5 ms·

From the horse's mouth: https://transition.fcc.gov/eb/jammerenforcement/jamfaq.pdf https://transition.fcc.gov/eb/jammerenforcement/jamfaq.pdf Section 333 of th

From the horse's mouth: https://transition.fcc.gov/eb/jammerenforcement/jamfaq.pdf https://transition.fcc.gov/eb/jammerenforcement/jamfaq.pdf Section 333 of the Communications Act : “No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under [the Communications] Act or operated by the United States Government.” 47 U.S.C. § 333. If you're willfully screwing with other people's transmissions, you're breaking the law. It's that simple. The method being used doesn't really enter into it.

yellowbkpk 11y ago
Wifi operates in unlicensed spectrum and transmitters and receivers are required to handle interference in this space. Is it still jamming if it's not a licensed station doing the broadcasting? </devilsadvocate> ...I suppose it does say "authorized" there, and 2.4 and 5Ghz transmitters are authorized.
- ryandrake 11y ago
  Understood you're playing devil's advocate, but the response would be: Why don't I stand outside with a WiFi antenna pointed at your house, doing the same thing, causing your WiFi devices to drop connections over and over, and then you tell me that I'm not jamming you.
  - facetube 11y ago
    Even further, denial of service attacks can be performed using totally valid and normal HTTP or HTTPS requests. In that case, it's the volume and the intent that matter.
- extrapickles 11y ago
  Yes its still jamming. Even though the devices are unlicensed, you are still not allowed to intentionally cause interference with other devices. You can think of it as the requirement to use the ISM bands is you have to be nice to other users of the band. The requirement on receiving interference means that you don't get to gripe to the FCC about other users of the band that are otherwise being nice.
  - FireBeyond 11y ago
    For added irony, the hospitality industry claims that allowing hotspots will "cause interference with their networks". So?!? That's not even implicit, but an explicit part of the use of the 2.4 and 5GHz spectrums. "There may be interference. Wear a helmet."
- ryanobjc 11y ago
  "unlicensed" devices are still authorized by the FCC. So your devil's advocate is unnecessary.
- codys 11y ago
  It always feels funny to me to refer to the ISM bands (the spectrum itself) as "unlicensed". - Devices operating there have to be approved - There are rules about how the devices work - There are rules about how the _operator_ is allowed to operate the approved devices ("Operation is subject to the following conditions" sticker on most equipment). (all of this under FCC part 15 rules)
  - yuubi 11y ago
    In other bands, the operator in control of the transmitter generally needs to file paperwork with the FCC to get a license (in some systems like cellphones, the base station is in control so the subscribers don't need licenses, just approved equipment).
karmajunkie 11y ago
Just playing devils advocate but it doesn't sound like they're creating radio interference. It sounds like they're interfering at the protocol layer, which would be another matter (likely also against regulations)
- dredmorbius 11y ago
  You don't have to be "creating radio interference". You have to be "interfering with radio communications". Intentionally preventing a radio communication from occurring is interfering with it.
- chris_wot 11y ago
  Ultimately if you follow the network layers it gets to physical media. Without physical media nothing works. Ergo, just layering over the top of the physical layer means you still interfere with wifi comms.

yellowbkpk 11y ago

Wifi operates in unlicensed spectrum and transmitters and receivers are required to handle interference in this space. Is it still jamming if it's not a licensed station doing the broadcasting? </devilsadvocate> ...I suppose it does say "authorized" there, and 2.4 and 5Ghz transmitters are authorized.

ryandrake 11y ago
Understood you're playing devil's advocate, but the response would be: Why don't I stand outside with a WiFi antenna pointed at your house, doing the same thing, causing your WiFi devices to drop connections over and over, and then you tell me that I'm not jamming you.
- facetube 11y ago
  Even further, denial of service attacks can be performed using totally valid and normal HTTP or HTTPS requests. In that case, it's the volume and the intent that matter.
extrapickles 11y ago
Yes its still jamming. Even though the devices are unlicensed, you are still not allowed to intentionally cause interference with other devices. You can think of it as the requirement to use the ISM bands is you have to be nice to other users of the band. The requirement on receiving interference means that you don't get to gripe to the FCC about other users of the band that are otherwise being nice.
- FireBeyond 11y ago
  For added irony, the hospitality industry claims that allowing hotspots will "cause interference with their networks". So?!? That's not even implicit, but an explicit part of the use of the 2.4 and 5GHz spectrums. "There may be interference. Wear a helmet."
ryanobjc 11y ago
"unlicensed" devices are still authorized by the FCC. So your devil's advocate is unnecessary.
codys 11y ago
It always feels funny to me to refer to the ISM bands (the spectrum itself) as "unlicensed". - Devices operating there have to be approved - There are rules about how the devices work - There are rules about how the _operator_ is allowed to operate the approved devices ("Operation is subject to the following conditions" sticker on most equipment). (all of this under FCC part 15 rules)
- yuubi 11y ago
  In other bands, the operator in control of the transmitter generally needs to file paperwork with the FCC to get a license (in some systems like cellphones, the base station is in control so the subscribers don't need licenses, just approved equipment).

karmajunkie 11y ago

Just playing devils advocate but it doesn't sound like they're creating radio interference. It sounds like they're interfering at the protocol layer, which would be another matter (likely also against regulations)

dredmorbius 11y ago
You don't have to be "creating radio interference". You have to be "interfering with radio communications". Intentionally preventing a radio communication from occurring is interfering with it.
chris_wot 11y ago
Ultimately if you follow the network layers it gets to physical media. Without physical media nothing works. Ergo, just layering over the top of the physical layer means you still interfere with wifi comms.