Live data from Hacker News

Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

vice.com

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#41

This article is insane. It basically claims that 1. In 2018 our phones were constantly snitching on our conversations 2. The author verified this experimentally 3. No one can prove it because "it's all encrypted" (since, as we all know, "encryption" makes all forensics impossible) 4. "It's not a big deal" because "it's just an extension of television advertising". With journalists like these, who needs disinformation…

I think you are throwing a great deal of water on this, but, it sounds like it could be independently testable, and verifiable. Now, we might need to know more about what make model of phone was in use, as well as apps, provider, etc, to replicate this. However, this could be turned into a test campaign with a test plan, treating this as any SUT. To determine if there is any substance to it, of course.

Given some of the more recent exposures of "Phone always-on behavior", constant telemetry [1], apps violating policy, FB&Google collusion around bid rigging, bypassing privacy laws, and, data being sent to facebook whether or not it was intended to go there, it sounds like it is within the realm of technical possibility, or, that it is occuring in some situations that are not readily apparent, or a bug.

Maybe it isn't occuring too, that is a possibility also.

Given how much of the internet is trying to share data back with FB, Google, Apple, and many others just by looking at Umatrix/Ublock, and a few other privacy apps, there is no doubt that much of the mobile internet is really feeding data back to them all the time. Good luck controlling that on mobile though! And, I am not talking about back-end transactions either..

[1] https://www.tomsguide.com/news/android-ios-data-collection

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#42

They almost certainly aren’t listening to you https://mobile.twitter.com/RobertGReeve/status/1397032784703... . But the likely explanation isn’t any better imo.

For me, its less about ads (I run adblocks everywhere, both on the computer and at the router level); but, the same idea surfaces in YouTube recommendations.

One recent example was some random show a friend was telling me to watch. Later that night, YouTube started recommending videos about the show. I've tried to explain it logically, in much the same way a character in scooby-doo would say "there must be a logical explanation for all of this" when faced with a ghost.

Did I search for it, or otherwise leave any intentional digital footprint of interest? Absolutely not.

Its reasonable to think Google has correlated the two of us as knowing one another. At the very least: I have this friend's phone number and email address in my Google Contacts. Our phones were in the same room together, and I certainly have some Google Apps installed. Maybe they know via GPS, or maybe its same WiFi/IP Address. It is reasonable that my friend has expressed a digital footprint of interest in the show, and Google is now funneling the results over to me, thinking "hey you have friends who are into this obscure show, maybe you will be to"

Of course, Google does not communicate its reasons. Its a black box.

What I cannot explain is why it chose that night to make the recommendation. We spend a few hours every week together. My friend has been watching this show for a while, mentioning it maybe once previously on a communication channel I feel reasonably satisfied as being "secure". Then, they mention it in person, and Google chooses that day to make the recommendation to me. Its one thing to assume I may be interested because this friend is interested; what raises concern with me was the perfect timing.

The funny part is, maybe Google isn't listening. It literally doesn't matter. Everyone I talk to, in my bubble outside of tech, believes they (meaning, "Big Tech") are. So, either: Google should be listening, because by-and-large people seem to think they are, and still use their products. Or: Google needs to realize their black box magic is conveying the impression that they are listening, and if their goal is to build trust, saying they aren't listening isn't enough; they need to dumb down their algorithms, or at least explain it better.

Personally: I think they're listening. I suspect its unintentional. I suspect their systems have grown so big, with so little responsible oversight, that some data stream is getting fed into some classifier then into another algorithm, and in the end its influencing the profile it builds on google accounts for things like ads and recommendations. I suspect it isn't the smartphones doing it; I suspect its Google Home speakers, in combination with a less controversial temporal + geographical correlation between two people.

Sure, this all sounds crazy. If you reading this works at Google; prove me wrong. I want to be proven wrong, with emphasis on the word proven. Why does YouTube make the recommendations it does? Why doesn't it explain the signals it uses in the generation of a recommendation? It must either be because you're afraid it would expose the depth and breadth of signals at your disposal, or, the algorithm isn't sophisticated enough to relay that information. And, maybe, just maybe, you'll begin to realize how bad both of those options are.

