Defense contractor Leonardo is promoting a new technology called SignalTrace that will package plate cameras with sensors that can scrape unique identifiers tied to your smart devices and make that data available to law enforcement.
Police, border security, and other government agencies already comprise Leonardo’s customer base, and with this technology, those clients seek to correlate footage from these cameras to phones, tablets, wearables, AirTags, and, naturally, the electronics inside cars themselves.
If SignalTrace can pick up your Bluetooth headphones, you can be sure it’ll also be looking out for your vehicle’s 5G hotspot, infotainment system, and even its tire pressure monitoring sensors. The company includes pet microchips as a potential entry point to tracking.
How many criminals are taking along their microchipped pets to and from their crimes?
Rhetorical question I know. They simply do not want to allow dissidents and undesirables the freedom of movement.
Also, if you contribute to a project like this, you are a traitor and should be treated as such.
How are they going to read pet microchips? They’re not broadcasting a signal constantly.
They’re not. Pet RFID chips are low frequency and have a read range of a few inches at most. By the time you pump enough energy in to get a signal a foot away, you’ve probably microwaved the pet and blown out the chip antenna.
I think they bounce rf waves off of them. Same as with money, larger bills have a magnetic strip, they can bounce rf waves off of them and see how much cash is out there if not shielded.
I, like most people, didn’t read the article. However, a lot of people use tracking tags on their pets collar so they can actually be tracked if they get out. I’m guessing that is what these cameras will be picking up.
hide your devices in a faraday cageXDrive around with a machine with 20k reprogrammable-MAC bluetooth radios that randomize the MAC address every 10 seconds ✓
Or buy cloned devices from China which all have the same MAC
Ya know, thats a good idea. I would make the time frame shorter depending on what the range of the transmitter is. If you switch while in range of the camera would it pick you up as two vehicles?
deleted by creator
There was some politician talking about how Section 702 is expiring on Pod Save America and he goes on explaining why it’s so great and needed and then one of his selling points is that there is a carve out for politicians and I couldn’t be more enraged when I heard that. Like I get the point he is making, but if politicians are above the law why would they care about the laws they are writing?
Politicians have been legalizing their corruption for a long time. Nothing will improve until we have a revolution and constitutional convention
deleted by creator
Normal citizens can do this to police.
I’m pretty sure if you follow a cop with a drone camera they are going to find a way to charge you with something.
A
largemany, distributed amount of objects isn’t a drone camera.Flock also uses drone cameras.
We just need batman level funding to do that
Eh it’s not that hard. The tech is just
- BLE radar.
- a webcam streaming to a cheap ALR program.
- Other antennas as needed.
Can’t be that expensive. How they come together (power, software) is an amount to work, along with maintenance.
Edit: oh and the threat of the violence monopoly being angry at you.
There is also the other path… Use the sensors they are installing everywhere, it’s not like security is a feature on most of these cameras.
The court ruled we can record police but they DOJ just indicted people in Milwaukee for this so we’ll see where that case goes.
This is how you make tech enthusiasts hate tech.
Or motivate them to tactically acquire new hardware.
The elites don’t want you to know this but the cameras in the park are free, you can take them home.
Strategically Transfer Equipment to Another Location
I had heard previously that shining multiple laser pointers at a camera will break it. Just a thought.
How powerful do we need to get for that. It’d be a clean way to work on the issue. You’ll need to be in line of sight though i imagine.
We got into this in detail on other social media. Some camera types are more susceptible, but the more powerful lasers are dangerous as shit , that could take out any camera. You need eye protection, and welding goggles might not do it because it’s different wavelengths. I’m not a technical guy so I can’t say precisely.
But the regular laser pointers can take out some cameras.
Scavenger hunt!
We have to quit these corporate electronics.
If they track all that other stuff then they are not ‘license plate cameras’.
Does GDPR protect Europeans from this kind of boring surveillance dystopia?
you don’t have to worry about GDPR anymore
https://efri.io/how-the-eus-digital-omnibus-now-openly-attacks-the-gdpr/
IANAL but it does have a bunch of exceptions allowing governments to do whatever they want.
