According to a report in Israel-based newspaper Haaretz, the Israeli Defense Forces intensified GPS jamming in the region to prevent drone assaults by Hamas and Hezbollah.

 

According to the IDF, Israel is interrupting satellite navigation systems "proactively for various operational needs." "Citizens should be aware that the disruption can cause various and temporary effects on location-based applications," the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) told Haaretz.

 

 

According to the analysis, this will have two effects on GPS services. For starters, GPS signal reception can be fully disabled. Second, it may be faked, which means it can send bogus location data to the device.

 

 

GPS receivers may be found in mobile phones jammer phone, aircraft, ships, and vehicles. They receive signals from many satellites at the same time and utilize them to compute their own precise location and altitude.

 

 

These identical receivers may also be found on cruise missiles and drones, where they are used to direct them to their destination. Any army organization interested in thwarting such an attack may emit forcefully on the required frequency band, preventing the GPS blocker device from receiving any satellite signal and completely disabling its operation.

 

 

Spoofing is a technique in which the signal mimics the genuine satellite signal and hijacks the GPS receiver. Once the receiver has locked on to the bogus signal, the disrupter will supply it with fake data, forcing it to compute and show an inaccurate position and altitude. This can result in the receiver reporting its genuine position dozens, if not hundreds, of kilometers away.

 

 

According to Haaretz, Israelis had GPS troubles last week because the IDF was apparently attempting to prevent Hezbollah's GPS-guided drones from entering far into Israel.

 

 

The publication said that Israelis are being impacted, citing an example in which a person from Haifa said his phone incorrectly indicated his position as being in the northern border area while being in Haifa. Residents in the West Bank said that their phones notified them that they were close to the Gaza border.

 

 

However, this may cause problems with the IDF HomeFront Command app, which provides information based on the user's phone location. According to the publication, blocking the app or the GPS transmitter on people's phones might result in a false signal.

 

 

Starlink and other low-Earth orbit constellations face new security risks

 

Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 really threw Ukrainian communications into a tailspin: Shortly before the invasion, Russian hackers disabled Viasat satellite ground receivers across Europe. Then entrepreneur Elon Musk stepped in and offered access to Starlink, SpaceX's growing network of low-Earth orbit (LEO) communications satellites. Musk soon reported that Starlink was suffering from cell phone jamming attacks and software countermeasures.

 

 

In March, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) concluded that Russia was still trying to block Starlink, according to leaked documents from U.S. National Guard pilot Ryan Teixeira seen by The Washington Post. According to the "Defense One" website, the Ukrainian military also blamed the Starlink problem on Russian gps jamming. If Russia blocks low-Earth orbit constellations, this will be a new height in the silent war between space and earth communications.

 

 

“There’s really not a lot of information about it,” said Brian Weeden, program director at the Secure World Foundation, an NGO focused on space governance. However, Weeden added, "My sense is that Starlink is harder to jam or interfere with [than GPS satellites]."

 

 

LEO satellites face new security risks

 

Regardless of their altitude or size, communications satellites transmit more power and therefore require more energy to jam than navigation satellites. However, low-Earth-orbiting satellites orbiting the Earth at altitudes of 2,000 kilometers or less switch frequently, which "results in delays and creates more interference" than large geostationary satellites, said Mark, professor of data protection and data protection. Mark Manulis said. Applied cryptography at the Cyber ​​Defense Institute (CODE) of the Bundeswehr University Munich.

 

 

Security and communications researchers have mostly studied defenses and countermeasures behind closed doors, but several publications and open-source research have revealed how unprepared many low-Earth orbit satellites are for a direct attack, and what defenses may be needed for future low-Earth orbit satellites.

 

 

For years, private companies and government agencies have been planning low-Earth orbit constellations, each with thousands of satellites. For example, the Department of Defense has been designing its own network of low-Earth orbit satellites to complement its more traditional geostationary constellation for more than a decade and has begun awarding contracts to build it. University research groups also launch miniature standardized CubeSats (CubeSats) into low Earth orbit for research and demonstration purposes. This proliferation of satellite constellations coincides with the emergence of off-the-shelf components and software-defined radio—both of which make the satellites more affordable, but perhaps less secure.

 

 

Russian defense authorities have commissioned a system called "Tobol" to counter jammers that could interfere with Russian satellites, journalist and author Bart Hendricks reports. This means that either Russia can deliver jamming signals to satellites, or it suspects that its adversaries can.

 

 

Many agencies and organizations launching the latest generation of low-cost satellites have yet to address the biggest safety issues they face, researchers write in the 2022 Low Earth Orbit Safety Report. This may be because one of the lures of low-Earth orbit is the relatively cheap ability of new hardware to handle smaller tasks.

 

 

"Satellites are getting smaller and smaller. Their purpose is very clear," said Ijaz Ahmad, a telecommunications security researcher at the VTT Technology Research Center in Espoo, Finland. “Less resources are devoted to computing power, processing, and storage.” Lower computing power means less encryption capabilities and a lower ability to detect and respond to outages or other proactive outages.