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#43

This article doesn’t make any sense. > For your smartphone to actually pay attention and record your conversation, there needs to be a trigger, such as when you say “hey Siri” or “okay Google.” In the absence of these triggers, any data you provide is only processed within your own phone. This might not seem a cause for alarm, but any third party applications you have on your phone—like Facebook for example—still hav…

You are correct. At least on early Android phones, there was a dedicated chip that monitored the microphone. Its capabilities were extremely limited - it can only be programmed to recognize certain phonemes (6 or so, I think?) and in a certain order, and when it hears them, it sends an interrupt to the main CPU which wakes up, starts recording, and sends the audio data to Google's servers.

Stuff has gotten more sophisticated (a sufficiently new enough iPhone can do background sound recognition for things like smoke alarms, barking dogs, etc to help deaf users - I think it uses significantly more battery, however), but there is no way in hell Apple and Google are letting others program or control this functionality.

I have said this over and over and over to friends and in online discussions: constant voice recognition or even just voice recording and transmitting would leave a huge footprint in terms of battery use, generated heat, data usage, and in the apps themselves (code and API calls). This stuff would leap off the page for any security researcher and be front-page mainstream media news.

And lastly, I point out that these companies do not do constant voice recognition...because they do not have to. Social media buttons, third party font services and javascript toolkits all feed Google and Facebook data about what pages you visit, at least from your IP even if you're not logged in. Google Maps alone constantly gorges itself on location and passively gathered bluetooth/wifi data, for example. Google sees the plain-text of any alert sent through Google Cloud Messenger, unless the app merely uses GCM to poke their app to retrieve the actual notification via their own servers, but google still knows something happened involving you and WaterBNB, or Fleabay, or Shminder Dating, etc. Your device's presence on a particular network and its activity level from your usage tells them even more, and they can know a lot about what you're doing because all the "good stuff" in Android isn't in Android, it's in Google Play Services, or whatever they call it these days. Then there's all the mobile app analytics data companies.

One of the reasons I switched to a used iPhone was because the privacy preferences allow you to switch off a huge number of 'system' data collection stuff that Android doesn't. It does wonders for one's battery life when your phone isn't constantly collecting wifi/bluetooth/cellular/GPS data for location mapping databases, noting when you go into stores, collecting traffic data, etc. This year I (accidentally, thanks to a not fully seated cigarette power adapter) managed a 6 hour trip w/ Apple Maps navigation, and it only used up about half of my battery. I was stunned.

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the incredibly poor search results I get from Google Assistant I find the idea that the old Samsung phone is listening to my every word is plausible but should be extremely ineffective since when I am deliberately using it, it sucks. However, if I am half way through a movie and I want to find some detail on it, it inevitably shows up within the first few search results whether I'm watching it on DVD, a blu-ray…

Is your TV internet connected? Some have content fingerprinting technology to determine what you're watching shares that back to the ad networks.

No, its an ancient panasonic with no network connection either.

The other thing I didn't count was that google probably know I search for movie information regularly and bias the search results accordingly, which is more plausible than it knowing what movie I am watching by listening to it. But maybe they have something like that "what am i listening to" feature that used to be in google play music.

I guess we unintionally might be triggering a pile of information side channels without the voice recognition spying being foremost.

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#45
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the incredibly poor search results I get from Google Assistant I find the idea that the old Samsung phone is listening to my every word is plausible but should be extremely ineffective since when I am deliberately using it, it sucks. However, if I am half way through a movie and I want to find some detail on it, it inevitably shows up within the first few search results whether I'm watching it on DVD, a blu-ray…

Maybe it’s just playing dumb?

Ha. Voice recognition does seem to induce a large amount of anthropomorphism.

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#46
post #3

They almost certainly aren’t listening to you https://mobile.twitter.com/RobertGReeve/status/1397032784703... . But the likely explanation isn’t any better imo.

I don't buy this. I was at a social outing some years back at pub that I had been to a number of times before with some longtime friends of mine. Somehow we got on the topic of favorite candies from childhood. I mentioned Warheads. I hadn't had one of those in two decades, and certainly hadn't seen any ads for them in a long time. But still, the very next day, I was getting ads for them on social media. Everyone I ha…

> You could whip up some kind of explanation that a friend of mine searched Warheads later.

