Play along with NSA: The RAFTER unintentional radio emissions how-to | Hacker News Reader

Play along with NSA: The RAFTER unintentional radio emissions how-to

phasenoise.livejournal.com

97 pointswolframio26 comments

Then again, direct sampling SDR don't have an LO to leak, but do have a stable clock. There are some power supplies and digital systems with spread spectrum clocks. No reason one could not use a spread spectrum ADC clock, heavily over sampled of course, then average the samples where needed. There are some ADC they randomize the data bus for EMC.

Do they still have vans in the UK that driving around looking for un-taxed TV?

>Do they still have vans in the UK that driving around looking for un-taxed TV?

Yes, well sorta if you say you don't own a TV you'll get an inspection sometime within a period of 1-2 years. The problem in the UK now is that if you have anything with the BBC player on it you have to pay the TV license also. IIRC they also changed the rules regarding TV and now every screen above a certain size is considered a TV because a lot of people were buying flat screens that don't have a tuner installed or removing the tuner to not have to pay the license. For anyone who wonders the cost of the license is 145£ a year that's more than some low cost TV's would go on sales like Boxing Day.

You're wrong about when you have to pay the TV license. Currently the law states that you have to pay if you watch any streamed live TV (regardless of whether it is from the BBC, Sky or another TV provider). Having equipment capable of watching live TV does not automatically incur the license fee.

The law is changing in September, such that you will also be required to pay it if you use iPlayer - however, just having a system that can use iPlayer does not mean you have to pay it - it will be payable only if you use it to watch either live or catch-up TV on iPlayer (other catch-up applications such as ITV's or Channel 5's are not included in this). For some reason, the BBC has decided that either adding a login system or monitoring IP addresses that connect to iPlayer is not the way to go and their official line is that they will continue to monitor usage in the same way as they currently do.

There are many long arguments about whether the TV license vans even exist or if they use radio emissions from devices to monitor what you're watching - some contend that flat screen TVs do not produce sufficient emissions, but there is research that says otherwise.

> For some reason, the BBC has decided that either adding a login system or monitoring IP addresses that connect to iPlayer is not the way to go and their official line is that they will continue to monitor usage in the same way as they currently do.

Because it is completely impractical.

TV licenses are per property, not per person, so all that would happen is that people would register accounts at a friend's property and keep streaming.

IPs aren't tied to specific subscribers, and giving out a database of IPs to subscriber addresses would be a huge breach of privacy (as advertisers can use it also).

Plus, frankly, the majority of people pay for their TV licenses and this system would just frustrate legal owners. You'd be deploying a system that may impact less than 5% of viewers, doubt it would even pay for itself.

Has the snoopers charter gone through yet? Once ISPs are forced to store usage logs it is only a matter of time before TV licensing start attempting to get hold of logs for enforcement purposes.

Does that balance the rights of the 5% who don't watch live TV but have license officers peering through their windows or (potentially) using detector vans to look through their walls to see what they're watching?

I agree neither are perfect (or maybe even good) solutions, but it's still a trade off somehow.

> IPs aren't tied to specific subscribers, and giving out a database of IPs to subscriber addresses would be a huge breach of privacy (as advertisers can use it also).

Would that really stop BT? Or do you think that they wouldn't without getting paid first?

> (other catch-up applications such as ITV's or Channel 5's are not included in this)

This is wrong, any catch-up TV that was first transmitted on terrestrial TV is included.

Taken from [1], under the heading "Will I need a TV Licence for all on demand programmes?".

You won't need a licence to:

(1) Download or watch S4C TV on demand on BBC iPlayer or listen to radio on BBC iPlayer.

(2) Download or watch programmes on demand from other providers, such as:

* ITV Hub, All 4 or Demand 5

* BT Vision, Virgin Media or Sky Go

* Netflix or Now TV

* Apple, Roku or Amazon

[1] http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/bb...

I was looking for this info throughout the web, thanks. As an American I had never dreamed of a license to receive broadcast television, so this was all very informative.

I'm fairly sure that even if you own a box that can receive TV you don't need to pay the license if you don't actually use it to watch TV.

Having said that, given the recent changes in the laws I would recommend getting a TV licence anyway since the burden of proof lies on you to prove you don't use the device rather than them to prove that you do. Furthermore enforcement it is a criminal matter which adds a level of annoyance if you get convicted.

On not needing a license if you have a TV but don't watch TV: that's exactly what I said.

I disagree with your second point. I have not had a TV license for 4+ years now, even though I own several devices capable of receiving TV broadcasts. Every two years the TV licensing people get in touch and check that I still don't need a TV license. Very smooth, no issues.

