Slashdot Mirror


Best Handset For Freedom?

Father Thomas Dowd writes "The images we are seeing of Iran are being captured on cell phones and the text is being twittered over SMS. Still, the government has some control over the networks, and we are all familiar with fears of wiretap technologies to spy on users. If the cell phone is the new tool of freedom, what would the best 'freedom handset' contain? I'm thinking of a device with an open OS, where each phone could be a router for encrypted messages passed through Bluetooth/WiFi/whatever, thereby totally bypassing physical infrastructures when necessary. Of course, some sort of plausible deniability encryption a la Truecrypt would also be good, in case the secret police catch you with your phone. What else might we need?"

232 comments

  1. What else might we need? by gringofrijolero · · Score: 1

    SCUD Wifi...

    --
    Todos mis movimientos están friamente calculados
    1. Re:What else might we need? by GreenTech11 · · Score: 1

      Even better, two tin cans and some string. Nigh on impossible to tap, and no encryption necessary!

      --
      Laughter is the best medicine, except if you have a broken rib.
    2. Re:What else might we need? by ZygnuX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually its pretty easy to tap.. and even easier to decode ( 1-to-1 relation between the waves captured and the audio transmitted)

    3. Re:What else might we need? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually its pretty easy to tap.. and even easier to decode ( 1-to-1 relation between the waves captured and the audio transmitted)

      Who said anything about digital? Typical slashdot...

    4. Re:What else might we need? by Starayo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, according to this totally trustworthy source, wire tapping was invented only years after the tin can phone!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:What else might we need? by Deltaspectre · · Score: 1

      What ARE they teaching in science these days?

      Analog is even easier to capture than digital since there's no encryption. All you need to do is shift the medium from string to air

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
  2. There's only one obvious choice... by MrCrassic · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...and that choice is the Neo FreeRunner. :p

    Or, for a more capable cell phone, I would believe that any phone with Android would do.

    1. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But consider what would happen if the secret police catch an Iranian rioter with a FreeRunner. For me it might be better to carry a cheap commodity dumb phone. For secure communication use a simple voice code committed to memory. Send messages by voice or SMS. Relay through an innocent cutout. Somebody who you legitimately would talk to, but who can't be easily be pulled in for questioning.

    2. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As a dissident, the better choice would probably be a stolen phone! Going to jail for stealing a phone will get you simple prison time and probably a beating or two. Going to jail for spying and sending videos to Western Agents could get you disappeared. Having an openmoko phone would be highly suspicious from a technology point of view (although it would probably be easy enough to hide stuff in from a bunch of police thugs.)

      --
      John
    3. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      All of this is kind of a moot point to me. If you need all of this encryption what you really need a few dozen million of your closest friends to demand change. The Iranian Revolution took place with no cell phones or internet. The Berlin wall fell without twitter. China still has Twitter and YouTube but it hasn't facilitated a popular movement for mass change.

      Twitter has been fun for CNN to browse all day but as far as an organizational tool and effective means of rebellion I imagine its actual use has been extremely overblown. People could have just as easily emailed these news posts directly to news organizations, bloggers and friends. And considering most of the important ones have been longer than 140 characters I suspect emailing is still the preferred means of communicating the current state of Iran.

      I hear a lot of about twitter but I haven't heard any useful news with it cited as a source.

    4. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by operator_error · · Score: 1

      As others have said, this would probably get everyone killed, ...but still, the NeoPwn is all open moku, with bigger balls. www.neopwn.com

    5. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by tsa · · Score: 1

      Great post. Thank you for keeping your head straight. We need people like you on this planet. If I had mod points I would mod you up.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    6. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Iranian Revolution took place with no cell phones or internet.

      The regime they were rebelling against had less technology and ability to coordinate response, too. If only one side is advancing, the balance shifts in favor of that side.

      I hear a lot of about twitter but I haven't heard any useful news with it cited as a source.

      There's plenty of useful news that's been reported there, but most of it hasn't been picked up by any of the major TV news outlets that I've seen. They are more interested in putting up compelling (or confusing) video from the scene than anything else. The NY Times has been following a lot of the non-traditional sources (Twitter, et al.) and culling real news from them on their own blog that's been updated frequently every day.

    7. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've been following the NY Times and Huffington live blogs all day. Here are representative posts:

      Twitter Source:
      "People are very angry...they are screaming like a banshee...this ain't aloha akbar anymore"

      "unrest today confirmed in Tehran, Esfahan, Rasht, & Shiraz."

      Email Source:
      "There were thousands of people out on the streets the police were using tear gas - the whole experience was terrifying. Towhid (Unity) Square looked like a battle ground.
      There were lots of female protestors - I saw a guard attack one women and then she went back up to him and grabbed him by the collar and said 'why are you doing this? Are you not an Iranian?' - he was totally disarmed and didn't know what to do but her actions stopped him."

      "...I don't know where this uprising is leading. I do know some police units are wavering. That commander talking about his family was not alone. There were other policemen complaining about the unruly Basij. Some security forces just stood and watched. "All together, all together, don't be scared," the crowd shouted.

      I also know that Iran's women stand in the vanguard. For days now, I've seen them urging less courageous men on. I've seen them get beaten and return to the fray. "Why are you sitting there?" one shouted at a couple of men perched on the sidewalk on Saturday. "Get up! Get up!"

      Another green-eyed woman, Mahin, aged 52, staggered into an alley clutching her face and in tears. Then, against the urging of those around her, she limped back into the crowd moving west toward Freedom Square. Cries of "Death to the dictator!" and "We want liberty!" accompanied her.

      There were people of all ages. I saw an old man on crutches, middle-aged office workers and bands of teenagers. Unlike the student revolts of 2003 and 1999, this movement is broad. [...]"

    8. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But consider what would happen if the secret police catch an Iranian rioter with a FreeRunner. For me it might be better to carry a cheap commodity dumb phone. For secure communication use a simple voice code committed to memory. Send messages by voice or SM

      Have pity on him for having such a bad phone?

    9. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SMS is actively monitored in Iran. Bad idea.

    10. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by Klistvud · · Score: 1

      Exactly! Moreover, there is always the possibility of the government simply SCRAMBLING or even SWITCHING OFF all cells (or WiFi spots, or Internet providers...) on their territory. They could always fall back on some sort of military grade communications, satellites or the like, whereas we, ordinary citizens, could not.

      That makes me think that this is a legislative, not a technological problem. We should pressure the powers that be to let us participate in law-making through public polls or plebiscites. The legal system as it is is extremely obsolete and is expressly made by anyone BUT the people, for anyone BUT the people. THAT'S the front we should be fighting on, methinks.

      --
      Intellectual Property: an immaterial non-entity, most fiercely contended by those with no proper intellect to speak of.
    11. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      But consider what would happen if the secret police catch an Iranian rioter with a FreeRunner. For me it might be better to carry a cheap commodity dumb phone. For secure communication use a simple voice code committed to memory. Send messages by voice or SM

      Have pity on him for having such a bad phone?

      I don't get your point.

    12. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      SMS is actively monitored in Iran. Bad idea.

      You don't send actual messages about riots in cleartext. You hide the message inside the normal crap which flows through the cell phone networks. Makes it hard to grep for intelligence or evidence.

    13. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

      I also know that Iran's women stand in the vanguard. For days now, I've seen them urging less courageous men on. I've seen them get beaten and return to the fray. "Why are you sitting there?" one shouted at a couple of men perched on the sidewalk on Saturday. "Get up! Get up!"

      Moral of the story is, women are the root of all evil?

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    14. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      Don't give them any ideas. They'll find some "evidence" in the koran that god doesn't want them to stop at the chador, but also requires foot binding and vocal cord removal for women.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    15. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Steganography is nothing new. And you can be sure that all intelligence services conduct extensive research into it.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    16. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by bhima · · Score: 1

      Very True... but that does not help when the authorities have control of cell towers.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    17. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by bhima · · Score: 1

      I thought the Neo Runner guys went out of business

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    18. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by plover · · Score: 1

      That's why you use a stolen phone. After you've sent your videos, you immediately THROW IT AWAY and steal another one for the next batch. You don't hang on to it for days on end or reuse it for dozens of news reports; that's a sure way to lead the authorities to you.

      Just don't keep stealing them from the same person or even from the same place. And don't throw it away or abandon it in the same place, and especially not in front of security cameras. If you're in the midst of the mob, you can drop it at your feet after sending the data.

      --
      John
    19. Re:There's only one obvious choice... by johndmartiniii · · Score: 1

      Yes, Openmoko is the obvious choice. Unfortunately, the project died because everyone complained about silly aspects. Whether or not it worked as a phone was immaterial. It could do all sorts of things AND it would also work as a phone (if not fully at present, then in the future). Ah well.

      --
      If you don't know what you're doing, you can't make mistakes.
  3. First thing that comes to mind by DirtyCanuck · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Most likely the next logical step for rural and otherwise disconnected people would be satellite. However currently it is cost prohibitive for the average person.

    So the best handset for this purpose would be satellite capable.

  4. Keep in mind though by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    that whatever your choice of handset, it isn't very "free" as long as it is locked to a single service provider.

  5. Handset for Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TOR, (The Onion Router) may be useful to build a path out to the wider internet. Some form of peer to peer networking could also be good, obviates the necessity of going through spied on servers. All of these could be placed (or may be already, I don't own one) on an Android handset, and that could be something the governments in oppressive countries will start checking for.

          This period of turbulence in the world may actually prove to be a benefit for freedom, if some people will unclench their fist.

  6. Open source smart phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First off, no commercial phone will come with encryption or any sort of privacy option. This means that you will either need add-on applications, or the ability to tweak the OS.

    Secondly, you need an OS you can audit. This rules out BlackBerry, iPhone, and the Nokia N line. Realistically, you're going to end up with a Linux phone.

    Thirdly, you need one that is well documented, with a vibrant developer and user community.

    With these criteria, I can recommend the T-Mobile G1. I compiled my own OS image, I can run whatever I want (I encrypt ALL data, messages, and calls), and none of it shared with the telcos or the government (one and the same at this point).

    1. Re:Open source smart phone by db32 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You encrypt all data, messages, and calls? I suppose that is possible, but exactly how do people at the other end of these communications decrypt them? What is the point of having one of these devices if you can't actually communicate with anyone?

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    2. Re:Open source smart phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can setup IPSec VPNs with my phone and route calls through the VPN using only the software that came packaged with my smartphone.

    3. Re:Open source smart phone by MrCrassic · · Score: 1

      I thought Blackberries can have all points of communication encrypted? Isn't that what was done for President Obama's device?

    4. Re:Open source smart phone by davester666 · · Score: 1

      It's so secure, you don't have to worry about texting your ex in a drunken stupor at 3am begging for a booty call. She'll get a text message, but will have no idea who sent it or what the contents are!

