• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI can activate your android phone's microphone.

Black Dog

King Of The Dog Pound
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
36,235
Reaction score
8,380
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
FBI can activate your android phone's microphone.

The Wall Street Journal reports that based on court documents and interviews with people involved with federal agencies, law enforcement officials in the U.S. are resorting to tools typically used by hackers to gather information on suspects. Use of these tools under court order has grown as suspects look for new ways to communicate including various types of chat and encryption tools.

Sources said that the FBI has been developing its own hacking tools for more than a decade, but also purchases them from the private sector. One such tool allows the agency to remotely activate microphones on Android-based devices to record conversations. This same tool can also remotely access the microphone of a laptop to record conversations unknowing by the device owner.
- FBI Can Activate Your Android Phone's Microphone

At least the FBI, is getting warrants to use the technology.
 
Yet another step to a surveillance state.
 
Just another in the long list of reasons to leave your phone in the other room when you're having sex.
 
So it took them till now to realize they can just hack these things?
 
At least the FBI, is getting warrants to use the technology.

prove it ... And I mean a proper warrant where probable cause is submitted to a judge, and not some fake blanket warrant rubber stamped.
 
prove it ... And I mean a proper warrant where probable cause is submitted to a judge, and not some fake blanket warrant rubber stamped.

I don't have to. Just because you subscribe to knuckleheaded conspiracy theories does not mean I have to. The article is quite clear about what the technology is used for. That is also not my point.

Thanks for playing.
 
I don't have to. Just because you subscribe to knuckleheaded conspiracy theories does not mean I have to. The article is quite clear about what the technology is used for. That is also not my point.

Thanks for playing.

So the two points raised by your post are not the point of the post...

So, what was your point?

Next, what "conspiracy theory" are you talking about? I literally asked that it be shown that these are warrants made to a lawful standard... And all of a sudden that's a conspiracy theory if I get your point correctly (the point of the response). If I'm wrong, then, again, what's the point?!
 
Just another in the long list of reasons to leave your phone in the other room when you're having sex.

Or you could just not have sex. :p or even better, put it near the PC and let gay midget pr0n running while you're out shopping for groceries. Check-mate FBI!
 
So the two points raised by your post are not the point of the post...

So, what was your point?

Read the article.

Next, what "conspiracy theory" are you talking about? I literally asked that it be shown that these are warrants made to a lawful standard... And all of a sudden that's a conspiracy theory if I get your point correctly (the point of the response). If I'm wrong, then, again, what's the point?!

Read the article....

A former U.S. official told the paper that the FBI typically doesn't resort to hacking tools unless it involves organized crime, child pornography or counterterrorism. The agency also doesn't use hacking tools when investigating an actual hacker for fear that the suspect will make the technique public knowledge. The FBI rarely discloses its techniques publicly in legal cases, the paper said.

Court documents reportedly show that a federal warrant application in a Texas-based identity-theft case asked the court permission to use software to secretly take photos using a computer's camera and extract files. The judge denied the application, wanting to know exactly how the files would be extracted without exposing information on innocent people.
 
Yet another step to a surveillance state.
I'm not sure what the point of this kind of comment is (and this isn't just targeted at you). What are you actually expecting to be done any differently to what is described in the OP's article?
 
Read the article.



Read the article....

A former U.S. official told the paper that the FBI typically doesn't resort to hacking tools unless it involves organized crime, child pornography or counterterrorism. The agency also doesn't use hacking tools when investigating an actual hacker for fear that the suspect will make the technique public knowledge. The FBI rarely discloses its techniques publicly in legal cases, the paper said.

Court documents reportedly show that a federal warrant application in a Texas-based identity-theft case asked the court permission to use software to secretly take photos using a computer's camera and extract files. The judge denied the application, wanting to know exactly how the files would be extracted without exposing information on innocent people.

Funny, now when you read this one article in isolation, fine, you sound right... This article does not occur in a vacuum however, but don't worry I'll let you maintain your delusions here and just be on my way.
 
FBI can activate your android phone's microphone.

The Wall Street Journal reports that based on court documents and interviews with people involved with federal agencies, law enforcement officials in the U.S. are resorting to tools typically used by hackers to gather information on suspects. Use of these tools under court order has grown as suspects look for new ways to communicate including various types of chat and encryption tools.

