Do you object to FBI listening to your cell phone's microphone?

randalee

Senior member
Nov 7, 2001
683
0
0
No poll, just want to have a good discussion about it. I feel like more and more of our freedoms are taken away with each new bill and law that is passed. One of the largest of these is the Patriot Act.

Recently, we learned that the FBI has the capability to tap into a cellular phone's microphone, to listen to conversations happening around the vicinity of the phone. Do you object to this type of "Big Brother" behavior? Or do you even consider it "Big Brother"?

Hey, it could create a nifty new market. Hard on/off switches for the microphone in the cell.

(Edit) -- adding link to CNet article.
 
Feb 24, 2001
14,513
4
81
Originally posted by: randalee
No poll, just want to have a good discussion about it. I feel like more and more of our freedoms are taken away with each new bill and law that is passed. One of the largest of these is the Patriot Act.

Recently, we learned that the FBI has the capability to tap into a cellular phone's microphone, to listen to conversations happening around the vicinity of the phone. Do you object to this type of "Big Brother" behavior? Or do you even consider it "Big Brother"?

Hey, it could create a nifty new market. Hard on/off switches for the microphone in the cell.

If there was a hard lock on it, I'm sure some bill would be pushed through to allow them to bypass that.

And if you don't have anything to hide then why not let them listen :roll:

I only use my Treo for looking at porn luckily :p
 

randalee

Senior member
Nov 7, 2001
683
0
0
They can't listen to my home phone when it's hung up. They can even turn your cell phone ON if you've turned it OFF, and use the mic to listen in on what's going on around the phone.

I'm talking about a HARD BYPASS switch, like an on/off rocker, that would effectively disconnect the microphone. It could be toggled by the user.

Edit -- Moto Razr, Nextel, and some Samsung phones confirmed (listenable)!
 

slsmnaz

Diamond Member
Mar 13, 2005
4,016
0
0
I would like to see a link to them being able to remotely turn on/off my phone and use it as a listening device before I freak out.
 

slsmnaz

Diamond Member
Mar 13, 2005
4,016
0
0
So it says hackers have already done this and that most phones require the carrier to install a piece of software to make it work. Plus they never even came to the conclusion that this was used in the mob case they cited.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
I can clearly see that there might be benefits to using something like this, but it reeks of big brother and will most certainly be abused. A 'real' hard-on-off switch would be a good idea, it would be a feature that would make me more likely to buy the cell phone all things being equal.
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
Carriers (ie; Cingular) can't send software downloads to my phone, because they don't support it, and it's not sold in the US market. I don't even think my phone allows OTA software upgrades.

Me: 1 Phonetappers: 0
 

randalee

Senior member
Nov 7, 2001
683
0
0
Originally posted by: slsmnaz
So it says hackers have already done this and that most phones require the carrier to install a piece of software to make it work.

But when has a carrier ever refused to comply with a matter of "national security"?

 

Doctor Nyse

Senior member
Jun 26, 2006
358
0
0
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Carriers (ie; Cingular) can't send software downloads to my phone, because they don't support it, and it's not sold in the US market. I don't even think my phone allows OTA software upgrades.

Me: 1 Phonetappers: 0


:gift:
 
Aug 23, 2000
15,509
1
81
they can try to listen into my surroundings, all they're going to get is the sound of my keyboard or me whistling and taking a dump.
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers
What about battery life? THats like being on a call all the time.

Oh snap, is that why my phone sometimes goes to a dead battery REALLY quick after being fully charged, and then the very next day it lasts the 30+ hours it's supposed to in standby? FVCK, I retract my statement about my phone being untappable :p
 

Turin39789

Lifer
Nov 21, 2000
12,218
8
81
Yea I object.

I suppose the only option would be to take the battery out. Or stop the government from giving away our privacy.
 
Feb 19, 2001
20,155
23
81
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Carriers (ie; Cingular) can't send software downloads to my phone, because they don't support it, and it's not sold in the US market. I don't even think my phone allows OTA software upgrades.

Me: 1 Phonetappers: 0

Sony Ericsson's W810i can do that... It's a cingular phone too =)
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,277
1,784
126
It is a waste of tax money as well as a violation of my privacy rights for the government to listen in on my cell phone's microphone.
I don't have anything to hide, but that doesn't mean that I approve of authoritarianism. Freedom > *
 

randalee

Senior member
Nov 7, 2001
683
0
0
Doesn't have anything to do with the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was simply the first big recent infrigement upon our right to privacy.

Edit -- "now can someone fill me in on what the Patriot Act is?" lol
 

Ruptga

Lifer
Aug 3, 2006
10,246
207
106
Avoid the 'noid my friend.

The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic surveillance in criminal investigations

The key word there is criminal. Not civil (as in lawsuits), not just checking, but criminal.

And don't rave about some slippery slope or something, it's just another modern tool for the modern world. Cops and the FBI don't have enough time to tap every random person that they feel like, and if they did have that much time they'd be fired for not paying enough attention to the terrorists/mob/etc.
 

randalee

Senior member
Nov 7, 2001
683
0
0
Okay, you've nixed me from the slippery slope. I won't go there. Yes, it's another nifty tool they can use to fight crime -- war on drugs, war on terror, etc. We have all these wars we're fighting, but none have a specific enemy. We're simply fighting "drugs" and those we determine to be "enemies of the state". I suppose the Jews just were "enemies of the state" -- the Nazi party, right?
 

Kwaipie

Golden Member
Nov 30, 2005
1,326
0
0
"just because they can, doesn't mean the will. Only those guilty of a crime have anything to fear, you're not guilty of a crime, are you? Comrade?"