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    5. Re:Open source smart phone by davester666 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yup, they have a special build of the OS for Obama's phone, to make sure everything is encrypted. Of course, it means that the device is functionally useless because nobody else can decrypt any sent data, but he really likes how the BlackBerry's keyboard feels.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    6. Re:Open source smart phone by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Or you could use Windows Mobile and a secure VPN.

    7. Re:Open source smart phone by nxtw · · Score: 1

      BlackBerries support content encryption, and Windows Mobile supports encrypting the entire user editable partition. I think the iPhone 3G S may also support device encryption as well. All support some sort of private channels of communication (SSL with http, imap, smtp, along with VPNs.)

    8. Re:Open source smart phone by nxtw · · Score: 1

      Also, hackability can be a downside. If it's easy to replace the bootloader or kernel with a modified and unsigned one from a cold boot, it doesn't matter if the software is secure; attackers can secretly install their modified kernel / bootloader on a device while the owner isn't looking.

      On devices that perform signature checking of firmware updates, this is less of an issue.

    9. Re:Open source smart phone by Mjec · · Score: 1

      I compiled my own OS image, I can run whatever I want (I encrypt ALL data, messages, and calls).

      What apps do you use for this? Have you put the image online somewhere?

      --
      "But everyone should know everything." -markab
    10. Re:Open source smart phone by david.given · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With these criteria, I can recommend the T-Mobile G1. I compiled my own OS image...

      I doubt that. If you had, you wouldn't be able to make phone calls on it. The GSM stack runs on its own processor core, has its own closed-source operating system shipped as a binary blob, cannot be upgraded without the encryption key that they won't give you, and for excellent regulatory reasons even if you did have the key, turning the radio on while running unauthorized firmware would get you beaten to death by lawyers.

      Sure, you can run your own code on the applications processor, but let's face it, any modern electronics device is full if little (and not-so-little) processors running lots of code that you have no access to. You simply have no idea what any of that stuff is doing. Auditing the code running on the apps processor is a start, but no more than a start.

    11. Re:Open source smart phone by tyrr · · Score: 1

      Who says you have to make GSM phone calls?
      T-Mobile G1 can do VoIP just fine.

    12. Re:Open source smart phone by Klistvud · · Score: 1

      A good point! And not to forget that the best encryption is achieved by pressing the OFF button and leaving it at that. Surpassed only by the act of removing the battery altogether... ;)

      --
      Intellectual Property: an immaterial non-entity, most fiercely contended by those with no proper intellect to speak of.
    13. Re:Open source smart phone by selven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You tell everyone you want to talk to to set up a public key. Public keys can be put on the internet, anyone who wants to contact you can encrypt his message with the public key and you use the private key (generated at the same time as the public key), which you are keeping to yourself, to decrypt the messages.

    14. Re:Open source smart phone by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Absolutely! If you want security you should go with the company everyone thinks of when they think security!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    15. Re:Open source smart phone by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      I doubt that. If you had, you wouldn't be able to make phone calls on it.

      Of course an appropriately skilled person can do so. T-Mobile has pushed all their changes back to the public git repository in the cupcake branch.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    16. Re:Open source smart phone by david.given · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, that's not what I mean. You can't make phone calls on it without talking to the GSM protocol stack. The GSM stack runs on the radio processor, and is closed source. It's not in the git repository. The GP had said that because it had recompiled all the software on the phone; it hadn't, it'd only recompiled the stuff that runs on the radio processor.

      So in order to be able to make phone calls, it has to run untrusted software (that could well be snooping the memory space of the application processor and sending his credit card details off to the New World Order using GSM debug packets). The same applies for the DSP firmware and the GPU, assuming the G1's GPU is programmable.

      In order for the GP to completely trust its phone, it would have to remove the GSM protocol stack completely, and therefore lose the ability to make phone calls.

    17. Re:Open source smart phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My HP IPaq HW6945 came with encryption. I'm sure others do too.

    18. Re:Open source smart phone by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

      That is ridiculous, and if you got what you claim you want you still wouldn't be there. Let me explain. You see, all of this OS code is interpreted by microcode that runs on the CPU.The GP had said that because they had recompiled all the software on the phone; lets assume that they haven't, they only recompiled the stuff that runs on the CPU and all the stuff that runs on the radio processor. They still have to run on top of proprietary microcode on the CPU so they have accomplished nothing! (according to you)

      Also, the GSM stack is not "untrusted" unless you don't trust T-Mobile, just as everything you compile from source and install on an Intel based machine does not run on "untrusted" microcode unless you don't trust Intel.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    19. Re:Open source smart phone by david.given · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The GP had said that because they had recompiled all the software on the phone; lets assume that they haven't...

      I'm using the traditional meaning of the phrase 'all the software', and assuming they had.

      Also, the GSM stack is not "untrusted" unless you don't trust T-Mobile...

      ...which the GP doesn't. Otherwise he wouldn't have replaced the firmware.

    20. Re:Open source smart phone by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "I'm using the traditional meaning of the phrase 'all the software', and assuming they had."

      They did, but that is not at all what you did. You tried to say the microcode running on the radio is part of all the software. When people say that, they don't mean microcode. Not on the radio, and not in the CPU core.

      "...which the GP doesn't. Otherwise he wouldn't have replaced the firmware."

      That is a ridiculous claim. The percentage of people who rebuild the OS from scratch because they don't trust T-Mobile approaches 0. We do it to add or change functionality, or because we can. In the GPs case (this thread) we are talking about not trusting the Iranian government, not T-Mobile.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    21. Re:Open source smart phone by david.given · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They did, but that is not at all what you did. You tried to say the microcode running on the radio is part of all the software. When people say that, they don't mean microcode. Not on the radio, and not in the CPU core.

      Right. But the OP specifically said that it had recompiled its OS and had verified that none of it was sending data to unauthorised sources. But the OP hadn't checked the radio, and wouldn't be able to, because the radio is a binary blob. Which means that it could have been sending data anywhere, for all the OP knew; the radio sees all data going over the air, knows exactly where you are, and has access to big chunks of the device's physical memory (which means it could probably, if it wanted to, snoop the application processor's workspace). If I were the DHS and wanted to know where every citizen was at all times, that's where I'd put my code.

      'Microcode' is a misnomer; the G1 radio processor runs a twenty megabyte operating system image. It's not a small or simple thing. Anything could be happening in there.

      (Usually these things are encrypted to prevent people from looking inside; the G1's isn't, though, and running strings on it shows that it seems to be the OKL4 variant of the Pistachio L4 OS. That's unusual --- things like VxWorks or Nucleus are more common. If you're interested in these things it's actually worth a look; there are a lot of interesting comments in there.)

      My point is that being able to audit the obvious source code gives you nothing. Computers these days aren't simple CPUs attached to memory any more. If you're going to trust T-Mobile's radio stack you might as well trust the main OS as well. Auditing the main OS (which is, in itself, a task beyond most humans) without also auditing the radio stack gains you nothing.

    22. Re:Open source smart phone by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "Right. But the OP specifically said that it had recompiled its OS and had verified that none of it was sending data to unauthorised sources."

      Which is correct. The GSM stack is not an unauthorised "source" (you mean destination.)

      "My point is that being able to audit the obvious source code gives you nothing."

      Your "point" is ridiculous since it gives you plenty.

      "If you're going to trust T-Mobile's radio stack you might as well trust the main OS as well."

      If you can't find your baby, you'd better check the bathwater you just thew out ...

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    23. Re:Open source smart phone by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      "Hi, Mom. Please set up a public key or we cannot communicate any more."

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    24. Re:Open source smart phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, they have a special build of the OS for Obama's phone, to make sure everything is encrypted. Of course, it means that the device is functionally useless because nobody else can decrypt any sent data

      Obama wasn't so excited at having all his communication blocked, so they licensed it to the Chinese government and they love it! Meet the Blockberry.

    25. Re:Open source smart phone by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      You mention not being able to audit the Nokia N line. Are you also including the N770/N800/N810 models? They all run maemo, which is open except for a few drivers. Not only that, but people have run debian and ubuntu-jaunty-remix on them. I even saw a tutorial to put KDE on the existing maemo base (removing hildon). The N810 is not a cellphone (no gsm/cdma chip), but it still have wifi/bluetooth with skype,etc pre-installed and the physical keyboard is very nice to have.

    26. Re:Open source smart phone by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      if he's willing to do all of that I don't think he has any friends.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    27. Re:Open source smart phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So how exactly does my grandmother install my public key on her rotary phone?

    28. Re:Open source smart phone by rhyre417 · · Score: 1

      In addition to the 'locked firmware' problem, "Telephone" implies that there is a centralized "telephone network" that can be
      surveilled and/or attacked, making for a short revolution.

      Wireless device have an interesting property. They can communicate with ANY compatible device within range, as long as it is programmed correctly. Why depend on "the man" (who is typically government regulated, or depends on 'retroactive immunity' in the US), if you don't have to.

      Just be more decentralized in your thinking. 10 years ago there was a great gadget called a 'Cybiko', which ran on unlicensed
      900 Mhz frequencies, but you could program on your own. The device went through several hardware generations, but doesn't exist any more. It even had an interesting 'walking talkie' application, which converted your voice to a digital signal and sent it to other Cybikos within RF range.

      No cell network required.

  7. Satellite Phone by TFer_Atvar · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you're worried about censorship, there's no better choice than a satellite phone. They're continuing to drop in price, you're not limited to a terrestrial cellular network, and many models can be tethered to provide Internet access. The big problem for non-Western countries (where they'd be most useful) is the cost, of course. In general terms -- there are cheaper options -- airtime is $1 per minute, and bandwidth also is pricey. Still, they'd be perfect in a circumstance like what's going on in Iran right now, or for any sort of major disaster.

    1. Re:Satellite Phone by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up: sat phones, while expensive, are the perfect tool for this (and a few other) job. Unless the Ayatollah puts a fine-grained Faraday cage all over Iran, there is no way to stop or trace satellite phone communications by the Iran regime.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  8. Just one small problem by madfilipino · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So you get it designed and manufactured and all that fun stuff.... you still need it approved by the government to use on a wireless network. How are you going to get around that "roadblock" to freedom? Some backwater country like Iran can say that in order to use it in the country it needs to have an approved "supreme commander shut off switch".

  9. Are you kidding? by rampant+mac · · Score: 5, Funny
    "If the cell phone is the new tool of freedom, what would the best 'freedom handset' contain?"

    Seeing how the election has gone so far, ummm, an M4 or AK-47?

    --
    I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    1. Re:Are you kidding? by linzeal · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's silly but maybe a derringer barrel that doubled as an antenna would be good.

    2. Re:Are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Seeing how the election has gone so far"

      Let me guess...you heard about that from one of those Twitter accounts that totally aren't run by US intelligence agencies.

      Anyway, what more proof does anyone need? The Iranian elections were run by fucking IRANIANS. Never trust fucking IRANIANS, the're goddamn foreigners.