I what?
I love anal
I Am Not A Lawyer
Soon? Oh boy do I have some bad news for this reporter
Mass surveillance by corporation
… pet microchips are passive LF RFID tags, they have a readable range of maybe 15cm? Unless they’ve figured out some way to power them at distance (or they’re sticking UHF tags in your dogs, which they arent) without frying the camera and giving everyone cancer, they’re inert. What weird marketing hype.
Industry researchers have managed to create directional antennas that read 125 kHz chips (the kind used in pets) from as far away as one meter. That’s most or all of the width of a sidewalk, if the reader is placed at ground level.
For unimplanted tags of unspecified size sure it’s technically possible to do, but I’ll let the article summarize why this is blatant marketing hype:
The ideal lab setup often fails miserably once you mount the reader near a gate or machine frame.
It’s worth saying: 1 meter is an ambitious goal for 125kHz. LF systems are intentionally short-range to prevent cross-talk. If you truly need 1-meter coverage, sometimes the real solution isn’t to push more current — it’s to rethink geometry, use multi-coil zones, or explore hybrid systems (LF for identity, HF/UHF for distance).
and then mention that the interference from the dermis vastly reduces the useful range of the tags, and that the article doesn’t actually specify what type of tag they’re designing for (or if it’s using a set orientation…).
Maybe time to start creating devices that spam various Bluetooth MACs and just leave them around… Raise the noise floor a bit
Nah, too easy to filter. Make them clone MACs they’ve seen, and simulate trips around the city.
Is this concept viable? Interesting.
Small single board computer with a solar battery could spam fake bluetooth MACs all day and night. You would need additional hardware to fake the 4G signals (and this would be illegal) or things in the unlicensed bands like tire pressure monitor sensors.
Your setup would cost about as much as theirs and they have infinity money, so absent some rich sponsor you’d be limited to screwing with a few nodes. A more effective use of battery power would be an angle grinder (this would also be illegal).
Ramp the signal up and down, add some doppler shift so it makes it think the signal is in motion. They would need multiple antennas to filter that out
I’d be a shame if someone hid an ESP32 nearby randomly broadcasting previously detected MAC addresses.
Despite doing an awful lot with ESP32s, Home assistant, and a bunch of LoRa stuff, I know very little about BLE. Would it be possible for folks to voluntarily add their MAC to a data base on gitlab, and have a ESP32 program that:
- Spammed out whatever the max reasonable number of random entries from that database is
- Updated it every-time it was on a specified WiFi So that every time I drove by one of these, not only do I look like a spacehulk of TPS, headphones, cars and cellphones, but I’m specifically helping someone appear somewhere not their location as well?
Thinking in terms of database management systems I would think these systems collect enough unique info that they probably can use ‘composite-keys’ to sort through collected content. If thats the case then they can probably filter out all of those fake MAC addresses with relative ease, but I like where your head is at.
they’re feeding them through LLMs and putting them in a database. maybe they’re sanitizing their inputs, maybe not.
Narrator: “They weren’t”
One of the reasons 80s tech is making a comeback.
ghost in the shell laughing man shit.
a couple years go by and they don’t know how to track people regularly anymore.
so if we bypass these sensors and algorithms, we become invisible in plain sight
Eventually you’ll be able to walk around invisibly simply by not carrying a phone.
deleted by creator
Mask/hood
Gait analysis. And no, a rock in your shoe doesn’t defeat it.
But a wheelchair does, checkmate atheists.
Wheel roll analysis?
Could one build a device that could overload these with fake data?
Or should we just use cordless angle grinders?
I don’t know anything about jamming these but I do know that DeWalt makes a pretty good cordless angle grinder
Its funnier than that, jammers are not legal, but data poisioning is. Leave a device near by that just rotates through IDs of all the signal types you know its listening for and it protects everyone passing by because their UIDs get lost in the noise.
I have one. Good shit.
Did we just initiate a kernel panic challenge?
Perhaps lasers could knock out the cameras.
