hat is too tight? Why are they so bold with their abilities while other countries are not? Are they just that much better, or are other nation states just better at keeping quiet?

yonisto 1y ago
The later. While I applaud Israel capabilities the are not unique. USA and china has more mony, talent and access to the hardware/software that is actually used to build the networks
tonyhart7 1y ago
both 1. israel cyberarmy is just better 2. they dont need to hide it anymore (where US and china do it may gain unnecessary publicity)
bigyabai 1y ago
You probably took your security for granted? I'm being perfectly serious, RCEs like this are table-stakes for modern cyber-warfare.
- solarpunk 1y ago
  Cyber-warfare probably shouldn't involve the entire civilian population's phones.
  - _aavaa_ 1y ago
    If factories filled with civilians are fair game for conventional attacks in total war. Why not cyber attacks on cell phones and electronics needed by the civilians to do those same jobs?
- spwa4 1y ago
  A state (or a carrier, in theory), doesn't need RCEs to do this. In every phone, the "actual phone", what talks to cell towers, is a separate system called the Baseband. It is a full computer, storage, memory, encryption, ... and it is under the control of carriers and through them of law enforcement and the like. It is also where the microphone and mostly the cameras are connected. The baseband then passes them through to the UI, like android or IOS. It's how carriers enforce disabling wifi when mobile data is active unless you pay extra, for example. But it can copy the sound of a phone call to separate channels, or copy the data being sent (even on wifi), or it can activate emergency messages or broadcasts. It can also transmit audio and video when the phone is not actually in a call. That sort of thing. In practice there are a great many different basebands and of course most states couldn't be bothered to actually write a decent system to use them (well, they tried forcing carriers to do it for them, but anyone who ever worked at a large carrier on a big project can tell you how that went), so only lowest common denominator features are in practice accessible. That means location and getting audio. But nothing is stopping countries from implementing more. I bet the NSA has something with a lot more features, for example.
  - gruez 1y ago
    >and it is under the control of carriers No, the only part where carriers can run arbitrary code is on the sim card, which can only run javacard applets. >It can also transmit audio and video when the phone is not actually in a call. Source? AFAIK both iPhones and Pixels have discrete modems, which means the baseband is separated from the main processor and communicates with it via some sort of bus. It's unclear how the baseband would be able to get arbitrary audio/video when it's isolated in this manner.
    - spwa4 1y ago
      Look obviously the baseband is under control of carriers. That's required since they manage spectrum, you know AT&T's "one phone could disrupt service for an entire neighborhood" argument. Which is true, btw. This includes the power to upload code to decide which channels and timing to use. Then it was decided to use this for law enforcement, and so audio was routed through the baseband. Other things were for carriers, like SMS management (including deleting SMS that were already shown to the user). Both to prevent apps from listening without the baseband's agreement AND to listen in without agreement from the apps. The limit on this is that there's already many different basebands, and of course neither carriers nor states could be bothered to actually implement the backend necessary. I'd bet good money the NSA has one though.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Waterluvian 1y ago
When you’re weak you have you act strong. Reminds me how at some point the U.S. was so strong that it didn’t even have to show up to dick swinging contests anymore. No military parades and the like, which feels antiquated and kind of embarrassing when you see the Russians or North Koreans doing it. Though the Americans are into military parades again… hmmm…
- spwa4 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - Waterluvian 1y ago
    I’m not even sure it’s a “strategy” for anyone. I think it’s just a consequence of being weak and being (or feeling) threatened. Not unlike bullies. I don’t think bullies make the conscious decision to be that way.
  - g8oz 1y ago
    Something similar could be said of Israeli strategy. They have not achieved anything of note except inflicting a Holocaust against the Palestinians. Perhaps because of some misguided idea that this makes them feel strong. I think that is why they keep sabotaging the talks that would have seen all the hostages returned by now.
    - bigyabai 1y ago
      Yes, violently disproportionate attacks on civilians is a part of IDF doctrine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine
      - spwa4 1y ago
        Disproportionate violence is the basic modus operandus of every state.
        1y ago
tdeck 1y ago
I think the boldness is a combination of 1) marketing to governments and organizations around the world and 2) knowing there will be no consequences either domestic or international for what they do.

