Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Security It's funny. Laugh. Hardware

Anti-Wi-Fi Wallpaper 233

Posted by michael from the better-than-tin-foil dept.
Alephcat writes "New Scientist is reporting on a wallpaper that can prevent hackers accessing secure networks via Wi-Fi - without blocking mobile phone signals - that's been developed by a British defence contractor. It is based on covert 'stealth' technology that was originally designed to hide military radars."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Anti-Wi-Fi Wallpaper More

Anti-Wi-Fi Wallpaper

Comments Filter:

  • Where'd The Town Go? (Score:5, Funny)

    by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:49AM (#9900179) Homepage Journal
    It is based on covert 'stealth' technology that was originally designed to hide military radars."

    "Heathrow Tower, we can see London, but RADAR says it doesn't exist, then this weird music starts playing and this guy gets up from his seat with a big book and says we've entered some twilight thingie!"

  • That's fine... but (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:49AM (#9900180)
    what's to stop me from establishing a VPN connection over my GPRS cell? Either way, they can't win.

    • Re:That's fine... but (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Have Blue ( 616 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:06PM (#9900389) Homepage
      The article says the main threat this targets is outsiders. They don't care if you VPN out from inside the building- physical security is meant stop you from getting in in the first place if you're not authorized. But you won't be able to get on wireless base stations inside the building if you're outside it.
      • Seems like a far more sensible (and cheap) way to deal with the insecurity of wireless networks is to use frickin' secure protocols!

        I mean, how hard is it to run IPSEC over the network?!?

        • Seems like a far more sensible (and cheap) way to deal with the insecurity of wireless networks is to use frickin' secure protocols!

          Or you could simply use wired networks.

          • Or you could simply use wired networks.

            In situations where wired networks are a good solution I see absolutely no reason to use wireless networks - wired networks are faster, more reliable, more secure. However there are a lot of situations where wireless networks are useful - I have a wireless network so I can move my notebook anywhere in my house without having to get tangled up in long network cables. On a factory floor I can see many times where you might want to access the corporate LAN or the inte

    • Re:That's fine... but (Score:3, Interesting)

      by retostamm ( 91978 )
      If you turn it into "block" mode, it will block all frequencies, so your Cell won't work either. Of course, you could get that effect with tin foil :)

  • Deja Vu (Score:2, Informative)

    by AKAImBatman ( 238306 )
    I have the oddest feeling of Deja Vu. Haven't we seen this story before? Like two weeks ago?

  • 1280x1024? (Score:4, Funny)

    by spinflip ( 628840 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:50AM (#9900193) Homepage
    Does it come in 1280x1024?
    • Never mind that - would it look ok applied to my car?

    • Re:1280x1024? (Score:5, Funny)

      by DragonMagic ( 170846 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:22PM (#9900537) Homepage
      Real geeks have 3200x1200 desktops, using dual 21" flat panel monitors.
    • As much as parent's post was a joke, this is the first thing that came to mind. Did they come out with some sort of interference pattern in desktop wallpaper? I am dissapointed now....
    • All joking aside, 1280x1024 is the abomination of resolutions. Whoever first did that should be beaten. Why in the world did this resolution come to exist and now damn us with so many LCDs with that native resolution?

      For those not aware, divide the width by height on the common resultions, all are 4/3 except 1280x1024 (5/4), with 1280x960 being the closest good-ratio resolution. The net of it being something designed for 1280x1024 looks strangely tall on a sane resolution, and something designed for san
      • I have a 1280x1024 LCD, and found that to be annoying as well. Many games run at 1280x960. What I ended up doing was I got "PowerStrip", a Windows app, that lets you tweak some settings manually. Basically now when I play those games there's a small bar on top and a small bar on the bottom (about 1/2" each). I don't notice the bars while playing, and the game isn't stretched. Plus I can play games that run at 1280x1024 ;)

        Here are the settings I used:

        Powerstrip screencap [dpk.net]

  • Everyone get ready.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by wolfemi1 ( 765089 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:51AM (#9900202)
    ... For an endless barrage of "tin-foil" jokes.

  • New Hats! (Score:5, Funny)

    by zrobotics ( 760688 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:51AM (#9900204)
    Well i guess tinfoil hats are about to be replaced. as an additional bonus, it is now easier to shield your entire body from "the man"!
    • And don't forget that instead of merely reflective tinfoil, you can now protective yourself while wrapped in a wide variety of fashionable colors and designs...

