Not my title! I do think we are being listened to. And location tracked. And it’s being passed on to advertisers. Is it apple though? Probably not is my take away from this article, but I don’t trust plenty of others, and apple still does
Apps listening to your mic to give you targeted ads is an urban legend. There’s tools to see which apps listen to you and there isn’t any evidence that any of the popular stuff ever open the microphone (unless you’re in a call or something). If you’re too worried about it, you can always turn off the mic permission for the app.
The ads are actually coming from other ways of tracking you like browser fingerprinting to follow what things you browse and build a profile on what you like/are interested in.
See also EFF’s article on it: https://www.digitalrightsbytes.org/topics/is-my-phone-listening-to-me
I’m not so sure. When my partner and I were on a road trip we had android auto connected and were singing along to songs we listened to via Spotify. At some point though, when I tried to fiddle with some settings the connection between the car and the smartphone bugged out and while trying to fix it we suddenly heard his voice being played back on the speakers “whispering” some lyrics he had sung 30 to 60 minutes earlier.
I put whispered in quotes because he certainly didn’t whisper those lyrics and I recalled the moment he sang them quite clearly. Beside his singing and the music playing there were no other sounds at that time.
My best guess is that he was actually recorded while singing and something was stripping all the background noises and music to make his speech more clear for speech to text analysis. It was creepy as fuck.
We both work in IT and I truly have no other idea what this could have been given the circumstances. He said there is actually a company that provides a framework that listens to, records and analyses whatever is spoken near smartphone microphones and all the big tech players like Google are using it. I don’t remember the name though. Would have to ask him.
That’s the most unlikely story I’ve heard in a minute… Even assuming there’re some deep rooted kernel level shenanigans, which no one has found yet, how would you fiddling with some settings expose that?
Probably just got a dropped call, and it resumed the playlist in shuffle, I’ve had it happen where the music comes out as if in a phone call (messes up frequencies) for a few seconds before it goes back to normal. Occam’s razor and all
Believe what you want, I don’t really care. The whole connection bugged out and the car’s infotainment system including android auto became unresponsive. There was no call, it wasn’t shuffle and it was definitely his voice, not the music playing. Especially since there was only the whispered singing. No other instruments at all.
I believe it was sunspots that caused bit flips on the phone CPU and regurgitated data from the L5 cache. /s
agreed. online tracking is so good it just seems like they’re listening to you.
The ones serving up the ads aren’t even the ones listening. They’re buying collated data from many different sources, then their algorithm matches your interests with one of the products they’re contracted to sell. Next thing you know you’re looking at a Rolex ad because you zoomed in on someone’s watch on their Instagram post.
Jfc, finally some sanity in this thread. Thank you. You’d think a bunch of supposed computer nerds would have done a fucking experiment before going off on some anecdotal bullshit.
Why wouldn’t you think this? There is no system in place for monitoring those companies, nor is there any type of punishment for if they were to be proven to be doing so. While on the other hand, there are piles of money to be made from advertisers for allowing exactly that to happen.
I’ve personally had things come up as being advertised to me after being NEAR people talking about those items, and I have seen several videos where people show this effect in action.
Frequency illusion is real, but is not reliable enough to repeat over and over, back to back, unlike the advertising.
When, ever, have the capitalist companies prioritized morality over money? Never.
While there is no system for monitoring the companies, experts can reverse engineer the apps and debug the devices. Thusfar, experts who have done this have found no evidence of these types of activities. All the evidence is anecdotal. I believe if this was a widespread practice, evidence would have been uncovered by now and we would have been reported on widely.
The implication here is really scarier than if they were listening to our conversations. It means they do not need to listen to our conversations. The telemetry they already have is so good that in many cases they know what you will say with such high degrees of accuracy that people assumed that they had to be spying on their conversations.
Either way, we need to demand an end to this unprecedented mass surveillance.
Forgive me if this is here already but this is how your post showed to me.
phew
Except it is also listening. This was a minor scandal back in September. I believe Cox media has since been dropped by Facebook and Google and such, but it happened.
What’s Happening: In a pitch deck that has surfaced since the initial story broke out, Cox Media Group (CMG), a digital marketing outfit based out of Atlanta, Georgia, was spotted touting “the power of voice” in a pitch. In it, they outlined how they can use AI to collect and analyze voice data from users through more than 470 sources.
https://news.itsfoss.com/ad-company-listening-to-microphone/
That article covers a pitch deck by an ad agency with absolutely zero detail of how it works.
If this is happening, it should be easy to test.
