Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Security Hardware IT

Wireless Security By The Gallon 216

Posted by timothy from the just-a-little-lead-ma'am dept.
prostoalex writes "The next effort to improve wireless security might involve a trip to Home Depot. Force Field Wireless sells buckets of aluminum and copped-laced paint designed to prevent the 802.11 packets from escaping the building, Information Week reports. The article also talks about the Firce Field's pitch to the government in order to improve the homeland security, but the only governments that got interested in anti-Wi-Fi paint were from the Middle East. According to the products page, they also sell the brush sets." Easier than wallpaper, or moving into an old house.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wireless Security By The Gallon More

Wireless Security By The Gallon

Comments Filter:

  • Works great on the scalp! (Score:5, Funny)

    by CyberGarp ( 242942 ) <`gro.ttebraG' `ta' `nwahS'> on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:34PM (#11213177) Homepage
    New cheap replacements for all those tin-foil hats. Easy application!

  • Boy... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:35PM (#11213188)
    > Force Field Wireless sells buckets of aluminum and copped-laced paint

    ...talk about a TEMPEST in a teapot.

    • Re:Boy... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by irving47 ( 73147 )
      HA. That one might even be too obscure for the /. crowd.
      • It's too obscure for me. :)

        What's it relating to?

      • Re:Boy... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:07PM (#11213513)
        TEMPEST is the codename for a pseudo-mythical method of surveillance used to intercept data from electrical devices, such as your computer, by intercepting unintended EM emanations. To quote:

        "TEMPEST was "invented" in 1918 when Herbert Yardley and his staff of the Black Chamber were engaged by the U.S. Army to develop methods to detect, intercept, and exploit combat telephones and covert radio transmitters. The initial research identified that "normal unmodified equipment" was allowing classified information to be passed to the enemy through a variety of technical weaknesses. A classified program was then created to develop methods to suppress these "compromising emanations". However, the actual acronym known as TEMPEST was only coined in the late 60's and early 70's (and is now considered an obsolete term, which has since, been replaced by the phrase "Emissions Security" or EMSEC).

        TEMPEST and it's associated disciplines involve designing circuits to minimize the amount of "compromising emanations" and to apply appropriate shielding, grounding, and bonding. These disciplines also include methods of radiation screening, alarms, isolation circuits/devices, and similar areas of equipment engineering.

        TEMPEST disciplines typically involve eliminating or reducing the transients caused by a communication signal and the resulting harmonics. These signals and their harmonics could allow the original signal to be reconstructed and analyzed."

        Link:
        http://www.tscm.com/TSCM101tempest.html

        The idea is that EM fields generated my, say, your monitor can be intercepted and used to reconstruct what's being displayed on the screen.

        • Re:Boy... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Detritus ( 11846 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:56PM (#11213897) Homepage
          One of the early exploits for these techniques was to tap into the power lines supplying embassy code rooms and other sensitive areas. Teletypes and coding machines would generate electrical noise on the power line when they were being operated. With some clever analysis, it was often possible to determine what was being typed or printed on the machine. Other avenues of attack were the acoustic and RF emanations of the equipment.
        • TEMPEST is a name associated with techniques to limit the amount of EM radiation emitted by devices used to handle sensitive information.

          It is a countermeasure to "Van Ek Phreaking", the blow-'em-away demonstration of which was a cart with a monitor and $100 worth of Radio-Shack parts that displayed the pictures that were on monitors in the curtained-off "non-disclosure-only" areas at a trade show, as it was wheeled by the booths.

  • Home Depot (Score:5, Funny)

    by vasqzr ( 619165 ) <`vasqzr' `at' `netscape.net'> on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:35PM (#11213190)

    The next effort to improve wireless security might involve a trip to Home Depot. Force Field Wireless sells buckets of aluminum and copped-laced paint designed to prevent the 802.11 packets from escaping the building,

    Lowe's [journalnow.com] should consider carrying that product.

  • TSS Covered It Last Month... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by GTRacer ( 234395 ) <gtracer308&yahoo,com> on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:35PM (#11213194) Homepage Journal
    ...In fact they covered an outhouse with it and sent their man in with a wireless laptop. His reception dropped but disn't die completely.

    Also, I hope they meant copper-laced paint, otherwise some police officers might want to speak with them. Hell, the bobbies may STILL want a word...

