OMG!!! This is proof positive that we are being illegally monitored in the extreme!!

[John F Kennedy III]

The consent you gave does not include logging every single keystroke you make on your phone. That is way past the scope of what you agreed to. Don't post 3 times, although maybe it was a computer error that made you triple post.

My phone screwed up. Lol.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

You also gave consent to have Apple kidnap you and use you in biological experiments to create a Human CentIPAD.

It wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Johnny Appleseed]

well I guess its a good thing they make them too expensive for me to own one

 

[Spikkle]

Surprise.. surprised?

Reading this thread... Maybe I'm from a generation past a lot of folks here. No-one remembers Carnivore? Equinox? Every packet coming in or out of your ISP is scanned and inspected. It uses a technique called "DPI" which is Deep Packet Inspection -- meaning even if you are running mail traffic on an http port, it still reads it, etc. Now, fast forward 15 years, and you have mobile phones which eventually terminate in TCP/IP traffic. It's monitored as "special" internet traffic for 3G/4G/LTE, and *every single GPRS (voice) packet* is recorded and stored (literally) by the carrier. Every speech is scanned and key words are flagged, making the recording of your conversation available for human inspection later.

Our laws, particularly on mobile phones, allow for "warrentless wiretaps". Connect the dots here. If a warrant for an individual isn't required, then why not do it to everyone? Especially if you have already been doing it for land line and internet for more than a decade.

Here's another question.... Do you really think the military pays $200 for toilet seats, or maybe is $190 going to other un-listed programs? ;-) I digress.

Oh.. almost forgot.... "Hello, thank you for your interest in my message. Please support Ron Paul 2012. If he wins, your department could be eliminated and you could not only read, but contribute to this forum without fear of reprimand!"

 

[JasonM]

Reading this thread... Maybe I'm from a generation past a lot of folks here. No-one remembers Carnivore? Equinox? Every packet coming in or out of your ISP is scanned and inspected. It uses a technique called "DPI" which is Deep Packet Inspection -- meaning even if you are running mail traffic on an http port, it still reads it, etc. Now, fast forward 15 years, and you have mobile phones which eventually terminate in TCP/IP traffic. It's monitored as "special" internet traffic for 3G/4G/LTE, and *every single GPRS (voice) packet* is recorded and stored (literally) by the carrier. Every speech is scanned and key words are flagged, making the recording of your conversation available for human inspection later.

Our laws, particularly on mobile phones, allow for "warrentless wiretaps". Connect the dots here. If a warrant for an individual isn't required, then why not do it to everyone? Especially if you have already been doing it for land line and internet for more than a decade.

Here's another question.... Do you really think the military pays $200 for toilet seats, or maybe is $190 going to other un-listed programs? ;-) I digress.

Oh.. almost forgot.... "Hello, thank you for your interest in my message. Please support Ron Paul 2012. If he wins, your department could be eliminated and you could not only read, but contribute to this forum without fear of reprimand!"

It's one thing if law enforcement does it themselves, it's quite another for a private corporation to do it for monetary gain and is invasion of privacy. Plus if the information was stolen on a regular basis by say China via hackers, they could potentially monitor information for certain "phone numbers" as well.

Again, this is private coorporations, not government big brother, although this certainly empowers big government to be sure.

Thus, one way to make sure to protect our liberty (and our identities and money) is to make sure that information is never there for them to grab in the first place. If restrictions in logging information were to be in place and mandatory annonymization of internet use was enshrined in the law, law enforcement, foreign governments and criminals would have one less tool to use against us.

 

[ShaneEnochs]

The Patriot Act is pretty proof positive imo...

 

[Dr.3D]

well I guess its a good thing they make them too expensive for me to own one

Yeah, I use the twisted pair to make telephone calls for that very reason.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Think anybody will throw out their electronic dog collars over this?

Nope, I didn't think so either.

 

[Danke]

 

[Spikkle]

Again, this is private coorporations, not government big brother, although this certainly empowers big government to be sure.

That is a very good point. I didn't mean to detract from the original notion of wrongful non-consented monitoring via private enterprise, but it is also important to note the lack of distinction between the two (corporate and government). The profit motive is such that it is no mystery that private companies are trying to get more and more data for so long as they can do so legally (if no law explicitly prevents it) and fight off challenges in court, or through lobbying.

