The Los Angeles Police Department has warned residents to be wary of thieves using technology to break into homes undetected. High-tech burglars have apparently knocked out their victims’ wireless cameras and alarms in the Los Angeles Wilshire-area neighborhoods before getting away with swag bags full of valuables. An LAPD social media post highlights the Wi-Fi jammer-supported burglaries and provides a helpful checklist of precautions residents can take.

Criminals can easily find the hardware for Wi-Fi jamming online. It can also be cheap, with prices starting from $40. However, jammers are illegal to use in the U.S.

We have previously reported on Wi-Fi jammer-assisted burglaries in Edina, Minnesota. Criminals deployed Wi-Fi jammer(s) to ensure homeowners weren’t alerted of intrusions and that incriminating video evidence wasn’t available to investigators.

  • Hurculina Drubman@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    back in the day, the trick was to cut the phone line, then shove the cut wire back in the phone box. wait for the police to come and see that there’s nothing wrong, then you go and burgle.

  • wheeldawg@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why did they specifically mention to “secure home DVR recorders”?

    Other than potentially losing some TV or movies, is that really a big deal next to the other items they mention? It seems really odd to mention one of the least important things.

    • Higgs boson@dubvee.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No. Think about it. Where is all the video from those cameras going? It is digital video, which the homeowner probably wants to record and playback… Many home security setups, particularly those that don’t rely on a cloud service, are basically a DVR back end with a security focused UI.

      • wheeldawg@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve never heard of used outside of a cable box. I didn’t know security setups would be called that.

        But with that information it makes sense.

        You made me one of the 10k today

  • thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    before getting away with swag bags full of valuables

    So just look for the guy who looks like he’s just been to four different network admin conferences?

  • henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m curious if these are actual jammers or just deauth devices.

    It also seems really risky because I think we have three different bands Wi-Fi devices use now?

    • tryitout@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      What do you mean actual jammer? If it puts out RF at a power level greater than the surrounding environment it is a jammer, correct? I would think for this attack to work you could just target the camera freqs used, you don’t have to target the whole home’s WiFi network. Probably a narrower range to focus on.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t think it’s that simple. The newer Wi-Fi standards are broadband (something on the order of 1GHz wide!), so the required power spectral density to block Wi-Fi across all channels is pretty extreme. I don’t think you’re doing that for $40. We should also keep in mind the standards were designed to operate in environments with other unlicensed devices and in the presence of interference.

        If you just want to target the frequencies the cameras are using, that would require a little bit of research skill that I think would elude most criminals. Also, some routers will change frequencies if the interference is bad.

        If I were building such a device I would use off the shelf Wi-Fi hardware and send deauthentication frames to any nearby stations. But even with this approach, there are devices that will ignore such frames now because it’s been a problem.

        • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          WiFi 6 camera probably exist, but most will use WiFi 5 or lower. Theres only 13 channels and of those usually only 3 or ever used due to band overlap.

        • fishos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol. None of my smart devices will connect to anything other than a 2.5ghz connection. Only my TV will accept 5g. The range is MUCH narrower than you think. Then figure in that the top 5 or 6 companies provide hardware for 90% of peoples home installations and that pool becomes even smaller. Also, a microwave operates on the same frequency as 2.5 and was a common disconnection problem in the past.

          This is trivially easy.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wish that apps notified you when your camera has been unreachable for too long, but at least that’s a hint that a jammer may have been involved. Cameras won’t stop them, but a the best setups would rely on wires and hidden local and cloud storage for recordings and alerts.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      apps notified you when your camera has been unreachable for too long

      The volume of false positives this produced would render the system significantly less useful.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      A numbers of cameras tell the user when they go offline, but yeah, a lot do not. I have a HomeKit system that sends an alert when WiFi or power has been interrupted to the camera or the primary hub.

  • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The thieves are jamming WiFi systems and the comments on the article and on Lemmy seem to blame the victim for not being tech savvy. The bulk of Nest/Ring customers do so because the app is easy to use and the cameras easy to setup. By definition the victims are far less likely to be able to defend against this kind of jamming attack.

    If the next step in escalation is to shut down the power to the house, will the victim be blamed for not having home batteries and solar panels?

    Why not question the viability of WiFi systems in general? Has video ever been more than a deterrent to those scared of cameras? Fearless thieves who know how to deter the systems get free loot for their trouble.

