Is there a way to build a cheap device that saturates a flock Bluetooth connection with simultaneous junk connections? Also the same for WiFi signals?
#randomthoughts
Login to reply
Replies (13)
If I'm understanding your question; I'm pretty sure Bluetooth jamming won't do anything but poison the ble data set of what the sensors are picking up. But it won't stop the unit from phoning home, sending footage and all other collected data to the mothership. ...that being said, I'm very interested in this line of reasoning
Yup.
Correct. It isn't directly disabling, but... If it can't lock onto other signals because the connections are saturated, and is you managed to coordinate the same thing over a wide area... That would put a strain on the infra running the system.
I'm much more of a fan of direct intervention, but there are times when saturating a network is preferable.
I think. I haven't ever done anything like this, but... It has to be possible.
That's correct. Just trying to make we all don't get locked up for something stupid :)
It's really hard to disguise any radio waves and still have them work. Noise is discarded, and there are few ways to create "noise" without it breaking everything.
if there is one fundamental rule everyone should know about radio is, all radios receive everything all the time. Only filtered by distance, antenna size, analog filtering components, and hardware processing. Almost all radios have the power to receive signals and software can do insane amount of heavy lifting to recover more than you'd ever think.
I'm not black pilled on much, but I am black pilled on wireless communication. Unless there is a practical way to hide radio waves and still use them I think were screwed.
Also realize that receivers, especially if there are more than one within range, are really good at detecting location of source signals. Even smartphone radios can do some amount of direction and proximity to sources.
Yes, but sometimes you don't want to destroy something and it's stupidly easy to drone a device close to a camera.
I'm actually very well aware of this.
Sure. That's visual obfuscation. I think that something along the lines of electronic obfuscation would be useful. If the hardware (evidently basically an android device) is saturated with connections, that could, in theory, prevent other devices from being tracked.
It's really easy to build a DEW from old microwave parts, but, again, there are times when non-destructive means are more effective.
Sounds like a great way to end up in prison.
Maybe take note of th UK where people cut the camera polls down with cordless grinders.
That's way more effective. And even if you get caught, cutting the polls down is far less of a crime.
Vandalism that will probably get you community service instead of a 20 year prison term.
Sure. But... Just because that's possible doesn't mean that it shouldn't be figured out.
On drones!?
Okay, I'm sold
That's modern PWM units.
Older transformer models stick closer to 2.4gHz, or at least have enough juice there to be useful.
Watch every video in this series:
These are also deniable. "I asked Claude to write the config, and it seemed to work".