Your Phone Number Is All a Hacker Needs To Read Texts, Listen To Calls and Track You (theguardian.com) 98
Samuel Gibbs, reporting for The Guardian: Hackers have again demonstrated that no matter how many security precautions someone takes, all a hacker needs to track their location and snoop on their phone calls and texts is their phone number. The hack, first demonstrated by German security researcher Karsten Nohl in 2014 at a hacker convention in Hamburg, has been shown to still be active by Nohl over a year later for CBS's 60 Minutes. The hack uses the network interchange service called Signalling System No. 7 (SS7), also known as C7 in the UK or CCSS7 in the US, which acts as a broker between mobile phone networks. When calls or text messages are made across networks SS7 handles details such as number translation, SMS transfer, billing and other back-end duties that connect one network or caller to another. By hacking into or otherwise gaining access to the SS7 system, an attacker can track a person's location based on mobile phone mast triangulation, read their sent and received text messages, and log, record and listen into their phone calls, simply by using their phone number as an identifier.Also from the report, "60 Minutes contacted the cellular phone trade association to ask about attacks on the SS7 network. They acknowledged there have been reports of security breaches abroad, but assured us that all U.S. cellphone networks were secure." Update: 04/18 16:51 GMT by M :Reader blottsie writes: U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Cali.) on Monday called for a full congressional investigation into the aforementioned widespread flaw in global phone networks.
Soooo.... (Score:5, Insightful)
All they need is your phone number and access to the SS7 system.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
...which you can get from a number of websites for a buck...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
But GP's point is well taken. A hacker who is tapped into SS7 can eavesdrop on any conversation or texting. The "Your Phone Number" part is a minor point.
Re:Soooo.... (Score:5, Interesting)
And yeah, they don't even need your phone number, if you get access to the user's local network, figuring their phone number out is a breeze.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, the government has most likely told the Cellphone operators to *make it easy* for this work. After all, be it a "terrist" or a citizen, both must be tracked and surveilled upon in-case one becomes the other.
Re: (Score:2)
No, encryption is between the phone and cell base (Score:5, Informative)
No, the encryption is between the phone and base station, not inside SS7 network.
Re:Soooo.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Karsten Nohl and his team were legally granted access to SS7 by several international cellphone carriers. In exchange, the carriers wanted Nohl to test the network's vulnerability to attack. That's because criminals have proven they can get into SS7.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-hacking-your-phone/
But yeah, totally available from a number of websites for a buck. It was just easier to get the carriers to give him access since he didn't actually have a dollar handy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Soooo.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Which the government already has. Go back to sleep we're here for your protection.
Re: (Score:2)
And has had almost immediately after the invention of telephones [wikipedia.org].
Re: Soooo.... (Score:1)
Stingray don't need you number, can snoop on everyone in range simultaneously. And doesn't fuck with the network, leaves no evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I used to write software for MSCs, an important part of mobile SS7 networks. And, yeah, big surprise, if you hack the thing that handles transporting messages that use an antiquated half-assed standard like SMS, then you can see unencrypted stuff. SHOCK. And yes, you would likely be able to access billing messages, but that doesn't mean Credit Card numbers. Billing messages means, "your account has mad
Re: (Score:2)
... so who cares?"
The media. So they can scare you, make you read ads, and profit. And politicians, so they can scare you, make you vote for them, and profit.
Re: (Score:3)
All they need is your phone number and access to the SS7 system.
Getting access to SS7 isn't particularly [telcovillage.com] difficult [release14.org].
Re:Soooo.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The point being that the access to SS7 is the story, *not* something about the phone device itself or something inherent to your phone number. The headline put out there in the media is focusing attention in the wrong direction.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I disagree. They're focusing attention on the _correct_ thing... in that someone, EXTERNAL TO YOUR PHONE, can "read texts, listen to calls [sic missing Oxford comma] and track you".
Yes, they need access to SS7, but it's more surprising (IMHO) than the usual "anyone with physical access to your device could do anything" warnings, since they don't have physical access to your device.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that would be better written as the phone networks themselves have risks. The current writing is vague about who to worry about here. People concerned may complain to Google, Apple, the handset makers, et. al, but they *all* should be complaining to their service provider.
