The reason the FCC is only allowing the sale of state approved routers in the US?

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    “Oh my goodness, this is a nightmare” typed everyone into their government approved location recording devices that can show them cats and boobs.

  • RegularJoe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    132
    ·
    6 days ago

    “This technology turns every router into a potential means for surveillance,” warns Julian Todt from KASTEL. “If you regularly pass by a café that operates a WiFi network, you could be identified there without noticing it and be recognized later – for example by public authorities or companies.”

    Later…

    Inexpensive or older routers either don’t store history at all or keep it for a short time.

    Newer models can store more information for more extended periods.

    https://www.thetechwire.com/how-long-does-a-router-store-history/

    • morto@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      79
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      We used to recommend people to run the newest stuff possible, but we came to a point that maybe it’s better for us to keep with older tech for a good while

      • mecen@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        6 days ago

        Or go to more civilized countries for vacation to get not backdoored hardware.

        • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Do you think every country has its own router hardware manufacturer and commodity chip manufacturer? 😂

          The 2 giants that make 95% of consumer routers around the world and the few companies that design the chips for them are both in heavy surveillance states.

    • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      6 days ago

      From what I’ve just read, the tech doesn’t seem ready to identify people yet. It can supposedly detect hand gestures, but facial recognition I seriously doubt. But that’s probably just a matter of improving the tech. See this article for more info.

      • Null User Object@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        6 days ago

        From OPs linked article…

        In tests involving 197 participants, the researchers said the system identified individuals with nearly 100% accuracy. The recognition remained effective regardless of viewing angle or how the participants walked.

        • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          I can totally believe when it tracks a person it can tell when the same person walks by again later. But matching people with their actual identities would require a database of wifi scan data that simply doesn’t exist yet.

            • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Well in theory every tech possibility is a “yet”, but the way I read this it seems like a person or object’s interference pattern is particular to the local signal environment - not like a fingerprint a different system could recognize at the airport.

      • obviouspornalt@fedinsfw.app
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        that’s a trivial problem to solve. combine this with a camera for facial recognition in a public space. then you’ve got wifi signature combined with the photo/video for facial recognition. then presumably you can use the WiFi signature anywhere else, even without the camera and be able to identify people.

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          I was wondering about that. The article didn’t say anything about being able to identify the same person walking past a different router. And I can’t imagine the study didn’t try. So I assume it doesn’t work.

    • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      That’s connection history. CSI motion detection software storing information it collects would be entirely independent of that. How much it saves and for how long would depend on the size of the router’s memory.

  • Comrade_Squid@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    5 days ago

    If I was a capitalist, knowing I am few and and my power only comes from the resources I own, resources stolen from the masses. I would use my stolen wealth to safe guard my own class interests against the masses. Hence we see surveillance capitalism.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    90
    ·
    6 days ago

    It would be great if there were some open source tool kits for this. If the technology is going to exist it should be in the hands of the people.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Yeah, if this shit has to exist, at least let me use it for presence detection in Home Assistant without having to buy separate sensors or something!

      • village604@adultswim.fan
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        It would be amazing to not have to deploy a network of esp32s to do it with Bluetooth.

        Although I’m already putting one in each room.

      • partofthevoice@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Probably just need a protocol to work with the data, however it can be interfaced with. Is it just measuring signal strength via speed over time?

    • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      6 days ago

      If you’re technical you might like enjoy this article that explains how the tracking works. Basically the router can perform math on the interference created by objects moving around the room. It seems like this would have to be part of the router firmware, which doesn’t sound like a standard feature. But if it is, the fix would be to install modified firmware with that function disabled. The smoking gun will be if somebody gets into DMCA trouble for doing this.

        • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          A sufficient fix is not letting your wifi devices connect to your neighbor’s network so their router can detect you walking between it and them.

          • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            my devices don’t, but unless I misunderstood it it does not matter whether you are connected to the neighbor’s router

            • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Wifi tracking uses measurements of the interference caused when objects pass between connected devices and a router. For your neighbors to track your movements their router would have to be connected to a device in your house, or maybe in the other neighbor’s house on the far side of your house, so when you walk around it interferes with that signal.

    • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 days ago

      Or an open source hardware device that changes your “wifi signature” randomly.

    • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      Opensource tech to do the same thing has been in the hands of the people for a long time. This is just a different way of doing it without motion sensors.

        • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          The motion sensing is more accurate in terms of fundamentally detecting movement, but if you’re going from that to assuming it can identify who you are, no it doesn’t do that. It can recognize a person as the same person it saw in the room yesterday, based on their gait and their effect on the local wifi signal, but it has no way of knowing if the pattern belongs to Old Man Wilson or Old Lady Jenkins, because there’s no database tying those patterns to people’s identities. And besides, the patterns are specific to that one signal environmnent anyway. It’s not like a fingerprint or a facial image you could record at home and then match to someone walking around in a store, which has a different signal environment.

