← Back to context

Comment by transpute

4 years ago

Future Wi-Fi devices will be able to see through your home and business walls, for activity monitoring and biometric identification, https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/31/wifi_devices_monitori...

> In three years or so, the Wi-Fi specification is scheduled to get an upgrade that will turn wireless devices into sensors capable of gathering data about the people and objects bathed in their signals... When 802.11bf will be finalized and introduced as an IEEE standard in September 2024, Wi-Fi will cease to be a communication-only standard and will legitimately become a full-fledged sensing paradigm... tracking can be done surreptitiously because Wi-Fi signals can penetrate walls, don't require light, and don't offer any visible indicator of their presence.

IEEE 802.11bf paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.14918

Papers on device-free wireless sensing (DFWS): https://dhalperi.github.io/linux-80211n-csitool/

Remote sensing with low-cost ESP32 and 802.11n: https://academic.oup.com/jcde/article/7/5/644/5837600

133 comments

transpute

Reply
andrepd  4 years ago

What the actual fuck??

Honestly I don't see any purely technical solution to this. At some point we have to demand that laws be written to outlaw this.

  • tttp  4 years ago

    If you live in Europe, you might want to sign the European citizen initiative banning biometrics

    Reclaimyourface.eu

  • shandor  4 years ago

    I...don't await eagerly the time when tinfoil ceases to be the joke it has been for decades, instead being promoted to a solution anybody even remotely interested in their privacy utilizes.

    • SilverRed  4 years ago

      RF blocking walls could be useful for more than just privacy. Could block out neighbors overpowered wifi APs. Just have a data line in and wifi APs inside.

      2 replies →

    • teitoklien  4 years ago

      Soon we’ll have to paint our home walls with Wifi proof paint to bounce off external signals , if they keep designing stuff like this...

  • kbenson  4 years ago

    > Honestly I don't see any purely technical solution to this.

    For home, chicken wire in the walls and wired networks. A Faraday cage is the simple solution, but unfortunately for this case is unlikely to be in most interior walls in modern buildings.

  • 4oh9do  4 years ago

    > Honestly I don't see any purely technical solution to this.

    The technical solution is pretty simple: do not use Wi-Fi. I use wired connections for all of the devices in my household. The only non-technical aspect of the solution was an interior design-based one about unobtrusive cable wiring around the house.

  • zlynx  4 years ago

    Build better walls. Don't try to outlaw people "looking at you", no matter what frequency they use.

    I find it equally ridiculous to try to outlaw software radio that might listen to "unapproved" radio bands, or listening to clear-text WiFi, baby monitors and cell phones.

    It's almost as stupid as people who would want brain implant computers to implement DRM so people can't record and share their own memory of a movie.

    Another analogy would be a country of blind people trying to legislate sighted people wearing blindfolds, because all of their privacy fences have huge holes in them.

    Technology improves people's abilities. Adapt.

    • Xplune13  4 years ago

      I think you should read your own comment but slowly to realize how absurd it is to say "Build better walls". You are basically saying the whole world should rebuild the walls because of this totally not needed WiFi standard. Great!

      Also I do not agree on "technology improves people's abilities" statement. It is always based on how the technology is used. Famous example. Harnessing nuclear energy. You can use it to blow up cities or to generate power around the world.

      One shouldn't develop technology for advancement's sake. Every new technology should be given thorough thought and analysis into it on why is it needed? and are the negatives outweigh the positives? or vice versa? and so on.

      1 reply →

    • Spare_account  4 years ago

      There are a lot of walls to upgrade then, who should pay for that?

      Standing in someone's garden, peering through their window is dealt with via legislation.

      Since the invention of video recording devices, rather than having everyone upgrade their windows, legislation was reinterpreted and updated to govern the recording of people in private places vs public places.

      It doesn't seem unreasonable for the same to be done to keep up with other forms of technology.

    • KMag  4 years ago

      > Build better walls. Don't try to outlaw people "looking at you", no matter what frequency they use.

