Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'phone'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Informatii generale
    • Anunturi importante
    • Bine ai venit
    • Proiecte RST
  • Sectiunea tehnica
    • Exploituri
    • Challenges
    • Bug Bounty
    • Programare
    • Reverse engineering & exploit development
    • Mobile phones
    • Sisteme de operare si discutii hardware
    • Electronica
    • Wireless Pentesting
    • Black SEO & monetizare
  • Tutoriale
    • Tutoriale in romana
    • Tutoriale in engleza
    • Tutoriale video
  • Programe
    • Programe hacking
    • Programe securitate
    • Programe utile
    • Free stuff
  • Discutii generale
    • RST Market
    • Off-topic
    • Discutii incepatori
    • Stiri securitate
    • Sugestii
    • Linkuri
    • Cosul de gunoi
  • Club Test's Topics
  • Clubul saraciei absolute's Topics
  • Chernobyl Hackers's Topics
  • Programming & Fun's Jokes / Funny pictures (programming related!)
  • Programming & Fun's Programming
  • Programming & Fun's Programming challenges
  • Bani pă net's Topics
  • Cumparaturi online's Topics
  • Cumparaturi online's Test
  • Web Development's Forum


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL











Found 12 results

  1. Gogu_Daltonistu

    Free PHONE!

    Cum zice si cantecul: FREE PHONE! Se ofera una bucata Lenovo Vibe P1 ASA CUM ESTE: acumulatorul nu tine prea mult(cam o ora/2 - cred) nefolosit de 2 luni, incarcat azi, testat 10 minute mici "bumpuri" pe carcasa de aluminiu in spate(nu s-au spart nuci dar nici mult nu mai era) Vine insotit de cablu, nu si de incarcator(usb to microusb). Telefonul functioneaza. Se expediaza la adresa indicata dupa ce decid cui ii va ajunge(normal, platesc eu si posta... daca e mocangeala macar sa fie pana la capat). Cum il primesti: faci ceva contributie la RST, sau ceva asemanator care sa nu aduca neaparat profit in buzunarul tau ci ceva de tip contributie(open source, va descurcati cu ceva destept). STIU, NU E PREMIUL DE TIP MISS UNIVERS, NU E NICI MACAR UN BEMVE. DAR E CEVA. Asa ca nu va apucati sa trolati ca aurolacii.
  2. The hugely popular smartphone messaging service WhatsApp, acquired by Facebook for over $20 billion last year, has reportedly been found to be prone to hijacking without unlocking or knowing your device password, making its hundreds of Millions of users vulnerable to, not just hackers, but also non-technical people. This trick lets anyone surrounds you to get effectively control over your WhatsApp account. The attacker needs nothing more than a phone number of the target person and access to the target mobile phone for a few seconds, even if it is locked. Hacking Whatsapp account in such scenario is not hard for your friends and colleagues. This is not actually a loophole or vulnerability in WhatsApp, and rather it is just the way WhatsApp is designed and its account setup mechanism works. NOTE: Moreover, we aren’t encouraging users to hack others WhatsApp account, but the purpose of publishing this article is to warn and remind our readers that you should be extra careful to whom you lend your mobile phone and not to leave it unattended for longer durations with strangers around. The trick enables the offender to get full control over the victim’s WhatsApp account in no time and the most surprising part is that it independently works on all mobile platforms, including Android, Windows and Apple’s iOS. Here’s How to Hijack someone else’s WhatsApp Account? Below are the clear steps to hack the WhatsApp account on any Smartphones: Begin by setting up a WhatsApp account on a new mobile phone using the phone number of your target. During the setup process, WhatsApp will call the target’s phone number and will provide a PIN that needs to be entered for the authentication of the account. If you already have access to the victim’s phone, you can just answer the phone call and grab the code with no efforts. Even if the victim has a lock screen enabled on the phone, you can receive the phone call to get the secret PIN. Using this known and simple trick your colleagues can hijack your WhatsApp Account easily. The worst case is with iPhones: Things get even worse on iPhone if the users have configured their iPhones with Siri authentication for the lock screen, because all the contact details are available to access the Siri’s settings, effectively giving everyone access to their phone number without the need for a PIN. Thus, if you try to steal the account information of WhatsApp, without even having the phone number of the target user, you can just call your number from target’s phone using Siri. Just check the given video demonstration that explains the simple trick of taking control of anyone’s WhatsApp account. Source