 

 

The rise of software-defined radio (SDR) is also making it easier to deploy hardware for new missions, including the ability of small satellites to cover multiple frequency bands. "When you make it programmable, you provide some kind of remote connection to that hardware so that you can program it. But if you ignore the security aspect, there are serious consequences," Ahmed said.

 

 

 

 

 

Bloody ground attacks by Hamas armed militants shocked Israel, but there were also surprises overhead, says a Brock University professor.

 

DRONES IN ISRAEL AND UKRAINE

 

This seems to be the first conflict where Hamas has successfully used armed drones. Some are quadcopters that operators fly via remote control. They can precisely drop explosives onto small targets - like an Iron Dome system. Videos online show them attacking people, a watchtower and a tank.

 

 

Ukraine has effectively used similar quadcopters against Russian military targets. They sometimes drop explosives right down an armoured vehicle’s open hatch.

 

 

However, technology is developing rapidly, in many cases, faster than the defence industry or NATO can react. For example, many ‘traditional’ countermeasures against small UAS rely on electronic jamming of the Command and Control (C2) link between the ‘drone’ and its remote control. Many current COTS products are, however, able to navigate autonomously to a given coordinate or can be controlled via a Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) network from the operator’s mobile phone. These features make jamming either completely useless, since the C2 link is no longer required to navigate, or unavailable, because of peacetime restrictions that prohibit the signal jamming of frequencies that are in use by the public.

 

 

The Space Domain

 

SATCOM is an essential part of BLOS UAS operations. But COTS UAS also utilize PNT signals provided by respective satellite constellations. Within the limits of the ‘Outer Space Treaty’, countermeasures against space-based communications and PNT may be a legitimate option to defend against an entire fleet of adversary UAS. This does not necessarily require kinetic engagements by anti-satellite weapons. Indeed, ground or space-based jamming capabilities could be effective without risking the creation of large amounts of debris which could render entire orbits unusable for mankind.

 

 

Depending on the country and its domestic laws, which are applicable during peacetime, circumstances may prohibit certain types of countermeasures and limit the options for defending against UAS. These possibly prohibited countermeasures include kinetic engagement of airborne UA, cell phone jamming of publicly used frequencies such as GSM or wireless networks, or interference with the commercial PNT signals.

 

 

Additionally, non-kinetic measures such as jamming radio frequencies or PNT signals may affect public and commercial communications infrastructure and therefore, may be restricted or completely off-limits. Especially in peacetime, countermeasures have to be balanced against potential adverse impacts on critical communication systems and possible economic losses

 

 

Drug Cartels. In Mexico, drones have been extensively used for drug trafficking purposes in the region of the Mexico-US border as their use significantly lowers the risk of being caught. The route of the drone is pre-programmed and due to its autonomous capability, it cannot be blocked by electronic jammers at the border. The cartels in Mexico also use so-called potato bombs – hand grenadesized IEDs – in attacks on each other.

 

 

Both categories, commercially available drones as well as military UAS, should be considered ‘autonomous’ in the way that they probably no longer require a permanent command and control link to fulfil their mission. This eliminates many of the current countermeasures which rely on gps jamming their radio transmissions.

 

 

Most UAS use a dedicated PNT data link to determine its precise location, and this link must be maintained to ensure mission success. The PNT signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is roughly equivalent to viewing a 25-Watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal can easily be jammed by a stronger power transmission in a similar frequency.

 

 

Any radio navigation system is generally vulnerable to interference. A typical patch antenna used to receive PNT signals must be able to receive them from virtually the entire sky. The advantage of this omnidirectional design is that even signals from satellites, which are just above the local horizon, can be received. However, this design is susceptible to a broad range of interference and drone jamming.

 

 

 

Top prosecutors across the country are again calling on Congress to pass legislation that would allow state prisons to interfere with cellphone signals smuggled to inmates. According to lawyers, the devices allow people to plan
violence and commit crimes.

 

“We simply need Congress to pass legislation giving states the authority to implement cell phone jamming systems to protect prisoners,
guards and the public at large,” 22 prosecutors wrote in a statement. Wednesday's letter to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

 

 

Wilson's office said it plans to contact Democratic prosecutors and does not believe the matter is partisan.

 

 

The letter, obtained by The Associated Press, cites several crimes that lawyers say were orchestrated by inmates using contraband cellphones, including a drug conspiracy in Tennessee and a double murder ordered by an inmate in
Indiana.

 

 

They also led a gang siege at a South Carolina prison in 2018 that lasted more than seven hours and left seven inmates dead. One prisoner described the bodies as "literally stacked on top of each other, like a horrible pile of wood."
Corrections officials blamed illegal cellphones for the unfolding violence, the worst prison riot in the United States in 25 years.

 

 

“By preventing prisoners from using prohibited cell phones, we can prevent serious drug trafficking, deadly riots and other crimes,” prosecutors wrote.

