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

The NSA Furby Documents

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 129 posts

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#11

Post by refulgentis »

kube-system wrote: post #7
refulgentis wrote: post #3

Context: Furbys were the toy for a year or two, and were actively marketed as learning from speech, had an active mic, and did adjust their speech based on what they heard, "learning" to speak English from Furbish. [^1] It's not so different from the fundamental fear of Alexa/Assistant/microphones that's fairly well diffused now. Except the Furby actively claimed to learn how to speak based on your speech, and had a…

Many voice assistants do record your voice and send those recordings elsewhere: e.g. https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html%3FnodeI...

Absolutely.

Is there a portion of my comment that indicated otherwise? I can still edit it for clarity (I thought that wasn't allowed after a reply occurred)

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#13

Post by Pwntastic »

The FOIA documents are up on archive.org now: https://archive.org/details/nsa-furby-memo/

I'm amused at page 8 of the listserve doc, in which someone points out that the ongoing discussion may at some point be released to the public under FOIA and to consider how it might look after showing up on the front page of a news site

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#14

Post by kube-system »

refulgentis wrote: post #11
kube-system wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many voice assistants do record your voice and send those recordings elsewhere: e.g. https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html%3FnodeI...

Absolutely. Is there a portion of my comment that indicated otherwise? I can still edit it for clarity (I thought that wasn't allowed after a reply occurred)

I'm not arguing with you, just adding to the conversation. While the Furby was feared to be recording, but actually wasn't, voice assistants can be a real concern in that they actually do.

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#15

Post by RajT88 »

alistairSH wrote: post #9
swozey wrote: post #5

Whats gov policy around Alexas and like half the IOT market? My botvac even has a microphone. I'm sure it's "don't ever speak about outside of this room" sort of thing. I guess phone calls would be over a secure line. Are there secure cell phone towers/whatever? I'm curious how gov phones are hardened.

In any SCIF or SCIF-like office space, they're all prohibited. You leave your cell phone at the front door of the secured area. Internet access is via SIPRNet (for classified) or NIPRNet (non-classified, but secured). Phones are through dedicated secure switchboards. The above is common in the DC area (lots of DoD contractors).

My company infosec training actually advises you don't have voice assistants or cellphones in your work area. They even make light of it in the video: "I know it sounds crazy, but it's not".

Google and Amazon as the biggest voice assistant makers are, of course, our competitors. But they are competitors to I would say most software companies in some fashion.

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#16

Post by aerostable_slug »

Years ago, I used to see low quality sun-faded warnings printed from color inkjets about Furby on entries to NNSA secure spaces. I hadn't thought about that little fellow in the longest time...

I'm guessing there are still a few taped up in various Labs at less-used portals.

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#17

Post by pvg »

refulgentis wrote: post #11
kube-system wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many voice assistants do record your voice and send those recordings elsewhere: e.g. https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html%3FnodeI...

Absolutely. Is there a portion of my comment that indicated otherwise? I can still edit it for clarity (I thought that wasn't allowed after a reply occurred)

One of these fears is rational and based on things people know are in fact taking place. The other one is isn't, so drawing the parallel seems iffy. Maybe it's a little closer to the fear your phone is listening to you and that's how you get eerily targeted ads when browsing the web.

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#18

Post by tylerflick »

alistairSH wrote: post #9
swozey wrote: post #5

Whats gov policy around Alexas and like half the IOT market? My botvac even has a microphone. I'm sure it's "don't ever speak about outside of this room" sort of thing. I guess phone calls would be over a secure line. Are there secure cell phone towers/whatever? I'm curious how gov phones are hardened.

In any SCIF or SCIF-like office space, they're all prohibited. You leave your cell phone at the front door of the secured area. Internet access is via SIPRNet (for classified) or NIPRNet (non-classified, but secured). Phones are through dedicated secure switchboards. The above is common in the DC area (lots of DoD contractors).

A relative of mine used to work in this space 20 years ago. Seems policies haven’t changed at all.

Tangental story about how serious the Gov takes OpSec. When I was in Iraq, a Marine in my unit found a roll of red Classified tape. He thought it would be cool to put a strip on his personal laptop, which was confiscated almost immediately. It was very clearly a personal machine, but policy is policy, and he never got that laptop back.

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#19

Post by alistairSH »

tylerflick wrote: post #18
alistairSH wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In any SCIF or SCIF-like office space, they're all prohibited. You leave your cell phone at the front door of the secured area. Internet access is via SIPRNet (for classified) or NIPRNet (non-classified, but secured). Phones are through dedicated secure switchboards. The above is common in the DC area (lots of DoD contractors).

A relative of mine used to work in this space 20 years ago. Seems policies haven’t changed at all. Tangental story about how serious the Gov takes OpSec. When I was in Iraq, a Marine in my unit found a roll of red Classified tape. He thought it would be cool to put a strip on his personal laptop, which was confiscated almost immediately. It was very clearly a personal machine, but policy is policy, and he never got t…

Oh yeah, they take it seriously most of the time. But you do get seemingly odd outputs from those procedures. Case in point...

Many years ago, I worked part-time for a small construction cost management contractor. They did some TS work for DoD/State (usually combo projects, where NSA/CIA/Army had a wing of a consulate that State managed).

I did not have a TS (or any other clearance) at the time. One day, I'm tasked with counting the windows and doors in an old hospital in Munich. All the room numbers are Sharpied out in one half of the building.

So, it's pretty obvious "men in black pajamas" are using that wing. I just don't know the room numbers.

Seemed super weird to me that only the numbers were considered secured info. I'm sure there was an explanation.

Years later, a friend-of-a-friend was moving to Munich to do "State Department" work (he was an HVAC contractor with a TS). Off hand, I said "oh, I bet you'll be in wing X, floor Y or Z in the old hospital". He about fell over that somebody in no way associated with his agency would know that. Got a chuckle from me.

Re: The NSA Furby Documents

#20

Post by odyssey7 »

pvg wrote: post #17
refulgentis wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. Is there a portion of my comment that indicated otherwise? I can still edit it for clarity (I thought that wasn't allowed after a reply occurred)

One of these fears is rational and based on things people know are in fact taking place. The other one is isn't, so drawing the parallel seems iffy. Maybe it's a little closer to the fear your phone is listening to you and that's how you get eerily targeted ads when browsing the web.

What makes the two fears fundamentally different?
Post reply on HN