      Regardless, it is nice to see US citizens showing their support for riots in support of Mousavi - you know the guy how supported the US hostage taking back in the 1970s.

    3. Re:Are you kidding? by jonwil · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      The whole mess in Iran started because the UK overthrew the democratically elected prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh just because he had the gumption to kick out the British owned oil company and replace it with Iranians.

    4. Re:Are you kidding? by syousef · · Score: 4, Funny

      Seeing how the election has gone so far, ummm, an M4 or AK-47?

      There is no way an AK-47 will ever be sold on any kind of usage plan. Can you imagine how things would go if a user disputed their statement and didn't like the outcome taking it to the billing department? "What do you mean you're going to charge me for the excess bullets!? I didn't use them that month! Here take them back you scum!" *machine gun fire*

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    5. Re:Are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re:Are you kidding? by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      You may be a bit confused, the outrage is in support of free democratic elections for people who want a basic amount of self determination, Mousavi just happens to be their candidate of choice.

      I doubt most people abroad are actually terribly fond of him, hence the tagline "Where is my Vote?" not "Got Mousavi?"

    7. Re:Are you kidding? by RichiH · · Score: 1

      Knowing how both work, you definitely want the AK. Though I would prefer the AK 74 (or the after 2000 models) over the AK 47. Smaller rounds means you can carry more with you.

    8. Re:Are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. What he should have done was let the Brit oil companies stay but tax the crap out of them. Like the UK government decided to do with American companies and North Sea energy back in the 70s.

    9. Re:Are you kidding? by malraid · · Score: 1

      Well, they used to say that in soviet russia having a typewriter required a license, but not an AK-47.

      --
      please excuse my apathy
    10. Re:Are you kidding? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      There is no way an AK-47 will ever be sold on any kind of usage plan. Can you imagine how things would go if a user disputed their statement and didn't like the outcome taking it to the billing department? "What do you mean you're going to charge me for the excess bullets!? I didn't use them that month! Here take them back you scum!" *machine gun fire*

      Yeah, the per bullet usage plan on the M4 is far superior but the warranty and build quality of the M4 leave it lacking compared to the AK. Doubly so when you consider the M4 costs 3 times as much to buy outright. Get yourself a PAYF (Pay As You Fire) plan and adsorb the extra cost in lower cost of entry and reduced maintenance.

      Plus the AK's UI is far more intuitive even if the aesthetics of the device are lacking.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  10. There's cheaper and less limited way... by sznupi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Step 1: Get cheapest phone you can find with GPRS and USB. Right now that would be probably LG KP100 - a little over $20 without contract. Use this phone only for "secret" communication, with prepaid SIM cards.

    Step 2: A netbook. Usual rules of secretiveness apply - make sure it doesn't transmit any identifiable information, keep "secret" OS separate and on a microSD card, transmit through Tor, and so on...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by MrCrassic · · Score: 1

      I thought the summary was referring to phones that are "free," so the first thing that came to mind were the open-source phones mentioned above.

      As far as being a dissident, I also recommend a super cheap phone, or at the very least one that can anonymize him or her...

    2. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Tor has been shown to be less secure than some people believe. True, it's better than nothing, but today's standard is I2P. I won't waste space here - google is your friend - check it out. Be warned, the sickos who used to inhabit Tor and Freenet have moved to I2P, but I have found that if I don't look, I can't be terribly offended. It's actually cleaner than freenet, unless you go searching for child porn. Enjoy . . .

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    3. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by houghi · · Score: 1

      Why the cheap phone for communications if you have a netbook.

      1) Take pictures with phone or camera
      2) Put the (micro)SD from the camera in the netbook.

      No need for a second phone.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    4. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by iiiears · · Score: 1

      About keeping something "hidden" on a usb device. Windows stores hardware IDs of recently connected devices in the registry. booting to a separate bootable OS image will go a long way to ensure your privacy but, Once you have decided to use an electronic device there are far too many ways too make a mistake.

        Read everything abbut computer forensics and networking as you can find. Realise that once your are a suspect there is very little you can do to hide what has been communicated.
       

      --
      15TW = 15,000 Nuclear Reactors. (Approx. one accident a month.)
    5. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by RDW · · Score: 1

      'Get cheapest phone you can find with GPRS and USB.'

      Yes, but not just one. Buy several and dispose of them regularly (if you're paranoid or at real risk, after a single use). But don't bulk-buy as that tends to attract attention:

      http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1499905

      To minimise the risk of tracking, keep the phone switched off when it's not in active use and make sure that 'off' means 'off' - if in doubt, remove the battery:

      https://ssd.eff.org/wire/protect/cell-tracking

    6. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] prepaid SIM cards [...]

      Seriously, I doubt you can get a prepaid SIM card easily/without giving your identity in Iran...
      I'm not even sure that in France, where I'm currently writing, we can do it. I will check, it may be interesting.

       

      [...] netbook [...] "secret" OS separate [...] microSD card [...] Tor [...]

      This is very interesting, and I have been thinking about it a lot this week: Would it be interesting to provide over Internet an "anti-censorship software pack" for people facing government monitoring and filtering in their countries, in order to make it easier to avoid centralized control?
      I reached the following conclusion: few people may be able to safely use those complicated tools, and the simple possession of them may be illegal. The most useful tools would be the simplest and the easiest to get, like a cheap phone and a prepaid SIM card (provided you can get one), a few numbers without saved names, etc.

      "Safe" communication is, in my personal opinion, more about protocols than tools. Moreover, the more you use tech tools, the easier you are to monitor. A writing on a wall has a broad audience and cannot be logged... I fear that a hidden message in a casual SMS is the most you can usually hope to send, in a situation like in Iran now.

    7. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      I'm not even sure that in France, where I'm currently writing, we can do it. I will check, it may be interesting.

      AFAIK, it's not possible in the UK either.

    8. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Seriously, I doubt you can get a prepaid SIM card easily/without giving your identity in Iran...
      I'm not even sure that in France, where I'm currently writing, we can do it. I will check, it may be interesting.

      If by prepaid we mean what I'm familiar with as "pay as you go" (that is, you charge it with some money which you then spend, as opposed to being on a fixed contract) it is possible. You used to be able to get them off the shelf in Virgin Mobile shops (and wherever else, I'm sure). And if in doubt, eBay. http://shop.ebay.co.uk/items/?_nkw=SIM+card&_sacat=0&_trksid=p3286.m270.l1313&_odkw=SIM&_osacat=0

    9. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by F34nor · · Score: 1

      Get rid of the central control and move to a peer to peer handset modle.

      http://www.terranet.se/index.php?Itemid=62&id=17&option=com_content&sectionid=8&task=category

    10. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And prepaid cards. For the love of God, don't forget to limit yourself to PREPAID cards. And, needless to say, buy them in reasonable quantities, not too large so the store clerk remembers you, not too small so they have 20 datapoints (shop locations) giving away your location. Buy them in different stores, but make sure your home is not right in the middle of those shop locations. Preferably limit yourself to shops lying in a single direction. Do not recharge the cards if you can avoid it. Communicate using SMS and keep that phone OFF except in secure locations (and the most secure location is within a crowd, say, in a movie theater). Preferably remove the battery alltogether. SMS'es will arive within a few seconds from turning on the phone, so turn it on in a crowd, receive the sms'es, send a response if necessary and turn it back off.

      Oh and, pay them cash. Long live cash for anonymity. Don't carry identification, even if that's illegal.

      Don't use an open source phone. There are so few they give search parties an easy reference point. The more popular the handset, the better. If you have a friend in the phone selling business, ask for the idiot's phone. Buy secondhand, and buy a new handset (with a new, unpredictable IMEI number) regularly. Sell the old one back, because if they are sold again, the buyer will present the authorities with an easy to find, but wrong, target. There are literally thousands of secondhand phone shops in Teheran, and none of those will bother to remember their customers. Especially street stands are good.

      Make sure you have another, regular phone, so that you have the option of dropping your "dissident phone" in a bin, without a search party wondering "hey why don't you have a phone". And carry some sort of hat and glasses, you'd be amazed how much they change your appearance, and it only takes 5 seconds to put them up.

      And if I were in Iran. I'd put on the women's police uniform with some 20 friends, those black clothes, they make you very hard to identify, and you can't really see if it's a man or woman inside, and attack isolated police officers in those clothes.

    11. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by argiedot · · Score: 1

      You can get Chinese phones without IMEI numbers that connect on the networks of some countries (India just banned them recently). Iran's networks may allow IMEI-less phones.

    12. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by unl0rd · · Score: 1

      Seriously, I doubt you can get a prepaid SIM card easily/without giving your identity in Iran... I'm not even sure that in France, where I'm currently writing, we can do it. I will check, it may be interesting.

      In Australia we need to show car licence or other form of ID to purchase pre-paid

    13. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Well, supposedly you also need means to communicate from time to time...

      Using a phone that's untraceable to you is a nice bonus on top of using Tor/etc.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    14. Re:There's cheaper and less limited way... by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Recharging might be ok, especially since:

      a) you can buy SIM-recharge code in many more places than SIM-cards

      b) people buy them much more often than SIM-cards

      And as for selling the old one...I don't know how it looks in Iran, but generally it's safer to destroy it. Or leave it in totally unrelated location, if you don't care about problems for the finder (but you already don't care about those for the buyer ;p )

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  11. I know what my ideal headset would have. by DragonTHC · · Score: 2, Funny

    A nicely shielded tin-foil dome to protect my head meat from the aliens!

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  12. Yeah, mesh networks suck. by pavon · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yup, a local government will have a much harder time shutting down satellite and radio (HAM, CB, walkie-talkie) communications, and they will be infinitely more reliable than mesh networking.

    First off, for mesh networking to work at all, you would need a large number of people that have the phones - a few people buying Freedom Handsets isn't going to cut it. Even then, your signal gets to the edge of down, and where does it go from there? Assuming you can link into the network, then why not just get a network enabled device to begin with and forget this mesh crap? Plus mesh networking will increase power requirements and unpredictability, requiring as big of a battery as a satellite phone.

    1. Re:Yeah, mesh networks suck. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Okay how's this for an amateur satellite project? You put a bird into lowish polar orbit. It is basically a store and forward communications satellite which uses lasers for up link and down link. Ground stations can be kept fairly simple. A gun sight for aiming. Transmit data with a laser. Receive data with a photo diode.

      Users invent their own identifiers. Messages are point to point or point to multi point. To exchange data with the satellite you need to send it your identifier, then the satellite points a laser your way to send a reply.

      Interface definitions and example implementations would be open source and freely available.

    2. Re:Yeah, mesh networks suck. by similar_name · · Score: 1

      a local government will have a much harder time shutting down satellite and radio (HAM, CB, walkie-talkie) communications

      Plus you could use something like this!