      It's just not possible to make a wall that can't be seen through, at least without making them tens of meters thick, even using high density concrete, tungsten, or uranium.

      Muons aren't photons, but cosmic muon tomography has been used to image the Great Pyramid of Giza and also several mountains. Exposure times for cosmic muon tomography are very long, but with enough exposure time, correlating 5-minute blocks across days, someone could work out mean density throughout your house and make low-res 3D video of your daily routine, even with 1 meter thick walls of reactor-grade high-density concrete with sheet steel cladding.

    • tgv  4 years ago

      > Build better walls.

      Rebuilding all houses in the world because someone creates a totally superfluous gadget. Seems reasonable.

      1 reply →

  • wyager  4 years ago

    Or just don’t install these devices in your house/live in a place where privacy is functionally impossible like an apartment building.

    • NoPicklez  4 years ago

      If the standard is built into all future WiFi standards you might have no choice in having to install those devices. If you want to obtain the fastest speeds/range/features etc.

    • rodneyhayes  4 years ago

      Seems like someone can just pull up anywhere in a car and have this capability. You probably won’t have a choice.

disabled  4 years ago

A lot of this work has been research of Dina Katabi at MIT, via a function called the Sparse Fourier ("4-E-A") Transform.

I am not excusing the privacy implications, which will be abused to the extreme. However, it will be used also for health reasons, like monitoring respiration, and activity.

salawat  4 years ago

This is one of those things that shouldn't even have a standard made for it.

What does everyone think is going to happen with capabilities like that?

  • transpute  4 years ago

    Good news, the paper mentions privacy.

    > We identify a number of critical issues that need to be addressed in this space... First, individuals should be provided the opportunity to opt out of SENS services – in other words, to avoid being monitored and tracked by the Wi-Fi devices around them.

    Bad news, the paper proposes remote human identification by every Wi-Fi device.

    > This would require the widespread introduction of reliable SENS algorithm for human or animal identification.

    Would opt-in be legally easier than requiring human body scan registration for opt-out of Wi-Fi remote sensing?

    • salawat  4 years ago

      This is a poison pill.

      In order to not be tracked you must consent to be tracked so we know you don't want to be tracked.

      This should not be done or allowed. Period. It's a huge invasion of privacy.

    • brobdingnagians  4 years ago

      It would be better to have a beacon that simply broadcasts that you do not want to be tracked, with no further identifying features. There isn't really a good reason for identifying you to then look up that you don't want to be tracked. Make that legally binding and enforce it.

      Or, better yet, make it totally opt in.

      1 reply →

  • quickthrowman  4 years ago

    Yeah, this tech standard is totally insane, why would I want anyone or anything to be able to scan people and objects inside my house without my knowledge? I’m aware of microphone attacks for keyboard password entry and other methods of surreptitious surveillance, but this is way past a microphone or webcam. I will pay a massive premium to purchase WiFi equipment without this feature.

    Unfortunately these will be everywhere, far beyond any existing camera surveillance network.

  • hooande  4 years ago

    Can make a lot of interesting products. Lights that turn on or change color when different people enter a room. home security systems that can detect motion. the ability to summon help for people who fall.

    I've been looking into this for a while, should be mature enough in a year or so. there are already dozens of companies in this space

  • idiotsecant  4 years ago

    Do you think making it a standard is required to use it? The technology exists now. Writing it down isn't breathing it into existence.

    • transpute  4 years ago

      Good to have threats documented, so technology/spectrum can be regulated and legal frameworks developed.

      e.g. lockpicks are regulated, how about wallpicks-via-WiFi?

      2 replies →

beermonster  4 years ago

And let’s not forget also Amazon Sidewalk

Scary times.

neolog  4 years ago

Is it practical to put a Faraday mesh into the exterior walls of a house?

  • ortusdux  4 years ago

    I've rented two houses that used chicken wire to bind the plaster to the lath. You could get a bit of cell service near the windows, but you needed a WAP in each room. Finding studs was a nightmare.

