Security forces can tap your conversations, even when your cellphone is turned off

From FreeWiki

Subject: Re: Security forces can tap your conversations through cellphones >even when turned off... > > > >CNET News.com http://www.news.com/ >FBI taps cell phone mic as eavesdropping tool > >By Declan McCullagh >http://news.com.com/FBI+taps+cell+phone+mic+as+eavesdropping+tool/2100-1029_ >3-6140191.html > >Story last modified Mon Dec 04 06:56:51 PST 2006 > > >The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic surveillance >in criminal investigations: remotely activating a mobile phone's microphone >and using it to eavesdrop on nearby conversations. > >The technique is called a "roving bug," and was approved by top U.S. >Department of Justice officials for use against members of a New York >organized crime family who were wary of conventional surveillance >techniques >such as tailing a suspect or wiretapping him. > >Nextel cell phones owned by two alleged mobsters, John Ardito and his >attorney Peter Peluso, were used by the FBI to listen in on nearby >conversations. The FBI views Ardito as one of the most powerful men in the >Genovese family, a major part of the national Mafia. > >The surveillance technique came to light in an opinion published this week >by U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan. He ruled that the "roving bug" was >legal because federal wiretapping law is broad enough to permit >eavesdropping even of conversations that take place near a suspect's cell >phone. > >Kaplan's opinion said that the eavesdropping technique "functioned whether >the phone was powered on or off." Some handsets can't be fully powered down >without removing the battery; for instance, some Nokia models will wake up >when turned off if an alarm is set. > >While the Genovese crime family prosecution appears to be the first time a >remote-eavesdropping mechanism has been used in a criminal case, the >technique has been discussed in security circles for years. > >The U.S. Commerce Department's security office warns that "a cellular >telephone can be turned into a microphone and transmitter for the purpose >of >listening to conversations in the vicinity of the phone." An article in the >Financial Times last year said mobile providers can "remotely install a >piece of software on to any handset, without the owner's knowledge, which >will activate the microphone even when its owner is not making a call." > >Nextel and Samsung handsets and the Motorola Razr are especially vulnerable >to software downloads that activate their microphones, said James Atkinson, >a counter-surveillance consultant who has worked closely with government >agencies. "They can be remotely accessed and made to transmit room audio >all >the time," he said. "You can do that without having physical access to the >phone." > >Because modern handsets are miniature computers, downloaded software could >modify the usual interface that always displays when a call is in progress. >The spyware could then place a call to the FBI and activate the >microphone--all without the owner knowing it happened. (The FBI declined to >comment on Friday.) > >"If a phone has in fact been modified to act as a bug, the only way to >counteract that is to either have a bugsweeper follow you around 24-7, >which >is not practical, or to peel the battery off the phone," Atkinson said. >Security-conscious corporate executives routinely remove the batteries from >their cell phones, he added. > >FBI's physical bugs discovered >The FBI's Joint Organized Crime Task Force, which includes members of the >New York police department, had little luck with conventional surveillance >of the Genovese family. They did have a confidential source who reported >the >suspects met at restaurants including Brunello Trattoria in New Rochelle, >N.Y., which the FBI then bugged. > >But in July 2003, Ardito and his crew discovered bugs in three restaurants, >and the FBI quietly removed the rest. Conversations recounted in FBI >affidavits show the men were also highly suspicious of being tailed by >police and avoided conversations on cell phones whenever possible. > > >That led the FBI to resort to "roving bugs," first of Ardito's Nextel >handset and then of Peluso's. U.S. District Judge Barbara Jones approved >them in a series of orders in 2003 and 2004, and said she expected to "be >advised of the locations" of the suspects when their conversations were >recorded. > >Details of how the Nextel bugs worked are sketchy. Court documents, >including an affidavit (p1) and (p2) prepared by Assistant U.S. Attorney >Jonathan Kolodner in September 2003, refer to them as a "listening device >placed in the cellular telephone." That phrase could refer to software or >hardware. > >One private