Removing phone mic and/or camera

I'm curious if anyone here has actually done this in the name of privacy, it's been something I've been considering for a bit now. Similar to the hardware switches on some newer privacy-focused devices like what Purism's doing, couldn't you just remove the onboard microphone and camera from your phone to prevent them being tapped? You could use a headset in the 3.5mm port to take calls and such when you want, not sure if there's much availability for external cameras though. I'm well aware there's more to worry about than mic and camera but I'm talking specifically about those hardware components.

>>11517 I've been considering it too. Smart phones in general are just too much pain, I rather get a dump phone, which I'm going to do soon. Cons? > minimal > no social media > muh projectile weapon and It's prolly easier to remove the mic.

I thought it would be neat to have switches for each functionality but your way is likely easier to do. There does exist micro USB cameras that plug into the port on the phone so yes that too is doable.

The builtin cameras on laptops are typically connected over USB, so it should be fairly easy to add a switch to disconnect the +5v and still have it re-enumerate automatically when you turn it on. Of course just unplugging it or cutting the cable would be even easier. The microphone may be integrated into the camera (easy) or it may go to a completely separate device (e.g. Azalia) where you might need another switch to disconnect it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucRWyGKBVzo Looks like it's what Snowden does too. Video throws around a lot of layman language like the generic 'hack' boogeyman but still worth a watch IMO. Though, I imagine it's a fairly hard task with how hard companies make it to get into your phone these days. I remember looking up info for disassembling my S7 and seeing that I'd need a special tool to pry the back off and all kinds of soykaf like that. I thought about maybe just cutting the plug off of a pair of headphones and putting that into the headphone port when I'm not using the speaker or mic, but I'm sure anyone getting into the phone could just as easily switch to listen to the onboard mic. And there's apps out there like Pilfershush Jammer (I hope I spelled that right!) on F-Droid but I don't know how effective they are.

>>11518 >> no social media God damn it, I would get a dumbphone but this is a dealbreaker to me because I often need a messenger when I go out and SMS isn't going to cut it.

>>11533 I'm not a social media guy really but I agree, I use things like Riot too much to rely on SMS. But a thought I had recently to mitigate that is - theoretically, could you have a dumbphone AND a smartphone working together? Specifically I mean, a dumbphone with a simple prepaid plan from which you could tether data to the SIM-less smartphone - essentially just a pocket computer that you'd otherwise use on Wi-Fi only - when needed? I find it hard to imagine any cons for this despite the slight inconvenience of carrying both with you (not that you'd necessarily HAVE to, different use cases and such) and the obvious question of whether or not you could get your hands on a dumbphone that could tether data. Otherwise, this seems like a dream setup to me. I could keep a smartphone in the way I use it day to day when on Wi-Fi without worrying about cell towers, and a dumbphone that stays battery-less until I need to make a call or tether data to the smartphone.

>>11534 Not sure if your idea would work, but sounds like an interesting project. Consider that wifi is yet another attack vector, though. Wired connection would be safer.>>11534

>>11517 Look up specific device teardown photos or videos, obscure Chinese or Indian brand low-end models have higher probability of being easy to disassemble. Older phones have spring contact microphone and speaker for easier repair, cameras are on ribbon cable. Phone can boot without cameras. A great example is LG V20 from 2016, most repairable flagship smartphone of that year, things got worse from now on; here's the teardown video: https://invidio.us/watch?v=KrmjuDO1Ccg Now what about removing cellular modems and associated circuitry? That's gonna be tough. >>11534 Instead of tethering another phone over constantly pwned insecure wifi, you could use 4G USB modem with router firmware that doesn't require host drivers. L33t hackermann way of using such modem is concealing one inside a power brick, so you just sit on a bench in park, plug in the cable from your "power brick", use cellular internet while charging the phone, disconnect it, and go.

