Can anyone still hide?

December 7, 2006 12:54 PM

We previously discussed your cell phone as a roving bug, but what about your ipod?
posted by bmpetow (26 comments total)

the vulnerability of the device stems from the RFID sensor in the Nike shoes, which constantly transmits its unique signal, thanks to its on-board power source, regardless whether the user has the iPod accessory turned on or not.

Eh? If it's RFID why would it need a power source?
posted by Artw at 12:58 PM on December 7, 2006

It's not RFID, as obviously the function is not to provide identification.

Why is the link going through google by the way? Here's the plain link.
posted by fvw at 1:07 PM on December 7, 2006

Oh, and powered RFID (for greater range or with low-power readers) does exist by the way, they're just more expensive and not very popular.
posted by fvw at 1:08 PM on December 7, 2006

Having RTFA that TFApoints at it seems that this is nothing to do with RFID whatsoever.

It's also distinctly unimpressive as far as privacy threats go... basically if you do not turn off or remove a wireless deivuice that you are carrying with you then people can ...shock... detect the wireless device! From up to 20 meters away! Gasp! And since it broadcasts a unique ID then theoretically someone could use that unique ID to tell if you're in the area.

No mention of whether that 20 meters requires line of sight.
posted by Artw at 1:09 PM on December 7, 2006

' Is it the shoes? '
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 1:16 PM on December 7, 2006

Wow. I had heard the phrase "iPod+Nike" before, in some of the marketing crap that came with my nano, but I didn't know what it meant. I assumed it was some expensive toy for stupid people. I have not yet changed that opinion since learning what it's about.
posted by gurple at 1:20 PM on December 7, 2006

This is a pretty lame 'attack'. If you're being stalked by someone they can stalk you more?
posted by chunking express at 1:34 PM on December 7, 2006

Whoa, I can see stalkers and thieves tracking someone with a a simple home-made surveillance device, but even corporations?

I dunno Artw, it’s pretty scary that people can use photon emission and simple fovea and optic disc technology to track you to within 20 meters. Corporations too.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:37 PM on December 7, 2006

Nike = consumer garbage.

iPod = consumer garbage.

Two great tastes, taste great together!

(by the way, it's a shoe that keeps track of how fast you're running, and like plays appropriate music for you. Some goofy shit like that. And it keeps track of like how often you run, etc.
posted by delmoi at 1:50 PM on December 7, 2006

Your favorite thing = consumer garbage
posted by spicynuts at 1:53 PM on December 7, 2006 [2 favorites]

It's RFID, not IPOD, omg, stfu and gtfo.
posted by cavalier at 1:58 PM on December 7, 2006

I dunno Artw, it’s pretty scary that people can use photon emission and simple fovea and optic disc technology to track you to within 20 meters. Corporations too.

Well, someone could put detectors all over town, and you wouldn't be able to see them, although you could detect the detectors as well.

Maybe someone should map out all RFID detector signals. That'd be kinda cool
posted by delmoi at 2:01 PM on December 7, 2006

It's the shoes that broadcast the signal, though. Not the iPod.

And I love "consumer garbage." Hilarious.
What are you, from Adbusters?
posted by chococat at 2:28 PM on December 7, 2006

Can you jam the signal if you put it on shuffle?
posted by jeremy b at 2:30 PM on December 7, 2006

Your favorite consumer garbage sucks.
posted by grouse at 3:45 PM on December 7, 2006 [2 favorites]

didn't we previously discuss this too?
posted by caddis at 4:38 PM on December 7, 2006

here.
posted by Artw at 4:56 PM on December 7, 2006

And I love "consumer garbage." Hilarious.

But not inaccurate.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:43 PM on December 7, 2006

You are not the products you buy, unless you buy stuff I don't like.
posted by Citizen Premier at 6:11 PM on December 7, 2006

Any interest in an RFID blaster? - it would power-emit or passively respond to RFID requests with random/expensive/cheap/crazy tag ID's constantly.

Basically 'game' the system and overload any watchers with garbage data. No law against that - as long as you stay within FCC emission requirements.
posted by jkaczor at 9:14 PM on December 7, 2006

Consumer Garbage
posted by tehloki at 10:08 PM on December 7, 2006

Yeah, I bet your fucking iRiver sings you to sleep by the tune of one of your ogg files, in a state of bliss knowing you are invulnerable to this attack on your privacy. Moron. It's a fucking radio transmitter, of course it can be tracked. Also, you don't own one, and never will. Quit bloviating.
posted by blasdelf at 10:54 PM on December 7, 2006

I hear you can use tinfoil to block the evil signal rays.
posted by ninjew at 12:19 AM on December 8, 2006

Using roving bugs to track roving bugs.
posted by pracowity at 3:58 AM on December 8, 2006

Using Karl Rove to eliminate stubborn poopsock stains.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:35 AM on December 8, 2006

“Well, someone could put detectors all over town, and you wouldn't be able to see them, although you could detect the detectors as well.”

I think most government employees and corporate goons have sophisticated photon emission detecting fovea. Citizens as well. Two of ‘em in fact.
posted by Smedleyman at 11:44 AM on December 8, 2006