Can Cell or Landline Calls Be Purposely Intercepted/Listened To?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kyphysics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cell
AI Thread Summary
Movies from the 1980s and 90s depicted police intercepting phone calls, raising questions about the reality of such technology. In the U.S., wiretapping requires a court order based on probable cause, ensuring accountability. While early mobile phones could be intercepted with simple scanners, modern technology has made such actions more complex and difficult for the average person. Law enforcement agencies have access to advanced interception devices like GSM interceptors, while organized crime can also acquire similar equipment, though it is harder for them to connect to phone networks.Concerns about privacy are valid, as conversations can be overheard through various means, including specialized devices and even creative methods like side-channel attacks. However, most individuals are unlikely targets for sophisticated surveillance. The discussion emphasizes the importance of being cautious about what is said in private or public, as technology continues to evolve, making it easier for both law enforcement and criminals to monitor communications. Ultimately, individuals must balance their privacy concerns with the realities of modern surveillance capabilities.
kyphysics
Messages
684
Reaction score
445
When watching movies from like the 1980's/90's, it seems there was a way that police or someone with the right equipment could scan the air and intercept/listen to phone calls.

I don't know if that was a movie thing that was fictional, but if it's true, does that technology/ability still exist today? Yes, I am a bit paranoid, b/c I kinda feel like someone intercepted me before.
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
Of course. In the USA, a court order is required for such wiretapping/intercepts. That court order could be at a very high/covert level of course, for deeply hidden investigations, but there should always be a chain of responsibility/accountability for the permission (I don't know the legal terms). There has to be "probable cause" to tap your communications, and that is part of the applicable court's permission for the monitoring.
 
In the movies, these guys would hold up some clothes hanger looking thing and seem able to intercept calls (not sure if that is the same as "tap").

I was asking if like your average Joe off the block could do this (not a law enforcement entity), by the way. But, it's still interesting, though.
 
kyphysics said:
I was asking if like your average Joe off the block could do this (not a law enforcement entity), by the way. But, it's still interesting, though.
Yes, the early mobile phones could be listened to with a simple scanner. Things have become more difficult for individual listeners since then. Every 5 years there is another level of complexity added to the system. That may be another layer of encryption, or the data rate may rise by another factor of ten.

Given the appropriate funding and permits, the authorities can record anything they want. That has become easier over time as the systems used in different countries have become standardised. Obviously organised crime can pay for the same equipment, but it is harder for them to plug it into the central part of a phone network.

Paranoid people will always believe their phone call is being listened to. The truth is, that might be the case, but what have they got to worry about, unless they are conspiring to commit a criminal activity? It takes three people to monitor one persons activity. A paranoid person is really not that important as their activities will be self-limited by their fear of discovery.
 
  • Haha
Likes Tom.G
Another way phones can be tapped is at the telephone switching center. There was a NOVA show on how transpacific cables came ashore in California and were routed to the telephone company into a special room with limited employee access and then out again to telephone switching equipment.

Later in the show, a former FBI OR NSA employee describes sitting at a music tracks like screen interface with lists of selected recorded phone conversations picking one at random and listening to it.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sputnik/about.html

Here's an article from propublica about the communications sweep:

https://www.propublica.org/article/a-trail-of-evidence-leading-to-atts-partnership-with-the-nsa
 
To intercept a landline conversation with an antenna (as in the 80's), it's probably done with a bugging device transmitter.

With specialized equipment available only to law enforcement, it is also possible for cell phones. It is called a GSM interceptor.

passive-mobile-gsm-interceptor-system-wide-band.jpg

This shadier website seems to also sell devices that could listen to calls in not so clearly specified ways.
 
jack action said:
With specialized equipment available only to law enforcement, it is also possible for cell phones. It is called a GSM interceptor.
With countless law enforcement agencies on the planet, it is not difficult to find one willing to help criminals get their own interceptor, or to corrupt the agency to do the bugging on behalf of criminals.

All hardware/software intended for law enforcement only has this same problem. Only "trusted" agencies should be eligible and who maintains the list of trust?
 
  • Like
Likes jack action
  • #10
To summarize, yes cell and landline can be listened to/intercepted, but the equipment and process are sophisticated nowadays and thus unlikely for an Average Joe. Most likely, it'd have to be by law enforcement and/or a decently well funded/sophisticated criminal (who probably wouldn't try to record a nobody like myself).

Fair summary? :-p
 
  • #11
kyphysics said:
Most likely, it'd have to be by law enforcement and/or a decently well funded/sophisticated criminal
I don't know about this. I looked at one of the items on the web page that Jack Action gave -- you can get a device that can be inserted into one of the leads on a landline phone for USD 540. And a cell phone scanner can be had for USD 658. Lots of people spend way more than these amounts for a smart phone.
 
  • #12
The meaningful answer is that you should assume that your conversations can be overheard. You should never say anything illegal, immoral, or embarrassing in public or private.

Ditto for the Internet. If you're really serious about privacy, never do anything illegal, immoral, or embarrassing on or even in the same room as a computer.

Few people in today's world are serious enough about privacy to follow either one of those advices. That leaves it up to each person to find their own balance between risks and needs.
 
  • Like
Likes nsaspook, Baluncore, jedishrfu and 1 other person
  • #13
Yes, regardless of being illegal, it can be pulled off. There are a variety of different ways of doing so.

There are even ways to evade bug sweeps. Side-channel attacks like the hanging light bulb method can intercept sound in a room if a telescope has a clear shot through a window- for about $400.

Our home security cameras can be hacked. Bluetooth isn’t as secure as people believe. If you don’t lock your car door then someone can easily slip something under your seat. I think there are even devices that can pick up sound in your car and simply attach to the undercarriage with a magnet. There are so many ways that we can be spied upon. When we have reasons to be concerned, it’s just vigilance and not paranoia. A person is considered paranoid when they have no reason to be. Even if we’ve done nothing to warrant it, people will be creeps. My neighbor constantly and blatantly attempts to connect to my devices when the Bluetooth is on. No telling what else.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes jack action and jedishrfu
  • #14
Fervent Freyja said:
Yes, regardless of being illegal, it can be pulled off. There are a variety of different ways of doing so.
The law comes in various forms. In some places the listening equipment is prohibited, in others the recordings. Generally, it is the use or distribution of the information gained that constitutes the offence.
Here, to be guilty of a crime, it is necessary to know that it is a crime, before actually committing the offence. But it is also a crime to conspire with another person to commit a criminal offence, and then you are guilty of conspiracy, not of the offence you planned. It seems now that terrorism and censorship laws have overridden all that common law.

Fervent Freyja said:
When we have reasons to be concerned, it’s just vigilance and not paranoia. A person is considered paranoid when they have no reason to be.
The fear that a paranoid person suffers, is as real as a "justifiable fear" is to another. Likewise, the "fear of God", when in the hands of an "abuser", is a powerful weapon against any "believer".
 
  • Like
Likes jack action and Fervent Freyja
Back
Top