    3. Re:Yeah, mesh networks suck. by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      That doesn't sound amateur at all. In fact it sounds fiendishly complicated to get right, and would require highly advanced laser technology for the satellite.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    4. Re:Yeah, mesh networks suck. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      That doesn't sound amateur at all. In fact it sounds fiendishly complicated to get right, and would require highly advanced laser technology for the satellite.

      Well many amateur satellites are fiendishly complicated right now. I don't see the laser up link being too much of a technical issue. The down link could probably be done with radio and a low gain antenna. Hiding the up link signal is the main issue I think.

    5. Re:Yeah, mesh networks suck. by sznupi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Known orbit, easily blinded by sufficiently powerful laser.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    6. Re:Yeah, mesh networks suck. by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      There's a flaw in your theory, though. Sharks aren't a local species in Iran, so what would they mount the lasers on?

    7. Re:Yeah, mesh networks suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lasers are easy to locate in most atmospheres due to back-scatter in dust, water vapor, etc. It's literally a big arrow back to the source if you are nearby at ground level, and due to dispersion it is a bright light when viewed from an airplane. Haven't you ever wondered why the pranksters shining laser pointers at aircraft are caught so easily?

      You would probably be better off with some spread-spectrum transmission and a high-gain antenna, if you are trying to avoid detection, and infrequent burst transmissions from a mobile ground station. Then, you need sophisticated radio tracking teams to search for you, instead of anybody with some decent night-vision goggles.

    8. Re:Yeah, mesh networks suck. by sznupi · · Score: 1

      I believe you are wrong, since Iran borders with Persian Gulf.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  13. Re:Freedom or terrorism by calmofthestorm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some of us believe freedom is worth risking our lives for. If you want to jump at shadows, that's your business, just make sure you don't try to trample my rights in the process. I'm far more afraid of our own government than terrorism.

    We've had enemies for decades. Sometimes, one will get through.

    --
    93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
  14. Also, Father Dowd, by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, Insightful

    as much as I hate to say it, also in light of the happenings in Iran:

    Probably the freest kind of cell phone you could have, which the Iranian people do not seem to have, is any cell phone securely taped to a Smith & Wesson.

    1. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right because that's what will build the sort of popular uprising that has overthrown numerous governments in the past (including the last Iranian form of government)... armed rebellion.

      There is nothing the Iranian government would love more right now than a bunch of armed self righteous knuckle draggers to start shooting police and militiamen. You instantly change it from a popular peaceful movement into a legitimate civil war and the Government has full authority to start fighting said war. The Iranian government is losing the respect of its people more and more every day due to its heavy handed over reaction to peaceful and unarmed civilians. But by all means break out the ol' Smith and Wesson and start shooting government officials. I'm certain the ensuing civil war will result in a peaceful and democratic government on top. Not a charismatic warlord.

      Soviet Union, Ukraine, India, Iran 1979... the list goes on and on of successful popular uprisings and bloodless transitions of power. It's often then violent transitions which result in unstable and repressive replacement regimes.

    2. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about shooting government officials? Or anything of the sort? I think you tried to read far too much into this than I ever meant.

    3. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, Like Tiananmen Square.

    4. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about shooting government officials? Or anything of the sort? I think you tried to read far too much into this than I ever meant

      Probably the freest kind of cell phone you could have, which the Iranian people do not seem to have, is any cell phone securely taped to a Smith & Wesson

      Sorry my bad. I didn't understand that Freedom by Smith and Wesson meant you would use the gun to fire small little 140 character notes taped to bullets out to friends a few streets down. Silly me jumping to the conclusion that you meant use the gun to shoot people. Again. My bad.

      I'm always forgetting the about the less conventional uses of firearms in revolutions. (They also make a great place to hide messages since cops won't look down the barrel!)

    5. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      There are many kinds of shooting people other than political assassination. Like, for example, defending yourself from armed thugs sent to find you in the night.

    6. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      Excuse me?

      Which Soviet Union are you talking about? It was formed in a decade of brutal armed conflict, and its resolution is still being fought over today in Moldova, Georgia, Russia, and in a hundred little border disputes. If you think India was entirely bloodless you may want to look up Subhas Chandra Bose, he didn't get any credit but he's a national hero there every bit as much as Ghandi. Martin Luther King always had his Malcolm X. What about the fighting in Iran after the supposedly bloodless transfer of power where "Overthrow the Shah" became "I am your unquestioned ruler"?

      But hey, Hitlers takeover was pretty smooth, so was Mussolinis. The American Revolution wasn't, nor was the UKs or Irelands. Spain's was messy and did lead to a dictator, as did France. I bet if we sat here all day we could make a giant list and I don't know that you'd see any correlation between peace and success.

    7. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's often then violent transitions which result in unstable and repressive replacement regimes

      You mean like the War of Independence? *ducks*

    8. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      It is very clear that you are too fixated on violent fantasies to have understood the examples that were presented to you. How do you think Gandhi would have fared if it he packed heat, but only used it for "self-defense"?

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    9. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, many times, peaceful negotiations fail. Sometimes, it does take a few people picking up Colt and S&W to overthrow an oppressive regime. The list for this far exceeds the list of successful peaceful regime changes. And, even with a violent change of power, peaceful nations have been formed. The fact is, it all depends. Sometimes peaceful changes work, sometimes they don't. Sometimes peace comes from war, sometimes it just leads to another war. You can't be certain, and nothing is forever.

    10. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Tweenk · · Score: 1

      Which Soviet Union are you talking about?

      He means the dissolution of the Soviet Union, not its formation.

      Examples of countries that had peaceful democratic revolutions that were successful in large part because the protesters did not use guns:

      Poland (1989)
      Czechoslovakia (1989)
      Hungary (1990)
      Lithuania (1990)
      East Germany (1990)
      Latvia (1991)
      Estonia (1991)
      Georgia (1991)
      Ukraine (2004)

      --
      Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
    11. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

      It would result in a charismatic warlord anyway. So why would it matter?

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    12. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For instance.... the War of Northern Aggression (sometimes called the Civil War).

    13. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      And my point is that, sure, they dissolution was smooth in that whatever was left of the Soviet Union didn't start an all out war to keep them in, but that's not the whole story.

      Almost half of Georgia is occupied by Russian troops right now, at this very second. Russia has been battling Muslims who would be better off connected to Azerbaijan ever since they split off. Moldova has two unrecognized countries within its borders, one of which recently agreed to limited autonomy but the other of which is one step away from rejoining Russia much in the same vein as a similar splinter group in the Ukraine.

      Or hey, beyond that, Russia invaded the Ukraine in 2005 and is still holding the territory.

      The dissolution was not successful because they didn't use guns, it was successful because the Soviet Union gave up, and Russia has been reclaiming territory lost ever since. None of which has been bloodless.

    14. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by lwsimon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."

      -Ghandi

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
    15. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by johndmartiniii · · Score: 1

      Do you really think that the Iranian revolution in 1979 was bloodless?

      --
      If you don't know what you're doing, you can't make mistakes.
    16. Re:Also, Father Dowd, by demachina · · Score: 1

      "is any cell phone securely taped to a Smith & Wesson."

      The 1978/1979 Iranian revolution that put the current regime in power succeeded largely because on September 8, 1978... Black Friday ... the Shah's security service openly shot and killed dozens of unarmed demonstrators. Not because armed protesters shot it out with the security services.

      A key factor in India's drive to independence was the massacre by British troops of unarmed protestors at Jallianwala not because Indians defeated the British military in armed conflict.

      The Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the Basij number in the millions and they are well trained to be armed thugs if the need arises. I'm pretty sure most of the Iranian protesters are young urban yuppies with a limited grasp of armed conflict. If they were to try to shoot it out with the Iranian secuirty apparatus they would probably lose and lose badly and they would also lose the moral high ground.

      Gandhi's methods will almost certainly serve them better than yours, though it may well mean some brave Iranian kids will have to get them selves killed, tortured or imprisoned in the process, and they will have to have some serious patience and staying power in the face of a brutal backlash from the state.

      I sure hope Moussavi and Rafsanjani are worth the price the Green movement might have to pay for them to win power. Moussavi is a former prime minister from the early years of the Revolution, during a time when the clerics killed thousands of political prisoners. The Ayatollahs wouldn't have let him run in the first place if he were not part of the current regime, he apparently just went rogue on them. Its not certain he will be a bastion of democracy, freedom and reform if he gains power unless he's changed a lot over the last 20 years.

      --
      @de_machina
  15. Idea about sending old digital cameras by FleaPlus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    On a related note, earlier today I was wondering if it would be useful if it would be useful to send old digital cameras to places like Iran and other regions where oppression is occurring (perhaps distributed by international media offices?). Just counting myself, I have 3-4 pocket-size digital cameras which are sitting around collecting dust. As a result, many more of the protesters and bystanders would have cameras, and would be able to capture evidence of violence and oppression. Even if they don't have internet proxy access (or a computer), they could give their memory card to someone who does have one. Of course, there's already some videos being leaked out (NOTE: videos are quite graphic) in defiance of the regime, but increasing the number of available photos and videos by an order of magnitude or two would be a game-changer.

    Of course, I have no idea how you'd go about starting to organize something like that, but I wanted to seed the idea in case it's worthwhile.

    1. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by ZosX · · Score: 1

      How would this be a "game changer"? Did Tienanmen Square not just have its 20th anniversary? Of course the chinese suppressed what happened, but I'm sure as a society they still know the truth even though they don't speak of it in schools. For what it matters, what effect did the event have on our interaction with China? It seems to me like greed over ideals won the day as usual. When people start getting killed en masse they usually give in. Nobody really wants to die. Society has become soft. A few hundred years ago, whole populations would gladly give up their lives for a cause they believed in. Now it seems like that this number is down to a select few.

    2. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Society has become soft. A few hundred years ago, whole populations would gladly give up their lives for a cause they believed in. Now it seems like that this number is down to a select few.

      I think it's more cultural than temporal.

      I've been reading that Martyrdom is an important aspect of Iranian culture and mythology. One of their 'founding fathers' was martyred by a tyrannical government. As such there is great respect and emotional power to someone being killed by the government in a protest. The Iranian Revolution was largely a series of ever growing 'vigils' for the fallen martyrs taken and killed by the Government. Every person killed brings more people to the next vigil. Popular opinion finally completely overwhelms the government as it simply becomes an armed but unrecognized squatter by the people. Iran is also very young. Youngsters tend to be more active and impatient for culture and political change.

      China on the other hand is/was a demographically older nation. They also have a strong tradition of respect for authority even in democratic nations such as Japan. As such I would extrapolate that there isn't the same sort of tradition of rebellion and insurrection as we have in Western Cultures. The Tienanmen demonstraters were largely students. They were largely unorganized and they didn't have the organization or precedent for change. It was a case of a culture being inconducive to revolution. But it's largely a question of details. The same eastern "people before self" mantra presents itself dramatically differently in Buddhist nations where self immolation is an accepted form of demonstration. The ego matters so little that people relatively readily give their lives for a cause (after all if you're just going to reincarnate what does it really matter?) (On an off topic this creates very very interesting traffic systems.)

