By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google Sign up with FacebookQ: New Cyber Wars
In those Wiki leaks released this week there are claims the CIA can hack not just smart phones but your TV and car.
Apparently they can hack Samsung TV's and turn them into listening devices, even when turned off.
Have China gone down the same path ?
Maybe they will hack e bike radios of foreigners ?
7 years 29 weeks ago in Web & Technology - China
well, we can test and see if they are hacking this site,,, which would be a good one to hack it seems,,,
I am working on plans to have a flair-up on the N/S Korea border and get it back into a shooting war. We need to get rid of that messy Fat Boy and reunite Korea once and for all!
so, if I wake-up dead anytime soon,,, maybe we were being hacked !
well, we can test and see if they are hacking this site,,, which would be a good one to hack it seems,,,
I am working on plans to have a flair-up on the N/S Korea border and get it back into a shooting war. We need to get rid of that messy Fat Boy and reunite Korea once and for all!
so, if I wake-up dead anytime soon,,, maybe we were being hacked !
It reminds me of the book 1984, when the main guy (Winston?) would write in a corner he knew wasn't covered by the camera in his apartment.
Fine read here:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-08/most-shocking-revelation-cia-sp...
excerpt:
Yesterday Wikileaks released 8,761 CIA documents detailing the agency’s hacking of smart phones, routers, computers, and even televisions.
These files reveal that the CIA can and has hacked devices that were supposedly secure– iPhones, iPads, and Android devices.
The documents further reveal that the CIA is deliberately infecting personal computers with spyware, including Windows, Mac OS/X, Solaris, Linux, and other operating systems.
They’re also hacking WiFi routers to deploy software that monitors Internet activity, and have even figured out how to bypass anti-virus software so that their spyware cannot be detected.
They’ve also managed to make the rest of the world believe that Russian hackers, not the CIA, are behind all this malware and spyware.
It’s like a restatement of that old Mission: Impossible line– “Should any of your IM force be caught or killed… we’ll blame Russia.”
The CIA is pretty shameless about its activities, nicknaming its various hacking programs “Assassin”, “Medusa”, and “Brutal Kangaroo”.
One of the deepest revelations is that the agency is able to hack Internet-connected televisions, including Samsung smart TVs, through a program called “Weeping Angel”.
Basically the CIA can turn your TV into a listening device, recording conversations in the room and transmitting the audio to a CIA server.
Even if you think the TV is off, it’s not.
CIA hackers have been able to spoof the on/off display and set the television to a “false off” mode.
Bottom line, no device that’s connected to the outside world is truly safe.
And future Wikileaks publications may show that the intelligence community is hacking home automation devices, Internet-connected automobiles (including driverless vehicles), and artificial intelligence like Amazon’s Alexa.
It’s hard to be shocked at this point that the government is spying on its own allies and citizens.
This is just the latest in a pattern of brazen surveillance and flagrant Constitutional violations on the part of the US intelligence community.
But that’s precisely what I find MOST concerning - the LACK of concern over these new CIA documents.
icnif77:
more:
http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-03-09/officials-cia-knew-vault7-leak-was-coming-focus-turns-to-contractors-as-the-source-of-it/
philbravery:
Alexa shutting down over CIA question will fire up the conspiracy theorist in all of us Read more at http://pickle.nine.com.au/2017/03/10/11/47/alexa-shutting-down-over-cia-question-will-fire-up-the-conspiracy-theorist-in-all-of-us#RGisJ71vWpWBpKFg.99
A knife in the hands of a surgeon vs one in the hands of a criminal, the first one is for saving lives, the latter is for ending. Would you prefer CIA or CCP to bug you? If you go to jail which jail would you rather end up in, the one in PRC or USA?
Two atomic bombs manufactured, which team would you prefer to be the manufacturer, Hitler's or Einstein's?
