Like, we all know they’re listening , but can we provide proof?
My friend was complaining about all the new super surveillance that will be government required in cars after 2027, and I said to him dude you have a stock android, you use every AI slop feature, you use a smart TV on your unsecured network, and uses x every day. They have everything they could possibly need on him. Oh and he posts questionable things to fb daily under his real name.
Here’s court cases lost by Google and Apple
Also, whenever monolithic megacorporations not recording you directly, virtually everyone is still buying any data about you they can get from actual malware distributing criminals.
Microphone hijacking is real and commonplace. (Edit: Fixed link thanks to some feedback.)
The malware vendors sell what they learn about us on black markets. And in net effect, everyone is buying from them.
They “Privacy Wash” the things they learn from the illegal recordings, by passing them from one disreputable broker to another. Each broker can keep poor quality records of exactly where they got their data. Pretty soon it’s just “part of your digital fingerprint” and “can’t be helped”.
Thanks for providing links but I don’t trust the ny post.
Here’s a story where people working for Apple got access to audio recorded during seemingly unwanted times like during sex.
But I imagine these people were enabling voice recording in the first place. I trust my phone not to record if I disable those features (though sometimes they make this difficult).
I think Apple is generally better about this stuff then other companies though? Since they actually went to court to protect e2e encryption.
Lastly, if youre someone of interest to powerfull people, there are otherways they can use your phone against you like with pegasus:
I don’t trust my smartdevices farther than I can throw them. Hence, I run GrapheneOS.
One’s a settlement with a blanket denial of guilt for Siri and Google Assistant. At least mild circumstantial evidence, because there’s a real mechanism (accidental activation and recording) is identified, but no proof, and certainly no proof of an ongoing intentional data broker style program. But at least enough of a pain that they won a settlement. So that counts as a trace of meaningful circumstantial evidence.
But the second one is just a link to sell you a product that doesn’t provide any evidence whatsoever and doesn’t even pretend to, it discusses the possibility in vague generalities as something hackable and tries to sell you a product. I’m baffled as to why you think that counts as a source.
I’m baffled as to why you think that counts as a source.
I mean, just Google it. Microphone hacking is a thing. (Edit: You know what, Let me Google that for you.)
I only felt obligated to grab a link grabbed because folks keep repeating the misinformation that “no one is hacking your phone microphone, or it would be in the news”. It’s just not news anymore.
Android and iOS malware will try to grab stuff off of your microphone.
It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s not news.
Malware actors do malware things, and sell whatever they can harvest.
You don’t need a microphone, any speaker can be a microphone.
https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/154343/can-a-speaker-be-used-as-a-microphone
It’s not logically sound, but at this point the burden of proof needs to be on Big Tech if they want to claim they’re not spying. Otherwise we’d have to prove it for each individual model, and that isn’t feasible, and only supports the opposition.
Wait. Government required in cars?
Yep 2027 head and eye tracking with llms that dictate if you’re tired.
That’s fucking hilarious. I am tired if I’m breathing. Guess I’m getting a disability check soon.
Link?
One of many,
https://www.gadgetreview.com/federal-surveillance-tech-becomes-mandatory-in-new-cars-by-2027
"The tech involves infrared cameras mounted on steering columns or A-pillars, tracking eye movement, pupil dilation, and drowsiness patterns. Unlike the breathalyzer ignition interlocks from DUI convictions, these systems operate passively—no blowing required. Your car simply watches and decides whether you’re fit to drive.
If the AI determines you’re impaired (blood alcohol ≥0.08% or showing fatigue), it can prevent ignition startup or limit vehicle speed. Think Minority Report, but for your morning commute."
Not that new cars aren’t already tracked every moment and government controlled, they are. This is just a worse version of it.
And fuck me not even here did I see or any of my automotive adjacent family had mentioned or knew of this. Fuck thats grim
Think of something you’ve never mentioned or discussed before, then out of nowhere, start having a conversation with a friend about it, how much you like it and are thinking about getting it, taking lessons etc then see what happens over the next week on either your or your friend’s ads (turn off ad blocker if you use one).
I recommend something completely unusual for most people like an instrument (didgeridoo or cowbell)
The thing I find so funny about all of this is that people would rather believe that their phone is spying on them with the Mic that there is no proof of. Then what is more likely the truth you are not as unique as you think you are and they have so much data on you they have no reason to spy on what you say because they know you better then you know yourself (we lie to ourselves).
But yes it is easier for people to believe the mic is spying on them because thy can’t or won’t accept the more likely option.Thank you. Had to scroll way too far to read this. People on here are not as technical as I thought.
Found the sane comment. What we know for sure is that a combination of browser fingerprinting, de-anonymization (you can take anonymized hashed emails and compare them to hashes of known emails), and the third party broker marketplace that they can predict things with disturbing specificity like pregnancy, and obesity, to hidden patterns you might not even realize are in the data.
Plus there’s enough statistically informed shots in the dark that drive specific ads that, sometimes, they strike with perfect resonance. That’s enough to explain uncanny similarity. And the microphone listening thing is still plausible, but without stone cold proof it’s just a guess, and it overestimates how much data they need to be able to track you and sell you shit.
