COMM Mysterious Fake Cell Towers Found Throughout the US

[Avatar]

‘fake’ cellphone towers found in U.S.

Seventeen mysterious cellphone towers have been found in America which look like ordinary towers, and can only be identified by a heavily customized handset built for Android security – but have a much more malicious purpose, according to Popular Science. Much more information at this article.

The fake ‘towers’ – computers which wirelessly attack cellphones via the “baseband” chips built to allow them to communicate with their networks, can eavesdrop and even install spyware, ESD claims. They are a known technology - but the surprise is that they are in active use.

The towers were found by users of the CryptoPhone 500, one of several ultra-secure handsets that have come to market in the last couple of years, after an executive noticed his handset was “leaking” data regularly.

Its American manufacturer boasts that the handset has a “hardened” version of Android which removes 468 vulnerabilities from the OS.
Android Security: Towers in casinos

Despite its secure OS, Les Goldsmith of the handset’s US manufacturer ESD found that his personal Android security handset’s firewall showed signs of attack “80 to 90” times per hour.

The leaks were traced to the mysterious towers. Despite having some of the functions of normal cellphone towers, Goldsmith says their function is rather different. He describes them as “interceptors” and says that various models can eavesdrop and even push spyware to devices. Normal cellphones cannot detect them – only specialized hardware such as ESD’s Android security handsets.

Who created the towers and maintains them is unknown, Goldsmith says.
Origin of towers ‘unknown’

“Interceptor use in the U.S. is much higher than people had anticipated,” Goldsmith says. “One of our customers took a road trip from Florida to North Carolina and he found eight different interceptors on that trip. We even found one at South Point Casino in Las Vegas.”

Their existence can only be seen on specialized devices, such as the custom Android security OS used by Cryptophone, which includes various security features – including “baseband attack detection.”

The handset, based on a Samsung Galaxy SIII, is described as offering, a “Hardened Android operating system” offering extra security. “Baseband firewall protects against over-the-air attacks with constant monitoring of baseband processor activity, baseband attack detection, and automated initiation of countermeasures”, claims the site.

“What we find suspicious is that a lot of these interceptors are right on top of U.S. military bases.” says Goldsmith. “Whose interceptor is it? Who are they, that’s listening to calls around military bases? The point is: we don’t really know whose they are.”

Baseband attacks are considered extremely difficult – the details of the chips are closely guarded. “Interceptors” are costly devices – and hacking baseband chips is thought to be technically advanced beyond the reach of “ordinary” hackers, ESD says. The devices vary in form, and are sold to government agencies and others, but are computers with specialized software designed to defeat the encryption of cellphone networks. The towers target the “Baseband” operating system of cellphones – a secondary OS which sits “between” iOS or Android, for instance, and the cellular network.

Goldsmith says that the devices cost “less than $100,000” and does not mention what level or type of device his team has detected. Most are still out of reach of average hackers, although freely advertised. One model is the VME Dominator, which is described as, “a real time GSM A5.1 cell phone interceptor. It cannot be detected. It allows interception of voice and text. It also allows voice manipulation, up or down channel blocking, text intercept and modification, calling & sending text on behalf of the user, and directional finding of a user during random monitoring of calls.”

What has come as a surprise is how many “interceptors” are in active use in the U.S., and that their purpose remains mysterious.

http://www.welivesecurity.com/2014/08/28/android-security-2/

 

[jcberean]

Just start chopping them down, destroy them! Next thing you know, the owners will show up

 

[Mark_I]

Is it really a surprise that there are such things sitting across our country? At this point we should have thought that they are everywhere.

 

[Mark D]

I thought it was pretty common knowledge that the NSA had these things up all over the place.

 

[dstraito]

Just start chopping them down, destroy them! Next thing you know, the owners will show up

Or even climb up and disable them without damaging them and see who shows up to fix them.

 

[Suzieq]

Do you think these fake towers are there for no reason?

Did you know they can pulse your house at night while you sleep from these towers?

These towers are not your friend. They are there to spy, control and attack, when you get out of line. It will be part of the police state that we are under now.