Stories are out there saying that if you get within miles of a hacker, they can eavesdrop on your phone. It still sounds like they are describing some sort of attack against your device. They make it worse by saying there are t
Re: (Score:3)
Also, phone number seems to imply "cell phone number". I only have landline.
Re: (Score:1)
May as well walk around naked (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Estimating Community Drug Abuse by Wastewater Analysis [nih.gov], Environ Health Perspect. 2008 Aug; 116(8): 1027–1032.
Wastewater analysis and drugs — a European multi-city study [europa.eu]
Re:May as well walk around naked (Score:5, Funny)
May as well walk around naked
Please don't
Re: (Score:2)
If you may as well, you'd be doing it, but you don't, because you know it's not the same.
Great argument.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Depends on the person. Some people are fine walking around naked, others (most) should be fully clothed at all times.
Uh duh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No need to panic, the US is safe. (Score:5, Funny)
"They acknowledged there have been reports of security breaches abroad, but assured us that all U.S. cellphone networks were secure."
Oh, so that's alright then.
Re: (Score:2)
att is hardwired to the NSA.
Re: (Score:2)
The NSA can put in a jail and trail with no jury no due process and limited attorneys rights.
Re:No need to panic, the US is safe. (Score:5, Funny)
"...but assured us that all U.S. cellphone networks were secure."
Best joke I've heard all day. Right up there with, "Don't worry, it's unloaded!" or "I'm sure he'll stop for us, we have the right of way!"
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There's some stuff you should never never put on a phone. Just like some stuff never never put on a computer that is connected to the internet.
Agreed 100%. I don't keep anything sensitive on my phone, period. For example, I don't do any banking from my phone. I don't use it for anything that could have what I think could might result in negative consequences to my finances or deeper personal data. Home address? Nope. Automated logins or stored passwords? Nope.
Most of the photos I take with it get transferred to a desktop PC and don't live on the phone. Not all, but most. The ones that remain are pretty innocuous. The police could search my phone t
Re:No need to panic, the US is safe. (Score:5, Insightful)
With apologies to Arthur C. Clarke:
When a distinguished but elderly computer scientist states that something is not secure he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is secure, he is very probably wrong.
dumb phones might be the smarter choice (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, the network referenced is the one used by dumb phones. In fact, it's strictly the subset of things that a dumb phone can do (e.g. a smart phone doing IP traffic using appropriately secure TLS would be better protection than SMS and voice calls over a cell phone).
Re: (Score:2)
Phone calls. Heh. (Score:2)
Wasn't SS7 used by the phreaks? (Score:2)
Surprised they are still using
Re:Wasn't SS7 used by the phreaks? (Score:5, Informative)
SS7 was the telco's efforts to block MFers using the "blue box"; Switching from in-band signalling to out-of-band signalling.
SS7, however, provides some inter-carrier connectivity to enable roaming between carriers; With an IMSI, the visited network can ask the home network "can I give this IMSI service?"... and a deactivation from the home carrier's network to the visited carrier's switches can turn the phone off (used to suppress roaming fraud).
Re: (Score:2)
What nonsense! (Score:1)
They acknowledged there have been reports of security breaches abroad, but assured us that all U.S. cellphone networks were secure."
That statement should have read:
They acknowledged there have been reports of security breaches abroad, but assured us that all U.S. cellphone networks were secure to the degree the NSA wants them to be secure."
Cell phones are not private, by design. (Score:2)
Ya Hey... (Score:1)
Oldschool phone phreaking (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Total bullsh*t (Score:2, Interesting)
Mobile networks use two different SS7 networks, one for TCAP communication which includes SMS but not voice and one for ISUP which includes no voice and no SMS (it is a Signalling System). Voice has moved over to SIP from ISUP and the majority of all voice calls never leave the Mobile Switching Center(MSC) and thus there is nothing to tap. Additionally the Mobile Directory Number is not the key used for communication, the IMSI is.
