What's new

SEVERE IPHONE/TAPATALK SECURITY WARNING

Grat3fulh3ad

The Voice of Reason
Veteran
Our Secret Security Establishment: the Big Picture

At the ACLU we’ve warned regularly about the dangers of our gigantic national security establishment — whether in calling for increased oversight, fixes for runaway government secrecy, in our report on the emerging public-private “Surveillance-Industrial Complex,” and in many other places.

Now the Washington Post has issued a major new investigative report on what it calls “Top Secret America” — a geographically sprawling network of secret government agencies with a budget of $75 billion. Based on the Post’s reporting, it is no exaggeration to say that our secret intelligence establishment has spun out of control.

The report — the first in a series of three to be published this week — contains amazing new hard reporting that confirms what has long been known to those who pay attention.

The national security establishment is out of control.
The fact is, bureaucracies almost always seek to expand their own power and budgets. Add secrecy powers that protect them from independent public oversight, ineffective oversight by Congress and even from within the executive branch, and mix in ever-expanding budgets, and you’ve got a recipe for an out-of-control security establishment:

The Post reports that 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence at 10,000 locations across the United States.
Two-thirds of the intelligence programs reside in the Department of Defense — a worrisome militarization of our intelligence capabilities, especially at a time when those capabilities are increasingly being turned inward upon the American people.
The $75 billion intelligence budget is 2 ½ times its size before 9/11. The budget of the NSA doubled between 2002 and today.
There is no person or agency with the “authority, responsibility or a process in place to coordinate all these activities,” in the words of one official. “There's only one entity in the entire universe that has visibility on all” secret programs, the Obama administration's nominee to be the next director of national intelligence told the Post. “That’s God.” However, since men are not angels, as James Madison wrote, checks and balances on government power are crucial, and that state of affairs is frightening and unacceptable.
Since there is no one overseeing all this, there is also no way of knowing how effective it all is. One top general complained to the Post, for example, that the National Counterterrorism Center “never produced one shred of information that helped me prosecute three wars!”


The government is drowning in information.
As I’ve written before, computers are the dominant metaphor of our age and everyone thinks we can stop evil in the world if we can just collect enough data. But the Post paints a stark portrait of hundreds of government agencies drowning in data, as government systems vacuum up vast quantities of information about daily activities across the planet in the unlikely hope of discovering useful information. Unsurprisingly, the government cannot possibly make sense of all that data:

The National Security Agency is intercepting 1.7 billion emails, phone calls and other communications per day.
Analysts publish 50,000 intelligence reports each year.
“The overload of hourly, daily, weekly, monthly and annual reports is actually counterproductive, say people who receive them,” the Post reports.
Out-of-control secrecy is counterproductive.
The United States created a system for allowing government workers to hide information from the public that is supposed to be their ultimate boss, and from the beginning, that power has been misused by bureaucracies to increase their power and hide waste and abuse. The Post reports examples showing how:

Secrecy means that different organizations throughout the government often work on the same issues, creating enormous redundancy.
Secrecy undermines the chain of command, as bureaucrats abuse it to keep rivals out of the loop, and subordinates find they are required to keep secrets from their bosses or commanders.
Secrecy is abused to protect ineffective projects and evade oversight. The CIA reclassified information at a higher level of classification than it had previously thought necessary, the Post reports, in order to prevent officials at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) from seeing it.
The Washington Post and the authors of this piece have not only done some very good investigative reporting, but they also do what the media too seldom does: use that reporting to take a step back from the day-to-day details of life inside government and show the big picture.

A civil liberties issue
It’s important to recognize that is not just a question of whether the redundant, ineffective, in-fighting bureaucracies described by the Post represent a good use of our nation’s treasure. The growth of the secret security state is a civil liberties issue.

The presence of what the Post (in an online video accompanying its article) calls a “Fourth Branch of Government” outside those created by our Founders should give all Americans pause. The fact that this “branch” is one that operates under a veil of secrecy and with little oversight makes it all the worse. And above all, we should not forget that a lot of these agencies’ activities are harming innocent people. Travel and financial watchlists are created. Names are added (often for obscure reasons) but not subtracted. Americans are spied upon for political reasons. Personal communications are eavesdropped upon on a stunning scale. And the bureaucratic curtain of secrecy often gives individuals no way to defend their rights.