 

 

To render the phones - which are smuggled into hollow footballs, implanted by corrupt employees and sometimes dropped by drones - worthless, prosecutors are asking for changes to a nearly century-old law A historic federal
communications law that currently prohibits state prisons from using signal jamming technology to suppress illegal cellphone signals.

 

 

Efforts to crack down on illicit cellphones in state prisons have been going on for years, and South Carolina Corrections Director Bryan Stirling is leading an effort by correctional directors across the country to demand more
technology to combat their use of smuggled phones. the behavior of.

 

 

In a progressive victory in 2021, the FCC passed a decision allowing state prison systems to work with cellphone providers to sequentially apply for permission to identify and shut down illegal cellphone signals. South Carolina
was the first state to request use of the technology, but Sterling told The Associated Press on Tuesday that the state has not yet taken any action on the request.

 

 

Sterling said federal prisons can jam cellphone signals behind bars, but that is not currently the case.

 

 

CTIA, the wireless industry trade association, opposes interference, saying it could impede legitimate calls. However, CTIA told the commission that it has "successfully worked with its member companies" to "cease service for
prohibited devices pursuant to court orders received," according to a 2020 FCC filing.

 

 

CTIA and FCC officials did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment on the new wave of subversion.

 

 

Congress has previously considered blocking the legislation, but has yet to sign any bill or even hold hearings. U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., reintroduced the measure in the last Congress in August.

 

 

"We're not going to stop advocating for this," Wilson told The Associated Press on Tuesday. "I can only hope that at some point Congress will take notice."

 

 

 

Drone signals can be jammed by using jamming signals to disrupt communications between the drone pilot and the drone. If you want to know more about whether you can jam a drone signal, read my complete guide - click here to go to the article.

 

Jammers work by emitting a much stronger signal than a remote control. They may interfere with radio signals and flight data as well as any video connections. The purpose of interference is to distort the signal to the point where the receiver simply cannot recognize it or to cause system failure. This is one way to legally stop drones and hijack communications.

 

 

Unless the government gives you permission, you're unlikely to buy a particularly large drone jammer.

 

 

There are a number of laws and regulations that may overlap with drone jamming technology, as well as a number of communications laws that govern the disruption of public communications frequencies:

 

 

US code

 

"No person shall intentionally or maliciously interfere with or disrupt radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this chapter or operated by the United States Government."

 

 

— 47 US Code § 333 – Willful or malicious interference

 

The code means that personnel operating jammers must be licensed and authorized by the federal government.

 

 

If a drone jammer is used on a drone, there is a risk that the drone will fall from the sky, causing property damage and personal injury. This level of disruption could lead to the possibility of people suing you based on the damage caused by using a drone jammer.

 

 

You can jam drone signals by purchasing a drone remote control and using a signal booster to confuse any nearby drones. However, this may not work unless the drone is closer to you than the pilot.

 

 

 

 

 

Congressman David Kustoff (R-TN) and Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) have introduced the Cellphone Jamming Reform Act, a bill aimed at addressing the issue of contraband cellphone use in federal and state prison facilities. The purpose of this legislation is to allow prisons to utilize cellphone jamming systems in order to protect inmates, guards, and the wider public from potential harm.

 

According to Congressman Kustoff, putting an end to the illicit use of contraband cellphones within correctional facilities will have an immediate impact on reducing crime rates, enhancing public safety, and relieving the burden on our overwhelmed correctional systems. He stresses that this act represents a crucial initial step towards tackling the current crime crisis faced by America. Congressman Kustoff expresses his pride in collaborating with Senator Cotton to introduce such pivotal legislation and urges fellow members of Congress to offer their support.

 

 

Senator Cotton highlights how prisoners have been exploiting contraband cellphones for engaging in illegal activities outside prison walls, including orchestrating attacks on rivals, promoting sex trafficking operations, facilitating drug trade, and conducting business transactions. The use of cellphone gps jamming devices can effectively halt these criminal endeavors; however, current regulations under the Federal Communications Act prevent correctional facilities from employing this technology. This bill seeks to rectify this issue so that criminals serve their sentences without posing any risk whatsoever to society at large.

 

 

The Cellphone Jamming Reform Act has received endorsements from multiple state attorneys general, including Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor. The Act is also supported by the Major County Sheriffs of America, National Sheriffs' Association and the Council of Prison Locals.

 

 

According to Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti

 

"The only way to stop the illegal use of cell phones in prisons is through jamming signal. When individuals are incarcerated, they should not be allowed to maintain contact with criminal organizations on the outside. I commend Congressman Kustoff for his unwavering commitment to protecting our nation from organized crime."

 

 

Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin stated

 

"Congress needs to pass the Cell Phone Jamming Reform Act without delay. Prisoners are using contraband phones to carry out criminal activities from behind bars. We have the technology to enhance security and put an end to this illicit behavior; it's time we utilize it. I haven't heard any valid reasons why we should facilitate criminals and enable convicted felons to continue their criminal enterprises while in custody."