Every device made to receive voice commands (Smart TVs, Amazon Echo) WILL listen to everything you say.
And if they provide a button or setting to turn that off you are relying on trusting them to comply with it (I don’t think they do and even if they are found doing it they will probably pay a minuscule fine for it)
Aside from devices that acknowledge theyre listening all the time there actually isnt any, for undisclosed data collection via microphone specifically. Research has, to my knowledge, never found that to be the case
Researchers have generally explained that they dont need to listen to what you say with a microphone- they collect so much data about you they can accurately model what you’re likely to have any interest in, and when that happens frequently enough confirmation bias takes over.
That being said, yes, that person is having all of their data collected, by meta directly and through cookies tracking them around the web. By google and android. By ai, and other companies. By the tracking images in the emails they open. Etc. Theres lots of evidence for all of those things
And there is evidence for companies having collected data that people didnt concent to, like when google tracked location data that people opted out of sharing (there was a lawsuit) or meta recently ended up in the news for circumventing the sandboxing around the Facebook app to collect mobile web activity in a way they’re not supposed to be able to.
Aside from devices that acknowledge theyre listening all the time there actually isnt any, for undisclosed data collection via microphone specifically. Research has, to my knowledge, never found that to be the case
Please stop quoting this misinformation.
Microphone hijacking is real, and it is common. The average user has been a victitm of it.
And in addition, Google and Apple effectively admitted to microphone abuse in court.
Neither of those sources really disagree with what I said, though I do appreciate you adding the additional context because those things are worth knowing about
Smart speaker research: Security researchers have documented potential vulnerabilities in smart speakers and voice assistants.
• Mobile security: Documented cases of spyware accessing device microphones have been reported.
• Enterprise security: Organizations have reported incidents involving unauthorized audio access.
• Application permissions: Studies have shown some applications requesting unnecessary microphone access.
None of those are really the widespread, passive, undisclosed listening for advertising data that people imagine there to be and that OP appeared to be asking about. The google and apple lawsuit is about google assistant and siri triggering unintentionally, which is a feature that discloses its always listening which I mentioned at the very beginning
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/facebook-doesnt-need-listen-through-your-microphone-serve-you-creepy-ads old article but the eff is pretty reputable
Did they? I read the article and the conclusion is they got fined but didn’t admit to anything, nor was any proof shown that they did anything. The whole thing was about Siri getting activated by ambient noise.
Pre-tech, God and/or your conscience was always watching and listening. Now others are watching and listening too.
For example there was this one time where videos from robot vacuums leaked, including people shitting. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11562599/Robot-vacuum-cleaner-took-photos-woman-toilet-images-ended-Facebook.html
Tesla employees watched videos.
Tesla workers shared sensitive images recorded by customer cars | Reuters https://share.google/MJUtuy8pySKKhu8FW
They shared a video of a child getting hit because they found it amusing.
Fuck that tabloid, the Daily Mail… but there was the guy who was attempting to mod his robovac so he could control it with a PlayStation controller. The AI he was using to help ended up giving him keys that let him remotely access thousands of robovacs, including their cameras and mics.
Link for the event f4 is talking about:
and this is why I made sure to get a model without a camera D:
That is what I did too for the first one. My current vacuum uses valetudo as alternative firmware.
Regarding TVs, WikiLeaks’ Vault 7 publication in 2017 included “Weeping Angel”, CIA malware for Samsung TVs which streams audio from them while they’re in “fake off” mode.
https://mashable.com/article/cia-samsung-tv-hack-weeping-angel
Phones no one has proven it which I wouldn’t be hard. TV’s definitely do they even can tell what your watching from the video on the screen. I find it funny one is proven one is not but both believed.
Mark Zuckerberg puts a sticker over his laptop camera and microphone.
You can get sound from any speaker by hacking the electrical signals generated in reverse.
He also gave his famous opinion about Facebook users. Deep down, he agrees with privacy advocates. The diff is that he’s a shitty enough person to take advantage of the less techy people out there even if his society will be damaged badly in the process. Most of us are not that shitty.
they trust me
dumb fucks
I think we can move beyond Facebook here. Trusting big tech with your data never works out well.
the biggest hypocrites are tech CEO’s limiting their children’s screen time and forbidding social media
Are drug lords who are not actively overdosing on their adulterated products also hypocrites?
I mean kind of yeah
That’s called being a Sociopathic Oligarch
Many years ago this one was done https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBnDWSvaQ1I
And the explanation behind https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv8gvXPwWjY&t=0
So this proves it. Then his second video was made because the MIB came to his door. Got it.
They’re absolutely listening.
AFAIK this is the only evidence: a claim by a marketing company that they’re actually doing it. However, they have some reason to lie about this, bc it makes them sound all-knowing and powerful to their clients.
https://www.404media.co/cmg-cox-media-actually-listening-to-phones-smartspeakers-for-ads-marketing/
It is not the only evidence, as you say, but it is particularly good evidence.