Why do you think they are having you breathing in all those nano aluminum participial into your lungs, from the chemtrails? So they can track you, from those nano particulars that are inside your cells. If they can control the nano particulars in your cells, then they can make you sick if they chose to.

 

[Haybails]

Edited to Add: OK, found this in the PopSci article.
"To show what the CryptoPhone can do that less expensive competitors cannot, he points me to a map that he and his customers have created, indicating 17 different phony cell towers known as “interceptors,” detected by the CryptoPhone 500 around the United States during the month of July alone. (The map below is from August.) Interceptors look to a typical phone like an ordinary tower. Once the phone connects with the interceptor, a variety of “over-the-air” attacks become possible, from eavesdropping on calls and texts to pushing spyware to the device."

So, where exactly are these towers (was it "17" that I read about?) located? Is there a map of their locations? How far is the reach of each of them?


HB

 

[Satanta]

Or even climb up and disable them without damaging them and see who shows up to fix them.

Scoped rifle. No climbing eeded.

 

[packyderms_wife]

I thought it was pretty common knowledge that the NSA had these things up all over the place.

This^^^ And if your driving through fly over country they are hidden in old grain silos or newly built silos to look like grain silos. These started popping up around this part of the US oh around 1995 or so.

 

[Dosadi]

If something needs to be private, it should never ever be in electronic format

 

[samus79]

Somebody had to lease/purchase the property these towers are located on, isn't that a matter of public record?

Edited to add: These towers obviously have transmitters, the FCC should have records as well

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

There was a link to this article in the article in PopSci.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/08/11/feds-to-study-illegal-use-of-spy-gear/
(fair use applies)

Feds to study illegal use of spy gear
By Craig Timberg
August 11 2014

The Federal Communications Commission has established a task force to study reported misuse of surveillance technology that can intercept cellular signals to locate people, monitor their calls and send malicious software to their phones.

The powerful technology -- called an IMSI catcher, though also referred to by the trade name “Stingray” — is produced by several major surveillance companies and widely used by police and intelligence services around the world.

The FCC, in response to questions from U.S. Rep. Alan M. Grayson (D-Fla.), plans to study the extent to which criminal gangs and foreign intelligence services are using the devices against Americans. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, in a letter dated this month, said the commission had authority over the surveillance technology and had established a “task force to combat the illicit and unauthorized use of IMSI catchers."

The task forces's mission, Wheeler wrote, "is to develop concrete solutions to protect the cellular network systemically from similar unlawful intrusions and interceptions.”

The action followed numerous news reports, in Newsweek, the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology and The Washington Post, about the vulnerability of cellular networks to interception. Grayson cited those reports in noting that IMSI catchers could be bought for as little as $1,800, or built by anybody with a moderate degree of technical expertise.

The devices work by mimicking cell towers to trick nearby phones to route their data through the IMSI catcher. Though some cellular traffic is encrypted, IMSI catchers often are marketed with systems for cracking common forms of encryption.

“Americans have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their communications, and in information about where they go and with whom they communicate,” Grayson wrote to Wheeler in July. “It is extremely troubling to learn that cellular communications are so poorly secured, and that it is so easy to intercept calls and track people’s phones.”

The widespread use of IMSI catchers by law enforcement also has prompted significant legal debates, with civil liberties groups arguing that police have too much latitude in collecting data that flows through cellular networks.

Stephanie K. Pell, a cyber-ethics fellow at the Army Cyber Institute at the U.S. Military Academy, said the FCC should investigate not only the illegal uses of IMSI catchers but the network vulnerabilities that allow them to work.

“I think it would be prudent to assume that the Chinese government and criminal gangs don’t care if IMSI catchers are illegal,” said Pell, who has written extensively about the technology. “Ultimately if we are going to get to the root of the problem, we will have to deal with this from a network vulnerability perspective.”

Pell said her views were personal and did not represent those of the Army Cyber Institute.

