Is it true that home routers can dragnet-record & send data to their owner from all our devices?

[ancianita]

Last edited Mon Jul 31, 2023, 09:11 AM - Edit history (2)

1.
Since Spectrum forced me to self-install a new modem, router, and all the changing of the devices' identifications that go with it, I've run across that claim. Did Spectrum tell me? Hell no, I should have read the TOS, right? And now I'm supposed to feel like a doofus over this.

I've deleted my FB app from my iPhone, and all other unnecessary apps. Nightly, I put the phone in airplane mode, shut down its wifi, cellular and bluetooth, then do a hard shut down. And no, I refused to use the Spectrum app to install the equipment.
Apps these days are evil. Stay away from voice service like Siri and Alexa; when they talk, don't think they don't also listen.

Corporations for profit and for years, have stealthily
a) drawn our data while offering us free devices and cheap monthly fees, and
b) outrun our government leaders.
Because even when our leaders want to stand up for Internet users' rights, they don't fucking know HOW because they think like consumers of products instead of knowing they and we are the product.

2.
Not for nothing, it won't be just the usual NSA and other operatives who'll be skulking around DEF CON ten days from now.
A couple of skulking rethugs from TX will be there, too, at their corporate owners' behest.
Not to mention other government officials and military people.

Finally, Biden and Harris are paying attention to getting help from the city of 35,000 that has been DEF CON for 30 fucking years.

FINALLY, Mayorkas from DHS is going to speak and do Q & A.
Finally Mark Warner from the Senate's Cybersecurity Caucus & Intelligence Committee will be attending.
There are a few TBA's on the schedule, so who knows, maybe even Biden might make a surprise appearance to praise Austin Carson's AI Red Team of hundreds. Because presidents recognize important infrastructure.

The point is, how much longer are we going to have to exist in what's become a fascist iron dome of surveillance?

I'm no big fish, but it's still the 'right to privacy' principle of the thing.


3.
It's been ten years since ...
a) Laura Poitras went to Hong Kong and helped Snowden tell his situation. She has received numerous awards for her work, including the 2015 Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature for Citizenfour, about Edward Snowden, ...
She won the 2013 George Polk Award for national security reporting related to the NSA disclosures. The NSA reporting by Poitras, Glenn Greenwald, Ewen MacAskill, and Barton Gellman contributed to the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service awarded jointly to The Guardian and The Washington Post.


b) Sarah Harrison was a WikiLeaks section editor.
She worked with the WikiLeaks' legal defense and has been described as Julian Assange's closest adviser. Harrison accompanied National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden on a high-profile flight from Hong Kong to Moscow while he was sought by the United States government.

Both these journalists have laid out to millions the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th & 13th Amendment problems that the coder world has been battling state & corporate abuse of on the nets for 30 ... years. Nothing's changed. Yet.



What Sarah Harrison says here is years old and woke: the neural network must be of, by, and for The People. Not the robots. We need to get woke AF. Good thing Joe and Kamala agree.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

1. Routers and modems do not have RAM so no, they cannot 'record' anything

They can however facilitate transmitting anything your devices want to spew up onto the internet, and because all your traffic goes through your ISP (and websites are full of all kinds of tracking stuff) the fact is yeah, a hell of a lot of what you do on the internet can effectively be tracked either by website owners or your ISP. Damn near every website sends a lot of data to Google Analytics, and most send stuff to Facebook if you generally browse the web while also logged into Facebook.

But it's not your modem or router that are doing it. They're just 'pipelines' not 'recorders'.

[PlutosHeart]

2. Doesn't a VPN help?

To stop the tracking I mean.

[canuckledragger]

3. Script blockers help.

What doesn't get loaded on to a website doesn't get to run and collect anything at all. I started using them as support for my ad blockers, because at the the time a lot of exploit attacks were coming from compromised ad servers that could affect legit pages unknowingly.

They stop everything by default until you approve each script the page is trying to run, on your choice of a temporary or permanent basis.

It's not for an average user though, as it can easily break a page from the get go until you know what to enable. (although to me, if a page is still broken after enabling 4-5 things, It's not a page I want to visit as it's way too bogged down with crap.)