      If you go back a few hundreds years in Western Cultures we also had dramatically less stomach for insurrection and opposition. The state was endorsed by God. We were good God fearing people and to question the state was the question the divine.

      I suspect the reason people are less ready to give their lives in western cultures is because our governments are relatively stable Go back a little over 100 years and I think you would find that Americans of the North and South were more than ready to give up their lives by the hundreds of thousands for a cause.

      Also patriotism sent millions of young men over seas not more than 50 years ago filled with nationalistic pride. I'm not quite certain when you think we became 'soft'.

    3. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by ZosX · · Score: 1

      I was thinking about the brave men and women who served in World War II. I'm guessing if there were a greater threat to our nation that many people would again join the fight, but in actuality, I think war on that sort of massive level is probably something for the history books for foreseeable future. Anyways this is probably for the best. Can you imagine the emo kids getting drafted?

      I think the south wanted the war a lot more than the north. Its not hard to get a bunch of southerners drunk and pissed off, and they all have guns. I can see some of their arguments having merit though.

    4. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 1

      "A few hundred years ago, whole populations would gladly give up their lives for a cause they believed in." Examples, please. I'm unaware of any such populations. I was under the impression it was always a small number of intelligent, determined, devoted people who brought about change. Like the US revolution. The majority were against the war. A minority brought it about anyway, brilliantly.

    5. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by sznupi · · Score: 1

      A few hundred years ago, whole populations would gladly give up their lives for a cause they believed in.

      And you know this how? From the dead?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    6. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My company includes a small office of developers in China. One day, one of them (who had managed to get permission to visit the US) was talking with one of our american developers, and the subject of Tienanmen Square came up. The Chinese man responded with what seemed to be legitimate surprise, "you don't think that really happened do you? It didn't -- we have a very civilized government that cares about its people. This is just old propaganda used to make China look bad."

      So, I can't say that I'm as sure as you that they know the truth as a society.

    7. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You would extrapolate wrong. There's a very long history in China of provincial rebellions leading to changes in regime.

    8. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 1

      I suspect the reason people are less ready to give their lives in western cultures is because our governments are relatively stable Go back a little over 100 years and I think you would find that Americans of the North and South were more than ready to give up their lives by the hundreds of thousands for a cause.

      I've always wondered if the Confederacy had used nonviolent resistance in their attempt to secede instead of open war if they might have been successful. That type of revolution wasn't really invented until later, so it wouldn't have occurred to a 19th century mind to "fight" without making war.

      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    9. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > On a related note, earlier today I was wondering if it would be useful if it would be useful to send old digital cameras to places like Iran and other regions where oppression is occurring (perhaps distributed by international media offices?).

      Why do you feel it is necessary to meddle in the affairs of other countries? Who are you to judge when "oppression" is or is not occuring?

      If you have excess energy, time and financial resources (if you have multiple unused digital cameras, you probably aren't worrying about where your next meal is coming from), why don't you do something that will improve your community? Act locally. Given the economic challenges that are facing families across the US, isn't there somewhere that you could volunteer and help your fellow man? Could you teach children from less-fortunate families how to use computers?

      I live in the US and I am getting tired of our country interfering with the politics of some of the crapholes around the planet. Why is it up to the US to "step in and do something?" We are not the world's beat cop that has to come running every time another country has a government structure or policy that we don't agree with. Before you assume that I am some tie-dye wearing hippie, let me assure you that I am not. I support the men and women of our country who "stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." Instead of sticking our nose into situations that are really none of our business (Iran, China, etc.), let's focus on getting our own house in order.

      One other thing: Judging by the recent news articles on North Korea's desire to pick a fight with the rest of the world, we should be focusing our attention on getting ready to show the DPRK what the sharp end of the stick feels like instead of meddling in Iran's election.

      Instead of collecting digital cameras for shipment to the far side of the planet, please use your energy locally to improve your neighborhood or city. Encourage others to do so as well.

      Posted anon because I have already modded a few times in this discussion.

    10. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you go back a few hundreds years in Western Cultures we also had dramatically less stomach for insurrection and opposition. The state was endorsed by God. We were good God fearing people and to question the state was the question the divine.

      If you are talking about "The Divine Right of Kings", you should know that that concept is 180 degrees divergent of both Judiaism and Christianity.

      Here's the Books of Samuel: the Reader's Digest version:

      People: Lord, please give us a king.
      God: You don't want a king. He'll fuck everything up.
      People: Again Lord, please give us a king.
      God: You don't want a king. He'll fuck everything up.
      People: Again Lord, please, please give us a king.
      God: OK. Here you go. Don't say I didn't warn you.
      People: This king you gave us. He fucked everything up!

    11. Re:Idea about sending old digital cameras by TerranFury · · Score: 1

      I've always wondered if the Confederacy had used nonviolent resistance in their attempt to secede instead of open war if they might have been successful.

      I think it's hard to claim the moral high ground when one of the central planks of your platform is the continuation of chattel slavery. Had it not been for that, I think a strong case could have been made for the right of southerners to self-determination. The problem is that this right of theirs was in conflict with that of their black slaves.

  16. Re:Freedom or terrorism by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Yeah, jumping at shadows is a good way to describe both sides of the spectrum. Especially living in San Francisco, you wouldn't believe the conspiracy theories people talk about from the government. The reality is, the US isn't going to suddenly turn into a totalitarian state anymore than terrorists are going to kill us all. If you're afraid of either, you're out of touch with reality (this only goes for the US: in Iraq or Iran, things are different).

    The practical matter of the question is, right now there are people on the ground who could probably use some sort of reliable communication system that is not disruptable. And most of us want to help them out if we can.

    --
    Qxe4
  17. OLPC or video camera by maxwells_deamon · · Score: 1

    not sure how traceable this would be. could you spoof the mac address.

    I would also be more likely to film things with one of the very cheap usb video cameras and upload at an internet cafe. not sure how trackable they are, and the quality is not going to be what you get with a Flip or something like that but you could buy with cash, film and toss if need be

    1. Re:OLPC or video camera by superwiz · · Score: 1

      You don't need to spoof a mac address, but you could have a peer-negotiated unique mac address that changes every time you reconnect. If the handshaking is done via signed pub/priv crypto system, you would have assurance that the device which was assigned the address was the one that is using it.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  18. ham radio by swell · · Score: 1

    For now, ham radio is probably the best communication device in times of dexterity.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:ham radio by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      For now, ham radio is probably the best communication device in times of dexterity.

      The only problem with that idea is that you won't really have anyone to talk to.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  19. Re:Freedom or terrorism by Comatose51 · · Score: 1

    That's a risk I'm willing to take...

    Know what else is good for terrorists? Oxygen and water. Fighting terrorism isn't the end-all-be-all of our priorities. In fact, the flu and cars kill more American annually than terrorists.

    --
    EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
  20. Automatically translation from Farsi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am using Twitter World - Breaking Borders to auto translate Farsi Tweets to English on my iPhone. Cool. Helps. Helps

  21. Re:Freedom or terrorism by calmofthestorm · · Score: 1

    I don't think either is a huge threat to be blunt. I'm far more scared of a traffic accident.

    I'd be a lot more scared of both in, say, the UK.

    --
    93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
  22. Go with the Flow by Comatose51 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't avoid the cellular networks just because the government controls them. If you go on your own frequency, they will just jam it. What you want to do is to piggy back on something else that would be too expensive for them to shut down. This might be too contrarian but I say use the cellular network but disguise your traffic so they can't sniff it out. In the end that leaves them with only the option of shutting down the entire cellular network, which they wouldn't be able to function without as well. Remember when Blackberry lost the patent lawsuit and how businesses and the government started freaking out? Use their tools against them. Hop on their frequencies. Guerrilla tactics! Blend in.

    --
    EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
  23. The back room boys by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course, some sort of plausible deniability encryption a la Truecrypt would also be good, in case the secret police catch you with your phone.

    "We have ways of making you talk."

    Plausible denial means nothing to the guy with a set of alligator clips, an old-school inverter and a honking big battery.

    The real spy hates spy tech.

    Each additional layer of complication introduces new risks. If he can send a message in the clear he will. What he really needs is a method or a system so familiar and mundane that no one gives it a second thought.
             

  24. Hedge Your Bet by Comatose51 · · Score: 1

    Just had an idea, you should communicate with each other in the open via botnets and spammers. Chances are that someone you want to communicate with will get the email. Use stenography and spam them across the Internet. Or if you just want to spread the word, spam in plaintext. Either you get your message through or the spam problem gets solved permanently. Either way you come out ahead.

    --
    EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
  25. Fake US Outrage Has Jumped The Shark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1953: US Operation Ajax - Overthrows the democratically-elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq

    1979: Iranians overthrow the US puppet Shah of Iran

    1980: US hostages being held due to the US interference in Iran are released - an action supported by Mousavi - you know the guy all these kids on digg and reddit seem to have fallen in love with...

    2009: Ahmadinejad wins reelection by a margin that roughly matches pre-election polls - and demonstrating his huge popularity in the large rural areas of Iran

    2009: After years of US cross border raids, support of minority ethnic group terrorist attacks inside of Iran, threats of attack to all out war from the US, and outright lies repeated in the media attributed to Ahmadinejad by the US media and intellegence agencies, to trying to manufacture US outrage with dummy Twitter and other social media accounts.

    2009: KDawson posts "Best Handset For Freedom?" on Slashdot

    The Shark, it has been jumped.

    Can we put the fake outrage to rest now. Yes it was a gold mine for Karma whores, but it's time for the US to give what every one of 'our Iranian brothers and sisters' wants - for the US to leave them the fuck alone.

    Not too much to ask now is it?

    1. Re:Fake US Outrage Has Jumped The Shark by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      some wee problems with your version, the big outrage is inside Iran and is not fake, nor is it due to U.S.. The economy is in a mess over there, 30% unemployment etc.etc. and the people are pissed at the government and want change.

    2. Re:Fake US Outrage Has Jumped The Shark by bertoelcon · · Score: 1

      Wait you mean the US is NOT supposed to keep other countries subdued under the guise of safety? That argument has good logic and reason behind it, not something the "majority" of us Americans excel in.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    3. Re:Fake US Outrage Has Jumped The Shark by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      I could agree with the idea that the US media was running this whole war if they hadn't been a week behind in covering it. Why start a conflict if you're going to be outdone in grabbing the ratings? If there's already facebook marches being organized before you report the first story on the war you created you're doing it wrong.

      Please repost stating that the protests were created by an alliance of mischievous 4channers and we can talk.

    4. Re:Fake US Outrage Has Jumped The Shark by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      isn't this what Barack Obama advocated? To go, "Yay freedom" and stay out of the Iranian Government's affairs?