yonisto 1y ago

The later. While I applaud Israel capabilities the are not unique. USA and china has more mony, talent and access to the hardware/software that is actually used to build the networks

tonyhart7 1y ago

both 1. israel cyberarmy is just better 2. they dont need to hide it anymore (where US and china do it may gain unnecessary publicity)

bigyabai 1y ago

You probably took your security for granted? I'm being perfectly serious, RCEs like this are table-stakes for modern cyber-warfare.

solarpunk 1y ago
Cyber-warfare probably shouldn't involve the entire civilian population's phones.
- _aavaa_ 1y ago
  If factories filled with civilians are fair game for conventional attacks in total war. Why not cyber attacks on cell phones and electronics needed by the civilians to do those same jobs?
spwa4 1y ago
A state (or a carrier, in theory), doesn't need RCEs to do this. In every phone, the "actual phone", what talks to cell towers, is a separate system called the Baseband. It is a full computer, storage, memory, encryption, ... and it is under the control of carriers and through them of law enforcement and the like. It is also where the microphone and mostly the cameras are connected. The baseband then passes them through to the UI, like android or IOS. It's how carriers enforce disabling wifi when mobile data is active unless you pay extra, for example. But it can copy the sound of a phone call to separate channels, or copy the data being sent (even on wifi), or it can activate emergency messages or broadcasts. It can also transmit audio and video when the phone is not actually in a call. That sort of thing. In practice there are a great many different basebands and of course most states couldn't be bothered to actually write a decent system to use them (well, they tried forcing carriers to do it for them, but anyone who ever worked at a large carrier on a big project can tell you how that went), so only lowest common denominator features are in practice accessible. That means location and getting audio. But nothing is stopping countries from implementing more. I bet the NSA has something with a lot more features, for example.
- gruez 1y ago
  >and it is under the control of carriers No, the only part where carriers can run arbitrary code is on the sim card, which can only run javacard applets. >It can also transmit audio and video when the phone is not actually in a call. Source? AFAIK both iPhones and Pixels have discrete modems, which means the baseband is separated from the main processor and communicates with it via some sort of bus. It's unclear how the baseband would be able to get arbitrary audio/video when it's isolated in this manner.
  - spwa4 1y ago
    Look obviously the baseband is under control of carriers. That's required since they manage spectrum, you know AT&T's "one phone could disrupt service for an entire neighborhood" argument. Which is true, btw. This includes the power to upload code to decide which channels and timing to use. Then it was decided to use this for law enforcement, and so audio was routed through the baseband. Other things were for carriers, like SMS management (including deleting SMS that were already shown to the user). Both to prevent apps from listening without the baseband's agreement AND to listen in without agreement from the apps. The limit on this is that there's already many different basebands, and of course neither carriers nor states could be bothered to actually implement the backend necessary. I'd bet good money the NSA has one though.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

Waterluvian 1y ago

When you’re weak you have you act strong. Reminds me how at some point the U.S. was so strong that it didn’t even have to show up to dick swinging contests anymore. No military parades and the like, which feels antiquated and kind of embarrassing when you see the Russians or North Koreans doing it. Though the Americans are into military parades again… hmmm…

spwa4 1y ago
[flagged]
- Waterluvian 1y ago
  I’m not even sure it’s a “strategy” for anyone. I think it’s just a consequence of being weak and being (or feeling) threatened. Not unlike bullies. I don’t think bullies make the conscious decision to be that way.
- g8oz 1y ago
  Something similar could be said of Israeli strategy. They have not achieved anything of note except inflicting a Holocaust against the Palestinians. Perhaps because of some misguided idea that this makes them feel strong. I think that is why they keep sabotaging the talks that would have seen all the hostages returned by now.
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    Yes, violently disproportionate attacks on civilians is a part of IDF doctrine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine
    - spwa4 1y ago
      Disproportionate violence is the basic modus operandus of every state.
      - 1y ago

tdeck 1y ago

I think the boldness is a combination of 1) marketing to governments and organizations around the world and 2) knowing there will be no consequences either domestic or international for what they do.