ie8 fix
madison

How to jam your neighbor's Wi-Fi legally

By | June 15, 2006, 2:09pm PDT

Summary: While Airgo’s third generation product achieves record breaking throughput, it annihilates any legacy 802.11 b/g product in the vicinity and effectively shuts them down. The other products from Broadcom and Marvel weren’t quite as devastating to the neighbors, but the damage is still severe. What’s crazy is that these products are FCC legal and are being sold on store shelves today.

Do you ever get frustrated with your neighbor hogging all the Internet bandwidth on the block?  Tired of your neighbor using his Wi-Fi gear on channel 1, 6, or 11 (that’s all the possible choices) on the 2.4 GHz spectrum?  Well now’s your chance to get even!  Introducing Draft N and Pre-N Wi-Fi!  They might not interoperate at high speeds with each other but they’re FCC legal and they’re guaranteed to shut your neighbor down or your money back!

While Airgo’s third generation product achieves record breaking throughput, it annihilates any legacy 802.11 b/g product in the vicinity and effectively shuts them down. Ok that’s not an actual advertisement, but it might as well be one.  Our friend Tim Higgins has been at it again testing so called "Draft N" and "Pre N" Wi-Fi gear (implied compatibility with 802.11n) and he has some very interesting results about the interoperability and interference characteristics of these products.  Earlier this month, Tim ran a battery of tests on these wannabe 802.11n Wi-Fi products to see if they lived up to the kind of throughput and range being promised by the Wi-Fi vendors. 

What the first set of tests reveals is that Airgo’s product still beats the "Draft N" competition from Broadcom and Marvell hands down with their third generation MIMO product in range and throughput.  Note: The results showing the Cisco business-grade 802.11g gear performing so well on range may not be a good test of chipset efficiency since it can use 100 mW of transmit power which may be higher than the consumer gear tested.  One could also easily quadruple the range on a Cisco Access Point with the right kind of high-powered antenna but that wouldn’t be a fair measurement on how good the radio and chipset design is.

In the second set of tests examining interoperability and interference characteristics on neighboring 802.11g Access Points, the results are alarming.  While the Draft N and Pre N products technically work with each other, it would seem that most of them don’t interoperate at the higher speeds.  Broadcom announced that their Draft N products will interoperate at high speeds with Atheros Draft N products, but the Atheros based products weren’t available for testing yet at the time of the review.  Broadcom and Atheros feeling the heat from relative newcomer Airgo have put their fiercely competitive past behind them though I’m not sure if this will help if they can’t post good throughput versus range numbers against Airgo.  When I asked Broadcom’s representative if they were guaranteeing future compatibility with 802.11n in writing, I couldn’t really get a straight answer and was told that their Draft G product was eventually compatible with 802.11g and that they are using a flexible design that can change if the 802.11n draft standard changes.  I finally got them to admit that there are no such guarantees for actual 802.11n compatibility.

Airgo is a very interesting story by itself.  I’ve praised them in the past for having the cleanest design in terms of staying in a single 20 MHz channel while retaining the speed crown.  Airgo’s competitors eventually pushed past the performance of Airgo’s first and second generation products by hogging two radio channels and Airgo quickly answered with their third generation product that also used a 40 MHz wide signal and regained a massive lead in throughput which holds today.  The problem is that Airgo when from being the nicest single-channel neighbor in town to being the absolute worst Wi-Fi neighbor in town.

While Airgo’s third generation product achieves record breaking throughput, it annihilates any legacy 802.11 b/g product in the vicinity and effectively shuts them down.  The other products from Broadcom and Marvel weren’t quite as devastating to the neighbors, but the damage is still severe.  What’s crazy is that these products are FCC legal and are being sold on store shelves today.  This is a serious problem in the city where town homes and condominiums are right next to each other and it’s even a problem for businesses which primarily uses 802.11 b/g.  While these products are aimed at the home market, they’re also sometimes used in a small office environment and these radio jamming characteristics are intermittent (when data is being sent) and difficult to track down.

