If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   At least 17 mysterious fake cellphone towers being used to intercept calls in US: "What we find suspicious is that a lot of these interceptors are right on top of U.S. military bases." So yeah, maybe not so mysterious (pics)   (ca.news.yahoo.com) divider line 113
    More: Scary, United States, cell phones, cell tower, towers, United States military bases, spyware, cellular network, Galaxy S II  
•       •       •

13033 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Sep 2014 at 10:21 AM (2 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



113 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-09-03 08:37:42 AM
"If you've been intercepted, in some cases it might show at the top that you've been forced from 4G down to 2G. But a decent interceptor won't show that," Goldsmith said. "It'll be set up to show you [falsely] that you're still on 4G. You'll think that you're on 4G, but you're actually being forced back to 2G."

Is this because the interceptors are cheap, or because they exploit some bug in 2G a protocol?  Would dropping backwards compatibility be a viable option?
 
2014-09-03 08:57:57 AM

serial_crusher: Would dropping backwards compatibility be a viable option?


Don't know.
Don't carry a cell phone.
Don't care.

But it would seem like a lot of tax dollars are being spent to spy on citizens.
 
2014-09-03 09:08:04 AM

vudukungfu: serial_crusher: Would dropping backwards compatibility be a viable option?

Don't know.
Don't carry a cell phone.
Don't care.

But it would seem like a lot of tax dollars are being spent to spy on citizens.


Do you also not own a television?

I figure the "right on top of" quote is not quite literal and that these towers were erected near military bases with intent to spy on military personnel.  Somebody else's tax dollars, yay!
/ But there's probably just as many fake towers paid for by our taxes in China....
 
2014-09-03 10:12:34 AM
Fake towers would clearly be violating all sorts of FCC regulations, so finding the owners would be pretty trivial-- who owns the land they're standing on?  Get a subpoena and force them to say.

Can't get a hold of the land owners-- because, say, it's listed as a bunch of shell corps based overseas?  No problem, then.  Just dismantle the towers and turn the patches of land into small parks.

You'll either hear nothing or be getting a prompt call from some lawyers establishing contact.

I seriously doubt the NSA would have to stoop to putting up false towers.
 
2014-09-03 10:24:44 AM
But do they have... An interocitor?
 
2014-09-03 10:25:16 AM
They're military towers. They're there because the military is experimenting with setting up their own cellular networks.
 
2014-09-03 10:27:42 AM

Coming on a Bicycle: They're military towers. They're there because the military is experimenting with setting up their own cellular networks.


I heard they are government weather control substations that will also broadcast the brown note during times of martial law.
 
2014-09-03 10:27:51 AM
FTA:
Only users of ultra-secure phones, like Goldsmith's CryptoPhone 500, can detect interceptors and block content from them. The CryptoPhone 500 looks like an ordinary Galaxy S III but features high-powered encryption and removes most vulnerabilities present in stock phones.

Paid content shill certainly has no goal in writing this article.  None.
 
2014-09-03 10:29:34 AM
Your advertisement blog sucks.
 
2014-09-03 10:30:21 AM
Dear NSA and China,

I'm broke so stealing my credit will not help you much, I'm a stoner, I like 'baitin...alot.  Everyone I know irl pretty much knows all the freaky, kinky, lazy, crazy and embarrassing stuff I do also so I'm not getting blackmailed.

Nothing to see here, move along now.
 
2014-09-03 10:30:28 AM
Someone should jam those.

img.fark.net

or does that only work for radar?
 
2014-09-03 10:32:45 AM
This makes sense, considering the news last night on the local co-owned Fox and NBC station. ISIS is in Cuidad Juarez and poised to come across the bridge to El Paso and take over the large military bases there.

To pick it up: the cell phone towers are to fool them into not stopping until they get to Roswell, where they'll meet up with the mother ship and be transported out of the galaxy.
 
2014-09-03 10:34:00 AM
s.yimg.com
//Owns over 2 dozen cats.
 
2014-09-03 10:35:02 AM

chozo13: Someone should jam those.

[img.fark.net image 272x204]

or does that only work for radar?


Don't be an asshole.
 
2014-09-03 10:35:19 AM

Ecobuckeye: Coming on a Bicycle: They're military towers. They're there because the military is experimenting with setting up their own cellular networks.

I heard they are government weather control substations that will also broadcast the brown note during times of martial law.


... Eh? Why is the millitary wanting to try to set up their own cell networks a conspiracy theory?

It just seems like it would be a prudent thing, security wise.  Not a "ZOMG they're trying to control your brain!", more a "The military may want a secure method of contact like this without the need to go through third parties who could, in theory, be more easily compromised"
 
2014-09-03 10:37:03 AM
In other news, military personnel like to talk on cell phones, on military bases.
 
