Disruptive Tech Gets Scary

 
 
By Peter Coffee  |  Posted 2004-11-01 Print this article Print
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Jamming devices such as TV-B-Gone and Cell-Block-R pose new challenges of detection and defense, and manufacturers must reckon with them.

Octobers advent of wireless weapons suggests a new and scary meaning of the phrase "disruptive technology." The month began with a worldwide wave of cell phone blockers appearing in churches, theaters and university examination rooms. Things then took a turn for the absurd with the Oct. 19 shipment of a $15 key-chain-fob device that will turn off almost any type of TV set within its range.

Its not going to stop here. The same kind of happy innocence that informed the early design of the Internet is also built into most of our wireless products, and its made them—so far—inexpensive and easy to use. One has to wonder if well someday look back at the early 00s as a brief Gilded Age of cable-free convenience—before our wireless systems all had to be armored in cumbersome defensive measures, both concrete and abstract.

The threats to system function are diverse. Cornfield Electronics TV-B-Gone is a digital shotgun, spewing out remote control power-switching codes from the same database thats built into any off-the-shelf universal remote control. Within a minute of activation, it will usually hit the infrared pulse code (or codes) to turn off any nearby TV unit. If you happen to have other devices in the area that use one of those codes, either by choice or by accident, then welcome to the world of collateral damage.

Cell phone blockers, such as the Cell-Block-R from Cell Block Technologies, take a different approach that sets—in effect—a protocol pitfall. To any nearby cell phone, the blocker device appears to be the best available network access point. The cell phone locks on to the blocker and disappears into its black hole. Theres no escalating war of power levels or risk of damage to communications devices, pacemakers or other electronic equipment—just a bit of electronic aikido that turns the devices normal function into the means of its own defeat.

To read about plans for in-flight cell phone service, click here. Vendors of these devices, both the TV-B-Gone and the Cell-Block-R and its competitors, stoutly maintain that they arent "jamming" signals—a good position to take if they dont want to go up against the Communications Act of 1934, which pretty much defines the regulation of radio emissions in the United States. Subchapter III, Part I, Section 333 of the act concisely states, "No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act or operated by the United States Government."

These devices escape the Section 333 prohibition in two ways. They dont "interfere"; they merely communicate under what one might call false pretenses. And they cause no nuisance to any licensed radio installation: Cell phones and TV receivers are appliances, and their designers are obligated to take the world as they find it in terms of surrounding signals. That world, like any ecosystem, initially had no enemies that targeted these emergent species, but, over time, nature always seems to evolve new predators for new prey.

I havent yet mentioned the previous generation of (mostly legendary) electronic weapons, such as EMP (electromagnetic pulse) bombs or HERF (high-energy radio frequency) guns. Like any good urban legend, most stories of terrorist EMP attacks and hobbyist HERF hacks mix just enough technical fact with requisite vagueness as to crucial details.

There are two fundamental reasons, moreover, to doubt that EMP or HERF technologies will ever play key roles in the terrorist arsenal. Conventional bombs and guns are cheaper to build or buy, and much more terrifying. Which gets more TV play: blood and body parts and smoking holes in the ground, or dead computers that merely look as if theyve been turned off?

EMP and HERF are electronic Godzillas, able to stomp on an entire building but also easily detected. The TV-B-Gone and Cell-Block-R are termites in the woodwork that can cause a lot more damage before their presence is known. No future wireless device can be responsibly designed and deployed without active, extensive consideration of the means and motivations for taking it down—and active defense, despite the resulting cost and complexity.

Innocence was fun while it lasted.

Technology Editor Peter Coffee can be reached at peter_coffee@ziffdavis.com.

To read more Peter Coffee, subscribe to eWEEK magazine. Check out eWEEK.coms Mobile & Wireless Center for the latest news, reviews and analysis on mobile and wireless computing.

Be sure to add our eWEEK.com mobile and wireless news feed to your RSS newsreader or My Yahoo page

 
 
 
 
Peter Coffee is Director of Platform Research at salesforce.com, where he serves as a liaison with the developer community to define the opportunity and clarify developers' technical requirements on the company's evolving Apex Platform. Peter previously spent 18 years with eWEEK (formerly PC Week), the national news magazine of enterprise technology practice, where he reviewed software development tools and methods and wrote regular columns on emerging technologies and professional community issues.Before he began writing full-time in 1989, Peter spent eleven years in technical and management positions at Exxon and The Aerospace Corporation, including management of the latter company's first desktop computing planning team and applied research in applications of artificial intelligence techniques. He holds an engineering degree from MIT and an MBA from Pepperdine University, he has held teaching appointments in computer science, business analytics and information systems management at Pepperdine, UCLA, and Chapman College.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Submit a Comment

Loading Comments...
 
Manage your Newsletters: Login   Register My Newsletters























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rocket Fuel