So who is to blame for all of this?  Airgo to its credit pushed for spectrum efficiency among the 802.11n standards body as long as it could and tried to lead by example while everyone else was spectrum hogging.  Once it was clear that the 802.11n draft standard wasn’t going to be swayed on spectrum efficiency, Airgo turned to the dark side and became the biggest spectrum hog of all.  The industry was moving the right direction with dual band 2.4/5 GHz products which mitigate interference issues until the arrival of the 802.11n MIMO type products because customers are easily seduced by higher speeds when what’s really needed is less interference and better range.

The range issues could have been easily solved with higher gain antennas which ironically are frowned upon by the FCC but don’t do nearly as much damage to the neighbors.  Since larger antennas are optional, people won’t resort to them unless they really needed the longer range in which case no one’s nearby to begin with.  With these N based products, they come off the factory floor ready to jam everything within its operating radius and this seems to be what the 802.11n standards body is encouraging with its decision to allow for wider channels.  The fact that almost none of these new "N" products interoperate with each other and none of them guarantee future compatibility with 802.11n is sad.  The best solution for anyone wishing to avoid the radio jam is to move to 802.11a and the 5 GHz band as soon as possible.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Disclosure

George Ou

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?page_id=557

Biography

George Ou

George Ou, a former ZDNet blogger, is an IT consultant specializing in Servers, Microsoft, Cisco, Switches, Routers, Firewalls, IDS, VPN, Wireless LAN, Security, and IT infrastructure and architecture.

64
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

If you are under FCC jurisdiction this is Illegal.
dingobully 3rd Feb 2009
One of the primary FCC laws regarding any such device
is that it may not cause any harmful interference. So,
no, it's not legal. But you probably wouldn't get into
too much trouble over it unless you, for instance,
started falsely advising people on an Internet blog
that such activity is legal. Oh, oops.
0 Votes
+ -
Cook and Jam at the same time
D T Schmitz 15th Jun 2006
Warming up leftovers or a cup o' jo in my non-UL-compliant RF-nuclear-emitting microwave oven jams channel 11 quite well!

But, thank you for the how-to! wink
0 Votes
+ -
Time for Metal Shop
nucrash 16th Jun 2006
A good ole Arc Welder seems to do the trick of knocking out about every frequency there is to have. 802.11A,B, whatever else is out there....

I was more interested in taking back the bandwidth of my neighbors. I pay good money for that 3 MB pipe to newsgroups, and damnit, I plan to use it... for the month.

Never fails though, I set up an AP and they take up the same three channels, leaving me out of luck. What is really sad is that I was there first. Bumns...!!!
0 Votes
+ -
MAC Addresses
burtoni 16th Jun 2006
Have you ever thought of restricting the MAC addresses that the router gives IP addresses to?
0 Votes
+ -
I use that now....
nucrash 16th Jun 2006
but what does that have to do with anything I posted. Interference is interference. If you spill a tonne of garbage into the radio spectrum, no one will be able to see anything they actually want.

Think of it like this... You want to go star gazing, but you want to do it from the street of a busy city. Due to the massive amounts of lumens put out by street lamps, you can't see but only the brightest stars in the sky because the others are simply not powerful enough to show up through the soup of light that is your neighborhood's streets.

An Arc Welder is much like setting a strobe light in front of your telescope while you are trying to see the little dipper. Filter all you want, you still won't be able to see a thing

RIP Sk0t. :~(
0 Votes
+ -
Oh man (LoL)
999ad@... 16th Jun 2006
nucrash: "Filter all you want, you still won't be able to see a thing"

. . . Ever again, I would suspect! : )
I have not been able to find any for sale in the UK.
0 Votes
+ -
Antennas
*nixuser 16th Jun 2006
If you search for "2.4GHZ antenna" or look at some of the "Wardriving" websites you should find more than enough links to information on antennas and companies selling professional antennas. Almost any of these should improve your system.
0 Votes
+ -
High gain antenna
lwojcik 16th Jun 2006
You can likely find antennae that work from ham sources, or make your own. High gain types are parabolic dishes or Yagi types. The Yagi style are linear units with additional elements that act as reflectors and re-radiators. An example of the design is a TV antenna. The "high gain" antennas are directional in nature - concentrating the transmnitted energy in a single direction. They do not output any more power overall

I would suggest looking at the hajm literature - such as the AARL antenna manual.
0 Votes
+ -
High Gain Antenna
john public 16th Jun 2006
http://www.hyperlinktech.com

If you want to go a few miles - make sure you can attach external antenna such as a Proxim card.