2014-09-03 10:39:07 AM

rzrwiresunrise: chozo13: Someone should jam those.

[img.fark.net image 272x204]

or does that only work for radar?

Don't be an asshole.


But I just made Gunners Mate 1st Class :(

img.fark.net
 
2014-09-03 10:41:19 AM

SmellsLikePoo: FTA:
Only users of ultra-secure phones, like Goldsmith's CryptoPhone 500, can detect interceptors and block content from them. The CryptoPhone 500 looks like an ordinary Galaxy S III but features high-powered encryption and removes most vulnerabilities present in stock phones.

Paid content shill certainly has no goal in writing this article.  None.


Yeah, this was the giveaway. What they're talking about is just driving around with what amounts to a detector & reporting the results, and you can set up a phony "cell tower" with a laptop & GSM chip for way less than $100K. There's a whole hobby community revolving around spoofing cell networks.
 
2014-09-03 10:41:32 AM
Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America says that shady individuals are setting up fake cell towers to intercept phone calls. Oh, that is frighting! No one knows who these people could be or where the "interceptors" are located. However, Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America seems to be able scan for them while driving.

What can we do?!!! Well, Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America has the only phone that can protect you from these evil phone snoopers! The magic phone offered by Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America, uses advanced encryption that somehow protects your communications with the cell provider even though the cell provider doesn't otherwise support such secure encryption.

/the actual Popular Science article is at least a little more credible
 
2014-09-03 10:41:36 AM

SmellsLikePoo: FTA:
Only users of ultra-secure phones, like Goldsmith's CryptoPhone 500, can detect interceptors and block content from them. The CryptoPhone 500 looks like an ordinary Galaxy S III but features high-powered encryption and removes most vulnerabilities present in stock phones.

Paid content shill certainly has no goal in writing this article.  None.


They redeemed themselves later on in the article by letting us know that only businessmen who want to do business in Asia need to worry about it.  I mean, my company's board of directors gets a hard on at every ancillary mention of the Asian market, but surely they're the only ones right?
 
2014-09-03 10:45:40 AM

Yogimus: In other news, military personnel like to talk on cell phones, on military bases.


Do they all have rules against that?  I know the big important places like Fort Meade do, but I'm thinking of people who live on a regular base using them while off duty, or people who live off the base but still nearby?
 
2014-09-03 10:46:15 AM
Sigh, everything in that article is FUD and advertisement for GakaxyS3s with encryption software being sold at a high price.

I could explain how GSM, CDMA, HSPA, EVDO and LTE actually work, but that would take a lot of time. Modern digital phones really can't be hacked like that. The only way to trick a phone is if you know a whole bunch of network info related to the account, the ESN and MEID of the device, and have a location that won't be detected by the carrier you are trying to mimic. NOT something done broadly, but technically possible for spying on specific devices.
 
2014-09-03 10:46:44 AM
Hmm.  It looks like these might just be the infamous stingrays rather than proper towers.
 
2014-09-03 10:47:12 AM

chozo13: Someone should jam those.

[img.fark.net image 272x204]

or does that only work for radar?


Reporting for duty.
 
2014-09-03 10:48:30 AM

GameSprocket: Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America says that shady individuals are setting up fake cell towers to intercept phone calls. Oh, that is frighting! No one knows who these people could be or where the "interceptors" are located. However, Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America seems to be able scan for them while driving.

What can we do?!!! Well, Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America has the only phone that can protect you from these evil phone snoopers! The magic phone offered by Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America, uses advanced encryption that somehow protects your communications with the cell provider even though the cell provider doesn't otherwise support such secure encryption.

/the actual Popular Science article is at least a little more credible



I wonder if it still lets me on to Facebook. No need to still my info, I'll send it to you
 
2014-09-03 10:49:38 AM
Fake cell towers are owned mostly by TMobile and AT&T. If you don't have cell service and you can see the tower, it's a fake tower.
 
2014-09-03 10:55:51 AM

rzrwiresunrise: chozo13: Someone should jam those.

[img.fark.net image 272x204]

or does that only work for radar?

Don't be an asshole.


Careful, you're surrounded by us.
 
2014-09-03 10:56:31 AM

serial_crusher: "If you've been intercepted, in some cases it might show at the top that you've been forced from 4G down to 2G. But a decent interceptor won't show that," Goldsmith said. "It'll be set up to show you [falsely] that you're still on 4G. You'll think that you're on 4G, but you're actually being forced back to 2G."

Is this because the interceptors are cheap, or because they exploit some bug in 2G a protocol?  Would dropping backwards compatibility be a viable option?


