Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security Wireless Networking Hardware

We're Jammin', Hope You Like Jammin' Too 422

theodp writes "Slate ponders whether a climate where anything can be photographed or surreptitiously recorded means the once-esoteric world of cell-phone jamming will become mainstream. Sites now offer portable cell-phone jammers that can provide you with the same kind of security bubbles used to thwart industrial spies, hostage-takers and bomb detonators. While actively jamming a cell-phone signal is illegal in the US, a distributor reports most of his sales go to US customers, including universities which use the technology to stop students from diddling away on phones during lectures."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

We're Jammin', Hope You Like Jammin' Too

Comments Filter:
  • Illegal in the US? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Trbmxfz ( 728040 ) on Saturday December 06, 2003 @12:33PM (#7647846)
    Sorry, but we cannot sell this cell phone jammer to UK customers

    Apparently, it's not very legal in the UK either :)

  • Jamming= Illegal (Score:5, Informative)

    by pvt_medic ( 715692 ) on Saturday December 06, 2003 @12:33PM (#7647853)
    The operation of transmitters designed to jam or block wireless communications is a violation of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"). See 47 U.S.C. Sections 301, 302a, 333. The Act prohibits any person from willfully or maliciously interfering with the radio communications of any station licensed or authorized under the Act or operated by the U.S. government. 47 U.S.C. Section 333. The manufacture, importation, sale or offer for sale, including advertising, of devices designed to block or jam wireless transmissions is prohibited. 47 U.S.C. Section 302a(b). Parties in violation of these provisions may be subject to the penalties set out in 47 U.S.C. Sections 501-510. Fines for a first offense can range as high as $11,000 for each violation or imprisonment for up to one year, and the device used may also be seized and forfeited to the U.S. government

    From
    http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/cellular/operatio ns/blockingjamming.html
  • by BigBlockMopar ( 191202 ) on Saturday December 06, 2003 @01:02PM (#7648046) Homepage

    So he started to bring a digital camera and a small tripod to class, and takes pictures of each blackboard full of material.

    Oh, I just found another sample [glowingplate.com]. Ugh... more sequences and series; I hated that stuff.

  • Safe Haven (Score:5, Informative)

    by nodwick ( 716348 ) on Saturday December 06, 2003 @01:06PM (#7648070)
    If you read the fine print (which actually isn't on the product page [icebergsystems.co.uk] as far as I could tell, they say that you have to have an "approved phone". From The Register [theregister.co.uk]:
    The snag is that Safe Haven technology needs to be integrated at the time of manufacture into new devices or installed as a Java download update to suitable equipment already in the market.

    "You need to have an approved camera," Blagden admitted, adding that the incorporation of Sade Haven technology is unlikely to affect handset prices.

    In other words, like most DRM-type schemes, it only works if your camera "supports" this feature. And just like DRM, I don't think it's going to be very popular among consumers -- this is a "feature" that benefits the guy trying to stop the camera user, not the guy buying and paying for the phone. I'd especially think that industrial spies would be smart enough to get a phone that didn't support this.
  • by Brandon30X ( 34344 ) on Saturday December 06, 2003 @01:19PM (#7648163)
    Well that's not exactly a great idea, now you would be transmitting a signal, just like a cell phone, as well. And the other persons phone will still try to keep in contact with the tower, so it will transmit periodically, so now you have two devices transmitting RF radiation near the medical equipment. Jamming is like screaming in someone's ear in order to keep them from hearing someone else talk.

  • by Robotech_Master ( 14247 ) * on Saturday December 06, 2003 @02:47PM (#7648798) Homepage Journal
    Except that the cellphone jammer works by broadcasting on cellphone frequences...so it would probably be just as interferential to the equipment as a cellphone, if not more so.
  • by henryhbk ( 645948 ) on Saturday December 06, 2003 @04:07PM (#7649361) Homepage
    The modern digital cell phones (old analog ones are a different story) have been shown not to interfere with telemetry. In fact we not only removed our jammers at the hospital, we installed cell repeaters in the hospital for crises (after 9/11 where we lost some of the wired phones). We also have a verizon tower on side of Bellevue (4 floors from the MICU and 3 from the CCU) and have never had a problem. We also did internal studies with blackberry's, with placing them on monitors, external pacemakers, ventilators, etc and sending messages, with no problems.

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Working...