    GTRacer
    - It's lame joke day

  • Good Old Fashioned Fix (Score:3, Funny)

    by mary_will_grow ( 466638 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:36PM (#11213206)
    I knew these cans of lead paint would find a use someday!!!!!

  • Ok... wow... misread (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dirtside ( 91468 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:36PM (#11213210) Journal
    At first glance I saw "Wireless Security By Gollum". I can't even begin to figure out what that might involve. The One Token Ring, perhaps?

  • What else does it block? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by millahtime ( 710421 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:36PM (#11213211) Homepage Journal
    So, it blocks an 802.11 signal. Wouldn't this mean that cordless phones would be blocked also. What about cell phones or old fashioned radios?

    This might me more of a pain than a solution
    • You beat me to it. All of a sudden I'm getting a NO CARRIER from my FM Radio and cell phone. And do we have to paint over our windows as well? This is an incredibly poorly-thought-out solution.

      Oh, and who the hell modded the parent post "off-topic"???

      • Re:What else does it block? (Score:4, Informative)

        by nrd907s ( 458195 ) <nrduncan AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:59PM (#11213438)
        From the article:

        There are drawbacks to the paint. It doesn't just block wireless networks. In the home, it would block the one or two remaining TVs connected to rabbit ears. More important, it blocks mobile-phone signals.

        The company also makes a window film that cuts down on signal leakage: A 30-inch-by-25-foot roll is priced at $45.

    • Re:What else does it block? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Kelerain ( 577551 ) <.moc.liamtoh. .ta. .retsampam_cva.> on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:07PM (#11213516)
      Its true this may not be the best wifi security solution (ethernet anyone?) but it would be *great* for say, theaters. No more annoying cell phones going off durring the movies! There are other issues to deal with, such as liability (doctors on call etc) but as long as you posted a sign that explained as such, things should be alright. It would be a great solution, and much easier to apply than expensive pannels and such that have been tried before.

      • Re:What else does it block? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Qzukk ( 229616 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:22PM (#11213636) Journal
        would be *great* for say, theaters. No more annoying cell phones going off

        I've heard cellphones that beep repeatedly to let you know you're out of service range.

        Of course, in a theatre situation, maybe that would remind the person to shut it off, or at least provide a homing beacon for those that want to shut it off for him before the movie starts.

  • Good old.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by Gorffy ( 763399 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:36PM (#11213212) Journal
    Paranoia. The true mother of all invention.

  • Well... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by imsabbel ( 611519 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:37PM (#11213221)
    As this "security improvement" only affects computers in specially prepared rooms, WHY THE FUCK use wireless at all? A nice Cat5 is 10times faster than wifi, and even more tempest-proof than a metal painted room.
    Not to mention that even to most fancy cable management system will be less work and cost than painting all walls+ceiling (and what about the floor if you arent in the basement?)...
    • of course, twisted pair leaks a little as well, maybe coax would be better for the truly paranoid, or fibre with shielded transceivers?
    • I agree with your entire post, but feel the need to point out that it'd be far easier just adding this stuff to some exterior paint and slapping it on your entire house. Won't cover the roof, but you could always paint the boards before putting down shingles, or even line your attic with aluminum foil.

      Like you said, though... far easier to install some cat5.

    • Re:Well... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by rednip ( 186217 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:59PM (#11213439) Journal
      As this "security improvement" only affects computers in specially prepared rooms...more tempest-proof than a metal painted room
      No the special rooms mentioned in the article are the Faraday cage, with which they compare the effect. This is what happens when you skim an article, just looking for something to bitch about. The article clearly states that this paint is intended for entire buildings, for example (from the article):
      DefendAir would be an attractive option to protect an RFID-enabled warehouse, he says.
      Also
      More important, it blocks mobile-phone signals.
      Can you imagine the benifit of using it in the outside paint for a movie theater, or resturant. You whouldn't even have to use jammers (which whould bleed into the street and are illegal anyways) to achieve freedom from hearing only one side of someone's conversation.
      • ...to achieve freedom from hearing only one side of someone's conversation.

        Do you also want to prevent others from talking in a foreign language while in the restaurant? If not, some places can ask people to keep silent or talk quietly, but otherwise a phone call is no different from talking to someone in person.
        • I am fairly convinced that the problem which most people have with cell phone users is that they cannot hear both sides of the converstation, hence my comment. Personally, I don't care about people carrying on conversations in resturants, but I know that many people do, including some that own them.