  • LiveLM@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Ok now what router do I buy and what firmware do I flash to plug this into Home Assistant?

      • Nugscree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Faraday cage, it’s going to be a hassle to wiremesh your entire apartment, and you can forget using a mobile phone inside of it, but there are no outside signals getting in that way.

  • DragonAce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    IIRC, when Meta bought out iRobot, it slipped out that they were using Roombas to collect the square footage and entire layout of your house to add to your data sets. So this doesn’t seem surprising at all. Good thing I configure my own router and firewall.

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    6 days ago

    From what I’ve read this is built into the required wifi router for Xfinity. I discovered this when I signed up for Xfinity fiber, had the fiber installed and setup and then cancelled it the same day, because of this and not being able to buy and run my own hardware, and needing to install an app on my phone to manage the router, and apparently not being able to choose my DNS. They required that I rent their hardware for an additional $15/mo. Oh well, at least fiber is in the house now, if anyone wants it in the future. I sure won’t be paying them to spy on me.

    Fuck Comcast, still.

    • FEIN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      6 days ago

      app to manage router

      This shit was a pain in the ass and now learning about this makes me feel even more pissed off as a customer

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 days ago

        Wrap it in aluminum foil.

        Whilst this sounds a lot like a foil hat joke, that’s literally the easiest way to wrap something in a conductive material cage (i.e. a faraday cage).

        If you don’t want it to look ridiculous, put it inside a box whose inside has been lined with aluminum foil.

        Mind you, personally I too would just cancel that shit, but the option is there to carry on using it whilst blocking its radio emissions.

      • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        This was fiber, if that makes a difference. I asked the install guy, he called his boss, because no one had asked him that before. He told me “no, it’s not allowed”. Also, I tried plugging the patch cable directly into my own wifi router and nothing.

        • Null User Object@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 days ago

          Also, I tried plugging the patch cable directly into my own wifi router and nothing.

          The router would need to be explicitly configured to connect to your account on the network, which would require certain information provided by the ISP, which it sounds like they weren’t going to provide.

    • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      That’s because Xfinity offers motion sensing as a feature, which requires this tech in the router. Presumably it’s configurable and costs extra to turn on.

      • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        It’s a “costs extra feature” for the customer. But, they have access to it regardless of whether it’s “turned on”. It’s never turned off for them. And, if that puts me in tin-foil hat territory, so be it.

    • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      Funnily enough, indoors, this would probably make you more visible as the only area with no reflections. Stealth works outdoors because the sky does not have a radar return.

    • monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      My understanding is that this catches disruptions between devices and router. I don’t think this would work. I would say you should instead sell a “bracelet” with “ancient Himalayan Salt” embedded into the silicone to absorb and cancel the tracking. It would probably sell a ton! Obviously wouldn’t work but $!

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Well you can’t stop it from knowing something is there. But you should be able to confuse it’s identification of a specific person.

          • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            I don’t know if it can actually see your gait. Might be that your legs are technically invisible to it. It’s just looking at how you uniquely disturb wifi signals. It maybe that your torso does most of that or something.

  • Imhereforfun@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    5 days ago

    This technology has been publicly demonstrated about 3 years ago, but I imagine it has been done years and years back. It’s really nothing mind blowing, just the way waves work, workaround believe it or not is the tin foil your walls.

  • minorkeys@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    5 days ago

    Mass data mixed with machine learning pattern identification means what already exists will lead to broken as fuck capabilities for those who own everyone. Ie. Not us.

  • BeUnique@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    That’s cool and all but if true, why use an animated photo instead of a real life example?

    • skisnow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’m not sure what you think an “example” would look like. It’s not taking a photo of you, it’s measuring what’s distinctive about the way you personally mess up radio signals and how it differs from how other people mess them up. Internally it’s just a ton of numbers.

      • bthest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        I assume they want to take those numbers and make a visual representation like a radar return or ultrasound image. Probably wouldn’t really look like anything but still it’d be pretty sick to impress your friends by looking at your 2nd screen filled with green matrix vertical scrolling shit and be like: “the cat wants out.”

  • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    6 days ago

    Very interesting concept. I was curious about how in the hell this could be done. This article explains the general method.

    When an inert object like a person moves around between the router and stationary connected devices like computers and printers, it interferes with the signal. The pattern of interference plus math can be used to plot the movement of the object - and even measure subtle changes like hand gestures. Home security software from companies like Xfinity can already use this tech to send you an alert when something is moving around in your house, without needing additional hardware. Imagine an informercial where a guy holds up a handful of “clumsy motion sensors” with wires sticking out of them, and “confusing instructions”. Not if you just let your router do it!

    As far as being a new and sinister means of surveillance, evil companies could already theoretically tap into anybody’s motion sensors or security cams. The difference with WiFi tracking is that you wouldn’t necessarily know it’s there.

    • fleck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      6 days ago

      That’s using CSI though. The article said the researches specifically did not utilize CSI.