    Treat security like we did before 2010; improve physical security to defend instead of relying on deterrence.

    • WhyFlip@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      LAPD is recommending cutting back shrubbery and coordinating with neighbors for extended leave… As a Los Angeles native, neither of these things happen. After all, high walls make for good neighbors.

      • theRealBassist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        He only says, ‘Good fences make good neighbors.’ Spring is the mischief in me, and I wonder If I could put a notion in his head: ‘Why do they make good neighbors? Isn’t it Where there are cows? But here there are no cows. Before I built a wall I’d ask to know What I was walling in or walling out, And to whom I was like to give offense.

        I tried to get the formatting right, but oh well

    • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t know why everyone doesn’t do what I did. I have a WiFi doorbell camera but I also have 13 other cameras that cover the entire perimeter of my house connected to a PoE switch. My switch is on an UPS and connected to an outlet my natural gas generator cutover powers. My office (includes my miniPC running HAOS and frigate) is also on an UPS plugged into outlets my generator cutover powers in a locked cage inside a vented drawer with a 120mm exhaust fan to keep air circulation going in the drawer. All motion is recorded and saved to my local NAS (that is in the same locked cage) for 30 days and it syncs the recordings directory to the cloud. I have isolated cameras that look like usb chargers that record motion on a loop to 128GB micro sd cards aimed at all entry/exit points, hallways, and points is interest. Everything is pretty much set it and forget it. I get notified of any motion on my property regardless of my location and the jpeg captures are immediately sent to a dedicated email I setup should something unforeseen happens to the recorded video. If my or my partners cell phone is not on the WiFi all the cameras (except the doorbell and isolated ones) are set to siren mode on movement detection and they are surprisingly loud especially if two or three are going off at once.

      • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If my or my partners cell phone is not on the WiFi all the cameras (except the doorbell and isolated ones) are set to siren mode on movement detection

        Is this something you coded, or are there security camera brands that support it natively?

        • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The only part I coded was sending the api calls to cameras to turn on/off siren mode. I relied on a lot of other folks reverse engineering to help me along.

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know why everyone doesn’t do what I did.

        1. Your setup is fucking insane, and I mean that in a good way. As someone who ran a small team focused on security and who entertained more than one “I totally sploited our OS/let me show you how we suck today so we can fix it” conversations with dizzyingly smart zealots, this setup has excellent layering and coverage. Well fucking done.

        2. Cost. The same people who say “I’m on a pension so they can’t steal much from me” without realizing their retirement savings and credit rating are the golden fucking goose, also won’t see the benefits to such a cost in capital and setup labour. They won’t do it, and they’ll see us as nutcases until the leopards have eaten their face.

        • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I was making a joke using the absurdity of what I put together as a hobby project over the past couple years as an example to reinforce the comment I replied to. I’ve spent my whole career in IT and it’s absurd the level of knowledge a lot of career or even hobbyist IT folks expect the general public to have.

          My generator cost $8k installed.

          I ran all the cables myself, still cost $1k for the materials.

          Doorbell camera $200.

          PoE cameras averages to $174 each or ~$2,500

          UPS’s: $300 combined

          MiniPC: $500

          Cage and mounts: $150

          Isolated cameras: $30 ea

          SD cards: $15 ea

          All told I have over $13k invested easily and it would easily be over twice as much without knowing how to do it myself. Anyone giving folks shit for using WiFi security systems is out of touch.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Fence with a lock on it is a lot cheaper. Crazy how much people will spend on surveillance, given how little it does to achieve deterrence.

            • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I got insurance. I’d help load the truck rather than get shot if someone broke into my house and I was home. This has mostly been a fun project hobby that I can continuously tinker with while working in my office from home. I’ve had a lot of trouble finding a hobby I’m able to stick to that is mentally challenging and rewarding to me. The progressive learning has been great and has me excited to continue with further integration. That said. I will have evidence for police and insurance. I also enjoy watching the deer and other wildlife without going outside which tends to change their behavior.

      • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’ve absolutely nailed the smug tone some of the comments here have, good work.

        Also, imagine explaining all that to my mum, you’d be there all week.

      • person420@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You just said HAOS and Frigate, and “set it and forget it” in the same statement. As a long time user of both I call shenanigans.

        I also think you overestimate the ability of the average person. My mom barely knows how to work her Ring doorbell camera.

        • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          That was one of my attempts at playing my hand that I was being sarcastic. I tinker with the shit weekly and yes it is way beyond what any reasonable person should be expected to invest or understand. It’s just become a hobby of mine and I was trying to be funny, which I’m not very good at.

    • Entropywins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, it’s not really a spike in burglaries so much as a spike in a specific tool being used in burglaries. Whether they use a brick, wifi jammer or a gun they were going to rob someone someway…

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or a hoodie. I’m not sure why it’s a big g deal to WiFi jam a video doorbell when you can also defeat it with a hoodie …. Plus that’s not a burglar alarm.

        Whoever is peddling anything as a burglar alarm that depends on WiFi is the real criminal

    • habitualTartare@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes but the camera should be in a place that can’t be physically tampered with easily since someone could theoretically unplug the camera and plug into your home network and see all your computers or other devices as if they had stolen your WiFi password. A small risk but it’s better to hardwire it somewhere they would need a ladder to get to or get a camera system that connects to a central box inside the house.

      • aviation_hydrated@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, if it’s not on a WiFi network, it’ll be fine. CCTV is a great example of this. Just wire up some cameras, encrypt the harddrive and put it somewhere difficult to get to. Only way to disable all cameras at once would be an EMP. There are kits for a few hundred $ and all the data stays local

    • kusivittula@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      yes, assuming the cables are inaccessible from outside. otherwise it would be easy to cut them.

  • Fillicia@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s one of the reason I went with a PoE camera. Just make sure your network is isolated so people can’t connect to your internal network from the camera Ethernet cable.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or vice versa, connect to your cameras from the rest of your network.

    • Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It doesn’t hurt to hide or disguise the cameras to make them difficult to spot. That way, burglars wouldn’t even try to find and break their server if they’re not noticed.

  • credo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    However, jammers are illegal to use in the U.S.

    What is the point of adding this bit for an article about burglaries?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ostensibly harder to obtain when they’re illegal to stock and sell retail.

      Same reason why you see folks in Japan and the UK obsessed with knife crime rather than gun crime. Obtaining a gun is more difficult to do legally, so fewer people carry them.

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it’s relevant? Is this not factual information that readers may or may not have known?

      The availability of hardware changes by a not-negligent degree based on the legality of acquiring it.

      Curious readers likely find information indicating that these shouldn’t be readily available at your local big box store to be pertinent information.

      • turmacar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It does and it doesn’t.

        Any microwave with the door rigged open is a super effective Wi-Fi jammer. Everything coalesced on 2.4GHz instead of licensing their own radio spectrum making absolute mountains of overlap. It’s harder jam nearly everything else. ( Not much harder, software radios are super cheap, but you at least need more electronics knowledge than a screwdriver and tape. )

    • communism@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because jammers are not inherently burglary tools. It provides extra information about the technology in discussion.

    • Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because Californians love writing laws as a knee jerk reaction to the crime de jour.

      Some pearl-clutching local will go to their state legislature and demand that WiFi jamming be banned despite the fact that the FCC is all over that shit. They keep passing redundant gun control laws in the same way for the same reasons.

  • Freefall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Something tells me that systems will just have a strong dummy wireless signal act as a tripwire and then it goes down, it triggers stuff…even super low end stuff could implement it.

    • Kelsenellenelvial@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some systems already have that. Replaced a switch yesterday and re-arranged some things on my network board and got a HomeKit notification that some things were offline and when it came back. Knowing when something goes offline isn’t as useful as keeping things up though. With something like a hardwired camera/NVR, even if your ISP service is interrupted the cameras can still record, and you can put a UPS there to keep things going, even if the rest of the network is down.

  • FlashZordon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Worked at an old job where one guy, that had access to the router settings, would disable the Blink Cameras so he could forge his time cards.

    Owners ended up realizing the cameras would only be disabled when he was on shift.

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I worked at Walmart ages ago and one of the overnight assistant managers would do this and then steal cash out of the cash office until he finally got caught.

  • septimian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    My August lock wifi goes down like 4 times a week. I feel so safe.

    Wish it had an Ethernet option, not sure how that would work on a door though lol

    • Grippler@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wish it had an Ethernet option, not sure how that would work on a door though

      You’d just run a cable to the door from the hinge side, preferably inside the door through the hinge so it’s not visible on the door itself. This is a very common solution for electronic locks in office buildings for example.