          Many have started to use 'cell phone jammers [google.com]', which are illegal in the U.S. [newhousenews.com] and I believe that it's a good law, but I do respect people's wish to create 'quite zones' on their private property. The previously

    • Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Glendale2x ( 210533 ) <slashdot@ninjam o n k ey.us> on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:15PM (#11213581) Homepage
      As this "security improvement" only affects computers in specially prepared rooms, WHY THE FUCK use wireless at all? A nice Cat5 is 10times faster than wifi, and even more tempest-proof than a metal painted room.

      Using Cat5 over wireless is a massive security improvement in itself, also available from the Home Depot. Cable ends and crimpers are available too, and at a cost far less than the paint. I suspect the paint is for suckering in people who think 802.11 is the only thing there is. The rest of us who actually care and want to save some money will continue to run cables.

      Every time I see something about "wireless security" I always wonder why people spend so damn much money (like the paint) and effort (new encryption schemes) on it when if you really cared about security you wouldn't be using it in the first place. "Wireless security" is good to stop someone from casually using your access point, but is no substitution for real security and encryption.

      Even then, people pick stupid or easy to remember passwords for their base stations, or open the window of their wireless-defeating painted room, thereby making it all a moot point.
      • You can run Cat5 over wireless now??
        This paint would also reduce the threat of someone sneaking a Wifi access point into the building to spy on you from a distance even if you only have a wired network.
        • You can run Cat5 over wireless now??

          I use Cat5 over wireless, not run it over wireless.

          Although a local grammar Nazi would be able to tell if my use of the phrase "Using Cat5 over wireless" instead of "Using Cat5 instead of wireless" is correct. I meant the word "over" in the former to be used as a preposition.
    • I think the great value of faraday sheilding for most people would lie in cutting down on interference from the outside world, rather than in preventing one's own data from leaking out.
      It's a great crapfilter.
  • Without covering windows and guaranteeing an effective mesh cover to create a faraday cage, you cannot guarantee no transmission, only signal degradation.

    You'd still be better off with grounded wire mesh and plaster in an older house if you wanted to imitate your tin foil hat.

    • We just this summer got a new sliding glass door installed. As the guy was giving us his pitch he was telling us about its resistance to heating up a room due to sunlight. One thing he mentiond was there were aluminium flecks in the glass to bounce off sunlight, I made him repeat that part. I have always wanted to try wifi across it and see what would happen. So in answer to your question : buy new windows?

      Sera

    • The solution is to mount an unshielded microwave magnetron on your roof. The microwave noise from that sucker will keep just about everybody from associating to your AP, including you. It might also result in some bird/squirrel carcasses on the roof, and a nasty visit from the FCC and most likely the FDA as well.
  • Paint not safe for painting on head.

    Can you put an RFID tag on a product such as this? What if someone painted over the RFID/antitheft tags with this paint?

    -ted
  • If you do fill your cavities with similar such stuff spare a thought for the cable droppers eh?
  • I wonder what happens if you eat the paint chips? Does your body become impervious to those evil signals. No more need for the tin foil hat.
  • Convincing consumers to take wireless security seriously has been harder. "They see it like tinfoil on your head," Wray says. "They think it's kind of paranoid."

    Uh, it is kind of paranoid.

    And it's surely no substitute for a robust encryption scheme.

    Since it's commercial in nature, how many modern offices can really do without cell phones and pagers?

    Oh, and 64 bucks seems ridiculously expensive for latex paint with aluminum and copper filings mixed in.

    This seems like one of those "theres a sucker born

  • ... Hmmmm ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ninjagin ( 631183 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:43PM (#11213294)
    I checked out the page and the concept seems pretty neat -- kinda like painting on your own faraday cage. I wonder how well it affects the color or application of the paint. The window-tinty film is also a pretty cool concept, too, though it looks like it'd cut down on a lot of visible daylight along with keeping your wifi in. I like my sunshine.

    The burning question I have (and hopefully a smarter-person-than-I can clue me in) is how is this going to affect my AM/FM/SW radio reception inside my house? It almost seems like a rooftop antenna would become a must-have, assuming that the blockage of signal would keep all those friendly informational radio waves from getting INTO my house.

    • I checked out the page and the concept seems pretty neat -- kinda like painting on your own faraday cage.

      Which is to say, this isn't much more difficult to do than stapling up wire mesh. Heck, if one puts up wall-paper, then putting wire-mesh behind it shouldn't be too much more difficult and would be much cheaper than this "paint."