The ISPs and Telecom in this country are private enterprise, for sure, but work hand in hand with the government for mutual benefit. It is important to note the "mutual", as it is really an ingenious relationship. The private enterprise bears the cost and can reap the benefit of conducting (in the most literal of terms) full scale surveillance of the private person -- internet users, TV watchers (anyone with a box under the set), and mobile phone+data users. They track and monitor our purchases (non cash) and even our travel habits and our physical position (GPS and wifi-based location -- notice Google's wifi location service in Android?). The purchase monitoring companies boastfully proclaim they can even predict life events such as divorce based on the information they collect from our spending records. By cleverly designing social products to expose features useful for us, they can glean even more information. Can you believe it, and we even provide them the meta-data for free. Great examples are automatic face recognition in your photos, targeted advertisements based on the contents of emails and their attachments, and On-Star (we blindly assume it doesn't, or couldn't, run on the server side if we disable the feature or service). We write the names of the folks in the picture or link them to our contacts lists. We reply to emails or send our own attachments which undergo more automated lexical analysis and pattern matching. Some of us even pay for the privilege of having our lives monitored and our privacy pilfered.

Now, back to the "mutual" part -- as I said, private enterprise absorbs the cost in order to buy and sell everything about us. Government forms partnerships with private enterprise to requisition the data and the analysis of it, be it either through legislation, regulation, or contractual agreement. We read privacy policies that say "we don't distribute personal identifying information", but this is a very loose term. If I was able to describe to you every minute detail about the habits, and possessions of your neighbor, you would know who I'm talking about. Likewise, we are naive to assume that the "non-personal" information collected about us and delivered, enumerated, is not reverse associated at the source and retrievable by any privileged entity. Even Occam's Razor would suggest they would maintain the relationship of collected data to actual identity for sake of efficiency, so as to not send the same data stream representing an individual person more than once to anyone paying to receive it.

The point I really intended to make, is that we are really naive to perceive the issues as independent problems. Our personal information should really be implicitly considered our own private property, the same as our DNA or our individual likeness (not saying it is, just that is ought to be). To put it in perspective, just because you lost a hair, shed a skin cell, or gave blood doesn't imply consent for a private enterprise to collect it, sequence your DNA, and trade biometric information on you for cash to anyone who would buy it.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Just one point about the US Intelligence gathering alpha agencies... They are the largest storage data mining depositories users in the world. They just purchase their hardware across multiple Storage vendors to mask the entire amount of server farms out there in Big Brother farmland.

Over the last month, Carrier IQ has attempted to quash Eckhart’s research with a cease-and-desist letter, apologizing only after the Electronic Frontier Foundation came to his defense

Accolades to our Libertarian friends @ the EFF.org!

You probably give consent in your phone contract. Not that the government cares about consent...

Phone 'Rootkit' Maker Carrier IQ May Have Violated Wiretap Law In Millions Of Cases
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygre...ve-violated-wiretap-law-in-millions-of-cases/

A piece of keystroke-sniffing software called Carrier IQ has been embedded so deeply in millions of Nokia, Android, and RIM devices that it’s tough to spot and nearly impossible to remove, as 25-year old Connecticut systems administrator Trevor Eckhart revealed in a video Tuesday. That’s not just creepy, says Paul Ohm, a former Justice Department prosecutor and law professor at the University of Colorado Law School. He thinks it’s also likely grounds for a class action lawsuit based on a federal wiretapping law.
“If CarrierIQ has gotten the handset manufactures to install secret software that records keystrokes intended for text messaging and the Internet and are sending some of that information back somewhere, this is very likely a federal wiretap.” he says. “And that gives the people wiretapped the right to sue and provides for significant monetary damages.”
As Eckhart’s analysis of the company’s training videos and the debugging logs on his own HTC Evo handset have shown, Carrier IQ captures every keystroke on a device as well as location and other data, and potentially makes that data available to Carrier IQ’s customers. The video he’s created (below) shows every keystroke being sent to the highly-obscured application on the phone before a call, text message, or Internet data packet is ever communicated beyond the phone. Eckhart has found the application on Samsung, HTC, Nokia and RIM devices, and Carrier IQ claims on its website that it has installed the program on more than 140 million handsets.

Specifically, Ohm points to changes made to the Wiretap Act under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 that forbid acquiring the contents of communications without the users’ consent. “Because this happens with text messages as they’re being sent, a quintessentially streaming form of communication, it seems like exactly the kind of thing the wiretap act is meant to prevent,” he says. ”When I was at the Justice Department, we definitely prosecuted people for installing software with these kinds of capabilities on personal computers.”
Carrier IQ didn’t respond to my request for comment, but the firm has posted a response statement on its website, claiming that it collects only limited “operational information” on devices for its carrier customers:

While we look at many aspects of a device’s performance, we are counting and summarizing performance, not recording keystrokes or providing tracking tools. The metrics and tools we derive are not designed to deliver such information, nor do we have any intention of developing such tools. The information gathered by Carrier IQ is done so for the exclusive use of that customer, and Carrier IQ does not sell personal subscriber information to 3rd parties. The information derived from devices is encrypted and secured within our customer’s network or in our audited and customer-approved facilities
​

Former Justice Department prosecutor and University of Colorado Law School professor Paul Ohm

But even if the data were somehow aggregated and anonymized before being communicated to a remote server, Ohm argues, Carrier IQ and possibly even Sprint and other carriers shown to have used the company’s services should still expect a costly class action lawsuit. “Even if they were collecting only anonymized usage metrics, it doesn’t mean they didn’t break the law,” says Ohm. “Then it becomes a hard, open question. And hard open questions take hundreds of thousands of dollars to make go away.”