I'll guess that 4G has inherently strong(ish) encryption and, while 2G does have some encryption options (5, actually), one of them is plaintext and another is very weak and was broken a long time ago.  Not sure about the state of the others.  Perhaps a rogue tower could negotiate down to 2G protocols/encryption while using 4G signalling.
 
2014-09-03 10:56:32 AM

Gunner's Mate First Class Phillip Asshole: chozo13: Someone should jam those.

[img.fark.net image 272x204]

or does that only work for radar?

Reporting for duty.


HAHAHA! Awesome!
 
2014-09-03 11:01:06 AM

serial_crusher: "If you've been intercepted, in some cases it might show at the top that you've been forced from 4G down to 2G. But a decent interceptor won't show that," Goldsmith said. "It'll be set up to show you [falsely] that you're still on 4G. You'll think that you're on 4G, but you're actually being forced back to 2G."

Is this because the interceptors are cheap, or because they exploit some bug in 2G a protocol?  Would dropping backwards compatibility be a viable option?


2G is relatively insecure. 3G and 4G are significantly more secure and harder to fake. So you jam 3G and 4G which forces the handset to fall back to 2G, which you can then exploit.

I am surprised that the article makes no mention of Stingray. It is likely that most of these devices are being used by police.
 
2014-09-03 11:01:57 AM

serial_crusher: Yogimus: In other news, military personnel like to talk on cell phones, on military bases.

Do they all have rules against that?  I know the big important places like Fort Meade do, but I'm thinking of people who live on a regular base using them while off duty, or people who live off the base but still nearby?


Most bases don't care.  And most of Fort Meade doesn't care either, just the NSA complex, and if you head into one of the SCIFs.  Otherwise, everyone has their cell phone.  And at the NSA, you just have to leave your cell in your car, or drop it in one of the little boxes they have at the entrance of the building.
 
2014-09-03 11:02:48 AM
Ve vant das information.
 
2014-09-03 11:03:21 AM
(gasp) People will know I like Domino's. Ruined.
 
2014-09-03 11:03:36 AM
"What we find suspicious is that a lot of these interceptors are right on top of U.S. military bases," Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America told  "So we begin to wonder - are some of them U.S. government interceptors? Or are some of them Chinese interceptors?

Hey Major, what is that thingy on top of HQ?
Hell if I know. Some asian guy came by yesterday and stuck it there. Then he gave me a Coke and left.
Any of that seem weird to you?
Nah. Well he did ask if I liked jokes, but he never told me any.
 
2014-09-03 11:04:32 AM

That was a long ad.

 
2014-09-03 11:06:06 AM

chozo13: rzrwiresunrise: chozo13: Someone should jam those.

[img.fark.net image 272x204]

or does that only work for radar?

Don't be an asshole.

But I just made Gunners Mate 1st Class :(

[img.fark.net image 320x240]


Oddly enough, accurate representation of a GM1 in the US Navy.

/ex-FC
//being Weapons Department was simultaneously awesome and the worst gig on the ship all at the same time
///Cruisers suck
 
2014-09-03 11:08:11 AM

SansNeural: Perhaps a rogue tower could negotiate down to 2G protocols/encryption while using 4G signalling.


This. I Thought it's known that the Feds do this (in theory with a warrant). They'll park a van, use it as a micro cell site to directly intercept certain traffic in a area (drug dealers), because it's quicker than dealing with the company.
 
2014-09-03 11:09:05 AM
But can they read my mind?
 
2014-09-03 11:12:34 AM
Wow, that article didn't really tell us shiat, just a bunch of vague ramblings about secure hones, but doesn't tell you ANYthing about these interceptor towers, how they know they're bogus, how a normal person can tell, how they were discovered, etc...
 
2014-09-03 11:12:34 AM
Familiar to anyone driving on I-55 near Ridgeland on the north side of Jackson, Mississippi: the mini-Washington Monument, a.k.a. the Monument to the Unknown Klansman.
c2.staticflickr.com
 
2014-09-03 11:14:54 AM
vudukungfu:

But it would seem like a lot of tax dollars are being spent to spy on citizens.

*Puts 200-2008 hat on* "Well the US hasn't had a terrorist attack so it's money well spent. FREEDOM!"
 
2014-09-03 11:15:12 AM
Goddammit, people, would you stop being so farking credulous? This story reads like one of those "satire" sites that doesn't understand the difference between what The Onion does, and simply passing off plausible hoaxes. That, or some Infowars nonsense.

No, there are not any "interceptor" towers pushing malware to your unprotected phones. The NSA is perfectly capable of intercepting your content using the normal cell infrastructure, and that's not how data transfers work, you idiots.
 