      Or, go the extra step: what happens when one tires of the faraday cage and wants to allow signals in from the outside/let signal out? What would one do THEN?!?

      But as other

  • Wrong idea (Score:5, Funny)

    by Marxist Hacker 42 ( 638312 ) * <seebert42@gmail.com> on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:44PM (#11213303) Homepage Journal
    FTFA:

    "It was my concept along with my colleague, Diane Lopez," says Wray, a former network engineer with Networks Associates. "We knew of people inundated with interference on their wireless systems. In fact, Diane, in her apartment, could find eight wireless networks around her. She needed to shield herself."

    No, she needed to stop wasting money on broadband and mooch off her neighbors.

  • fire hazard (Score:2, Insightful)

    by iggymanz ( 596061 )
    metallic paint might do the "Hindenburg thing" and quickly engulf the room. Also, metal fires are hard to put out.

  • Legal to sell in some states? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ARRRLovin ( 807926 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @05:52PM (#11213367)
    I'd like to see the MSDS(Material Safety Data Sheet) for those products. Adding heavy metals to non-commercial coatings can't be legal everywhere. I used to work in the retail coating industry (neighborhood paint store) and even just your standard bathroom paint is regulated heavily. So heavily it makes other EPA legislature look completely logical!
  • The article and the web site say this stuff is non-toxic. Copper is a well known biocide used in bottom paint [westmarine.com] to kill marine life that likes to live on boats. How is this any different (except for the lower price - it doesn't say "marine" on the lable).
  • What are the environmental effects of this type of paint? I would think that direct exposure to this paint (i.e. with no outer layer of nontoxic / latex) would be harmful. Boatowners use copper-based paints to keep barnacles from growing on the bottom of their hulls in saltwater. Designed to flake off over time, the paint is poisonous to sealife and highly toxic to humans. How safe can this stuff be? Do we really need more harmful metals dispersed in our environment?
    • Pennies are coated in copper, and we handle those all the time, and little children even put them in their mouths and swallow them. Is the exposure from this paint going to be greater than that from pennies and other everyday copper objects? I sort of doubt it.
  • Now, we should all be using encryption on our wireless networks, so I wouldn't suggest this as a mechanism for wireless security -- furthermore, I'm sure this isn't 100% effective, so any determined attacker would simply turn up his amplifier by a few dB.

    That said, this could be a useful way of protecting against unintentional transmissions. Our computers are doing an awful lot of radiating, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if there was enough leakage to provide an effective cryptographic side-channel.

  • You have questions, I have answers. (Score:5, Informative)

    by FreeLinux ( 555387 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:00PM (#11213447)
    Q. Does it really work?

    A. Yes, to some extent. The metalic paint does effectively impede radio signals however, it is not 100% effective. Some signal may still leak through the paint also, untreated windows and doors will allow the signal to leak. None the less, signal propagation is greatly reduced by the paint, which was the primary reason for its development.

    Q. What about cordless phones?

    A. This paint will affect most radio signals including corless and cell phones, AM/FM radio, broadcast TV and more. The overall effect will vary depending on paint application quality, signal frequency and strength, as well as other factors.

    Q. Is this paint a health risk?

    A. Copper based paint, commonly used in marine applications, is a known health risk and environmental hazard. While there is little data available for aluminum based paints, there do not appear to be significant health risks at this time. This does not mean that there aren't health risks associated with aluminum based paints.

    • Copper is regulated in its use in California. It is not regulated Federally, but some other states probably regulate it. The primary reason copper is regulated is that it is fairly highly toxic to plant life, and in particular to marine life....Here is a link to a MSDS, http://www.agrium.com/uploads/Ultra_Yield_Copper_ O xy_Sulfate_12_percent_MSDS14189.pdf [pdf sorry] scroll down to section 12, ecological information where it says ECOTOXICITY May be harmful to livestock and wildlife if ingested. Clean up
    • While there is little data available for aluminum based paints, there do not appear to be significant health risks at this time

      Just ask the deodorant manufacturers about the potential link between their product and early-onset Alzheimer disease (the majority of such products include aluminum, one exception is Old Spice). Otherwise, we know aluminum is neurotoxic in animal models. I'm not saying there's a definite problem, but current studies have provided some controversial results (so what's new).

  • I consult and some days I work in a beautiful office that's 90% windows. Great for wi-fi and cells, right? NNNNT! They're all coated with magic Anti Signal Coating, and (near as I can tell) the only way to get any sort of reception on any wireless equipment is to stick the thing out the window or walk outside.

