6 ms·

Play along with NSA: The RAFTER unintentional radio emissions how-to

97 points by wolframio 10y ago

demouser7 10y ago
It is a very interesting topic because almost all electronics devices have similar emissions , see http://www.cvel.clemson.edu/pdf/ED_Detection_2008.pdf http://www.cvel.clemson.edu/pdf/ED_Detection_2008.pdf Someday thieves will use these techniques to locate who in a dark alley has the latest iPhone.
- 20yrs_no_equity 10y ago
  Fortunately, someday sooner, iPhones will become effectively useless to thieves. As a victim of an iPhone theft - it was literally ripped out of my hand on a very public boulevard - I was grateful to be able to remotely wipe it within hours. I am even more grateful now that it will require a passcode within 12 hours if it doesn't get a touchID, and I really look forward to the day that "wipe and make unable to be re-authorized except by taking it to an Apple store, and also mark this phone as stolen" will be built in to "find my iPhone". Since the phone hardware will only run software signed by Apple's private key, Apple can make a stolen phone effectively unusable. You need to have a key to put it in recovery mode, and even with signed software the hardware ID won't change, so the only signed code could be code that will check the hardware during the authorization process (I think this is already happening for anti-counterfeiting purposes.)
madengr 10y ago
Then again, direct sampling SDR don't have an LO to leak, but do have a stable clock. There are some power supplies and digital systems with spread spectrum clocks. No reason one could not use a spread spectrum ADC clock, heavily over sampled of course, then average the samples where needed. There are some ADC they randomize the data bus for EMC. Do they still have vans in the UK that driving around looking for un-taxed TV?
- dogma1138 10y ago
  >Do they still have vans in the UK that driving around looking for un-taxed TV? Yes, well sorta if you say you don't own a TV you'll get an inspection sometime within a period of 1-2 years. The problem in the UK now is that if you have anything with the BBC player on it you have to pay the TV license also. IIRC they also changed the rules regarding TV and now every screen above a certain size is considered a TV because a lot of people were buying flat screens that don't have a tuner installed or removing the tuner to not have to pay the license. For anyone who wonders the cost of the license is 145£ a year that's more than some low cost TV's would go on sales like Boxing Day.
  - kelnage 10y ago
    You're wrong about when you have to pay the TV license. Currently the law states that you have to pay if you watch any streamed live TV (regardless of whether it is from the BBC, Sky or another TV provider). Having equipment capable of watching live TV does not automatically incur the license fee. The law is changing in September, such that you will also be required to pay it if you use iPlayer - however, just having a system that can use iPlayer does not mean you have to pay it - it will be payable only if you use it to watch either live or catch-up TV on iPlayer (other catch-up applications such as ITV's or Channel 5's are not included in this). For some reason, the BBC has decided that either adding a login system or monitoring IP addresses that connect to iPlayer is not the way to go and their official line is that they will continue to monitor usage in the same way as they currently do. There are many long arguments about whether the TV license vans even exist or if they use radio emissions from devices to monitor what you're watching - some contend that flat screen TVs do not produce sufficient emissions, but there is research that says otherwise.
    - Someone1234 10y ago
      > For some reason, the BBC has decided that either adding a login system or monitoring IP addresses that connect to iPlayer is not the way to go and their official line is that they will continue to monitor usage in the same way as they currently do. Because it is completely impractical. TV licenses are per property, not per person, so all that would happen is that people would register accounts at a friend's property and keep streaming. IPs aren't tied to specific subscribers, and giving out a database of IPs to subscriber addresses would be a huge breach of privacy (as advertisers can use it also). Plus, frankly, the majority of people pay for their TV licenses and this system would just frustrate legal owners. You'd be deploying a system that may impact less than 5% of viewers, doubt it would even pay for itself.
anc84 10y ago
That Spycatcher book sounds interesting but looks intimidating. Can someone comment on its style and for-leisure readability?
- stevetrewick 10y ago
  It's an easy enough read, quite leisurely. Suitable for the beach or a rail commute. At least I thought so, but YMMV depending on what you'd normally read under those circumstances.
- nabla9 10y ago
  It's interesting book and easy to read. Wright clearly had chip on his shoulder and it shows, but all facts in the book seem to be correct. It became bestseller trough Streisand effect. UK tried to ban it's publication in Australia and it was forbidden in England. British newspapers were given gag orders.
  - SyneRyder 10y ago
    An additional sidenote: the Australian lawyer who defended the publisher in the Spycatcher case is now the Prime Minister of Australia. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/sep/14/malcolm-turnbull-spycatcher-lawyer-prime-minister https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/sep/14/malco...
  - beezle 10y ago
    As I recall he was a bit of a conspiracy type as well with his 5th man theory, very Angleton. So yes the book is interesting but bear in mind the agenda as well
    - nabla9 10y ago
      Right or wrong, his suspicion of Hollis was not crazy. Was Roger Hollis a British patriot or Soviet spy? IWP panel uses argument mapping to investigate April 21, 2015 http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/was-roger-hollis-a-british-patriot-or-soviet-spy http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/was-roger-hollis... http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20150417_ReportandChronologyHollis.pdf http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20150417_ReportandChronologyHollis...
PhantomGremlin 10y ago
This cat-and-mouse game has been going on for a long time, even outside of spycraft. E.g. radar detectors are illegal in several states, so of course there have been devices sold to law enforcement to allow them to detect these illegal radar detectors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_detector_detector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_detector_detector That's all probably moot now. I think law enforcement has moved mostly to using lasers, which are much more difficult to detect.
- sandworm101 10y ago
  The handheld units are now universally laser, but there are a couple places where radar is still the norm. Some cops have car-mounted radar units so they don't need to get out of, or open the window of the car. These are great if you want to watch a highway that doesn't get much traffic or to catch speeders while your own car is moving. Both scenarios are very common in rural areas. Also, automated speed detection systems (aka "photo radar") use radar because you don't have to aim it like you do a laser.
- codethief 10y ago
  > This form of "electronic warfare" cuts both ways and since detector-detectors use a similar superheterodyne receiver, many early "stealth" radar detectors were equipped with a radar-detector-detector-detector circuit, which shuts down the main radar receiver when the detector-detector's signal is detected, thus preventing detection by such equipment. TIL there exist radar detector detector detectors.

