>8Kbit/second is enough if all you need is to understand what is being
>said, not recognize the speaker. The processing power to do this is
>pretty small on today's scale of things.)
With decent compression techniques, 8kbps is close to telephone
quality, and 2400bps has artifacts but is still qu
| Ian Farquhar (ifarquha) wrote> The other problem for this technique is
| battery life.
|
| Suppose this worked by recording from mic to memory and then
| transmitting later. This leads to a bunch of questions:
|
| By what factor could transmission time/power be reduced sending such a
| recordin
At 11:26 AM 12/9/2006, Daniel F. Fisher wrote:
Ian Farquhar (ifarquha) wrote> The other problem for this technique is
battery life.
Suppose this worked by recording from mic to memory and then transmitting
later. This leads to a bunch of questions:
By what factor could transmission time/powe
Ian Farquhar (ifarquha) wrote> The other problem for this technique is
battery life.
Suppose this worked by recording from mic to memory and then
transmitting later. This leads to a bunch of questions:
By what factor could transmission time/power be reduced sending such a
recording later? Ho
mplemented already.
Ian.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Taral
Sent: Monday, 4 December 2006 2:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: John Ioannidis; cryptography@metzdowd.com
Subject: Re: cellphones as room bugs
On 12/3/06, Thor Lancelot Simon
On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 09:26:15PM -0600, Taral wrote:
> That's the same question I have. I don't remember seeing anything in
> the GSM standard that would allow this either.
>
I'll hazard a guess: mobile providers can send a special type of
message (not sure if it would be classed as an SMS) wit
On 12/3/06, Thor Lancelot Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's been a while since I built ISDN equipment but I do not think this
is correct: can you show me how, exactly, one uses Q.931 to instruct the
other endpoint to go off-hook?
That's the same question I have. I don't remember seeing anyt
Thor Lancelot Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>It's been a while since I built ISDN equipment but I do not think this is
>correct: can you show me how, exactly, one uses Q.931 to instruct the other
>endpoint to go off-hook?
You make use of the undocumented remote management interface [0].
Pete
At 10:21 AM 12/2/2006 -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Quoting:
The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic
surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a
mobile phone's microphone and using it to eavesdrop on nearby
conversations.
The technique
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 20:26:07 -0500
Thor Lancelot Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 05:15:02PM -0500, John Ioannidis wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:21:57AM -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> > >
> > > Quoting:
> > >
> > >The FBI appears to have begun using a novel
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 05:15:02PM -0500, John Ioannidis wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:21:57AM -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> >
> > Quoting:
> >
> >The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic
> >surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a
> >
At 07:21 AM 12/2/2006, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Quoting:
The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic
surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a
mobile phone's microphone and using it to eavesdrop on nearby
conversations.
BTW, its easy to thwar
At 07:21 AM 12/2/2006, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Quoting:
The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic
surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a
mobile phone's microphone and using it to eavesdrop on nearby
conversations.
The technique is cal
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:21:57AM -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>
> Quoting:
>
>The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic
>surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a
>mobile phone's microphone and using it to eavesdrop on nearby
>conversa
14 matches
Mail list logo
