On 2013-10-15 15:11, GtwoG PublicOhOne wrote: yes, somewhat yes, yes, yes The description differs because the use of cell phones as roving wiretaps is believed to be somewhat rare at this point because users can use wireshark or a cell signal detector to see if anomalous amounts of data are being transmitted. The look of Shotspotter is a secret and afaik we can't even know exactly where they are for that reason. Moreover, the ownership of a smart phone is voluntary and provides advantages to the owners whereas Shotspotter is thrust upon us and it is not obvious how to avoid it.

On 2013-10-15 18:21, GtwoG PublicOhOne wrote: Roving wiretaps have a specific meaning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roving_wiretap If you would like to willfully ignore well-established meanings of words don't be surprised when people choose to stop talking to you. My phone runs Android 4.3 and it won't take dictation commands unless Google Now is in the foreground or I press the microphone at an input screen. IIRC, Siri on iOS requires tapping the home button 3 times to activate. Have fun trying to fake the location and yet stay in contact with towers close enough to be useful. Easy to use cell phone detector: http://www.brickhousesecurity.com/product/rf+signal+detector+ii.do If you don't like that one, you could just as easily find plenty more by using the search engine of your choice to search for cell phone detectors. I think that's good marketing, if you don't, you don't have your finger on the pulse of the police state. Yes it is, in cities like SF and Oakland, if someone is within earshot, there's a smartphone within earshot too. If you think they're all picking up all conversations or all conversations with keywords just set up a speaker to speak 'sarin bomb al-qaeda active shooter'. You're probably proposing that everyone on this list throw out their phone, so let's pretend that we're going to do that. There are now (let's say) 50 fewer phones out of a population of 380,000 in Oakland. I do. It's easy when they're mostly GPL thrust upon users as EULA (GPL is a distribution license, not a EULA). You should talk to someone with a smart phone sometime. Maybe you'll see that the advantages include things like providing driving directions, access to email from multiple locations, making phone calls. The sort of thing that gets you laid. I think asking people to page me would have a profound negative impact on my sex life. That's up to the user. You can sit in your ivory tower all day and night and think people are stupid, but in the end you've likely made 0 people give a fuck. I'm against surveillance, so I spoke at city council against DAC, I've taught at crypto parties and otherwise. I'm building up my chops to make more contributions to privacy software. I care about taking steps that people will actually follow. If I stood on the street corner telling people to delete their Facebook and throw out their smart phone no one will follow that advice. How about if the moon were suddenly made of cheese? RedPhone, SilentPhone. Mark Klein said this was happening in 2005 and apparently it was happening since February 2001. Again, it's really hard to get people to care, but I do. I've gotten dozens using these tools, how many cell phones have you got people to throw away? Cell phone detector + reciting likely trigger words. Cameras can be dealt with using adhesive bandages (they don't leave residue over the lens). Those aren't here yet and it's hard to tell what's fact and what's fiction in regards to the future of online tracking. There are loads of tools like privoxy, adblock, ghostery, Tor Browser Bundle and Tails available. Now get people using them. Adblock is the easiest sell possible, run this and the ads go away. It is important to keep our eyes to the future, but not to the extent that we should ignore what's going on today. What are you doing now about this stuff? What? Since when did this become libertarian-talk? Where does this principle come from? Is the converse true? Keyphrase: Allah (pbuh) airplane September 11th, sarin gas underwear bomb

I'm glad that there's at least one other person out there who knows the right way to pronounce this guy's name. Thanks for the laugh, G. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 12:53 AM, GtwoG PublicOhOne <g2g-public01(a)att.net>wrote;wrote: -- Tony Barreca LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tonybarreca Skype: tonybarreca Twitter: tbarreca Mobile: (510) 710-5864