  • There'll be some attenuation, sure, but don't forget the signal you get after going through one of these painted-on Faraday cages also depends on how strong the original signal was. Even if you put steel plates up if you blast the signal strongly enough something will get through.

    Case in point: a few weeks ago I took a regular ol' D-Link 802.11b router, took its antenna off, and threw it in a steel toolbox. Closed the lid, weighed it down. I was still able to get a halfway decent signal from more than

    • You weighed down the lid? Were you afraid the router or its signal would have tried to open the lid if it were not weighted?

      • Something like that. :)

        I wanted to try and keep the signal leakage down, and I was worried that the lid would keep open a crack with the power cable sticking out of it. Weighting it helped keep the lid tight and (I think) helped reduce leakage through the toolbox.
  • My buddy's house, with stucco out and plaster in, provides a very strong 802.11b-arrier. An AP in his neighbor's house (visible in a window) is only intermittently reachable from his den, standing by his own window, about 22 feet line-of-sight from the neighbor's AP.

    My neighborhood, a in a new development, is full of houses made from sticks, vinyl and wallboard. I can easily reach anywhere from 6 to 10 APs from just about anywhere in my house (and only 2 are mine.)

    • Re:Is it as good as Stucco and plaster? (Score:4, Informative)

      by stratjakt ( 596332 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:15PM (#11213583) Journal
      It's not the paster or stucco, but the metal lath to which the stucco and plaster are adhered to.

      If you ever see it installed, they (usually) first staple up a thick metal mesh, which holds the plaster in place. Wood lath was the status quo in the really olden days, before steel became cheaper than hardwood strips.

      Norm Abrahms goes wardriving in this weeks episode of This Old House!
      • Maybe it's just a really crappy WAP.

        Like this ol Linksys here on the receptionists desk we use for a paper weight. Can't connect to it unless your laptop is with in 10' of it.

        Same laptop has no probs connecting to other WAPS at quite nice distances (parking lot 3 floors down as one)

  • OT: glowing letters (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lawpoop ( 604919 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:06PM (#11213507) Homepage Journal
    Hey folks -

    A few years ago I had a metallic paint pen. If you burnt the paper that had markings from this pen on it, the ink would glow brightly for a brief time before going out. It was a neat effect, glowing words.

    Now I'm trying to re-create this effect for a film project, and I've had no luck. I've bought out the pen section at staples, tried various metallic paint pens, and none of them do this.

    The idea is to have the credits written on a piece of paper, totally unlit, so all you see is darkness. As the flame creeps across the page, the letters will glow as the flame hits them. How could I do this?

  • It's pretty hard to snoop packets on a chunk of Cat5. If the traffic is sensitive just use that. Cheaper and faster anyway.
  • Looks like lead laced paint may just make a comeback after so many years being scorned. Dupont may have just found a way to dispose of all that "hazardous waste" they have buried somewhere! ... just dont lick the walls!
  • Force Field has been trying to interest the Department of Homeland Security, but discussions are ongoing, Wray says. "Ironically, we have had foreign governments contact us--from the Middle East. Kind of scary." Wray says he won't sell to them.

    But he'll sure as hell let the U.S. drop it on them. I foresee a new wave on non-lethal radar seeking missiles with latex payloads.

    Got an ICBM headed at you? No problem, just spray the area of its path with a fine latex mist. These guys just put the Bush missile-de

  • Good (Score:2, Funny)

    by Ed Thomson ( 704721 )
    Finally I have a reason to paint over the windows to get rid of that pesky Sun.
  • Do you paint your windows too? If the stuff really works, you are NOT going to be able to use your lap top out in the back yard. My aluminum siding probably works just as well and affords me a little fire protection into the bargain. Besides, Home Depot makes huge donations to the republican party. fuhgiddaboudit!
  • Um... my house is entirely covered in relatively thick metal -- aluminum specifically. It doesn't do much with respect to my 802.11 signal getting out. I can still work in my backyard through a layer of aluminum and two walls.

    A wee paint layer with some metal in it won't do diddly if my 50s aluminum siding doesn't.

  • Too much *and* too little (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rarose ( 36450 ) <`rob' `at' `robamy.com'> on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @06:32PM (#11213723)
    This is too little protection for the people who need it (i.e. corporate/government protection), so those folks will opt for more serious protection.