I think that really is the most likely explanation. Facebook and Google knows who your friends are, and if a friend is interested in Warheads, maybe you are too. So you start seeing ads.

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#47
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how any of these things work, at all. Much in the same way that Facebook and WhatsApp already hash direct messages and compare them to hashes of ad key phrases known to be effective, both audio and video can be hashed at the device level and sent as comparatively small strings, rather than large buffers of media. This can happen while the device is offline, and they can be easily sent along with routine da…

Using some sort of hash instead of transcribing the speech doesn’t change any of the things I listed that make this implausible. There would need to be a background service that has access to the mic without using the official APIs (which show a mic notification) that somehow no one has been able to find for the 5+ years that people have been claiming this is happening. The truth for all of these is probably that we…

I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but it does not need to be a background service that's subverting a sandbox. It just needs to be a running app that has been given microphone permissions. Zoom and even basic voice memo apps, for example, can capture and send audio just fine even while another app is in focus, and can do so without displaying a microphone icon of any sort within the OS UI.

Most people blindly install applications with whichever permissions are requested, and the typical social media user won't ever be intentionally force stopping the app when they're done checking it, so they are always effectively running in the background -- presuming that some battery optimization hasn't kicked in. Facebook and others are very overzealous about their default permissions, and that inarguably, absolutely, 1,000% gives them the technical ability to do whatever they want with your microphone while the app is running, and their user agreement allows them to do anything they want with anything they capture from any source.

So, with all of that in mind, it is completely reasonable to expect that audio recordings could be hashed locally and sent as routine API data without it being at all obvious. I'm not necessarily saying that past research into these claims had the wrong conclusions, but you're definitely being very naïve and apologetic toward companies whose entire business models are based around invading privacy at all costs, and aren't afraid to collude[0] with each other to make those invasions happen without public pushback.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28967575

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#48
post #36

This article doesn’t make any sense. > For your smartphone to actually pay attention and record your conversation, there needs to be a trigger, such as when you say “hey Siri” or “okay Google.” In the absence of these triggers, any data you provide is only processed within your own phone. This might not seem a cause for alarm, but any third party applications you have on your phone—like Facebook for example—still hav…

What’s “AP” here?

Application Processor. It's what you'd refer to the "main" CPU running your OS and apps, as opposed to (say) the baseband chip or other coprocessor.

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#49

This article is insane. It basically claims that 1. In 2018 our phones were constantly snitching on our conversations 2. The author verified this experimentally 3. No one can prove it because "it's all encrypted" (since, as we all know, "encryption" makes all forensics impossible) 4. "It's not a big deal" because "it's just an extension of television advertising". With journalists like these, who needs disinformation…

But our phones are listening. We took a long drive today, and my wife and I discussed homosexuality during a significant portion of that drive. Once we got home, my wife started seeing ads for gay bars and events in Sarasota. Neither of us is homosexual, for what that’s worth. This isn’t the first time this has happened. Every so often my wife would suddenly see ads on Facebook about things we’ve just discussed in me…

Agreed. Similar speech-to-ad conversions have been happening for years now, and they are definitely not coincidences or confirmation bias.

Re: Your phone is listening and it's not paranoia (2018)

#50
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy this. I was at a social outing some years back at pub that I had been to a number of times before with some longtime friends of mine. Somehow we got on the topic of favorite candies from childhood. I mentioned Warheads. I hadn't had one of those in two decades, and certainly hadn't seen any ads for them in a long time. But still, the very next day, I was getting ads for them on social media. Everyone I ha…

I had this with Elder Law ads, after I started watching Better Call Saul. I was watching it as MP4s I'd pirated /years/ ago, on VLC, on a computer running Arch Linux. I have lots of examples that I can hand-wave away as interest profiles, but I've thought about this one since and just have absolutely no idea how it would happen. If someone could explain how this happened without using the mic, I'd be really intereste…

Your phone picked up on the theme.
Post reply on HN