Slashdot Log In
Cheap Video Sniffing
Posted by
timothy
on Sun May 04, 2003 11:18 AM
from the what's-on-channel-five dept.
from the what's-on-channel-five dept.
HadleyRipleyArgusRockefellerDog writes "Want to see what other people find interesting enough to watch with an X10 Camera? Radical Software Group has a page describing how to build a "video sniffer". They say they picked up their first image after walking half a block in NY city. X10's work on the same frequency as 802.11b. .. anyone want a combo WiFi/Video sniffer for Christmas?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Don't you know? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.trustedworlds.net/)
I already know. A pool, from left to right, and then this hot twenty-something in a blue dress, up and down.
Really, what else is there?
Year Old Dupe (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Year Old Dupe (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Thursday November 29, @09:35PM)
Yes, it's completely intentional.
Legal? Moral? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://modesto.sf.net/piave/index.html)
erm...i'll give it a miss (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Sunday April 27 2003, @07:14AM)
Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Ummm... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://decafbad.net/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 05 2006, @04:17PM)
Looking at baby cribs, kids rooms, and garden sheds just isn't my thing, thanks.
Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.darkside-comic.com/)
A quick trudge of any *shudder* blog site is more than enough to convince me that everyone else leads a life as boring as mine.
Of course, it may just be that the people with interesting lives are out living them. Now there's a thought . . .
umm, I'm not so sure (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.peterswift.org/)
Video sniffing...next thing we're gonna have an article on dry erase marker sniffing.
Encryption (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.irmak.org/)
Re:Encryption (Score:5, Informative)
(Last Journal: Friday June 25 2004, @09:26PM)
Cool tv though (Score:1, Offtopic)
(Last Journal: Friday February 17 2006, @06:51PM)
Re:Cool tv though (Score:5, Informative)
Security camera? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why in the hell would a security camera be wireless? And this thing doesn't even seem to be encrypted!
Re:Security camera? (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://home.arcor.de/36bit/samba.html)
And this thing doesn't even seem to be encrypted! They probably could not imagine that anyone would care enough to tune in. Even if someone tuned in, so what? I would leave it unencrypted even now.
Re:Security camera? (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday March 26 2006, @01:47PM)
First, the bad guys could watch the feed from that wireless camera unknown to anyone for weeks to "case" the target.
Secondly, all they'd probably have to do to render that camera useless would be intercept some video of the area it watches when said area was unoccupied, change any necessary onscreen time/date stamps (which aren't even an issue if it's a cheap-ass X10 camera), and rebroadcast it with a signal strong enough to overpower the signal from the real camera.
Of course, this all becomes a non-issue if you assume that an X10 camera would never be used to secure something valuable enough to be of interest to technically-sophisticated thieves who could easily defeat the system. But this is America, and stupider things have happened.
~Philly
Re:Security camera? (Score:5, Informative)
(http://heelix.multiply.com/journal | Last Journal: Wednesday October 03, @04:41PM)
I worked a couple jobs while paying for college. Security (the polyester kind) being one of the less rewarding - almost as fun as column chromatography of feces samples in the lab. Anyhow, tape decks were spendy, broken cameras were cheap. I'd wire up a couple cameras in the open and leave a blind spot. That is where I stuck the hidden camera connected to one of two working tape decks. Just like shooting fish in a barrel. You would see them look to make sure the cameras did not cover that area, walk back, and stuff the goods in their pockets/lunchbox/etc.
Don't assume. The concept of honeypots extend outside of IT....
Re:Security camera? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://focasmi.org/ | Last Journal: Saturday September 20 2003, @07:34AM)
Security cameras don't usually record every square inch, because in many cases it isn't very practical or cost effective. If you were going to (hypothetically speaking of course) break into a place, you would definitely want to know what the camera *couldn't* see. You'd watch the camera, compare with what you know about the inside of the building, and through the process of elimination -- voila! You now know what the camera doesn't see.
Sometimes people who place security cameras don't think about other possible ways of entering buildings. They usually watch the door. But one could conceivably enter a building through windows or ventilation systems.
Even if you had a camera looking at every possible means of entry, chances are good that one or more of those cameras can be disabled or fooled somehow. Knowing what the camera can and can't see can reveal strategies for disabling or fooling the cameras.
Re:Security camera? (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://focasmi.org/ | Last Journal: Saturday September 20 2003, @07:34AM)
Even with a totally visible camera, you can't usually tell how wide the angle of view is on the lens. Also, some visible cameras are capable of moving, and do so on a programmed frequency. You'd definitely want to know what that camera can see.
If you have a place that has a lot of visible cameras the space available to hide in may be as little 2-3 sq. ft. Without being able see that space for sure, you might not take the chance, but if you can pick up the video image via X10 video sniffing, you will know exactly where that space is.