2014-09-03 11:15:42 AM

vudukungfu: serial_crusher: Would dropping backwards compatibility be a viable option?

Don't know.
Don't carry a cell phone.
Don't care.

But it would seem like a lot of tax dollars are being spent to spy on citizens.


As soon as i read "don't carry a cell phone" -- i was like this guy must be old or a crazy..

thanks for clearing it up later in the same post for me buddy
 
2014-09-03 11:16:38 AM
Paging dittybopper.
 
2014-09-03 11:21:34 AM

FormlessOne: That was a long ad.


The original article over at PopSci is an even longer ad.

LazyMedia: Goddammit, people, would you stop being so farking credulous?


The primary info source for the article is a guy who sells $3500 hardened phones.  Hmmm.
 
2014-09-03 11:23:08 AM
That's some mighty fine reportin' there, Lou, errrrr Tori.

I wonder if she's familiar with the basic 5 Ws and the H.

FTFA:  "According to a recent report, ..." By whom?  Published where?  What research was done?  Is it the least bit credible?

FTFA:  "The worst part is that no one knows who erected these towers or what information is being gathered. ..."  Well, somebody does.  What did the author do to try to find out?

FTFA:  "To be clear, these 'towers' are not necessarily the tall, physical spires we're accustomed to seeing along highways or atop hills. These interceptors can be small, mobile installations that transport easily and can be purchased for as little as $100,000. .."  Ok, towers can be different from the ones we're used to seeing.  Of the 17 "phony" towers the author claims exists, where are they and of what type are they?

FTFA, quoting the dude who actually apparently gave the "tip" to the "journalist" that became this sponsored content / native advertising masquerading as journalism:  "What we find suspicious is that a lot of these interceptors are right on top of U.S. military bases,"   You probably don't mean "on top of" because if you do, then they are probably antennas erected by the government for something, possibly even a normal cell phone tower, though possibly more nefarious.  That assumes, of course, that these towers actually exist since the article to so bereft of facts.

/How the heck does drivel like this get written and how the heck does it get past an editor with an IQ higher than that of a gnat?
 
2014-09-03 11:27:41 AM
the more and more i read this story the more I just think..like who would be believe this?? The FCC and local city would know who's tower that is, its not just operating on spectrum without proper authority and 50 different people signing off.. You cant really "hack" phones the way they mention.. then i read the comments, and now my eyes are bleeding
 
2014-09-03 11:29:57 AM

GameSprocket: Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America says that shady individuals are setting up fake cell towers to intercept phone calls. Oh, that is frighting! No one knows who these people could be or where the "interceptors" are located. However, Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America seems to be able scan for them while driving.

What can we do?!!! Well, Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America has the only phone that can protect you from these evil phone snoopers! The magic phone offered by Les Goldsmith, the CEO of ESD America, uses advanced encryption that somehow protects your communications with the cell provider even though the cell provider doesn't otherwise support such secure encryption.

/the actual Popular Science article is at least a little more credible


THIS!!! I was wondering when someone would pick up on it. This dude is just advertising his business, that is all.

I have a Jewish friend who ran for a state level office. He was trailing in the polls, so he had someone deface all of his signs with all sorts of antisemitism. Sure enough, he got TV coverage and picked up a few points, but eventually lost...People must have just known he was an ass hole... CSB
 
2014-09-03 11:30:19 AM

devildog123: serial_crusher: Yogimus: In other news, military personnel like to talk on cell phones, on military bases.

Do they all have rules against that?  I know the big important places like Fort Meade do, but I'm thinking of people who live on a regular base using them while off duty, or people who live off the base but still nearby?

Most bases don't care.  And most of Fort Meade doesn't care either, just the NSA complex, and if you head into one of the SCIFs.  Otherwise, everyone has their cell phone.  And at the NSA, you just have to leave your cell in your car, or drop it in one of the little boxes they have at the entrance of the building.


There are a generally a number of SCIFs on all military bases, but yes, I concur.  There are a couple of places I routinely visit that are not technically bases but overseen by the Navy.  Out in the parking lot the phone, laptop, etc are all OK to use, but leave'm in the car before entering the building.  In fact, when I had to download some software to bring in the building, I went to the car, WiFi-tethered the laptop to my cell phone, got the files, burned to a CD and brought that into the building to be IA scanned.

Even on Navy ships at port, the sailors and civilians are using their smartphones.  Some spaces are classified, no cameras or RF allowed.  Generally your phone won't get a signal below deck anyway.
 
2014-09-03 11:44:51 AM
This article doesn't even have an author in the byline, as the other Right Click articles do. Which means it's coming from inside the house.
 
Displayed 50 of 113 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report