investigator interviewed by CNET News.com, Skipp Porteous of >Sherlock Investigations in New York, said he believed the FBI planted a >physical bug somewhere in the Nextel handset and did not remotely activate >the microphone. > >"They had to have physical possession of the phone to do it," Porteous >said. >"There are several ways that they could have gotten physical possession. >Then they monitored the bug from fairly near by." > >But other experts thought microphone activation is the more likely >scenario, >mostly because the battery in a tiny bug would not have lasted a year and >because court documents say the bug works anywhere "within the United >States"--in other words, outside the range of a nearby FBI agent armed with >a radio receiver. > >In addition, a paranoid Mafioso likely would be suspicious of any ploy to >get him to hand over a cell phone so a bug could be planted. And Kolodner's >affidavit seeking a court order lists Ardito's phone number, his 15-digit >International Mobile Subscriber Identifier, and lists Nextel Communications >as the service provider, all of which would be unnecessary if a physical >bug >were being planted. > >A BBC article from 2004 reported that intelligence agencies routinely >employ >the remote-activiation method. "A mobile sitting on the desk of a >politician >or businessman can act as a powerful, undetectable bug," the article said, >"enabling them to be activated at a later date to pick up sounds even when >the receiver is down." > >For its part, Nextel said through spokesman Travis Sowders: "We're not >aware >of this investigation, and we weren't asked to participate." > >Other mobile providers were reluctant to talk about this kind of >surveillance. Verizon Wireless said only that it "works closely with law >enforcement and public safety officials. When presented with legally >authorized orders, we assist law enforcement in every way possible." > >A Motorola representative said that "your best source in this case would be >the FBI itself." Cingular, T-Mobile, and the CTIA trade association did not >immediately respond to requests for comment. >Mobsters: The surveillance vanguard >This isn't the first time the federal government has pushed at the limits >of >electronic surveillance when investigating reputed mobsters. > >In one case involving Nicodemo S. Scarfo, the alleged mastermind of a loan >shark operation in New Jersey, the FBI found itself thwarted when Scarfo >used Pretty Good Privacy software (PGP) to encode confidential business >data. > >So with a judge's approval, FBI agents repeatedly snuck into Scarfo's >business to plant a keystroke logger and monitor its output. > >Like Ardito's lawyers, Scarfo's defense attorneys argued that the >then-novel >technique was not legal and that the information gleaned through it could >not be used. Also like Ardito, Scarfo's lawyers lost when a judge ruled in >January 2002 that the evidence was admissible. > >This week, Judge Kaplan in the southern district of New York concluded that >the "roving bugs" were legally permitted to capture hundreds of hours of >conversations because the FBI had obtained a court order and alternatives >probably wouldn't work. > >The FBI's "applications made a sufficient case for electronic >surveillance," >Kaplan wrote. "They indicated that alternative methods of investigation >either had failed or were unlikely to produce results, in part because the >subjects deliberately avoided government surveillance." >Now on News.com >Google bets on mobile market Web 2.0: Big app on campus Albuquerque extols >role in PC revolution Extra: Apple planning new iMacs, full-screen iPods? > > >Bill Stollhans, president of the Private Investigators Association of >Virginia, said such a technique would be legally reserved for police armed >with court orders, not private investigators. > >There is "no law that would allow me as a private investigator to use that >type of technique," he said. "That is exclusively for law enforcement. It >is >not allowable or not legal in the private sector. No client of mine can ask >me to overhear telephone or strictly oral conversations." > >Surreptitious activation of built-in microphones by the FBI has been done >before. A 2003 lawsuit revealed that the FBI was able to surreptitiously >turn on the built-in microphones in automotive systems like General Motors' >OnStar to snoop on passengers' conversations. > >When FBI agents remotely activated the system and were listening in, >passengers in the vehicle could not tell that their conversations were >being >monitored. > >Malicious hackers have followed suit. A report last year said Spanish >authorities had detained a man who write a Trojan horse that secretly >activated a computer's video camera and forwarded him the recordings.