>>11517 I did, several years ago when I first started becoming conscious of opsec. It's a pain to use the lanyard headset every time, you'll be forever untangling the thing. Be aware that this kind of modification doesn't secure you in any way from having any of the device's operation "tapped", you'd just be air gapping some peripheries (that is to say, communications aren't more secure whenever you plug in the mic, i.e, whenever you communicate). My thoughts on the practice have since advanced, and I can offer some reasons why caring about the integrated cam and mic on an Android/IOS infected machine is somewhat oxymoronic. Simply put, what's the threat model that prioritizes air gapping two components that nobody is using to spy on you (although they could), while the OS is actively scraping the device to commodify you to Cambridge Alanytica types, including the OS devs? For example, it's almost certain that nobody is using your device to take pictures of the inside of your pocket or generate muffled ambient audio recordings (obviously I'm making the assumption that you're not operating on some exceptional threat model). Right now, as I type this, any cell phone you're operating is scanning the wifi signals around you to triangulate your position, discover proximate cell phones(read:who you're with), and helping to generate a geographic map of wifi hotspots. Whenever you send an SMS it ends up in a silicon valley server, either because you're using stock spyware as a client or the recipient is. Your Gmail is monitored to assist persuasive designers in modifying your behavior (even if only the recipient is using Gmail and you're using a different client). Any database containing information like this is liable to leak, eventually. Think Equifax. Even if for some reason, you decide to trust Apple or Alphabet, once that data’s in the wild whoever you’re worried about taking recording you while you websurf can acquire it. In terms of hardware, there are no libre source/open hardware cell phone modems. The ones integrated into cellular devices are as much/more of a security risk than the audio/visual sensors since they are attack vectors which broadcast their presence (and are likely networked to sensitive data, like bank account info), AND they’re a bridge for all of the info collected by any sensor you choose to network, such as a micro usb camera. Yikes. In the end, pulling out a couple of sensors will most likely have zero real impact. I couldn’t stop caring about it though, so I've stopped running cell phones. AOSP phones are a good option if you want to do something in the name of privacy and can’t give them up however, as well as the Librem 5 or the PinePhone(which I’m thinking about tinkering with myself). Holistically all would have a bigger real impact, in the name of privacy, and you could still pluck out some sensors if the mood strikes.

>>11572 Completely agree with this. The worst enemy we have is the things we overlook, the OS and the companies behind them in this case. Hell, i recently updated my smartphone. I received a message from a relative, and the notification offered me to reply "Thanks" or "Thanks!" by just tapping a button. I was confused and read the message. She complimented me. The OS likely read my message and inferred that I would reply "Thanks" because she said "good job" This soykaf if completely fuarrrked. Who knows how long they've been reading my messages without any indication. One can't trust ANY smart device.

The way I've come up with is just to lightly punch the mics with an awl or an eyeglasses screwdriver to knock them out. Crude, but it works. Since the cameras are behind glass and I don't want cracks to spread everywhere, I use a higher-wattage laser pointer to destroy those. It doesn't take too much to ruin a CMOS under a lens. I just kind of gently and patiently attack both and check often if they still function until I've managed to destroy those sensors without damaging the rest of the phone's functions. No collateral damage so far. But to be fair, I don't make a habit of buying expensive phones anyway. Probably more proper to open it up and disconnect ribbon cables, cut traces, or de-solder components from the board. But sometimes simpler is better. Sometimes carefully-applied violence is the most effective tool.