Action needed
The ACLU is doing everything we can to raise awareness of these problems. Most recently, we announced the launch of a new “Spyfiles” web page focused on political spying.

But unless Congress takes action, this problem is only going to get worse. Congress needs to sharply increase its oversight of “Top Secret America” — in particular by:

Taking a close look at the individual programs it’s funding
Whether those programs are delivering value commensurate with their budgets
Whether management of the national security establishment as a whole needs to be reevaluated
Whether that establishment as a whole makes sense in its current size and shape
Of course, Congress isn’t entirely to blame — in 2007 it did create an independent Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board with some significant powers for overseeing anti-terrorism efforts. But, the Obama administration has failed to appoint anybody to that board. Like Congress, the administration too must recognize the importance of solving these problems, lest its legacy for future generations of Americans be a secret security establishment that continues to waste money and violate individual rights.
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-s...our-secret-security-establishment-big-picture
 

monkey5

Active member
Veteran
Wow!

Wow!

throw aways + texting ftw.

Grat3fulh3ad, Yeah, I've always not trusted this high teck..stuff.. i'll text:"my lips to your ear"....then, who i'm talking to knows i want to see them and talk! I say/text... nothing! Nothing important any way! STAY SAFE BROTHERS! monkey5
 
S

Serrated Edges

1) Don't do illegal biz on your iPhone

2) Jailbreak your phone and you can wipe those stored screen shots, among other security hack you can install from Cydia.

3) You can Remote Wipe with a MobileMe account.

My girl got busted a while back, and I figured it out using Mobile Me, the GPS on the phone traced to somewhere it shouldn't of, and I immediately did a Remote Wipe on the phone. Cops went through the phone as much as they could, but it was fully wiped, just like a brand new iPhone out of the box.

You can use an iPhone, but you have to be tech savvy. Don't be the consumer and get caught....
 

Yes4Prop215

Active member
Veteran
Damn ive been wanting to upgrade my phone...i want to be able to have internet and shit on the go.

is there any alternatives to this? i can just get an iphone and NEVER use it to talk about illegal shit.
 

mobudda

Member
If you care about security you should NEVER talk about anything sensitive on the cell phone network unless it's via a PC.

I would not trust any mobile platform currently on the market because they are all immature.

Secondly Apple has a horrible track record for security and the only reason it's desktops aren't that bad is because took all the code from BSD.. a UNIX clone.

Thus as Apple keeps tweaking their OS's get less and less secure and this shows in most of the recent hacking competitions. On top of that Apple supports mass censorship and that alone should have you scared of using their products.

If you must use their phone don't considering yourself secure regardless of what apps you are using. Apple is simply too controlling to be a good OS maker. Microsoft may suck, but they endorse third party software and rather than hide behind proprietary design and secrecy. If you truly want security you have to use Unix or Linux as those are the only secure OSs around. Apple had a good OS, but they are quickly ruining it and their business model is the worst around. I would not trust them on anything personally. That's not to say they can't make decent products of have good ideas it's just to say you can't trust them. They care vastly more about meeting their own demands than their users. Apple has a vision they want push on people rather than the other way around.

MS gets the label as the evil empire, but in the end MS won the OS wars because they supported third party apps and hardware and have a far more open operating system. Apple has never fully learned from their foolish business model and much of their security comes from eliminating choice.

I would personally trust google 100 times more than Apple but I still wouldn't use my cell phone, encrypted or not, to communicate secure data. There is simply no mature cellular platform that offers security.
 

Hundred Gram Oz

Our Work is Never Over
Veteran
Nice thread, Rez

If you have sensitive information that you want to keep sensitive then communicate via handwritten notes which are encrypted, change the encryption codes after each use, write out your note in a series of codes like below. Write in very small handwriting, wrap the note in cling film, burn the loose ends to seal and put it into your mouth (around your gums) until the note is delivered, this way if you see trouble coming you can swallow the note and your information stays with you.

Encryption examples:

CRX14ZIE / 24 Hours.
WED35DS / Meeting at OP.
POK32KIL / Police Everywhere.
ZDZ11UTY / Dummy Run Tonight.