  3. The NSA’s phone-snooping program is on its last legs after senators voted Tuesday to approve the USA Freedom Act, banning bulk collection of Americans’ data two years after the practice was revealed to the public by Edward Snowden. President Obama signed the bill late Tuesday, moving quickly to kick-start several Patriot Act powers that expired this weekend after senators missed a deadline for renewing them. But the bill, which cleared the Senate on a 67-32 vote, puts limits on a key power. Investigators still can demand businesses to turn over customers’ documents and records, but the data must be targeted to individuals or groups and cannot be done indiscriminately. The National Security Agency must end its snooping program within six months, forcing intelligence officials to set up a system that will leave the information with phone companies. Investigators will be able to submit a query only if they have a specific terrorism lead. “It’s the first major overhaul of government surveillance in decades and adds significant privacy protections for the American people,” said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who led a two-year fight to end the NSA’s snooping. “Congress is ending the bulk collection of Americans’ phone records once and for all.” Supporters of the NSA program predicted that intelligence officials will not be able to get the same kinds of results if phone companies rather than government agencies hold the data. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, said Mr. Obama will be blamed for weakening U.S. security and that the NSA program’s end was in line with the president’s opposition to detaining suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and failing to confront the Islamic State. “The president’s efforts to dismantle our counterterrorism tools have not only been inflexible, they are especially ill-timed,” Mr. McConnell said. But it was the majority leader’s miscalculations about scheduling that backed NSA supporters into a corner. Mr. McConnell wanted the entire program to be extended and tried to use the June 1 expiration deadline to force fellow senators into a take-it-or-leave-it choice. But his colleagues, including a large percentage of Republicans, rejected his bid, sending the Senate over the deadline and undercutting Mr. McConnell’s leverage. On Tuesday, Mr. McConnell made a last-ditch effort to change the bill, doubling the six-month grace period for the NSA and requiring the government to certify that it could keep producing the same results even without storing the phone data itself. Even some senators who were sympathetic to his cause, though, voted against the amendments, saying any changes would have sent the bill back to the House and prolonged the fight, leaving the Patriot Act neutered in the meantime. Nearly half of Senate Republicans voted for the USA Freedom Act, joining all but one Democrat and a Democrat-leaning independent. The vote was a major vindication for the House, which for the second time this year has driven the legislative agenda on a major issue, striking a bipartisan compromise that senators were forced to accept. The bill also had the backing of the intelligence community, which has assured Congress that it won’t be giving up any major capabilities and can make the new system work even with the data held by phone companies instead of the NSA. Mr. Obama initially defended the program, but after several internal reviews found it to be ineffective and potentially illegal, he said he would support a congressional rewriting to end the law. The George W. Bush and Obama administrations justified the program under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which gives federal investigators power to compel businesses to turn over customers’ documents and records. Using that power, the NSA demanded the metadata — the numbers, dates and durations involved — from all Americans’ calls. The information was stored and queried when investigators suspected a number was associated with terrorism and wanted to see who was calling whom. Backers said the program didn’t impinge on Americans’ liberty because the information, while stored by the government, wasn’t searched until there was a specific terrorism nexus. They said there were never any documented abuses of the program. But opponents said repeated reviews, including one last month by the Justice Department’s inspector general, found the program has never been responsible for a major break in a terrorism case. Given its ineffectiveness, they said, it was time to end it. Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat who had been battling behind closed doors for years as a member of the intelligence committee to end the program, said the vote was a first step. He said he and like-minded colleagues now will turn to other powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the government uses to scoop up emails — a power Mr. Wyden said is increasingly gathering information on Americans, contrary to its intent. “This is only the beginning. There is a lot more to do,” he said. Some of Mr. Wyden’s colleagues in those fights, including Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, voted against the USA Freedom Act. “Forcing us to choose between our rights and our safety is a false choice,” said Mr. Paul, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination and making his stand against the Patriot Act a major part of his campaign. Mr. Paul even used the obstruction powers the Senate gives to a single lawmaker to block action Sunday, sending Congress hurtling across the deadline and causing three powers to expire: the records collection, the ability to target “lone wolf” terrorists and the power to track suspected terrorists from phone to phone without obtaining a wiretap each time. The lone-wolf and wiretap powers were extended without changes. Source
  4. Ce preferati si de ce: Windows Phone sau Android ?
  5. ce spune titlu' pm cu pretul si volumul.