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  26. Seriously? by PNutts · · Score: 1, Insightful

    These are the governments who put taps on undersea cables. They have the best and brightest people working to hide their communcations while at the same time discover the other guy's covert communications. Iran is making nukes. You think they (or the countries that support them) can't build a receiver? Hell, I have a cell phone jammer from China and I'm nobody.

  27. The Grotesquely Ugly Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    In the absence of an external interfering force (e. g., the army of the Soviet Union), the fate of a nation is determined by its people. Period.

    After the Kremlin exited Eastern Europe, the peoples of each nation in Eastern Europe rapidly established a genuine democracy and a free market. Except for Romania (where its people killed their dictator), there was no violence.

    In Iran (and many other failed states), no external force is imposing the current brutal government on the Iranians. The folks running the government are Iranian. The president is Iranian. The secret police are Iranian. The thugs who will torture and kill democracy advocates are Iranian.

    If the democracy advocates attempt to establish a genuine democracy in Iran, violence will occur. Why? A large percentage of the population supports the brutal government and will kill the democracy advocates.

    Let us not merely condemn the Iranian government. We must condemn Iranian culture. Its product is the authoritarian state.

    We should not intervene in the current crisis in Iran. If the overwhelming majority of Iranians (like the overwhelming majority of Poles) truly support democracy, human rights, and peace with Israel, then a liberal Western democracy will arise -- without any violence. Right now, the overwhelming majority clearly oppose the creation of a liberal Western democracy. The Iranians love a brutal Islamic theocracy.

    The Iranians created this horrible society. It is none of our business unless they attempt to develop nuclear weapons. We in the West are morally justified in destroying the nuclear-weapons facilities.

    Note that, 40 years ago, Vietnam suffered a worse fate (than the Iranians) at the hands of the Americans. They doused large areas of Vietnam with agent orange, poisoning both the land and the people. Yet, the Vietnamese do not channel their energies into seeking revenge (by, e. g., building a nuclear bomb) against the West. Rather, the Vietnamese are diligently modernizing their society. They will reach 1st-world status long before the Iranians.

    Cultures are different. Vietnamese culture and Iranian culture are different. The Iranians bear 100% of the blame for the existence of a tyrannical government in Iran. We should condemn Iranian culture and its people.

    1. Re:The Grotesquely Ugly Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the 3rd time i have read this same thing, and its the 2nd it has been on fairly unrelated article.

    2. Re:The Grotesquely Ugly Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spamming your argument is an admission that it's a weak argument.

    3. Re:The Grotesquely Ugly Truth by s0litaire · · Score: 1
      ermm you're missing the HUGE "elephant in the room".

      The UK and the USA backed and funded a CIA engineered coup dâ(TM)état which overthrew the elected government in the late 50's and stuck in a friendly "shah", who then turned around and made Iran the dictatorship we know and love today.(all because Iran, at the time, wanted to nationalise its Oil industry for the good of it's people and the US and UK didn't like that (since their huge oil companies would not be able to get at the Oil!)...

      --
      Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
    4. Re:The Grotesquely Ugly Truth by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 1

      You mean the huge oil companies who'd found the oil, drilled the wells to extract it, built the refineries etc? Why should they not get at the oil?

      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
    5. Re:The Grotesquely Ugly Truth by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Because it is not theirs?

      If I find your safe, cut it open and came up with a plan to launder the money, can I just take your money?

    6. Re:The Grotesquely Ugly Truth by JustJenFelice · · Score: 1

      This is such an overly simplistic, naive comment that I don't even know where to start.

      If the Iranians are so in "love" with this "brutal Islamic theocracy", then why are they taking to the streets by the thousands, risking death, fighting for the reform candidate?

      I am in no way saying that the people have clean hands when it comes to their current predicament, but there are many, many other forces at play here.

      If the overwhelming majority of Iranians (like the overwhelming majority of Poles) truly support democracy, human rights, and peace with Israel, then a liberal Western democracy will arise -- without any violence.

      This is easily the most deluded, asinine statement that I have ever read on Slashdot. As if there is some magic check-list that, once met, the peace fairy will visit your nation and all will be right with the world.

      Look back through history...are there any representative democracies (assuming that this is what you were referencing in "liberal Western democracy" that arose without bloodshed, pain and suffering? America? Nope. France? Anywhere in Europe? Not even close...the evolution of democracy in Europe (and the rest of the world) was a direct result of wars, revolutions, and other socioeconomic pressures. To imply otherwise is foolish

      While I fully agree that America should keep its bloody, "nation-building" hands off of Iran (as should the rest of the world), this kindergarten concept of "if they want democracy it will happen" is disingenuous.

      --
      [Insert pithy line of moxie here.]
  28. Web 2.0 Version of The Iraq Baby Incubator Hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3589/us-iraq-lie.html

    (not the best site but it will do)

    It worked for the first US attack on Iraq.

    The fake WMDs stories worked for the second US attack on Iraq.

    It shouldn't be the least bit surprising that the US is once again up to the same old shit - just the technology has been upgraded.

  29. US intelligence agencies monitor this stuff. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Informative

    The best handset for freedom will also be the best handset for terrorism.

    As I understand it (not being affiliated with them but only observing reports on the open media):

    The US intelligence agencies monitor cellphones in the middle east and other areas of interest from satellites. (They definitely tap GSM phones and it would be silly if they didn't tap satellite phones as well.) This was used to map out terrorist networks, using both voice intercepts and traffic analysis (including one they got a big break on because a major message forwarder swapped smartcards in a single handset for the calls to each of his contacts - he didn't know that the phone also sent its own i.d. as well as that of the smartcard.) Eventually the terrorists figured out cellphones were compromised and moved off them entirely.

    Given that the US has this ability but is unlikely to share info from it with a regime it exposes, few others have anything like it (for the next few years at least), cellphones hacked for security might be useful for resistance movements (that aren't opposed by a major space-capable power) and boobytraps for terrorists. I'd guess that will continue to be the case for at least another decade or so.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:US intelligence agencies monitor this stuff. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      ... but is unlikely to share info from it with a regime it exposes ...

      Typo. Should be "opposes". B-(

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    2. Re:US intelligence agencies monitor this stuff. by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      Satellites, not so much. King Airs equipped with special ELINT equipment, on the other hand, are very popular and effective within the U.S. intel forces. I've had the pleasure of working on some of them. The problem with this is that flying unmarked King Airs over Tehran would be very conspicuous.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
  30. Faulty Premise by asackett · · Score: 1

    "If the cell phone is the new tool of freedom..." is a faulty premise so the rest is irrelevant.

    The only effective "tool of freedom" is the one that denies your oppressor the ability to oppress. In most cases, this is effective violence executed properly against the proper target(s). Any communication that does not serve this purpose is just so much noise.

    --

    Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

    1. Re:Faulty Premise by davidwr · · Score: 1

      The only effective "tool of freedom" is the one that denies your oppressor the ability to oppress.

      OK, how about "the desire to be free is the new, er, not so new tool of freedom?"

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    2. Re:Faulty Premise by asackett · · Score: 1

      OK, how about "the desire to be free is the new, er, not so new tool of freedom?"

      Okay, to the extent that motivation is a tool in your definition. But I've yet to spend the money I wish I might have. :-)

      --

      Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

  31. 60 Minutes Anti-Iranian Propganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onNzrNEFs1E

    That footage is not of some no-name blog playing ideological games. That footage is from what massive number of US citizens consider the most respected journalists on TV.

    US citizens barking out outrage right on que like a trained animal is not the least bit shocking.

  32. where are all the big brother whiners? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    the future is not big brother, ie, the govt surveils you everywhere

    the future is little brother: it is your fellow citizen who surveil you, completely uncontrollably

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  33. Primitive version used in Tienanmen by davidwr · · Score: 1

    20 years ago CNN used a primitive version of a Satellite Phone to get "live" pictures back from Tienanmen Square in Beijing, China.

    If I recall it took about 20 seconds for a grainy tv-quality frame to transmit.

    Similar satellite picture phones were used in the Middle East during Gulf War I in the early '90s.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  34. Today is the Day by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    With this stories posting my beloved /. has officially jumped the shark.

    1. Re:Today is the Day by Vexorian · · Score: 1

      Again?

      --

      Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
    2. Re:Today is the Day by Cross-Threaded · · Score: 1

      No, that was A shark, this was THE shark.

      --
      They call us sheeple, I wonder why?
  35. Border crossing. by Ostracus · · Score: 1

    "If the cell phone is the new tool of freedom, what would the best 'freedom handset' contain?"

    All the phone is is the recorder of acts. The freedom comes from dissemination and in that regard the phone is ineffective. More could be accomplished with a flash card hand carried across the borders than relying on infrastructure that can be controlled by a hostile government.

    --
    Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
  36. phone-to-phone text message relays by Alan+R+Light · · Score: 1

    Science Fiction author David Brin has already suggested installing peer-to-peer relays for text messages on mobile phones, as a means to ensure emergency communications could be maintained in case of a partial or complete breakdown of the wireless networks. Such a system would have been quite useful, for example, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and the bandwidth is so small as to be almost unnoticeable.

    Of course, encryption would also be nice, but this would be a good start, to establish such a standard.

    Note that the Nextel network already allows peer-to-peer calls, although it does not use phones as relays.

  37. Plausible deniability by davidwr · · Score: 2, Funny

    Remind me to plant 4.3GB from /dev/random to some obscure location of your hard drive and label it newworldorder.iso.truecryptX2, then call the guys who hire the men with the alligator clips.

    Just for grins, I'll encrypt the file with TrueCrypt using your wife's maiden name as the password. Since you obviously had one layer of encryption and since the decrypted file looks random, obviously there's a second layer of encryption.

    "What's the password to the 2nd layer"

    "What second layer? I have no idea what you are talking about"

    "We have ways of making you talk."

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Plausible deniability by Tweenk · · Score: 1

      Remind me to plant 4.3GB from /dev/random

      You would have to wait a LOT of time...

      --
      Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
  38. Security by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    The best possible way to secure your communications is through the use of pre-paid cell phones because there are virtually no records of your transactions nor communications. Simply get a new sim card periodically and add some air time. You won't be able to be easily tracked and you could list a bogus address with the cell company. It is lower tech and whole lot easier.

  39. Real Digital Freedom. by crhylove · · Score: 1

    I have a dream for REAL digital freedom:

    An open source wifi phone. Hardware, Software, everything controllable and redesignable by the consumer. With a standard USB port for charging and computer connection.

    Every house having a wifi router, all connected to each other in an adhoc p2p network replacing the existing corporate infrastructure.

    Everyone could have free anonymous and uncensored internet and phone calls anywhere, at any time.

    Fuck wire tapping, fuck Cox, fuck Charter, fuck Apple, and fuck Verizon.

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
    1. Re:Real Digital Freedom. by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      Sounds awesome. Your calls will sound great with 50000ms coast-to-coast latency.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  40. Depends on how you define terrorist by davidwr · · Score: 1

    In fact, the flu and cars kill more American annually than terrorists.

