I like how the image clearly shows a blue sky for this very expected and foreseeable headline.
post
I flashed a $10 orbic to take to local protests.
At protests you should not bring your smartphone but instead rely on anonymous drvices such as Meshtastic.
If you want to bring your smartphone to a protest, set Airplane mode and communicate with others through Bluetooth or WiFi networks using Briar or Bitchat
May I ask you how? Or if you have more info? No criticism here, honest question. Afaik the only way to do that would be to fingerprint a behavioural pattern, which albeit possible is surely more secure than cell communication.
Meshtastic with 3 jumps would be stretching for actual communication. Plus Bluetooth is even worse for security. Direct connection might be a better way to use the device.
I've had meshtastic for about 2 ish years now and its still being worked on.
What is unsafe about cell communication is that there is virtually no way to prevent being tracked. Bluetooth is not necessarily more secure but has several advantages:
- Its Mac address can be easily changed. With a fake Mac address it's more difficult to track someone down, albeit it needs some "technical skills" (going in the developer settings)
- With these apps communication is encrypted by default unlike cell tower communication
- The range is limited. If police listens over Bluetooth they'll be able to track less people down
Isn't Bluetooth easy to intercept?
Not at the same scale as mobile traffic
Bluetooth by definition doesn’t go much past 10-20 meters
Super easy. You can also do basic triangulation with some specialty hardware.
But we're talking about a protest where bad actors (the police) just want the names of its attendants. Our phones scream to everyone "I am [name surname] and I am here!". Bluetooth instead says the same but with a lower tone of voice, so less people can listen. Also, with little configuration you can instruct it not to broadcast its identifier.
I don't understand why cell phones don't authenticate the towers they connect to. Is this really just a "standards lag behind modern security" thing, or is it on purpose to allow these Stingray devices to be used?
Even if they did, I don't see government having trouble getting a proper authentication key.
why cell phones don’t authenticate the towers they connect to.
I believe it's because they assume it's not necessary because it was until now
- prohibitively expensive, but now a "tower" is less than 2k EUR e.g. https://www.crowdsupply.com/ukama/ukama
- prohibitively complex, see above, namely you don't need to be a TelCo engineer to get it going
- probably illegal, namely you needed (and I bet still need in most places) wireless band allocation before you could deploy anything
... so I imagine there was no authentication because there was no practical threat beside few "fun" examples in CCC or DEF Con.
The use of Stingray by US law enforcement has been challenged on grounds that the law enforcement agencies have no spectrum license. Those challenges seem not to have found success.
On the other hand, prisons in the US have been stopped from operating cell phone jammers on prison grounds, on the same complaint of no spectrum license.
I don't know the specific methods, but 3G, 4G and 5G do authenticate bidirectionaly, just 2G doesn't, partially why Android now has "Disable 2G" toggle.
Also probably why they said they can downgrade you to 2G to intercept communication.
What's happening here is probably similar to anyone being able to send Wi-Fi deauthentification frame to your device to disconnect you. Unless you're using WPA3.
IMEI/IMSI are collected (and immediately linked, hence deanonymized even if SIM was inserted only once) by cell tower operators. Just not bring your device, period.
Yeah, I agree with that personally, but realistically, "your phone was near a place" is not the same as "you were involved". If they hijack a phone onto a Stingray, they can get way more info than just IMEI.
Yeah, if you go protest you should leave your tracking device at home or, even better, with a friend or relative who you know will not be there. The US government doesn't require subcutaneous tracking chips (yet), you can put yours away.
Those circumstances include immediate threats to national security and situations where a person is in danger of death or serious injury.
Well I see a problem there. It doesn’t specify the cause of the danger or the reason the person is in danger in the first place.
This is exactly why I was railing against some of the earlier protests which featured politicians openly asking protestors to take out their phones and send texts to opt-in for fundraisers. Besides all the obvious bullshit, it put those protestors who didn't know better at serious risk.
Thankfully, I haven't seen too much of that at the protests I've been to recently, but this is a good reminder that we have to keep educating people to leave their phone at home.
When I go to a protest with friends/family we leave our phones at home and then use basic walkie talkies. It's open channel, so no privacy, but the main goal is to just communicate basics like "I'm safe." We predetermine a couple of locations to meet up at if things get rough and we're separated.
all 36 comments