Sources said that the FBI has been developing its own hacking tools for more than a decade, but also purchases them from the private sector. One such tool allows the agency to remotely activate microphones on Android-based devices to record conversations. This same tool can also remotely access the microphone of a laptop to record conversations unknowing by the device owner.
- FBI Can Activate Your Android Phone's Microphone

At least the FBI, is getting warrants to use the technology.

Big deal. I'd imagine this is old technology, actually. That should come as absolutely no surprise to anyone. We embrace advanced technology, we pay the price. There's no reason it shouldn't be able to do that same with TV sets. They have speakers. They connect to the internet. Or your computer, for the same reason. They can activate your computer's webcam...clone your phone...*shrug*
 
i'm less than convinced.

You shouldn't be convinced. The government not only was never trustworthy to start, but has lately demonstrated the degree to which it will thumb its nose at the People and our rights. They don't really feel the need for warrants anymore.
 
Big deal. I'd imagine this is old technology, actually. That should come as absolutely no surprise to anyone. We embrace advanced technology, we pay the price. There's no reason it shouldn't be able to do that same with TV sets. They have speakers. They connect to the internet. Or your computer, for the same reason. They can activate your computer's webcam...clone your phone...*shrug*

This is the exact opposite of what should really happen. Government wasn't given blanket usage over all tech. Everything they do is constrained. It is unreasonable to claim that as we as a civilization and society advance that I must necessarily submit to government oppression and aggression in order to participate in our evolved world. Completely illogical, particularly given humanities need and instinct to evolve. No, the government is restricted. Can they? Yes. May they? Not without warrant. They don't get carte blanche use of technology, they are still government and government is still restricted.
 
Funny, now when you read this one article in isolation, fine, you sound right... This article does not occur in a vacuum however, but don't worry I'll let you maintain your delusions here and just be on my way.

I am not trying to "sound right" I am saying I read one ****ing article and make no assumptions passed that because I don't really care all that much. Hell an unknown hacker is far more dangerous than the government. The government is using the tech against organized crime etc. They don't give a **** about me or you.

So please stop turning everything into a conspiracy that's not there. It's one damn article.
 
FBI can activate your android phone's microphone.

The Wall Street Journal reports that based on court documents and interviews with people involved with federal agencies, law enforcement officials in the U.S. are resorting to tools typically used by hackers to gather information on suspects. Use of these tools under court order has grown as suspects look for new ways to communicate including various types of chat and encryption tools.

Sources said that the FBI has been developing its own hacking tools for more than a decade, but also purchases them from the private sector. One such tool allows the agency to remotely activate microphones on Android-based devices to record conversations. This same tool can also remotely access the microphone of a laptop to record conversations unknowing by the device owner.
- FBI Can Activate Your Android Phone's Microphone

At least the FBI, is getting warrants to use the technology.


if you believe that then I got some beach front property and bridge to sell you.
 
if you believe that then I got some beach front property and bridge to sell you.

If you have some proof they are not I would be glad to see it? Otherwise it is nothing but speculation based on nothing. There is no proof at all they have done anything wrong. They are not the NSA.
 
If you have some proof they are not I would be glad to see it? Otherwise it is nothing but speculation based on nothing. There is no proof at all they have done anything wrong. They are not the NSA.
The NSA spies on Americans without warrants, so does the DEA.Why on would you believe that the FBI which is ran by the same government is somehow getting warrants?
 
I am not trying to "sound right" I am saying I read one ****ing article and make no assumptions passed that because I don't really care all that much.

So, you started a thread on a topic with an article that is not on a point that you don't want to discuss on a topic that you don't really care about.... And then you give this attitude when someone tries to discuss the point that you raised an didn't want to discuss, it takes me back to where we started... What is your point??

Hell an unknown hacker is far more dangerous than the government. The government is using the tech against organized crime etc. They don't give a **** about me or you.

Democide (murder of citizens by their government) was the number 1 cause of death world wide in the past century.

The worst thing hackers ever did was steal some credit card numbers and spilling Dorito crumbs on their parents computers.

So please stop turning everything into a conspiracy that's not there. It's one damn article.

What conspiracy theory?!? You are seeing conspiracies where none exist... And getting angry about your imagined ideas... I'm no expert, but those are two signs.
 