>>11572 Hey lain, this is a good, well-thought out response. You make a lot of valid points, but I think you're only seeing one side of the coin. I agree that yes, for the average person who still uses stock Android, social media, "the cloud", SMS etc etc etc etc, then this would be pointless for that kind of person. But things don't really tend to be that black and white in my experience, and that's my issue with these kinds of "it's not worth it, the botnet's already got you" responses. Hell, in my experience alone, the path to becoming conscious of opsec wasn't sudden at all, in fact it was very gradual. I moved over time, doing things like using my Gmail through a 3rd party FOSS client, using frontends for social media while I still had it, getting used to DDG, switching to GNU/Linux, and so on, deleting things when I could once I realised how little I got from the hassle of trying to protect my privacy at all. I'm not trying to just blogpost here, I'm trying to make a point that while it might seem worthless to take certain steps, they add up over time and it's a lot more valuble to recommend them to someone than just "delete all your social media, switch operating systems, cancel your cell plan, buy a PinePhone". A surprising amount of people are open to these small steps, which is what I realized when I deleted all my social media and gave options for friends to keep in touch. There is a *lot* of space between "botnetted social media drone" and "stallmanesque privacy obsession", and there's a lot of nuance on how much data on you can actually be collected. Anyways, re:threat models. Yes, this is an important point to make, I agree. I guess for reference, my threat model isn't spectacularly high. I'm no journalist or whistleblower or anything, but I have my reasons to want to be private outside of my parallel general interest in it. So I take the steps I can - I run Lineage on my phone, I firewall pretty near everything on it through Netguard until I'm ever ready to use it. I use Protonmail for email, and GPG when in contact with people who are forced to use Gmail and the like. The point I'm trying to make now is that a large amount of what you're saying doesn't apply too heavily to my setup. But I still have steps I want to take, and disabling these components is a part of that. The lack of a libre cell modem and such is also a point of concern to me, hence my idea here >>11534 about the dual phones and using my smartphone largely just as a small computer. Sure, it's not like it's a solid fix for the fact that that modem is going to track me, but I can mitigate that by keeping it in a faraday case and batteryless until I'm ready to use it. Being tracked *sometimes* is still obviously not good, but it's a lot better than being tracked *all the time* on account of the phone constantly connecting to nearby towers. The Wi-Fi triangulation is a point of concern for me as well and something I wonder if any FOSS operating systems implement remedies for that I'm just not aware of. I'm not attacking your response, I appreciate it actually. I'm just trying to provide some context and awareness of nuance.

>>11576 I had thought of this, but was too worried about damaging the phone to try it. Is it really just as easy as shoving a tiny screwdriver into the mic? I've got covers over the cameras for now anyways, but I wonder if just destroying them would be worth it...

Next lvl of paranoia. Lain, just watch what you're saying. It's more likely someone would listen to the actual call rather than filtering through the noise of daily-life chatter. It doesn't give out as much as simply having the phone in the first place. I agree that selfie-cameras are cancer, but microphone? In a phone? Come on, literally the only reason to keep a phone is to use a mic for calls. Get a phone with removable battery if you're so scared, goddamit. The camera, especially on a laptop, would be the last target, because it has a high chance to give out the attacker. Many laptop cameras have a built-in led, so they wouldn't work without glowing the led. Check your device's circuit for yourself to confirm this. If the led glows without any reason - anyone would know something is not quite right. Adding such led is also an easy hack. Covering cameras in laptops is such a dumb fad... If _they_ have privileges high enough to hide on your own system then you are already screwed in many worse ways...

>>11592 >It's more likely someone would listen to the actual call rather than filtering through the noise of daily-life chatter >literally the only reason to keep a phone is to use a mic for calls >Get a phone with removable battery if you're so scared, goddamit. >Covering cameras in laptops is such a dumb fad... You sound like you've been living under a rock for the past decade, or at least since the 2013 leaks. >If _they_ have privileges high enough to hide on your own system then you are already screwed in many worse ways... Is it really that absurd of a thought to you that other people might be disturbed by the thought of being able to be watched? Like, literally watched through a camera?

>>11593 >Is it really that absurd of a thought to you that other people might be disturbed by the thought of being able to be watched? Like, literally watched through a camera? If that is a concern at all, then you must have already failed with opsec on multiple fronts. Don't get compromised. Realistically, someone having pics of your shirt should be the last of your worries in that situation.

>>11518 Why even carry a phone then? Just go NoPhone.