Basically, if you know a Mobile Directory Number and you could insert yourself
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Using the MSISDN you can get the IMSI from HLR using the right MAP operation, using the IMSI you could activate call forwarding unconditional for incoming calls loop it through your listening device and start listening to incoming calls, I am not sure how you would be able to listen in on outgoing calls. I am also not sure how the looking at text messages would work without having access to communication at the right place.
Does it work on other phone systems? (Score:1)
I watched the 60 minutes episode, it was Interesting.
Does it work for POTS or VOIP as well? How about T-Mobiles IP calling feature?
Re: (Score:2)
Between the network switches it's all SS7. If you have access to that, you have access to all telephony. It's a bit like BGP in the IP world.
Re: (Score:2)
SS7 was pretty much designed for POTS aka PSTN in the mid 70's. It's been extended over the years obviously. The attack is not generally not successful 100% of the time previous ones were saying 70% or so. A lot depends on where the attacker has access to the SS7 system.
I know everyone's phone number (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Jenny! (Score:2)
I know her number is 867-5309! ;)
So it's NOT all you need, then (Score:2)
Your Phone Number Is All a Hacker Needs To Read Texts, Listen To Calls and Track You
Really? That's all a hacker needs?
By hacking into or otherwise gaining access to the SS7 system...
Oh. So "no" then.
Hey, did you know that all a hacker needs to read your emails is your email address? Oh, and the ability to hack into the server that hosts your mail and bypass all its security.
dog bites man (Score:3)
As it happens, I read Exploding the Phone by Phil Lapsley about a week ago, and it's still on my desk. It's a great book. If you like this kind of stuff (I know I do) this book contains as much material on the subject as can reasonably fit in under 400 pages. If you like this stuff, read it.
The pertinent chapter for this thread is titled "A Little Bit Stupid" in which John Draper exploits recently automated [*] "busy verification" to eavesdrop on a primary line of the San Francisco FBI. How do you like them apples, with the roles reversed? (Hint: not very much, not very much at all.)
[*] It had become a little bit too automated in certain large American cities, which additionally qualifies this material for the Boy Scout merit badge "Stolid and Stupider", though that's a much harder-to-tell story about design incompetence internal to greed-addled AT&T.
Even though Draper bragged to a turncoat, he was still protected by the FBI's nearly impenetrable internal aura of "impossible things can't happen to us" until Draper demonstrated the technique while his turncoat buddy made a tape recording.
Why so much fuss? To protect the rectitude of lovable Uncle Sam? Probably not so much. Because tight-assed officialdom in positions of power say a great many things they definitely don't wish to defend against the harsh light of day? You be the judge.
Really, I don't know how Lapsley managed to write this entire book and not intrude more into the obvious. Perhaps two hundred pages of draft manuscript hit the floor in the editing process. (I know every third sentence in my first draft would have contained judgmental invective.)
Here's another thing that freaked out the FBI. The hackers weren't even savvy enough to try to market their incredible capability to the highest bidder (Sold!—to the secret undercover double-agent Flim Colby) and they weren't actually taking any money! or drugs! or prostitutes! so you can't even release the scent hounds.
Alfred Hitchcock [goodreads.com]
Action is where your crepuscular adversary has taped your intimate moments of conspiratorial graft and offered it up to the highest bidder. The FBI loves action.
Suspense is where your glazed-doughnut adversary has recorded your intimate moments of conspiratorial graft, and doesn't even give a shit, so pretty soon compromising cassette tapes are bouncing around on the dashboard of some horrible mid-seventies beater or tossed randomly into a shoe box of bad Country and Western ($2 obo) at someone's yard sale. The FBI hates suspense.
You see? I'm terribly prone to editorialising.
Anyway, my point about the SS7 hack is pretty much "dog bites man". This kind of thing has been ubiquitous since the first long-hair envious AT&T engineer included "observability" in his desiderata concerning globally distributed systems undergoing a Groundhog Day–esque eternal-September late pubescent growth spurt.
My friend is currently being stalked/harassed (Score:2)