According to the company, CMG Local Solutions’ access to advertising data based on voice and other data is collected by third-party platforms and devices “under the terms and conditions provided by those apps and accepted by their users.”
In the since-deleted blog post, CMG Local Solutions discusses whether Active Listening is legal. “We know what you’re thinking. Is this even legal? The short answer is: yes. It is legal for phones and devices to listen to you. When a new app download or update prompts consumers with a multi-page terms of use agreement somewhere in the fine print, Active Listening is often included,” the company said in the post.
Apps still need mic permissions to do so. Many Android ROMs include notices when the mic is being used, it would be very easy to tell if an app was actually doing this.
One of my weirder hobbies is trying to convince people that the idea that companies are listening to you through your phone’s microphone and serving you targeted ads is a conspiracy theory that isn’t true.
ARS said, that reuters said, that users said.
Someone needs a new hobby. “Proof” from 3 layers of journalists interpreting a case that they themself said never went to court. Trying to use evidence of absence as proof will never win any hearts in a debate.
I didn’t seriously believe it happened either for quite some time because confirmation bias is a bitch. But I’ve seen it happen a few times where it would have to be a seriously unlikely coincidence.
If it was searched for in Google, Facebook, apple, or whatever sure
If it was correlated with locality and time, sure.
You can infer a lot from a few searches but there are times where nothing was searched for and a novel concept came out of conversation and book there’s ads and search completion for it.
Maybe, just maybe, someone settling a lawsuit without being found guilty, doesn’t ACTUALLY mean they’re innocent.
So Apple and Google have created the most sophisticated spyware known to man, so undetectable that tens of thousands of developers and researchers have never even seen a sign of it, and then they use the data for ads so sloppily that anyone can prove they’re listening?
I’m sure Apple just paid 95 mil because they were bored.
That Siri was bugged in a way that activated it unintentionally, which then sends recordings to Apple, is not in dispute. Turning that into “they’re always recording your conversations” is a big leap. Why would the whistleblower that revealed the recordings being misused not bother mentioning that?
It was activated at times in which it was unintentional and then they sold that data.
People are saying, and I have observed, extreme coincidences with the ads were timely, They were on novel data that wasn’t thrown through searches, and they weren’t explainable by locality.
You don’t have to be recording 24x7 to get they observed outcome.
Do you have any proof they sold that data? I’d love to know why the plaintiffs settled out of court if they thought they could prove Apple is feeding every voice recording into their ads. They had to pay 5x as much just for slowing down old iPhones, actively selling voice recordings would undoubtedly be worth far more than that.
The issue is that contractors had access to the recordings, which is certainly a breach of privacy, but not a grand conspiracy to target ads.
I’m not going to play move the goal posts with you all day long.
At what point did I move the goalposts? I never denied that the recordings existed. I simply fail to see how someone at Apple would decide that selling private conversations is worth the insane risk.
Quick experiment. If you don’t own a dog or a cat, talk about buying dog or cat food a couple times today.
about buying dog or cat food a couple times today.
I have both, also, if it’s real, you’d have to match up with an advertiser that really wants your profile.
I search for crap all the time but don’t get ads most of the time, then one time, I look up this one kaz air filter and get nothing but ads for it for a week. hundreds of home depot ads.
I love how having both a dog and a cat is somehow dismissive
My big problem isn’t with the concept I could talk about buying parrot food.
But there has to be a vendor out there that says hey whoever I’m buying this data from, I need to put an ad in front of parrot owners.
These are going to be very high cost ads, so whatever products they’re going to sell you probably have a respectable profit margin or respectable expected lifetime value.
Trying to trigger it on purpose, without any idea of who’s advertising or for what is somewhat of a fool’s errand.
How many dog and cat owners are out there anyway? Dozens perhaps.
Yes Apple.
Apple is the one who got caught so far
If you think Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Samsung et al aren’t doing this, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Did yall read the article?
Ok? I didn’t say differently. OP said
Is it apple though? Probably not is my take away from this article, but I don’t trust plenty of others, and apple still does
I’ll buy-t. What did Apple get caught doing that these other companies haven’t got caught doing?
Edit: Oh, the Siri settlement. The article linked argues against the claim of it being used for advertising, though.
People always talk about getting served ads after they talk about something. I think it’s the other way around. The ads put the thought into your brain and then you start talking about it and notice after you’ve already been thinking about it for a while.
While I do suspect they listen, I have pretty solid (anecdotal) evidence they scan text messages. When I bought my house I had no solicitor, I text my buddy to see who he used and he texted me a response.