  • What, you want me to put wallpaper on my windows? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by radiumsoup ( 741987 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:51AM (#9900207)
    Or on the ceiling? (Think multi-story apartment complex) Carpet?

    Get real... the people who want security in the first place WON'T USE WIFI.

    It'll never make it to market.
    • What if you don't use wifi, but also want to ensure that no one in your office can attach to a rogue AP?

      I'm sure there are a number of uses for this which have little to do with securing one's own wireless LAN.

    • Don't be too hasty... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ackthpt ( 218170 ) *
      Get real... the people who want security in the first place WON'T USE WIFI.

      Uninformed people want security, too, they just don't know it until they've been violated or 0wn3d. One former CIO thought WI-FI was extremely cool until I started showing him the stuff about War-Chalking on Slashdot. Funny reaction, though, seemed I was part of some problem by revealing such things. Must be the PHB self-defense mechanism kicking in... 'didn't make mistake, peon warning of possible security holes is actualy prob

      • Never trust anyone in a position of authority to do the right thing. Never answer leading questions from them like, "how would you run this shop...", "show me how our system would be compromised...", or "what is your view on [politics/religeon/sports]..."

        Once they have you pigeonholed on their blacklist, your ability to be effective will be much diminished beyond anything they think it is safe for you to do, and your opportunities for moving around and/or up in the company will be sharply curtailed.

        Just
    • If he had, he would have seen;

      that rogue APs are a concern (Strike 1),
      that they are working on transparent window treatments (Strike 2), and
      that they have considered market pricing (Strike 3).
    • Not sure if you are aware, but WiFi is used for other applications than Internet access. Companies use it in inventory control applications in stores and warehouses and all kinds of places. I think they would be very interested to know they could prevent someone from setting with a laptop snooping what's going on with their inventory.

      Hospitals and doctors offices would be especially interested to help keep their information inside their walls and further comply with regulations.

      They would likely make mo
    • It's not really wallpaper, it's a thin sheet of Kapton (1/10th of a millimeter). You can see trough that, so you can paste it on windows, and you can also put it under the carpet and in the crawl space above you.

      But I think you are right, people who want security won't use Computers :)
    • Get real... the people who want security in the first place WON'T USE WIFI.

      No - people who want real security will use secure protocols over WiFi. I want security, and as such I run IPSEC over my WEP encrypted 802.11g network.

      Of course a bit of driving around Southampton (UK) [nexusuk.org] shows that there are a hell of a lot of insecure networks and a worrying number where the access points are left in their factory default configuration.

      People who don't understand security should not be allowed to set up any publi

  • Why limit themselves? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by pla ( 258480 )
    a wallpaper that can prevent hackers accessing secure networks via Wi-Fi - without blocking mobile phone signals

    But... I want it to block cell phones as well.

    And lining the whole house in foil just looks way too shiney for normal use...

  • Does it go both ways? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:51AM (#9900213) Homepage Journal
    Can they make wallpaper that enhances my wifi instead of killing it?

    • Re:Does it go both ways? (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      No problem. See, you just need to install it upside down.
    • Can they make wallpaper that enhances my wifi instead of killing it?

      Put in conducting patterns along the lines of a zone plate, and maybe. That'll be directional, and only work in some places in the room, though.

      What this amounts to is an RF lens, being used as you would use an RF dish.
    • Can they make wallpaper that enhances my wifi instead of killing it?

      For this you will need to send inverse-polarity tachyon pulses into a time-flux capacitor. Don't forget to modulate the pulses at your shield frequency.

  • Anti Military Radar... (Score:5, Funny)

    by CODiNE ( 27417 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:52AM (#9900217) Homepage
    Heh... I see an army of wallpapered tanks crossing the battlefield. :-)

  • OK, I Admit It (Score:3, Funny)

    by ReadParse ( 38517 ) <john@fun[ ]ow.com ['nyc' in gap]> on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:53AM (#9900241) Homepage
    Yeah, I thought they meant software wallpaper... like a JPG covering my desktop. "How the hell would THAT work?" I wondered. Feeling silly now.

    RP

  • Same principal as a microwave door. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Trespass ( 225077 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:54AM (#9900248) Homepage
    Kind of neat, but I worry about the fragility of the wallpaper in any kind of commercial or industrial setting. It seems to me such a material would be far more useful incorporated in a vapor barrier *inside* the wall. I know it would be an expensive retrofit that way, but how else would you deal with drop ceilings and the masses of ducting and cabling therein?

    • Yeah, the wallpaper is basically a big RF choke.

