4 ms·

People use them to essentially DDOS cell phones with BLE connection requests. That's one of the situations where I'd feel justified in taking a device and stom

People use them to essentially DDOS cell phones with BLE connection requests. That's one of the situations where I'd feel justified in taking a device and stomping it to bits, and I'd support anyone else doing the same. If anyone does encounter this in the wild with Apple devices, first, install your damn updates because I'm pretty positive this is now blocked, but in the meantime turn on Lockdown mode to keep this from interfering with you.

FireBeyond 3y ago
You might feel justified, but courts would likely disagree. Apropos of anything else, the FCC regs around the 2.4GHz spectrum are pretty explicit, "Part 15 devices ... must accept any interference that may be received". In their eyes, the device that is flawed is the phone, not the Flipper.
- BenjiWiebe 3y ago
  I believe there's equivalent language (even for licensed uses) about not causing interference, so probably the Flipper and the phone are doing poorly here.
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    My understanding, entirely possible that it is incorrect, is that the "not causing interference" is to "authorized services", i.e. specifically licensed frequencies and users/devices, not other users of those "free-for-all" spectrums. But I may well be wrong, in which case I would agree with you.
- fencepost 3y ago
  I've been at a conference where someone decided doing this would be amusing. I'm pretty positive there would have been widespread support for addressing the issue with a little property destruction, with the alternative being "Congratulations, you've shown you can't play nicely. Your admission to the conference is revoked, you're blacklisted from our future conferences, and we'll let the organizers of other local conferences know your name and why you're banned from our conference so they'll be forewarned." As for courts, if this hadn't already been resolved (at least on iOS) I wonder if you could request that jurors and the judge turn their phones on for a demonstration. Given the state of Android updates in the general public, it'd probably still be effective on a significant percentage of people.

FireBeyond 3y ago

You might feel justified, but courts would likely disagree. Apropos of anything else, the FCC regs around the 2.4GHz spectrum are pretty explicit, "Part 15 devices ... must accept any interference that may be received". In their eyes, the device that is flawed is the phone, not the Flipper.

BenjiWiebe 3y ago
I believe there's equivalent language (even for licensed uses) about not causing interference, so probably the Flipper and the phone are doing poorly here.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  My understanding, entirely possible that it is incorrect, is that the "not causing interference" is to "authorized services", i.e. specifically licensed frequencies and users/devices, not other users of those "free-for-all" spectrums. But I may well be wrong, in which case I would agree with you.
fencepost 3y ago
I've been at a conference where someone decided doing this would be amusing. I'm pretty positive there would have been widespread support for addressing the issue with a little property destruction, with the alternative being "Congratulations, you've shown you can't play nicely. Your admission to the conference is revoked, you're blacklisted from our future conferences, and we'll let the organizers of other local conferences know your name and why you're banned from our conference so they'll be forewarned." As for courts, if this hadn't already been resolved (at least on iOS) I wonder if you could request that jurors and the judge turn their phones on for a demonstration. Given the state of Android updates in the general public, it'd probably still be effective on a significant percentage of people.