Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/10/06/the-fcc-helped-create.html
…
1 Like
Yes. It may be a bit of a strain for those passing laws and if it’s not the FCC’s top priority, it should be at least their number two, but these things should be wiped clean and flushed from our cities.
12 Likes
Who’s passing laws these days? Is there some kind of Shadow Congress I haven’t heard of? The last 100 laws were regulations by Executive Order, followed immediately by lawsuits.
2 Likes
8 Likes
This is what happens when the courts get all backed-up. Some committee starts making up crap as they go along and before you know it, it’s hit the fan.
6 Likes
huh huh, huh huh
pooblem
huh huh huh
3 Likes
the militarization of the police is out of hand.
1 Like
Why do I get the feeling that the EFF and ACLU are on a hiding to nothing because the FCC and BPD just don’t give a toss?
Such discussions should include the carriers to harden their handsets against Stingrays and other (unauthorized) MITM attacks.
Bonus points if their cell phones can DDoS an “unauthorized” cell tower with questionable credentials in a coordinated fashion with their known cell sites.
3 Likes
Lets ALL have a stingray!
http://www.rtl-sdr.com/building-your-own-rogue-gsm-basestation-with-a-bladerf/ http://www.rtl-sdr.com/building-your-own-rogue-gsm-basestation-with-a-bladerf/
4 Likes
If IMSI catchers were only available to the authorities, then such hardening would never happen, but now that anyone with motivation and a few buck can do it, I’m sure it will become a selling point eventually… although The Law will lobby hard for some sort of backdoor, of course, to prevent some hypothetical, unspecified-because-secret bad stuff.
1 Like
I meant “harden cell phone technology so that IMSI catchers are useless.”
Bonus points if cell phone network can alert/attack/protect/defend against rogue cell sites.
Typically clumsy wording on my part, sorry.
I meant that hardening of cellphones and cell services will never occur, if IMSI catchers are only available to the authorities. Law enforcement groups will lobby against hardening because increased public security makes their jobs less convenient. Cellphone providers will lobby against it because that would mean spending some of their profits on service improvements.
But… the technology to make IMSI catchers is quickly becoming available to anyone, so maybe lawmakers will start taking public privacy and security a bit more seriously, and the cellphone industry will start taking steps to secure their products against attack. Maybe.
Whatever the providers do, the Justice Department will be standing before Congress demanding some sort of magical backdoor for themselves.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
