Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
China Crime Privacy Security Transportation Technology

Chinese Spying Devices Installed On Hong Kong Cars 171

Posted by timothy
from the it's-coming-from-inside-the-faraday-cage dept.
jjp9999 writes "Spying devices disguised as electronic border cards have been secretly installed on thousands of Hong Kong vehicles by Chinese authorities, according to a Hong Kong newspaper. A translation of the story states Chinese authorities have been installing spying devices on all dual-plate Chinese-Hong Kong vehicles for years, enabling a vast network of eavesdropping across the archipelago."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chinese Spying Devices Installed On Hong Kong Cars

Comments Filter:
  • It's China... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Stormwatch (703920) <<rodrigogirao> <at> <hotmail.com>> on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @02:02AM (#36432838) Homepage

    Nothing they do surprises me anymore.

    • We took Japan as the big role model for society when it was still market leader 'til their bubble burst, now China is the new role model. Soon we'll see something similar here, of course only to find your car easier if it gets stolen or something like that. And how conveniently easy it is to implement, stick the bug into the license plate! You have to have one to operate your vehicle, it's government issued and it's illegal to tamper with it already. Beauty!

      • by tmach (886393) on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @02:31AM (#36432970)

        Actually, the current suggestion is to put a device on your car to track the mileage so they can tax you based on how much you drive.

        http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/18/news/economy/gas_tax_drivers/?section=money_latest [cnn.com]

        • by mrchaotica (681592) * on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @03:09AM (#36433080)

          ...so they can tax you based on how much you drive.

          Which is blatant BS (on their part, not yours), since if they only cared how much you drive (rather than where and when), then all they'd have to do is check the fucking odometer!

          • Or tax at the fuel stating.

            • by jesseck (942036)
              That's where they think they can get us- many people don't realize that the price of gasoline already includes taxes. Of course, they claim it's because some of us (like me) drive a 12 MPG SUV, and others a 40 MPG compact, making the fuel taxes unfair. Personally, though, I don't care- I bought the SUV for a reason.
              • by Nadaka (224565)

                Road wear is relative to the weight of the vehicle, so your 12 MPG SUV causes more damage per mile than the 40 MPG compact. That makes the gas taxes used for road maintenance more fair (at least in that respect).

                • by slapout (93640)

                  But if you need to haul a lot of people/things an SUV is just one vehicle on the road whereas you would need more than one of the compact cars.

          • That depends on whether they want to use variable road pricing, which was an idea mooted in the UK a few years back. The idea being that you get charged more for driving on roads that are more congested. Or something like that.

            • If variable road pricing is incompatible with the Bill of Rights, well then they don't get to do the fucking variable road pricing!

          • by tehcyder (746570)

            ...so they can tax you based on how much you drive.

            Which is blatant BS (on their part, not yours), since if they only cared how much you drive (rather than where and when), then all they'd have to do is check the fucking odometer!

            Yes, because it would be much more efficient for the government to pay people to go around writing down people's mileages from their odometers, after first identifying the owner, getting them to open up the car, writing each one down and collating them each day...

            • GPS tracking would also be an efficient source of violating our privacy. I expect also for the devices to track speed and speed limits, eventually allowing them to ticket you automatically (which would suck massively).

            • by operagost (62405)
              In most states in the US, there is a safety inspection once a year when the odometer reading can be taken with absolutely no inconvenience to the owner.
            • by TWX (665546)

              Every time an inspection at a government facility is conducted for emissions or safety (as many places require) the odometer reading is noted. When a vehicle is registered the odometer reading is noted.

              It wouldn't be all that hard to start conducting equipment or emissions inspections in the few places that currently lack them, and while doing so, check the odometer.

              Mind you, I don't think it's right, and I'm much more in favor of fuel taxes, but it's certainly not hard to do it.

            • I hope you're not serious. Your car must be inspected once a year. Make odometer reading part of the inspection process.
            • I don't know about your country, but in mine you have to take your car for inspection every year. Think it would be too much a hassle for the mechanic to check the odometer while he's at it, and cash in the tax as well? The whole deal could be kept in a database where the garage has to enter your current amount, get a statement what to cash in from you and have to transfer it with the rest of the tax they have to pay anyway, being a business.

              It would actually be more efficient than inventing a new system th

            • Holy strawman argument, Batman!