The NSA spies on Americans without warrants, so does the DEA.Why on would you believe that the FBI which is ran by the same government is somehow getting warrants?

Because no evidence has been presented to claim such. All government agencies are not the same.
 
So, you started a thread on a topic with an article that is not on a point that you don't want to discuss on a topic that you don't really care about.... And then you give this attitude when someone tries to discuss the point that you raised an didn't want to discuss, it takes me back to where we started... What is your point??

No. I give attitude to someone who tries to put words in my mouth without even reading the article.

Democide (murder of citizens by their government) was the number 1 cause of death world wide in the past century.

So the US is going around killing it's own people? Don't make me laugh. Of course you think 9/11 was an inside job?

The worst thing hackers ever did was steal some credit card numbers and spilling Dorito crumbs on their parents computers.

OK well I guess you never researched it then...

This Week in Cybercrime: Hackers More Dangerous than Al Qaeda? - This Week in Cybercrime: Hackers More Dangerous than Al Qaeda? - IEEE Spectrum
The Rise of Terrorist Hackers: Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen - The Rise of Terrorist Hackers: Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen
F.B.I. Director Warns Congress About Terrorist Hacking - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/08/us/fbi-director-warns-about-terrorist-hacking.html?_r=0

Hackers are becoming a bigger threat every day. With viruses and worm attacks taking down huge swaths of the internet etc. It is becoming a threat to national security.

What conspiracy theory?!? You are seeing conspiracies where none exist... And getting angry about your imagined ideas... I'm no expert, but those are two signs.

Lets see... Conspiracy Theories 2,313 1/3rd of your posts.

Now lets see... Just in this thread you are worried about the the government mass slaughtering it's people. So yes you tend to drift off into the tinfoil hat zone sometimes.
 
Last edited:
No. I give attitude to someone who tries to put words in my mouth without even reading the article.

If asking you to backup a claim is putting words offensively in your mouth, then you are far too sensitive.


So the US is going around killing it's own people?

They HAVE done that (and no not 9-11, there are enough debates on that topic), but that wasn't what I was talking about, I was talking about Democide on a larger scale than anything the us had done to make it the leadin cause of death worldwide.

Don't make me laugh. Of course you think 9/11 was an inside job?

Non-sequitar, but if you insist, yes, the us runs Alquaida.


OK well I guess you never researched it then...

This Week in Cybercrime: Hackers More Dangerous than Al Qaeda? - This Week in Cybercrime: Hackers More Dangerous than Al Qaeda? - IEEE Spectrum
The Rise of Terrorist Hackers: Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen - The Rise of Terrorist Hackers: Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen
F.B.I. Director Warns Congress About Terrorist Hacking - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/08/us/fbi-director-warns-about-terrorist-hacking.html?_r=0

Hackers are becoming a bigger threat every day. With viruses and worm attacks taking down huge swaths of the internet etc. It is becoming a threat to national security.

1- critical infrastructure is not hooked up to Internet, at most equipment is wired into the local intranet within the facility.

2- all three of those articles beyond the false claim dealt with 1, deal in hyperbole and people that stole credit card info and people's emails... The emails are a threat to national security only because it exposes criminality within government / corporate organizations.



Lets see... Conspiracy Theories 2,313 1/3rd of your posts.

Meaning 2/3 of my posts are not dealing with conspiracy theories... Oh, and oddly enough, I had been talking about this type of wiretapping for roughly ten years while you call it conspiracy theory... And now it comes out a accurate and I'm still wrong because you buy into the spin that makes it acceptable.

Now lets see... Just in this thread you are worried about the the government mass slaughtering it's people. So yes you tend to drift off into the tinfoil hat zone sometimes.

I never said I was worried, that's you putting words in my mouth, and not in the form of a question.

Speaking of questions, you still never said what conspiracy theory I allegedly (alleged by you) have brought up?

What I said was that Democide was the number one cause of death worldwide over the past century alone, with the implication that governments do not act in a trustworthy manner more often then not based on historical precedence, but even this is only barely within the scope of the point... Which, given all your apparent difficulties expressing yourself, I still don't know what your point was??

Perhaps, if you don't want to discuss a topic that you not create a thread on that topic, or at least express what the point is that you are trying to make...
 
Back
Top Bottom