Have to be B/G can't attach external to A legally(at least in USA)
0 Votes
+ -
Says who on 802.11a?
georgeou 16th Jun 2006
Cisco and all the other enterprise vendors offer Access Points with N type connectors for 802.11a and they sell large 9 dBi antennas in north america.
0 Votes
+ -
Not legal in UK
Xwindowsjunkie 16th Jun 2006
Sorry.
0 Votes
+ -
Weird
icheyne 17th Jun 2006
OK well thanks anyway guys.
0 Votes
+ -
D-Link DWL-M60AT
kidtree 20th Jun 2006
This little indoor directional antenna saved my network connection. My antenna was shielded by the computer it was mounted to. The antenna I bought is rated for a 6dB gain, but putting it up on the windowsill, aimed at my router, boosted my S/N ratio by 40+ dB, a factor of 10,000 or better!
http://www.dlink.com/products/?sec=1&pid=58
0 Votes
+ -
Spectrum
SysTech42 16th Jun 2006
Yeah, so 2.4-2.5 GHz is getting frickin crowded. I've been getting around this problem by containing my high frequency data streams in an elongated, tubular RF proof ecnlosure. I even go so far as to provide a separate PVC coated waveguide for send an recieve. It's even flexible so I can route it around furniture or under rugs. It can even be directed to run inside the walls. It's totally secure. Unless someone can beat the firewall and get in through the wired side, they'll never see my network traffic on any RF scanners.
0 Votes
+ -
You should try for a patent!
B. Short 16th Jun 2006
Sounds like a great invention you have there! Submit that description to the Patent Office.

Given the current behavior of the US PTO regarding high-tech, seems like you'd have a 50-50 chance. Then you could sue for a royalty on every foot of CAT-5/6 cable produced!
0 Votes
+ -
yeah..... i'll have to recount this comment after i start breathing again.

Best comment ever.

Valis Keogh
CEO
Valis Enterprises
http://www.valissoft.com
0 Votes
+ -
I like your thinking but....
nucrash 16th Jun 2006
The problem with your PVC Wave guides is that they don't really go the distance. My guess is that yours are made of copper. I decided to increase the distance of mine here at work by making them out of glass. That seems to work quite well. Your wave guides have problem with magnetic interference and you really shouldn't run them near electrical wiring or anything of that nature. My glass wave guides appear to be much more resistant to this sort of interference. Infact, other than cost, I haven't found a single downside to my glass wave guides.
0 Votes
+ -
no subject title..well except for this
richvball44 18th Jun 2006
nucrash

you are a total geek!

keep up the experimenting man!
0 Votes
+ -
What ARE You Talking About?
mejohnsn 29th Jun 2006
Do you have any idea what the skin depth is like on 2.4 GHz? It really doesn't matter whether the wave guide is made of copper or not, since he already coated it with his conductor of choice.

And where do you get the idea that it has problem with "magnetic interference"? That is almost as far out there as your glass wave guides. Glass isn't a conductor! What you have is not a waveguide, but just a reflecting canyon.
0 Votes
+ -
Waveguide, hmm.
Xwindowsjunkie 16th Jun 2006
I suspect you're a CAT person.
0 Votes
+ -
homer says
richvball44 18th Jun 2006
mmmmmmm waveguides
pretty damned secure for a non wired environment

dont they use those internally at "some" sites that "don't exist?? happy
0 Votes
+ -
I've built a similar system
scidhuv00 18th Jun 2006
Mine is a bit more crude, I only have a single send and receive wave guide, though I have encased the entire element in copper which eliminates all but the most powerful radio waves from interfearing with it. I've used a BNC to connect it which makes it really simple to add and remove, and I can use the wave guides on each of my systems as a repeater for the signal increasing the distance that the signal can travel almost infinitely.

