It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

*CELL PHONES* Touch Screen Conspiracy.

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by sv_gravity 800
 


It is impossible to install a program on a machine that communicates with an outside source that leaves no evidence. There will be data being sent out, system resources being used, unexplained memory being taken up. I'm sorry, but there are much more efficient and secretive means of obtaining someone's whereabouts than to use these programs that you speak of (that may or may not exist). Bottom line is, if it is on your phone, it can be found. There is no if's, and's or but's about it.




posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by ninthaxis
 


en.wikipedia.org...(computing)



with a public backdoor creator anyways, you typically clone your virus, or program in this matter, to look like another program. shape shifting digitally



you need to look like something else to stay hidden and thats how its done, publicly i bet

private tech could be on your computer thats 100 percent invisible to your operating system, saying no space has been taken yet there has been its just your operating system can read this invisible ghost program.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Thompson's paper described a modified version of the Unix C compiler that would:

* Put an invisible backdoor in the Unix login command when it noticed that the login program was being compiled, and as a twist
* Also add this feature undetectably to future compiler versions upon their compilation as well.



well WIKI says its possible!

i say its possible!



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Well, if you look at how most touchscreens out now work, you can start to see how this claim would start to crumble.

electronics.howstuffworks.com...

think about a bunch of little buttons behind a thin layer of plastic, as you move your finger across, you're pushing down on different buttons at different locations on the screen, and that gives you the data.

something like that just isn't precise enough to read fingerprints, at least not with most touchscreens, but there might special ones, specifically designed to do so.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by sv_gravity 800
 


Damn it! I don't have any of this technology myself. No cellphone or camera except the one I had years ago that broke. All I need in this life of sin is me and my laptop.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by sv_gravity 800
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 


lol... i could do that to you about 6 years ago bro.....

picture now. 2010, this isn't 2004 anymore... web cams are old school bro.


First I'm NOT bro, never assume sex.

Second of all not everyone had web cams back then. This is the first one I had. Lucky you to be a savy computer spy
I need to learn some skills lol



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:22 PM
link   
It seems to me that such tech would require both hardware and software components on every single phone. I don't think that normal touch screen sensors have the resolution to read fingerprints. In fact I'm sure they don't. If additional fingerprinting hardware were in the phones, it would not escape the engineers and workers who make the phones, and it would probably not escape the hackers who mess with the phone. That's too many civilians to keep quiet. I think that alone makes it highyl unlikely.

But, I probably would have said the same thing about the FBI using your phone to listen to your conversations even when the phone is off, yet they have admitted to having the ability to do this, and they have done it:



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.

...

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.)

...

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.

...

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."

Source

Yikes. You could be right. Although I would assume that they already think that you are wherever your phone is, at least when the phone is being used, which means they can tell where you are without having to fingerprint you.

And in direct contradiction to my claim in the first paragraph that the standard tech is not up to the job, here is a new phone that can, in fact, read prints:
Sharp's Next Gen Mobiles to pack print reading tech
Similar Article about the Sharp tech



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Interesting theory OP. They probably get our fingerprints off of our income tax returns too...

P.S. It is only a matter of time until they have printers that can create replicas of finger prints; thus, allowing them to plant evidence and link an individual to a crime they didn't commit.

[edit on 25-3-2010 by Aggie Man]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by sv_gravity 800
 


Lets cut the insults and get into some real substance gravity. First off, you have provided no proof of your claims that such finger print technology can be installed in a functioning cell phone. You said there is no reason for you to provide proof. If you are going to make outrageous claims, provide supporting evidence to back it up.

Second, do not insult my technological knowledge because wikipedia supports your claim. It is IMPOSSIBLE to install a software or hardware component that cannot be discovered by someone. Yes, I said IMPOSSIBLE! That is not an outrageous claim of an ignorant individual but a fact. No matter how well someone "hides" a piece of hardware or software, the fact that it is on that cell phone makes it discoverable. So the operating system can't detect the software, big deal. No one trying to discover the workings of their cell phone is going to go through the operating system. Regardless of how well you hide this piece of software/hardware, it is still broadcasting information out on whatever network you happen to be on, whether its a local wi-fi connection or the cell company you get coverage from. That will be the first thing that clues someone into the fact that there is something interesting on the phone.

Again, please try to provide some support of your theory instead of belittling the people you are so eager to debate with. If such technology exists, show us!



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ninthaxis
reply to post by sv_gravity 800
 


Lets cut the insults and get into some real substance gravity. First off, you have provided no proof of your claims that such finger print technology can be installed in a functioning cell phone. You said there is no reason for you to provide proof. If you are going to make outrageous claims, provide supporting evidence to back it up.