 

 

Background:

 

 

• The use of contraband cellphones is a pervasive issue within both federal and state prison facilities. Inmates exploit these devices to engage in a wide range of illicit activities, such as orchestrating hits on individuals outside the confines of the prison walls, operating illegal drug enterprises, facilitating unlawful business transactions, promoting sex trafficking, and coordinating escape attempts that put correctional staff, fellow inmates, and the public at risk. Incidents involving contraband cellphones have been reported nationwide.


• Over the past five years in South Carolina alone, there have been four significant cases of drug trafficking where operations were conducted clandestinely within prison walls using contraband cellphones. Notably, the most recent operation was directly linked to a Mexican drug cartel. Furthermore, in 2018, inmates affiliated with gangs orchestrated a merciless assault resulting in the deaths of seven inmates and numerous injuries through their unauthorized use of cellphones in a maximum-security facility.


• In Oklahoma, 69 defendants were found guilty of participating in a "drug trafficking operation that was primarily directed and controlled by incarcerated gang members using unauthorized cellphones from their state prison cells."


• In Tennessee, an inmate utilized an illegal cellphone to orchestrate drug conspiracy deals by sending a package filled with methamphetamine to his significant other.


• In Georgia, prisoners employed illicit cellphones to carry out fraudulent calls, demanding payment and even sending photos of injured inmates to their relatives while requesting money.


• As indicated by the Indiana Department of Corrections, during the previous year (2022), a gang enforcer incarcerated within Indiana Department of Corrections ordered a double homicide through the use of an unauthorized cellphone within prison walls.


• According to The Wall Street Journal's report, Martin Shkreli, the disgraced pharmaceutical executive who was sentenced to seven years for securities fraud, continued making decisions at Phoenixus AG with the assistance of an illegal cellphone.


 

 

 

 

 

 

F.C.C. spokesman Clyde Enslin declined to comment on the issue or the Maryland case.

 

Wireless carriers pay tens of billions of dollars to lease spectrum from governments as long as others don't interfere with their signals. And there are additional fees. Verizon Wireless, for example, spends $6.5 billion a year building and maintaining its network.

 

 

"It is counterintuitive that this type of device has found a market at a time when wireless consumers' demand for improved cell phone coverage is clear and strong," said Jeffrey Nelson, a Verizon spokesman. These carriers also raise public safety concerns: criminals could use gsm blocker to prevent people from communicating in an emergency.

 

 

The CTIA, a major cellphone industry association, asked the F.C.C. on Friday to maintain the illegality of the interference and continue to pursue violators. The company said the move was in response to requests from the two companies to allow jammers to be used in certain situations, such as prisons.

 

 

The individuals who used the jammers expressed guilt about their vandalism, but some clearly had a mischievous side, and others gloated over the phones. "It was worth it just to watch those stupid teens in the mall get their phone hung up." Can you hear me? Noooo! Nice, "the jammer's buyer wrote last month in a review on a website called DealExtreme.

 

 

Gary, a therapist in Ohio, also declined to give his last name, citing the illegal use of the devices. Interruptions are necessary to get the job done effectively, he says. He runs group therapy sessions for people with eating disorders. During one meeting, a woman's confession was rudely interrupted.

 

 

"She was talking about sexual abuse," Gary said. "Someone's phone was turned off and they kept talking."

 

 

"There's no etiquette," he said. "It's an epidemic."

 

Gary said that despite the no-phone policy, calls always interrupt therapy. Four months ago, he bought a jammer for $200 and secretly placed it on the side of the room. He tells patients that if they are waiting for an emergency call, they should give the phone number of the front desk. He didn't tell them about the jammer.

 

 

Gary bought the jammer from a website in London called PhoneJammer.com. Victor McCormack, the site's operator, said he ships about 400 jammers a month to the United States, up from 300 a year ago. He says more than 2,000 holiday gifts have been ordered.

 

 

Kumaar Thakkar, who lives in Mumbai, India, and sells jammers online, said he exports 20 jammers a month to the United States, twice as many as a year ago. Clients include cafe and hair salon owners and Dan, a New York school bus driver, he said.

 

 

"The kids thought they were secretly hiding in their seats and using their phones," Dan wrote in an email to Mr. Tarka, thanking him for selling jammers. "Now kids don't understand why their phones don't work, but can't ask either because they'll get in trouble!" It's fun to watch them try to get the signal."

 

 

Andrew, an architect in the San Francisco area, said using jammers started out as fun and became a practical way to keep quiet on the train. Now he uses it more wisely.

 

 

"At this point, just knowing that I have the power to cut someone off is satisfying enough," he said.

 

 

One afternoon in early September, an architect boarded a local train and became a mobile vigilante. He sat next to a woman in her 20s who he said was "chatting" on her phone.

 

 

"She kept using the word 'like.' She sounded like a valley girl," said architect Andrew, who declined to give his last name because what he did next was illegal.

 

 

Andrew reached into his shirt pocket and pressed a button on a black device the size of a cigarette pack. It emits a powerful radio signal that interferes with the chatterer's cellphone transmissions as well as those of others within a 30-foot radius.

