My point was that not all devices hanging from the bottom of small airplanes are for spying. Something very similar is used for detecting gases from pipeline leaks, and those pipelines are regularly patrolled. I used to fly pipeline patrol as a sideline. They are everywhere. I don't deny that snooping goes on, but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Hurray! Getting somewhere. But let's think about the following obstacle for a moment:

I do not believe the cops here are that sophisticated or care. Someone would have to complain if it bothers them but will it ever? If both sides of the link randomly change SSID, MAC and channel all the time, with SSID's etc looking similar to the many access points in the area that are named something like "TelecomCompanyFF3BA4E2", then who cares.

Can't track a smartphone that has no GSM antenna. By the way, there are at least two phones that have physical switches for the GSM antenna, the microphone, the GPS, the battery, etc. Why on earth would they do such a thing when they can just remove the SIM card and mute the microphone in software and not install anything not approved by google. They must be James Bond or something. Or they know better.

I always wondered why it was not legal before. Something to do with computers making electromagnetic noise affecting devices of the aircraft I thought, but now they allow them so what was the real motivation one wonders.

Does this require that your hardware has a secret feature that makes it automatically connect to the stingray access point?

The FAA being overly cautious and that there were supposedly random events on airliners where electronics devices interfered with the navigation equipment during landing.

The golden rule before airplane mode was cell phones or devices with that capability could not be turned on at all and that other electronic devices (laptops etc, video players) could only be turned on above 10,000 ft.

Eventually the FAA tested them and determined that they would not interfere with the electronics. With modern technology pilot flight maps and inflight weather are now available on notebooks or ipads so being able to use them in flight was a necessity. They kept the no cell phone rule partly because the airlines did not want to deal with incivility if everyone was talking but there was also a concern that they could interfere with ground equipment.

No, secret just taking advantage of how cell technology works. Basically automatically connect to the strongest cell signal if it is your carrier. In the old days you could select a roaming carrier but have not had to do that in many years so not sure how that works anymore.

Yes, there were many and maybe still some concerns about emi/rfi/hazardous radio emissions on aircraft. The aircraft were never certified to have internal transmissions outside of the ones installed as part of aircraft. Radio is additive, it also can produce the sums and negatives of the frequencies. It is still possible that a great number of directed frequencies could affect ground control approach or other means to safely land a plane. It is also possible that any of the computer systems could be affected. Just shows you how silly people can be till they crash and burn in a fiery ball of jet a fuel.

There was once concern that electronic devices onboard an aircraft could disrupt communications or navigation equipment. As pilot in command, I could, and did, test and certify electronics for use on our aircraft. Nothing ever caused a problem. That was years ago, and systems have long been hardened to prevent any ill effects. The real reason for forbidding the use of cellphones on airplanes goes back to the days of the first generation of phones, where an airborne phone could disrupt many cell towers. The prohibition was by the FCC, not the FAA, who just enforced the FCC's mandate. That situation was made obsolete by technology many years ago, but it's still in force. The airlines have not pressed the issue because they like things the way they are. You can make phone calls in flight on many flights, using the airline's systems, as long as you're willing to pay. It's extra income for the airline. Some actually offer free calling in flight. The "above 10,000 ft" or cruise flight is entirely arbitrary, as is most of the FAA regulations. Many don't make a lot of sense, but I had to memorize them for checkrides and tests.

In my former life I helped run EMI tests on aircraft systems too. These were fairly extensive tests and we found some problems but not to often. One time it caused the autopilot to glitch inflight which caused pilots to quickly wake up... The inflight phones use satellite systems and yes they are very expensive.

The software that runs on the aircraft systems has come a long way. I once flew aircraft in which the only software was in my head. Now software can land the plane without the pilots ever touching anything except the flight director inputs. New flight directors can land, brake, and bring the plane to a stop with engines at idle, in the center of the runway. That software has been well tested, and the hardware has been thoroughly tested to insure that EMF interference will not affect it. But some software in some aircraft is still a problem. Witness the Boeing 737 Max.

A lot more wrong then just software...

We've gone a bit off topic.

Well, this is an internet forum. It's a miracle when a thread doesn't go off topic. But you're right. Back to topic...

Quick question since we have a pilot here. Was the WTC being hit in the middle by an airliner piloted by a newbie an impossibility and if yes what is your theory for what really happened?

No, phones are made so that they connect to cell towers. As you drive on the road you are passed from tower to tower. If it's your own carrier then fine, if not then you are roaming. If you make a call on that tower it will cost more. The devices that are used mimic a tower. Your cell phone will hook to it. Whatever data that can be collected they collect. I doubt if it is the entire phone call. That would take up too much space, They admit to collecting "metadata".

They haven't talked about that for a good while now. Seems to be just accepted. The courts told them to stop some of it. A year later they found out that they were still doing it in defiance of the court order.

All the governments have to do when brought into court is to say, "That would violate national security for me to talk about it." And that's it, you can't compel them to tell any more.

They do collect cell phone "metadata" still. They have huge facilities that they built that will store thousands of exabytes of data. No reason to believe that they won't keep that for decades.
Careful, this is Alex Jones territory.
I think that the martians did it because they were mad at the way we portrayed them in the movies.

No.

Sure, and I said access points, not cell towers. Wifi access points as michaelk suggested that are simulated/offered by a stingray device or similar. Does this require that your hardware has a secret feature that makes it automatically connect to the stingray wifi access point?