Researchers Turn Home Wi-Fi Router Into Spy Device 108
hypnosec writes "Researchers at University College of London have applied principles of radar used in defense and designed a detector using home based Wi-Fi routers to spy on people across walls. Using the principles behind the Doppler effect ... Karl Woodbridge and Kevin Chetty, at University College London, have built a prototype unit that uses Wi-Fi signals and recognizes frequency changes to detect moving objects. The size of the prototype unit is more or less the size of a suitcase. The unit contains a radio receiver comprising of two antennas and a signal-processing unit. The duo carried out test runs and ... they managed to determine a person's location, speed, and direction (even through a one foot thick brick wall). The device could be used to spot intruders, monitor children or the elderly, and could even be used in military applications."
Cool (Score:1)
Would be nice to see how this might be used for good, not just evil.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
In the hand of all good US army and intelligence everything is used for good... anyone else using it will be for bad bad terrorism...
Re:Cool (Score:5, Funny)
Ok, it can be used to detect if you are about to be attacked by zombies or RIAA agents.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice rationalization for a wallhack there. Personally, I think even in the case of a zombie apocalypse you have to have *some* standards. Otherwise, what is the difference between you and a zombie?
WWJD (Score:5, Funny)
So cheating with wallhacks is bad? Not for a christian -- Jesus abused an item cloning bug [wikipedia.org] himself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hope cloning food is one of those glitches that will end up as a feature someday, like rocket jumping. At any rate, since he shared the bread and fishes with all on the server, I wouldn't call it abusing the bug, especially since they were all just idling anyway, there wasn't a match in progress at that time.
Re:WWJD (Score:4, Funny)
At any rate, since he shared the bread and fishes with all on the server, I wouldn't call it abusing the bug, especially since they were all just idling anyway, there wasn't a match in progress at that time.
Some other cases of him exploting glitches also come to mind. But being a son of the server admin, I don't think there was any chance of him getting banned...
Re: (Score:2)
Well yeah, there's that ^^ But as I said, I don't think it counts as cheating, since he wasn't really fragging anyone... IIRC he mostly warned of the impending crash of the server they were on, while handing out the access details for the new one ("the admin's private server has many slots") to those who agreed to installing punkbuster and having their score reset. He exploited glitches to get the attention of players for that purpose, sure, but I'm not sure that sounds as cheating?
Re: (Score:3)
I dunno, in the end the Roman Empire guild crucified him after all.
Besides its not entirely clear that he was the son of the server admin, there's been these confusing references to an account named Holy Ghost, as well as the Jesus account and the Admin account itself of course, suggesting that all three are "one, but separate" etc. Might be the same player administering the server and then playing on 2 other accounts as well.
Re:WWJD (Score:4, Insightful)
Didn't Jesus let them kill him on purpose, so he could respawn 3 days later as a further demonstration of him being (endorsed by) the admin? But yeah, it's hard to make sense of it going just by a bunch of server logs which may have been tampered with.
Re: (Score:2)
Good point, I had forgotten it was more or less ordained.
As for the partial server logs, remember that whole confusing "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" statement when all along he claimed to be uninterested in PvP entirely? Very confusing.
His followers seemed to be heavily into PvP mind you...
Re: (Score:2)
Or he lectured the crowd for hours about not beeing greedy and sharing with others before announcing that they didn't have enough food to go around... and surprise! many of the people had brought their lunches and decided to share.
Re: (Score:2)
what is the difference between you and a zombie?
I smell better.
Re: (Score:3)
Do zombies go by smell? Because in that case peppering the walls with bullets where you detect silhouettes will just help them find you quicker, and smelling nice just makes it worse :/
I on the other hand won't have to change a thing. I'll just sit here like I always do, quietly, reading slashdot covered in a thick crust of dead skin and feces, waiting to get last post. I'm ready!
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, I've got to go with sound primarily, followed by movements faster than a typical zombie. This conclusion is the result of many hours of studying documentary footage of zombies hunting in their natural habitat.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice rationalization for a wallhack there. Personally, I think even in the case of a zombie apocalypse you have to have *some* standards. Otherwise, what is the difference between you and a zombie?
Brainsss!
Re: (Score:2)
Or Sectoids and Mutons. Clearly this is an X-Com motion scanner.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, it can be used to detect if you are about to be attacked by zombies or RIAA agents.
How does one tell the difference?
Zombies do less damage and have more respect for individual rights?
Hats and shield (Score:1)
The tinfoil house will be near us soon. Makes me wonder if the tech will be used as an indication that you "have something to hide" if no signal is detected.
