6 ms·

I would really like to see a practical open source implementation of this so people can start looking for ways to defeat it. Otherwise you know the police are g

I would really like to see a practical open source implementation of this so people can start looking for ways to defeat it. Otherwise you know the police are going to abuse this.

LarryMullins 4y ago
Short of lining your walls with foil, how could you defeat it legally? Jamming isn't legal. We need new legislation to ban this, without a law enforcement exemption. I don't have high hopes.
- giantg2 4y ago
  I would take a wild guess that it wouldn't be jamming, but some sort of network configuration. Maybe something like extra access points with specific geometry, higher power exterior APs than interior APs, or random beam forming or reflections. Jamming could still be an option. Most devices are required to accept any interference from other lawful devices. So in theory, you could find legal ways of jamming. https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-jam-your-neighbors-wi-fi-legally/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-jam-your-neighbors-wi-f...
  - BenjiWiebe 4y ago
    The same law that says you must accept interference also says you may not cause interference, or something like that. You could only legally jam by making transmissions that are actually useful and just happen to also interfere. IANAL.
- iam-TJ 4y ago
  "Jamming" is legal in as much as any device that operates in the ISM[0] bands must accept interference - so in the 2.4GHz example, microwave ovens, baby monitors, TV relays, remote door monitors, wireless alarm systems etc., all operate in the same band and will interfere with WiFi that is close by (since they use a different modulation). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_radio_band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_radio_band
  - kccqzy 4y ago
    And in college I remember a professor or a TA demonstrated jamming by operating a modified microwave oven while running iperf or something similar on a nearby Wi-Fi network.
  - robocat 4y ago
    You are correct that ISM band devices must accept interference, however jamming is illegal in the USA due to FCC regulations: https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement Definitely start with the presumption it is illegal anywhere in the world, even though you might be able to hack around regulations to find loopholes. I think the FCC is focused on broadcast interference, safety requirements, and commercial sales of jamming devices.
- Gigachad 4y ago
  Lining the exterior walls doesn't sound all that hard for a new build. Just lay the RF blocking sheet down before the drywall. People love those RF blocking wallets that have dubious value, a "privacy wall" upgrade from builders would probably sell well.
  - kccqzy 4y ago
    They can sell it as improving Wi-Fi in your own home too, even if you trust neighbors not to pull any shenanigans, since your Wi-Fi network won't be subject to interference from neighboring networks.
    - skykooler 4y ago
      Downside is that your cellphones would also stop working indoors.
      - geysersam 4y ago
        Okay so nobody will buy it.
      - Gigachad 4y ago
        That's an inconvenience for guests but you could stick a QR code to join your wifi on the wall. Phone calls should still work over wifi calling I'd think.
      - autoexec 4y ago
        Just put a mini cell tower/booster on the inside of your house connected via wire to the outside. Problem solved, and you now have the ability to cut off cell access on the inside if you want to.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
azinman2 4y ago
It’s not some “radio gun” you can just point at a house - you need a very calibrated setup purpose built for each space. This would be very obvious and would require access to inside to do the calibrations. There are far more obvious ways to know if someone is home, from thermal sensors, looking in windows and knocking on doors, or park outside and just watch. Further if the police want to know if you’re home, it’d already game over.
- transpute 4y ago
  DHS 2014 report on ~$10K handheld devices for through-wall-surveillance, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Radar-TWS-SUM_0514-508.pdf https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Radar-T... X-Ray vans (2015), https://www.foxnews.com/science/x-ray-vans-security-measure-or-invasion-of-privacy https://www.foxnews.com/science/x-ray-vans-security-measure-... > The Z Backscatter Van (ZBV), manufactured by American Science and Engineering .. can also see through clothing and into some buildings, are raising privacy concerns as well as questions about health risks ... the van -- which looks like a standard delivery van -- takes less than 15 seconds to scan a vehicle; it can be operated remotely from more than 1,500 feet ... vans range in cost from $729,000 to $825,000.
- oceanplexian 4y ago
  Yes and 5 years ago the most impressive thing “AI” could do is tell you if an object was a cat or a banana. Now it can hold complex conversations and write computer code. It’s never too early to start thinking of the implications of technology. It’s not inconceivable that in a few years every crooked small town cop will have access to tools straight out of science fiction- tools that started out as innocuous research.
- rogers18445 4y ago
  You can record first, and calibrate/train later. Then analyze recorded data.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > There are far more obvious ways to know if someone is home, from thermal sensors, looking in windows and knocking on doors, or park outside and just watch. All of these have the disadvantage that the observer can be spotted - there exist numerous articles on how to spot cameras because sketchy AirBnB hosts placed hidden cameras in bedrooms and toilets. A radio-based monitor however doesn't need line of sight - if small enough, it can be hidden just about anywhere where no one looks, like the interior of a rainwater tank, under the bottom of a trash can, in a roof water drain.
llanowarelves 4y ago
Things like this have been known for a while, and for some reason now being talked about in mainstream. Talking about / showing things as an early "adopter" (ECHELON, Snowden stuff pre-Snowden, etc.) tends to get people angry and you slandered with vitriolic things like "conspiracy theorist" so the juice is not worth the squeeze.
- dogleash 4y ago
  the life of a politically inconvenient story: 1. it's conspiracy theory 2. it was obvious to everyone 3. forgotten

I would really like to see a practical open source implementation of this so people can start looking for ways to defeat it. Otherwise you know the police are going to abuse this.

LarryMullins 4y ago

Short of lining your walls with foil, how could you defeat it legally? Jamming isn't legal. We need new legislation to ban this, without a law enforcement exemption. I don't have high hopes.

giantg2 4y ago
I would take a wild guess that it wouldn't be jamming, but some sort of network configuration. Maybe something like extra access points with specific geometry, higher power exterior APs than interior APs, or random beam forming or reflections. Jamming could still be an option. Most devices are required to accept any interference from other lawful devices. So in theory, you could find legal ways of jamming. https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-jam-your-neighbors-wi-fi-legally/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-jam-your-neighbors-wi-f...
- BenjiWiebe 4y ago
  The same law that says you must accept interference also says you may not cause interference, or something like that. You could only legally jam by making transmissions that are actually useful and just happen to also interfere. IANAL.
iam-TJ 4y ago
"Jamming" is legal in as much as any device that operates in the ISM[0] bands must accept interference - so in the 2.4GHz example, microwave ovens, baby monitors, TV relays, remote door monitors, wireless alarm systems etc., all operate in the same band and will interfere with WiFi that is close by (since they use a different modulation). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_radio_band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_radio_band
- kccqzy 4y ago
  And in college I remember a professor or a TA demonstrated jamming by operating a modified microwave oven while running iperf or something similar on a nearby Wi-Fi network.
- robocat 4y ago
  You are correct that ISM band devices must accept interference, however jamming is illegal in the USA due to FCC regulations: https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement Definitely start with the presumption it is illegal anywhere in the world, even though you might be able to hack around regulations to find loopholes. I think the FCC is focused on broadcast interference, safety requirements, and commercial sales of jamming devices.
Gigachad 4y ago
Lining the exterior walls doesn't sound all that hard for a new build. Just lay the RF blocking sheet down before the drywall. People love those RF blocking wallets that have dubious value, a "privacy wall" upgrade from builders would probably sell well.
- kccqzy 4y ago
  They can sell it as improving Wi-Fi in your own home too, even if you trust neighbors not to pull any shenanigans, since your Wi-Fi network won't be subject to interference from neighboring networks.
  - skykooler 4y ago
    Downside is that your cellphones would also stop working indoors.
    - geysersam 4y ago
      Okay so nobody will buy it.
    - Gigachad 4y ago
      That's an inconvenience for guests but you could stick a QR code to join your wifi on the wall. Phone calls should still work over wifi calling I'd think.
    - autoexec 4y ago
      Just put a mini cell tower/booster on the inside of your house connected via wire to the outside. Problem solved, and you now have the ability to cut off cell access on the inside if you want to.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

azinman2 4y ago

It’s not some “radio gun” you can just point at a house - you need a very calibrated setup purpose built for each space. This would be very obvious and would require access to inside to do the calibrations. There are far more obvious ways to know if someone is home, from thermal sensors, looking in windows and knocking on doors, or park outside and just watch. Further if the police want to know if you’re home, it’d already game over.

transpute 4y ago
DHS 2014 report on ~$10K handheld devices for through-wall-surveillance, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Radar-TWS-SUM_0514-508.pdf https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Radar-T... X-Ray vans (2015), https://www.foxnews.com/science/x-ray-vans-security-measure-or-invasion-of-privacy https://www.foxnews.com/science/x-ray-vans-security-measure-... > The Z Backscatter Van (ZBV), manufactured by American Science and Engineering .. can also see through clothing and into some buildings, are raising privacy concerns as well as questions about health risks ... the van -- which looks like a standard delivery van -- takes less than 15 seconds to scan a vehicle; it can be operated remotely from more than 1,500 feet ... vans range in cost from $729,000 to $825,000.
oceanplexian 4y ago
Yes and 5 years ago the most impressive thing “AI” could do is tell you if an object was a cat or a banana. Now it can hold complex conversations and write computer code. It’s never too early to start thinking of the implications of technology. It’s not inconceivable that in a few years every crooked small town cop will have access to tools straight out of science fiction- tools that started out as innocuous research.
rogers18445 4y ago
You can record first, and calibrate/train later. Then analyze recorded data.
mschuster91 4y ago
> There are far more obvious ways to know if someone is home, from thermal sensors, looking in windows and knocking on doors, or park outside and just watch. All of these have the disadvantage that the observer can be spotted - there exist numerous articles on how to spot cameras because sketchy AirBnB hosts placed hidden cameras in bedrooms and toilets. A radio-based monitor however doesn't need line of sight - if small enough, it can be hidden just about anywhere where no one looks, like the interior of a rainwater tank, under the bottom of a trash can, in a roof water drain.

llanowarelves 4y ago

Things like this have been known for a while, and for some reason now being talked about in mainstream. Talking about / showing things as an early "adopter" (ECHELON, Snowden stuff pre-Snowden, etc.) tends to get people angry and you slandered with vitriolic things like "conspiracy theorist" so the juice is not worth the squeeze.

dogleash 4y ago
the life of a politically inconvenient story: 1. it's conspiracy theory 2. it was obvious to everyone 3. forgotten