We should share notes some time.
0 Votes
+ -
You can set one of these up on a wall pointed at the coffee shop three blocks away and steal their signal. Other designs are listed.

http://www.turnpoint.net/wireless/has.html
0 Votes
+ -
cantennas...3 blocks?
leigh@... 17th Jun 2006
I got 1.5 Kilometres (line of sight) out of a large dog food can, and with over 80% signal strength. Pointing at another target 5Kilometres away (No line of sight) saw the signal strength degrade significantly but still able to surf ok. I used the wavelength principles from that same site.
0 Votes
+ -
How things come full circle
burtoni 19th Jun 2006
In University we use to do this with Gunn diode antennae, literally out of a dog food can using X-band ham frequencies. At 400 mW line-of-sight was the limit. Two high points 10 miles apart could be done with ease. The baud rates were lower in the mid 80's, after all we were soldering this stuff together out of 74LS chips. Hearing of people using dog food cans with their wireless routers brought back some memories. Now I wonder if I can find any of those Gunn diodes... LOL
... I mean, making sure homeowners and small businesses have wireless networks that don't get blown out of the water with FOGHORN newcomers certainly CAN'T be as important as policing the TV and radio airwaves against "indecency!"

I mean, Congress DID just pass and our President DID just sign a new law increasing the penalty for airing "indecent" material by tenfold, indicating exactly where FCC attention will be for the forseeable future, rather than keeping incompatible hardware off store shelves so the rest of us don't end up with useless wireless networks!

Thank goodness we're all safely protected from indecency, though.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!
0 Votes
+ -
Yes we can, and we Must Expect it.
mejohnsn 29th Jun 2006
And we must make our expecation known to the FCC and to our representatives in Washington.

After all, the Communications Act of 1934 is what set the charter for the FCC, and guaranteeing that the public could get the benefit of using the airwaves without undue interference IS part of that charter.

The reason we do not see enough of that happening today has NOTHING to do with enforcing indency regulation: it has to do with the disastrous belief in 'deregulation' which gained a stranglehold in Washington in the Reagan years. The FCC has been backing down from its responsibilities ever since.

But now that WiFi is becoming so common, we are going to feel the pain of their irresponsibility a lot more, until we put the pressure back on our representatives in Washington.

In the meantime, what can we do? We can try to find WiFi vendors who do responsible, high-quality implementations of 802.11, reward them with our business, and hope the decorrelators can handle it. But there's not much else we can do.

Unfortunately, ZDNet reviews do not go into enough detail on the RF performance to help us choose such vendors.
0 Votes
+ -
I Have Been Complaining ...
markdoiron 16th Jun 2006
I have been complaining about this ever since one of my neighbors set up a new network in his home. I wish I could set my SSID up to read: PLS TURN OFF JAMMER!!!!!

mark d.
0 Votes
+ -
Which "N" product did they buy?
georgeou 16th Jun 2006
How much damage are they doing?
0 Votes
+ -
The more importan questions...
nucrash 16th Jun 2006
1: Are they using any security... WEP,WPA,WPA2, MAC Filter, Radius...?

2: Have you ever used Kismet?

3: Do you know how to google.. "Cracking Wireless Encryptions?"
0 Votes
+ -
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/index.php?p=43
This is a good on that dispells some myths.

Yes I have used Kismet, that's why it's dumb to use MAC filtering, SSID hiding, and not using DHCP.

If you search "George Ou" and wireless on Google, you'll get a ton of hits on me.
0 Votes
+ -
I believe I commented on that post
nucrash 16th Jun 2006
Several times infact.

But this time around I wanted to suggest, rather than be annoyed with your neighbors for hogging up the spectrum, why not live in harmony trying to suck up the bandwidth that they so graciously paid for.

WPA and WPA2 seems to pose more of a problem with this, but fortunately, about 50 to 60% care to use encryption. This is up from the 20 or 30% from a couple years ago.