 

[The Mountain]

"Tower" is probably a misnomer. These are broadcast/transceivers that mimic cellphone broadcast hardware, but are likely not up on masts the way regular cell towers are. These are probably just semi-directional antennas hung off the side of buildings or stashed up on roofs, connected to a small hardware package. You can't just "chop them down" or track down the landowner, because those things don't exist.

And these are separate from the "Stingray" towers the government uses.

 

[Dazed]

Couple of points

the map shown wouldn't give enough coverage to do much at all. The average usable range of a cell tower is about 15 miles (maybe more, maybe less depending on height and terrain) Generally about 10 miles.

If the NSA or another agency wanted to have malicious equipment, they'd rent space on existing towers. No need to build a whole tower. Lots of folks rent space on those towers.

It'd be more likely that they'd simply use the Verizon or ATT networks that already exist to track and snoop on your phone.....or send malicious programming...Wouldn't need any special towers or transmitter sites.

The whole article in PS sounds like an advertisement for CryptoPhone to me.

BTW, these aren't the same as a Stingray.

 

[Weps]

Somebody had to lease/purchase the property these towers are located on, isn't that a matter of public record?

Edited to add: These towers obviously have transmitters, the FCC should have records as well

ould be Gov't purchased them through a shell company...happens all the time. Or, it's possible the towers on US Mil property, the OP mentions they're near bases, so it's quite possible it's land belonging to the installation.

FCC may, far more likely to be regulated by the NTIA. When I was with Civil Air Patrol, when we certified ROA A-CUT or B-CUT, it was done by an NTIA qualified TA, even our licenses stated on the back that the NTIA was the authorizing agency granting use of AFFMA/US Gov frequencies.

I wouldn't imagine the FCC regulates or keeps records of NSA or DoD systems or transmissions. AFAIK on a technical part, parts of the DoC, namely the NOAA are USUS.

Botht the DoC and NTIA report directly to the CinC, as to where the FCC is an indepednant agency formed under Congressional order. This enables those agencies to hide their misdeeds under the cover of "Executive Privliage" as AG Smolder did to "Fast & Furious".

 

[Publius]

Quickest way to disable one of these once its located is to cut the wire's that leads to the tower and ask anyone that knows anything about transmitters and they will tell you it will takeout the whole key setup.

 

[paul d]

Somebody had to lease/purchase the property these towers are located on, isn't that a matter of public record?

Edited to add: These towers obviously have transmitters, the FCC should have records as well

Yeah, right next to the IRS emails.

 

[Weps]

the map shown wouldn't give enough coverage to do much at all. The average usable range of a cell tower is about 15 miles (maybe more, maybe less depending on height and terrain) Generally about 10 miles.

If the NSA or another agency wanted to have malicious equipment, they'd rent space on existing towers. No need to build a whole tower. Lots of folks rent space on those towers.

It'd be more likely that they'd simply use the Verizon or ATT networks that already exist to track and snoop on your phone.....or send malicious programming...Wouldn't need any special towers or transmitter sites.

The whole article in PS sounds like an advertisement for CryptoPhone to me.

BTW, these aren't the same as a Stingray.

We're assuming that map is accurate and forthcoming, it may not be correct in either.

Assuming these are actual cell towers and not another form of comm tower, it's entirely possible the NSA/DoD/Whatever agency owns them doesn't want open access to them by technicians that aren't vetted. Then again, they maybe renting space on towers, while operating their own as well.

Maybe, these could be a backup to the recent whistleblowing that has been ongoing. Or it's possible they don't want anyone outside the agency/orginization to have access, using existing infastructure could cause degridation and or leaves an opening for anyone with the power to see...which is why we're just now hearing of it.

 

[Reasonable Rascal]

China. 'nuff said.

RR

 

[savurselvs]

Or even climb up and disable them without damaging them and see who shows up to fix them.

thats why i have a scope!!!!!

 

[Sleeping Cobra]

Small Haarp antennas ?

 

[night driver]

Small Haarp antennas ?

That's kind of funny since HAARP runs in the VERY low frequency radio spectrum and that means antennas hundreds of feet long...

 

[Sasquatch]

Most here seem to believe it must be a full size tower, it could just be a "Stingray" that they are picking up. You really didn't think the government would let you just cut the wires or shoot the transmitter did you? I'm surprised the government pricks don't use satellites to track EVERYTHING & EVERYONE, or are they? Damn!!

Stingray, the fake cell phone tower cops and carriers use to track your every move
Over the past 12-18 months, there’s been an increased level of scrutiny applied to the various ways local, state, and federal law enforcement officials track and monitor the lives of ordinary citizens. One tool that’s come under increasing fire is the so-called stingray — a fake cell phone tower that law enforcement officials deploy to track a suspect, often without a warrant or any other formal approval.

A stingray is a false cell phone tower that can force phones in a geographical area to connect to it. Once these devices connect, the stingray can be used to either hone in on the target’s location or, with some models, actually eavesdrop on conversations, text messages, and web browser activity. It’s not clear how much the police cooperate with the cell phone carriers on this — in at least some cases, the police have gone to carriers with requests for information, while in others they seem to have taken a brute-force approach, dumping the data of every single user on a given tower and then sorting it to find the parties they’re interested in tracking. Stingrays can be used to force the phone to give up its user details, making it fairly easy for the police to match devices and account holders.​

(more at link)
http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/1...ps-and-providers-use-to-track-your-every-move

At the bottom of the map it says "Display a table of map data". There is a list of what is currently known at the link below that will open the table, it's local, state federal and military departments.

https://www.aclu.org/maps/stingray-tracking-devices-whos-got-them

 

[mistaken1]

snip


The FCC, in response to questions from U.S. Rep. Alan M. Grayson (D-Fla.), plans to study the extent to which criminal gangs and foreign intelligence services are using the devices against Americans. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, in a letter dated this month, said the commission had authority over the surveillance technology and had established a “task force to combat the illicit and unauthorized use of IMSI catchers."

snip

“Americans have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their communications, and in information about where they go and with whom they communicate,” Grayson wrote to Wheeler in July. “It is extremely troubling to learn that cellular communications are so poorly secured, and that it is so easy to intercept calls and track people’s phones.”

“Americans have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their communications" unless of course it is their own government violating their privacy.

It is a shame they would not investigate and expose all privacy violating players and their actions. Yah, I know, I am holding my breath waiting for this to happen.

 

[WFK]

Quickest way to disable one of these...... .

That advice will do you (and me on the same forum) no good!
THINK what you write!

 

[Meadowlark]

Edited to Add: OK, found this in the PopSci article.
"To show what the CryptoPhone can do that less expensive competitors cannot, he points me to a map that he and his customers have created, indicating 17 different phony cell towers known as “interceptors,” detected by the CryptoPhone 500 around the United States during the month of July alone. (The map below is from August.) Interceptors look to a typical phone like an ordinary tower. Once the phone connects with the interceptor, a variety of “over-the-air” attacks become possible, from eavesdropping on calls and texts to pushing spyware to the device."

So, where exactly are these towers (was it "17" that I read about?) located? Is there a map of their locations? How far is the reach of each of them?


HB

Looks to me that they are situated and border crossings or major ports. I am guessing some alphabet soup agency. Take your pick.

 

[sy32478]

Looks to me that they are situated and border crossings or major ports. I am guessing some alphabet soup agency. Take your pick.

Well if it is at our ports and borders we can certainly rule out ICE.

 

[Warthog]

Just start chopping them down, destroy them! Next thing you know, the owners will show up

I guess that would do it! I think you would have to bring the saws all, a wood chopping device wouldn't cut the mustard

 

[Heliobas Disciple]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...earing-about-arent-necessarily-towers-at-all/
(fair use applies)

Rumor Check: Those Fake Cellphone ‘Towers’ You’re Hearing About Aren’t Necessarily Towers at All
Jonathon M. Seidl
Sep. 4, 2014 12:22pm

A story has been taking the Internet by storm this week about an encrypted cellphone device that has uncovered 17 “fake” cell towers across America. There’s just one problem: the “towers” aren’t necessarily towers at all.

The story seems to originate from a Popular Science article last week titled, “Mysterious Phony Cell Towers Could Be Intercepting Your Calls.” It focused on how a fancy device called the CryptoPhone 500 (available for $3,500) can detect when your call has been routed through a “phony” tower. And in fact, the phone recently discovered “17 different phony cell towers known as ‘interceptors.’” The story then spread to an obscure site and beyond. But what the original article never makes clear is that the “interceptors” are not necessarily physical towers, and such devices have been known about for several years.

In fact, TheBlaze has been reporting on interceptor devices that mimic towers since 2011, when our own Buck Sexton wrote about something known as a “Stingray” and its legality:

The Stingray is a generic term for devices that can track a cellphone’s location as long as it is turned on. As the Journal described its method of operation, the Stingray functions by:

“mimicking a cellphone tower, getting a phone to connect to it and measuring signals from the phone. It lets the stingray operator “ping,” or send a signal to, a phone and locate it as long as it is powered on.”

Law enforcement across the country does not have a standardized procedure for obtaining permission to use devices like the Stingray, though generally police agencies obtain a court order and not a search warrant, which would require a higher standard of proof.

This raises the question: should law enforcement be able to know exactly where you are without going before a judge to show probable cause?

TheBlaze TV’s Real News program continued debating the topic in February 2013 and TheBlaze has covered the Stingray numerous other times here, here, here and here. In fact, Elizabeth Kreft conducted a detailed interview this July with a security expert talking about how the Stingray (which is also a brand name in addition to the generic term) and another variation called the Hailstorm work, and why the public should know about them:

NF: These devices are pieces of physical equipment that police use themselves to track cellphones. It works by mimicking cell service providers’ cellphone towers and then sending out electronic signals that force phones — really trick phones — into reporting back their identifying information, including their electronic serial numbers and their location. A good way to describe this is that old kids pool game: so the cell site simulator will say “Marco,” and your cellphone says “Polo.”

EK: Ha. I want to laugh, but I’m too annoyed. So many ways for innocent Americans to be tracked. Now, some of these are carried and some are permanently fixed, right?

NF: One is a handheld model that is a little less powerful, others are vehicle-based that have stronger signals, some of them have directional antennas — but they all work in the same way. But there are several concerning things about how these work, much like cell tower dumps, they trigger every phone in the area — including phones of completely innocent bystanders — into reporting back their location information to the police.

This image and its caption sums it up well (don’t let the picture of the actual tower confuse you — look closely):

This graphic illustrates how a StingRay works. Signals from cellphones within the device’s radius are bounced to law enforcement. The information relayed may include names, phone numbers, locations, call records and even text messages. (Image source: KQED)

On Thursday’s Glenn Beck Radio Program, the CEO of the company behind the CryptoPhone 500 cleared up some of the confusion: Les Goldsmith of ESD America confirmed the towers aren’t necessarily large physical structures.

“That’s the one misconception the media got from this,” Goldsmith said. ”When we say a fake cellphone tower, that can be simply a laptop with two dongles plugged into it to actually give it GSM coverage.”

“It doesn’t have to be a large fully built tower,” he added. “So you can have somebody in a hotel room with a laptop that is collecting every phone within half a mile and having it run through there instead of a normal cell tower.

“Think of it as a cellular repeater. You put a cellular repeater in your building to give you better coverage. All your calls pass through the cellular repeater. Well, an interceptor pretends to be a cell tower and passes your call on like a cellular repeater. It just turns encryption off on the way so it can listen.”

Here is the map from Goldsmith and his company showing where the “towers” they located are:

This map from ESD America shows where its special phone picked up on “fake” tower pings. But the towers aren’t physical structures — they are devices that mimic towers.

But again, they’re not necessarily physical towers.

To be fair, the second site to pick up the “17 fake towers” story did eventually add a note at the top of its story admitting the confusion:

There have been many comments to this story from people who are assuming that these ‘towers’ are physical installations. There’s no reason to assume this is the case: it’s far likelier that they are mobile installations of the kind used not only by law enforcement and government agencies, but also by scammers and other criminals.

