Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 163 posts

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#121

Post by georgeplusplus »

LadyCailin wrote: post #119
ridaj wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exact cell site locations would be considered competitive strategic information by most carriers, who spend a lot of time, money and energy selecting the right cell sites to cover the right markets at the right cost. Also, they change all the time, eg when leases expire, when customer traffic patterns changes, when there are upgrades, etc.

I don’t buy that. I’m sure the way that they select the sites in the first place is probably proprietary, but once you start broadcasting radio frequencies, it’s trivial to pinpoint the location of the towers, so there’s absolutely nothing stopping anyone, particularly a competitor, from mapping them out quite easily.

If it’s done quiet easily as you claim, then why hasn’t it been done already?

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#122

Post by raxxorrax »

ridaj wrote: post #114
nerdponx wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering all the stuff that's open public information, it's a bit surprising that cell tower locations aren't .

Exact cell site locations would be considered competitive strategic information by most carriers, who spend a lot of time, money and energy selecting the right cell sites to cover the right markets at the right cost. Also, they change all the time, eg when leases expire, when customer traffic patterns changes, when there are upgrades, etc.

Encryption helps against IMSI-Catchers, but you can also just implement a form of secure tower identification if ISP want to keep their secrets. The mexican cartels could do it if the urban legends are true.

edit: And as others have said, it compares a bit to wanting to keep the location of a lighthouse a secret.

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#123

Post by Xelbair »

calibas wrote: post #12

Stingray use requires a warrant and every case should be dismissed where one was used without a warrant. I'm sure that's the main reason they want to hide the use of stingrays, they know they're doing something wrong. Police having the ability to spy on everyone with little to no oversight is nightmarish authoritarianism, it's completely against the spirit of American democracy, not to mention in violation of The Con…

>Stingray use requires a warrant and every case should be dismissed where one was used without a warrant. I'm sure that's the main reason they want to hide the use of stingrays, they know they're doing something wrong.

they'll just do a parallel construction - use stingrays to find other evidence, scrap stingrays from record and only go forward with evidence gathered from usage of stingray.

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#124

Post by cosmodisk »

clSTophEjUdRanu wrote: post #34
calibas wrote: post #12

Stingray use requires a warrant and every case should be dismissed where one was used without a warrant. I'm sure that's the main reason they want to hide the use of stingrays, they know they're doing something wrong. Police having the ability to spy on everyone with little to no oversight is nightmarish authoritarianism, it's completely against the spirit of American democracy, not to mention in violation of The Con…

Any smart, ethical police department would go for a warrant. I'm friends with someone in law enforcement and they say the last thing they want is evidence tossed. Often they get warrants they don't even need just so there isn't a chance of having evidence tossed later.

Having dealt with police throughout various stages of my life(never as a suspect,or offender),all I can say is that they lie,cheat and misinform people. I'm sure there are plenty of decent people out there but the force has plenty of those with broken moralle compasses.

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#125

Post by dfc »

raxxorrax wrote: post #122
ridaj wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exact cell site locations would be considered competitive strategic information by most carriers, who spend a lot of time, money and energy selecting the right cell sites to cover the right markets at the right cost. Also, they change all the time, eg when leases expire, when customer traffic patterns changes, when there are upgrades, etc.

Encryption helps against IMSI-Catchers, but you can also just implement a form of secure tower identification if ISP want to keep their secrets. The mexican cartels could do it if the urban legends are true. edit: And as others have said, it compares a bit to wanting to keep the location of a lighthouse a secret.

What is the cartel secure tower identification story?

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#126

Post by btcbanking »

sb057 wrote: post #80
mLuby wrote: post #74

If we had a crowd-sourced database of cell towers (picture & coordinates) wouldn't it then be straightforward to know (and report) when your phone wasn't connecting to a legitimate tower? I for one want to make sure the criminals aren't intercepting my signal with home-made stingrays; the police have other lawful ways to get what they need.

People are way ahead of you: https://cellularprivacy.github.io/Android-IMSI-Catcher-Detec...

The f-droid link on that page brings a 404

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#127

Post by jokoon »

ColanR wrote: post #86
jokoon wrote: post #63

Knowing Bellard managed to build a 3G cell tower just by using a cheap antenna, I guess it means anybody can build a stingray, although connecting to the cellphone network might not be a trivial thing to do. No idea how companies secure their networks, and I wonder if there are security standard about it.

Where might I find more information about this?

https://bellard.org/lte/

Actually it's a 4G antenna. It's not a stingray, but to me, it's a big step towards it if you're a black hat and can find a way to access the cellphone network.

I have optimism and want to believe most big telco have good security practices and make it extremely difficult or impossible to connect to their network. Although one might be able to do some social engineering and do it, since the cellphone network requires a lot of antenna and manpower to install and maintain them.

For example, imagine you set up a fake company that installs those antennas. How can the telco make sure the antenna is not being moved around (monitoring GPS of the connected smartphones, maybe checking the residency of users to see if something is statistically fishy)? So in short, I tend to think it's not very hard to penetrate cellphone networks, unless the telco spends enough money to secure it and triple check their contractors.

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#128

Post by raxxorrax »

dfc wrote: post #125
raxxorrax wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Encryption helps against IMSI-Catchers, but you can also just implement a form of secure tower identification if ISP want to keep their secrets. The mexican cartels could do it if the urban legends are true. edit: And as others have said, it compares a bit to wanting to keep the location of a lighthouse a secret.

What is the cartel secure tower identification story?

https://www.npr.org/2011/12/09/143442365/mexico-busts-drug-c...

I think this was an example of such a network.

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#129

Post by gnud »

masonic wrote: post #118
TallGuyShort wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ACLU. edit: to be clear, I think the government itself could really do with reeling it back a bit as well - but this very news is a reminder that some people are watching out for the watched.

The ACLU was mostly mute on these issues during the prior administration, when these abuses became routine.

Just a couple of links to disprove this troll:

https://www.aclu.org/cases/florida-stingray-foia (2014)

https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-florida-v-city-sarasota-stin... (2014)

https://www.aclu.org/cases/foia-request-justice-department-p... (2014)

... and tons more, at https://www.aclu.org/defending-our-rights/court-battles?topi...

Re: ACLU sues Homeland Security over 'stingray' cell phone surveillance

#130

Post by acollins1331 »

PeterisP wrote: post #103
abeppu wrote: post #24

Some informed person can probably tell us: are there any technical developments on the horizon which could plausibly make stingrays unviable? From a lay perspective, it seems like cell tech hasn't been designed to meet some criteria that ought to be achievable. - Are there future cell technology standards being planned which would make it harder for a 3rd party device to impersonate a cell tower? (e.g. the police wou…

The key factor is the compatibility with international roaming - customers, manufacturers and operators really want the phone to "just work" when you step out of a plane in a random place where the only cell tower in range is run by an operator that was established after your phone was made. There can't be a global list of 'trusted operators' for political reasons (long story), and in order to make calls, your phone…

Actually it looks like the two problems with your obvious solutions (political and companies being cranky about you noticing you're on a different tower) are complete bullshit and can be solved with very simple legislation. The more complicated and expensive solution doesn't need to happen.
Post reply on HN