I wonder if you could pick up audio using the accelerometer in the phone. The iPhone 6s accelerometer samples at 2 kHz and I imagine is quite sensitive.
A quick search shows that it using a accelerometer as an acoustic pickup has been done with a 3-axis accelerometer with a sensitivity comparable to the one in an iPhone 6 - though with far more bandwidth.
Edit: looks like it has been done. Too bad Snowden didnât remove his.
But⌠what about the reports that you can use signal injection to take over a phone using wired headphones, from up to 16 feet away?
Need a phone that takes this approach: (the neo900 did not, but an interesting idea)
For Android phones, connect it to a debug monitor and log system events like camera and microphone use. That would let you know if someone is watching and when. A rootkit exploit could lie to the debugger, of course, but it raises the bar quite a bit. Itâs also good for finding apps to tear out of the phone, like the unused Facebook app that still connects to the mothership every night.
Never mind the GPS, WiFi, and cell tower tracking your location⌠Wouldnât it be far more easier and correct to put the phone in a cage?
They donât mention Flexispy because Flexispy is just some product that happens to do those things too. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Even in some alternative universe where that product is the only method in existence to compromise a phone, even just that can be plenty dangerous to plenty of people, regardless of whether you personally are not one of those people.
Sounds like itâs actually you that is muddying the signal TBH.
No, the actual show is discussing FlexiSPY and the developers of FlexiSPY also confirmed it was their product being discussedâŚ
And because of the nature of how FlexiSPY works, itâs not a real concern since you first have to disable every security feature on the target device to even install it.
Itâs like when Dateline NBC attached explosives to a GM truck to claim the fuel tanks would suddenly explode in a collision. Since most people donât put model rocket engines triggered by a remote device in/near their fuel tanks, it wasnât a legitimate concern.
The points stand: The demonstrated technique works against more than just flexispy, and the fact that you do not consider yourself at risk of flexispy in no way means that others are not at risk.
How have they demonstrated it works with tools other than FlexiSPY when the program ONLY discussed that one tool?
Of course, for any such tool to work on iOS, you need to first disable all security on said iOS device by Jailbreaking it.
âPerhaps the most terrifying thing â if your phoneâs been hacked, youâd never know.â
Because a phone having its audio components physically removed is a pretty solid way of ensuring that none of the malware on the phone is using those audio components.
Yes, but not getting malware by disabling security features is a much easier, cheaper, just as secure way to make sure malware doesnât use the microphone than physically removing componentsâŚ
Part of Snowdenâs whistleblowing was that this is simply not true. Removing a microphone is factually - and frankly, obviously - a higher level of security against that microphone being used by malware than simply trusting that default security features will have kept the phone invulnerable at all times, including when it was not in your possession, and including before it was purchased, and including before it was manufactured.
Your situation (where default security is fine and no states or spouses or others with access to your phone are investigating you) is not everyoneâs situation. Risks that you do not consider pertain to you are not risks that pertain to no-one.
So long as you keep your iOS device up to date and donât jailbreak it, itâs not a risk to anyone with an iOS device. You cannot jailbreak an iOS device running iOS 7 or later without the passcode either (because you need the passcode to unlock the device). To suggest say otherwise is just FUD to get viewers.
Nothing Snowden revealed said anything differently.
And seriously, you think you could physically remove a microphone in a way that would the NSA couldnât add a brand new microphone to the device?!
Do you trust your spouse so much that youâd give them your passcode but also trust them so little youâd physically remove the microphone?!
Are you serious?!
Nevermind. Doesnât matter. Weâre done.
Agreed, your hypotheticals are absolutely insane. âI gave my spouse my passcode but removed the microphone because I donât trust themâ
Thatâs nuts!
Those protect against different things. I could keep my known phone utterly sanitary of anything that my spouse could object to and give up the password to alleviate suspicion, but still not want my spouse to be able to use it to listen to me when Iâm away.
In that case, why not just have a second phone? If you had so little trust, why would you even bring it with you? After all, if you remove the microphone, why couldnât they just add a microphone? How would you know if one was added? Not to mention every speaker can be easily fashioned into a microphone.
And itâs weird you think your spouse would be so daft to not notice the device lacks a microphone and you always have to use a headset to make calls. Hell, what would prevent them from attacking the headphones you use?
Itâs also a bit bizarre youâd think theyâd be smart enough to install a jailbreak on the device that gives them remote access to the microphone but not smart enough to test it even once to see if it worksâŚ