97 points by wolframio 10y ago

It is a very interesting topic because almost all electronics devices have similar emissions , see http://www.cvel.clemson.edu/pdf/ED_Detection_2008.pdf http://www.cvel.clemson.edu/pdf/ED_Detection_2008.pdf Someday thieves will use these techniques to locate who in a dark alley has the latest iPhone.

20yrs_no_equity 10y ago
Fortunately, someday sooner, iPhones will become effectively useless to thieves. As a victim of an iPhone theft - it was literally ripped out of my hand on a very public boulevard - I was grateful to be able to remotely wipe it within hours. I am even more grateful now that it will require a passcode within 12 hours if it doesn't get a touchID, and I really look forward to the day that "wipe and make unable to be re-authorized except by taking it to an Apple store, and also mark this phone as stolen" will be built in to "find my iPhone". Since the phone hardware will only run software signed by Apple's private key, Apple can make a stolen phone effectively unusable. You need to have a key to put it in recovery mode, and even with signed software the hardware ID won't change, so the only signed code could be code that will check the hardware during the authorization process (I think this is already happening for anti-counterfeiting purposes.)

madengr 10y ago

Then again, direct sampling SDR don't have an LO to leak, but do have a stable clock. There are some power supplies and digital systems with spread spectrum clocks. No reason one could not use a spread spectrum ADC clock, heavily over sampled of course, then average the samples where needed. There are some ADC they randomize the data bus for EMC. Do they still have vans in the UK that driving around looking for un-taxed TV?