>>11592 >just watch what you're saying >at all times because you carry a spy device on you LOL To answer OP, yes I have de-soldered the microphone from my phone I only use the microphone on headphones for a phone call. I guess technically a speaker and a microphone are the same thing so if I were even more schizo I'd remove those too. >>11518 I've had many dumb phones, the ones you can buy now just run sketchy as fuarrrk android roms though. I managed to side-load apps on to many of these "dumb phones". >>11616 This. Imagine needing to be contactable 24/7.

>>11620 >at all times because you carry a spy device on you LOL This, pretty much. Even if you don't, then someone else does nearby, for instance the person you are talking to. +1 for NoPhone

You can typically just detach the cameras and microphones from the the device and that's all you need, since most phones and tablets are now coming with "dual microphone" setups or multiple mics, you have to get inside and remove each single one. Apple devices are particularly bad about this, but what is nice about them is that you can have one apple device for niggercattle service that has your sim in it, and a second apple device with the mics removed inside the house accessible at all times. If mobile is a problem, then maybe Librem once the software catches up will put you at ease since you can place a prepaid sim inside of the phone and to retain functionality with botnet services just place botnet apps you might have to use inside of a vm on a different connection. People use this stuff mainly via wifi anyway so maybe using your brewing soykaf traffic through tor on public wifi and your nigger cattle traffic through a vpn on public wifi with both of them listed with separate macs would be ideal.

>>11624 >and a second apple device with the mics removed inside the house accessible at all times. Do you do this? What is the point? Just use your PC.

>>11642 Phone calls on my sim get forwarded to the second one without it and I can use a headset to talk on the phone. When I'm done I remove the headset and I can continue my business.

>>11643 If your calls get forwarded over IP why can't you just use a soft-phone on your PC? The ergonomics are basically the same since you're using wireless headphones anyway. Hell, you could even pick up some IP phones from an office liquidation sale and set them up so they ring throughout your house. Am I missing something?

>>11644 Because I did not think to buy one of those, and Apple stuff is a perfect botnet interface to handle appshit people want you to use. Synchronizing an app to my phone so that I am efficient in public.

>>11648 > choosing apple over aosp for privacy reasons Something doesn't add up here, anon.

>>11649 Yes it does. There are two devices, these are botnet devices. I use these two devices for my job, purchases, communicating with meatspace people. These devices are botnet because I have to be reached by work via phone and app. Then I have my soykafpost machine. This machine is private and secure. This blacklists almost every server and website I use the botnet devices for.

I'm looking for an app that disables wifi as soon as you lose connection to a known network so you're not being tracked by every wifi jn the city as soon as you pass them

>>11958 You can do it with android's system profiles. Set up a profile with a trigger on network disconnect. It's as simple as that. For the reference: I'm on Lineage 16.0 right now.

>>11517 Unless there was a hole or potential zero days for this (cam/mic) in the new AOSP, you're still fuarrrked either way. If you had a phone back then, they only stopped the camera running background around android Nougat so there's already enough data gathered anyways. Apps within Marshmallow and below could use the camera, and record stuff when permitted. Though even if you had a Nougat or 11, there's still what's called OEM patches which could be a secret permission for them to still use the camera and record in background, bypass Nougat camera restrictions, storage isolation, and some other soykaf that's bad for you. Most botnet apps are bundled as system apps which have system-tier permissions so you're fuarrrked if you use OEM ROM. Either way, still fuarrrked because the clipboard is and had always been accessible for any apps and apps can access clipboard while running in background.

>>12052 Thanks for this! I'm on Lineage OS 16 too. Why is it that Graphene OS is more private? It's options like this that 'really' give you privacy when you must use a botnet to begin with.