Not that I encourage breaking into the networks of others... that would be a very naughty thing to do. But then again, so is flooding your neighborhood to the point that you can't use your own wireless hardware.
0 Votes
+ -
Ah, I missed your point
georgeou 16th Jun 2006
Yes, you have a very good point though I obviously can't endorse it.

Flooding your neighbors with a massive 40 MHz wide MIMO signal is particularly nasty and I don't know why this is even being allowed. It wouldn't be nearly as bad if it was just a stronger signal using a bigger antenna.

WPA and WPA2 in PSK mode can be hacked (if a weak PSK is used) using a computationally expensive dictionary attack. It is a couple orders of magnitude slower than dictionary attacks on something like MSCHAPv2.
0 Votes
+ -
Well if you really want to
Uralbas 16th Jun 2006
You can avoid receiving interference from your neigbors by isolating the side where they transmit with with simple foil. You only be out of luck if your provider is in the same line of sight, depending on where you live and where each access point is. Its a simple solution. I had a similar problem, placed foil on the side of the house where my "good" neigbhor transmitted.. and voila... had no issues ever since.
0 Votes
+ -
Part 15 devices
Xwindowsjunkie 16th Jun 2006
George:
Part 15 devices are the bottom of the heap in legal pecking order. They have no relief in the courts. The aluminum foil trick really is the best solution no matter how close to aluminum hats it seems! the blocking foil just needs to be between the antenna and the noise source. I think even in the situations where the noise source was in-line with your access point, if you "protected" the access point with a barrier between it's antenna and the noise source, your signal to noise ratio will go up tremendously and you'll probably recover service. Just have to make the foil patch 2 to 4 square yards of foil.
You have to remember that the radios are CDMA devices just like Ethernet. Carrier Detect Multi-Access. A radio hears noise or a packet, it waits to transmit until it quits.
By the way, 802.11B access point devices can run at 500 milli-watts (1/2 watt) with 18dBi antennas, that translates into nearly 3 watts ERP. We buy them 50 at atime and use them on oil rig locations. No problems getting through the noise there! I've been doing Ethernet and the Internet since before DNS, but I've been doing radio since the 60's.
0 Votes
+ -
Which product has 500 mW?
georgeou 16th Jun 2006
I know you can get massive antennas, but where do you get an 802.11 b/g or 802.11a AP with 500 mW output? Most consumer grade products run between 30 to 100 mW.

Another thing is, you can't run more than 3 of those 500 mW APs in close proximity.
0 Votes
+ -
Interference is to be tolerated
SteveCS 16th Jun 2006
WiFi operates under Part 15 of the FCC regs. As a result WiFi can not cause interference to licensed operaters and has to except interference from licensed operaters. I turns out the channels 1 to 6 are in ham bands. Hams can run a lot of power if they need to on those frequencies. More importantly you have to tolerate it as a WiFi user.
0 Votes
+ -
Jamming is still illegal
kokuryu 16th Jun 2006
I will make sure the Justice Dept. is aware of these illegal jamming devices and have them removed from the market immediately.
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Jamming is still illegal
mejohnsn 29th Jun 2006
It is, and it isn't;) Read the Part 15 notice on the back of your WiFi device: it says,

This device may not cause harmful interference,

But it also says,

this device must accept any interference that
may cause undesired operation.

So one might think, based on the 1st part, that you are right. But expect the manufacturer to equivocate on the meaning of "harmful interference".

But the truth is that there is a contradiction here: the device is not allowed to _cause_ "harmful interference", yet it must _accept_ harmful interference from others. For a network device, which is always both transmitting and receiving, this makes no sense.

But this sorry state of affairs can also be blamed on the FCC: it really does make very little sense to put WiFi devices in the unregulated spectrum under Part 15. But they didn't want to put the effort into designing regulations for WiFi use under any other basis.