  6. FOR YEARS THE government has kept mum about its use of a powerful phone surveillance technology known as a stingray. The Justice Department and local law enforcement agencies insist that the only reason for their secrecy is to prevent suspects from learning how the devices work and devising methods to thwart them. But a court filing recently uncovered by the ACLU suggests another reason for the secrecy: the fact that stingrays can disrupt cellular service for any phone in their vicinity—not just targeted phones—as well as any other mobile devices that use the same cellular network for connectivity as the targeted phone. Civil liberties groups have long asserted that stingrays are too invasive because they can sweep up data about every phone in their vicinity, not just targeted phones, and can interfere with their calls. Justice Department and local law enforcement agencies, however, have refused to confirm this or answer other questions about the tools. But in the newly uncovered document (.pdf)—a warrant application requesting approval to use a stingray—FBI Special Agent Michael A. Scimeca disclosed the disruptive capability to a judge. “Because of the way, the Mobile Equipment sometimes operates,” Scimeca wrote in his application, “its use has the potential to intermittently disrupt cellular service to a small fraction of Sprint’s wireless customers within its immediate vicinity. Any potential service disruption will be brief and minimized by reasonably limiting the scope and duration of the use of the Mobile Equipment.” The document was previously sealed and only came to light after the defense attorney for a defendant in the case filed a motion last year to dismiss evidence collected by the stingray. It’s the first time the ACLU has seen the FBI acknowledge the stingray’s disruptive capabilities and raises a number of questions about the nature of the disruption and whether the Federal Communications Commission knew about it when it certified the equipment. “We think the fact that stingrays block or drop calls of cell phone users in the vicinity should be of concern to cell service providers, the FCC, and ordinary people,” says Nate Wessler staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “If an emergency or important/urgent call (to a doctor, a loved one, etc.) is blocked or dropped by this technology, that’s a serious problem.” Stingrays are mobile surveillance systems the size of a small briefcase that impersonate a legitimate cell phone tower in order to trick mobile phones and other mobile devices in their vicinity into connecting to them and revealing their unique ID and location. Stingrays emit a signal that is stronger than the signal of other cell towers in the vicinity in order to force mobile phones and other devices to establish a connection with them and reveal their unique ID. Stingrays can then determine the direction from which the phone connected with them, data that can then be used to track the movement of the phone as it continuously connects to the fake tower. Although stingrays are designed to recognize 911 calls and let them pass to legitimate cell towers without connecting to the stingray, the revelation from the FBI agent raises the possibility that other kinds of emergency calls not made to 911 may not get through. Law enforcement agencies around the country have been using variations of the stingray since the mid-90s to track the movement of suspects in this way. The technology is used by the FBI, the Secret Service, the U.S. Marshals Service, Customs and Border Patrol agents and the Drug Enforcement Agency as well as local law enforcement agencies in more than a dozen states. But the secrecy around their use has been extreme, due in part to non-disclosure agreements that law enforcement agencies sign with the companies that make stingrays. Stingrays Cloaked in Secrecy Authorities in several states have been caught deceiving judges and defense attorneys about how they use the controversial technology or have simply used the devices without obtaining a warrant in order to avoid disclosing their use to a court. In other cases they have withheld information from courts and defense attorneys about how the stingrays work, refraining from disclosing that the devices pick up location data on all systems in their vicinity, not just targeted phones. Law enforcement agencies have even gone so far as to intervene in public records requests to prevent the public from learning about the technology. The revelation in the court document is therefore significant and also begs the question: Who else knew about this capability and for how long? The Federal Communications Commission is responsible for certifying equipment that operates on radio frequencies to make sure that devices comply with certain technical standards and do not cause radio interference. If the companies that make stingrays failed to disclose the disruption of service to the federal agency, it would mean the devices had potentially