Re: [GTALUG] Question [about network security and privacy]
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:21 PM, ac via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:25:28 -0400 (EDT) "D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk" <talk@gtalug.org> wrote: <snip>
| That way the control is what I chose and the information I share is my own | security/privacy trade-off.
+1
All systems other than Linux and other open source OSes (BSD, FreeDOS...) seem to have migrated to oversharing. And even on Linux, some important applications programs seem to be headed that way (Firefox?).
with the advent of strong encryption it is in the best interests of multinationals and governments (+1% and Capital) that there are other ways of obtaining data.
it would be trivial for the same players to make every person in the world 100% secure and private, if that was the objective.
snip As I don't want to be one of the 'chickens' I am wanting a way of shutting down a black box internal cell phone wireless transmitter. I need to use the black box, would very much rather not but for health reasons its quite useful, but don't want the stupid thing to be transmitting. According to the 'idiots' selling the thing it will only transmit AFTER its been logged onto the companies 'cloud' (like I'm going to pay for insecurity!!). There seems to be no understanding that 1. I don't want their access to my data 2. I don't want the machine looking for a cell network. Somehow the sellers (and manufacturer) are missing the point that if the machine can send cell phone signals it can also receive them - - - and I won't allow that if I can help it. The machine has what is termed an 'airplane' mode but use of this results in regular requests to be taken off of that mode. ET is desperate to call home. How could I disable this 'feature'? Dee
On June 14, 2017 6:49:07 AM EDT, o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:21 PM, ac via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:25:28 -0400 (EDT) "D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk" <talk@gtalug.org> wrote: <snip>
| That way the control is what I chose and the information I share is my own | security/privacy trade-off.
+1
All systems other than Linux and other open source OSes (BSD, FreeDOS...) seem to have migrated to oversharing. And even on Linux, some important applications programs seem to be headed that way (Firefox?).
<snip the middle>
Somehow the sellers (and manufacturer) are missing the point that if the machine can send cell phone signals it can also receive them - - - and I won't allow that if I can help it. The machine has what is termed an 'airplane' mode but use of this results in regular requests to be taken off of that mode. ET is desperate to call home.
How could I disable this 'feature'?
You could roll your own with FONA and Raspberry Pi. https://www.adafruit.com/product/1963 Kind of clunky but with the demise of project Ara this might be the only way a consumer can ensure that a service is truly disabled by their own physical kill-switch. Ara was an interesting modular project. Makes me wonder now what really killed it? Was it lack of demand or the possibility of too much future demand? I think perhaps the latter. People got an eye opener after Snowden demonstrated how to semi-secure a phone in his 60 Minutes interview. Otherwise its a lot of work to physically disconnect the cellphone antenna every time you go private :-) Here's one way I attempt to protect financial data in the short term. I keep a credit card on a smartphone however there is no sim card in it. When I want to do a transaction I turn on the hotspot on my active other (not so smart) phone. I make my NFC transaction with the now connected smart phone app and then turn off the hotspot. Its a bit of a pain for a one off transaction but I tend to use the cc in clusters and debit or cash for one off shopping. I figure it is easier to delete the card from the app remotely if the phone is lost or stolen, than it is to go through the hassle of suspending or cancelling a lost or misplaced card.
Dee
-- Russell Sent by K-9 Mail
You could short out the antenna but that could burn out the transmitter and things around it. You could change the software on the phone and remove the code to start up the cell transceiver. If you remove the sim card then the phone will not login to any carriers network and will not contact the internet. The phone will still be able to make emergency calls and arguably you could be tracked via the IMEI and possible GPS feedback that is supposedly part of the emergency call service. In theory the carriers could let non sim enabled phones to login to their networks and then mask them out but there would be little value to this so I doubt that they would carry on some truly surreptitious tracking just for the joy of it. On 06/14/2017 06:49 AM, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:21 PM, ac via talk <talk@gtalug.org <mailto:talk@gtalug.org>> wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:25:28 -0400 (EDT) "D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk" <talk@gtalug.org <mailto:talk@gtalug.org>> wrote: <snip> > | That way the control is what I chose and the information I share is > my own | security/privacy trade-off. > +1
> All systems other than Linux and other open source OSes (BSD, > FreeDOS...) seem to have migrated to oversharing. And even on Linux, > some important applications programs seem to be headed that way > (Firefox?). > with the advent of strong encryption it is in the best interests of multinationals and governments (+1% and Capital) that there are other ways of obtaining data.
it would be trivial for the same players to make every person in the world 100% secure and private, if that was the objective.
snip
As I don't want to be one of the 'chickens' I am wanting a way of shutting down a black box internal cell phone wireless transmitter. I need to use the black box, would very much rather not but for health reasons its quite useful, but don't want the stupid thing to be transmitting. According to the 'idiots' selling the thing it will only transmit AFTER its been logged onto the companies 'cloud' (like I'm going to pay for insecurity!!). There seems to be no understanding that 1. I don't want their access to my data 2. I don't want the machine looking for a cell network.
