Flock 'Safety' Stalking Cameras - and other ANVR spy cameras
- Iniciador del tema ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛
- Fecha de inicio
-
🔧 Site instability resolved. You can report double-posts and broken attachments. For bigger issues, use the Technical Grievances thread.
🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa. -
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Registrado
- 12 de Dic, 2022
From https://www.leonardocompany-us.com/lpr/signaltrace-product-sheet
"Tire pressure sensors" identification
- Registrado
- 18 de Ene, 2024
I wonder how you could combat this, something tells me that the tech is too experimental to actually be useful and is far less useful than just knowing what a car looks like but suppose this did get deployed on a massive scale like the flock cameras have, how would you bypass this? could we see vehicle hardening similar to how browsers can be hardened to prevent tracking? what would be the most generic set of signals present in a car? would it be best to minimize your signals or would that just make you stand out? would people make small faraday cages in their cars glove box to store electronic devices in? would it be possible to counteract the signal used to pickup your onboard devices or would that just make you stand out more?
the fact it picks up on safety systems is quite devious since that could potentially mean you would need to make your car less safe if you wished to not be tracked, even buying an older model of car that doesnt output any signals would be less safe since i doubt you can find a car old enough to not output signals that still has adequate safety systems (though i dont know exactly what safety systems would output electronic signals).
another problem i see is that if the technology for this is there or can get there then this could have the potential to be more harmful than flock cameras because it would be alot easier to hide than a camera that must have a line of sight, these sensors depending on the technology could be hidden quite well while still gathering an adequate level of info on cars that pass by.
888Flux
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 6 de Jul, 2021
It captures any WiFi, BLE, and other signals passing through the area that it can pick up. It's not a new idea. Just the scale of it is what's different.
Everything is shitting out a BLE or WiFI MAC address these days. A pair of bluetooth headphones in your backpack, your phone, smart watches, and anything else. The idea here is to capture all of that and create as many data points as possible across different locations.
This concept is already in use for things like retail stores for foot traffic measurement. What is NOT new however is it all being meshed together like how ALPR networks like Flock are for mass data aggregation. Once that happens yeah it's gonna get fucked real quick.
Some tire pressure sensors are already logged on places like Wigle https://wigle.net/, same with in-car Bluetooth entertainment system MAC IDs
Don't bring your phone with you. If you absolutely need it for navigation get a GPS unit. MapQuest still exists too. There is no safe way to bring a phone with you if what you are doing is under scrutiny.
Find a GPS unit without any wireless / bluetooth functionality and you are set. GPS sounds scary but it's one of the least pozzed things out there. GPS is entirely passive and receive-only.
The only risk is that whatever you enter is probably saved in memory somewhere and stuff like that. So if your car is impounded or something and you left it in there it's most likely possible to recover data that was entered on there.
- Registrado
- 12 de Ago, 2023
If you're talking about passive signal tracking, I can talk about the technical generalities of how it's done.
When you go to a medium to large business, they have WiFI access points from companies like Cisco Meraki, Unifi, Aruba, Ruckus, Juniper, and so on. The common thing between all enterprise access points is that they're centrally managed. There's a server somewhere, usually at the company that's managing their networking (so not even owned by the company that provides the WiFI but sort of a "cloud" SaaS thing) that all the access points connect to and not only pull the configuration and software updates from, but send statistics and data back to. Stuff like connected client MACs and signal strengths and data flows, but also scans of the local radio spectrum to identify foreign access points that are on the same frequency and to alert the sysadmin that there's potential for interference. So the technology has been there for at least 2 decades to track people based on their client MACs. Usually you'd have to connect to the AP to be logged, but just turning on your own hotspot will get you logged too.
The database with all this data is at the companies that manage these network devices, and they'll definitely get requests from law enforcement to track users. The question is how large the scope of data they hand over is, and whether they do any filtering at all or just hand over the entire database, that the cops then upload to the feds central servers, where they further process it and feed it into larger databases that combine tracking data from multiple sources, like from cell phone tracking and now from these new AI-powered cameras.
Regarding passive signal tracking via Bluetooth and other frequency emissions, like NFC and ISM-band stuff like TPMS sensors. Yes, it's definitely possible. Who knows if these closed-source proprietary access points, that on paper should just do WiFI stuff, also listen in to Bluetooth. WiFI and Bluetooth operate on the same 2.4GHz frequencies, so the hardware to receive Bluetooth emissions is already there, it's just a software thing to decode and upload it.
NFC and ISM band stuff is a bit harder, as it's usually in frequency bands that are far from those used by WiFI, so the antennas designed for 2.4GHz can't receive it. But if the hardware is designed with the right antennas and radios to receive it, and they install this hardware on the streets or in businesses, like they're doing with these new cameras (they could even integrate the passive radio receivers and camera together into an all-in-one tracking device) it's definitely possible to track people with passive emissions.
You can significantly lower your risk by not using Bluetooth stuff,, turning off WiFI when you're not using it, turning off the cell modem (although it's only possible if you use a phone with a hardware killswitch like a Pinephone or Librem), not driving a car made in the last 10-15 years (before they started putting telematics and TPMS into every car).
The largest risk of tracking that everyone has on them is their cell phone. Nobody turns their modem off, even if they could. (you can't even turn it off on all phones that don't have a hardware kill switch, that airplane mode setting in the OS is just a suggestion, the modem is still turned on all the time). You can put it in an antistatic or EMI shielding bag that acts as a faraday cage for RF.
