I prefer smartphones with kill switches, Librem 5 and Pinephone.
But you need to trust that they are actually working, and that the device was not intercepted and modified en route.
Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
71–80 of 205 posts
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#72I was hoping they would test chip bags, because it was a plot device in the most recent Terminator movie.
After searching, I found that Kaspersky has a blog post on the topic: https://usa.kaspersky.com/blog/terminator-dark-fate-chips/18...
It surprised me that chip bags were more effective in their test than cookie tins, but only when they double-bagged it
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#73Interesting experiment however his experience with tinfoil and metal boxes doesn't match mine. I placed my phone wrapped in a towel inside a metal box: as soon as I close the lid I can't ping the phone on local WiFi and can't reach it with call (it goes direct to voicemail as if the phone was switched off). The GPS doesn't record any position while in the box. I didn't test the Bluetooth though. Same thing for my car…
I would note that GPS is much more fragile than WiFi/Bluetooth/GSM. The GPS signals are already incredibly weak at the receiver.
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#74Bit of an aside but the ineffectiveness of tin foil hats to prevent government intrusion into our minds has been known for some time :) http://web.archive.org/web/20100708230258/http://people.csai...
I've lately started seeing claims on some of the forums that embrace things like vaccines contain 5G mind control chips claiming that lead effectively blocks government mind control and that is the real reason lead paint was banned, and that it is not actually harmful.
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#75I really like Snowden's recommended Faraday cage for phones or other devices of similar size: two drink-shaker cups[1]. Drink shakers are cheap and widely available. The average hotel room in any medium/large hotel chain probably includes a shaker as a standard item as part of the minibar. The simple two-cup style (as seen in [1]) is preferred over the fancier "strainer top" style because you can press the two cups t…
What's the physics behind being able to make a container light-tight with a couple of right angle corners yet radio waves seem to leak out like water?
Also, 20-30 Db of attenuation for light is already quite a lot. Whilst for a radio signal it is still very conceivable that 30Db of attenuation still allows for a signal to be received.
Our eyes simply aren't very sensitive instruments. And the visible part of the spectrum is uncharacteristically full of 'noise', so it makes some sense that our eyes don't need to detect any signals that are too far below the noise-floor.
That makes me wonder. How much 'darker' is any given bit of radio spectrum as compared to the visual spectrum earth at night.
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#76If all phones were mandated to have a physically isolating means to disable their wireless chips, we could avoid this problem all together.
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
A couple of right angles not really make it light tight either. I remember going caving and we would have to go 100m or more through many different turns before we all turned our lamps off and truly experienced perfect dark.
Are you familiar with daylight tanks for film processing? They work as advertised using right angles.
The last time I used a daylight tank was in the mid '90s so maybe newer models are different, but I believe they are made out of black/dark plastic? Several right angle turns of black plastic provides multiple opportunities for a visible-light photon to be absorbed into a black body where it should be re-radiated as infrared (heat).
A hole/leak in the metal wall of a Faraday cage is going to be a lot more reflective and can easily act like a crude waveguide[1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waveguide_%28radio_frequency%2...
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#78I built something in college that needed UL testing for RF emissions, and visited a facility in Long Island with a TEMPEST room about the size of my house. Was very memorable.
I also read an article this year by a guy that made his house radio-wave proof, because, he claimed, he was very sensitive to radio waves. It was WAY more involved than I would have guessed - for the same reasons discussed in this article and in this HN discussion. Nails and screws are a problem. Windows are a big problem. But still - how cool to be cut off from the onslaught of EM radiation.
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#79> "Wrap it in tin foil" is perhaps the most common advice [...] Unfortunately the results were extremely inconsistent [...] 90 dB attenuation in one test would produce only 50 dB the next time [...] You would have no way to tell whether you've managed to fold and seal it adequately well On the other hand, aluminium foil is incredibly commonly available, if not in a kitchen draw, it will be at the nearest shop. Althou…
I'm not an expert on Faraday cages, would the effects stack if you wrapped your phone in aluminum foil, then put it in a cookie tin?
Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags
#80If you are sufficiently concerned, why not mod the phone to add a physical battery disconnect? Would this not provide 100% protection?
Even better: practice defense in depth and do both.