>>12187 That's why you not only tape your laptop's camera but also your phone's. I don't expect any lainons here taking selfies regularly anyway

>>12209 This. Front-facing cameras are useless to me. I feel much safer looking at my phone now that I've taped the camera. I can look at it but it's no longer looking back at me. As other anons have said, removing the mic to your phone or, really, any device you bring out in public is pointless. Your phone can't hear you, but your boss's phone can. Or your friend's, or your mom's, or the little cutie at the bus stop everyday when you walk by...unless you walk somewhere secluded (which has its own problems if you're not tough), something nearby is listening to you. Rear-facing camera is useful day-to-day, so you don't want to cover that up. A better mitigation is to make it as close to a digital camera as possible: disable backups or don't start them at all. Maybe turn on airplane mode everytime you open the camera. Absolutely no reason why a camera app couldn't work without Internet.

>Hardware kill switches are nothing but marketing frills. The microphone kill switch is useless since audio can still be gotten via the sensors (such as the gyroscope or accelerometer). https://crypto.stanford.edu/gyrophone/files/gyromic.pdf https://venetosmani.com/publications/Speech_Activity_Detection_Using_Accelerometer_IEEE_EMBC_2012.pdf And just put a piece of tape over your camera.

>>13309 Sensitivity is not quite as high, and the work required to extract good audio is more than "start recording". It's not a guarantee at all, but it raises the minimal effort required. Consider as well that by this logic you should never use HDDs in a computer, as they also have sensors which can be used to eavesdrop on screaming discussions.

>>11518 >Cons? no internet... ? i can't figure out what people use dumb phones for and therefore they are amazing to me

>>13712 I put off getting a smart phone until it was basically too difficult to avoid (without jumping through hoops like ordering online). They're really good for what they do: talk and text. Plus, at least the models I always had, you could handily remove the battery with zero effort, rendering it inert if you so chose. One that I had was able to store mp3s and had a little low-res camera, which basically made it do everything I use my smart phone for now. Well, to be fair, I've become something of a data plan pleb, and the luxury of surfing the internet in transit is somewhat nice, but definitely not something I'd miss if I had to let it go. On the overall thread, you can easily disable the cameras by obscuring them with an opaque sticker. The microphone is a bit more tricky, since you might need to disassemble the phone to get at it and be sure it's completely disabled. One might also ask, "how do I use it to make phone calls then?" Cheap bluetooth headset is your answer. If you're particularly paranoid, you can get a Librum or PinePhone, which I understand both have hardware switches for all recording-capable devices.

>>13309 The average phone has 2 microphones. One on the top and bottom for calls. Some have three or four which is camera-facing microphone (mono or stereo) for the main camera. There's also MEMS microphone hidden somewhere which sometimes are in the guise of "sensor" but in reality it has a special API for the apps to constantly spy on you recently which surprisingly understudied while being obvious. This secret MEMS thing happened right after android had a privacy upgrade and microphone permissions pull request although such thing won't stop the big data from ever collecting. They even had the audacity to claim that "apps were not using the camera in background" after having one Yes permission by hiring a nut job and writing an assuring article for PR - that of course 'is' false and you could prove with OLD apk, OLD phone, and a phone with LED indicator for camera activity. Before android Oreo, there were apps that could activate the front camera, even games did but I think it's not in video capture but they're just snapping pictures since the performance wasn't affected that much. Some phones had LED indicators for camera activity (had one) and you won't even need special root apps to know which apps were abusing the camera, and such apps don't even have any "special permission" depending on the vendor OS you're using. If you're using AOSP or Cyanogenmod (at the time) you would see a bunch of special permissions (about 7 pages of scrolling) that vendor OSes tries to hide while vendor/stock OS would show you that there's no special permissions for such abusive app. Storage isolation is still a problem these days. fuarrrk phones.

>>13791 Also, clipboard exposure is the go-to for privacy abusive/invasive apps. Copy something in clipboard? Some background app grabs it. Copy your password? Well good luck if you're still not using AppOpsX. Pull request never, don't dream. They earn for your personal data, that's their revenue model. They'll change once they have a replacement for their invasive soykafs.

