Live data from Hacker News

How to Block Stingray Devices

oaklandmofo.com

51–58 of 58 posts

Re: How to Block Stingray Devices

#51
post #30
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, thanks for the explanation. Meanwhile, setting my Samsung Galaxy S9 to no-2G gives me a warning message that cannot be dismissed: "This setting turns off 2G service. If 2G service is off, some app..." (the remainder can't be viewed).

> (the remainder can't be viewed). Sounds like terrific UI design

Samsung takes something that works. Then goes out of their way to make it worse.

Re: How to Block Stingray Devices

#52
post #15

When sincerely concerned about stingray devices it might be a better idea to either invest in a professional detection appliance or to install applications such as AIMSICD. ( foss/free) If you only deny 2g connectivity; it provides no certainty against being stung and you won't know if you are a target. https://github.com/CellularPrivacy/Android-IMSI-Catcher-Dete...

While the idea behind the app is great, that one specifically is abandoned and should be considered non-working.

Re: How to Block Stingray Devices

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak for Google devices but per Apple's iOS security whitepaper (page 41) [1]: "To protect the device from vulnerabilities in network processor firmware, network interfaces including Wi-Fi and baseband have limited access to application processor memory. When USB or SDIO is used to interface with the network processor, the network processor can’t initiate Direct Memory Access (DMA) transactions to the applic…

PS4 PCI-E accesses were protected with an IO MMU too, but they managed to screw it up. So that doesn't necessarily mean that it's safe.

Indeed even Apple's MMU was bypassed by Google Project Zero [1], but it still significantly increases the cost of exploitation.

[1]: https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2017/10/

Re: How to Block Stingray Devices

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PS4 PCI-E accesses were protected with an IO MMU too, but they managed to screw it up. So that doesn't necessarily mean that it's safe.

Indeed even Apple's MMU was bypassed by Google Project Zero [1], but it still significantly increases the cost of exploitation. [1]: https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2017/10/

Oh, totally. It's an important part of modern defense in depth. 'Just because they said they turned on the IOMMU doesn't make it bulletproof' is all I'm saying.

Re: How to Block Stingray Devices

#55
post #30
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, thanks for the explanation. Meanwhile, setting my Samsung Galaxy S9 to no-2G gives me a warning message that cannot be dismissed: "This setting turns off 2G service. If 2G service is off, some app..." (the remainder can't be viewed).

> (the remainder can't be viewed). Sounds like terrific UI design

Especially given that you can't even expand the message to read all of its intended contents.

Maybe it saves a few milliseconds of battery life every charge.

Re: How to Block Stingray Devices

#56

What might me important for some reader: shutting off 2G services means that you won't have telephone voice services, if your operator doesn't support voLTE.

No, there's also 3G as well, remember. My phone allows 2G, 3G, 2G and 3G, 3G and 4G, or 2G and 3G and 4G network selections in its settins menu (Android 7, Sony)

Re: How to Block Stingray Devices

#57
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What exactly are the practical consequences of being spied on by GMAF, compared to law enforcement?" Should law enforcement order them to relinquish all data about someone wrapped in a gag order, they get all information they need without that someone even noticing.

You believe you are not of interest to LE, and therefore have no need to protect yourself from a Stingray. I disagree, but if we were to accept that premise, then you shouldn't really concern yourself with NSLs, either. So, besides LE taking an interest in you, what are the actual consequences of FAMG spying on you?

I think I am not of interest to LE today, but who knows what could happen in a few years from now. Should the wrong people get in power I don't want them to know what's in my head as much as I don't want any potential employer to know about my ideas. The point is that whatever information they collect today about people, it stays in their servers forever, ready to be scraped through AI to build a profile.

Re: How to Block Stingray Devices

#58
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does mean that SDIO or USB-only access is safe. Of course, it's not 100% safe, but the lack of DMA moves the control over safety from the modem firmware to the application processor.

You'd be surprised how unsafe those are too, even though they aren't RDMA protocols. USB and SDIO stacks aren't really designed with malicious input in mind; it's like the 90s all over again if you think of those as the network protocols they are.

That's right, any kind of communication opens up some form of attack surface. Eliminating DMA is still worthwhile by reducing its total size, and shifting more of the implementation to the softare stack gives the device owner (hopefully the user) more control over the attack surface.
Post reply on HN