    • Actually, "stealth" technology isn't the same as the material used in microwave doors. I'm not too up into the physics of microwaves, but I can tell you that the "small particle physics" involved in the stealth technology is different than the material science dampening that is used for microwaves.

      What happens in the stealth case, is that a collection of molecules absorb electromagnetic radiation to excite thier vibrational states. The wavelength range absorbed of the radiation is dependent and on the ord
    • cripes a low-tech version of this is called aluminum siding and aluminum storm windows with aluminum screening. effective to kill a wifi AP sitting 6 inches from one side and any kind of gear trying to connect on the other.

      So this makes most houses improved in the late 80's wifi-proof.

      I simply extended the aluminum screening all the way up in all windows and effectively cut off all the neighbors. the only leak points I have are the front door window and the sliding glass door in back, both fixable with a
      • The article was specifically about a material that would block some wavelengths, but allow others to pass through. Aluminum siding does not do this in a precise and controlled way.
        • doesn't matter, I still have cellphone coverage in my house, yet nobody around my home can access my WiFi (on the ground) climb up on a 24 foot ladder then you can get the signals.

          cince wifi is 2.4ghz it's highly directional, and is absorbed by living things (trees) the signals spilling out UPwards will not be reflected by the trees.

          why go high tech and spend gobs when low tech works just as well and does the same job.

          I have no problems with cellphone coverage in the house, nobody can get a signal on my
  • Now I can trade in my itchy/uncomfortable tin foil hat, with a paper one! Now I will be the cool one wearing a crown-like the ones from Burger King!

  • Was it in the first Omen movie where the guy had a room that was papered with pages from the Bible in order to keep Satan out?

    ::: tin foil hat joke removed :::
    • Interesting Note:

      Faraday cages, while blocking EM waves, also do a damn find job of blocking Satan. Apparently the Prince of Darkness propogates just like radio.

      The guy in the movie must have bought the New King James Maxwell Bible.

  • Finally! (Score:2, Funny)

    by seaniqua ( 796818 )
    Something to replace the tinfoil in my hat!

  • That just might be the anser for me (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mpost4 ( 115369 ) * on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:57AM (#9900280) Homepage Journal
    I am selfish, if I pay for my net access, no war driver is allowed on. Right now I am just trying to be harder to get in then my neibores.
    • ehm.. how about encrytpting and securing your network ? leaving your wifi network without password is like a door with no locks. After locking the air + encrypting all data, you're pretty safe. A lot safer than NOT encrytping it and considering this wallpaper safe

      • Well, WEP may stop an amateur wardriver but not a determined attacker: an attacker who can access the packets can certainly mount a known-plaintext attack and often a chosen-plaintext attack. Limiting access by MAC can reduce the possibility of chosen-plaintext attacks, and physically limiting transmission radius is a good way to lower the cyphertext's exposure and prolong known-plaintext brute force attacks. And obviously, if you're concerned about security, you're going to want to also encrypt whatever hi

    • Then lock down the AP with MAC filtering and WEP, and secure any shares (Folders or printers) with passwords.

      Voila. Is it REALLY that hard?
      • Done, but WEP can be cracked and MAC's can be cloned. but I just want to make sure the best I can, if some one wants into a wireless network they will get in, I just want to make it very hard for them so that they go on to the next network.
      • Also forgot to put this in, the network will some times, "just stop working" thanks to a pull of the plug. Also Non-Broadcasting SSID (ok it will take maybe only about .5 milliseconds for that to be defeated)

        But I use all I can do to stall

        NonBroadcasting SSID
        WEP at 128
        Mac Address Filtering
        Located in an area so that it has weak signal by the time it gets to the inside walls.
        And it is to the people around unreliable, it could go out for a whole day, or weekend (when I am out of town, or don't care to get
  • WIFE: "What do you mean we need it to prevent the hacker children next door from getting our credit card numbers?"

    HUSBAND: "I know, honey -- it sounds bad, but think of all the information we have flying through the house and out the walls because we don't have this anti-wifi wallpaper in every room."

    WIFE: "What information? You mean three to four hours every Friday and Saturday night of video game data? Are you scared the hacker children next door will get your serial number? Are you scared that THEY to

  • I don't know ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Rubbersoul ( 199583 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:59AM (#9900301)
    But it is also the work of moments then for an outsider to breach that company's computer security using the Wi-Fi connection. Unless the Wi-Fi base station is protected by security measures that most amateur users would not bother to set up, it gives anyone up to 100 metres away the chance to bypass the corporate firewall and wirelessly hack straight into the network.

