FBI Taps Cell Phone Microphones in Mafia Case

cnet-declan writes "We already knew the FBI can secretly listen in to car conversations by activating microphones of systems like OnStar. A new Mafia court case suggests that the FBI can do the same thing to cell phones. The judge's opinion and some background information [pdf] are available for reading online. The most disturbing thing? According to the judge, the bug worked even if the phone appeared to be 'powered off.' Anyone up for an open-source handset already?" From the article: "This week, Judge Kaplan in the southern district of New York concluded that the 'roving bugs' were legally permitted to capture hundreds of hours of conversations because the FBI had obtained a court order and alternatives probably wouldn't work. The FBI's 'applications made a sufficient case for electronic surveillance,' Kaplan wrote. 'They indicated that alternative methods of investigation either had failed or were unlikely to produce results, in part because the subjects deliberately avoided government surveillance.'"

Comments

The Solution

[FrostedWheat]

Remove the battery.

Or better yet, don't have one!

Re:What's so alarming here?

[iamdrscience]

The alarming thing is the possibility that the bug could have been something that was not a physical modification to the phone's hardware, but a software modification. The article suggests that this may have been the case. So while it's probably not the case that the FBI could remotely turn any phone into a bug, the possibility of that being the case is alarming.

As long as there's a court order...

[plnrtrvlr]

...then I don't care whose phone is getting bugged or how. Technology is constantly changing, so our abilities to moniter the public changes as well. It is the job of the courts to assure the public that this does not occur without probable cause. As long as there was a court order to bug the mob guys' phone, I don't care how they do it. I just want constant assurances that our government is allowing judicial oversight. This is all just a rehash of the same old story from back in the days when they were first tapping phone lines across the street from Ma Bell's switchboard.

Re:As long as there's a court order...

[idlake]

It is the job of the courts to assure the public that this does not occur without probable cause.

Well, as the Bush administration has shown, it's not the job of the courts to do this. And if spying becomes as simple as pushing a bunch of buttons, you can be certain that people will do it without a court order.

This is all just a rehash of the same old story from back in the days when they were first tapping phone lines across the street from Ma Bell's switchboard.

Well, no, it isn't. That required physical access and had significant costs associated with it. Now, the costs are considerably lower, and surveillance follows the person around. That changes things considerably.

Overall, it's a question of balance, not black-or-white-it's-all-the-same style arguments, like you're making.

Re:What's so alarming here?

[nchip]

It is probably feasible with Qualcomm BREW based handsets in cdma networks. CDMA operator has power to "push" content, including applications to you device. BREW apps can access your microphone and don't necessary need to be visible.

GSM networks don't have such delivery systems, and use java for applications. Most phones don't support starting Java midlets automatically to backround, or access microphone. Even when in background, running applications are visible somewhere in the menus.

Basically the java applets are sandboxed, while BREW apps are signed by the operator to be "trustable".

Re:Soapbox much?

[Anonymous Coward]

> How perfectly tangential of you to take a technical discussion about cellphones and use it to spout anti-American bullshit.

I'd like to suggest that criticizing the U.S. government when it does bad things, is actually PRO-American, not anti-American.