been approved under false pretenses. The Harris Corporation in Florida—the leading maker of stingrays for law enforcement in the U.S. and an aggressive proponent of secrecy around their use—has already been singled out for a questionable statement the company made to the FCC in a 2010 email. In the correspondence, a Harris representative told the FCC that the technology was used by law enforcement only “in emergency situations.” But according to records the ACLU obtained from the police department in Tallahassee, Florida, in nearly 200 cases that the equipment was used since 2007 only 29 percent of these involved an emergency. Stingrays are regularly used in day-to-day criminal investigations to track suspected drug dealers, bank robbers and others. The FCC certified stingray equipment from Harris in April 2011 and March 2012. Asked whether the company disclosed the stingray’s disruptive capabilities to the FCC when it sought certification, an FCC official told WIRED, “We can’t comment on how the devices operate because that information is confidential in accordance with the FCC’s application process.” She said Harris had specifically “requested confidentiality in the application process.” She also said that if “wireless customers experiencing unexplained service disruptions or interference” report it to the FCC, the agency will “investigate the causes.” How Stingray Disruption Works The case in which the FBI disclosed the service disruption is ongoing and involves a defendant named Claude Williams who was suspected of participating in a string of armed bank robberies. In July 2012, the FBI’s Scimeca submitted an application for a warrant to use a stingray to track Williams’s phone. Although Scimeca was seeking authorization to use a stingray, he referred to it alternatively as mobile pen register and trap and trace equipment in his application. The nomenclature is important because the ACLU has long accused the government of misleading judges by using this term. Pen registers record the numbers dialed from a specific phone number, while trap and trace devices record the numbers that dial into a particular number. But stingrays are used primarily to track the location and movement of a device. Although Scimeca disclosed to the magistrate that the equipment could disrupt phone service, he didn’t elaborate about how the disruption might occur. Experts suspect it has something to do with the “catch-and-release” way stingrays work. For example, once the stingray obtains the unique ID of a device, it releases it so that it can connect to a legitimate cell tower, allowing data and voice calls to go through. “As each phone tries to connect, [the stingray] will say, ‘I’m really busy right now so go use a different tower. So rather than catching the phone, it will release it,” says Chris Soghoian, chief technologist for the ACLU. “The moment it tries to connect, [the stingray] can reject every single phone” that is not the target phone. But the stingray may or may not release phones immediately, Soghoian notes, and during this period disruption can occur. Disruption can also occur from the way stingrays force-downgrade mobile devices from 3G and 4G connectivity to 2G to get them to connect and reveal their unique ID and location. In order for the kind of stingray used by law enforcement to work, it exploits a vulnerability in the 2G protocol. Phones using 2G don’t authenticate cell towers, which means that a rogue tower can pass itself off as a legitimate cell tower. But because 3G and 4G networks have fixed this vulnerability, the stingray will jam these networks to force nearby phones to downgrade to the vulnerable 2G network to communicate. “Depending on how long the jamming is taking place, there’s going to be disruption,” says Soghoian. “When your phone goes down to 2G, your data just goes to hell. So at the very least you will have disruption of internet connectivity. And if and when the phones are using the stingray as their only tower, there will likely be an inability to receive or make calls.” “A Grave Threat to Privacy” Concerns about the use of stingrays is growing. Last week, Senator Bill Nelson (D—Florida) sent a letter to the FCC calling on the agency to disclose information about its certification process for approving stingrays and any other tools with similar functionality. Nelson asked in particular for information about any oversight put in place to make sure that use of the devices complies with the manufacturer’s representations to the FCC about how the technology works and is used. Nelson also raised concerns about their use in a remarkable speech on the Senate floor. The Senator said the technology “poses a grave threat to consumers’ cellphone and Internet privacy,” particularly when law enforcement agencies use them without a warrant. He also noted that invasive devices like the stingray will inevitably force lawmakers to come up with new ways to protect privacy. His combative speech marks the first time a lawmaker has called out the controversial technology in the public chamber. But his speech was also remarkable for another reason: Nelson’s state of Florida is home to the Harris Corporation, and the company is his second biggest campaign donor. Source