Started to type into Google to get a number and it was the top suggested search after 2 chars. Nowhere else did I mention this solicitor, hadn’t heard of them before this, have no other searches for this solicitor. It’s not a big firm, it’s not even in my city - only explanation I have is they scanned the messages.
I found indisputable proof of this happening.
We were using Google maps, driving in a production van. We were talking about the song “Gasolina” by daddy yankee. The person whose phone it was did not speak Spanish. Moments later we were being served suggestions to stop at “estaciones de gasolina”
That’s not how proof works.
“Is it Apple though, probably not…”
Can I ask, why are you so ready to performatively forgive them here? Apple is not your friend, Apple and Tim lined up to donate the million like the rest of those greedy, transactional cowards.
Apple doesn’t “do” it per se, instead Apple shares certain data with third party partners for the purposes of “improving your product experience” the data is then laundered 17 times through middle layers and added to a shared digital fingerprint of you and your household’s web of connected devices. You and your family are then sold on a marketplace as advertising targets actively interested in X category or product (Apple is also subsequently a customer in that marketplace). You then either receive that advertising or your family is targeted with it so that they can then casually mention the product back to you (company knowing you were already interested) so it feels organic and “I was just thinking the same thing!” and boom, you’re buying that new set of pots and pans.
We’re already living in the matrix, you’re just a little drone being pinged around according to other people’s will, to support the pursuit of endless growth. So yes, in a way companies are spying on you… After you’ve given them individual permissions to access your microphone and permission to share “certain data” about you with third parties, in a carefully orchestrated dance - so that they have plausible deniability and so you don’t have to threaten your parasocial relationship with their brand and can continue saying “probably not Apple though…”
Two ways to process voice, on device or on server. Device-based solutions either are very basic and just detect differences between words or need training data based on your voice or they need lots of processing power for more generalized voice recognition. So is your battery draining and phone is often hot because an app is keeping the mic on and keeping the phone from slowing the processor? Other option is to stream the data to the server. This would also increase battery usage as the phone can’t sleep, but might not be as noticeable, but more evident would be your phone using a lot more bandwidth than is reasonable while you aren’t actively using it.
Ads aren’t why you should be concerned about apps w/ microphone access…
Where exactly are you getting the idea that this belief is widespread?
Not my title, as I already said. But anecdata backs this up ime. Go ask your parents for a giggle, see what they say
I’ve heard many folks suspect it. It’s a widespread, if weakly substantiated concern.
I have heard it repeated several times. It’s based on how virtual assistants are allowed to listen over your mic for keywords, applications like Facebook requesting full microphone access, and people with stories of getting ads for things after having a conversation about the same.
The third could be a form of recency bias; I just learned about this, and now I see it everywhere. Also, it’s easy to know who is in your circle, and items you recently searched could be advertised to your friends. I saw this by getting sudden ads for handguns after getting an Amazon link from my gun crazy friend.
Like people allowing google Gemini to always listen for permanent background Shazaam functionality and and having surprised Pikachu faces lol.
as I posted this, found this Apple law suit for Snooping Siri post on my feed lol.
Ugh and Google fingerprinting free for all Feb 2025
me, a GrapheneOS user 😈🙈🙉🙊
I saw it happen about 3 years ago. I mentioned Omega watches to my buddy who had somehow lived to 50 w/o ever hearing the name. Later that same day there was a Facebook ad for Omega on his Samsung phone.
Yep me too. Wife was adamant her phone was spying on her so we decided to test it by talking about Lexus cars (having chosen cars because at the time she was getting no car ads anywhere, had no interest in cars, and she had never heard of the brand before so certainly hadn’t searched for it). A few hours later, her Facebook feed was full of Lexus ads. 100%.
The comments here show the real problem, adverts dont have to say why they’ve been selected.
All online ads should have to say which filters they matched to advertise to you. The advertising in most cases now is centralised into Google or Facebook, this is absolutely technically possible.
All online ads should have to say which filters they matched to advertise to you.
According to the Signal foundation, the reverse is true. They claim they got banned for revealing that info.
https://signal.org/blog/the-instagram-ads-you-will-never-see/
Wow.
This gives me that gut uneasy feeling. Those grabs are hyper specific examples.
Sharing data with the plebs is the true crime.
Believe it, don’t believe it, some people believe the earth is flat, and 5G gives you cancer
We live in an age where the voice can be processed locally on the phone (we’ve had on-device speech-to-text since the late 90s…), and it’s already listening for a wake word, meaning mic is always hot. It doesn’t need to be streamed and use bandwidth; it can fire off 4K of JSON every few hours and relay more than enough information.