[wackadoo wabbit]

5. Info won't be sent to google-analytics.com and googletagmanager.com

(and the numerous other tracking sites) if you use Firefox with the NoScript extension. Honestly, I feel naked browsing without NoScript! It's the very second thing I download onto a new computer (the first is Firefox).

https://noscript.net/

[Think. Again.]

7. How much does...

..."no script" interfere with the viewability of (supposedly) innocent websites like mainstream news outlets, YouTube, even DU, etc?

Is the viewing and interaction experience smooth with it installed?

[wackadoo wabbit]

17. You get to choose which JavaScript programs you want to let run on your computer

Different sites want different amounts of JavaScript to run. This particular page on DU, for example, would like 11 different JavaScript programs to run. (I've gone to sites where they want to run more than 40 programs! And those would all be running, hogging your computer's resources, if you go there without NoScript.)

Not all of those 11 JavaScript programs are from DU, though. There's a YouTube one, which is from an embedded YT video. And I'm sure that some of the others aren't DU specific. Personally, I've permanently allowed democraticunderground.com to run, and I can see DU just fine with that one only. I might allow youtube-nocookie.com on an as needed basis, if I really want to see a particular video. I very, very rarely allow the twitter programs to run on my computer.

If you don't allow at least the domain-name JavaScript program to run, most sites won't function (or won't function very well). I've gotten used to knowing what I need to allow for a site's functionality (mostly, anyway; sometimes it's a bit of trial and error, especially when a site wants to run upwards of 30 programs).

So I guess this is my long-winded way of saying that it can be a bit hands-on if you're going to a new site and they want more than just their domain-name program to run. But if you're going to the same sites every day, you can permanently allow the programs they need, and you won't personally have to do anything after that.

[ancianita]

6. Okay. I get it. I guess I meant transmit. Sorry, wrong word.

But some servers get it, was my point.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

8. So where do they store the settings?

[Hugh_Lebowski]

10. They do have a very small amount of memory for storing configs fair enough (nt)

[Disaffected]

21. Do not routers and modems have microprocessors?

If so, they have RAM(?).

[Hugh_Lebowski]

22. They do but that fact alone does not necessarily require RAM to accomplish

All a processor MUST have ... is its microcode, which is burned into the chip and is therefore non-volatile.

Then in almost every case you'll have firmware (loosely called BIOS) which is code that defines how the device the chip sits on (roughly ... its motherboard and the addt'l devices on that motherboard) communicates with said chip. BIOS code is essentially ROM and requires purposeful user action to update, and has a very small capacity.

Modern routers have a very small quantity of memory to store config settings but it's an insignificant amount in the context of 'recording' and it requires an authentication (login/password) to change its contents.

There's all kinds of devices/software out there that could be described as 'recording you', in some sense, but your modem and router are not among those.

[Disaffected]

26. I'm not contending that modems and routers record your information.

I don't have evidence for that one way or another.

But, there would be nothing to stop a manufacturer from adding sufficient RAM to do that. Whether or not that would be especially useful for the purpose - who knows?

[Hugh_Lebowski]

27. That's a different subject, whether it's possible

For sure it's possible. But there's also a LOT of hardware tinkering types out there, and if the maker of a router started adding the necessary software and hardware to do that on consumer-level routers, the jig would be up very quickly (I'm not saying there are NO routers made that could do a ton of tracking ... perhaps military-grade ones do exactly that )

Bottom-line there's little need for it though as there's already many other means to track/record us in one sense or another when we're on the internet.

[Disaffected]

30. Yeah, there is little (no?) need for it.

I was simply stating at the outset that routers and modems do have RAM and, I would think it would be needed for a lot more than storing settings, such as data buffering and internal program control variables for starters (the software in them is complex and there would be no way of accomplishing that w/o a sizeable amount of RAM memory.

A little Googling indicates in fact that 64 to 256 MB is typically employed in such devices.

[Tetrachloride]

4. A browser such as Brave will take care of some privacy

the fewer special apps we use
the less privacy is lost sort of

[taxi]

9. The Xfinity, Comcast, or whatever provider supplies their own modem/router

took away some control also. Their supplied equipment does not allow to change settings when the internet is down. This means is that you cannot make changes to security settings like access control. For those who have frequent visitors, like a card or game players, or a rotary club, your password can be easily shared. Also in apartment complexes it isn't uncommon for some to use your connection as a test lab for learning how to hack.
A bigger inconvenience is during internet outages.
If a storm takes out the internet you cannot simply plug a movie or music collection into the router and access it from anywhere in the house.