Hi Shawn- Re. "slut-shame": I was merely expressing envious admiration at the proclaimed prowess of anyone who says they need GPS and on-the-fly email to get laid, because they must have an outstandingly busy "social calendar." Sorry I misunderestimated an admittedly inept attempt at a light-hearted and encouraging comment;-) Re. Panasonic GPS etc.: It maintains a list of places I've programmed into it. Mostly client sites, no exciting social calendar or anything. But it doesn't transmit either, or connect to the internet. So if someone wants to get at what's in it, they have to obtain it first, and it's not in the vehicle unless I'm using it (primarily because I don't want my windows smashed for a device that can be sold for a crack rock or three). LPRs: I've been contemplating solutions to those, but they're a lower priority until or unless they get commercialized, at which point I'll go on the warpath. The first time I drive past an an electronic billboard that suddenly flashes "Hey G, we know you're shopping for a toaster-oven, here's a great deal..." I'll pull over and spraypaint obscenities across it. FasTrak: Wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole, and neither should anyone else who values their freedom of association. I recognized that as a surveillance device when it first came out; keyword "bumper beeper" for the oldschool version. BTW, did you know that SF Muni buses not only record video of the passengers, but also AUDIO? First time I saw that notification on the side of a Muni bus was the last time I rode Muni. House bugged: Probability asymptotically approaching zero, for reasons that needn't be discussed in public. Car bugged: Nope, ditto. I don't worry about LE and the TLAs, for various reasons including that we have recourse at the voting booth. (Yes, the faith some of us have in elections is touching, too...) I do worry about the unregulated private sector, particularly the Bigs, and as I said, anyone who believes it's only about "personalized advertising" is welcome to contact me to buy a bridge I have for sale cheap. Misuse of terminology: You say to-may-toe, and I say to-mah-toe, you say fell-lay-tio, and I say fell-lah-toe;-) The point stands that what Google and Facebook do is basically the same thing as a roving wiretap: tracking persons and their communications across multiple devices and locations. While we're at it, do you know how small a sample of text is needed to get author attribution? Just say Twitter... details in person. And voiceprint attribution was 99.96% accurate as of 1962 (published); fast-forward at the speed of Moore's law, draw your own conclusions, and more details in person. Consumer cellphone detectors: I should have specified, "a cellphone detector that you or someone else in the community has verified works properly." Many are the devices that claim to work, and many are the spam five-star reviews; the S/N ratio for consumer devices and random electronics is nasty so I don't bother to keep track of them. I was involved with crypto a decade before Cypherpunk, and involved in Cypherpunk too. (A couple of sentences redacted here.) More details in person, including what the best physical RNG is and according to who. Agreed, Goolag's voice rec happens on the server side, which also enables "flexible" control of keyword lists. How the device behaves in normal use is one thing. How it could behave under various other circumstances remains to be seen and tested. For example use GPS output to determine when person is in an "interesting" place, trigger device at preset incoming audio volume level, etc. More easily, activate when device owned by person A comes within X distance of device owned by person B. Etc. I've never tried meth either, but one doesn't need to, in order to conclude it's bad for one's wetware. Good to hear we agree that Goolag Glass is a one-way mirror, but I do not trust it to only activate when people wink-nudge it. Same case as "smart"phones: selective activation by triggering criteria. Looking forward to ways to thwart it. Agreed it's reasonable to assume people around me carry "smart"phones. I try to be aware of devices in my environment, and I don't hesitate to request devices-off for certain conversations in certain surroundings. There was a time when most cellphone batteries were far more easily removable, and people routinely removed them before they started private F2F conversations. Since "9/11 constant-contact syndrome" has set in with a vengeance ("someone I love might call me when they're about to die") it's harder to get people to unhook even briefly. Weird. The time will eventually come when "second-hand surveillance" is recognized as being every bit as obnoxious to non-consenting parties as second-hand smoke is to nonsmokers. That or the future looks like Brave New World, "predict & control" via consumer lifestyle. Ask people in the (whatever relevant earlier era) what they'd think about thermonuclear weapons, climate change, drug-resistant bacteria, etc. We're still fighting over teaching evolution in public schools. Heath Robinson is as near to your keyboard as consumer cellphone detectors are to mine, but here's a link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heath_Robinson As I said, if you needed an ad-hom to use on me, "chasing squirrels while believing he's the reincarnation of Heath Robinson" would do nicely;-) Read the link and unpack the suggested ad-hom, and you'll probably agree it's well-compressed and works on multiple levels. One thing though. Comparisons with Ted Kaczynski really are highly objectionable, seeing as he's a domestic terrorist & multiple-murderer. I read his "manifesto" back when the FBI were pleading with every lefty in the Bay Area for help catching him. I found it to be a tangled mess of nonsense, fit for inclusion in an anthology of post-modernist horse shit. Come to think of it, comparisons with post-modernists are highly objectionable too... So let's not go using comparisons to terrorists, or calling each other post-modernists, OK? Especially when there are plenty of symbolic furry animals and creators of deliberate absurdity to use for comparisons instead, and cheeky comments about social calendars and so on. In any case we have more in common cause than we have opposing each other. My central point here has always been that unregulated private-sector surveillance is more dangerous to civil liberties than the TLAs, by a decent handful of decimal places. We can agree to disagree about that, and let history be the judge. Cheers- -G ===== On 13-10-16-Wed 1:53 PM, Shawn Lesniak wrote:

