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

mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

joshhorne.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 192 posts

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#151

Post by r_hoods_ghost »

transpute wrote: post #49

> Because mmWave radar doesn’t process visual light, what it sees is not personally identifiable. With machine learning improvements, identification and more are possible. From a 2021 paper on IEEE 802.11bf Wi-Fi Sensing, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.14918.pdf > Indeed, it has been shown that SENS-based classifiers can infer privacy-critical information such as keyboard typing, gesture recognition and activity tracking…

And lets be honest here, mmWave radar won't be used on its' own, but instead will be used to in conjunction with visible light and other forms of privacy violating sensing technology to increase the resolution of the panopticon.

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#152

Post by [deleted] »

zardo wrote: post #140
hornej wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

all sensors/technology are invasive to a degree, but I would argue radar fairs well in usefulness and anonymity in comparison to other sensors. if the data were leaked, would you rather have some of your vitals and point cloud data exposed, or a video of you taking a shower?

I'd rather neither. I've handled the latter by not installing a camera in the shower.

[deleted]

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#153

Post by Sanzig »

marbu wrote: post #132
transpute wrote: post #49

> Because mmWave radar doesn’t process visual light, what it sees is not personally identifiable. With machine learning improvements, identification and more are possible. From a 2021 paper on IEEE 802.11bf Wi-Fi Sensing, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.14918.pdf > Indeed, it has been shown that SENS-based classifiers can infer privacy-critical information such as keyboard typing, gesture recognition and activity tracking…

This statement about privacy of mmWave radar you raised made me wonder if someone haven't already tried to implement SAR[1] with mmWave radar, and quick search reveals that indeed, this is being looked into, eg.: - https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=9136646 - https://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.00636.pdf That said, it doesn't mean that every mmWave radar could work as SAR. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S…

Fundamentally, any radar that can be configured to capture coherent data (ie: amplitude and phase rather than just amplitude) can be a SAR. SAR is basically post-hoc digital beamforming to sharpen the image. If you have amplitude and phase information (which you can get if your radar can be configured to output raw quadrature baseband) you can do SAR processing. There's no fancy hardware required, SAR is largely a software problem.

You do also need information about where the sensor was located at each pulse, but it doesn't have to be extremely precise - there are algorithms that do iterative processing to accomplish motion compensation.

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#154

Post by hwillis »

transpute wrote: post #49

> Because mmWave radar doesn’t process visual light, what it sees is not personally identifiable. With machine learning improvements, identification and more are possible. From a 2021 paper on IEEE 802.11bf Wi-Fi Sensing, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.14918.pdf > Indeed, it has been shown that SENS-based classifiers can infer privacy-critical information such as keyboard typing, gesture recognition and activity tracking…

What an insane thing to say. 60 GHz is more than enough to get completely recognizable images with a sufficient transceiver

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Millimeter-wave-40-60GHz...

There's a huge difference between a phased array scanner and the transceivers described in the OP, but mm waves are absolutely not "privacy-preserving"

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#155

Post by ctdonath »

smegsicle wrote: post #62
parsimo2010 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right on. The whole "mm wave radar is detail rich but gives privacy" line is a contradiction. Any data that is detailed enough to be useful is detailed enough to be a privacy concern. While it might not be the same as leaking nude photos from someone's camera, radar data is something that needs to be carefully thought out. Radar data from a car can provide information about people's driving behavior even without loca…

> leaking nude photos from someone's camera whatever happened to that meme about common ccd cameras picking up uv images that make out details through eg swimsuits, but hopefully filtered and removed in software before making it to the images?

Those camera manufacturers quickly eliminated that capability, likely via optical filtering. That was about 20 years ago. Consumer-grade cameras do not have that ability nowadays (bad publicity).

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#156

Post by iam-TJ »

leohonexus wrote: post #33

Very dumb question: If mmWave is operating at 60GHz, how would it be possible for processors (which are operating at less than 1/10th of that clock rate) to process that sampling rate?

In summary, 60 GHz is the CARRIER frequency (the central frequency) around which a modulated signal is centred or otherwise aligned. The modulated signal BANDWIDTH (channel width) is where the signal information is encoded and is going to be measured in Mega-Hertz (MHz).