Re: (Score:2)
1) The foil vapour-control-layer just behind the plasterboard on my aerogel internal wall insulation seems to be starting to to that job quite well already.
2) I don't have an FB a/c so I really must be a terrrrrist, yes?
Rgds
Damon
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, just wait for the FUCK act (Facebook Update Complete Knowledge act). That will make it illegal to not put everything about yourself on Facebook.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, you can just claim that you just want to shield from the evil phone radiation.
Re: (Score:3)
Dont need to. just buy "magnetic paint" at home depot and paint your walls. it's a very high concentration of iron in the paint and it blocks RF quite well.
Re: (Score:3)
Nope. metal reflects RF if grounded, floating or charged with 10,000 volts.
Wrong history... (Score:1, Flamebait)
The article gets off to a bad start in the very first sentence:
Rubish. The US Navy did not invent radar as it implies. Nicola Tesla descibed the concept in 1917 and others were playing with similar ideas before then. Sorry. Im not going to bother reading the rest. Isnt there an actual paper on the subject we can read instead of this badly-informed junk?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wrong history... (Score:4, Informative)
So does that mean if I'm exploring out in the woods, and I stumble upon a cave entrance, that the cave didn't exist prior to my discovery?
If I'm researching some technology and I stumble upon a related patent, that the patent didn't exist before I found it? Great, that means I just need to stumble across every patent in the USPTO, and I own every technology in existence!!
Screw the rest of the steps, just:
5. PROFIT!!!!1!
Your interpretation is completely at odds with decades of history of this phrase.
Re: (Score:2)
No, actually the cave simultaneously existed and did not exist until you stumbled upon it.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it is literally impossible to stumble upon radar technology, or upon the fact that someone else stumbled upon it, figuratively.
Sigh. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it is literally impossible to stumble upon the idea of radar technology...
But it is not impossible to stumble upon The Idea of Radar Technology, especially if someone has left it lying on the floor of a dark room.
Re: (Score:2)
Incorrect. Stumbling upon something literally refers to the act of coming upon something.
stumbling upon is like when you are walking in the woods smoking a big doobie and you trip over a log in the path
Re: (Score:1)
No, that's more like stumble. Its when you discover the village of smurfs as the result of your stumble (being closer to the ground) that you stumbled upon something.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah except bullshit. You don't understand the language (regardless of where you were born) - in this semantic context it clearly means "Invented".
Re: (Score:2)
You don't understand the language
And you think a bald assertion might fix that?
in this semantic context it clearly means "Invented".
What? You think I read TFA? AFAIC the context is the OP's quote, and it can be interpreted either way (depending on which eye you close).
BTW: 95th percentile at state level for mid-HS english comprehension test (1970's), but hey my english teacher thought I cheated too?
Re: (Score:1)
Even then, nobody was really interested until WW2.
Maybe they got interested in radars to avoid icebergs and ships a problem encountered by Olympic, Titanic, Lusitania .... and installed one on the Normandie
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Rubbish ^2 - The quote does not imply the navy invented radar.
YMMV but it certainly sounded that way to me...
Re: (Score:2)
Umm... not only that, but I know of NO such described incident with regard to the US Navy.
I DO know of such an incident in the UK, which occurred while they were experimenting with attempts to interfere with aircraft engines using radio waves. It was this that started Thomas Watson-Watt and the other UK scientists off on their eventual invention of Radar.
The US had nothing like this, and did not do any research in the field. I think that this item is just transposing something that happened in the UK and claiming that it happened in the US - something the Americans frequently do....
Allow me to recommend "Man of High Fidelity: Edwin Howard Armstrong" by Lawrence Lessing, and specifically direct your attention to the part that covers Major Armstrong's service in the U.S. Army Signal Corps during World War I.
Get the trickle-down effect right (Score:2)
"...and could even be used in military applications."
The naiveté is overwhelming. Military applications, if even remotely plausible, would be the first to get this technology, not high-tech baby monitors.
Re:Get the trickle-down effect right (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
So, can hackers figure out a way to feed these things wrong information so the output image looks like a shock site of your choosing?
Re: (Score:2)
...*
What is that?
What?....wait...noooo....ARRRRRRGGGGHHH!!!
Mental terrorist!!! MENTAL TERRORIST!!!!!
Re: (Score:2)
So, can hackers figure out a way to feed these things wrong information so the output image looks like a shock site of your choosing?
