I read a few of the news articles and it sounds like the thieves are jamming WiFi and the sensors. This prevents the system from even triggering. The thieves are walking around the homes without the glass break, door, and motion sensors going off it seems.
Not commonplace, but getting some exposure in the news recently - gangs of organized thieves in metro Detroit area are targeting upper scale homes for burglaries. They are purportedly using wifi jammer to circumvent alarms (like Ring).
What can millions of Ring (and customers from other wifi-dependent alarm companies) do about this? IS there a viable counter to these signal jammer? Maybe it's time to explore legacy, analog wired alarm solutions as backup instead of the reverse?
They're using a wifi jammer, according to this article. No obvious way to prevent this, so hardwired systems would be the only resistant option.
Most Wi-Fi jammers use disassociation flooding to kick the devices off the network. This attack is prevented with WPA3 which can use protected management frames. Unfortunately Ring still hasn’t got around to adding WPA3 support to its devices. It was requested via their feature request process a long time ago, so I’m not overly hopeful they’ll add it.
There are trade offs and risks with each security system. There’s also different types of burglars from opportune amateurs to seasoned pros.
If you’re concerned about this threat, there’s a raft of solutions out there with high definition footage without any reliance on Wi-Fi or internet.
Whatever they're using for jamming must go beyond the WiFi frequencies to affect z-wave and whatever frequency Honeywell et al uses for their RF communications.
This makes sense because most alarm systems these days (even ADT/Brinx/etc) rely mostly on wireless sensors.
This is a huge vulnerability because it's pretty rare to find a security system that's been installed to use all hardwired sensors. To go hardwired you probably had to have it built-in as the house was built or did it while doing some major remodeling.
Cellular jammers are readily available. DSL, cable, or fiber are not jammable, but all devices need to be hardwired.
Zwave can be jammed just as easily as wifi. Cellular is great but if the door/window sensors are blocked and unable to report to the base station, the alarm won't think anything is wrong.
What I found when doing some simple research over the last couple of days is that different manufacturers use different frequencies for their devices so it might be a guessing game for the burglar, although my guess is that the professional burglars carry jammers for most of the common frequencies used by the big name brands like Ring, Simplisafe, Nest(ADT), etc.
To me it makes sense to have devices from different brands. Ring doorbell, ADT alarm, Wyze cameras, etc...
What's scary is that there are a bunch of videos on youtube demonstrating how easy it is to bypass these alarms AND with instructions telling you exactly how to do it and how to get the jammers.
Is this pervasive? If you watch the news, it’s pretty evident thieves aren’t concerned with cameras. They mask up and hood up and go. Be on alert, they have no fear.
Burglars can use wide-band jammers to jam all frequency bands : GSM, LTE, Wifi and Z-Wave. Some alarm systems are robust to such attacks (like Ajax Alarm System -- https://ajax.systems/blog/what-is-jamming/).
In short, the alarm hub must be hardwired with Ethernet to your router; And hub, router and modem on a battery backup. Then, only communications between sensors and hub can be jammed.
Then, alarm hub communicates frequently with sensors. If communication fails, it signals a jamming attack, notifying the user via hardwired Internet. With a working speaker on the hub, it can sound a siren and send a voice alert to the intruders.
SimpliSafe system is another system that offers some jamming protection, but lacks the Ethernet hardwired connection, so it must rely on a GSM/LTE link, which is still better than Wifi alone.
Corrections has silently taken away all cellphone jammer from prisons.
The technology, which was brought in during 2008-09 to hinder inmates from using smuggled mobile phones, has amounted to a cost exceeding $17 million.
The use of jammers was discontinued in June after it was determined that they were causing interference with the newly implemented safety systems for prison guards.
In the wake of its implementation, Corrections Minister Phil Goff hailed cellphone blocking in New Zealand prisons as a momentous leap forward, ensuring that prisoners are unable to commit further offenses while behind bars.
Details recently acquired under the Official Information Act shed light on the number of cellphones seized from the 18 prisons operated by Corrections over the course of the past three years.
Between January 2020 and November of the current year, the Corrections staff came across 626 cellphones and over 750 cellphone-related items, which included batteries, chargers, and SIM cards.