“In the next days or weeks, someone will sue, and then this company is tangled up in very expensive litigation,” he adds. “It’s almost certain.”
Over the last month, Carrier IQ has attempted to quash Eckhart’s research with a cease-and-desist letter, apologizing only after the Electronic Frontier Foundation came to his defense. Eckhart’s legal representation at the EFF declined to comment on the legality of Carrier IQ’s business practices.
If the case went to court, Carrier IQ’s first line of defense might be that users have agreed to some form of tracking in their contract with one of Carrier IQ’s cellular carrier customers. But when I reached Eckhart by phone, he pointed out that in his tests, he turned on the phone’s airplane mode, shutting down its cellular connection and using only Wifi. Even then, the app seemed to record all his keystrokes and communications as they happened. “[Sprint] defines their service as their network,” he says, referring to his own tests on his Sprint-connected HTC Evo. “I don’t understand how my phone on my own wireless network is their service, and how they have the right to look at that.”

Ohm argues that even when the phone is connected to the cellular network, only carriers are protected by contracts they make with users, not an intermediate software company of which most users are unaware. And carriers themselves typically don’t spell out in their contracts the kind of surveillance that Eckhart has shown Carrier IQ to be performing. “This seems like really intrusive, comprehensive surveillance,” says Ohm. “If so, is there really a provision in the contract that’s so all-encompassing? They may say they’ll periodically monitor for quality assurance, or something to that effect. But that seems like a far cry from saving every keystroke.”

 

[LibForestPaul]

Aside from the Skype incident, where encrypted conversations could be listened to, it's also worth noting that in this case, the software's taking information before encryption and possibly after decryption, so encryption's pretty useless with this particular software. Edit: it actually doesn't appear to be logging keystrokes in the browser, but appears to intercept encrypted queries and then decrypts them... but that can't be right.

no, it is logging everything from what i have read...

 

[LibForestPaul]

This is the future of the internet by the way. Trusted computing, windows 8, etc... And it will be mandated...don't have a trusted secure computer...ISP will shut you out. Can't have national security threat of a comprised machine hitting economic interests.

 

[LibForestPaul]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12/01/security_firms_compete_to_sell_snoopware_to_repressive_governments/

enjoy...spying for sale

 

[Kludge]

no, it is logging everything from what i have read...

Check the video. It isn't recording keystrokes on the virtual keyboard for the browser (or at least, I didn't notice it when I watched). It records some keystrokes, but not others. It is recording website addresses you view, though, whether encrypted or not, which I'd guess means CIQ is integrated in the browser, but Idunno.

 

[JasonM]

Check the video. It isn't recording keystrokes on the virtual keyboard for the browser (or at least, I didn't notice it when I watched). It records some keystrokes, but not others. It is recording website addresses you view, though, whether encrypted or not, which I'd guess means CIQ is integrated in the browser, but Idunno.

The virtual keyboard is logged, there is a code associated with numbers, so i imagine it's the same with letters and characters. You should watch it again when he's dialing the numbers and it's logging it in the background. If you don't have a background or active interest in this sort of thing it can be hard to keep your attention for more than 5 or 10 minutes.

Again, no data is ever encrypted until it starts flying through the airwaves. You can come up with the best cipher in the world, but if a spy is hiding in your house while you translate the secret message into a readable format or vise versa, there is no need to break the code.

 

[JasonM]

This is the future of the internet by the way. Trusted computing, windows 8, etc... And it will be mandated...don't have a trusted secure computer...ISP will shut you out. Can't have national security threat of a comprised machine hitting economic interests.

Not necessarily. I predict that all this sharing and ignorant trust will be greatly damaged if a cyber war ever breaks out and massive disruptions occur, with all of our personal computers as unknowing foot-soldiers for either side (or even multiple sides in some cases if there is more than one malicious program installed) for the especially computer illiterate folks. If it's bad enough, it will mean the end of our cyber liberties if the propaganda machine wins the hearts and minds of ignorant folks. But by the same token, there will be much greater demand for a more robust security system and the market forces and geniuses of mankind will be happy to oblige (provided they are free to develop countermeasures to privacy threats without overbearing corporate and government regulations.....and yes big corporation can be just as bad as big government.....after all corporations will be human beings, and human beings can only be trusted to be human with all the perks and downsides it involves).

 

[AFPVet]

Guys, I wrote a college paper about this stuff. There are so many programs and things out there that it is nearly impossible to use technology and avoid being monitored.