    Yeah, cuz most amateur users are going to install special wallpaper ...

    I understand that some compaines may want this, and it is a cool idea, but if you are going to use Wi-Fi you have better do your best to secure it, not just pray you can keep everyone out with some wall paper.

    • Re:I don't know ... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Sheetrock ( 152993 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:08PM (#9900409) Homepage Journal
      Think of it as part of a security solution rather than the whole solution.

      I use a firewall, but I also patch my machines. Some people skip the second step until the first or second time someone brings in a laptop from home and connects it to the internal network, which brings me to the point about running software firewalls on individual machines in addition to the one at the router.

      I agree that this wallpaper is better as a backup defense rather than a primary one, but plays an important part nonetheless. Home laptops are being pushed with WiFi now.

  • gives a whole new meaning to the word firewall.

    Well, I better go and line my TFH with some Anti-Wi-Fi wallpaper.

  • ... an encore from this [slashdot.org] article?
  • Where does the energy from the "blocked" WiFi RF radiation go? Can the shield "ground" out to a storage cell? Sure, its a tiny amount of power. But if the WiFi transmitter can be engineered to consume just a little more power than it transmits, the recovered "signal" power could feed a battery supplying the transmitter, and multiply the lifespan of a single charge by many times. That could be the key to deploying WiFi off *any* grid of wires, either network *or* power.
    • Maybe "blocked" in that case means "reflected" instead of "absorbed".
      • If it's reflected inwards, that means it's absorbed by the objects inside the room, and converted to heat - lost. The "stealth" military lab which invented it alludes to "diffraction" in the article. Maybe their masks could be made into PV receptors tuned to the WiFi frequency, using the same technique as their "shield", but with interconnects or capacitors, or some combination.
  • If a company's *really* that concerned about people gaining access to their network through tapping, then they should be moving away from wireless altogether and towards fiber optics. Fiber is completely impervious to electromagnetic tapping, because it's optical, not electrical.

    WiFi will never be secure. So decide if you want security or convenience.
  • This will make a nice companion to my anti-wallpaper wi-fi invention. *bzzaap!*

    Yes, the greatest battle since Freddy vs Jason! (please see the recent photoshop contest at Fark.com for others)
  • was originally designed to hide military radars

    How can you hide a radar? It needs to transmit enough power in it's area of interest to cause a strong enough reflection to detect. Putting an RF shield around it would be pointless surly?

  • Cost effective??? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Atryn ( 528846 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:11PM (#9900439) Homepage
    Ok, let me quote a couple spots to see if I understand this correctly...
    The technology is designed to stop outsiders gaining access to a secure network by using Wi-Fi networks casually set up by workers at the office.
    Ok, so we are talking about stopping "casually set up" convenience networks, not hackers.
    But it is also the work of moments then for an outsider to breach that company's computer security using the Wi-Fi connection.
    Ok, so it only takes moments to detect if an employee has done this.
    Until now, the only way to ensure people are not illicitly gaining access to company secrets has been to turn offices into a signal-proof "Faraday cage", by lining the walls with aluminium foil, and using glass that absorbs radio waves in the windows.
    Clearly this solution is expensive and unsightly.
    The wall covering can be mass produced at relatively low cost. A square metre will cost about £500: peanuts to big business.
    $921 / square meter?!?!?! That's what, roughly $175,000 worth of wallpaper for a 200 square meter open cubicle-filled office space.

    Wouldn't it be easier and less expensive to:
    1. Train workers not to set up Wi-Fi
    2. Have IT periodically scan for active networks

  • Helps wardrivers find the good stuff... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dpbsmith ( 263124 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:12PM (#9900445) Homepage
    ...they'll beam a wifi and a cellphone signal at a building and measure the reflections. If the building is much more reflective at wifi frequencies than cellphone frequencies, they've found something really worth finding. How they get it once they've found it is another matter, of course.

  • Today's tally:

    Replace tinfoil hat with new wallpaper. : 34,109

    D'oh! I thought they meant Windows desktop! D'oh! I'm a friggin' idiot! D'oh! : 14,951

    "Firewallpaper" : 12,520

    Capture the RF energy into a capacitatory dongle and have perpetual motion! Ha ha HAAAA! Global domination! : 1954

    This is a repost! Death to the reposters! Die! Die! Die! Arrrgghhhh! (gurgle) : 675

    In Soviet Russia, wall papers you! : -1

  • Polarising Filter (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:17PM (#9900499) Homepage Journal
    Reading the decription of the technology it really sounds like a polarising filter for radio frequencies:
    On one side most of the copper is removed, leaving a grid of copper crosses. On the other side, matching crosses, turned through 45 degrees, are etched away - leaving a film of copper with a grid of cross-shaped holes. BAE says that by carefully changing the size of the crosses and their spacing, the sheet can pass precisely defined frequencies, while blocking all others.
  • This appeared months ago! [silicon.com]

    Slow news day?