You would need a Tin Foil house
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I think Intelligence Agencies would be the first to get it. If they don't already have it, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
If these researchers disappear soon, you'll know said agencies have had the technology for a while. :)
NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Also just letting you know we are pushing for legislation to ban[...] any rapidly moving iron object in the premises that may scatter signals.
NSA wants do ban ammunition? I need popcorn to watch the battle between NRA and NSA, not sure which side will be surviving this epic fight.
Re: (Score:2)
Hi there. NSA here. We'd like to ask everyone to stop copying our ideas. Unfortunately we can't patent them for obvious reasons, but we can block you just as much under the 'National Security' stamp, so just forget about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act [wikipedia.org]
You can apply for a classified patent and the government can retroactively classify an already granted/applied for patent.
Once your patent is classified, your only customer is the government or government contractors with clearance.
Re: (Score:1)
Apply for a foreign patent first as a way around it?
Re: (Score:1)
Basically, this device is a digital signal processor looking at two antennas and looking at the phase shifts induced by a moving reflective object.
The effect is quite pronounced, and only needs some source of RF to illuminate the area. An OTA TV transmitter transmitting its normal fare does very nicely. If you have ever used a TV with rabbit ears, I am sure you have seen the effect yourself. You move about the room
and even be used in military applications?? (Score:1)
whoa, whoa cowboy, slow down there....that last "even" just made the entire rest of the article padded filler to justify what anyone would expect anyway, but seeing it couched in such pathetically blatant terms only makes it stand out all the more. We all saw Real Genius son, we all know how this works, you're not on our side.
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, come on, you are exaggerating. We haven't all seen real genius. I mean I do, every morning in the mirror, but since I rarely leave my house the rest of you sad fucks are out of luck.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to be a capacitive bag of antenna-tuning water, until I took an arrow to the knee...
so what\s the news here (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
From what I understood this doesn't require a custom transmitter, the normal wi-fi router already in the room will work fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Peter Wright would have been all over this.
Passive radar (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_radar [wikipedia.org]
Passive radar uses radio sources, like TV and FM stations, instead of having its own transmitter. The receiver detects the direct signal from the transmitter and the signal reflected from the target. The trick is to separate the two. Using the doppler effect does that nicely for moving targets.
The advantage of passive radar is that it can't be detected.
The radar in TFA doesn't need to be undetectable, the targets probably don't have detectors. It could have its own transmitter. That would simplify the receiver design a lot. The transmitter is quite simple and cheap, being a GUNN diode or something like that. It would also require a directional transmitting antenna. Developing such a device would be much cheaper and it would work much better.
Given that the researchers did the job the hard way, their accomplishment is quite impressive. On the other hand, we haven't seen a fully field tested version. There is a large gap between a lab demo under controlled circumstances and an actual useable device.
Re: (Score:1)
It would also require a directional transmitting antenna.
To the rescue [weinterrupt.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You are worried about TR-069?!? At least with TR-069 you know the equipment vendors and operators have a convention to allow only some remote provisioning... I mean, if they were devious, they could compile in back doors instead of TR-069. The farmacy has a pill that will make them stop chasing you.
Home Wi-Fi Router? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The headline is a bit misleading. They did not convert a Wifi station to a spy device, but created a completely separate device to interpret Wifi signals and their reflections in a building.
Well, actually they converted a Wifi station to HALF of a spy device.
They simply created the other half.
Sigh.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Finding new ways to spy on people is something we seem to be really good at here in the UK
Re:Sigh.. (Score:4, Funny)
Finding new ways to spy on people is something we seem to be really good at here in the UK
On the plus side, James Bond ends up with an ample supply of new gadgets to show off.
Re: (Score:1)
But the Americans are still the masters of disguise [wikimedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Great (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Cool! Do a functional RC model of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAI_Harop [wikipedia.org]
Detecting & Blocking it? (Score:1)
So if it uses Wifi-range signals, we could prolly make a "spy device detector" or even "spy device blocker" in dd-wrt?
With everyone using wifi, I don't understand how results could be so accurate. Please enlighten me:)
Re: (Score:2)
NSA's been doing this for years (Score:1)
Device-free Passive Localization for Wireless (Score:2)
Reminds me of this 2008 Google Tech Talks: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PiMimSrP7A [youtube.com]
Continuum (Score:1)
Cellphones might be better ... (Score:2)
... initiate a call to the perps, precisely triangulate the location of the phone source through common RF firection finding, use passive detection using your own cell and responding perps cell signals (add in others for more precision). Would have been complicated to do once upon a time but tech is there to do it now. Reply to this post if you want to take this idea to market :-)
Someone Comes to Town (Score:1)