  7. Vand soft care permite LOCALIZARE/INTERCEPTARE/ACCES IN TELEFON/ACCES JURNAL APELURI/ACCES SMS-URI...chiar mai mult poti suna, trimite sms de pe telefonul victima. Softul este f.simplu de instalat, trebuie doar sa aveti acces 5min la telefonul victimei, nu se depisteaza cu nici un antivirus de telefoane, odata instalat virusul este ascuns si nu apare in aplicatii deci practic este invvisibil. Pret 500eur
  8. WASHINGTON - The CIA pays AT&T more than $10 million a year to provide phone records with possible links to suspected terrorists, the New York Times reported Thursday, citing government officials. The arrangement is voluntary and there is no court order requiring the company to cooperate with the Central Intelligence Agency, officials told the Times. The program differs from controversial data collection by the National Security Agency, which receives phone records or other "meta-data" from telecommunications companies through court orders. The CIA passes on phone numbers of suspected militants abroad and AT&T then sifts through its database for records of phone calls that can identify foreigners with terror links, the newspaper reported. Most of the logs handed over by AT&T are related to foreign-to-foreign calls, the report said. For international calls that include one end in the United States, the company does not reveal the identity of the Americans and hides several digits of their phone numbers, which allows the CIA to comply with a ban on domestic spying, it said. The Central Intelligence Agency could choose to refer a hidden number to the FBI, which could then issue a subpoena demanding AT&T divulge the information, according to the report. An AT&T spokesman did not confirm or deny the program but said the firm acted in accordance with laws in the United States and in foreign countries. "In all cases, whenever any governmental entity anywhere seeks information from us, we ensure that the request and our response are completely lawful and proper," spokesman Mark Siegel told AFP. But he added: "We do not comment on questions concerning national security." Without verifying the existence of the program, the CIA said its intelligence gathering does not violate the privacy of Americans. "The CIA protects the nation and upholds the privacy rights of Americans by ensuring that its intelligence collection activities are focused on acquiring foreign intelligence and counterintelligence in accordance with US laws," said spokesman Todd Ebitz. The CIA is usually associated with gathering intelligence through spies in the field while the NSA focuses on eavesdropping abroad and code-breaking. But an unnamed intelligence official told the Times that the CIA sometimes needs to check phone records in "time-sensitive situations" and be able to act with speed and agility. The report offered the first indication that the CIA had a role in electronic data collection as leaks from a former intelligence contractor, Edward Snowden, have sparked a global firestorm around the NSA's digital spying. US Internet communications firms have voiced complaints that they are legally required to cooperate with the NSA's "data mining." Industry advocates have expressed concerns that NSA spying revelations could turn consumers in the US and abroad against the American technology companies. Source: CIA Paid AT&T for Phone Records: Report | SecurityWeek.Com
  9. Swapping software can give one GSM phone the power to prevent incoming calls and text messages from reaching other phones nearby. By making simple modifications to common Motorola phones, researchers in Berlin have shown they can block calls and text messages intended for nearby people connected to the same cellular network. The method works on the second-generation (2G) GSM networks that are the most common type of cell network worldwide. In the U.S., both AT&T and T-Mobile carry calls and text messages using GSM networks. The attack involves modifying a phone’s embedded software so that it can trick the network out of delivering incoming calls or SMS messages to the intended recipients. In theory, one phone could block service to all subscribers served by base stations within a network coverage area known as a location area, says Jean-Pierre Seifert, who heads a telecommunications security research group at the Technical University of Berlin. Seifert and colleagues presented a paper on the technique at the Usenix Security Symposium in Washington, D.C., last week. An online video demonstrates the attack in action. Seifert’s group modified the embedded software, or “firmware,” on a chip called the baseband processor, the component of a mobile phone that controls how it communicates with a network’s transmission towers. In normal situations, when