Mobile phones are a blessing for the police, never use them if you want to keep safe, your laptop is also very vulnerable, hackers can easily access your computer remotely and track everything you do, including listening to your mic and looking at your webcam, the virus will remain encrypted meaning it will be fully undetected (FUD) from all anti-virus software. There are ways to detect if your being monitored by a hacker, pm me if you need some help.

There are forums out there that forensic cops use to discuss different techniques for data recovery, its a good idea to monitor them so you know exactly what your up against.

Be Safe All.

HGO
 
Last edited:
I'm running an android phone thats rooted. I'm thinking if I can boot into nandroid and do a full wipe of data and cache that would take care things right?
 

angel4us

Active member
ICMag Donor
reverse mic cell phones

reverse mic cell phones

i was having thanksgiving dinner last year when my neices "boyfreind" started getting teased about his recent trip to jailhouse . and when i asked him for what ? he told me they reversed my phone AGAIN. and i was like what? again? reversed your phone?????? apparentely the police can use anyones cell phone and use it as a microphone . they did it twice to him in two completely different investigations/cases.
 

midgethorse

Member
"i was having thanksgiving dinner last year when my neices "boyfreind" started getting teased about his recent trip to jailhouse . and when i asked him for what ? he told me they reversed my phone AGAIN. and i was like what? again? reversed your phone?????? apparentely the police can use anyones cell phone and use it as a microphone . they did it twice to him in two completely different investigations/cases."


No freakin way, I would like more to this story if you care to share.
Midgethorse.
 
T

tokinafaty420

Any blue tooth device can be used as a microphone even if the device is powered off. The only way to prevent it is to take the battery out.
 

midgethorse

Member
I understand that, I was curious about angel saying Leo used it against her neices boyfriend.
We know what they can do, but need to hear more about them actually putting these tactics to work.
Midgethorse
 

prophecy

Member
If the phone keep everything...why I still have A LOT of Mo on it?

Anyway, just don't use the word weed on your phone, EVER! Don't go on cannabis forum with it! Don't take picture of your grow with it! Why you should have problem?

I think this thread is for them who sell like 30000$ of cannabis every months. For auto production they will not lose their time...
 
The iPhone info was very useful, and something I had not come across before, so thanks, but I thought this was ICMAG (International Cannagraphic Magazine) and not POEHMESCMAG (People Of European Heritage Making Ethnic Slurs Cannagraphic Magazine). Please see below, you could have just as easily said "corner mart" instead of what you chose to say:


From The Times
January 12, 2009
More than an ordinary four-letter word
Why is Paki an unacceptable word, but not Brit? Because of Britain's bitter racial history
Murad Ahmed

Our little Paki friend... Ahmed.” Oh boy. I've heard that one before.

But not as recently as the friends I spoke to yesterday in Oldham, a place where racial tensions spilled into riots not long ago. Apparently, they still get called Paki all the time. By whom? “Oh, just little kids on the street. What can you do? They're only children.”

Prince Harry is not a child. He is unlucky only in that, unlike most young men, his worst moments end up splashed across the front page of newspapers. That he thought it acceptable to use the word Paki to refer to a Pakistani colleague represents a pathetic failure in his upbringing. Someone, somewhere along the line - a wise grandparent perhaps - should have told him to cut it out. These days the word Paki is used only by those who don't know any better, rather than by those who should.

The Equalities and Human Rights Commission thinks that we need an inquiry into the Prince's behaviour. What would we discover? That the third in line to the throne is a bit of an idiot? That is an open-and-shut case. But we should have an inquiry about the word Paki.

Prince Harry's three-year-old remarks have opened up a new debate about words. Some people have asked why, if it is acceptable to use “Brit” to refer to British people, and “Aussie” to describe an Australian, what's wrong with using Paki for Pakistanis?

Simple. It's because of history.

Paki is a word from a different age - one where it would be spat out just before an Asian received a swift Doc Marten boot to the head. It was more often heard in the phrase “go home, Paki” than “my Paki friend.”. It was intended to be a form of violence and intimidation towards immigrants who had come to these shores from the Indian subcontinent. It became, through its very use, racist.

