Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

julianoliver.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 138 posts

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#121

Post by piker »

eyeJam wrote: post #116
piker wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) According to the article, disabling the wireless camera itself may be a crime in the US. If so, there are a host of ways the participant could face criminal liability under the described facts. (2) Civil liability does require, generally, causation--cause-in-fact and proximate cause. The cause-in-fact test is a simple "but-for" assessment: but-for our guy disabling the wireless, would the robbery have happened? I…

Disabling the cameras would make it much harder to identify and catch the thief and therefore recover the stolen property. And so, on a balance of probabilities, 'but for' disabling the cameras the damage (loss of property) would not have occurred. I see what you're saying, but there's a strong argument to be made for finding the camera-disabling guest negligent. If I was advising a client I would never state things…

And "but-for" the police's inability to catch the bad guy, the plaintiff would have recovered his stolen goods as well, right? And "but-for" the Chief hiring the detective in charge of the case, the plaintiff would have been more likely to recover his property. And on and on. He should sue them all as well.

A lawyer who doesn't quite yet understand factual causation or the limitations imposed by proximate cause would do well to hedge an answer like this with a client. A knowledgeable lawyer, however, would win this on SJ.

[edits: typos]

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#122

Post by jaytaylor »

hammock wrote: post #75

Title was edited from the original to censor the mention of Airbnb (a YC company)? Really, Dang?

I doubt it's explitly up to Dang, I remember seeing this same sort of thing back when PG was running the show too. And even if it is up to Dang's discretion..

Why would YC want to propagate negative content corresponding to their ventures?

As far as I'm aware, HN never promised to let us (the users) rule the roost this way. And they've never promised freedom from censorship.

To be clear, I don't mean any of this in a critical way. It simply is what it is.

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#123

Post by rdancer »

mleonhard wrote: post #94
rdancer wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more clearcut, all the cameras in all the neighbouring flats get disabled (this is actually the reason why jamming is illegal -- EM radiation doesn't know to respect property boundaries).

It looks like the script uses arp-scan to detect cameras. That is an ethernet-level tool so it will detect only devices on the wifi network your computer is connected to, not all networks within range.

Yep, you're right. An 802.11 client broadcasts the MAC address in every frame in plaintext, so a more straightforward approach would be to use `airodump-ng` to list the cams. The innocent bystander practical & legal concerns were probably the reason author did it this way.

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#124

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

jaytaylor wrote: post #122
hammock wrote: post #75

Title was edited from the original to censor the mention of Airbnb (a YC company)? Really, Dang?

I doubt it's explitly up to Dang, I remember seeing this same sort of thing back when PG was running the show too. And even if it is up to Dang's discretion.. Why would YC want to propagate negative content corresponding to their ventures? As far as I'm aware, HN never promised to let us (the users) rule the roost this way. And they've never promised freedom from censorship. To be clear, I don't mean any of this in a…

I thought there was an announcement a few months back explicitly talking about editorial independence at HN.

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#125

Post by jaytaylor »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #124
jaytaylor wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it's explitly up to Dang, I remember seeing this same sort of thing back when PG was running the show too. And even if it is up to Dang's discretion.. Why would YC want to propagate negative content corresponding to their ventures? As far as I'm aware, HN never promised to let us (the users) rule the roost this way. And they've never promised freedom from censorship. To be clear, I don't mean any of this in a…

I thought there was an announcement a few months back explicitly talking about editorial independence at HN.

That's a good point! I also recall the announcement [0] and related HN discourse [1].

Reviewing it now, it looks to me like they declared editorial independence without going into much detail. I especially don't see anything about guaranteeing the preservation of things that may harm the YC or affiliated brands.

[0] http://blog.ycombinator.com/two-hn-announcements

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10298512

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#126

Post by Kequc »

superuser2 wrote: post #41
andersonmvd wrote: post #4

One easier way to detect (without jamming afterwards), for iOS at least, is to install the "Fing" app, connect to the wifi and scan the network. Then you will know the connected devices and their names. Chances are that cameras will have easy to recognize names on them. EDIT: you'll get the MAC address too, so you can compare if they match camera companies.

I've got to hand it to Fing, they've convinced people to pay through the nose for something we used to do for free. Nmap. You want nmap.

Talk about not easy to use. I am not ashamed to say I can't figure this software out and I'm a software developer. What am I supposed to do in the case that it demands I set a target? Localhost? It'll tell me all about what I'm connected to.

192.168.1.1? That tells me what my router is connected to but that isn't necessarily what I want. 90% of output is just what it is doing. Oh you initialised, completed, initialised, completed, Unable to split netmask from target expression, script post-scanning, Read data files from: /usr/local/bin/../share/nmap.

I have no immediately identifiable use for this.

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#127

Post by superuser2 »

Kequc wrote: post #126
superuser2 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got to hand it to Fing, they've convinced people to pay through the nose for something we used to do for free. Nmap. You want nmap.

Talk about not easy to use. I am not ashamed to say I can't figure this software out and I'm a software developer. What am I supposed to do in the case that it demands I set a target? Localhost? It'll tell me all about what I'm connected to. 192.168.1.1? That tells me what my router is connected to but that isn't necessarily what I want. 90% of output is just what it is doing. Oh you initialised, completed, initialis…

True, the syntax is cryptic and unintuitive. Target is a subnet in CIDR notation, i.e. 192.168.1.0/24. The other various options describe the scan to perform. You can do simple pings, a full portscan, a quick portscan of the few most popular ports, and enable various IDS-evasion behaviors.

Fing provides something of a value-add by wrapping its sort of functionality in a nice UI. It's just amusing to see people discover Fing as though it were the first or only tool of its kind.

nmap is a universal stalwart of network security since the late 90s. It is the classic "hacking tool" long predating Metasploit, and Hollywood VFX people have even figured this out - it features in hacking scenes in Matrix Reloaded, Battle Royale, Bourne Ultimatum, and Elysium. I suspect ease of use has never been a priority, since its target audience is fellow open-source-savvy l33t haxxors.

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#128

Post by apricot »

viraptor wrote: post #118
the-dude wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I feel like I fully have the right to watch you as you repair my plumbing. If you are present: yes. I just realized the fight against surveillance is not particular with the NSA/GHQC and or the government. It will be a fight within.

I feel like this is a completely different area though. Would you ever rent services from someone saying: "I'll do the work in your house, but you can't look" ? I get the general idea of "I don't waive my right for privacy when I enter someone's house", but for work I just don't see any use case. If I can't see what you're doing in my house, you're not working in my house. What's the reason I'd ever want/need the opp…

> Would you ever rent services from someone saying: "I'll do the work in your house, but you can't look"?

For a second there, I thought I was in another proprietary software vs. free software thread...

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#129

Post by wutbrodo »

forgottenpass wrote: post #16

That disclaimer bugs me. Just admit you don't know what the fuck you're talking about and to consult a lawyer before using on equipment the user doesn't own and control. Instead it misleads the uninformed, and shows the slightly-informed you skimmed half a news article once.

Can you clarify the problem you have with the disclaimer? The important parts of the disclaimer seem to be the lines "this might be illegal, make sure to check, use with caution" as well as mention of de-authing being the potential problem. Those seem to me to be enough for an informed user to be able to do their research and enough for an uninformed user (or those unconfident in their ability to research it) to be sufficiently scared away.

Re: Detect and disconnect WiFi cameras

#130

Post by JabavuAdams »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #73
JabavuAdams wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Q: Why do you want a baby monitor? We got one as a gift, but hardly used it. Of course both my kids are little Darth Shnorkulas. I just can't really think of a scenario where the monitor helps. I mean I've had those panicked moments where I'm like "Is my kid dead, and I've just been sitting here playing computer games?" But either get up and check, or just keep playing. They almost never die.

My favorite part of asking any technical question is the mandatory "you don't actually want to do what you're asking us how to do" :) Pretty much most of what people said in response; if the baby's asleep and I'm cooking in the kitchen while watching a YouTube video and boiling something, it'd be nice to have a window displaying the kid in the corner so I can tell when it wakes up. Plus, it might be nice to tune in f…

> My favorite part of asking any technical question is the mandatory "you don't actually want to do what you're asking us how to do" :)

As I was writing my response, I realized that I was doing this, but it amused me. So yeah, touché.

Post reply on HN