When you go to a medium to large business, they have WiFI access points from companies like Cisco Meraki, Unifi, Aruba, Ruckus, Juniper, and so on. The common thing between all enterprise access points is that they're centrally managed. There's a server somewhere, usually at the company that's managing their networking (so not even owned by the company that provides the WiFI but sort of a "cloud" SaaS thing) that all the access points connect to and not only pull the configuration and software updates from, but send statistics and data back to. Stuff like connected client MACs and signal strengths and data flows, but also scans of the local radio spectrum to identify foreign access points that are on the same frequency and to alert the sysadmin that there's potential for interference. So the technology has been there for at least 2 decades to track people based on their client MACs. Usually you'd have to connect to the AP to be logged, but just turning on your own hotspot will get you logged too.
The database with all this data is at the companies that manage these network devices, and they'll definitely get requests from law enforcement to track users. The question is how large the scope of data they hand over is, and whether they do any filtering at all or just hand over the entire database, that the cops then upload to the feds central servers, where they further process it and feed it into larger databases that combine tracking data from multiple sources, like from cell phone tracking and now from these new AI-powered cameras.
Regarding passive signal tracking via Bluetooth and other frequency emissions, like NFC and ISM-band stuff like TPMS sensors. Yes, it's definitely possible. Who knows if these closed-source proprietary access points, that on paper should just do WiFI stuff, also listen in to Bluetooth. WiFI and Bluetooth operate on the same 2.4GHz frequencies, so the hardware to receive Bluetooth emissions is already there, it's just a software thing to decode and upload it.
NFC and ISM band stuff is a bit harder, as it's usually in frequency bands that are far from those used by WiFI, so the antennas designed for 2.4GHz can't receive it. But if the hardware is designed with the right antennas and radios to receive it, and they install this hardware on the streets or in businesses, like they're doing with these new cameras (they could even integrate the passive radio receivers and camera together into an all-in-one tracking device) it's definitely possible to track people with passive emissions.
You can significantly lower your risk by not using Bluetooth stuff,, turning off WiFI when you're not using it, turning off the cell modem (although it's only possible if you use a phone with a hardware killswitch like a Pinephone or Librem), not driving a car made in the last 10-15 years (before they started putting telematics and TPMS into every car).
The largest risk of tracking that everyone has on them is their cell phone. Nobody turns their modem off, even if they could. (you can't even turn it off on all phones that don't have a hardware kill switch, that airplane mode setting in the OS is just a suggestion, the modem is still turned on all the time). You can put it in an antistatic or EMI shielding bag that acts as a faraday cage for RF.
- Registrado
- 24 de Nov, 2018
we all have to be surveilled because the police are too fat stupid and incompetent to do their jobs
888Flux
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 6 de Jul, 2021
we live under a system that is the worst of both worlds. A dystopia so deranged that it's almost impossible to comprehend.
A dual system of anarcho-tyranny. There is an ever increasing police state and surveillance panopticon while the justice system fails to protect the vulnerable and actually prosecute people for real crimes.
Everything you do is tracked, whether it's by the government or by the private sector. But it means fuck all when violent rapists, sex offenders, domestic abusers and murderers are let off with slap on the wrists back out into the public to reoffend.
What is the point of having ALPRs and facial recognition and militarized police with AR-15s and armored vehicles with impunity to kill whoever they want when it does absolutely fuck all. It doesn't reduce crime. It doesn't do shit besides embolden the state to be able to fuck with you more (and get away with it) if you happen to piss the wrong people off.
There is this flawed, retarded mental model of the world held by so many that has led us to where we are today. And companies like Flock greatly benefit from it.
Chuds love parroting shibboleths like 13/52. No doubt there is a racial component to crime, that's objective reality. But it's *more* disproprotionate than what you might think and holds true for just about any demographic profile.
There is a small portion of the overall total population that exhibits antisocial behavior and tendency for violent crime. Somewhere probably between 1% to 5%. The same people who commit violent crime are the same people who commit crimes of opportunity like theft. There aren't like specialities to criminals which is this absolutely fucking retarded shit that most people believe. A person who does a carjacking or steals a wallet is the same person who beats his girlfriend or shoots someone in a drive-by.
If you fucking put these people in prison there is no more crime. That's the answer. But it's never been about that. It's always been about control and "safety" will always be the poison pill to giving horrible people horrible tools to fuck with you more.
- Registrado
- 18 de Jul, 2021
Better idea: how about a giant rolling faraday cage, like a hamster ball, to put the whole car into? Then you don't have worry about all the onboard systems.
- Registrado
- 16 de Mayo, 2019
A simpler solution would be a specialized transmitter, plugged into the car electronics. It would flood the spectrum with random device signals, filling these sensors with bad data. Or you could wardrive a while to collect signals and use them as your broadcast jammer data.
You'd obviously stand out as the lone car broadcasting 20x the number of devices it should have. If all they cared about was fingerprinting to get coarse individual identification/tracking, it's making the job easier for them. But they couldn't figure out which devices were yours. If enough people did this, they couldn't even track individuals.
An even simpler solution is figure out where the signal collector is installed, and hide one of these transmitters nearby.
- Registrado
- 20 de Mar, 2024
I like to believe that things will get better, people are more politically conscious and aware than they were 10 years ago, what Snowden hoped to achieve in 2013 is coming to reality and as Boomers die off the obstacles in the way of change will cease to exist. Maybe one day there'll be a privacy-conscious Zoomer in the White House and we can fix this mess.
- Registrado
- 18 de Jul, 2021
Lol, I'm not holding my breath. The word 'privacy' isn't even in their vocabulary. Most of them broadcast their entire lives 24/7 on social media using their real names. fr fr no cap skibidi 6-7
They never knew a world without social media or smartphones. To them it's perfectly normal to have yourself completely exposed, all these apps tracking you, all your passwords and financial details in that phone, all these myriad connections & smart devices, etc. Makes me feel like a paranoid luddite by comparison.