Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Crime

Burglars are Jamming Wi-FI Security Cameras (pcworld.com) 92

Posted by EditorDavid from the see-you-later dept.
An anonymous reader shared this report from PC World: According to a tweet sent out by the Los Angeles Police Department's Wilshire division (spotted by Tom's Hardware), a small band of burglars is using Wi-Fi jamming devices to nullify wireless security cameras before breaking and entering.

The thieves seem to be well above the level of your typical smash-and-grab job. They have lookout teams, they enter through the second story, and they go for small, high-value items like jewelry and designer purses. Wireless signal jammers are illegal in the United States. Wireless bands are tightly regulated and the FCC doesn't allow any consumer device to intentionally disrupt radio waves from other devices. Similar laws are in place in most other countries. But signal jammers are electronically simple and relatively easy to build or buy from less-than-scrupulous sources.
The police division went on to recommend tagging value items like a vehicle or purse with Apple Air Tags — and "talk to your Wi-Fi provider about hard-wiring your burglar alarm system."

And among their other suggestions: Don't post on social media that you're going on vacation...
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Burglars are Jamming Wi-FI Security Cameras More

Burglars are Jamming Wi-FI Security Cameras

Comments Filter:

  • Paranoia FTW (Score:3, Informative)

    by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Sunday July 28, 2024 @03:45PM (#64662170)

    I wired my own, with an off site backup. I suppose if you sneak up at night in a mask and cut my coms cabling (which is exposed at the side of the house), I won't get any further video.

    But you're going to have to handle my neighbors' cameras, too.

    • Two cameras at the gate.
      One on the top of the house.
      One in the garage.
      One in the courtyard.
      One in the workshop.
      All using CodeProject.AI.

      My servers are configured to send me an alarm if one camera goes down for more than 30 seconds, and if multiple cameras go down within a small timeframe, to raise hell via a 120 dB siren alarm.
      Footage also goes to a tucked-away server. That nice rack that's easy to find? Yeah, it's not in there.
      And RJ45 wiring goes inside walls and sometimes even I have a hard time figuring

      • It's easy enough these days to hide a storage device where a thief won't look or have time to look.

        Mine's not hidden, but it's not where thieves looking for cash, jewelry, or alcohol (the top 3 for break-ins) are likely to look.

      • Back in the 90s I knew one guy who had a web server hidden under 3 feet of concrete with wiring set up to make it *very* hard to know where it was going without ripping up *all* the concrete in a giant warehouse. Had a bunch of activist websites who where constantly being harrassed by cops and lawyers. Not sure if the theory was ever tested but I'd wager as long as everyone kept mum about it, they'd have not found it. It was a *huge* building (former ice cream factory size of a city block and filled with ar

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It's nice if you can hardwire, but a lot of people rent and aren't able to drill holes.

      Another option would be an alert on failure. If the camera goes offline you get notified. Wireless burglar alarms often do that. Loss of comms to the remote sensors is considered a potential sign of tampering.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by EvilSS ( 557649 )
        You can also get cameras that have local (on-camera) storage. Even if the WiFi is jammed they still record to their local micro SD card. Most of my cameras are POE but I have a few wireless ones that I use away from the house and they all have their own Micro SD card.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          I was looking at wireless cameras with solar and an SD card for a few locations where I can't easily run wires.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by EvilSS ( 557649 )
            I'm using Tapo (D-Link sub brand) cameras with their solar panels. Works pretty well. Even without the panels they have pretty good battery life. I use them to watch my driveway (>900' and I don't have good views from the house).

  • Wireless signal jammers are illegal in the USA (Score:5, Funny)

    by war4peace ( 1628283 ) on Sunday July 28, 2024 @03:52PM (#64662182)

    ...Um, so is burglary.

    • Re:Wireless signal jammers are illegal in the USA (Score:5, Insightful)

      by codebase7 ( 9682010 ) on Sunday July 28, 2024 @04:19PM (#64662224)
      Sadly, there's plenty of idiots in the US who believe making something illegal means that others are somehow robbed of their ability to do it.

    • ...Um, so is burglary.

      One is a state crime, one is a federal crime... The state can assrape these morons for the burglaries and then fed's can have their turn.... And yes, the feds usually do prosecute people operating jammers.

    • Thus the issue with making such laws. A law making something illegal doesn't stop people from doing that. It only gives the legal system the basis to prosecute well after the crime is committed and the damage has been done. This is also the mechanism by which people in government can get away with flagrant violations of the Constitution. It goes something like this:
      Government bureaucrat: "We're going to make XYZ a crime."
      Citizens: "You can't do that. Show me where in the law it says you can."
      Bureaucrat

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by schwit1 ( 797399 )

      So are firearms possessed by criminals. So are illicit drugs. How has that worked out?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      It's a lot more complicated than that. Yes, signal jammers in general are illegal. But now you're on the license-free ISM band, and the laws get a lot more complex. Build a signal jammer the right way and you might get away with it by claiming you're jammer was merely some new kind of wireless device that happens to interfere with wifi. But as long as you're within legal limits, it can be perfectly legal.

      Plus there are plenty of signals you can emit that will cause wifi devices to be disrupted - weather ra

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vbdasc ( 146051 )

      When you outlaw something, only outlaws are going to use it.

  • they enter through the second story, and they go for small, high-value items like jewelry and designer purses.

    I have none of those things.

    Also, the only thing I use WiFi for is my phone, everything else is hard-wired. Wired on VLAN1 and WiFi on VLAN2.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Yes, all the heroin addicts in my neighborhood have already purchased WiFi jammers. They are renowned for their forward planning and discipline, and regularly pull off sophisticated heists netting them tens of dollars.

  • Such a surprise (Score:4, Informative)

    by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Sunday July 28, 2024 @03:55PM (#64662190)

    The only surprise, really, is that it took so long. Anything wireless is obviously easily disrupted if you do not care about breaking the law.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by CAIMLAS ( 41445 )

        My guy, you can buy a wide spectrum jammer on any number of sites for less than $50. They all have fairly short range, mind you - about 20' or so - so they're usually equipped by each person in a burglary team for better coverage.

        Cellular and wifi going out is the first sign of an impending burglary/carjacking in much of the world.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          That is my take as well. In fact, I probably have everything needed for a dirty hack that would do it right here at less than $20 part cost. Hence I am surprised that this is reported as "news".

          • it appears for much of humanity, this is news... I mean, it appears to me that as far as maybe 80% of people are concerned, they use the term "Computers", or maybe "internet" when in fact they could just as easily, and more honestly, say, "Magic"

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by gweihir ( 88907 )

              Probably. Given that only about 20% of the human race is rational (can be convinced by rational argument, actual fact-checkers and independent thinkers are only something like 10%), this fits well. Also fits the mindless cheering or mindless fear that can be observed when it comes to these topics.

    • Anything wireless is obviously easily disrupted if you do not care about breaking the law.

      How easily? My cameras have local SD cards which still record when the wireless goes down and integrated audible alarms in case someone tries to remove them. Quite a few vendors have thought of this.

      • It isn't impossible to take away that local SD card before, during or after the burglary. And don't worry, the thief or thieves won't mind to destroy your camera to get that SD card.

        So yes, the local SD card storage is better than nothing. Barely.

        • It isn't impossible to take away that local SD card before, during or after the burglary.

          Of course it's not impossible, but it is difficult to do it quietly. Again many cameras on the market have integrated audible alarms precisely to stop thieves from stealing the cameras or ejecting the SD card from them.

          I actually hope they try. If I'm not home I would prefer my camera to go in alarm complete with flashing its light and having that scare off would be thieves (or neighbours doing that for me), rather than having a functional camera system that as able to record me getting robbed in full glory

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        And what has a local SD card to do with the wireless being disrupted? Oh, right, _nothing_. Obviously if you were smart enough to invest into camera-local storage or, much better, a wired network, this attack is not applicable to you.

        That said, jamming WiFi is _really_ easy and cheap. I am not going to point out products to you because that could be legally problematic here, but you can get the required equipment from AliExpress for less than $20. Add a directional WiFi Antenna and you will even get decent

  • So their actions will be recorded anyway.

    • So their actions will be recorded anyway.

      No... NO NO NO NO. Most wifi cameras do not have an SD card backup. Maybe some do, but not most.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Nkwe ( 604125 )

        So their actions will be recorded anyway.

        No... NO NO NO NO. Most wifi cameras do not have an SD card backup. Maybe some do, but not most.

        Well more accurately (based on my experience only) is that most wifi cameras do have a SD card slot that could be used for backup, but it's pretty rare for someone to install a SD card in that slot and actually configure the camera to use it...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by antdude ( 79039 )

      Until the burglar find and take/destroy it. :P

  • Just last week it was LEOs that were jamming... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by i.r.id10t ( 595143 ) on Sunday July 28, 2024 @04:13PM (#64662216)

    Just a few days ago we had the article about LEOs doing the same thing... for the same reasons.

  • make sure it's not the American Gestapo [criminallegalnews.org] invading your home because they use the same techniques as burglars [tomshardware.com], and if you kill a one of their members, they'll classify you as terrorist and disappear you in some black site in eastern Europe.

    • naw, they just shoot you and kill you then claim they got sent to the wrong address, or that they thought you were the perp or whatever... there are several stories in the news over the past few years about this. Local cops, the ones that are most likely to break in the wrong door, don't have access to eastern european black sites, it takes the feds for that.

  • No shit sherlock! (Score:3)

    by codebase7 ( 9682010 ) on Sunday July 28, 2024 @04:16PM (#64662222)
    If the only thing you have backing up a security system (camera, motion sensor, etc.) is a Wifi connection, you don't have a reliable security system. Period.

    The minor criminals have known this for some time, it's only more recently that law enforcement decided to abuse it as well [slashdot.org].

    • Many cameras on the market have other backup mechanisms, such as local SDcards along with audible tamper alarms should a thief think the easiest thing to do is to steal the camera.

  • Use a combination of visible wifi cameras and hidden wired in cameras. Make them think they disabled the cameras so that they can be caught and convicted.

  • OR (Score:2)

    by e3m4n ( 947977 )

    Post on social media that you _are_ going on vacation. Instead stay at home. When they break in, kill the shit out of them, while fearing for your life. Desecrate the shit out of the corpses something they would never want to be remembered by. After a dozen homes do this they will run out of idiots willing to risk their lives.

  • This is pretty much the dumbest thing they could do.

    First, if you have an NVR, it's going to start contacting you immediately to tell you that all the cameras have gone down, so it's basically telling the homeowner that you're there. They'll look at the last few seconds, see a suspicious vehicle appear right before everything goes down, and call the police. And boom, they're busted.

    Second, any home security camera that isn't complete junk is going to have a micro SD card slot to which it makes a continuo

    • What do you think the average police response time is? If the gang is organized enough to bother jamming wifi devices they certainly aren't going hang around to appreciate the ambience of your home. Two minutes would be a generous amount of time here.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        What do you think the average police response time is? If the gang is organized enough to bother jamming wifi devices they certainly aren't going hang around to appreciate the ambience of your home. Two minutes would be a generous amount of time here.

        The fact that it happens before they approach the house means it will be at least a minute or two before they even break in. If they're looking for something specific, it might only be another couple of minutes, but a typical break-in lasts 8 to 10 minutes. So realistically, you're probably talking about ten to twelve minutes before they are gone. That really should be enough time. If it isn't, then an alarm system is likely useless, too.

        • when I reported a break in, one day long ago, the police showed up around 25 minutes later. When I 'discussed' it with the officer, he basically said that his job was to file the report and give me a copy for my insurance claim not to, "waste his time" working to recover my wife's necklace or some such.

          Hence I manage my own protection and don't involve the police unless absolutely necessary, and then only to get that report from them for the insurance.

    • Its important to remember the limitations of cameras. Often the pictures aren't perfect, or the suspect conceals themselves enough to not be very discernible. Its another tool in a good home security system. Have some overlapping cameras at enough distance that even if jammers are used you'll get some kind of video from the beginning of the burglary. Use mainly motion sensors, door sensors, laser beam sensors etc to alert you to go look at the cameras. A grainy photo after the fact isn't much help. If you s

  • does ring have any POE hardware?

  • ... hard-wiring your burglar alarm system ...

    When wi-fi-based security systems became available, a few years ago, I immediately saw the simple point of failure. It was only a matter of time until criminals became sufficiently organized to defeat it.

    But going to businesses without surveillance, I can see the appeal: Brick walls or lots of exposed roof trusses means metal conduits all the way, for good security. And that shit is expensive, like 10 times the cost of the electronics! Of course, buildings are being retrofitted with wi-fi cameras and

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Electronic warfare (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stikves ( 127823 ) on Sunday July 28, 2024 @08:32PM (#64662668) Homepage

    So, let's expect drone based casing of joints, wireless hacking, using Flipper Zero to infiltrate local networks and disabling alarms...

    And do not forget boosting car fob ranges, so that they can use a high powered antenna based system to steal your vehicle from the driveway. Yes, just with a laptop and a large antenna, they can make as if that keyfob on your coffee table is next to the car, and it auto unlocks, and remote starts. No need to pick a key.

    Interesting times indeed...

  • Do they mean internet provider? I don't have a wifi provider
    • No, dumbass, they do not mean to talk to your internet provider. Your internet provider is only interested in getting service to your premises, what you do with that service once it is on your premises is up to you. So if your wifi link is not working and you want it replaced with a wired connection, you will need to talk to the person who provided you wifi, AKA your wifi provider, whether that be your IT dudeperson, your landlord, your wife, or even yourself. But god help you if you need to talk to yo

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mjwx ( 966435 )

        No, dumbass, they do not mean to talk to your internet provider. Your internet provider is only interested in getting service to your premises, what you do with that service once it is on your premises is up to you. So if your wifi link is not working and you want it replaced with a wired connection, you will need to talk to the person who provided you wifi, AKA your wifi provider, whether that be your IT dudeperson, your landlord, your wife, or even yourself. But god help you if you need to talk to yourself, because you sure as shit are not going to receive any intelligent answers.

        Erm... If your service provider also provides (and in some cases here in the UK, manages) your end point which includes Wifi, yes they are also obligated to support that.

        However there's nothing they can do against Wifi jamming aside from recommending that you purchase a security camera that has local storage or a wired connection to remote storage. As a security minded person, I wouldn't trust a camera that didn't have a wired connection or local storage (a big SD card is not expensive these days, I've a

  • The origins of WiFi are in technologies (distributed spread spectrum) that were designed to be highly resistant to jamming. Are they just blasting a ton of energy across all the frequencies used by WiFi 2.5 and 5 Ghz ISM bands? I suppose they are simply checking all the standard WiFi channels then jamming the channels used by the target. Assuming they can reliably determine which ones are the target's channels and which are the neighbor's. So presumably the access points and clients could detect the jamming

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by EvilSS ( 557649 )
      Some just sweep the 2.5/5ghz spectrum with enough noise to knock the clients offline. The other way is a deauth attack, where the jammer scans then spoofs deauth requests from the local wifi devices, kicking them off of the WiFi network.This was fixed in 802.11w (which encrypted deauth requests) but if the cheap chipset in the camera doesn't support it then they are still vulnerable.
      • Deauth attack sounds more practical to me than flooding all those frequencies with enough power to disable the cameras in a house presumably some distance away. I'm no expert though, maybe it's a common tech nowadays.
    • There are only 14 WiFi channels (11 in use in the US). You can just jam them all. Why would they determine which channels are the target's and which are the neighbors? You jam the entire frequency range, commit your crime, and leave. The neighbors aren't going to assume that the WiFi working poorly is indicative of a crime next door and go over to intervene or call the police. And if they did, likely there wouldn't be a response.

  • Signal interference in ISM bands (doubtful thats being used here) is a tad different than sending deauth frames to a connected wifi client on a specific access point. In fact, some enterprise vendors' dedicated "security radio" will do this to help deauth clients that may have connected to a rogue access point with the same SSID that it detects.

    In any case, its just a reminder that 802.11 isn't bulletproof, you are presenting to anyone in range whats connected to what, and those connections can be fucked w

  • That way burglary will be saved locally, and while it won't trigger a security alert if WiFi is jammed, it would retain evidence for LEO/insurance information. Better than nothing.

  • A homeless guy stole a bike from my backyard about a year ago. I did have a single wi-fi camera that caught him trying to open the front door. Now I have 6 cameras. Half of them are wired. Other half are wireless. It is difficult to run ethernet to all locations. But, I think this is a reasonable compromise. I also now have window and door sensors. They are wireless. 900MHz however. I am assuming that this frequency doesn't get targeted by common wireless jammers.

Slashdot Top Deals

Think of it! With VLSI we can pack 100 ENIACs in 1 sq. cm.!

Close