[msfiddlestix]

13. Very informative, thank you.

Someone is hacking into my YouTube account and watching stuff which appears under my "Watched" folder.

I pay a monthly premium for YouTube because I use it as a tool for various musical instrumentation interests and the ads are a huge nuisance. Plus it seems I have other useful organizational functions and features which I find very useful.
But. Still. I cannot figure out how to keep out hackers from what I suspect is a nearby neighbor.

infuriating and frustrating. I was thinking that maybe my security functions on my xfinity wfi router might be the problem.

Thinking maybe they are able to run a security check remotely and change the password.

[taxi]

18. That is a concern. I couldn't find security functions on the xfinity provided modem/router.

A quick look found the router we use for just over a hundred dollars, and we have all sorts of things hooked up and running at the same time without problems. On a side note - take a look at your autoplay settings for YouTube and consider when you want them on and when you want them off. When we visit a website much more than what we see goes into the computer, images included.

[msfiddlestix]

19. Yes, everything we watch on the computer or on the phone will appear on the tv youtube

This issue I have with scores of videos I have never clicked on, or anything related began to appear on my watch file just recently, the past couple of weeks. I've had xfinity service for a couple of years. I think.

For instance there is an youtube video I think it's called cooks and cons or something like that I have never clicked on, and it's completely overwhelmed my actual watched vids which I do repeatedly watch. It happens I know a neighbor watches it all the time, but I don't think she can access my wifi account. She lives a bit farther away from my digs than others.

I have to get to the bottom of it soon. I just haven't had the damn time it takes for *me* to accomplish.

I need a computer geek in my life. LOL.

[taxi]

20. Rechecking xfinity security just now confirmed what I thought I experiences with them.

The easiest and most sure way to do this is also the least costly.
Unfortunately, like having a computer geek in your life, it means more junk that you have to put up with.
If it were me, and I didn't want to make a bunch of changes or make things too complicated, here's what I would do -

Look for a router, not a router/modem like the xfinity provided modem/router.
This new router will plug into the xfinity modem, and it will have security functions that can be accessed with or without the internet.
Once the router is plugged in to the xfinity modem the wireless functions of the xfinity router can be turned off. Now everything has to go through the router you just installed, and you have total control.

Be sure the new router has access control - a way to manage who can connect and who can't by checking a box. Turn it on, connect to it, set access control to enabled, and block new devices from connecting.

All this can be done without any interaction with your service provider. Should you buy a router with a modem, a cable ready router, then your provider will make a change to their system before it can work.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

23. The most logical thing to try first is just changing the password on your Youtube

account.

If you access it through Google or FB authorization, change the passwords on those accounts.

By far most likely though is just that YT has screwed around with its algorithm for the 'watch' list, and you didn't know they did it

[msfiddlestix]

29. on your last point, was my first suspicion/instinct.

I play fiddle, banjo, mandolin. lots of bluegrass and old time appalachian. So youtube has suddenly decided that I'd be interested in western movies. egads. But at least those were in the "recommended for you" thingy

But THEN, I started seeing weird cooking shows galore in my watched History library folders. That, I believe is indicative of hackery.

I might be wrong. I dunno. so yeah gotta do these security checks.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

24. Another easy thing to try is changing the wifi password of your router

Should be easy to google how to do this on the internet. Pro-tip: Take a picture on your phone of the sticker on the bottom of the router. It can def. come in handy. And of course make sure you write down your new wifi password somewhere safe

All devices connected to wifi will have to be logged in again after, of course. TV, phone, computer, tablets, etc.

[msfiddlestix]

28. Good Tip! TY. I hate having to reset logins. On my Roku apps that's a lot of resetting.

it's not just the router or my devices.... it's all of my apps on Roku! That's the biggest pain the ass! That might be even be the access point. argggh.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

32. Resetting wifi password should just 1 time per device (nt)

[wackadoo wabbit]

14. You can buy your own modem/router

That's what I did. Not only does it give me better security, but it paid for itself in less than a year.

[ancianita]

16. I should try that. Knowing Spectrum, they'll reject it. I'll check with my local IT guy about that.

I used to have my own router with Comcast and didn't have my current privacy problems.