 

 

"She spoke into the phone for about 30 seconds before she realized no one was listening on the other end of the phone," he said. What was his reaction when he first discovered he could wield such power? "Oh my gosh! Liberation."

 

 

As cellphone use soars, making it difficult not to hear half of a conversation in many public spaces, a small but growing group of rebels are turning to a blunt countermeasure: cellphone jammers, devices that interfere with nearby mobile devices invalid.

 

 

The technology is not new, but foreign exporters of jammers say demand is increasing and they are sending hundreds of jammers to the United States each month, prompting scrutiny from federal regulators and the wireless industry last week. new worries. Buyers include cafe and hair salon owners, hoteliers, speakers, theater operators, bus drivers and, increasingly, public transport commuters.

 

 

The development is sparking a battle for control of the airspace over the ears. This damage is collateral damage. Insensitive talkers inflict mischief on the defenseless, while jammer device punish not only the perpetrators but also the more cautious chatterboxes.

 

 

"If there's one thing that defines the 21st century, it's our inability to back down for the benefit of others," said James Katz, director of the Mobile Communications Research Center at Rutgers University. "The caller thought he was rights outweigh those of those around them, and the disruptor believes his rights are more important.”

 

 

Jamming technology emits radio signals so strong that they overload cell phones and prevent them from communicating with cell towers. Ranges range from a few feet to several meters, and equipment costs between $50 and a few hundred dollars. Larger models can be reserved to create no-call zones.

 

 

It is illegal to use gps blocker in the United States. Radio frequencies used by mobile phone providers are protected in the same way as those used by television and radio stations.

 

 

The Federal Communications Commission says first-time users of cell phone jammers could be fined up to $11,000. His law enforcement agencies have prosecuted several U.S. companies for distributing the devices and are also prosecuting their users.

 

 

F.C.C. investigators said Verizon Wireless visited an upscale restaurant in Maryland last year. The store owner, who asked not to be named, said he spent $1,000 on a high-powered jammer because he was tired of employees focusing on their phones instead of customers.

 

 

"I tell them, put your phone away, put your phone away, put your phone away," he said. They ignored him.

 

 

The store owner said F.C.C. investigators spent a week there, using special equipment designed to detect jammers. But the owner has turned it off.

 

 

Verizon investigators were also unsuccessful. "He went to everyone in town and gave them his phone number and said if they had any questions to call him immediately," the store owner said. He said he had stopped using the wifi blocker.

 

 

Of course, detecting the use of smaller, battery-powered jammers, such as those used by disgruntled commuters, would be more difficult.

 

 

 

 

 

In today's fast-paced world, high-speed Internet and mobile services have become necessities rather than luxuries. But as data services continue to evolve and mature, requiring higher Internet speeds, and as operating systems need protection, hackers and adversaries continue to interfere. For some, this involves hacking into wireless connections in homes and offices for the purpose of extracting personal or business data.

 

But whether they're targeting government agencies, private companies, or individual users, these attackers typically use high-power signal jamming devices - wireless portable devices that block communication between devices. Such jammers are also a means of defense for users seeking to escape these attacks.

 

 

With this dichotomy in mind, former Khoury doctoral student Hai Nguyen and his advisor Guevara Noubir, both members of the Institute for Cybersecurity and Privacy at Khoury College, have pioneered a novel approach that can essentially eliminate these high-performance cellphone jammer in the event that traditional techniques fail. This failure occurs because traditional technologies are designed for non-malicious interference, require mechanical moving parts that are slow to respond to interference, or require additional radio frequency bands to achieve resilience. Their technique, known as JaX, can circumvent these scenarios.

 

 

"When you use wireless communication, you want to make it as robust and reliable as possible. As researchers, we like to solve difficult problems, and this problem has always been there, "Nubier said. "We want to approach this problem from a unique perspective, which is to develop secure communication technologies for GPS and Wi-Fi."

 

 

Nguyen and Noubir started working on this machine learning-driven idea about a year ago, when signal jamming played a major role in the Russia-Ukraine war. As they built up large amounts of synthetic data and collected experimental materials, their goal was to build a kind of black box that could be placed in front of the network and seamlessly protect users. The solution does not require complex machinery, thus simplifying the process of eliminating high-power signal gps jammer.

 

 

"For data collection, we set up a test bench, and for transmitters, we used software radios, and for jammers and receivers, we used other radios," explains Nubier. "We sent a legitimate signal, and then we also sent interference. We receive them through two antennas that store data, so we know what we are sending and what is interfering.

 

 

"The cool thing about our work," he added, "is that we can get an adversary's jammer to emit a more powerful signal than a legitimate one, and we can eliminate the interference as if it never existed!"

 

 

Nubier believes the paper's findings could be useful for a wide range of individual and organizational users who want to avoid malicious attacks on their data.

 

 

"The fact that we were able to achieve a very low bit error rate shows that we can outperform an adversary that can transmit a hundred times faster than a legitimate signal," he said. "There can be an extremely noisy signal in the environment, but because we have JaX, we can estimate what the gsm jammer is really transmitting, subtract it, and just leave the legitimate signal."

