What's everyone doing now that wifi jammers are used?

So now that thief’s are using WiFi jammers that apparently can be bought for $40, what is everyone turning to to protect your property?

1 Like

I have NEVER considered a WiFi connected device to be any sort of serious security device. For a serious security device, it needs to be wired (power and data), and the video recorded locally with serious backup power (no, a 15 minute UPS does not qualify). I do have what would likely be considered a Pro-sumer level video camera system, with hours of backup power.

With that said, I have over 40 Wyze cameras, and I do use them regularly as they are quite a bit less expensive than my wired system, and the software is more convenient for a quick look remotely.

3 Likes

Without WiFi, a Wyze v3 camera should still be recording to the SD card.

https://support.wyze.com/hc/en-us/articles/360051120111-Can-I-use-Wyze-Cam-v3-without-Wi-Fi#:~:text=Yes%2C%20you%20can%20use%20Wyze,without%20Wi-Fi%20after%20setup.&text=But%20if%20you%20have%20a,record%20to%20a%20microSD%20card.

News of break-ins these days show quite a few security camera captures, but in many of them the perpetrator is covering their face. So ultimately I’m not so sure how much security cameras (even wired ones that capture clear images) can really protect a property.

It appears even traditional alarm systems would be disabled by a jammer since all the sensors’ signal would be blocked as well.

Perhaps a POE device that can trigger a siren?

1 Like

They can be useful to see if someone’s casing the joint. Also reveal M.O. to a certain extent. What time is prime. How careful are they before committing to the act. How quickly do they move. Etc.

Cam-captured someone doing a big graffiti recently. Careful – circled the site in a 1/2 block radius before beginning. All black dress hoodied and masked. Took about twenty minutes – they looked quite relaxed as they developed the ‘work.’ Took a few moments to savor it, then snapped some pics and sauntered away.

Hire Security: :raccoon: :raccoon: :raccoon: & :skunk: :skunk: :skunk:

I once came home in the middle of the day to a car slowing down and stopping in front of my neighbor’s house. As soon as it noticed I was pulling into my driveway, it sped off. Who knows, maybe I did prevent something bad from happening.

I used to have a dog who was usually in the yard and would bark at anything that moves. Definitely felt secure, but then probably not so neighborly…

Recent PD take:

There’s a concept covered in this film:

Safe neighborhoods have humans – and human eyes – on the street.

Ie, physical street life. People on the street living and interacting being watched by people looking out their windows or sitting on their stoops.

It’s about the trend where these living neighborhoods were replaced by more ‘efficient’ high-rise projects with surrounding recreational spaces at their bases that went unused (and invited crime.)

The film may also be available to stream free courtesy your public library at this site:

1 Like

This is why X-ray cam is the future.

How about @Bam’s “assertive security” of sharks with laser beam or monkeys with lightsabers?

I wonder if the jammer used is a Dstike.

https://dstike.com/products/dstike-deauther-monster-v2

I have the Dstike Monster and haven’t been successful in locking up my network. I can create Rick Roll SSIDs but not much else. The Dstike does not work with 5G networks.

Could/do any of the attacks trigger a router’s/network’s onboard defense (like firewall or antivirus?)

Two of the most common attacks are a simple broadband signal generator and a specific WiFi De-Authentication. In the case of the first, the jammer simply broadcasts a strong enough signal that the intended signals are covered in noise. An audio example would be trying to talk back and forth with someone 100 feet away in an empty stadium. That would likely work fine, but now add 50,000 other people and there is so much noise that the person 100 feet away can not be heard. A broadband jammer is a quite simple device.
A De-Authentication attack is an smart device that to keep this simple, impersonates the WiFi client and sends a command to the WiFi access point telling it that the client is disconnecting. Note that WPA-3 prevents that by encrypting the management packets. However although the WPA-3 standard has been out for quite a few years, most IoT devices do not support it.
Both of these attacks happen between the WiFi client and access point, so a firewall or anti-virus never get involved.

2 Likes

My knowledge of networking is very basic. I noticed nothing different when attacking my network.

Noiiiiice…I mean…what more does one really need? Sometimes I Rick Roll myself on purpose.


INTERESTING! I didn’t realize this. I haven’t looked into WPA-3 much because it’s so incompatible with way too much that there hasn’t been a point because I couldn’t use it anyway. But now I am much more interested in it! I appreciate you sharing this. That’s really cool. I will definitely be a lot more supportive of the advocacy toward WPA-3 support now. It is tempting to have a separate router that runs just WPA-3 for all the devices that support it if not just to have something that combats the growing Deauth attacks that have been going on nationwide. It still doesn’t stop jamming, but it’s cool to know there is an easy way to combat deauth.

Getting a WiFi access point that supports WPA-3 is the easy part. Getting client devices to support it is the harder part.
Keep in mind that I am using enterprise grade WiFi at home, I can independently specify each SSID (up to 15) to be WPA-2, WPA-3, or both with nothing more than a dropdown setting. I have a WPA-3 SSID setup up, but about the only thing that uses it currently is my phone. None of my IoT devices support it.

1 Like

If I reboot my router, I’ll quickly get a Wyze notification that my “Wyze Sense Hub went offline”. Will I get the same msg if a WiFi jammer is used?

I would assume most likely yes.

Thanks, Tom. Likewise, and likewise curious, I think.

@K6CCC

Do the jammers present a detectable signature (because of anomalous behavior) to an independently-monitoring counter-device?