    This is too much protection for Joe Casual User who will pissed at bad cellphone reception, bad TV reception, bad coreless phone. Or downright ineffectiveness if they don't also paint the ceiling, floor and windows. (Note on business plan: Shit! Windows???!? What are we going to do about windows? )

    Thumbs down.
  • So, how safe is this stuff if your house catches fire? Previously we had some form of latex paint putting fumes into the air... now a copper laced paint tossing its fumes up? Dunno about that one.

    Why not just build sheetrock with a wire mesh built into it?
  • Many people I know have wireless networks, but move the nodes only rarely. Wouldn't directional antennas be a good option for these people? They achieve longer ranges and/or lower power consumption, and are harder to eavesdrop on and send malicious packets to.

  • Didn't Screensavers pre-redesign do a bit on this?

    Alex was a loose cannon, slamming advertisers. Note that the new version has no studio audience and no woo-hoo guys.
  • I can hang my tinfoil hat in on the hatrack while I'm inside my house now, right?
  • If you are really concerned about security, get rid of all your coax, cat5 and wireless hardware and replace it with fiber optics. That's what they use in modern facilities that have serious issues with security.

  • Other options (Score:5, Informative)

    by leighklotz ( 192300 ) on Wednesday December 29, 2004 @07:11PM (#11214012) Homepage
    The Defend Air people don't give any data I can find on the dB-vs-MHz effectiveness of their product, but plenty of competitive technologies do. I wish they did, because I want to line my laundry room with the stuff! The washing machine makes a terrible racket in my radio.

    There's Hospital Quality [rfi-ind.com.au] shielding done with aluminum foil, and more serious shielding [rfi-ind.com.au] of both E and H fields for MRI machines. I won't even go into the RF-sealed doors...

    If you're concerned about magnetic fields, then Mu Metal [google.com] is the stuff. Just don't bend any of the Hydrogen-annealed variety. You can get sheet and tape [lessemf.com] in small quantifies from these folks, who by the way also offer "Personal Protection Devices [lessemf.com] (silver-impregnated fiber baseball caps, not tinfoil hats, please) ...and their own copper paint [lessemf.com] which is startlingly more expensive than the DefendAir product...they even have the same window film that keeps out the sun, but also makes your cell phone not work.

    For sealing over the gaps, don't forget 3M 1181 Copper Tape [google.com], which features electrically-conducting adhesive, but only specifies 80dB isolation at 30MHz-1GHz.

    But my favorite so far is Metal Foam [metalfoam.net], which reminds me of the almost weightless foamed glass Aerogel [nasa.gov] that was a announced a few years ago... Foamed aluminum is available commercially in 2x2ft sheets from from Austria, Alulight [alulight.com]. They claim 40dB isolation [alulight.com] in the 2Ghz range and over 100dB to 140dB [alulight.com] in the 10Mhz-1GHz range, plus excellent sound isolation, structural, and fire safety properties. What's not to like? Anybody know where the get this stuff in the US? Reade [reade.com] seems out of my range, but I'll ask them.

  • This is astatine. Why in a technological age when we have so much control over protocols that we degrade ourselves to securing rooms by physical means. It's as retarded as wearing a tinfoil hat.

    Instead of blocking 802.11b/g frequencies with wall paint (along with cell-phones, radios and key-less car remotes) can't we use what's in place? You can design a router to restrict traffic based on hardware MAC address and design your DHCP servers to assign by MAC address. Create some scripts to synchronize your ro

  • but the only governments that got interested in anti-Wi-Fi paint were from the Middle East.

    This is because at least in the US (and probably in most civilized countries) buildings with sensitive information are already shielded and have been for decades. I've been in a couple of those by virtue of living in the DC area - sucks when your cell phone doesn't work.

  • Homeowners be very careful with this (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    While the manufacturer claims the product contains no lead (that's because of lead paint laws), the concern would be the copper and aluminum itself.

    Asbestos was banned when fiberglass was available as an alternate solution to insulation. Fiberglass has been listed as a carcinogen in California. But I'll bet it won't be listed as a carcinogen in the rest of the US until a suitable replacement for it is found.

    That's how environmental law generally works. When you have a replacement, you ban the old stuff.

  • Fire! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Zegnar ( 704768 )
    So, what happens when the fire department run in, and their radios don't work?
  • Is it too much to ask that /. posts have correct spelling?

    Seriously, how hard is it to simply spell correctly, or if you can't, to proof your post before submitting it?

Slashdot Top Deals

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Close