 

 

While this process sounds promising, the benefits only matter if the technology is logically sound and affordable - two barriers that often prevent innovative technologies from becoming ubiquitous. But Noubier believes he and Nguyen have cleared that hurdle, too.

 

 

"Our machine learning model is compact, so if you're designing any new system, you can easily incorporate it," he says. "Again, if the Department of Defense wanted to integrate JaX, the cost would be negligible compared to other models, and the model would be much more efficient."

 

 

Noubir and Nguyen, who recently defended their dissertation and joined Meta as a research scientist, acknowledge that new approaches to old problems always need tweaking and fixing. Still, they expect JaX to solve long-standing network problems and want to bring it to market.

 

 

 

 

 

WINDSOR LOCKS: Tech-savvy burglars targeted homes in Connecticut and Massachusetts and broke into a home there after receiving details about the security systems from fellow homeowners, according to arrest warrants issued Friday.

 

Matthew Colon, 31, of West Springfield, Massachusetts, was arrested for conspiracy to commit first-degree burglary and conspiracy to commit second-degree burglary. Enrique Santiago, 37, of Springfield, Mass., was charged with first-degree burglary, possession of burglary tools, theft of a firearm and conspiracy.

 

 

Police said they expected to arrest a third man in the case, which was linked to other burglaries involving heightened surveillance and information about when the homeowner left, according to Colon's arrest warrant.

 

 

Early on May 20, 2022, a Green Manor Terrace resident called Long Island police to report that surveillance cameras showed two men walking through his backyard. The arrest warrant states that officers who stopped the burglary found a broken rear sliding glass door and a collection of discarded evidence near the home, including a Wi-Fi jammers, a portable radio, a glass punching tool, A crowbar and bolt cutters.

 

 

Burglars broke through the chain link fence and disabled security cameras with manual and Wi-Fi gps blockers, but the poolside cameras were beyond the phone jammer, Windsor Locks Detective Chief Jeff Lampson wrote in Windsor Locks range and continue recording. Affidavit Warrant. The homeowner reported $4,200 in cash missing, along with a man's watch, jewelry and his wife's 9 mm handgun, the search warrant said.

 

 

On May 26, a resident two doors down found a pillowcase containing a watch, a gun and other items the victims identified as belonging to them, police said. Police said the location of the bag of stolen goods and a backpack containing a WiFi jammer showed the thieves fled in different directions after the break-in.

 

 

Lampson said Friday that federal law prohibits the use or operation of jamming devices and that federal investigators are interested in the case. He said police in the area have noticed the devices are increasingly being used in burglaries.

 

 

In this case, however, police say it was DNA that led to the thief's demise. During a search of the Green Manor Terrace property on May 23, a homeowner told police she found a pair of gloves she had never seen before and handed them over to investigators. Police submitted swabs from the gloves and other evidence they suspected the thieves had come into contact with to the state forensic laboratory.

 

 

Lampson wrote in the arrest warrant that on Aug. 16, the San Diego lab reported "criminal conduct" with DNA on the gloves. Police said the same DNA was linked to two previous burglary investigations, including a 2010 car break-in in Middletown and a 2012 break-in in South Hadley, Mass., where a gun was stolen. Santiago was arrested in both cases, according to arrest warrants.

 

 

Santiago, through his attorney, told Windsor Lock investigators that a man who drove a black sedan and whose father owned a tuning company coordinated the break-in at Green Manor Terrace, the warrant said. When Lampson asked the homeowner if he knew anyone matching that description, the man immediately identified Colon, a co-worker at a home health care company in East Longmeadow, Mass., Lampson wrote in the arrest warrant.

 

 

The homeowner said he considered Colon a friend and told him about a trip to Long Island last May, the warrant said. The victim also said Colon and his father helped him remodel the home, the warrant said. He said Matthew Colon had been to his home multiple times and was aware of the security camera system, the warrant states.

 

 

When faced with the victim's statements and evidence of the burglary, Colon told police he was "tricked" into the burglary plan by a third suspect in the case.

 

 

The suspect's girlfriend also worked in home health care with the Colon and Windsor Locks victims. Lampson wrote in the arrest warrant that other workers at the company reported break-ins at their homes in Massachusetts, including one woman who said Colon had come to her home to help repair a gazebo before the break-in.

 

 

Cellphone records showed calls between Colon, Santiago and the unidentified suspect in the Windsor Locks burglary before and after the break-in, the warrant stated. Police said the third suspect is a felon with a long criminal record that includes armed robbery and numerous burglaries.

 

 

Santiago also has a long rap sheet, including convictions in Connecticut for burglary and larceny, the warrant stated. Massachusetts investigators said they believe he is part of a criminal organisation involved in targeted burglaries, according to the warrant. He posted US$150,000 bond and is scheduled to appear in state Superior Court in Hartford on May 31. Colon posted bond of US$100,000 and is to appear in court on May 2.