  • I have a better idea... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by stubear ( 130454 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:20PM (#9900523)
    ...and they can save half the money they spent (not because the idea is expensive but because I'm greedy). Simply fire ANYONE on the spot who connects an unauthorized wireless hub to the corporate network. No questions asked, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Show the employee, err...ex-employee, the door and make sure to have him escorted by no less that four security guards. Make him look foolish for his transgressions and make sure others see his shame. This idea works for opening e-mail attachments without verifying the source and giving out passwords to unauthorized people amongst other problems with security.
  • If you're using this to keep wireless data inside (and not pervent transmission altogether), doesn't it seem like this would defeat any chance at room to room wifi access? I mean, it's hard enough to get good signal strenth in buildings without having some futuristic alien-technology inspired government stealth ultra-anti-signal wallpaper in the place.

  • Smells like a conspiracy to me. (Score:5, Funny)

    by MarkGriz ( 520778 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:21PM (#9900527)
    That damn paint-and-wallpaper trade group is just trying to scare everyone so they can unload a warehouse full of surplus foil wallpaper that went out of style in the 70's
  • Wallpaper? Data secrecy? Is there no Martha Stewart joke to be had here? C'mon, people!
  • This is really cool technology, and pretty simple, too.

    If you have the version with Diodes, it blocks 2.4, 5 and 6 frequencies by default.

    If you run a current trough the diodes, it'll work like a sheet of copper and block pretty much everything.

    But it will have to come down in price before I coat my house with it, it's more than $100 per square foot.
  • tiny strips of wire/foil at various lengths glued to the back of the wallpaper at various angles would have a similar effect to chaff.
  • I have aluminum siding, you insensitive clod!
  • Why not just secure the network rather then hacking security as an afterthought?

    This is a nice option, it is a good idea to make sure your installation is that little bit 'extra clean'.
    Don't forget there will still be holes. Roof, floor, ventilation. Then any repaired walls or windows will need this treatment. I know many places would love the opportunity to save a few dollars on the next broken window.
  • Brought to you by the makers of the tin-foil hat and the ionic bracelet...

  • selective interference (Score:2, Interesting)

    by dillee1 ( 741792 )
    The tech behind that wall paper sounds like the same as selective interference used on camera lens anti-reflection coating.
    In this case the spacing of the 2 reflective layer is tuned to allow maxium transmission of GSM and 3G signal; the reflection wave from first copper layer is 180^ out of phase with the reflection wave from the second copper layer.
    IMO this wallpaper will block EVERYTHING and just allows the mobile channels to go through.

  • Who needs wallpaper when you can just fight back? (Score:5, Funny)

    by vizualizr ( 462581 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @01:54PM (#9901644)
    Maybe I'm the only one who ran across http://www.evilscheme.org/defcon/ [evilscheme.org] this little gem , but this seems like a very good low-budget option for striking back at your friendly neighborhood wi-fi swipers.

  • I leave WEP and everything off, and keep it in a DMZ on my local network. My router then records all packets not coming from one of the MAC addresses of my machines. Free WiFi, but I get to peek :)

  • Great stuff -- Enforce no mobile phones! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by billsf ( 34378 ) <billsf@cuba.calyx . n l> on Friday August 06, 2004 @09:21PM (#9905964) Homepage Journal
    There must be (a possibly bigger) market in blocking mobile phones? Make the tuned circuits resonate at lower frequencies (larger) and block mobile phones. Its so obvious as a legal way to enforce 'quiet zones' in so many places. Modern mobile phones are at 800, 900, 1800 and 1900MHz. Larger elements and the added bonus mobile phones are close to harmonic intervals makes for a simplified design.

    There is quite a bit of information (in books, not http) how to do this. Is about as 'hi-tech' as anti-theft tags on CDs. At five or ten bucks a m^2 there would definitely be a market for a variety of purposes, and frequencies, including wlan. This beats the hell out of active jamming. Except for perhaps the US, this is definitely NOT patentable.

Slashdot Top Deals

Solutions are obvious if one only has the optical power to observe them over the horizon. -- K.A. Arsdall

Close