But the damage seemed to already be done when the original story took off.

Now you have a more complete picture. The use of such technology is still concerning and worth debate, but at least you know that some mysterious construction group isn’t necessarily erecting actual towers in the dead of night and disguising them. Instead, it seems more likely that law enforcement and other government agencies are doing it in a much more covert and frankly easy way with small device and laptop.

And that’s probably more scary.

Watch Goldsmith’s interview with Beck below:
(go to link to watch video)

 

[NoName]

Here is the map from Goldsmith and his company showing where the “towers” they located are:

This map from ESD America shows where its special phone picked up on “fake” tower pings. But the towers aren’t physical structures — they are devices that mimic towers.

In Texas looks like Dallas, Corpus Christi and Laredo...all drug interdiction ...surprised San Antonio and Houston weren't included.

 

[samus79]

Bumping this thread with an update, this article pretty much confirms what we already knew, these are data gathering devices for the various federal LEOs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/31/leahy-grassley-wants-answers-from-doj-dhs-on-cell-/

 

[Publius]

Bumping this thread with an update, this article pretty much confirms what we already knew, these are data gathering devices for the various federal LEOs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/31/leahy-grassley-wants-answers-from-doj-dhs-on-cell-/

Think they have given any thought that some in our government used one of these to track Brian Terry so the mexican drug runners could intercept him?

 

[samus79]

Think they have given any thought that some in our government used one of these to track Brian Terry so the mexican drug runners could intercept him?

While I think the Feds are responsible for his murder, I doubt they had an active, direct involvement like you are suggesting. But then again the way they tried to use fast and furious to push gun control I would not be surprised to find out you are right.

 

[kittyluvr]

Bumping this thread with an update, this article pretty much confirms what we already knew, these are data gathering devices for the various federal LEOs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/31/leahy-grassley-wants-answers-from-doj-dhs-on-cell-/

Full text of article, just in case...

Congress demands answers on feds’ cellphone tracking by simulator towers

By David Sherfinski - The Washington Times - Wednesday, December 31, 2014

The chairman and ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee want answers from the Obama administration on cell-site “simulators,” which are reportedly used by law enforcement to track suspects but also have the potential to capture information on cellphones in their vicinity.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, Sens. Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat, and Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican, asked about federal policy and the usage of the simulators.

“The Judiciary Committee needs a broader understanding of the full range of law enforcement agencies that use this technology, the policies in place to protect the privacy interests of those whose information might be collected using these devices, and the legal process that DOJ and DHS entities seek prior to using them,” the senators wrote in the letter dated Dec. 23 and released Wednesday.

The senators cite a November article from the Wall Street Journal that reported the Justice Department is targeting criminal suspects using the devices, which mimic cellphone towers and can also snag information and general phone locations of innocent Americans.

While not confirming or denying the existence of such a program, a Justice Department official told the paper that agencies comply with federal law, including by seeking court approval, and that discussion of such matters would allow suspects or foreign powers to determine U.S. surveillance capabilities.

The senators also wrote that after briefings by FBI officials with staffers, the FBI changed its policy so that it now obtains a search warrant before deploying a simulator, with “a number of potentially broad exemptions.”

Those exemptions include cases that pose an imminent public safety danger, cases that involve a fugitive, and cases where technology is being used in public places or areas the agency determines there’s no “reasonable” expectation of privacy.

Among other things, the senators asked for details about the FBI’s use of the simulators since Jan. 1, 2010, through the effective date of the new policy, and then afterward, as well as the agency’s policy on retaining and destroying information collected by the simulators.

Beyond this specific issue, the debate over privacy and data collection has been front in center in Congress this year.

Earlier in December, the Obama administration said it renewed for 90 days the National Security Agency’s program that collects and temporarily stores information on the dates and durations of phone calls to see if there are any ties associated with terrorism.

Senate Republicans filibustered a bill to halt the program after a different version easily won passage in the House earlier in the year. President Obama says he has taken steps to limit the snooping, such as asking investigators to get a court’s sign-off, but opponents say the administration is relying on a faulty reading of the post-9/11 Patriot Act to justify the program.

 

[SAPPHIRE]

I'm believing there are many tools to pick up/transmit/store info in urban scenario.......we have some so-called cell phone towers that look like evergreen trees (not very convincing ones!) and alleged GWEN towers.....very tall structures with a cluster of "stuff" at the top.......not lights.......so what???

Lots of woo woo stuff out there.......but spying indeed 24/7...................

 

[samus79]

Thanks kittyluvr, my iPad wasn't letting me copy and paste the whole article.

 

[DryCreek]

Thanks kittyluvr, my iPad wasn't letting me copy and paste the whole article.

Because the NSA didn't want the information out there!

J/K

 

[Weps]

I'm believing there are many tools to pick up/transmit/store info in urban scenario.......we have some so-called cell phone towers that look like evergreen trees (not very convincing ones!) and alleged GWEN towers.....very tall structures with a cluster of "stuff" at the top.......not lights.......so what???

Lots of woo woo stuff out there.......but spying indeed 24/7...................

GWEN was done away with in 92' because of it's interference with PLCC, SLFCS took on GWEN responsibilities, with MEECN being the current system, which uses VLF, LF, and EHF through Milstar.

It may not be purpose built cell towers, most of the AT&T "Long Lines" towers are still in place with the infrastructure still intact, many companies buy up that space because it's cheaper than building your own tower. Those sites were and are still highly restricted because they are deemed important to national security. A good chunk of AUTVON/DSN and SAGE traffic/data went over Long Lines, it was the largest telecomm system in the world and the only way to transmit traffic that distance before fiber-optic and satellite, to this day some areas still use microwave because of the expense of the other two options and the infrastructure is still in place.

Also, for anyone interest that has an Android, AIMSICD (Android IMSI-Catcher Detector) app can detect if you're on an IMSI catcher (Stingwray).

 

[Millwright]

GWEN was done away with in 92' because of it's interference with PLCC, SLFCS took on GWEN responsibilities, with MEECN being the current system, which uses VLF, LF, and EHF through Milstar.

It may not be purpose built cell towers, most of the AT&T "Long Lines" towers are still in place with the infrastructure still intact, many companies buy up that space because it's cheaper than building your own tower. Those sites were and are still highly restricted because they are deemed important to national security. A good chunk of AUTVON/DSN and SAGE traffic/data went over Long Lines, it was the largest telecomm system in the world and the only way to transmit traffic that distance before fiber-optic and satellite, to this day some areas still use microwave because of the expense of the other two options and the infrastructure is still in place.

Also, for anyone interest that has an Android, AIMSICD (Android IMSI-Catcher Detector) app can detect if you're on an IMSI catcher (Stingwray).

I have access to some of the old long line sites occasionally. Most of the equipment in the old sites has been gutted, it is so Fred Flintstone that I doubt there are any spares or repair parts left. What used to take a bank of equipment 8' high and 30' long, can now be done with a radio about the size of your stereo receiver and a 2 meter dish. There are also very few guys left that have a working knowledge of these systems.

Here is a site dedicated to them. http://www.drgibson.com/towers/

This is the battery bank from one of these old sites, kinda interesting.

 

[Tex88]

I have access to some of the old long line sites occasionally. Most of the equipment in the old sites has been gutted, it is so Fred Flintstone that I doubt there are any spares or repair parts left. What used to take a bank of equipment 8' high and 30' long, can now be done with a radio about the size of your stereo receiver and a 2 meter dish. There are also very few guys left that have a working knowledge of these systems.

You would be amazed and horrified if you knew what sort of rather important services are to this day run on equipment and technology from the early to mid nineties, both in rural areas as well as in high population areas known for their lack of monetary skills. Lets just say that many times when I'm sending out newer, more modern equipment, I have to explicitly explain not to use a hammer during install.