Again, this is more fallout from the disastrous tendency to unthinking deregulation in Washington.
0 Votes
+ -
Jammin with WIFI LOL
warzjohn 17th Jun 2006
Linksys WRT54 series routers canbe upgraded with open source firmware to broadcast at 500mW, check under openWRT for this linux software and then upgrade antennas and paint the wall near the offending neighbor with metal based paint, they sell some for security but I think any metal based paint would do and be cheaper to block all radio waves both ways in and out. This would cut down on interference and increase your home wifi.
John
0 Votes
+ -
Re:
harrisharris 18th Jun 2006
Only the Linksys WRT54 routers made before the summer of '05 will work this way. The newer ones will not run third party firmware.
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah, stay away from the WRT54 v5.
georgeou 18th Jun 2006
Version 5 is the one you need to avoid.
0 Votes
+ -
Re:
harrisharris 22nd Jun 2006
That is the one that I have, but since I've reconfigured it to be just an antenna, using my D-Link as the main router, it has performed like a charm with no lockups.
0 Votes
+ -
Re: But on a different note
harrisharris 22nd Jun 2006
Is it considered spam to end a reply with a signature, such as:



http://www.helmetheadcyclegear.com
0 Votes
+ -
500mW devices
Xwindowsjunkie 17th Jun 2006
checkout http://www.valuepointnet.com/Rugged_Access_Points/SuperAP_510g_500MW/INDEX.html

No its not a "home device" but it works in the same service and its still a part 15 device.
We just put an order in for 50 yesterday.
They come with dozens of features that allow you to tailor functionality to limit and control access and users. The admin interface is a web page on the device itself. They also have lower power like 300 mW and 150 mW units.
I tested one in an oven for 21 days at 150 degrees Farenheit. It worked continuosly and maintained connectivity without a single Ethernet packet being dropped over a 250 foot path supporting 4 continous connects the entire time for the entire 21 days. We have a server/client application that requires continuous connection with four packets per client per second. I was very impressed with their product. BTW the 250 foot path was a "hairpin". The unit in the oven radiated a signal through a Lexan door in the oven at a chain link fence 100 feet away. The signal reflected off the chain link and bounced back to connect to the other radios. The ovens other three sides were made from steel along with the top and the bottom. The 4 other units were operating "behind" the oven about 150 feet away and were separated with 2 sheetrock walls and 2 cinderblock walls. I didn't want to make it too easy.
Do I like the radios? Yes. I finally had to stop the test because I needed the oven for another equipment test.
0 Votes
+ -
Thanks for the info
georgeou 17th Jun 2006
A 500 mW AP with an 18 dBi antenna is just freaky.
0 Votes
+ -
equipment test?
richvball44 18th Jun 2006
or baking some chocolate chip cookies happy
no fcc license needed for that

what fcc licenses fo you hold??
i was studying years ago for fcc license and getting into wireless security.....this was about 10 years ago..but i got sidetracked..my tech job caused me to get merged out

where is a good start??
0 Votes
+ -
FCC certs
Xwindowsjunkie 21st Jun 2006
I hold Amateur Advanced class license and Commercial General Radiotelephone license with Ships' Radar Endorsement.

FCC licenses don't count for much any more. FCC deregulated broadcasting to the point that they only have to have a licensed engineer on retainer now instead of full time. Licensing like in the MCSE pursuit is just indicative of minimal credentials. Easiest way to get into broadcasting is to get a job at a small market television or radio station.

If your interested in Amateur Radio license checkout http://www.arrl.org/

BTW 150 degrees F doesn't really do much in the cookie baking department, just kinda mooshes the dough into a sugary slick.
0 Votes
+ -
What a pathetic article
realitycheck101 18th Jun 2006
Why even publish such rubbish?
0 Votes
+ -
And why do you reply
bumberfsck 22nd Jun 2006
Such rubbish? Trolling? It would appear so. Nothing was rubbish about this. If you're gonna call it rubbish maybe you should say what you thought was rubbish. I'm tired of the idiot trolls on here.
0 Votes
+ -
One of the primary FCC laws regarding any such device
is that it may not cause any harmful interference. So,
no, it's not legal. But you probably wouldn't get into
too much trouble over it unless you, for instance,
started falsely advising people on an Internet blog
that such activity is legal. Oh, oops.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix