TPM uses hidden embedded bluetooth to geolocate and completely remotely control computers regardless whether they are offline or online. Laptops released at least as far back as 2009 who's specifications say no bluetooth actually have a hidden embedded bluetooth inaccessible to users. Laptops released at least as far back as 2009 who's specifications say there is bluetooth actually have two bluetooths: one bluetooth accessible to users and a hidden embedded bluetooth not accessible to users.
Regardless whether you believe TPM is a backdoor and Microsoft required
manufacturers to install hidden bluetooth, both TPM and bluetooth have
an extremely visible unique identifier (UUID). Their UUID can be
geolocated. TPM and hidden bluetooth cannot be disabled nor uninstalled.
Starting in 2006 with Vista, Microsoft secretly required manufactuers to
install TPM. The hype is that users had the option to enable TPM in the
BIOS and then had to activate it and that Microsoft required TPM to be
shipped activated only with Windows 8. This is false and a spin. I say
secretly because the manufacturers' specifications do not include TPM.
The notebook reviews didnt discuss TPM. Vista, Windows 7 and Linux do
not have an TPM icon to click to enable. The BIOS did NOT have an option
to enable TPM. I have read the specs of numerous netbooks. None
mentioned TPM. I have looked at the BIOS of numerous netbooks to make
sure none had computrace. None of the BIOS listed TPM. Windows and Linux
hardware profilers do not list TPM. Hence, I naively purchased netbooks
that had TPM.
My HP Mini 1000 netbook, released in 2009 with Windows XP has TPM. My
Asus 1025C netbook released in 2011 with Windows 7 has TPM. lsmod shows
the TPM is enabled, activated and being used but not by me. :
lsmod from live DVD of Tails using Asus 1025C netbook on Jan 9, 2013:
tpm 17566 1 tpm_tis
tpm_bios 12836 1 tpm
tpm_tis 13150 0
lsmod from live DVD of Tails using HP Mini 1000 netbook on 9/2/2013:
tpm 17735 1 tpm_tis
tpm_bios 13244 1 tpm
tpm_tis 13040 0
TPM is very active. I didn't encrypt my harddrive with TPM. I didn't use
TPM. What is TPM doing?
I believe TPM uses hidden embedded bluetooth to disclose geolocation of
both their UUIDs and data when the computers are offline. Microsoft is
requiring manufacturers to install bluetooth starting with Windows 8.1.
This is a spin as apparently Microsoft had required manufacturers to
install hidden bluetooth probably starting with 2009.
The specifications of laptops are misleading. eMachine 250's
specification listed bluetooth none. MSI specified "n/a" for bluetooth
in their specification of my two MSI L1350D netbooks. "n/a" is
ambiguous. Asus specified some 1015PE has them and some not depending on
"region." HP Mini 100 netbook specification was some have bluetooth,
some don't. Toshiba specified "no antennae" for the Toshiba NB505
erroneously indicating bluetooth could not be transmitted without an
antennae.
Windows and Linux bluetooth manager did not detect bluetooth. Windows
and Linux hardware profilers did not detect bluetooth. I naively
purchased netbooks misbelieving they neither had bluetooth nor TPM.
Thereby, enabling my abuser's crackers to continue to geolocate,
bluesnarf and infect my netbooks offline. The only netbook I purchased
that the specs stated had bluetooth was an Asus 1015PX (different model
than 1015PE). I paid a computer repairman to open the Asus to remove the
Broadcom combo wifi/bluetooth half mini PCI card. Yet, I continued to be
cracked offline.
lsmod of Asus 1015X after removal of combo wifi/bluetooth card:
bnep 18863 2
bluetooth 258249 7 bnep
rfkill 20451 4 bluetooth, asus_wmi
DMESG, lsmod, ps ax | grep blue detected active bluetooth in all of my
netbooks. I posted lsmod outputs on forums inquiring whether Linux loads
bluetooth modules on all computers or just computers with bluetooth. I
asked for someone without bluetooth to post their lsmod. No one posted.
The only response I received was that my lsmod showed active bluetooth.
It as not until I actually read the processes listed by Conky on the
desktop of a live PartedMagic CD that I realized that bluetooth was not
only installed but extremely active. Blueman is almost always the top
first process in memory. Three out of the top five processes in memory
that Conky lists are bluetooth:
blueman-app PID 4218
Krfcommd
obex-data-server
Bluetooth is being used but not by me.
HP, eMachine and MSI do not list bluetooth in the BIOS. Asus 1015PX
listed bluetooth in the BIOS for the combo card but not for its second
bluetooth which is hidden. I cannot disable bluetooth in the BIOS. I
attempted to kill bluetooth in htop but could not. I typed bluetooth=no
upon boot up. Bluetooth still loaded.
The commands to kill TPM are at
http
/lunaticoutpost.com/private.php?action=send&uid=3135. I could not kill TPM.
I waited months to purchase an open hardware linux laptop at http/rhombus-tech.net/community_ideas/laptop/. But rhombus lacks donations and volunteers.
Thus, I purchased even older netbooks. This month, I purchased an used Averatec 1150 netbook released in 2006 and an used Asus 900 released in 2008 from Ebay. I diagnostics that they won't have TPM and hidden bluetooth.
This morning, I read the three comments by CLU: " Disable TPM hardware drivers in linux by blacklisting them and bluetooth. That's the NSA backdoor. . .That's part of the bluetooth stack. If you blacklist the drivers it can't connect and by proxy disables the cell phone built into every laptop since 2005. You'll note that you get back around 7% of system resources (at least on the i7 I have running) after doing so. On the craptacular i3's I have it returns around 20% of the system CPU. " http/www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-06-25/government-spying-you-through-your-own-computer%E2%80%99s-webcam-or-microphone
If CLU is correct that starting in 2005, laptops have a cell phone built in (hidden bluetooth), I didn't go far enough back in history. If dmeg, lsmod, ps ax | grep blue, conky and/or htop detect bluetooth, I won't be able to use my new used 2006 and 2008 netbooks.
Two nights ago, I ordered an open hardware linux pengpod tablet without bluetooth and TPM. Tablets don't replace netbooks. I need an open hardware laptop!
Users should file a class action suit against the manufacturers of laptops who's specifications misrepresented no bluetooth. Users should file a class action suit against manufacturers of laptops who's specifications stated bluetooth but failed to disclose two bluetooths.
Regardless whether you believe TPM is a backdoor and Microsoft required
manufacturers to install hidden bluetooth, both TPM and bluetooth have
an extremely visible unique identifier (UUID). Their UUID can be
geolocated. TPM and hidden bluetooth cannot be disabled nor uninstalled.
Starting in 2006 with Vista, Microsoft secretly required manufactuers to
install TPM. The hype is that users had the option to enable TPM in the
BIOS and then had to activate it and that Microsoft required TPM to be
shipped activated only with Windows 8. This is false and a spin. I say
secretly because the manufacturers' specifications do not include TPM.
The notebook reviews didnt discuss TPM. Vista, Windows 7 and Linux do
not have an TPM icon to click to enable. The BIOS did NOT have an option
to enable TPM. I have read the specs of numerous netbooks. None
mentioned TPM. I have looked at the BIOS of numerous netbooks to make
sure none had computrace. None of the BIOS listed TPM. Windows and Linux
hardware profilers do not list TPM. Hence, I naively purchased netbooks
that had TPM.
My HP Mini 1000 netbook, released in 2009 with Windows XP has TPM. My
Asus 1025C netbook released in 2011 with Windows 7 has TPM. lsmod shows
the TPM is enabled, activated and being used but not by me. :
lsmod from live DVD of Tails using Asus 1025C netbook on Jan 9, 2013:
tpm 17566 1 tpm_tis
tpm_bios 12836 1 tpm
tpm_tis 13150 0
lsmod from live DVD of Tails using HP Mini 1000 netbook on 9/2/2013:
tpm 17735 1 tpm_tis
tpm_bios 13244 1 tpm
tpm_tis 13040 0
TPM is very active. I didn't encrypt my harddrive with TPM. I didn't use
TPM. What is TPM doing?
I believe TPM uses hidden embedded bluetooth to disclose geolocation of
both their UUIDs and data when the computers are offline. Microsoft is
requiring manufacturers to install bluetooth starting with Windows 8.1.