When questioned about the reason behind inmates smuggling cellphones despite the existence of cellphone jammers, Neil Beales, the Corrections chief custodial officer, revealed that the jammers were taken out in June.
He mentioned that the jammers had been identified as a source of interference for newly introduced safety systems, particularly impacting the proper functioning of alarms designed to ensure the safety of corrections officers.
Advancements in cellular technology have made signal blockers more and more obsolete.
Beales clarified that the tool mentioned was merely one of several measures employed to combat the use of cellphones in prisons. He emphasized that there are still several other more effective tools that remain in place.
With their ability to detect a variety of metals found in cellphones, Cellsense devices provide a reliable solution. These devices not only offer screening and x-ray capabilities but also employ detection dogs to further enhance their metal detection capabilities.
Beale emphasized that a few inmates go to great lengths to introduce contraband into prisons, and we are constantly striving to stay ahead of the new methods used for smuggling contraband into our correctional facilities.
According to the spokesperson, Corrections has been actively researching new and emerging technology to supplement their existing systems. They have recently introduced the use of full body imaging technology at various locations to identify contraband that may be concealed on or inside a person's body.
The year 2018 marked the admission by Corrections of a communications blind spot near Rimutaka Prison caused by cellphone jamming technology, leading to the inability to track residents of a child sex offender unit situated outside the prison premises.
The use of cellphones by inmates can be a means to exert influence on individuals outside the prison, as well as to coordinate illicit activities such as drug deals. In May this year, nine prison employees at Rimutaka were suspended for alleged misconduct, which included the smuggling of cellphones into the prison.
Roger Brooking, a criminologist and drug and alcohol counsellor, has consistently criticized the allocation of funds towards jammers. Therefore, it is not surprising that Corrections has decided to discontinue their use, aligning with Brooking's concerns.
He remarked that their functionality is lacking and has never been operational.
As per the information provided by prisoners, they have discovered loopholes in the prison's signal jamming system. Consequently, inmates have been able to make unauthorized phone calls for activities like drug deals or staying in contact with their relatives.
A cell phone jammer is a tool that can block the reception or transmission of cell phone signals by creating interference at the operating frequencies of cell phones. This interference leads to either no signal or a significant reduction in signal quality. Although cell phone jammer can be utilized in a wide range of settings, they are primarily used in areas where silence is expected or mandated.
Techopedia explores the functionality of cell phone jammers.
A cell phone jammer is formed by:
When a cell phone jammer is in operation, the majority of cell phones exhibit no network signal. Conversely, when the cell phone jammer is switched off, the cell phones become active again. It is important to note that cell phones utilize distinct frequencies for transmitting and receiving information. Therefore, most cell phone jammers block either one or both of these frequencies, indirectly preventing communication on both ends.Cell phone jammers work based on the same principles as jammers utilized in preventing radio communication. They either disrupt the frequencies from the cell phone to the base station or from the base station to the cell phone.
Cell phone jammers serve as essential tools for law enforcement and military personnel to restrict and disrupt communication in diverse scenarios. To counter corporate espionage, specific organizations rely on these jammers to block communication within sensitive areas. Moreover, portable cell phone jammers are utilized by individuals to prevent others from using their phones in close proximity.
Cell phone jamming is considered illegal in numerous countries, including the United States, except for military and law enforcement purposes. The United States has some of the most stringent laws worldwide when it comes to cell phone jammers, banning their sale and purchase and imposing strict regulations on their usage. However, in countries like Mexico, the use of cell phone jammers is allowed in certain public areas like hospitals. It is important to recognize that laws governing the use of cell phone jammers vary from country to country.
Cell phone jammers are prohibited for three distinct reasons
The deployment of cell phone jammers can impede your ability, as well as that of others, to contact 911 and other emergency services. Furthermore, they introduce significant risks to public safety communications and disrupt various other means of daily communication.
Here, you will discover an in-depth explanation of signal jammers, the reasons behind their illegality in the United States, procedures to follow when encountering disruptions in authorized communication, and how Cellbusters can assist with any questions regarding cell phone jammers.
Strategies for Addressing Jammed Authorized Communication
Do you have reason to believe that a signal jammer is causing the interference? There are multiple factors, such as signal jammers, that can contribute to the disruption of network connections:
Prior to submitting an interference complaint through the FCC Consumer Complaint Center, it is recommended to troubleshoot equipment and connectivity issues in accordance with the manufacturer and service provider guidelines. Apart from checking the owner's manual and contacting the company's technical support, conducting an online search for your device/model and the specific issue could help in identifying or ruling out potential causes.
A cell phone jammer is a device that can block the reception or transmission of cell phone signals by creating interference at the operating frequency ranges of cell phones. When a cell phone jammer is used, it transmits signals on the same radio frequencies as mobile phones, which disrupts the communication between the phone and the cell phone base station. This prevents the phones within the range of the jammer from receiving signals.
When choosing a cell phone jammer, you can consider things like:
Whether you are looking to quiet people standing near you in a public place, or you are trying to silence the cell phones being used at your business or learning institution, there are many benefits to using cell phone jammers and knocking out cellular connections. At the same time, you need to do your homework beforehand in order to make certain you buy a signal jammer that will properly fulfill your application.
When searching for cell phone jammers for sale, you should take the following into consideration…
Congressman David Kustoff (TN-08) has reintroduced the Cellphone Jamming Reform Act of 2022, aimed at curbing contraband cell phone use in federal and state prison facilities. This bill would authorize the use of cell phone jamming systems by state and federal prisons to enhance the safety of inmates, guards, and the general public.
The U.S. Senate saw the introduction of the companion bill by Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC). Furthermore, Representatives William Timmons (SC-04), Tom Rice (SC-07), Ralph Norman (SC-05), and Jeff Duncan (SC-03) are co-sponsors of this legislation.
Congressman Kustoff stated that in correctional facilities throughout the nation, prisoners are utilizing contraband cell phones for unlawful purposes such as managing drug operations, aiding in sex trafficking, and coordinating escape attempts.The illicit mobile phones pose a significant challenge, prompting Congress to implement measures safeguarding the public from hazardous offenders conducting unlawful operations while incarcerated.I am delighted to collaborate with Senators Cotton and Graham in reintroducing this crucial bill aimed at ensuring the safety of our communities in West Tennessee and across the United States.
Inmates have utilized illicit cell phones to coordinate unlawful endeavors beyond the confines of correctional facilities, such as orchestrating attacks on adversaries, engaging in human trafficking, managing drug enterprises, and conducting business transactions.Cellphone signal jamming devices have the capability to prevent this, however, the Federal Communications Act prohibits facilities from utilizing this technology. The proposed bill aims to address this issue, ensuring that criminals can serve their sentences without endangering the public.
The Correctional Leaders Association, the Council of Prison Locals, the American Correctional Association, the National Sheriff's Association, and the Major County Sheriffs of America all endorse this legislation.
The prevalence of contraband cell phones is extensive within federal and state prison facilities. Inmates have utilized these unauthorized devices to engage in illicit activities, such as orchestrating targeted attacks on individuals beyond prison confines, operating illegal drug networks, facilitating unlawful business transactions, promoting sex trafficking, and coordinating escape plans that pose risks to correctional staff, fellow inmates, and the general public.
The South Carolina Prison Incident was ignited by the presence of cell phones and contraband. A violent clash between rival gangs, fueled by the illicit trade of contraband facilitated through cell phones, erupted within the confines of the Lee Correctional Institution near Bishopville, South Carolina. Tragically, this altercation resulted in the loss of seven inmates' lives and left 20 others injured.
In 2013, Lt. Osvaldo Albarati, a correctional officer at the Bureau of Prisons, was killed for disrupting an illegal contraband cell phone operation. The inmate responsible for his murder used a contraband cell phone to coordinate the assassination with a hired gunman, as detailed in the legal charges.
In 2018, a report revealed that a prisoner at FCI Fort Dix orchestrated a murder and assault using a smuggled phone while incarcerated in a New Jersey prison. Another inmate at the same facility was accused of possessing and sharing child pornography through a contraband phone. Additionally, six other inmates admitted guilt in separate cases.
The utilization of contraband cell phones extends beyond enabling violent criminals to persist in their illicit endeavors. According to The Wall Street Journal, Martin Shkreli, the disgraced pharmaceutical executive convicted of securities fraud and sentenced to seven years, managed to exert influence over decisions at Phoenixus AG by means of a contraband cell phone.