Re:Security camera? (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://dattaway.us/)
Ever heard of Pringles cans used for X10? That works too!
Re:Security camera? (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://dattaway.us/)
Something to think about when sniffing or trying to prevent reception of undesired signals.
2600 had an article on this as well... (Score:1)
I'd never do this (Score:4, Funny)
(http://home.primus.ca/~ronsharp/tororg.html)
I know nobody is going to read tha article (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
More
uhm (Score:1)
X10 cameras (Score:1, Funny)
(popup)
Buy are new X10 Camera. Broadcast your personal life to your neighborhood! Publicise your life! Offer expires 11:59:59tonight.
How about (Score:2, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Monday September 29 2003, @08:46AM)
Supply Vs Demand (Score:3, Funny)
What a wonderful society we live in.
Someone should set up an X10 looking at the image from goatse and broadcast it for any voyers out there.
finally.... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.geocities.com/tablizer | Last Journal: Saturday March 15 2003, @01:22PM)
Non-Modder Friendly Solution (Score:5, Informative)
Simply Amazing! (Score:5, Funny)
(http://snort-wireless.org/)
Re:Simply Amazing! (Score:4, Interesting)
I wonder, though. X10 cameras and 802.11b equipment do work on the same frequency. Would it be possible to write a program that would allow you to receive X10 data with a WiFi card? We've got the GNU Radio program [gnu.org] that can receive HDTV signals and radio signals and so on. Perhaps that could be modified to grab X10 signals through your wifi card.
Mind you, it may be that the two technologies are too different to be easily adapted to one another. Sharing spectrum is only one factor to be considered, and a fairly small one at that. Any X10 geeks care to comment on the feasibility of receiving X10 signals with 802.11b hardware?
Only in New York.. (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday May 03 2004, @11:25PM)
Start your own TV-studio (Score:4, Funny)
(http://vincent.vanscherpenseel.nl/ | Last Journal: Sunday March 13 2005, @05:13AM)
you mean people actually have X10 cameras? (Score:2, Funny)
hypocrites! all of you!
Child abuse (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Yeah, about a year ago.
Okay... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://mypuppet.net/ | Last Journal: Monday June 23 2003, @01:58PM)
Then they turn around and say "cool, I need to get me some of that" to a device that lets you invade other people's privacy without their knowledge or consent.
Of course, Slashdot people are also "we hate the MPAA, when does the new Matrix movie open?" too, so I guess I shouldn't be too shocked
Re:Okay... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's like if I walk down the street and people use X-ray glasses to stare at my crotch - that is an invasion of privacy. But this is the equivalent of me walking down the street with my dick dangling merrily. If I show it for the world to see, it's pretty dumb to get mad at people who look.
Yet ... (Score:1)
Wireless receiver (Score:1, Informative)
Do we need the video receiver? (Score:2, Interesting)
(http://www.lazphotos.net/photos/)
This is a very good thing! (Score:2)
Just the other day, my boss was telling me that now when he and his wife stay in someone's guest bedroom, he's always nervous about whether there is an X10 camera hidden in there.
I suppose I could build him one of these, and he could have at least some idea of whether he's being watched or not...
steve
Useful? (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.dynamicmedical.ca/)
You can scope out a house in advance, see if anyone is home, etc. etc.
Wireless functionality is great, but I wouldn't use those cameras in my home without some form of encryption.
or just buy one (Score:3, Interesting)
If You Wanna Look at a Hallway... (Score:2)
Beats a couple hundred bucks spent for that hardware.
cool fun but, (Score:1)
The way things are nowdays I wouldn't want to be seen walking around toting something that looks like what they built.
Liable to get you hauled in for a chat...
Funny article about X-10 (Score:2, Funny)
(http://flickr.com/photos/robl)
Surveillance Losing Its Fun [blogspot.com]...
Highly Illegal (Score:1)
(http://www.silentbrouhaha.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday July 31 2004, @07:42AM)
Think there's a associated federal law about this.
X10 != X10.com, the annoying pop-up company (Score:5, Informative)
(Last Journal: Tuesday April 08 2003, @10:19PM)
Do not dismiss X10 (the technology) just because some lame company has hijacked it and promotes the use of the products for illegal surveillance (yes, making a recording of you trying to boink your drunk and ugly date without her knowing is indeed illegal).
There are plenty of good companies to get X10 products from without going through X10.com. Smarthome [smarthome.com] and Radio Shack [radioshack.com] are a couple.
It's a shame X10.com chose the sleasy marking route because it really has tainted a pretty decent and useful technology.
-S
Does anyone else see the irony... (Score:1)
Hmmm.... (Score:2)
(http://www.dailykos.com/user/eAddict)
Re:we must destroy x10 (Score:2, Funny)