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

The protester's guide to smartphone security

privacyguides.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 246 posts

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#71

Post by philwelch »

liontwist wrote: post #56

I don’t understand the issue. Protesting is legal. Are we advocating for illegal activity?

There’s some strategic ambiguity going on here. If you’re going to a protest that looks like the Women’s March on Inauguration Day of 2017, you don’t have to worry about this kind of thing. If you’re starting fires or breaking into the Capitol building, you definitely do have to worry about this sort of thing. And just to make things even muddier, the exact same protest can radically change from one to the other based on specifics of time and place. In the summer of 2020, Seattle and Portland had mostly peaceful and uneventful protests by day in the exact same places where shootings and arsons would break out after dark, while on January 6th, just as some of the rioters were trying to force their way through the windows on one side of the Capitol building and clashing with Capitol Police, on the other side of the Capitol they were peacefully walking through wide open gates and doorways and milling around in the hallways as the Capitol Police looked on. And yeah, the peaceful ones get prosecuted sometimes too.

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#72

Post by [deleted] »

gruez wrote: post #52
kevindamm wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reasoning behind this is that your fingerprints and face etc. are public knowledge. Whereas you can retain your right to remain silent (about your password/PIN), failing to provide these aspects of your person can be viewed as not cooperating.

>The reasoning behind this is that your fingerprints and face etc. are public knowledge. Not really. You can be compelled to give blood sample for alcohol testing, but your blood is hardly "public knowledge". Same thing with strip searches.

[deleted]

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#73

Post by red0point »

iseanstevens wrote: post #55

Also Meshtastic.org is a cheap (various It supports strong encryption layer and over 1 km/mile per “hop” in most circumstances. Designed originally for off grid, it’s very flexible and pretty polished. Abstracts your phone into a UI. Has a whole ecosystem behind it. I’ve been using it for festivals and tracking my vehicles (high theft area) for years. Very handy should infra not be available. Should be great for prot…

Do you have any information about the privacy achievable by Meshtastic?

From a quick glance it looks like it‘s using static NodeIDs derived from the Bluetooth MAC address in the always unencrypted Packet Header.

So not only can you sniff these messages from far away at greatly simplified complexity when comparing to cellular communication, but also tie it to the hardware that you carry with you.

Mesh networks sure have its uses, but I‘d be wary of their offered privacy in the presence of adversaries you could be facing at protests!

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#74

Post by timewizard »

diggan wrote: post #3

If you're attending a large-scale protest, it's likely that the cell-towers (or stingrays) won't be able to handle everyone who is connected anyways, so worth planning to use apps that can chat over P2P WiFi or Bluetooth together with the rest of your friends. This also allows you to continue using Airplane Mode the entire time, while being able to communicate with people nearby. Alternatively, investing in walkie-ta…

Keep in mind "Mens rea." If you are implicated in the crimes of the crowd all of these actions may be used to increase the penalties you face. Even if you "trust" the crowd, somehow, you should remember that agent provocateurs exist.

You might ask what attending a large scale protest is intended to achieve and decide for yourself if the personal risks are worth it.

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#75

Post by philwelch »

jMyles wrote: post #20
tehjoker wrote: post #12

If you're this worried, don't bring your phone lol. If you need to take pictures (and don't take identifiable pics of people without consent), just bring a camera. Otoh, the main function of protests is to get media attention, so if they don't get publicized there was basically no point unless they evolve into direct action. If you're interested in this second point, read https://www.amazon.com/If-We-Burn-Protest-Rev…

> don't take identifiable pics of people without consent Hard disagree. Public events are public events. My conclusion, based on experience at street protests, historic trends, and current political events, is that there have been significant actions by provocateurs over the past decade or more, and particularly in Portland in 2020. Taking and posting pictures of these people is an important act. It the internet age…

I mean there’s two sets of social norms here, right? Set one is that whenever you see the first person advocating or starting to break windows or start fires or do something else illegal, you all point at the guy and chant “fed, fed, fed” until he slinks away in shame or maybe shove him out of the crowd and into the police lines and let the cops handle him. The other set of norms is that when you see people do those things, you don’t snitch. Various protesters will adopt either set of norms.

Maybe you’d argue that the second set of protesters are actually feds; I won’t argue the point because I prefer the first set of norms myself.

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#76

Post by Almondsetat »

liontwist wrote: post #67
Almondsetat wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Protesting is legal first of all, where? secondly, what has legality of protest got to do with privacy?

The concern of your phone being taken by authorities or capturing incriminating evidence

Are you making the "if you've got nothing to hide" argument?

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#77

Post by [deleted] »

philwelch wrote: post #71
liontwist wrote: post #56

I don’t understand the issue. Protesting is legal. Are we advocating for illegal activity?

There’s some strategic ambiguity going on here. If you’re going to a protest that looks like the Women’s March on Inauguration Day of 2017, you don’t have to worry about this kind of thing. If you’re starting fires or breaking into the Capitol building, you definitely do have to worry about this sort of thing. And just to make things even muddier, the exact same protest can radically change from one to the other base…

[deleted]

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#78

Post by liontwist »

Almondsetat wrote: post #76
liontwist wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The concern of your phone being taken by authorities or capturing incriminating evidence

Are you making the "if you've got nothing to hide" argument?

That would be sharing your phone and password with the police because there is nothing to hide.

I’m asking why you’re expecting to be booked by authorities and your phone confiscated for attending a “protest”.

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#79

Post by Almondsetat »

liontwist wrote: post #78
Almondsetat wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you making the "if you've got nothing to hide" argument?

That would be sharing your phone and password with the police because there is nothing to hide. I’m asking why you’re expecting to be booked by authorities and your phone confiscated for attending a “protest”.

1. because the U.S. is not the only country on Earth

2. because even in nations with strong constitutional protections, law enforcement likes to play dirty

Re: The protester's guide to smartphone security

#80

Post by layman51 »

diggan wrote: post #5
djoldman wrote: post #4

> If you lose your phone, you may be able to locate or wipe your phone remotely depending on the model... > Please be aware of the legal consequences of these actions. Wiping your device or revoking online account access could lead to obstruction of justice or destruction of evidence charges in some jurisdictions. This can be really serious. It is far better to never have/collect/obtain data in the first place.

It got me curious; lets say I go to a protest, lose my phone and wipe it remotely. I couldn't possibly know who exactly got it (since I lost it) so if I remote wipe it while in police custody, could they really get you for "obstruction of justice" for example? Wouldn't that require intent?

There’s a setting on iPhone called “Erase Data” which will erase the data on it after 10 consecutive failed passcode attempts. That seems like a recommended setting for any smartphone to be honest, especially if it is used for business.
Post reply on HN