    With the broad definition of "terrorist" I wouldn't be surprised if flu viruses and automobiles were added to the no-fly list soon.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Depends on how you define terrorist by shawb · · Score: 1

      The U.S. government is trying to add the flu to no fly lists.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
  41. You don't need a phone by tsa · · Score: 1

    You don't need a phone, you need a television studio, preferably one previously owned by the government. With so many people demonstrating it should be relatively easy to occupy one and spread your message.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  42. Democracy by michaelmalak · · Score: 1
    Let's see, the Iranian people can choose between a cronyistic theocrat or a puppet of the U.S. elite. Sound familiar?

    The best phone would be one that prevented the Iranian people from getting so worked up over sham elections in the first place -- and that's probably no phone at all.

    Knowledge is power, and knowledge doesn't come from SMS (although, on rare occasions, data might).

    1. Re:Democracy by raju1kabir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's see, the Iranian people can choose between a cronyistic theocrat or a puppet of the U.S. elite. Sound familiar?

      Not today it doesn't. Who in this scenario is the puppet of the US elite?

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    2. Re:Democracy by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      I think that's why its important for Americans not to get too involved in this or this lesser of two evils *will* look like a U.S puppet!

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
  43. Quarantines by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Quarantines make some sense for diseases which are both highly contagious and highly dangerous. There was a time we thought the 2006 strain of flue would be just that. It turned out not to be the case. There are some diseases, like Ebola, that would warrant a quarantine.

    Quarantines also make some sense for highly contagious diseases which are not widespread but could easily become widespread without one. This applied to bird flu in 2006 and it applied to the 2009 swine flu in its early stages. Once a disease that isn't particularly dangerous gets a foothold in an area there's not much point in preventing travel within that area or between that area and similarly-affected areas.

    There is a possibility that the 2009 swine flu will evolve into a highly dangerous strain. If this happens, expect quarantines and travel restrictions if you are traveling from an affected area to a non-affected area.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  44. Suck? by mcrbids · · Score: 1

    You say that mesh networks are bad, and then go on to suggest that we should all use HAM radio instead. Why would you think that HAM radio isn't just another variation of a mesh network?

    1. Doesn't rely on a centralized carrier - check!

    2. Radio waves to transmit digital information - check!

    3. Equipment can be stationary or mobile for short-range coomunication - check!

    4. Digital information is repeated from point to point until its destination is reached - check!

    I think that you've been thinking about mesh networks as short-range wifi-like computer-only mesh networks. But there is no aspect of these networks that isn't being done in some fashion on the far older HAM networks! It's slower, older, often manually prformed - but it's just as much a 'mesh network' if not more so!

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  45. Re:Freedom or terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One mans freedom fighter is some other mans terrorist. Nothing new in that.

  46. Forget Truecrypt by niteshifter · · Score: 1

    Of course, some sort of plausible deniability encryption a la Truecrypt would also be good, in case the secret police catch you with your phone.

    Truecrypt - a product I'm right fond of and use - isn't going to be able to stand up to the cryptanalysis that some police forces will bring to bear. Their notion of plausible deniability differs: They'll believe you're telling the truth just before (or just after) your death by acts of torture.

    I think a blend of well established practice and tech will serve them better. In the form of microSD passed hand to hand or via drops. They're small, elude most metal detectors and can easily hidden or easily disposed of should the need arise.

    1. Re:Forget Truecrypt by joshki · · Score: 1

      I'm curious about your statement. Are you saying that most police forces are capable of cracking TrueCrypt, or are you saying that most police forces have no problem torturing it out of someone?

      If the former, I think you're mistaken. TrueCrypt should be fairly secure against cryptanalysis. Of course, there's no way to know for certain, I suppose, but it's generally highly regarded. If the latter, I guess it depends on the motivation of the torturee -- torture doesn't guarantee a confession, you know.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
  47. HUH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of this is rubbish.. If you want to organise something without risk of being discovered.. you don't stand on the street corner and shout.. you whisper to trusted friends WHILE GOING ABOUT YOUR NORMAL DUTIES.. that is Hide in plain sight..
    - Encrypting a conversation on a Phone or email.. may as well be shouting..
    - Using TOR .. you may as well be shouting.. many networks actively block TOR.. or record the machines that are active.. People may not know what your saying.. but they know you are hiding something..
    Using a stolen Phone: nice try.. but during an uprising.. the owner and the person caught with the phone will be suspect.. and if the phone was used to make a subversive call.. you and the owner will be shot..

    I question much of what I had been hearing about all this.. The red flag was a post from a supposed Iranian who claimed that all services were being blocked..EVEN SATELLITE TV RECEPTION.. WTF How? They could jamb the satellite uplink but that would be at international disgust.... local uplink stations -understand them being "controlled" same as local TV stations.. and attempts to jamb foreign TV transmissions.. but the local satellite reception? really.. you could have a go and make it hard for 10 or 15KM then it becomes a very expensive and intensive operation...

  48. Re:Freedom or terrorism by notarockstar1979 · · Score: 1

    Yes, yes, there's always one jackass who has to say this or something akin to it. Freedom is good for terrorism so let's become a totalitarian state. I love trolls.

  49. For true freedom by darth+dickinson · · Score: 1

    The best handset is a M1911.

    1. Re:For true freedom by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 1

      I prefer 10mm to the .45, though.

      However, either is so completely counterproductive to the Iranians' cause as to be pointless.

      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    2. Re:For true freedom by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      The matching *head*set has been causing problems with beta testers, though...

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
  50. Ah, the crypto jerkers strike again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The crypto jerker dreams that if the secret police capture you with communication they can't read they will let you go.

    Reality is they just kill you with all the others and dump you in the massgrave you were forced to dig.

    Read up on freenet and their dreams of how it is supposed to get info out of places like Korea.

    Then think for a second about WW2 style radios transmissions from occupied europe to england. Were the germans intrested in decoding the messages? Sure. But do you for a moment think that ANYONE caught simply by triangulating the radio broadcast was let go if the messages couldn't be decoded? If you do, then you are an idiot.

    those with sense will see the failure of a so called darknet. It only works in a free society. In a dictatorship ANY form of non-approved communication is illegal and the ISP you use, have to use, with a darknet will simply report unknown communication on any port and track it to their customer database.

    If the crypto jerkers are right,then explain this. If having a "secure" phone is supposed to keep you safe, how can people be killed who do not even HAVE a phone. Like the simply passerby who was killed by british police during a protest?

    The pen might be mightier then the sword, but a goon squad beats any encryption. Or more accurately, beats anyone using encryption, with a wrench.

  51. Plausible deniability? by OriginalSolver · · Score: 1

    Regimes like that don't get a little thing like evidence get in the way of them keeping control. Anyone caught with a handset which can be traced to subversive messages in deep doodoo. Their relatives and friends probably are too.

  52. Moderators, Are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moderators, I hate you. Parent is INFORMATIVE.

  53. depends on priorities by homer_ca · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are three parts to security: Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability, C.I.A. If the C part is most important, then a netbook with encryption and OS on removable storage makes sense. Availability isn't so good because you can't leave it on all the time to receive messages. Once the revolution has started, availability is more important because the government will be trying to shut down networks, and there is the element of hiding in plain sight if there are a hundred thousand other people in the crowd. In that case, adapt your plans to whatever communications you have left.

  54. Re:Freedom or terrorism by srussia · · Score: 1

    The best handset for freedom will also be the best handset for terrorism.

    That's because one man's freedom fighter is someone else's terrorist.

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
  55. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We are forgetting the internal communications of Iran. They may not be able to use "external" sources like Twitter, or Facebook, or etc..... I imagine there are thousands of "internal" sites within the Iranian internal infrastuctue that are providing the communications.

  56. what else? netsukuku? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe that could be interesting... if anyone can put an effort on it
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netsukuku
    http://netsukuku.freaknet.org/?pag=faq

  57. idiots by smoker2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the "secret police" catch you, the fucking last thing to worry about is "plausible deniability". This isn't the White House, or the Senate. You don't get your "phone call". If the secret police catch you, you suffer. No trial, no evidence, no representation. Worrying about hiding stuff on a phone is moot. Just be glad if you are released alive.

    1. Re:idiots by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      The secret police? What happens when the US Army catches you walking around with a cellphone known for those capabilities?

      Well, it might be better now, but do you really want to be an Iraqi national walking around in Baghdad with one of these when a bomb goes off?

    2. Re:idiots by nacturation · · Score: 1

      If you get hauled in by some secret police, you're pretty much screwed regardless of what phone you had. So wouldn't having a phone with the ability to limit detection be better than one which transmits everything in the clear?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:idiots by selven · · Score: 1

      What you want to do is put moderately bad material (eg. porn) on the outside layer, so they'll think that's what you're trying to hide and stop there. Or, you could set up a three layer truecrypt. Nobody expects three layers (except maybe the Spanish Inquisition)

    4. Re:idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering that the Iranian Governments own satellite news station gives excellent, and generally less biased, coverage of the situation, why don't the Western Media just use their footage ?
      It's all very well to bleat of Iranian censorship but ignore the ACTUAL vision that the Iranians themselves are showing, but to pretend that the only footage is "secretly" forwarded by "freedom fighters" is just disingenuous.
      Apparently the Western Media is not interested in facts, only the US version of events and the potential to further de-stabilize Iran.
      It's interesting that Germany has called for a recount of the Iranian election but were silent on the last 2 US elections where recounts were demanded but ignored in the US itself.

  58. Iridium/Globalstar/Thuraya by hazard · · Score: 1

    Your best handset for freedom is the one which does not pass through the government-controlled networks. E.g., Iridium, Globalstar, Thuraya. I'm sure that this is the way at least some of the information is leaking out to the West. If somebody catches you with it - well, don't let them do that. Newer handsets are pretty small and look like normal mobile phones.

  59. Rubbish .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what you need is the Freedom Fries handset.

  60. These phone criteria could apply to terrorists too by drunkenoafoffofb3ta · · Score: 1

    The answers from slashdot's finest are equally applicable to freedom-wanting Iranians or people wanting to coordinate an attack on, say, americal soldiers in Iraq.

  61. See Usenet for unstopable electronic communication by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    At the moment it and email run over tcpip, but before that, both ran just as well over UUCP which meant connectionless and completely decentralised. The flood fill nature of usenet means that it only takes a single transfer to completely bypass all centralised control.

    You could run a similar content (text, documents, photos, videos, etc) sharing architecture over wireless or bluetooth, completely bypassing the centralised networks. It would have to be something store and forward, similar in concept to usenet or email. Phones would then only have to be within 10-100m to transmit and receive information.

    I wouldn't worry too much about being caught, cos they're kill you anyway whether they have evidence of you doing something or not. It would be nice though if this could be dressed up as a "file/music sharing" application like edonkey etc and marketed at kids giving you a ready built routing infrastructure.

