Live data from Hacker News

Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

mattblaze.org

81–90 of 205 posts

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#81

This is a super cool blog post. However I think it alludes to a much larger problem. For many products today, it’s very difficult or impossible for most people to verify the product works. For a network switch, there are free and open source tools like iPerf to test and verify speeds are as advertised. For a faraday box, you have to go through all these steps (and knowledge learned) just to be able to test these. Wha…

It's supposed to be called the Federal Trade Commission.

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#82
post #33

> "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…

Microwave ovens make for poor Faraday cages. The problem is that you only need 30-60dB to "keep the power in" while you probably want at least 100dB to "keep the signals out." You can test this: put your phone in the microwave and try to call it. Over the years I have had about a 75% success rate. Other household appliances tend to be even worse; any gaps in metallic seals effectively turn into slot antennas and let…

For the sake of keeping people from doing stupid things.

DO NOT MICROWAVE YOUR PHONE.

The test involves placing your phone in the microwave and closing the door without turning the microwave on. I'd unplug the microwave before trying this.

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#83

This is a super cool blog post. However I think it alludes to a much larger problem. For many products today, it’s very difficult or impossible for most people to verify the product works. For a network switch, there are free and open source tools like iPerf to test and verify speeds are as advertised. For a faraday box, you have to go through all these steps (and knowledge learned) just to be able to test these. Wha…

> For many products today, it’s very difficult or impossible for most people to verify the product works.

Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use regular expressions." Now they have two problems. - Jamie Zawinski via Coding Horror [0]

To your point, maybe Zawinski's aphorism is broader than regexp.

The quote investigation [1] linked from CH is well worth reading.

0. https://blog.codinghorror.com/regular-expressions-now-you-ha...

1. http://regex.info/blog/2006-09-15/247

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#84
I actually have a little cookie box, which is lined with heavy aluminum foil, which I put in a steel lunch box.

Perhaps it sounds like overkill, but it’s the only way I seem to be able to fully isolate the devices.

That said, I’d probably just buy a bag... but I’ve been trying to keep it with what I have lying around the house.

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#85
post #15

I 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…

> The average hotel room in any medium/large hotel chain probably includes a shaker as a standard item as part of the minibar.

Maybe the hotels you stay in, Bond, James Bond.

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#86
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume for the same reason you ground your home, building up charges is a great way for Bad Things to happen.

Why would a phone pouch/box build up great charge? You don't ground your home because of charge buildup either - grounding is there to decrease the chance a thunderbolt will run through precious things, like house walls, people, electric wiring etc.

You absolutely want to ground your home due to charge buildup, I have seen the exploded appliances, no lightning required.

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#87

My understanding is that a Faraday Cage, of any size, relies on a proper grounding system to work at all so these boxes and rfid blocking pockets etc all seem to be tinfoil hats parading as space age metamaterials.

Apparently not: "Small Faraday cages with no conductors penetrating the shield do NOT need to be grounded."

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#88
post #81

This is a super cool blog post. However I think it alludes to a much larger problem. For many products today, it’s very difficult or impossible for most people to verify the product works. For a network switch, there are free and open source tools like iPerf to test and verify speeds are as advertised. For a faraday box, you have to go through all these steps (and knowledge learned) just to be able to test these. Wha…

It's supposed to be called the Federal Trade Commission.

I suppose the FDA is also supposed to make sure our food isn't leaded?

These agencies seem to test one vector while ignoring everything else. I don't trust them.

https://www.consumerreports.org/food-safety/your-herbs-and-s...

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#89
post #15

I 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…

Now would be a great time to sell a ton of mints that just happens to fit an iPhone max with a case inside.

“Security Mints - sweet & secure”.

Maybe a kickstarter?

Re: Testing Phone-Sized Faraday Bags

#90
post #33

> "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…

Microwave-ovens definitely don't leak below 2.4 GHz. Any frequency above that is a non-issue for microwave-oven operator safety. It also wouldn't be an issue for any communication device transmitting below 2.4 GHz. If you want to shut down 5 GHz communication then a microwave-oven would be leaky. 60 GHz: it shouldn't matter since it needs LoS anyway. Also, remember to ground your faraday cages.

The width of the area around microwave doors looks suspiciously close to lambda/4 for 2.4 GHz (~3 cm) on pretty much every microwave I've ever seen - I'd almost be surprised if that construction isn't tuned to reflect 2.4 GHz, which would make it a very leaky container at say 0.9/1.8 GHz.
Post reply on HN