dogma1138 10y ago
>Do they still have vans in the UK that driving around looking for un-taxed TV? Yes, well sorta if you say you don't own a TV you'll get an inspection sometime within a period of 1-2 years. The problem in the UK now is that if you have anything with the BBC player on it you have to pay the TV license also. IIRC they also changed the rules regarding TV and now every screen above a certain size is considered a TV because a lot of people were buying flat screens that don't have a tuner installed or removing the tuner to not have to pay the license. For anyone who wonders the cost of the license is 145£ a year that's more than some low cost TV's would go on sales like Boxing Day.
- kelnage 10y ago
  You're wrong about when you have to pay the TV license. Currently the law states that you have to pay if you watch any streamed live TV (regardless of whether it is from the BBC, Sky or another TV provider). Having equipment capable of watching live TV does not automatically incur the license fee. The law is changing in September, such that you will also be required to pay it if you use iPlayer - however, just having a system that can use iPlayer does not mean you have to pay it - it will be payable only if you use it to watch either live or catch-up TV on iPlayer (other catch-up applications such as ITV's or Channel 5's are not included in this). For some reason, the BBC has decided that either adding a login system or monitoring IP addresses that connect to iPlayer is not the way to go and their official line is that they will continue to monitor usage in the same way as they currently do. There are many long arguments about whether the TV license vans even exist or if they use radio emissions from devices to monitor what you're watching - some contend that flat screen TVs do not produce sufficient emissions, but there is research that says otherwise.
  - Someone1234 10y ago
    > For some reason, the BBC has decided that either adding a login system or monitoring IP addresses that connect to iPlayer is not the way to go and their official line is that they will continue to monitor usage in the same way as they currently do. Because it is completely impractical. TV licenses are per property, not per person, so all that would happen is that people would register accounts at a friend's property and keep streaming. IPs aren't tied to specific subscribers, and giving out a database of IPs to subscriber addresses would be a huge breach of privacy (as advertisers can use it also). Plus, frankly, the majority of people pay for their TV licenses and this system would just frustrate legal owners. You'd be deploying a system that may impact less than 5% of viewers, doubt it would even pay for itself.

anc84 10y ago

That Spycatcher book sounds interesting but looks intimidating. Can someone comment on its style and for-leisure readability?

stevetrewick 10y ago
It's an easy enough read, quite leisurely. Suitable for the beach or a rail commute. At least I thought so, but YMMV depending on what you'd normally read under those circumstances.
nabla9 10y ago
It's interesting book and easy to read. Wright clearly had chip on his shoulder and it shows, but all facts in the book seem to be correct. It became bestseller trough Streisand effect. UK tried to ban it's publication in Australia and it was forbidden in England. British newspapers were given gag orders.
- SyneRyder 10y ago
  An additional sidenote: the Australian lawyer who defended the publisher in the Spycatcher case is now the Prime Minister of Australia. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/sep/14/malcolm-turnbull-spycatcher-lawyer-prime-minister https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/sep/14/malco...
- beezle 10y ago
  As I recall he was a bit of a conspiracy type as well with his 5th man theory, very Angleton. So yes the book is interesting but bear in mind the agenda as well
  - nabla9 10y ago
    Right or wrong, his suspicion of Hollis was not crazy. Was Roger Hollis a British patriot or Soviet spy? IWP panel uses argument mapping to investigate April 21, 2015 http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/was-roger-hollis-a-british-patriot-or-soviet-spy http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/was-roger-hollis... http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20150417_ReportandChronologyHollis.pdf http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20150417_ReportandChronologyHollis...

PhantomGremlin 10y ago

This cat-and-mouse game has been going on for a long time, even outside of spycraft. E.g. radar detectors are illegal in several states, so of course there have been devices sold to law enforcement to allow them to detect these illegal radar detectors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_detector_detector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_detector_detector That's all probably moot now. I think law enforcement has moved mostly to using lasers, which are much more difficult to detect.

sandworm101 10y ago
The handheld units are now universally laser, but there are a couple places where radar is still the norm. Some cops have car-mounted radar units so they don't need to get out of, or open the window of the car. These are great if you want to watch a highway that doesn't get much traffic or to catch speeders while your own car is moving. Both scenarios are very common in rural areas. Also, automated speed detection systems (aka "photo radar") use radar because you don't have to aim it like you do a laser.
codethief 10y ago
> This form of "electronic warfare" cuts both ways and since detector-detectors use a similar superheterodyne receiver, many early "stealth" radar detectors were equipped with a radar-detector-detector-detector circuit, which shuts down the main radar receiver when the detector-detector's signal is detected, thus preventing detection by such equipment. TIL there exist radar detector detector detectors.