Somehow the sellers (and manufacturer) are missing the point that if the machine can send cell phone signals it can also receive them - - - and I won't allow that if I can help it. The machine has what is termed an 'airplane' mode but use of this results in regular requests to be taken off of that mode. ET is desperate to call home.
How could I disable this 'feature'?
Dee
--- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
-- Alvin Starr || voice: (905)513-7688 Netvel Inc. || Cell: (416)806-0133 alvin@netvel.net ||
On 2017-06-14 06:49 AM, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
don't want the stupid thing to be transmitting. According to the 'idiots' selling the thing it will only transmit AFTER its been logged onto the companies 'cloud' (like I'm going to pay for insecurity!!). There seems to be no understanding that 1. I don't want their access to my data [snip] Somehow the sellers (and manufacturer) are missing the point that if the machine can send cell phone signals it can also receive them - - - and I won't allow that if I can help it. [snip] How could I disable this 'feature'?
One option is to attempt to root the device (if it is the type to have a root mode) and see if you can disable it. The other option is to see if you can install some kind of firewall software to at least limit it will listen to and/or send to. -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/ |"Nerds make the shiny things that distract Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 | the mouth-breathers, and that's why we're | powerful!" #include <disclaimer/favourite> | --Chris Hardwick
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Kevin Cozens via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2017-06-14 06:49 AM, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
don't want the stupid thing to be transmitting. According to the 'idiots' selling the thing it will only transmit AFTER its been logged onto the companies 'cloud' (like I'm going to pay for insecurity!!). There seems to be no understanding that 1. I don't want their access to my data
[snip]
Somehow the sellers (and manufacturer) are missing the point that if the machine can send cell phone signals it can also receive them - - - and I won't allow that if I can help it.
[snip]
How could I disable this 'feature'?
One option is to attempt to root the device (if it is the type to have a root mode) and see if you can disable it. The other option is to see if you can install some kind of firewall software to at least limit it will listen to and/or send to.
Greetings These ideas are pretty good ones, and I am looking into them, but all of this presupposes at least a somewhat willing machine user (willing to root or physical changes or ????). What about the other 95% of the users who have no idea how vulnerable they are. I'm thinking a better thing would be start a 'shame' list that gets broad-casted at the next major computer security conference of the multi-nationals that are using an implied consent from their customers placing those same customers in a (computer/telecommunications type) potentially very vulnerable position of not really having their personal health information given the security it deserves. The sales reps are talking about how it meets the standards but they sure are answering questions when I'm asking about any controls on outside calls into the machine that might alter its functions! What say you to this form of push for a change? Dee
I stumbled across a project called pihole that makes a pi a hygiene proxy. I ripped from it the logic that does the "bad guy" list maintenance which includes some windows and apple spyware address ranges. A dynamic blacklist would be the way to go in my opinion. The system blackholes the dns entries. I like it. David On Wed, Jun 14, 2017, 9:34 PM o1bigtenor via talk, <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Kevin Cozens via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2017-06-14 06:49 AM, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
don't want the stupid thing to be transmitting. According to the 'idiots' selling the thing it will only transmit AFTER its been logged onto the companies 'cloud' (like I'm going to pay for insecurity!!). There seems to be no understanding that 1. I don't want their access to my data
[snip]
Somehow the sellers (and manufacturer) are missing the point that if the machine can send cell phone signals it can also receive them - - - and I won't allow that if I can help it.
[snip]
How could I disable this 'feature'?
One option is to attempt to root the device (if it is the type to have a root mode) and see if you can disable it. The other option is to see if you can install some kind of firewall software to at least limit it will listen to and/or send to.
Greetings
These ideas are pretty good ones, and I am looking into them, but all of this presupposes at least a somewhat willing machine user (willing to root or physical changes or ????). What about the other 95% of the users who have no idea how vulnerable they are. I'm thinking a better thing would be start a 'shame' list that gets broad-casted at the next major computer security conference of the multi-nationals that are using an implied consent from their customers placing those same customers in a (computer/telecommunications type) potentially very vulnerable position of not really having their personal health information given the security it deserves. The sales reps are talking about how it meets the standards but they sure are answering questions when I'm asking about any controls on outside calls into the machine that might alter its functions!
What say you to this form of push for a change?
Dee --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
participants (5)
-
Alvin Starr -
David Thornton -
Kevin Cozens -
o1bigtenor -
Russell