  • fulafel  4 years ago

    Yes, this kind of shielding in construction is well understood, people concerned about information leakage have been doing it for decades and made the specs public. (Also people suffering from perceived "eletromagnetic hypersensitivity")

  • shard  4 years ago

    Of course, any house totally shielded with a Faraday cage would look extra suspicious and thus receive closer scrutiny. You'd need most of the house to be non-shielded to act as a honeypot while maintaining a small shielded section of the house for "emergencies".

  • FridayoLeary  4 years ago

    With 2 conditions; a) you would have to do it before closing up the walls and b) give up on radio.

    • lstamour  4 years ago

      Also, expect to have very strange windows. Of course, if visible light can pass through, that might be considered a flaw in your faraday cage so YMMV.

      Personally, I'd like it if my devices knew what room I was in. Back in 2013, I'd started working on a home automation project with that goal in mind, but then all these closed source devices came out that were incredibly cheap and convenient and I haven't revisited the idea since.

      I do look back with a bit of regret that more hasn't been done to push for reverse engineering these devices or somehow encouraging companies to open source their routers to support third-party operating systems, etc. We take for granted that we've open source smartphones and standard PC specifications when we don't yet have a standard that could let me run YouTube TV on my Echo Show 8, for example, or add lossless FLAC playback to my smart speaker...

      2 replies →

  • knicholes  4 years ago

    I recently cut a couple holes in my house exterior through stucco. Like a sibling comment, that stucco was secured over some wire mesh. I can't remember how dense the mesh needs to be to block whichever frequencies would be used, but something like that would be commonplace and provide reasonable doubt.

    • hellbannedguy  4 years ago

      There are different types of lathe used for plaster walls.

      From chicken wire to mesh with 1/8, or less, inch rectangles.

      I imagine the whole room would have to be covered with lathe. In good construction the lathe is covering every sq. inch of a room before the the base coat is put on.

      Plaster wall are not typical anymore. Stucco is still used on exterior walls, but it usually just covers up ap the foundation, and might extent up the wall a few feet.

      Plaster walls in a bathroom are the best walls though. The house I'm in has 1" thick plaster walls, and they hold up to a lot of abuse.

      A well plastered plaster room would need screen on the door too, but that's doable.

      If I was building a house, it would have stucco walls. Maybe only the exterior walls, and the ceilings? Then my signals could go room to room, but the world is locked out.

      No one uses chicken wire, but it works just as well as the new smaller holed lathe sheets.

      I still have no clue if modern sheets of lathe would act as a Faraday Cage?

      I have fooled around with Faraday Cages, and tiny openings matter.

      (I remember hearing about a guy who stole a vechicle with lowjack. He covered the vechicle with chicken wire, and the cell signal with through? He was caught.)

  • _wldu  4 years ago

    Trying to stop radio waves is sort of like trying to stop water. Any little crack or hole and it'll come through.

  • _rkz1  4 years ago

    In addition to that, you might want/need to use only wired connections to your router and rip out any components that enable wireless.

KETpXDDzR  4 years ago

I see a market for personal WiFi jamming devices.

  • elric  4 years ago

    Those are illegal (at least in the US, and likely just about everywhere). Which is bitterly ironic in this case ... spying on people inside their homes using WiFi is "fine", but trying to jam that bullshit is ... illegal.

  • ortusdux  4 years ago

    Jamming would run afoul of the FCC. Now having one or more WAPs randomly modulate their signal strength should do the trick

passerby1  4 years ago

Do I understand it correct that it's possible to 'sense' what people speak with this technique?

  • jk7tarYZAQNpTQa  4 years ago

    No, that would require a precision that's probably still decades away. It could be used to grossly place people and large objects, and notice their movement. Sensing voice would require to monitor vibrations in either the person speaking or anything that vibrates with the emitted sound.

    Funnily, there are much easier ways to do that, although they require direct line of vision [1]. Another option would be to measure the vibrations on walls (think glass on the wall, but hitech).

    [1] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2020/06/eavesdropping...