I'd be very interested if you could show me the part of the law where they assume guilt. Since it is a criminal conviction, the usual standard is they'd need to have evidence "beyond reasonable doubt".

On first point apologies I misread your post.

However with regards your chances if enforcement decides you have infringed...

Some random statistics pulled from the newspaper hits on the first page of Google for "tv licensing conviction". 10% of cases in magistrates courts are TV licensing related (200,000 cases a year). If they decide that you are one of the people that they prosecute your case will take minutes to be heard on a day when the magistrate hears a lot of cases of cases. 90% of TV licensing cases that go to court end in conviction. Most of these cases are indeed open-and-shut (the classic is "why do I have to pay for a tv licence when I already pay Sky?" - which is pretty much an admission of guilt). Do you really expect a fair trial under these conditions?

It is a very interesting topic because almost all electronics devices have similar emissions , see http://www.cvel.clemson.edu/pdf/ED_Detection_2008.pdf

Someday thieves will use these techniques to locate who in a dark alley has the latest iPhone.

Fortunately, someday sooner, iPhones will become effectively useless to thieves.

As a victim of an iPhone theft - it was literally ripped out of my hand on a very public boulevard - I was grateful to be able to remotely wipe it within hours. I am even more grateful now that it will require a passcode within 12 hours if it doesn't get a touchID, and I really look forward to the day that "wipe and make unable to be re-authorized except by taking it to an Apple store, and also mark this phone as stolen" will be built in to "find my iPhone".

Since the phone hardware will only run software signed by Apple's private key, Apple can make a stolen phone effectively unusable. You need to have a key to put it in recovery mode, and even with signed software the hardware ID won't change, so the only signed code could be code that will check the hardware during the authorization process (I think this is already happening for anti-counterfeiting purposes.)

This cat-and-mouse game has been going on for a long time, even outside of spycraft.

E.g. radar detectors are illegal in several states, so of course there have been devices sold to law enforcement to allow them to detect these illegal radar detectors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_detector_detector

That's all probably moot now. I think law enforcement has moved mostly to using lasers, which are much more difficult to detect.

The handheld units are now universally laser, but there are a couple places where radar is still the norm. Some cops have car-mounted radar units so they don't need to get out of, or open the window of the car. These are great if you want to watch a highway that doesn't get much traffic or to catch speeders while your own car is moving. Both scenarios are very common in rural areas.

Also, automated speed detection systems (aka "photo radar") use radar because you don't have to aim it like you do a laser.

> This form of "electronic warfare" cuts both ways and since detector-detectors use a similar superheterodyne receiver, many early "stealth" radar detectors were equipped with a radar-detector-detector-detector circuit, which shuts down the main radar receiver when the detector-detector's signal is detected, thus preventing detection by such equipment.

TIL there exist radar detector detector detectors.

That Spycatcher book sounds interesting but looks intimidating. Can someone comment on its style and for-leisure readability?

It's an easy enough read, quite leisurely. Suitable for the beach or a rail commute. At least I thought so, but YMMV depending on what you'd normally read under those circumstances.

It's interesting book and easy to read.

Wright clearly had chip on his shoulder and it shows, but all facts in the book seem to be correct.

It became bestseller trough Streisand effect. UK tried to ban it's publication in Australia and it was forbidden in England. British newspapers were given gag orders.

An additional sidenote: the Australian lawyer who defended the publisher in the Spycatcher case is now the Prime Minister of Australia.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/sep/14/malco...

As I recall he was a bit of a conspiracy type as well with his 5th man theory, very Angleton. So yes the book is interesting but bear in mind the agenda as well

Right or wrong, his suspicion of Hollis was not crazy.

Was Roger Hollis a British patriot or Soviet spy? IWP panel uses argument mapping to investigate April 21, 2015 http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/was-roger-hollis...

http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20150417_ReportandChronologyHollis...

I enjoyed this book: "Spy Handler: Memoir of a KGB Officer"

https://www.amazon.com/Spy-Handler-Officer-Recruited-Hanssen...

It presents the story from the other side. It follows the carrier of the person who handled two highest profile defections to the Soviet Union: Hansen and Ames.

You can skip over some chapters of his childhood and early career. But has nice stories from Beirut (what used to be the Paris of the Middle East, also a popular playground for Spies), India, Australia and of course during his post as counter-intelligence chief in US.

It doesn't talk in depth about technical issues but more about handling of sources, procedures used, blackmailing tactics, honeypots.

Oh also talk about Robert Pelton's selling of Ivy Bells operation (probably a hundred million+ dollar cost) to the Russians for $35k. How they smuggled him out by shaving his beard and dressing him as a delivery worker.

Thank you!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com