Shining_brow:
Doesn't matter which manufacturer - if you're under the bomb when it goes off...
philbravery:
The only one of those you mentioned that suffered from an atomic bomb was Japan. The Jews and the Chinese were murdered by more traditional means.
earthizen:
Those sufferings would continue should Hitler get the bombs and it is highly doubtful many of the Jews and Chinese of today would exist.
philbravery:
The US dropped more than 26,000 bombs in 2016 — here is where they went The Fiscal Times Rob Garver, The Fiscal Times Jan. 6, 2017, 8:24 PM 10,442 Air Force via U.S. Air Force For a nation that isn't officially at war against another nation, the United States dropped an awful lot of bombs on a pretty large number of countries last year, according to research by Micah Zenko, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and research associate Jennifer Wilson. According to their calculations, based on data released by the Pentagon as well as information collected by think tanks and news organizations, the U.S. dropped some 26,171 bombs across all its weapons platforms, on targets in seven different countries. The biggest recipients were Syria (12,192) and Iraq (12,095), where the U.S. is participating in the effort to destroy the terror group ISIS, which still controls parts of both countries. Next on the list was Afghanistan where, despite having pulled out the vast majority of combat troops years ago, the U.S. saw the need to drop 1,337 bombs. The only other country in triple digits was Libya, which was hit with 496. Smaller targets included Yemen (34), Somalia (14) and Pakistan (3). The total number of bombs dropped was up 3,027 over the previous year, they found. Writing on his blog, Zenko admits, "This estimate is undoubtedly low, considering reliable data is only available for airstrikes in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya, and a single 'strike,' according to the Pentagon's definition, can involve multiple bombs or munitions." Zenko added, "As President Obama enters the final weeks of his presidency, there will be ample assessments of his foreign military approach, which has focused on reducing U.S. ground combat troops (with the notable exception of the Afghanistan surge), supporting local security partners, and authorizing the expansive use of air power. Whether this strategy 'works'-i.e. reduces the threat posed by extremists operating from those countries and improves overall security and governance on the ground-is highly contested. Yet, for better or worse, these are the central [tenets] of the Obama doctrine."
philbravery:
Dead or maimed is the same whether your a Jew .Arab.Chinese or Kalothumpian
earthizen:
Dead or maimed, regardless of nationality terrorists are terrorists. The targets of those bombs were terrorists. Would you prefer them to visit and bomb your country or go bomb them where they are?
philbravery:
So you are saying thst the civilian death toll is of no consequence as long as you destroy the bad guys. Wow Nuke two cities and your on a winner
earthizen:
No. Do you prefer those civilian deaths be in your country, you included, from terrorist attacks, or the country where the terrorists are?
earthizen:
'Wow Nuke two cities and your on a winner' You prefer WW II to continue, Hitler to continue putting Jews into gas chambers until there are none left, and Japan to keep occupying china, creating massacres after massacres?
philbravery:
You contradict yourself. ..No but as long as it is a County that that has Terrorists. The quick and easy way out. So by your reasoning the USA should Nuke itself?.
earthizen:
No contradition here. USA did not nuke Syria, Somalia...etc. in its attempt to wipe out the terrorists in these countries, so your logic of nuking itself doesn't stand. Any developed country would apprehend terrorists found on their soil, USA is no exception.
philbravery:
Ok ...Saudi Arabia is a big allie of the US but it funds and produces Terrorists, so why don't the US bomb Saudi into the dust ? (Sand)
earthizen:
The bombs target terrorists directly, not those sponsoring them apparently. Many possible reasons, to keep using lethal force to a minimum by using more civilized means. If the sponsor of terrorists is a country, more civilized means would be diplomatic negotiations, escalating to war as a final solution. Most developed countries try not to declare war on another country, one obvious reason being massive loss of civilian lives, another being the possibility of escatating into WW III.
philbravery:
You keep changing your position . First you favor mass killing as long as it is done by the USA then you claim selective strikes. FFS make up your mind
earthizen:
Framing doesn't work. Quote me where I said I favored mass killing. I asked you to choose between two scenarios, both involved mass killing in WW II. Where did you get the idea I favored mass killing?
philbravery:
I don't need to frame you . You hang yourself throughout the thread
1984
philbravery:
As in Gorege Orwell's book ? Or Wham's first record release?
philbravery:
Actually that story "on the beach " is pretty scary to think about in this day and age