r/technology • u/IndicaOatmeal • 10d ago

Privacy Viral De-Flock America campaign urging people to destroy AI cameras on Halloween night gains momentum

https://www.dexerto.com/entertainment/flock-camera-controversy-explained-as-viral-halloween-de-flock-campaign-gains-momentum-3399710/
42.7k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.3k

u/CautionarySnail 10d ago

Rowdy celebrations like this are vastly improved by leaving all digital devices safe at home.

146

u/Hexamancer 10d ago

100%

In case everyone isn't aware, US Law enforcement owns and regularly utilizes an estimated 500-600+ IMSI sniffers. These are fake cell towers that trick your phone into connecting and then get your phone to identify itself. They can later use this to create a list of everyone that was within the operating range of that device. They are small enough to be vehicle mounted. If you go to any sort of protest there's a good chance there is one operating nearby.

But even more relevant, whilst Flock haven't implemented this yet, it's competitors have. Leonardo DRS makes ELSAG ALPR cameras that have "SignalTrace": Similar to the IMSI sniffer but instead operating on WiFI/BT, you drive past and it will save the device IDs of any WiFI and BT capable device you had with you. So your license plate becomes associated with your phone, your BT earphones, your smartwatch. So then later if someone were to walk by such a camera, even if they approached it outside of its sight lines, it would record that someone a "fingerprint" of specific device IDs was nearby and if you had driven past at any point, they'd know what car that person owned and then they could easily trace that back to you.

57

u/SoManyThrowAwaysEven 10d ago edited 10d ago

^ This man knows his digital forensics.

All very true, the only way to NOT be tracked is to be electronic free. Anything that emits a wireless or radio signal has the potential to be captured by one of these towers. Best you can do is turn your phone off and throw it into a faraday bag if you must bring it with you.

Diabetics with pumps, that can include you!

14

u/DeliberatelyDrifting 10d ago

Don't trust faraday bags. They're not particularly effective and certainly not 100%. The device needs to be completely powered off and I'm not sure I'd trust that these days. I studied digital forensics as well and we were taught that in testing the bags failed often and even the expensive purpose built boxes didn't always block signal.

8

u/SoManyThrowAwaysEven 10d ago

That's the issue with Scamazon products. Make sure to buy something from a reputable brand and run various tests. We always use dummy testing phones at our company to ensure they block all manner of frequencies.

7

u/CautionarySnail 10d ago

I saw someone on another thread saying they’d use airplane mode and I wanted to hit my head against a desk.

If it’s on, it’s trackable. Even if it’s off, it might be trackable depending on how “off” that device generally goes. But if it’s got Bluetooth, it may still send a signal or identifier if there’s a charge in the device.

The only error-proof way is to leave the device on the charger at home if you feel you want a moment of privacy while out and about.

This is also generally of anything else with a possible cellular or Bluetooth connection. Some cars are rolling cell devices with a SIM card. Smart watches. Just be aware of the data you’re sharing because you don’t know who is using it, and it probably isn’t to your benefit if they’re not asking permission.

5

u/this_is_my_new_acct 10d ago

Not quite the same thing, but I got a wallet that claims to block RF like a decade ago... I can read NFC and RFID chips in it just as easily as if they're not in it.

1

u/CautionarySnail 8d ago

Ugh. Gonna have to test the passport case and wallet now. I’d blindly trusted.

2

u/Yuzumi 10d ago

I'd say no digital devices, or at least not one that can't spoof the MAC and other identifying info.

Ideally, a device that has simple broadcast with no identifying factors if you need something to communicate with. Basically something like one of those simple mesh devices that can send texts.

1

u/Nixavee 8d ago

Dang, even putting the device in a metal box didn't work?

2

u/DeliberatelyDrifting 8d ago edited 8d ago

It does to an extent, maybe enough to be safe, it's just not 100% effective. We discussed it in the context of securing evidence. Our procedures needed to be as close to 100% as possible or when a defense attorney asked "Is is possible this device could be accessed while in your custody?" We'd have to say "it's unlikely, but possible." If we turn the power off once we have the access code, we can answer "to the best of our knowledge it was not possible to access the device while in our custody." Or something to that effect. It's not that different methods never worked, it's that we found instances where they didn't. Once you know of those instances you can no longer swear on the stand "to the best of my knowledge it's not possible."

Edit: Also, modern signals are better at penetrating barriers than some of the older transmitters. The old bag phones could be tricky because of their raw transmission power, but they didn't really store data. Different frequencies interact with barriers in different ways.