>>11533 It's probably possible to set up an sms->matrix bridge.

You can also burn out camera CCDs using a laser or focused sunlight while they are on. Dynamic microphone can be dealt with using a powerful magnet, electret microphone can be destroyed with acetone.

bump live

>>11517 Listen here fool removing the mic is a fatal flaw especially if there's task needed when to use these tools.

>>11518 Uhh lainchan is considered social media.

shizo thread why you need phone without microphone, you use phone just for SMS texting?

>>11518 Based, I have used a dumbphone for three months and don't miss smartphones at all. Two week battery life, highly compact size and option to remove battery are all huge pluses for me that are hard, if not impossible to attain with smartphones today. >>15548 >imageboard >social media

>>15548 >Uhh lainchan is considered social media. "Social media" has connotations posts being tied to identities, whether real or pseudonymous. Image boards don't.

>>15555 >Based, I have used a dumbphone for three months and don't miss smartphones at all. Two week battery life, highly compact size and option to remove battery are all huge pluses for me that are hard, if not impossible to attain with smartphones today. That's fine if one's needs boil down to having voice comms with other people. I have a smartphone because I don't care about voice calls. I just want a mobile computer with a data connection that doubles as a wifi hotspot for my laptop. I suspect I'm not in the minority.

>>15554 >why you need phone without microphone, you use phone just for SMS texting? read the OP >>15555 I confirm what >>15548 said, lainchan and other boards are social media in many ways. >>15556 >image boards

>>15558 God I hate that this image is me.

>>15548 >lainchan >social

>>15576 change that >>15578 would anti-social media be a better monecre?

>>11517 Phones have multiple microphones usually about two to three. Some even have a undocumented and dedicated MEMS microphone which the phone manufacturer most probably has some kind of API to interface it with their system apps bloatware >the mic appears as an unsuspecting sensor which require no permission instead of a sound recorder which requires one

>>11517 >remove Or you can make a flex PCB which has one purpose: hardware switch, modify or 3D print your back cover, attach the switches over the battery, mic, camera. You can even probably do a flex PCB sandwich between SIM card and your phone if you want the true Airplane Mode.

I've removed the cameras, never connected the phone to to data or wifi, and always have the battery out of it unless I need to make an emergency call or text while I'm out. I never use it at home either.

>>15578 Yup literally the definition of it speak factual sense.

>>15653 Quite a fictitious lie you have in there mate.

Yaas rather than pay for the 3500$ GSMK Cryptophone or then the 800$ Librem Phone or then the 400$ Pinephone go the ghetto way of buying some old Nexus or something from China for 50$ and then just knife away (or invest in something like this https://www.ifixit.com/Store/Tools/Pro-Tech-Toolkit/IF145-307 ) the LTE chip and instead use a pocket 4G modem to share WiFi through which you use a VPN on the phone and use prepaid SIMs on the modem that you keep switching.

https://www.gl-inet.com/products/gl-e750/

At five foot six and 270 pounds, the bank robber was impossible to miss. On April 19, 1995, he hit two Pittsburgh banks in broad daylight. Security cameras picked up good images of his face — he wore no mask — and showed him holding a gun to the teller. Police made sure the footage was broadcast on the local eleven o’clock news. A tip came in within minutes, and just after midnight, the police were knocking on the suspect’s door in McKeesport. Identified as McArthur Wheeler, he was incredulous. “But I wore the juice,” he said. Wheeler told police he rubbed lemon juice on his face to make it invisible to security cameras. Detectives concluded he was not delusional, not on drugs — just incredibly mistaken.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/06/europe/antwerp-belgium-cocaine-seizures-scli-intl/index.html

>>15665 >$70 ifixit toolkit I love how it markets itself like it's some next gen phone or a Razer laptop. So needless and unnecessary just like the price. I literally have a way cheaper toolkit that has all the same soykaf this has.