     

    --
    Deleted
  62. Punk/Net by scurvyj · · Score: 0

    The ideas and the tech have been around for decades and now they are cheap enough. Let's take it back boys.

  63. lol by edittard · · Score: 1

    Of course, some sort of plausible deniability encryption a la Truecrypt would also be good, in case the secret police catch you with your phone.

    I'm sure that will stop them from totally beating the crap out of you.

    --
    At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
  64. VPN by Krneki · · Score: 1

    Some mobile carriers do not allow VOIP communication or will charge you extra if you use it. Since you can't use SSH for VOIP (apparently SSH is not intended for UDP) the only solution is a VPN connection.

    So you need a device that is able to create a VPN tunnel before starting a communication, the downside is battery longevity, since having constant 3G connection will eat you battery in no time.
    The other solution is a pre-paid SIM card, but in most states you won't be able to get one unless you show your ID.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  65. why kdawson? by superwiz · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Why do they keep this guy around? I mean, is he anything but a washed up philosopher? I don't mind a philosopher. But this is a techno site. Shouldn't he have some modicum of technical understanding? If cell phones act as routers, that means that have to constantly (or at least often) maintain a certain level of transmission. Which means they would have talk-time level of power consumption. For most phones that's too short. The passive mode on phones is so low on power consumption because they are mostly just receiving. Anyone with even a tiny bit of technical knowledge would understand this. How's is this guy kdawson a slashdot editor? C'mon.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  66. Disingenous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You seem to forget that carrying any phone rigged for freedom would be a punishable offense in itself in countries like Iran. You assume the theocracy would give a rats ass about things like plausible deniability.

  67. Meraki looks promising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If enough people would get behind products like those at http://meraki.com/, then a phone that supports wi-fi (like the FreeRunner) would do the trick. However I think the government holds us back on this front by limiting the output power we can transmit.

  68. because US armed support in Iran works? by fantomas · · Score: 1

    Check Iran's history. I'd imagine nobody in Iran would want to be associated with 'change through US firepower'.

  69. HAM radio FTF! by doti · · Score: 1

    I always thought HAM radio was the obvious tool for guerrilla communication.

    All your points are valid, but the most important one is the independence from the centralized (read: government/corporations controlled) infrastructure.

    The required technology is also way more simple to master (DIYish), giving you further freedom.

    The point of being slower is certainly a set-back for multimedia, but text-based communication certainly covers most basic needs.

    HAM radio For The Freedom!

    --
    factor 966971: 966971
  70. I'm trying to ignore Iran by petrus4 · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'm getting sick of hearing about it. The single main reason is that any (and I mean any) Americans who are involving themselves in it are complete, total hypocrites.

    You allowed a monster to hold political office in your country for eight years. He was the single worst political leader that you have ever had, and one of the worst that any country in the world has ever had.

    He stole at least the first election, if not both of them. He committed the greatest crime against you that anyone in your government ever has. (9/11) He is responsible for baseless war crimes against Iraq. He built gulags, advocated torture, sought ways around international laws that prohibit torture, and worked tirelessly, night and day, to move your country as close to outright fascism as he possibly could.

    Through it all, you never opposed him in any meaningful way. Not once.

    No impeachment. No censure. No investigation of him directly; only actions aimed at entirely dispensable underlings like Scooter Libby.

    You never challenged either of his election victories. You were never even willing to remotely comprehend the idea that he might have been responsible for 9/11, instead sticking your fingers in your ears and singing whenever anyone suggested it, or calling such people either insane conspiracy theorists, or traitors and un-American.

    When he insisted that war with Iraq was necessary, despite using a totally bogus rationale, the vast majority of you unquestioningly swallowed it whole.

    With the presidency of George Walker Bush, (and even more, with the continued outrage that the man has not been taken into custody for his crimes) America has permanently forfeited any right that it may previously have had, to pass comment on the moral character of any foreign government, or whether or not said government is serving the cause of liberty.

    You cannot credibly oppose monsters in government abroad, when you are entirely willing to allow and accept them domestically.

    Spare me also the usual, semi-crying, "Why do you hate America?" response. The only thing such response serves to do, is illustrate the complete, unsparing lack of even the most basic intelligence in the person making it.

  71. cryptocam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A camera that encrypts photos as soon as they're taken, uploads them to a secure server (with anonymized metadata) and wipes them from memory in a matter of seconds. Then selected photos can be chosen for publishing. This could be very useful for covering political activism anywhere in the world.

    The problem with all encrypted communication is that it singles you out as a "terrist". The only way to avoid this is to make encryption the default in mainstream devices, free (open soft/hardware) or not.

  72. Self destruc button by deviceb · · Score: 0

    with remote detonation via a button inside one of your teeth. -complimented with sidonnie capsule.

    --
    Kill your TV
    1. Re:Self destruc button by deviceb · · Score: 0

      then we need the full encryption
      i like the open router idea to bounce the traffic around.
      Shortrange radio support
      a method to create or control voluntary botnets
      video & audio live streaming
      a map based system for calling out roadblocks, embasies, hospitals.. routes to them... targets.
      thats a start... sounds like a laptop

      --
      Kill your TV
  73. Documenting your own oppression, torture and death by dweebasaurus+max · · Score: 1

    Seems beside the point to me somehow. A loser strategy. What about surviving? Political triumph would be nice, but let's be realistic: The Iranian government and their apparati do not wish to "Take Counsel with the Governed" which it says right in the pages of the Holy Quran itself you're supposed to do and is wisely, but not widely, interpreted to be a basis for some measure of democratic input to governance. ISLAMIC FAIL. Mohammed (pbuh) would hit the roof over this kind of bull-crap. Besides filming yourself being beaten to death, may I suggest a cell-phone shadow network? Build cell phone servers that will accept any message from any phone without interrogating the SIMM card, and rebroadcast it on WiFi. Build them into cars. Arrange for a mesh of access points. Then when the "authorities" bring down communications networks, you have your own, ready to go. You could co-ordinate crowd tactics that way....

  74. Chicken and egg by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

    I've often wonders about p2p text messaging, not for anything noble but just because it seams that certain communities would be great candidates for it (schools, universities, festivals, etc). There are many problems including:
    1)Battery life, almost all phones switch of wifi/bluetooth asap to save battery life, which on smart phones is apparently fairly short anyway. To constantly have wifi/bluetooth active would reduce the idle life of most phones so much most people would disable this feature.
    2)Carriers wouldn't like it, sending text messages across a room via bluetooth seams fairly trivial, however AFAIK (my current phone is a cheap POS) its much easier to send MMS than SMS because few phones support receiving text, without 3rd party apps. Either this is down to bickering over standards or more likely the carriers putting pressure on phone makers not to implement/standardize such features.
    3)Range and complexity, even in ideal situations (high density, high diffusion), the range of wifi/bluetooth is still fairly limited. And as neither are particularly great at handling walls, you would end up with large subgroups of completely disconnected users, and its not that useful to only be able to communicated with people in the room. The way around the separation problem is to buffer and send messages when other users are in range, however this increase complexity & starts introducing possible security problems and DOS attacks.
    4)Chicken and egg, this being useful relies on it being installed on most phones, but being installed on most phones relies on it being useful (even ignoring carrier interference)

     

    While 1,3 can be solved technically and 2 will become a moot point as carriers allow smart phones, 4 is the real problem, especially as there is little demand for yet another way of sending text between phones. While fellow /.ers may appreciate the beauty of open-p2p phone networks, most normals wont give a damn.

     
     
    p.s encryption would be fairly trivial to implement as you could exchange keys when physically near each-other and/or due to the mesh/p2p nature making consistent MITM attacks tricky(especially as if one pear slows down to re-encrypt messages a faster route will probably be found) sign all outgoing messages and encrypt replies (ofc you wouldn't want to send anything sensitive until you trust the keys, probably achieved by standing next to each-other and sending a message)

    --
    IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
  75. Who is the idiot? by hey! · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The idiot is the person who thinks he can secure liberty for himself alone.

    The time to worry about plausible deniability is before the secret police catch you. And make sure everyone knows the drill too. In the face of the secret police "individual liberty" has no practical utility.

    Even an oppressive state can't kill everyone. That's the game going on in the streets of Tehran today. The protesters want to nucleate into a crowd so big that it can't be dispersed without killing lots of people. The government doesn't want to do that, because in Iran that means funerals, which are ready made protest rallies. The government wants to keep the crowds isolated and intimidated so that it doesn't end up signing its own death warrant.

    The key to effective oppression is intimidation. The key to defeating oppression is to gather so many people together they can't be intimidated.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  76. Seriously? "Freedom Handset"? by Cross-Threaded · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You have got to be kidding me."Freedom Handset"?

    If people really want to change the situation they are in, they will find a way to communicate their ideas.

    The message is so much more important than the medium used to pass the message.

    The more "security features" you add to a device, the more difficult it is for the message to get out. You have to have a device to send your encoded messages, and whomever you are trying to communicate with needs a device to receive that message.

    I would think that the less complicated you can make the delivery of the message, the better the chance of your message making it to the people that you want to hear it.

    The real "Freedom Handset" should be a Bull-Horn.

    --
    They call us sheeple, I wonder why?
  77. Re:Freedom or terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you know anything about the UK other than what you occasionally pick up about CCTV cameras on Slashdot? Democracy is if anything more vibrant there than in the US. Its system of law and government has proved stable for hundreds of years longer than America's and indeed was the template for much of America's. Its press is as free, feisty and respected as you'll find anywhere. Its population is hugely more mobile (internationally) than America's and, in my opinion, is much more in touch with the political processes of their government and what's going on outside of their immediate surroundings. You're an idiot.

  78. Because it isn't theirs? by Mathinker · · Score: 1

    You mean the huge oil companies who'd found the oil, drilled the wells to extract it, built the refineries etc? Why should they not get at the oil?

    Maybe because it isn't theirs? I do not claim that they shouldn't expect a reasonable return on the investment of their efforts, but why would it necessarily give them ownership rights on the resource itself?

    1. Re:Because it isn't theirs? by b96miata · · Score: 1

      Because that's what their exploration agreements with the government said?

  79. Mod parent up! by Parallax48 · · Score: 1

    Where are mod points when I need them

  80. Aloha Akbar, Aloha Ackbar, Allahu Akbar? by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    this ain't aloha [Ac]kbar

    Google fight:

    1. Allahu Akbar: 2.25M
    2. Allah Akbar: 1.58M
    3. Aloha Ackbar: 0.0311M
    4. Aloha Akbar: 0.0302M

    I'm sure they meant "Hello general" ;-)

    1. Re:Aloha Akbar, Aloha Ackbar, Allahu Akbar? by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      "Aloha" also means goodbye

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  81. Greed begets greed by Mathinker · · Score: 1

    Any company greedy enough to cut a deal like that shouldn't be surprised at all when they discover that governments can be greedy bastards also....