 

 

Ensuring the safety and security of both staff and inmates within correctional facilities is of utmost importance. Implementing stringent security measures is crucial to maintain control and prevent dangerous situations from arising. Sadly, the presence of cellphones in prisons poses a significant threat to this goal.

 

One of the main challenges that correctional facilities face is preventing contraband items from entering the prison. Traditional security measures such as body scanners, metal detectors, and thorough searches often prove ineffective in detecting smaller items like cellphones. Inmates and their accomplices have become increasingly creative in concealing these devices, exploiting vulnerabilities in the system.

 

Once cellphones find their way into prisons, they become powerful tools for organizing criminal activities within and beyond the facility's walls. Gang leaders, drug dealers, and other inmates can use cellphones to coordinate illicit operations, intimidate others, and even continue conducting their illegal businesses from behind bars.

 

In response to the Greenville Veteran's Suicide Incident, correctional facilities are under immense pressure to strengthen security measures and address the issue of cellphone access within prisons. The incident demonstrated the urgent need for innovative solutions and strategies to combat this growing problem.

 

This article was published in partnership with The Marshall Project, a nonprofit news organization covering the U.S. criminal justice system. Subscribe to the newsletter or follow The Marshall Project on Facebook or Twitter.

 

Shortly before noon on Sept. 11, 2018, a former Army soldier named Jared Johns lay in bed, turned on his iPhone camera, and said goodbye to his family.

 

Near the end of the two-minute video, Johns' eyes widened as a text message read on the screen: "She's calling the police and you're going to jail," it read.

 

Johns, who had served in Afghanistan, took a deep breath, placed a 9mm pistol under his chin, and pulled the trigger.

 

The 24-year-old veteran is one of hundreds of former and current service members who have fallen victim to a "sextortion" conspiracy. The scheme that led to his suicide involved scammers posing as underage girls on dating sites. Prosecutors said they sought to extort men who responded to their solicitations.

 

But the most startling aspect of the plot in Johns’ case was that it was allegedly carried out by inmates at Lee Correctional Institution, a maximum security prison in South Carolina about 150 miles east of Greenville. And the inmates did it using smartphones — banned devices that should have been blocked by the prison’s $1.7 million “managed access system.”

 

Now prison officials and some federal agencies have proposed purchasing an even more complex and potentially more expensive technology to stop illicit cellular and Wi-Fi messaging from contraband phones in prison: a jammer that will block all calls within its range.

 

“Inmates are incarcerated physically, but they’re still free, digitally,” said Bryan P. Stirling, the director of the South Carolina Department of Corrections, who has been on a mission to get signal jammers in prisons since 2009.

 

But some experts warn that jamming technology, which the federal Bureau of Prisons recently tested in a South Carolina prison, could put the public at risk by interfering with 911 calls and other cellphone service nearby. For rural prisons, the concern focuses on drivers on local roads and highways. Plus, they say, the technology probably won’t work.

 

“They’re taking an internal problem and impacting people who are not involved,” said Richard Mirgon, a former executive at the Association for Public-Safety Communications Officials. “It’s tantamount to saying, ‘Why not jam up the freeway to keep people from speeding in the side streets?’ It’s just so extreme.”

 

 

Problems with the best solution

The best solution, according to telecommunications companies and advocates for prisoners’ rights, would be to stop the influx of cellphones into prisons. But that has proven difficult,

especially at a prison like Lee, which has a long history of serious phone-related incidents. Inmates there have used contraband cellphones, for example, to order a hit on a corrections officer who was shot almost to death in 2010 and to publicize prison riots twice in the past four years.

 

Sex, drugs and cellphones:Relationships between guards, inmates unravel SC prisons

 

Prison officials at Lee say they have tried to stem the tide. In 2017, the corrections department felled large trees that loomed over the prison to stop drones from dropping off packages of cellphones. That same year, the department spent $8.3 million to install 50-foot netting at the perimeter of its prisons, including Lee, in hopes of stopping couriers from throwing backpacks of cellphones over fences.

 

Corrections officials say these solutions reduced the number of cellphones in state prisons. In fiscal year 2017, prison guards confiscated 7,482 phones, batteries or chargers in the state’s facilities, which house more than 21,000 people. In the fiscal year that ended in June, officials collected 3,900. Chrysti Shain, a spokeswoman for the corrections department, said that inmates now must spend thousands of dollars to acquire a phone.

 

Yet, the department acknowledges phones still get inside. Experts point to low-paid guards and prison workers who can augment their low pay by selling inmates contraband.

But even if cellphones get in, there should be no calls getting out. That’s because of the nearly $2 million in technology that Lee officials purchased to block calls from unauthorized phones.

 

 

Challenges with cellphone signal blocking

In 2017, after clearing the treeline and setting up the nets, the corrections department hired Tecore Networks, a communications company, to install the system that is supposed to detect and block all calls made from contraband phones. The technology is supposed to work like this: If someone makes a call, the system compares the cell number to a predetermined list of prison staff phone numbers — called a white list —and then either allows the call to go through, or blocks it.