This is a spin as apparently Microsoft had required manufacturers to
install hidden bluetooth probably starting with 2009.
The specifications of laptops are misleading. eMachine 250's
specification listed bluetooth none. MSI specified "n/a" for bluetooth
in their specification of my two MSI L1350D netbooks. "n/a" is
ambiguous. Asus specified some 1015PE has them and some not depending on
"region." HP Mini 100 netbook specification was some have bluetooth,
some don't. Toshiba specified "no antennae" for the Toshiba NB505
erroneously indicating bluetooth could not be transmitted without an
antennae.
Windows and Linux bluetooth manager did not detect bluetooth. Windows
and Linux hardware profilers did not detect bluetooth. I naively
purchased netbooks misbelieving they neither had bluetooth nor TPM.
Thereby, enabling my abuser's crackers to continue to geolocate,
bluesnarf and infect my netbooks offline. The only netbook I purchased
that the specs stated had bluetooth was an Asus 1015PX (different model
than 1015PE). I paid a computer repairman to open the Asus to remove the
Broadcom combo wifi/bluetooth half mini PCI card. Yet, I continued to be
cracked offline.
lsmod of Asus 1015X after removal of combo wifi/bluetooth card:
bnep 18863 2
bluetooth 258249 7 bnep
rfkill 20451 4 bluetooth, asus_wmi
DMESG, lsmod, ps ax | grep blue detected active bluetooth in all of my
netbooks. I posted lsmod outputs on forums inquiring whether Linux loads
bluetooth modules on all computers or just computers with bluetooth. I
asked for someone without bluetooth to post their lsmod. No one posted.
The only response I received was that my lsmod showed active bluetooth.
It as not until I actually read the processes listed by Conky on the
desktop of a live PartedMagic CD that I realized that bluetooth was not
only installed but extremely active. Blueman is almost always the top
first process in memory. Three out of the top five processes in memory
that Conky lists are bluetooth:
blueman-app PID 4218
Krfcommd
obex-data-server
Bluetooth is being used but not by me.
HP, eMachine and MSI do not list bluetooth in the BIOS. Asus 1015PX
listed bluetooth in the BIOS for the combo card but not for its second
bluetooth which is hidden. I cannot disable bluetooth in the BIOS. I
attempted to kill bluetooth in htop but could not. I typed bluetooth=no
upon boot up. Bluetooth still loaded.
The commands to kill TPM are at
http
/lunaticoutpost.com/private.php?action=send&uid=3135. I could not kill TPM. I waited months to purchase an open hardware linux laptop at http
/rhombus-tech.net/community_ideas/laptop/. But rhombus lacks donations and volunteers. Thus, I purchased even older netbooks. This month, I purchased an used Averatec 1150 netbook released in 2006 and an used Asus 900 released in 2008 from Ebay. I diagnostics that they won't have TPM and hidden bluetooth.
This morning, I read the three comments by CLU: " Disable TPM hardware drivers in linux by blacklisting them and bluetooth. That's the NSA backdoor. . .That's part of the bluetooth stack. If you blacklist the drivers it can't connect and by proxy disables the cell phone built into every laptop since 2005. You'll note that you get back around 7% of system resources (at least on the i7 I have running) after doing so. On the craptacular i3's I have it returns around 20% of the system CPU. " http
/www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-06-25/government-spying-you-through-your-own-computer%E2%80%99s-webcam-or-microphoneIf CLU is correct that starting in 2005, laptops have a cell phone built in (hidden bluetooth), I didn't go far enough back in history. If dmeg, lsmod, ps ax | grep blue, conky and/or htop detect bluetooth, I won't be able to use my new used 2006 and 2008 netbooks.
Two nights ago, I ordered an open hardware linux pengpod tablet without bluetooth and TPM. Tablets don't replace netbooks. I need an open hardware laptop!
Users should file a class action suit against the manufacturers of laptops who's specifications misrepresented no bluetooth. Users should file a class action suit against manufacturers of laptops who's specifications stated bluetooth but failed to disclose two bluetooths.
Facebook
Twitter