[NickB79]

11. I've noticed that other family members can see each other's search histories

My daughter was asking me about a news story I was reading here at DU, and I thought she was snooping on my phone.

Turns out she can see it on her tablet from us sharing the same router. Same with things my wife has looked up.

I didn't realize that was possible.

[ancianita]

12. And here we are. Now what.

It's not as if armies of hackers haven't fought against corporate insurgencies and data theft on the Internet. Bad enough our own NSA does it for them. Proprietary software and trade secrets should not justify or allow their TOS stealth tracking and theft of data. But the realization has come that we don't "own" Internet devices. Computers, maybe. Only if we run our own servers, they say.

It's just that the law has not caught up. Let's hope that's changing. There are huge numbers of cybersecurity lawyers and law firms at work, many giving presentations and working on DEF CON teams each year. We'll see if now we can finally get government to fight them.

[ancianita]

15. Please check what Harrison says in the video.

IIRC, VPN's can give you a layer of privacy. Nord VPN, which always seems to rank in the top three, even advertises on tv these days.

I don't have anyone around who might do what's been done to you, but I'm going to check out getting a VPN, anyway.

Unless someone here can advise a better solution.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

25. You're probably all also using the same browser (edge, chrome, safari, etc)

But none of you have personalized that browser so that you each have a specific login/password.

My GF and I each have our own google accounts we can use to log into Chrome. If I'm logged in my account, I never see any trace of anything she does. I don't see her favorites, histories, downloads, etc. She comes over and logs into Chrome on my PC and everything changes entirely and she sees Chrome basically exactly as it looks at her house, her history, faves, etc.

If you don't take these sorts of steps with personalization, Chrome will basically see your router as 'you' and therefore everyone who uses Chrome via your router is 'one person' with one history. I'm guessing other browsers will do the same.

I'm betting if you change that situation, what you describe will stop happening.

[ExWhoDoesntCare]

31. Yep, need to set up your browser to log in.

My husband and I both use Firefox; however, he has no idea of where I've surfed, and vice versa.

Because each of us has a separate browser account that is inaccesible to the other.

So much for "no secrets between spouses," LOL.

[ificandream]

33. I have one big objection to the OP.

Wikileaks was not journalism. Publishing Democratic emails was the publishing of stolen documents ... assuming that the documents weren't changed.

[ancianita]

34. Enough people in the world say the opposite that I'm inclined to tell you to take it up

with Harrison and other Internet rights experts.

I'm not a journalist like Harrison, and so am not qualified to argue whether accepting documents constitutes knowledge of their origin, stolen or freely given by those who stole them. It's more complicated than it looks, and I'm inclined to agree with her support of Assange. Because she knows the legal issues about Internet copyrights and Internet property rights, etc.

One can argue, for instance, that nothing we produce on the internet is our licensed intellectual property. And so whoever her ISP was, neither Clinton nor the Democratic Party owned any emails they created. The server owner did.

[ificandream]

35. I was a journalist ... over 35 years at a daily newspaper.

And I would argue vehemently that Wikileaks wasn't journalism. The information they published was stolen. And if what you say that "the server owner" was the owner, it confirms the data was stolen, does it not?

[ancianita]

36. Glad to hear it.

But when it comes to who stole the documents -- and it wasn't Assange -- and who accepted the documents, those are two different entities. Me taking money of unknown origin doesn't make me the thief, nor does spending it implicate me as an accomplice. It's dropped off at my door and I spend it. Whether money or documents or NSA surveillance data.

Trump claims to know who erased Hillary's emails, right? So he likely knows who gave them to Wikileaks. Seriously?
You want to make a bad guy out of a data drop? Think Snowden is as bad as Trump?

[ificandream]

37. Um ...

"Me taking money of unknown origin doesn't make me the thief, nor does spending it implicate me as an accomplice."

First, receiving stolen property is not acceptable whether the recipient knew it was stolen or not. On top of that, in this particular case, Wikileaks was instrumental in the data being stolen.

[ancianita]

38. Well...

again, you assume that I know the money dropped at my door is stolen, doesn't it. Link proof that Wikileaks was instrumental, and you win. Because so was Daniel Ellsberg and the New York Times. Then say by what standard one was okay and the other wasn't.