E.g. for 802.11a/n/c the CARRIER is in the 5.x GHz band but the modulated signal BANDWIDTH will be one of 20, 40, 80, 160 MHz around a central frequency [0]. The 'base' 20MHz bandwidth at best performance (signal to noise ratio) will be able to modulate (encode) at a raw 54Mbits/second.

Intel publish [1] an easy-to-read set of tables that show the relationships between standards, frequencies, bandwidths, MIMO, and modulation schemes.

[0] simplified - actually there is a (frequency-hopping or direct sequence) spread-spectrum method

[1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000...

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#157

Post by nexuist »

mateo1 wrote: post #129
hornej wrote: post #2

I've been following and building mmWave radar stuff for a little over a year now and I wanted to write an intro to help anyone get up to speed on how it works, why it's special, and what's been happening in the space.

Please write up how to make a simple passive detector so people can have a chance to know if they are being tracked. This is going to be in every home in 10 years embedded in phones, TVs, smart speakers. All public venues. Trams, buses, subways. Everywhere. But most importantly homes. Every. Single. Person. 24/7. Breathing rate. Abnormal motions. Current location. Current activity. Maybe, just maybe if we raise a som…

How is this any worse than smartphone tracking today? What does it matter if I buy technology that tracks me because I feel like it'd be useful to me?

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#158

Post by kwertyoowiyop »

waterproof wrote: post #143
transpute wrote: post #49

> Because mmWave radar doesn’t process visual light, what it sees is not personally identifiable. With machine learning improvements, identification and more are possible. From a 2021 paper on IEEE 802.11bf Wi-Fi Sensing, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.14918.pdf > Indeed, it has been shown that SENS-based classifiers can infer privacy-critical information such as keyboard typing, gesture recognition and activity tracking…

Yeah. Up front they say: > what it sees is not personally identifiable Then later on in the article: > [the new HomePod could] [detect] the user's identity based on their gait, height, and physical profile Uh-huh. …did they read their own article?

It just depends on whether they’re talking to Congress or the Police.

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#159

Post by hedora »

jasondclinton wrote: post #19

I've been waiting for someone to finally make a consumer stud finder that works and this just might finally happen after this deregulation of the spectrum. The construction industry would hand over wheelbarrows full of money for a BLE phone-paired puck that located studs and pipes behind drywall. Someone could even sell a "pro" version that combined the data from multiple pucks to render a 3D point cloud of the insid…

Most studs have things (like drywall) nailed to them, and the nails are usually made of iron. So, all you need is a high-power rare earth magnet. I use a particularly strong refrigerator magnet.

If you want to splurge (or are willing to couple trips to the coffee shop), you could buy one (or two) of these:

https://www.homedepot.com/p/C-H-Hanson-Magnetic-Stud-Finder-...

I was tipped off to these by the someone in the construction industry. He buys a few whenever they're in stock, so that he can have them in every toolbox, lose them, etc.

Note that, once you find a nail head, you can just leave the magnet hanging in place. If you have two, you can hang both, then use a straightedge or chalk-line to mark the point between the two where you want to make a hole. The fancy radar puck thing can't do that. (Maybe, someday, fancy AR goggles will solve that problem, but we're a long way off from that.)

Re: mmWave radar, you won't see it coming

#160

Post by throwaway0a5e »

rvnx wrote: post #86
john567 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My reaction as well. Given how many ways there are to uniquely identify individuals this isn't a selling point for the tech. It's just a different kind of camera and of course it can identify people it's just that it will not reproduce a picture of people's faces to do so.

Not yet, because the resolution is too small for now but you can count on progress. Thinking more globally, couldn't 5G mmWave make it possible to get to know exactly how people are moving ? (let's say, someone gets out of his house, the government can know it in realtime, even without a phone, because the mmWave could map its position).

>couldn't 5G mmWave make it possible to get to know exactly how people are moving

If you've got the signal density to illuminate the stuff you want to look at there's no reason you couldn't.

Post reply on HN