To put it politely, anyone who thinks that the word Paki is acceptable is unaware of this sordid history or unable to understand its significance. Put another way, if you think that it's all right to call someone a Paki you're ignorant or stupid. See how using words in a certain way can come across as insulting or cruel? That's the point. Words are powerful, and we should take care how we use them.

Some Asians call each other Paki, just as some black people call each other “nigger” - to reverse the exclusion that each term implies. “A white man's nigger is my brother,” they are trying to say and, therefore, they are the only ones allowed to say it. Anyway, I still remain unconvinced that Asians have embraced the word Paki as a form of cultural pride. Five years ago a fashion designer created a clothing label called “PAK1”. It never caught on. Many thought that having the word emblazoned across their chest merely invited abuse or legitimised the word.

And even when Paki is used within the Asian community, it is still considered hurtful by many - an all-purpose, generic insult, applied to Indians and Bangladeshis as well as to Pakistanis, without the relief of any positive, postmodern connotations.

Context is key. It can be funny to make light of racism and the stupidity of it, but it is a delicate game. Whenever a photograph of a suspected al-Qaeda operative appeared in the paper, a colleague would point it out and say, goofily: “That's your dad, that is.” He was ridiculing the stereotype: Asian-man-plus-beard-equals-terrorist.

In return, I jokingly called him an infidel. It might not be your brand of humour, but we found our banter hilarious. I can imagine it being OK to use the word Paki ironically - but only if the joke was on the racist, not on the brown person.

With Prince Harry's comments, while his use of the word Paki is offensive, taken in context, his use of the word “raghead” - referring to Arabs - is not. Raghead is commonly used in the Armed Forces, to refer to the enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan. If someone is shooting at you, it's understandable that you might come up with a term for them that is less than flattering. Like no other place, the battlefield really is a “them and us” situation, where politeness and racial sensitivities are not high on the agenda.

That's why the focus is on the word Paki.

It's not just another nasty four-letter word. The outrage isn't another example of creeping political correctness. It's about the experience of immigrant communities in Britain and the struggles that they endured when they came here in the Sixties and Seventies.

For Asians, there was once a time when it was no surprise that an authority figure, speaking in the Queen's English, would call someone a Paki. Just get on with it, thought many, we're the outsiders here.

Now that we are in the mainstream, Brits, Asian or otherwise, bristle when they hear the word Paki, because its use is so rare and outrageous. The tabloids capture this mood across the country. That, at least, is progress.
 

jkowner

New member
Hi, long time lurker first time poster.... as I read this about the screen shots. It reminded me when my first Droid was going tits up I put all my pictures on the computer before my new one came in..... well in doing so I noticed about 400 random shots from websites and other camra shots I never took andcouldnt see untill downloading all pictures onto my computer.
 
I

IE2KS_KUSH

Re: SEVERE IPHONE/TAPATALK SECURITY WARNING

Those are cached images from sites you visit with the mobile browser its not a big deal though.
 

ExEcutioner

Member
Everytime I see something like this said, I think to myself, "Right. Cause cops really have the resources/time to pay any attention whatsoever to Joe Blo who says "weed" on the phone. That's probably only a million people - or maybe 100x that - every single freakin day."

My take, if they're watching you closely enough to have read your text messages or listened to your phone calls, you're already caught. I really doubt it's the impetus of a bust, ever.

No disrespect but SHUT THE FUCK UP WHEN u dont know what the fuck you are talking about..... FUCKER i was getting fake texts ostensibly as my friends who carelessly texted me for what they wanted..... and my phone convos sounded like they were bein tapped.....and no fucker they didnt get me......

please can we fucking work toward solutions and no misinformation and your bullshit baseless theories... that stuff happens
 
thxs for post this shit is scary especially with these LEO, like the ones in NYC who will lie on their mothers just to make a case stick. Many have been arrested for driving with a bag of smoke because somehow the LEO are able to see whatever it is, smoke or a gun which is hidden under the seat or in the glove compartment. Somehow they have better vision than the six million dollar man that they can see whatever it might be from their vehicles. Jury doesnt care and will always believe them..
 
Top