              Don't you realize that all they'd really need to do is look at the odometer once a year when you renew the registration? Hell, if the jurisdiction requires emissions testing or an inspection, then the info is already there on the report!

            • by Nadaka (224565)

              If they want to do mileage based taxation, just do an odometer check when you get your tag renewed.

            • by JBMcB (73720)

              Yes, because it would be much more efficient for the government to pay people to go around writing down people's mileages from their odometers, after first identifying the owner, getting them to open up the car, writing each one down and collating them each day...

              Or how about a transmitter that ONLY TRANSMITTED YOUR ODOMETER READING, instead of every place you've driven?

              Or, if you want to do variable road pricing, have it figure out how much you owe based on where you've driven and just transmit that?

          • yep, and if it is that they want to allot it based on particular road usage just get anonymous cellular tower use data and allot it proportionally. The privacy issue is somewhat moot now though, as they can already track you without something specifically installed in your car between cellular gps and high speed cameras (which they are already using instead of toll booths in south florida: http://miami.cbslocal.com/2011/02/20/cash-less-tolls-have-begun-on-the-florida-turnpike/ [cbslocal.com]
          • by spauldo (118058)

            Yeah, but if you crossed state lines, then your state would be collecting tax for miles driven in another state.

            You might think that states wouldn't care about that sort of thing, thinking that it would even out, but IFTA [wikipedia.org] does just that for commercial vehicles - my company has to keep track of where I drive and submit that paperwork to Oklahoma along with a nice fat check, and Oklahoma pays the other states what is owed them.

            Before IFTA, you had to buy fuel permits from every state you operated in, keep tra

            • You might think that states wouldn't care about that sort of thing

              On the contrary, I know full well that states (as well as municipalities) would be up in arms about it. My response to those concerns?

              "Tough shit; the People's Rights come first!"

              Besides, my solution would be to measure aggregate road usage and dole out the funds to each jurisdiction accordingly. They don't need to know who is driving on each chunk of road; they only need to know how many.

      • stick the bug into the license plate!

        I do wonder how they work technically. I mean, there can't be much space for a battery in such a licence plate. You can't use RFID like technology at a distance of more than 10-50 meters, which would make actual eavesdropping a challenge even for a government. If it is to have any semblance of being secret obviously you can't use the car's battery or electrical systems.

        Very weak radio transmitters still need about a watt for reasonable communications (ie. cell phones). So if you wish to use something like t

        • by nzac (1822298)

          Read the article, the battery is 3 AA(A)s in plastic.

          You don't need a anything close to that to have them on standby. They could activate them when they scan them crossing the border for a period of time with a known bit sequence of arbitrary length.
          The article writer/PI is pretty bad though at least one of the crystals is the clock for the microchip no (need for two carriers). To me is looks like the black one is providing a clock to a high power transistor for the carrier the blue is just too close to the

        • stick the bug into the license plate!

          I do wonder how they work technically. I mean, there can't be much space for a battery in such a licence plate. You can't use RFID like technology at a distance of more than 10-50 meters, which would make actual eavesdropping a challenge even for a government. If it is to have any semblance of being secret obviously you can't use the car's battery or electrical systems.

          Very weak radio transmitters still need about a watt for reasonable communications (ie. cell phones). So if you wish to use something like this for, say a year (they're valid for a year), you'd need a tiny, tiny 31 MJ (that's megajoule) battery, or 3 KWh, but it can't be much larger than a watch battery.

          So how the hell do you keep that thing powered ?

          For that matter, which radio do you use ? Cell network ? It would require a hell of a lot of people in the loop.

          Perhaps they are very low power transmitters and there is a network of receivers... perhaps the bugs have data storage which they dump when in range of a receiver. Who knows maybe its a mesh or p2p system. But enough clueless speculation - from actual article, their is more than one type of device. One type is about the size of a PDA (so no need to speculate about nano batteries and friggin lasers) with a range of around 20km. Don't forget the penisula is not that big. The ones in the article are fitted to

          • by rednip (186217)

            Yea, there's an idea for eavesdropping, place a bug in a spot with a lot of general noise when operating and where few people have conversations. If they required that you put it on your dashboard and announce yourself first, then I'd start to wonder such things. If this is the best that Red China can come up with, well then, no wonder communism is on the wane.

            All the 'spying' that they need is done just by being active and identifiable at specific points, like ezpass. Perhaps the thing was just built by

            • Yea, there's an idea for eavesdropping, place a bug in a spot with a lot of general noise when operating and where few people have conversations. If they required that you put it on your dashboard and announce yourself first, then I'd start to wonder such things. If this is the best that Red China can come up with, well then, no wonder communism is on the wane.

              All the 'spying' that they need is done just by being active and identifiable at specific points, like ezpass. Perhaps the thing was just built by a committee, or someone who wanted to sell extra parts, or had a large engineering margin. People get so worked up about the silliest of menudo, while the real suppression becomes 'old news' and accepted. Oddly all this does is make them far less capable of spying than the City of London (when if comes to cars, but I'm sure that they keep great records on people).

              It seems unlikely it'd be used for mass spying - so much easier to use, say, fucking mobile phones! (sigh). But if you were trying to catch people who think the police listen in to their mobile phones anyway - like smugglers (who are right) - then it's probably a good idea (reasonable return on investment) but I suspect it would be targeted - not blanketed.

              Test your sarcastic ideas against reality - when was the last time anyone ever got convicted on the basis of a in car recording device huh? It's trivial

          • by fliptout (9217)

            Lots of things are very profitable to smuggle in to China. Foreign cigarettes are a big one.

          • by onepoint (301486)

            >>And that's where I get stuck - trying to figure out what is profitable to smuggle into China. Milk products made from milk?

            The one item that has a huge markup is gold. the spread is up to 20%, and small 5 gram bars have the largest mark-up

        • by mikael (484)

          Even a cheap PAYG mobile phone has bluetooth and voice recording capability (eg. ZTE). Using a laptop bluetooth dongle it is possible to set the phone to record audio to files and stream off the audio files through Bluetooth from a distance of 10+ metres. No mobile phone network is required. The maximum range really depends on the strength and sensitivity of the other party.
          Since there is around 64 Mbytes of internal memory, so it really makes me wonder what it is going on inside a device like that.

      • We took Japan as the big role model for society when it was still market leader 'til their bubble burst, now China is the new role model. Soon we'll see something similar here, of course only to find your car easier if it gets stolen or something like that. And how conveniently easy it is to implement, stick the bug into the license plate! You have to have one to operate your vehicle, it's government issued and it's illegal to tamper with it already. Beauty!

        Until some arsehole steals your license plates. Oh, wait....

      • Hey gamers, help me out with your combo skills!

        When .gov quits pretending to actually be for citizens, they'll just pull up the covers with the nice Corps they're in bed with. Let's pair the last two semi-consecutive stories in a row.

        "Location aware apps from Adobe. Spying from Government."

        Why are we now falling for the spin? Are we that desperate for Minority Report style ads?

    • Yeah really, pretty clumsy effort.. In the 'west' we do it right, we build the device into the car.. inside your rear view mirror is a hidden camera and mic

    • Re:It's China... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Mistlefoot (636417) on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @02:33AM (#36432974)
      Isn't this legal for the government to do in the US as well? Not much they do surprises me either though....
      • by AHuxley (892839)
        In the US they use your phone or in nav system.
        http://www.zdnet.com/news/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eavesdropping-tool/150467 [zdnet.com]
        With the new GPS rules and very friendly telcos, expect ever more data to be available to the FBI with less oversight.
        http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/13fbi.html [nytimes.com] ie. expect to be of interest after 'five meetings of a group" and enjoy terms like "preliminary investigation", “proactively” ect.
        Or just fix a device to your car as a nice and legal "tracking beacon" t
      • In the USA they put transponders in your tires, and sensors in the roads to track you. You must be new here if you've not heard about that (conspiracy theory).
  • In China, I'd think that you'd be getting off very lightly if you were charged with tampering those.

    • by wisty (1335733)

      In China, it's quite common for people to tamper with their license plates. Taping a CD over them (to blind cameras) is popular. Swapping your plates for forged military / police plates is also done, but a little riskier - some farmer got sentenced to death for "impersonating the military" - driving with military plates to avoid toll booths, but the sentence was overturned and I think the judge got sacked.

      Heavy charges are reserved for property crimes, drug related crimes, violent crimes, and anything *remo

      • by cyfer2000 (548592)
        The farmer was not sentenced to death, he was sentenced life in jail. The charge was that farmer evaded 3.8 million Yuan (~$600,000) in toll by dressing in fake military uniform and putting fake military license plates on his truck. Apparently pretending to be a military personnel is illegal everywhere I know. And apparently the Chinese highway toll is freaking high.
  • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @02:24AM (#36432950)

    Those who RTFA can read this:

    Apple Daily says they took the device to a university professor and a private investigator, both of whom attested to the espionage potential of the units.

    or this:

    An Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at City University of Hong Kong, Zheng Liming, took apart one of the devices and confirmed that it can listen in on conversations

    and see a photo in which a hole in the plastic shell is marked "cavity for receiving sound" (a microphone would have been more convincing), two quartz crystals (the likes of which can be found in almost every modern electronic devices) marked "generate carrier frequency for radio transmission" and a nondescript chip that "turns voice signals into digital information".

    You know what? I think I'll take a photo of my cellphone's innards, photoshop conveniently spy-sounding labels into the photo, bring my cellphone to a university professor who will testify that my device has a microphone, a crystal, an antenna and a processor that definitely has the potential to turn it into spying device then write an article about it.

    Some journalism...

    • Um, except that it wasn't your cellphone. It was a device that is installed for 'inspection and "quarantine"' reasons (secondary quotes because quarantine doesn't make sense in almost any context) by a government agency and does not seem to have any business even being there let alone containing voice to digital and a radio transmission circuits.

    • by wvmarle (1070040)

      It is taped to the windshield. It does not seem to have any (external) power supply. How could such a device be able to transmit a serious quantity of data, over a distance of 20 km, with mountains in between? Hong Kong may be small but it's hilly, with peaks of almost 1000m tall. From most parts of this 20km radius there is no line of sight to Shenzhen - all mountains in the way, except for the north-western part of Hong Kong which is mostly protected wetland. Such transmission if at all possible takes a s

      • It is taped to the windshield. It does not seem to have any (external) power supply. How could such a device be able to transmit a serious quantity of data, over a distance of 20 km, with mountains in between? Hong Kong may be small but it's hilly, with peaks of almost 1000m tall. From most parts of this 20km radius there is no line of sight to Shenzhen - all mountains in the way, except for the north-western part of Hong Kong which is mostly protected wetland. Such transmission if at all possible takes a significant amount of power, a battery that fit in there would run out in hours or less. On these points alone I'd call this story total nonsense.

        Last time I checked the Chinese had no problems setting up receivers in Hong Kong, well, less than before it became Chinese territory anyway! So I'll have to call nonsense to your nonsense.

        They have been installed since 1997 - that means most are in place for some four years now. The only way to keep it working is if it's a passive device, using external radio sources as their power source, as is typical for devices used for automatic toll payment and similar purposes.

        Please link to the source of your information? And why would a device the size of a mobile phone have to be passive? It's not like they haven't always been an obvious electronic device.

        I was in Hong Kong three years ago and what you are saying was bullshit then. The licenses are good for ten years - but the displayed perm

        • by wvmarle (1070040)

          Active broadcasting a signal takes a lot of power. A typical mobile phone can last maybe 10-12 hours on a charge, when talking. Up to two weeks standby. For these devices well let's be generous, make it double the time, that's 24 hours of broadcasting signals. The rest of the year: no battery. And I didn't see a battery on the photos.

          As I said, and what you handily ignored: no visible power source on any of the photos. An external power source is a necessity for this kind of broadcast if it has to last a w

          • by makomk (752139)

            And I didn't see a battery on the photos.

            That'll be the three cylinders covered in blue plastic taking up most of the space within the casing. At a guess, anyway.

          • by Demonoid-Penguin (1669014) on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @06:41AM (#36433832) Homepage

            Active broadcasting a signal takes a lot of power. A typical mobile phone can last maybe 10-12 hours on a charge, when talking. Up to two weeks standby. For these devices well let's be generous, make it double the time, that's 24 hours of broadcasting signals. The rest of the year: no battery. And I didn't see a battery on the photos.

            What have you been smoking? There is only one photo in TFA linked article. Look again - see the blue shrink wrapped batteries? [theepochtimes.com] Still no? How about now? [youtube.com]

            The device will not fit in your shirt pocket - it's a little larger than an iPhone (I and other posters have seen these devices). As for your proof - again, what the fuck have you been smoking? A phone and this device have little in common when it comes to power consumption (see if you can work out why). Hint - I can buy devices on the open market that will transmit an audio signal for more 12 months - and they will fit in my pocket. No nuclear power pack involved. Don't go basing you idea of surveillance technology on what the FBI leaves attached to the bottom of Arab students cars - you can bet the Chinese have access to far more sophisticated devices than I can buy.

            The rest of your screed is pure castles in the air - try getting off the sofa and visiting the world. China == Hong Kong - lip-service is the only difference between one side of the border and the other. The speculated range of the devices is just that. Speculated. As for signal interception - really, are you fucking serious? Do you hear mobile telephone calls on your transistor? (and that's a GHz crystal in the photo you can't see - just under the battery pack that doesn't exist).

            Consider it - every insightful argument you've come up with is wrong - you can't see the obvious, and you can't even count up to two properly. And no, advertisements don't count as pictures. But hey - don't let your ignorance to stop from being an expert in Chinese spying devices, it never stopped you from making laughably clueless statements about the nature of emails or programming.

            A dollar gets me ten you've got some weasely denial.

            • by wvmarle (1070040)

              Please put of your tinfoil hat and stop ignoring what I'm actually writing.

              First of all, I am a Hong Kong permanent resident. And still live there.

              Secondly: what is really in that blue shrink wrap? May be batteries indeed. I can't see: it's shrink wrapped.

              Now let's look at the numbers that I "can not add up" and you don't even bother to look at. So let's say that blue thing is a battery. My half-year old phone can pack 5.6 Wh in it's battery, it looks like my battery is roughly half the size of that blue

              • First of all, I am a Hong Kong permanent resident. And still live there.

                And yet you've never seen one of these devices.... and you have only considered a receiver (if there's only one) being on the mainland?

                Secondly: what is really in that blue shrink wrap? May be batteries indeed. I can't see: it's shrink wrapped.

                So because you can't see it (but everyone else can) it doesn't exist. And the video is fake too is it? Because the guy in the video looks just like the guy he's supposed to be. Is that Western propaganda?

                Now let's look at the numbers that I "can not add up" and you don't even bother to look at. So let's say that blue thing is a battery. My half-year old phone can pack 5.6 Wh in it's battery,

                I don't doubt you about your phone battery, though you clearly have no grasp as to what consumes power in your phone. Your phone receives a signal. Your phone has a screen

              • by b0bby (201198)

                I don't live in Hong Kong, but those blue batteries look just like the battery packs you use in cordless telephones. I bet you'd get a decent life out of them if you were only waking up the device when you were recording or transmitting.

          • by Fzz (153115)
            If there are 20,000 of these devices, they wouldn't have the bandwidth for all of them to be transmitting simultaneously. But that would be a stupid design anyway - it's not how you'd build such a device.

            What you'd do is include an RFID-style receiver. You'd interrogate this from some roadside equipment (such as you'd find at tollbooths or on the approach to customs, or anywhere interesting things happen). The receiver responds with its ID, and if they want to enable that particular transmitter, they'd

            • by wisty (1335733)

              Or, it's just the guts of a cheap mobile phone. It's only installed on the occasional "high risk" targets (frequent border crossers), and immediately swapped as they pass customs. Everyone with a bug gets "inspected", and the "inspected" cars get their bugs serviced or swapped for a non-bugged plate.

          • by hey! (33014)

            A typical mobile phone can last maybe 10-12 hours on a charge, when talking. Up to two weeks standby. For these devices well let's be generous, make it double the time, that's 24 hours of broadcasting signals. The rest of the year: no battery. And I didn't see a battery on the photos.

            The blue plastic wrapped thing is the battery pack. It contains three cells the size of a AA. A single alkaline AA has more energy than most fully charged cell phone batteries, and of course has a multi-year shelf-life. A three alkaline cell could provide (by your calculations) as much as 40 hours of talk time and several years stand-by. There are battery technologies that would out perform this by an additional factor of three, but given given the number of these things produced I think the cheaper tec

      • by hey! (33014)

        Well, look at the thing. If it isn't meant to transmit, then why the UHF antenna? And it has a hefty looking 3 cell battery. Plain old alkaline cells could deliver 1100 maH apiece. More expensive Li-Fe2 cells would provide up to 3000 maH apiece and have good shelf-life. A three cell battery pack could yield as much as 9000 maH, or 10x the energy of a typical cell phone battery when fully charged. Since a regular 900 maH cell phone battery might yield 3 hours talk time, a 3000 maH alkaline battery pack mig

    • You need to watch and understand the video of the report to understand its severity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGFsHhu7sJ0 [youtube.com]

      The devices are supposed to be for identification purpose only - an RFID device can very well do that. So the fact that it needs a battery is already fishy - why use a more expensive device that needs more maintenance instead of cheap, readily available devices that need almost no maintenance?

      The professor in question had actually disassembled the device in question, and it was
    • by aeoo (568706)

      You know what? I think I'll take a photo of my cellphone's innards, photoshop conveniently spy-sounding labels into the photo, bring my cellphone to a university professor who will testify that my device has a microphone, a crystal, an antenna and a processor that definitely has the potential to turn it into spying device then write an article about it.

      Except everything you are saying here is not nearly as absurd and ridiculous as you hope it would be.

      The USA is engaged in warrantless spying to such an extent, that it's not even something targeted, but rather, it's a data mining operation of the highest order. And yes, cell phone data is mined, you can be sure of it. So yes, your cell phone is in all likelihood spying on you as we speak. It's spying on you for the benefit of the government and also for the benefit of the corporations.

      Read this and thin

  • maybe, maybe not. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mark_elf (2009518) on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @02:29AM (#36432968)
    We have a couple of experts saying it certainly could be a bug. But nobody said they found the freq it was transmitting on and got feedback from it. Kinda flimsy evidence so far.
    • by geekmux (1040042)

      We have a couple of experts saying it certainly could be a bug. But nobody said they found the freq it was transmitting on and got feedback from it. Kinda flimsy evidence so far.

      I agree, probably need more evidence, but if I were to suspect any country (or Government) in the world of doing this, it would be China, based on everything else they've done to monitor, censor, and control.

  • the source... (Score:5, Informative)

    by mathfeel (937008) on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @03:35AM (#36433176)
    I clicked the link and was about to RTFA, then I spotted that it's from "The Epoch Time" referencing an article from "The Apple Daily". I am from HK and those are not two news sources that I trust. The first is a media front for the Fa Lun Gong, which as much as I dislike communism, I have a worse distaste for a money sucking "religious" cult. The latter is a sensationalist tabloid paper. It is famous for its yellow journalism. If you want a report on fact, that's not it.
  • by carsonc (792247) on Tuesday June 14, 2011 @06:32AM (#36433784)
    I'd be weary of the source as it is the Apple Daily. They are known for not being that reliable. I was on the cover a number of years ago, and they photoshopped my hair blond to make me look more white and miss quoted me. I was pissed but then everybody told me that everybody knows that's what they do. C'est la vie. I'll wait till I hear it from a different paper.
    • by bronney (638318)

      Lol. That's like reverse racism. I don't even read the papers anymore here. Apple daily is a fun read when ou go dim sum Sunday yeah? :)

  • "No charge, Sir" (Score:2, Interesting)

    by davide marney (231845) *

    The article notes that the Chinese government has been installing these devices at no charge since 2007. Well, there's your biggest reason to be suspicious. What kind of respectable government would actually buy _you_ something? In the US, drivers have to buy their own RFID transponders just for the privilege of being able to pay tolls electronically. In China, one would expect to not only pay for the transponder, but slip some money under the table at the same time, no?

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by mrsam (12205)

      In the US, drivers have to buy their own RFID transponders just for the privilege of being able to pay tolls electronically.

      Not necessarily. I did not pay for my EZ-Pass transponder. At least in New York and New Jersey, two of the states that use the EZ-Pass transponder that I can vouch from personal experience, the transponder is given to you free if you have the tolls billed automatically to your credit card.

      Which is, pretty much, is the only practical approach. If you take the other option of getting a

  • . . . is that, no matter the source, no matter the content, no matter its significance, the Wu Mao Dang will spun it round, round, baby, right round. . . You're being harmonized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party [wikipedia.org]
  • I was lucky to find this with just a little googling. It is a JZ-871 GFSK transceiver module.

    http://www.sz-wholesaler.com/p/505/545-2/micro-power-data-rf-module-jz871-171649.html [sz-wholesaler.com]

  • The real pros would install a spying device that can also disable the car and then sell this to the car owner as "extra service".
    Maybe even add a button for the owner to press, so he thinks he is in control. A blue button with a star on it would look very nice.

  • Those living in the bay area know how it CAN be a spying device too.

Never put off till run-time what you can do at compile-time. -- D. Gries

Working...