Just program whole dictionary of key phrases and scan the wake word buffer like you are already doing. Easy, stealthy, encrypted. Every voice assistant from a major tech company could (and likely IS) doing this.
This also provides ample opportunity for domestic (or even foreign!) spying my state actors, too.
Instagram showed me an ad for a medical condition I only discussed out loud, in person, in my doctors office.
Instagram was immediately uninstalled that day.
Your age group, sex, location, profession/industry, income estimation - you can assume they have this data.
That + a few data points that could be tracked by apps or websites:
- Searched online for symptoms
- Searched for doctors
- Called the clinic to schedule an appointment
- GPS to the clinic
- Connected to the clinic’s WiFi
- Doctor is a specialist in X
Cross some of that, personal info, and ads of treatments for conditions of X.
They don’t need to listen to your mic.
That said, if it’s a fairly common condition, it might be the case you were presented the ad before and never noticed it.
None of those data points apply. It was nothing I had searched for or spoken to anyone until I saw the doctor that day and the Instagram ad was present by the time I had driven home, specifically mentioning the clinical term mentioned by the doctor.
It wasn’t even the stated reason for my visit, it was an afterthought at the end of the appointment… “Oh yeah, as long as I’m here, what is this…?”
I hate to add to the conspiracy, but I know my eye doctor uses a 3rd party which has sections of their hipaa privacy acceptance which allows them to use your info to sell you ads if you don’t decline. Phreesia, is the 3rd party company. Now add the other apps that track your location… time spent there…
and I know my grocery store does the same when you use the discounts. and worse, they have facial recognition so I can’t even opt out (kroger).
Your issue was likely a combo of that.
Can’t be facial-recognized if you always wear an N95 mask in stores ;)
Sorry, but facial recognition software has basically caught up. I would not rely on a mask to prevent me being recognised today:
https://privacyinternational.org/news-analysis/4511/can-covid-19-face-mask-protect-you-facial-recognition-technology-too https://www.ft.com/content/42415608-340c-4c0a-8c93-f22cdd4cc2d6 https://www.techtimes.com/articles/304431/20240508/new-software-shows-promise-facial-recognition-underneath-mask.htm
It must be very situational on when it works, because the FBI has specifically cited a face mask as a reason that it still hasn’t caught whoever left a bunch of bombs laying around on Jan 6.
Interesting. I can imagine a scenario where the resolution of CCTV is low enough that a mask would impede recognition in that instance. It’s definitely not something I would want to rely on, though.
A random person recognized Luigi in just a couple days, and he was wearing a mask in all the video footage released.
Modern recognition systems can scan footage a lot faster than humans. Many modern systems don’t just use facial recognition but other factors like general height, walking gait, stride length, etc. to make more accurate recognitions.
Wasn’t his face revealed in cab footage where he’d taken his mask off within like, a day?
I think there is also probably a difference of scope in what is leveraged when Kroger is trying to get your facial pattern while you’re in the store to track where you go and get more data to sell advertisers vs like, the lengths gone to by the state in order to catch someone who shot a rich person dead in the street.
Other methods of data collection can be scarily effective. Stores have identified people were pregnant before they knew.
Very likely they identified you as someone that could have that condition, and you noticing the ads after talking to your doctor is a form of recency bias.
You can collect almost all the same data from traditional surveillance methods. Collecting and processing mocrophone data just isn’t effective enough to make up for the massively increased costs from processing it.
As much as I logically know this to be the case, especially now that Android and iOS indicate when things like the mic are active… My brain still wants to reject it because it is just too coincidental.
I do not trust mic switches however, unless someone can provide proof that it physically disconnects the circuit to that microphone, it can be bypassed somewhere and there’s no reason to trust the manufacturer.
It displayed the ad before I could get home and research it. It had only been discussed out loud and in person.
Did you connect to the clinic’s WiFi?
Just being near their WiFi is enough.
Yes, I was on the wifi before the appointment.
This is why. Not because your phone is listening to you.
The wifi was not related to the medical issues, the symptoms, or the specific clinical term mentioned by the doctor.
But it’s reasonable to believe other people would have searched the same topic on that network
Edit: or even that they looked it up o their own network following connecting to the clinic’s.
There’s always other signs.
ITT:
People saying “They already use every other bit of data they can access, why do you naive optimists think they wouldn’t use the most obvious one?”
vs.
People saying “They already use every other bit of data they can access, why do you naive optimists think they would need to use the most expensive one?”
it’s effective, timely, accurate, and profitable.
ofc they’re gonna use the audio, too; where and when possible.