      But regarding CSI: I evaluated that as a small part of my Master’s thesis and it worked pretty OK for motion detection but not for classifying other activities, at least not on a SISO link. For more complex stuff you would need both a MIMO access point (router) and device (e.g. phone). Also, you need to constantly transmit messages to get up-to-date CSI, which is not great for power consumption as well as cluttering the communication channel. There are some other constraints, especially regarding noise. E.g. I managed to completely destroy the CSI spectrogram by turning on a microwave oven. There is 802.11bf in development, which is supposed to standardize this, because currently using CSI is pretty much a “hack”, as it is not intended for sensing. Once this is widely adopted, I would start being worried, but not right now.

      This is from my thesis:

      • zaphod@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        It’s not too different from what I can tell. They seem to just exploit the fact that beamforming information (BFI) is transmitted back to the access point. BFI is ultimately not so different from CSI. What they exploit is that they can just listen in and intercept the BSI without access to the AP.

      • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        The need for a constant signal to scan movement is a good point. Makes sense that nearby wifi devices can’t just be sitting there, they have to be actively transmitting to the router or there’s no signal for the target to interfere with. I must have gotten CSI and wifi scanning confused. Tbh I’m not even sure why CSI is in the article except for history, but I found the principle fascinating. In your research did you turn the intererence into anything like a heat map of a person standing in the room, or is it more of a signal fingerprint, like chromatography or spectrography?

        • fleck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          My topic was fall detection (as in elderly people falling) specifically without using cameras or wearables. The idea was to take the CSI (basically what you see in the image) and just stuff it into some machine learning model to get a prediction as to whether someone fell in a given time frame, so I was trying to classify the signature of the falling “activity”. From my literature survey, this has been done successfully with CSI. But as with a lot of research, it typically lacked practicality. Much of my work was implementing the firmware, data recording, processing, and so on. I also had to record a ton of falls (ouch) and label them. I ended up throwing away the CSI approach though, because of the noise reasons I mentioned. That was simply a deal breaker. I went with FMCW radar instead (and it worked pretty good).

          • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            Fascinating project! Definitely sounds like at best it might detect that somebody probably fell down, but not that Old Man Jenkins is having a bowl of Lucky Charms instead of Raisin Bran and his blood pressure is a little high - which seems to be the conclusion people are jumping to here.

            • fleck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              It definitely depends on the circumstances. With 60 GHz radar e.g. you get quite a good distance resolution and can detect e.g. breathing rate really well (from the torso movement during breathing) and things like how many people are in a room, etc. But its always very dependent on the environment, your settings, subjects, noise, whatever. That’s why I said its typically not practical. By using dedicated devices perhaps, and most of these kinds of news are about people who use dedicated devices, but that’s like putting a camera in your home. When you have to abuse an existing communication channel, probably not so realistic.

      • ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Wouldn’t a microwave causing significant interference also be a sign of a very faulty, potentially unsafe microwave? If it’s bathing your environment with microwaves, you’re cooking to some degree. I know a 2.4 GHz router is using microwaves too, but restricted to much lower power. I’d be very suspicious of an oven that’s leaking enough to interfere with my signals since you don’t know how strong the leaking microwaves are and they may in fact be harmful. I imagine someone standing in front of their microwave watching it operate, cooking their eyeballs as they wait.

        • fleck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          to be fair, maybe. To pass FCC/CE regulation regarding EMC, it has to adhere to strict limits at 2.4 GHz (but I could also imagine for microwave ovens specifically that the allowed emissions are higher than for other devices, because 2.4 GHz is just the band it operates in. But idk, I didnt read the standard for those). But it does not mean that it may not radiate anything in that band.

          Anyways, my observation was that it did interfere and the microwave was definitely closed. But also it was not 10m distance to the microwave, more like 2m, so relatively close. WiFi receivers are quite sensitive to be able to work with low received powers. So just a little emission is sufficient to interfere. You are probably not disturbing the communication itself, because OFDM is quite robust, but it certainly destroyed my use case (which operated on the whole CSI).

          And there is definitely some stuff leaking, e.g. through radiated emissions on the wiring (the power line). But it is certainly not cooking anything. That’s also what the regulation makes sure of.

    • hovercat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 days ago

      I can tell you as someone who read the papers on very early deepfakes and AI video generation with amazement followed by dread, this is going to be feasible on a large scale in a short period of time. Researchers do stuff on an absolute shoestring budget usually, it’s incomparable to what large companies and governments have at their disposal. There are already consumer products that were able to become fairly precise motion sensors with just a firmware update. Next gen devices will be built with motion fingerprinting in mind, I can almost guarantee it.

    • brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 days ago

      It gets more accurate with more access points, too. So corporate and education settings will be the easy places for this to get implemented.

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        I would expect them having access to that anyway when they control the device, or when they are the manufacturer

    • Bluewing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      It’s a start. It may take time to make it work for “everyday” use, but if it’s possible now, it can be done better in the future.