a call or SMS is sent over the network, a cellular tower “pages” nearby devices to find the one that should receive it. Normally, only the proper phone will answer—by, in effect, saying “It’s me,” as Seifert puts it. Then the actual call or SMS goes through. The rewritten firmware can block calls because it can respond to paging faster than a victim’s phone can. When the network sends out a page, the modified phone says “It’s me” first, and the victim’s phone never receives it. “If you respond faster to the network, the network tries to establish a service with you as an attacker,” says Nico Golde, a researcher in Seifert’s group. That’s enough to stall communications in a location area, which in Berlin average 200 square kilometers in size. The group didn’t design the hack to actually listen to the call or SMS but just hijacked the paging process. Traditionally, the details of how baseband processors work internally has been proprietary to makers of chips and handsets. But a few years ago, baseband code for a certain phone, the Vitelcom TSM30, leaked out. That enabled researchers to understand how baseband code works and spawned several open-source projects to study and tweak it. The Berlin group used that open-source baseband code to write replacement software for Motorola’s popular C1 series of phones (such as the C118, C119, and C123). Those devices all use Texas Instruments’ Calypso baseband processor. The researchers tested their attack by blocking calls and messages just to their own phones. However, they calculate that just 11 modified phones would be enough to shut down service of Germany’s third-largest cellular network operator, E-Plus, in a location area. “All those phones are listening to all the paging requests in that area, and they are answering ‘It’s me,’ and nobody in that cell will get an SMS or a phone call,” Seifert explains. Jung-Min Park, a wireless-security researcher at Virginia Tech, says that although devising the attack requires detailed technical knowledge, once it is created, “if someone had access to the same code and hardware, repeating the attack should be possible for an engineer.” Although carriers today mostly tout their 3G and 4G services, most networks around the world still use GSM networks. Around four billion people worldwide use GSM networks for calls, and carriers also use them for some machine-to-machine applications. The problem could be fixed, but that would require changing GSM protocols to require phones to prove their identity through an additional exchange of encrypted codes. “The defense is expensive to deploy,” says Victor Bahl, principal researcher and manager of the mobility and networking research group at Microsoft. “I can only speculate that the cell network providers are reluctant to invest in mitigation strategies in the absence of an immediate threat.” Seifert says the research of his group and others shows that basic aspects of mobile communications can no longer be assumed to be safe from hacking. “The answer of the carriers is: ‘It’s illegal—you are not allowed to do it,’” he says, “However, the implication is that the good old times, where you can assume that all the phones are honest and following the protocol, are over.” Demo: Sursa: Software Update to $20 Phones Could Topple 2G Cell Networks | MIT Technology Review Oare e chiar "noua" stirea?
  10. [EN] 1. you download from here http://android-x86.googlecode.com/files/android-x86-1.6-r2.iso 2. you have to download a virtual machine in this tutorialis virtual box http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads or virtualPC or vmware 3.Select the .iso image to boot up and its done! enjoy [RO] da pai intai salut la toti cred ca intelegeti pasii 1 si 2 iar la 3 e simplu trebuie sa pui sa "boot-eze" prima data imaginea downloadata. o puteti trage si pe un cd sau un usb si merge si la cateva laptopuri cum ar fi "The Lenovo ThinkPad x61" dar asa e cel mai simplu cu Virtual Box Important!!merge doar pe x86 un mic video ca sa vedeti despre ce e vorba mie unu imi place desi are cateva buguri numai bine sper ca v-a placut:) [poate rep+] le :a si am uitat sa zic o sa va puna sa alegeti dintre 1live cd 2 vesa mode 3 debug mode 4 install Cel mai bine merge cu VESA mode
  11. The Evolution of Mobile Phones Video ? 5min.com really interesting:)
  12. whistler

    problema cu un card

    sau mai bine zis cu un telefon. inca nu stiu sigur. pana acum cateva zile, daca puneam phoneul la comp si puteam sa citesc datele de pe card. ACUM nu mai pot. rulez windows xp pro sp1. am incercat chiar si cu un update la driver`urile de la usb ... un reset la telefon, un add hardware wizard.. cam de toate. are cineva idee cam ce anume ar putea fi ? maine o sa incerc sa schimb si cablul de date. poate e de la el, desi telefonul mi se incarca. nu. nu am un card reader si nici nu vreau sa formatez cardul. later edit : poate fi softul, intrucat am dat peste o problema asemanatoare ridicata de un alt utilizator . multumesc.