Last weekend Tom's Hardware, a well-known information technology Web site, informed its readers that WiFi technology can now detect a concealed firearm, even if it isn't visible in any way.
The full system comprises a Wi-Fi transmitter, a Wi-Fi receiver, and the WiFireNet AI.
When ordinary Wi-Fi signals encounter an object in their path, they penetrate and bounce off in ways specific to that object, based on its shape, orientation, and material. This data, the channel state information, can be analyzed to identify the object with high accuracy. Security researchers previously disclosed a technique that lets ordinary Wi-Fi routers identify people with 99.5% accuracy.
. . .
After training, the final AI system, WiFireNet, could detect concealed handguns solely based on Wi-Fi CSI, with varying accuracy. In controlled trials tracking up to four moving individuals in a small indoor space, the system achieved an average handgun-detection precision of 72.5%. However, under stricter localization requirements, such as pinpointing the weapon’s exact location on the carrier, precision dropped to 53.8%. The neural network also struggles to perform accurately in unfamiliar, untested indoor layouts.
That said, the system is still experimental, with a roadmap of planned improvements.
There's more at the link.
There have been previous claims that other systems can do the same, but as far as I'm aware, none of them have been as rigorously tested as this new development. We should assume that such systems are more likely than not to be deployed at any place where security requirements are likely to be high all, or some, of the time (e.g. law enforcement agency offices, arenas and other public performance centers where high-profile figures may be speaking or in attendance, etc.) It's likely that as such systems become more affordable and more widespread, they'll be deployed at sports venues, cinemas, hotels and other sites as well.
We may find more and more regulations in public places, or in private venues that impose restrictions upon those using them, that if a concealed firearm is detected, we may be denied entrance unless we can demonstrate a good reason why we need to be armed there. The Second Amendment and/or preparedness to defend ourselves against crime are not likely to be acceptable reasons. If we advance them, we're likely to be labeled as right-wing extremists, kooks, or paranoid survivalists.
In that light, David Codrea asks:
With no reasonable expectation of privacy in public places, technologies employing CCTV cameras, facial recognition, license plate scanners and the like generally don’t cross a “plain view” legal threshold, although there’s movement to reconsider how much is allowable, especially when surveillance becomes prolonged for tracking purposes.
But what if it’s a real bad guy? Since when has requiring you and I to be disarmed done anything but give predators the advantage?
Naturally, those intent on controlling not just guns but their fellow man, will be all for expanding the surveillance state if they can seize the power to do it. What laws to do that can we expect them to enact, and how will the courts react to challenges, especially if Democrats win the midterms , then take over in ’28, and start reshaping the Supreme Court to reverse Bruen, McDonald, Heller, and more?
Good questions!
I can see a market emerging for a sort of pouch or flat box, that can be carried inside a jacket or handbag. It would be made out of, or lined with, X-ray-proof material, similar to the pouches made to protect exposed photographic film when traveling by air; they prevent the undeveloped film from being blackened by security X-rays. I presume that such material will also work against WiFi signals - can anyone confirm, please? If not, one could add another layer of anti-static and/or or RFID-blocking material to the container. Working together, they may protect what's inside against detection, offering a way to conceal a gun even in the face of such intrusive security measures. It won't be ideal, being slower to get to than a simple holstered firearm, but it'll be a heck of a lot better than nothing for those of us who value our personal security and that of our families.
Peter
19 comments:
Hi Peter, It's trivially easy to wrap an object with radio frequency reflective material such as aluminum foil (tinfoil, not just for hats anymore) or copper mesh screen (Amazon is your friend here), The problem is that now you have a brightly RF reflective blob showing to the detection device. That might be a wee tad suspicious.
What you really need is a material that absorbs RF signals, such as the paint on stealth aircraft, to make the gun effectively invisible. Unfortunately, I don't think the aircraft companies are selling their secret technology to the vast unwashed masses quite yet.
regards
Make inserts for wallets and purses that cause the scanner to think there is a concealed weapon. Disguise them as name badges for conferences. There are things that can be done.
Agreed. Could one make an entire jacket or waistcoat out of such surveillance-resistant materials? Of course, that would make one stand out even more on security screens, but if multiple people are wearing one, there would still be the problem of separating the wheat from the chaff, as it were. Are they carrying something illegal, or just messing with the security systems for the heck of it?
OTOH, I remember some fella with a rifle on a rooftop ...
Any of the EMF protection items like this jacket
https://defendershield.com/products/emf-radiation-protection-hooded-jacket
Just protecting my health. ;)
I can't say I've got any way to do the experiment, but most electronics hobbyists have seen the black foam used to protect static-sensitive components. It's black because it's filled with carbon dust, which makes it conductive, and that should be absorptive rather than reflective like the aluminum foil. Maybe that makes a blank spot in the picture that's just as useful, if they figure out how to detect that.
In a room where everything is reflective, maybe a black hole is all they need to search you.
Sounds like a good upgrade opportunity for a sneaky pete holster.
What you want is a Faraday cage. It would not reflect the radiation, but rather allow it to pass around the object, like water around a boulder in a stream. See LessEMF.com for materials.
Some good reading on blocking and absorbing RF energy. An absorbing holster might disrupt the detection without creating the Hotspot a simple shield would. Combining both, shielding to disrupt the gun's outline and absorption to reduce the returned signal sounds like a good possibility.
https://www.modusadvanced.com/resources/blog/rf-blocking-rf-shields-vs.-rf-absorbers
I worked a large event where dot gov deployed a millimeter wave device that basically does the same thing. A bigger problem was false positives, showing a weapon where none existed. It became a negative as far a the security screening was concerned.
Could an AI device learn and improve? Sure.
Could it be spoofed or fooled ? Also sure.
There are already card protection wallets on the market, using metal mesh or similar to block those scanners that criminals are reputed to use to drain your credit card as you walk by. If enough people have those, a few more with firearms inside probably won't be noticed
Will exploring defeat techniques will eventually become suspect itself?
Usually such defeats segment into:
Concealment
Cloaking
Obscuration
Explanation
Active Countermeasures
Concealment as other have discussed moves the presentation to a detectable larger "blob" and more importantly may affect the utility by delaying use in crisis to shed the concealment materials
Cloaking as discussed depends on materials that are not really readily available, and not discussed may create other signal issues like attenuation of normal expected reflection of radiation.
Obscuration may hold some promise, as often this an additive camouflage layer making the concealed less obvious. Can the resolution of the WiFi/AI combination "see through" a Liberace/Elvis-style sequined attire? What do heated vests common seasonally in parts of the county look like to WiFi/AI? does a strategically positioned serving tray blank out the WiFi?
Explanation is adding a reason why the person has a lump on metal on them. Implants come to mind.
Active Countermeasures are manipulating the received signals to degrade/neutralize the ability for WiFi/AI to see. This risks being noted as an emitter and is technically non-trivial.
In favor of the legitimate carrier is that the achievable resolution of the WiFi/AI combo is limited.
That also works against the legitimate use of the WiFi/AI for security purposes.
How well the WiFi/AI works when a crowd (layered targets) with phones doing WiFi traverse its view isn't explored.
Interesting area using otherwise passive emissions to echo-locate.
Manny false positives would help. Everyone should start carrying aluminum foil false pistols to overload these systems!
You'd need to carry a water pistol wrapped in foil.
On a similar subject, that same wifi can tell if you are carrying a candy bar in your pocket, if you have credit cards in your wallet, and they can do this from the other side of a wood/gypsum wall. I'm afraid the only solution is to remove the people that purchase these systems from the gene pool.
Expect such technology to be deployed in ever more expanding places. Expect countermeasures to proliferate. And expect significant responses to such countermeasures to become SOP. Without specific legislation or court rulings explicitly protecting the right to carry the default reaction of organizations will be infringement...and prosecution.
There WILL be countermeasures... And they will be both good and bad... sigh
Emerson & Cuming
A material which absorbs RF more than other materials is like a blurred out area on a map.
Worn on your body it stands out, but not as much as a RF reflective material. Either case warrants inspection.
I suppose better would be an entire suit if such material. Then no one spot is perceived as suspicious. However, would the spooks now perceive everything about you as suspicious?
As always, the best method to avoid a punch is not to be there. That applies to many facets of life.
Peter, there is such a jacket. It is called the Bill Of Rights. If the spooks ignore that, which has greater authority, your 'security jacket' made of cloth will only be cause for investigation. And you'll be out the money to acquire it
Post a Comment