You'd be mistaken for thinking that an administration whose president has two daughters close in age to this survivor might somehow, someway be circumspect about this kind of thing. Or that the President himself would be outraged over such awful behavior and, well, do something. But this administration, from top to bottom, strains credulity. It really does.
There are apps, usually referred to as IMSI-catcher-detectors. They often require a rooted or jail broken phone. And, it's unclear how successful they are. But they claim to be able to tell when your phone is being spoofed by an IMSI catcher such as a Stingray, as well as to detect when you are receiving possibly malicious SMS messages that are attempting to manipulate your phone. A quick search of the keywords "IMSI", "catcher", and "detector" will bring up a good number of sites for you to peruse.
I nominate Unredacticus to be the new superhero our country desperately needs. The one that will rid us of the crypto-nazis, criminals, and cowpods that populate the Department of Justice. It, and it's staff, have become a threat to the common good. And this under a "liberal" president who fancies himself a constitutional scholar? Spare us, Unredacticus!
The U.S. Department of Justice appears in no small way to have increasingly become a criminal enterprise. In general as an agency, and through various of the agencies it oversees, like the FBI, it has blatantly violated constitutional rights of Americans. It is a critical vehicle for other agencies with which it operates, like the NSA, DEA, and local law enforcement agencies, too, in their onslaught against constitutional and other legal protections for citizens. Maybe it's time it was investigated, and it's staff prosecuted, as the criminal enterprise it is, under the RICO statutes, beginning with past and present Attorneys General. A fantasy, I realize. But we can always hope.
Maybe it's time DOJ was understood to mean Dumb Old Joke, since that's what they seem to be becoming, between the antics of the FBI, the total disregard that DOJ has for public and congressional sentiment about stopping mass domestic spying, and so on. A dumb old joke, but one that's increasingly reckless, out of control and dangerous to the constitutional and legal rights of American citizens and others.
There are a couple other negatives: recording and security:
Recording the nanoform can't be done yourself, but must necessarily be done by the manufacturer. That's just not suited to widespread acceptance by individuals, companies or governments. It also presumes a great deal of trust that the manufacturer will maintain appropriate privacy over what could be somewhat to very sensitive data.
Anothe aspect of the nanoform is that it affords no security in itself. No passwording, no encrypting. That could be a major consideration depending on what someone put on their nanoform, since if it feel fell into the wrong hands, it would very easy to access using the same devices (microscope, scanner, magnifying glass, etc). About the only security would be physically locking up the disk as one might do with jewelry, art, cash, etc.
Along with the disadvantage you noted, these two help to make this rather more impracticable than would seem at first glance.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Ima Dork.
(untitled comment)
Re: dumb idea
Re: Re: countermeasures
(untitled comment)
treated any differently than anyone else...who works in a law enforcement agency or capacity.
(untitled comment)
Re: Re:
(untitled comment)
The DOJ's up to it again
Maybe it's time DOJ was understood to mean Dumb Old Joke, since that's what they seem to be becoming, between the antics of the FBI, the total disregard that DOJ has for public and congressional sentiment about stopping mass domestic spying, and so on. A dumb old joke, but one that's increasingly reckless, out of control and dangerous to the constitutional and legal rights of American citizens and others.
More bad
Recording the nanoform can't be done yourself, but must necessarily be done by the manufacturer. That's just not suited to widespread acceptance by individuals, companies or governments. It also presumes a great deal of trust that the manufacturer will maintain appropriate privacy over what could be somewhat to very sensitive data.
Anothe aspect of the nanoform is that it affords no security in itself. No passwording, no encrypting. That could be a major consideration depending on what someone put on their nanoform, since if it feel fell into the wrong hands, it would very easy to access using the same devices (microscope, scanner, magnifying glass, etc). About the only security would be physically locking up the disk as one might do with jewelry, art, cash, etc.
Along with the disadvantage you noted, these two help to make this rather more impracticable than would seem at first glance.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Ima Dork.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt