Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:GNUradio? (Score 1) 131

We implement it as a chip that intercepts the serial bus to the VFO chip, and disallows certain frequencies. On FCC-certified equipment we might have to make that chip and the VFO chip physically difficult to get at by potting them or something. This first unit is test-equipment and does not have the limitation.

My main interest in this SDR project would be as part of a home-brew RF/digital test/research bench for a variety of mobile cell-based equipment and development of new types of devices for new uses.

How does a company like Harris Corp. get away with manufacturing/selling Stingrays for use in the US, and can this project possibly use the same technical exceptions used by Harris Corp. to negate the requirement to artificially cripple it?


Comment: Re:GNUradio? (Score 1) 131

The receiver has a block on certain cellular frequencies in the 800MHz band. This is the only restriction. The radio can tune to any frequency between 50MHz-1000MHz, otherwise.

Is this block implemented in software or hardware? Could it theoretically be bypassed/removed by someone technically oriented?


Comment: Re:GNUradio? (Score 1) 131

This is meant to be an entire FCC type-approved transceiver with spurious emissions low enough to amplify to the full legal limit for the band.

Does being FCC Type approved mean there are certain frequency bands that are verboten? In other words, is the coverage continuous from 50mHz - 1gHz or are there required gaps?

I know that communications receivers capable of covering the cellphone bands were made illegal to sell in the US a while back. Just wondering how SDR will deal with such legislation going forward.

This may be a real concern where a SDR may cover bands where things like cellphones and police/military/air communications live and are heavily regulated and some portions restricted from even reception by unauthorized persons. Aren't many trunked police/fire/EMS radio systems in the 800mHz band, or is that dated? It's been a long time since I held an amateur radio license.


Comment: Re:But this isn't net neutrality at all... (Score 1) 590

by BlueStrat (#49126609) Attached to: Republicans Back Down, FCC To Enforce Net Neutrality Rules

Of course, we don't fully what the rules will do since they have been acting in secrecy!

They will be published when they are finalized.

We have to give the government the power to regulate the internet before we can know what they'll do to the internet.

Wait, this sounds sickeningly-familiar....

Oh well. I'm sure it'll be fine.

After all, it's only the same FCC that has pursued a "wardrobe malfunction" for nearly 8 years, pushed for the Fairness Doctrine, and whose "Diversity Czar" Mark Lloyd was quoted as admiring the way Chavez seized control of radio/TV/media and placed them under State control.

I'm sure porn and less mainstream media outlets, political blogs, forums, etc that the government may dislike will have nothing at all to fear. /s (for the clueless)


Comment: Re:Facts not in evidence (Score 1) 405

by BlueStrat (#49122793) Attached to: NSA Director Wants Legal Right To Snoop On Encrypted Data

Your (and my, and any individual citizen's) personal interpretation of the Constitution is not the measure. It is the interpretation and implementation by our three branches of government.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


Government's job is to secure and protect the rights of the people. The government can decide/declare anything it wants, but if the overwhelming majority of people refuse to comply there is actually very little it can do, and it risks being abolished and replaced/restored.

So how about you consider the alternative: one where you don't assume that everyone working at every/any level of government, e.g., NSA, doesn't have the worst motivations and is actually trying to do their best to honorably, legally, and Constitutionally, protect our nation and its people instead of the opposite. How about that?

Sorry, but that boat sailed with all the lawlessness and abuses that have been revealed regarding domestic data/comm interception/storage, the widespread use of parallel construction, and the mass compromise of encryption schemes.

History proves over and over that the biggest danger to life and liberty is and has always been one's own government. The kind of "trust" you advocate for in this context would be foolish.


Comment: Re:Why is the government scared to talk about thes (Score 1) 241

by BlueStrat (#49114365) Attached to: In Florida, Secrecy Around Stingray Leads To Plea Bargain For a Robber

Why is the federal government (and its agencies) so scared to allow state and local law enforcement agencies to reveal the use of these devices?

Well, you could find out by assembling your own "stingray" piecemeal using some of the test equipment in the links below, and use it to monitor/record police/DHS/NSA and wait to see what charges they decide to prosecute you for if you're arrested, and then take the government to court for the same charges.



Although your chances of getting the same 'justice' system that is complicit in these criminal acts by those in government to turn around and prosecute these same criminals are slim at best.


Comment: Re:How do Climate Change Believers Profit? (Score 1) 438

by BlueStrat (#49104719) Attached to: How One Climate-Change Skeptic Has Profited From Corporate Interests

Hmm, what industries could profit from climate change true believers?

How about governments, those who run them, and those tied to and who profit from government? They gain ever more power & control over ever-wider-ranging areas of life and have another excuse to squeeze the marks for more of their wealth.


Comment: Re:The Constitution is Clear - Tenth Amendment (Score 1) 78

by BlueStrat (#49095661) Attached to: When It Comes To Spy Gear, Many Police Ignore Public Records Laws

Alternate idea: an amendment that makes it a felony for government officials/reps/etc. to violate or aid/abet the violation of the constitutional rights of one or more people.

Warrantless mass surveillance already violates the 4th Amendment and multiple laws.

What effect will another law have when the existing laws are ignored? Existing laws against these ongoing abuses have already, and continue to be, flaunted by those in government.

The digital Panopticon, if it is going to exist, needs to be universal in that citizens may not be denied the right and ability to use it to keep tabs on those in government.


Comment: Re:The Constitution is Clear - Tenth Amendment (Score 2) 78

by BlueStrat (#49093161) Attached to: When It Comes To Spy Gear, Many Police Ignore Public Records Laws

How quaint. The Feds haven't taken the Constitution seriously for generations.

Maybe it's time for a "Digital Second Amendment".

Whatever technological means the government may use to monitor/surveil/track/datamine individuals without a warrant may also be used to monitor/surveill/track/datamine those in government both while on and off the government clock by otherwise law-abiding people.


Comment: Re:Just a piece of paper. (Score 1) 78

by BlueStrat (#49093133) Attached to: When It Comes To Spy Gear, Many Police Ignore Public Records Laws

They don't want us to be able to keep anything at all secret. And they want to keep all their stuff secret.

That could change.

It's not like the hardware is not available.





Comment: Re:Time to go back to land lines and cash. (Score 4, Insightful) 192

by BlueStrat (#49091889) Attached to: How NSA Spies Stole the Keys To the Encryption Castle

At what point do we start putting these criminals away? They have broken every law on the books.

One of the most insidious effects of this sort of Panopticon-level data collection & analysis is that it works as well against prosecutors, judges, AGs, and even SCOTUS justices, as it does some CEO or key IT admin somewhere they're interested in compromising.

Parallel construction is blind, therefor the current US justice system no longer is. Along with every other government agency, bureau, department, etc, all the way down.

Total Information = Total Control

The US Government is under the control of those who control that information. Even if the target is squeaky-clean, they are perfectly capable of planting things like kiddie-porn or any other convenient data on a hard drive such that it would stand up to the type/depth of forensics used in the typical criminal trial.

Threatening to leak damaging private information, especially when it involves an elected official right before a(n) (re)election, works without even involving the justice system or making a public scene.


Comment: Re: Papers, Comrade (Score 1) 116

by BlueStrat (#49089565) Attached to: The Disastrous Privacy Consequences of Canada's Anti-Terrorism Bill

As you can see, the majority of the population supports this. Who are you to tell the people what's best for them?

Well let's see, he appears to be somebody who advocates for political and ideological changes by informing his fellows about what the government is up to and what the consequences may well be, thereby instilling fear in the public over government intrusions into their privacy and more.

A textbook terrorist using mass fear to accomplish his goals is what he appears to be (at least that's how the government press release will describe him after he's been detained for 'enhanced interrogation'.).


Comment: Re:It's not less precipitation. (Score 1) 264

by BlueStrat (#49075705) Attached to: NASA: Increasing Carbon Emissions Risk Megadroughts

That's a strawman, economic studies show it costs 1% or so of GWP to respond to AGW

Other economic studies disagree.

If you want to discuss those you need to bring science to the table to back up your positions like the scientists do.

Hockey stick charts built on 'massaged' data and failed computer models unable to even accurately model past, known patterns is not 'science'.

That's Alchemy, aka snake-oil.


Comment: Re:Pointless (Score 2) 111

by BlueStrat (#49075513) Attached to: Privacy: the 21st Century's Newest Luxury Item

~Government checklist for initiating drone strikes on domestic threats.~

If the target adheres to, implements, and/or publicly promotes any individual item or subset from the following, the target may added to the strike list.

1: Unplug. Yes, unless you need that phone on, it goes off, or into airplane mode. The HTC One M8 has an extreme battery saver mode, when combined with airplane mode, makes a useful alarm clock.

2: Learn the basics of OpenPGP [1], and build a web of trust. One can even have keysigning parties, and done right, no computers need to be brought over... public key fingerprints and IDs can be printed on pieces of paper, and people can indicate that the printed item is theirs.

3: Use social networks minimally, if at all.

4: Use OpenPGP tools on top of messaging and other protocols.

5: Use a VPN service, or perhaps TOR behind the VPN service, since it is routine for admins to block TOR exit nodes, or any nodes relating to TOR.

6: Use containers [2] for web browsing, so the social media buttons on one site can't chat with the social media buttons on another.

7: Check your Web browser against Panopticlick, and fix it so it isn't unique.

8: Even if one doesn't use TOR, use a VPN. This at least keeps the ground level ISP from modifying your traffic... they have to either block it, throttle it, or let it through... and (for most purposes) can't modify it.

9: Assume that any data that leaves the machine is available for anyone. Encrypt your stuff, or face the consequences.

Privacy can't be bought. It is a Class A Felony under secret Federal intelligence service court directives.

[1]: OpenPGP can be PGP, NetPGP, GnuPG, or any of those tools that use the OpenPGP format.

[2]: Containers can be VMs, sandboxes, or even separate user accounts.



Comment: Re:What about knife factory workers? (Score 1) 188

by BlueStrat (#49067821) Attached to: MegaUpload Programmer Pleads Guilty, Gets a Year In Prison

You've never read Atlas Shrugged.

If you think Rand was advocating anything 'collectivist' at all, perfect or otherwise, then you could not have read the same 'Atlas Shrugged' that the rest of the planet has. Rand railed against the sort of collectivist/socialist policies & programs etc she saw gradually taking root in the West that she and her family suffered through while in the USSR.

I'm convinced you got fed your opinions on AS and Rand from your teachers/professors and/or your political/ideological peers.

Try actually reading a work before you try to take it apart, or else you risk looking the fool.


Have you ever noticed that the people who are always trying to tell you `there's a time for work and a time for play' never find the time for play?