Second, do not insult my technological knowledge because wikipedia supports your claim. It is IMPOSSIBLE to install a software or hardware component that cannot be discovered by someone. Yes, I said IMPOSSIBLE! That is not an outrageous claim of an ignorant individual but a fact. No matter how well someone "hides" a piece of hardware or software, the fact that it is on that cell phone makes it discoverable. So the operating system can't detect the software, big deal. No one trying to discover the workings of their cell phone is going to go through the operating system. Regardless of how well you hide this piece of software/hardware, it is still broadcasting information out on whatever network you happen to be on, whether its a local wi-fi connection or the cell company you get coverage from. That will be the first thing that clues someone into the fact that there is something interesting on the phone.

Again, please try to provide some support of your theory instead of belittling the people you are so eager to debate with. If such technology exists, show us!



your so lazy do your own reasearch i already know this is possible which is why i brought it to everyones attention, you do the reasearch to find out how its possible if you dont already know, which most people should


iPhones have a FingerPrinter Identifier program you can download from the apps that allows you to lock and unlock your phone using your fingerprint
which proves the tech is availible

the tech to but a program like that hidden in a phone has been availbe for YEARS.



i'm not here to write a essay on how it can be done. do your own reasearch if you dont know


i'm sure there are thousands of techies on this site that understand how you can go threw hiding something.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


true, never thought about that.


some very interasting topics are coming out of this.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by OnceReturned
 


finger printing or voice req, would guarantee who is in possession of the phone



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnceReturned
It seems to me that such tech would require both hardware and software components on every single phone. I don't think that normal touch screen sensors have the resolution to read fingerprints. In fact I'm sure they don't. If additional fingerprinting hardware were in the phones, it would not escape the engineers and workers who make the phones, and it would probably not escape the hackers who mess with the phone. That's too many civilians to keep quiet. I think that alone makes it highyl unlikely.

But, I probably would have said the same thing about the FBI using your phone to listen to your conversations even when the phone is off, yet they have admitted to having the ability to do this, and they have done it:



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.

...

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.)

...

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.

...

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."

Source

Yikes. You could be right. Although I would assume that they already think that you are wherever your phone is, at least when the phone is being used, which means they can tell where you are without having to fingerprint you.

And in direct contradiction to my claim in the first paragraph that the standard tech is not up to the job, here is a new phone that can, in fact, read prints:
Sharp's Next Gen Mobiles to pack print reading tech
Similar Article about the Sharp tech



mine has a HD screen. and they just gave me this 400 dollar touch screen to replace my 100 dollar phone that broke but was under warranty. Which got me thinking about the touch screen conspiracy, they gave me 300 bucks for free like how generous?



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by jaden_x
Well, if you look at how most touchscreens out now work, you can start to see how this claim would start to crumble.

electronics.howstuffworks.com...

think about a bunch of little buttons behind a thin layer of plastic, as you move your finger across, you're pushing down on different buttons at different locations on the screen, and that gives you the data.

something like that just isn't precise enough to read fingerprints, at least not with most touchscreens, but there might special ones, specifically designed to do so.



well i guess not every touch phone can be guilty of being able to do this.


But the iPhone for sure is, since you can download a fingerprint application yourself if you want.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   
"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.)"

the same proccess can be used to start up the fingerprint application.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
this isn't the tech of future phones its now


anyone with a iphone go look threw the apps and try out the fingerprint app to lock and unlock your phone


which PROVES this generation phones have the tech, at least the iphone



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


No not happening. As they may be able to recreate the patterns involved in the finger print they will never be able to match the dna from a real finger print.

Canadian forensics experts have been able to pull dna from fingerprints, allowing them unprecidented identification. Imagine, no more partial prints putting the stopper on a case, they only need a sliver for your dna that produced said finger print.

Just thought you might want to know.


Also as for the touch sceen reading your prints, they are not scanner front displays. In order for it to actually read anything, even passivly it still needs to scan the screen. So far, no phones have scanners or fingerprint biometric recognition software. Too much stuff , but gove them another 6 months to a year and we will be that much closer.




posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ADVISOR
 




the iphone can scan your FINGER PRINTS! the IPHONE! and its NOW! not 6 MONTHS FROM NOW!


i'm doing it as we speak on my friends application, well he is my fingerprint doesn't work but he keeps locking it and unlocking it right infront of me, it is clearly working.



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Well, with this kind of technology available, why is it so implausible that this theory couldn't be accurate??

www.smartwater.com...

www.flexispy.com...

I know these aren't the MOST advanced, but I highly doubt they are going to make such advancements available to the general public. It should be enough for us to be leery of that kind of tech being around.

Love & Light
S&F

[edit on 25-3-2010 by themightymissm]



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join