I just came across this Bruce Schneier talk about the big-picture issues of increasingly powerful technology for communication / surveillance and found it to be relevant to the discussion here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0d_QDgl3gI On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Patrik D'haeseleer <patrikd(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

On 2013-10-17 06:41, GtwoG PublicOhOne wrote: If this were your first sex-negative post on the list I might have believed that. In addition to crack being a racist allusion, it also reinforces the idea that the war on drugs is important which you should realize enables the surveillance state Trailer hitch, reflective coat, mud Guess you won't be crossing the Golden Gate any time soon. I do and I remind other passengers of that on occasion. Because you're not as important as you fancy yourself? Right, so which was the anti-surveillance candidate? I have no interest in talking to you in person. If something were sensitive, I would not reveal it to or trust it from the person who wanted to invite undercover cops to a lockpicking workshop. Buy it from somewhere with a good return policy. It's not like it's hard to find a cell phone to test it with. Intel RDRand? If you actually had something important to redact, you would do so silently. You can speculate all day and night, or you can read some indictments once in a while. Maybe if you actually read about this stuff and had an interest in communicating about this sort of thing, you'd see that this idea already has a name, geofencing. I wonder sometimes if your goal is to say as many tangential inflammatory statements as possible. Sneak in whatever controversial, misleading statements you want into your emails and people who try to counter them are missing the point and people who are tacit are agreeing. Casual meth use is possible, I know people who have partaken, giving into the drug scare encourages the surveillance state. You are then unaware of the battery life. If it turned on more, the battery life may be cut in half. You should try all devices in this car/box/whatever that is not close to the conversation rather than turning off devices which signal for one could easily correlate synchronized phone turn off events. If by routine, you mean by cyberpunks, and other people under intense scrutiny (other than journalists who are allergic to opsec)? Right, and there will be a time where we use the metric system for everything too Old people don't like new things, good or bad. Maybe I should have clarified and said I don't care either. I don't do research to get jokes, especially for people I've never found to be funny. So how'd you deal with the cyberpunk mailing list being hosted on al-qaeda.org? Your analysis of his writing differs from the analysis of many scholars who said he had a gift for writing. I found it to be quite readable and made some excellent points. No other Luddite author comes to mind. When Sleepytime Gorilla Museum needed a writer to counterpoint the Italian Futurists, they picked Ted Kaczynski. Also, terrorist fear mongering encourages surveillance. How about you explain what separates you from Luddites. Ideology and methods are different. I can agree that many terrorist acts were committed by people whose ideologies I agreed with. If you're not for civil rights of terrorists, then you're not for civil rights. I'm insulted by that. TLAs don't face jail time if they go 'too far' and get caught.