 

The wireless telecommunications lobby group CTIA, which represents some of the country’s largest carriers and equipment manufacturers, has recommended that prisons use the managed access systems, as they are called. But it’s unclear how many facilities across the country actually do. Shawntech, another private company that sells managed access systems to correctional institutions, says it provides the multi-million dollar systems to close to 350 jails and prisons.

 

Even engineers who back the system as a solution warn that it’s not a silver bullet to stop all illicit calls, which can circumvent the system because of a very basic rule of how a cell tower works: If you can’t see it, it can’t see you.

 

When someone inside makes a phone call, the closest cell tower will pick up that signal. In a prison with a managed access system in place, the tower is usually located within the perimeter. But, for example, if an inmate stood behind a wall with water pipes, the cell signal would find the closest tower it could see, which would be outside the prison.

 

Also, cell companies often change the strength of a signal if customers in an area have bad reception. It’s like listening to two conversations happening at once in the same room; it’s easier for you to hear the loudest speaker. Whenever cell companies boost a signal, cellphones inside the prison will be able to find it more readily. It’s a problem that Tecore flagged in a 2018 press release.

 

That’s what South Carolina’s corrections officials say happened at Lee, and how the inmates contacted Johns in the first place.

 

Current and former prisoners at Lee said they could use cellphones easily, even with the managed access system in place. This year, inmates at Lee were caught live-streaming on Facebook.

“Walk into one room, and it’s fine; walk into another and you won’t be able to,” said a current inmate in the prison, who said he has used a prepaid Boost Mobile cellphone to make calls. His identity is not being revealed out of concern for his safety.

 

Tecore, which manages the prison’s system, did not respond to multiple emails or calls over several weeks seeking comment.

 

 

Jamming all calls, even to 911

These problems explain why corrections officials and federal agencies have proposed using technology long opposed by the communications industry: cellphone jammers to stop all calls, even from phones owned by staff or emergency workers.

 

Unlike managed access systems, which allow people to make calls if their numbers are on an approved list, a jammer is indiscriminate in its reach and power to block all frequencies, including data and Wi-Fi. That’s a problem for the nation’s 911 phone system, which operates on a frequency close to the one commercial carriers use.

 

Only federal authorities can legally use jammers, and only in limited circumstances involving national security. But with the blessing of the FCC’s Chairman Ajit Pai—appointed by President Trump in 2017— and the U.S. Department of Justice, prison jammers could become a possibility.

 

In September, the department and state officials put out news releases saying that a test at South Carolina’s Broad River Correctional Institution showed that a micro-jammer could block calls inside a cell block while allowing “legitimate calls” a foot outside its walls.

 

But a technical report on the same test by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration was squishier. It noted that the test involved only one of the 14 gsm jammer required to block calls in half the cellblock. And it found that jamming was detected at least 65 feet away, though it said it was unclear how significant that interference would be to regular cell-phone service.

 

The telecommunications agency would not comment on the study.

 

Precise jamming — limited to a specific distance and also only to cellphone frequencies— is prohibitively expensive, especially for larger correctional facilities, said Ben Levitan, a technical engineer who has worked with the South Carolina corrections department in the past and read the NTIA’s report.

 

That kind of jamming is “cool in theory, but it’s impractical,” he said.

 

A 2018 T-Mobile report also concluded that jammers with the precision to overpower only phone frequencies up to a certain distance would generally be too expensive for prisons.

 

 

How SC prisoners have used cellphones

 

In Johns’ case, inmates at Lee used smartphones to pose as girls on the dating app Plenty of Fish. After they got a response, the inmates impersonated the girls’ parents, saying the girls were underage, asking for money or threatening to go to the cops.

 

The scammers demanded just over $1,100 from Johns. A single father who was already struggling with mental-health issues, Johns couldn’t afford that.

 

Three weeks after his suicide, Johns’s mother, Kathy Payne-Bowling, got a Facebook message asking her to contact an inmate at Lee. She told her ex-husband, Kevin, who talked to the inmate and was told that other prisoners had called their son.

 

“I couldn’t believe it when I found out,” Payne-Bowling said. “These guys, they’re not supposed to have phones in the first place!”

 

Read between the lines:Transcripts of text, Facebook messages between Jared Johns, his mom and alleged scammers

 

The family contacted the police, and within a month the local district attorney’s office charged two inmates with blackmail in relation to Johns’ death. They have pleaded not guilty. No trial date has been set.

 

The U.S. attorney in South Carolina also charged 15 people, including five Lee inmates, in a similar scam in 2018. Prosecutors say the alleged perpetrators extorted nearly $560,000 from 442 service members. Three inmates pleaded guilty earlier this year, as did seven people on the outside who helped to orchestrate the scheme.

 

The Johns family plans to testify in favor of legalizing jammers at a Senate hearing later this year.

 

But the family blames corrections officials for not doing more to prevent inmates from getting phones in the first place.

 

“If these guys in the prison just kept the phones out like they’re supposed to, this wouldn’t have happened,” said Johns’ twin brother, Jacob. “I would still have my brother. I would still have my family. I’d still have our life.”