“It also makes you think that if the FBI has this capability, who else does? Can your business competition use your cell phone to monitor your planning sessions? Who needs a bug when you can use your competitions cell phone against them?”
Just curious, Michele. Did you view this as a problem BEFORE Obama won the election and took office?

Marcm, some of us were opposed to the “Patriot Act” a long time ago. (Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt for my sweetie).
Michele asks about business competition, you bring in Obama. funny.

I’m pretty sure this is an urban legend.

Just take the battery out of the phone, then the system won’t work. Or put it in mylar.

This is an old story and I hadn’t heard of it. It doesn’t appear to be an urban legend, either.
I don’t wear my cell phone; when it isn’t charging in the kitchen, I keep it in the car. So, the FBI will hear whatever drive-time music I listen to, whatever DVD the kids are watching and whatever petty argument we’re having.
Fun.

How many FBI people would it take to listen to every conversation in America? And how boring would that be?

On a related issue:
60 Minutes – today
Bruce Schneier an internationally renowned security technologist and author. One of my “security guru” heroes.
He will be talking about TSA security screening. Schneier became famous for developing cryptography codes. He is a grown-up hippie computer nerd that is refreshingly blunt. He has testified before Congress.
Since 9/11 he has focused on airport security – most of which he calls “security theater” that wastes considerable money.
See his website for links to some of his writings about airport security.
http://tinyurl.com/8gprnt
Airport Pasta-Sauce Interdiction Considered Harmful
The TSA’s Useless Photo ID Rules
Airline Security a Waste of Cash
Airplane Security and Metal Knives

Julie, what do you think about the *post*? Cell phones and all that?

A comment on the man in the video. I have only seen Shepard (Shep) Smith a few times during the afternoon. From what I have seen, he is great! He has an independent spirit that is not intimidated by Sean Hannnity.
The answer is yes – the cell phone microphone can be turned on when the phone is off.
I just spent some time checked my guru’s site. I knew wireless had extensive security weaknesses, but it is far worse than I thought. New technology allows obtaining signals in the air by companies other than the teleco companies (Sprint, Verizon, AT&T, etc)
A company sells software that is advertized for people wanting to spy on their spouse.
Bruce Schneier first wrote about the possibility of turning on a cell phone microphone in 2006.
December 5, 2006
Remotely Eavesdropping on Cell Phone Microphones
“I give a talk called “The Future of Privacy,” where I talk about current and future technological developments that erode our privacy. One of the things I talk about is auditory eavesdropping, and I hypothesize that a cell phone microphone could be turned on surreptitiously and remotely.
I never had any actual evidence one way or the other, but the technique has surfaced in an organized crime prosecution:”
May 10, 2006 – When “Off” Doesn’t Mean Off
Nintendo Wii (new game machine)
July 28, 2005 – Automatic Surveillance Via Cell Phone
Your cell phone company knows where you are all the time. (Well, it knows where your phone is whenever it’s on.) Turns out there’s a lot of information to be mined in that data.

I love Bruce Schneier; he’s definitely one of us.

Power switches are between the batteries and circuits, and when you turn it off it cuts off the power to the circuitry. How then can anything be heard? Doesn’t make sense.

“Marcm, some of us were opposed to the ‘Patriot Act’ a long time ago.”
marcm addressed the question to michele, since she authored the lead post. while at the time she expended her energy attacking dems and rights groups who were against the patriot act, i’m pretty sure that she had little bad to say about the patriot act or on the u.s. government spying on its own citizens. until now.
maybe for once you can let michele answer for herself. it would be a nice break from her malkin parroting and it would give your keyboard a rest.

Julie said: He has an independent spirit that is not intimidated by Sean Hannnity.
Boris says: Huh? I’ve never seen anyone intimidated by Sean Hannity. Hannity is an uneducated, willfully ignorant, racist blowhard just like Limbaugh, O’Reilly and the rest of the neo-con nutballs.

maybe for once you can let michele answer for herself. it would be a nice break from her malkin parroting and it would give your keyboard a rest.
Wow…it must really offend you when a conservative doesn’t fall into your broad-brush categories.
the liberal commenters far outweigh conservatives and you are basically telling me to “sit down and shut up”.
The liberal way of dealing with those who disagree with them?
False accusations? Check
Shushing? Check
Labeling disagreeing politically as “lying”? Check
Got it. Won’t buy into it, but I got the MO.

“…you are basically telling me to ‘sit down and shut up’”.
i’m doing no such thing. no, by all means, continue… but every time you answer for michele, you only add to the perception that you two are one and the same. last i checked, she’s still capable of typing, she just avoids the discussions that follow her hit and run style of posting. i’d like her to answer marcm (although i’m pretty sure i know already) since the comment was directed to her.
“the liberal commenters far outweigh conservatives”
are you calling liberals fat? i’m kidding – i know you’re playing the “pity me, the outnumbered and the oppressed” skit…
“it must really offend you when a conservative doesn’t fall into your broad-brush categories”
HA! exactly the opposite! i find it completely refreshing when a republican doesn’t fit the current “conservative” mold – sadly, i just don’t find it often enough.
so let’s analyze your newest claim, that the “liberal way of dealing with those who disagree with them” includes “shushing:” marcm disagrees with michele on eavesdropping during the bush administration, so marcm engages her in a discussion… that’s shushing? um… you’re wrong again. isn’t it you and zz (and other conservative participants) that tell us if we disagree to go to a different blog? so, what’s that on your part? some might call it a false accusation. on the last item, it’s my opinion that any accusation of “lying” comes from continuously making claims without facts to back it up, when there is actually evidence to the contrary. i won’t call you a liar for having your facts wrong about the obama/ayers thing (as i pointed out already), but… will you continue to make the claim without providing evidence to prove it? sure, mccain and palin can disagree with obama on taxes, but both repeatedly lied about obama’s tax plan. don’t tell us that you don’t understand the difference.
now, the title of the post says “fbi can eavesdrop…” and michele glosses over that to take issue with the possibility that this is just another tool in competitive capitalism. so, i want to know, michele, do you have a problem with the fbi/cia using this as tool to invade privacy? are you only worried about corporations misusing the capability (hey, the government sets a standard for others to follow by setting aside the law when it’s inconvenient)? didn’t you see this coming during the bush administration when he initiated these actions?

Henrietta22: Beats me. The entire story sounds pretty ridiculous to me. (and I am an engineer with experience in building communications device circuitry.)
I noticed that Fox News conveniently omitted the details on how you would do such a thing, probably because the story is a fake and there are no such details.
Scientific coverage on Fox News lost all credibility for me a couple years ago when they ran their infamous “water car” story. I don’t think there’s a single person in the newsroom who actually understands science.

This story has been circulated to take ur mind off the alien DNA being implanted via flu shots.