Use jamming devices for a better life

Family Use Desktop Wi-Fi Phone Signal Jammers Live Better

The development of wireless networks for smartphones is a big factor in accelerating the speed of development, as mobile phones have a more important role in people’s lives because mobile phones can solve network problems. Having a role, mobile communications, mobile internet, and other aspects. As a result, children’s habitual involvement in the Internet causes many problems, especially in home networks. This is mainly due to the Wi-Fi network. As a result, many families are gradually installing devices to block radio interference on their phones in order to control their children’s online time.

Networks are convenient for people to access the Internet, but the problems they cause cannot be ignored. Wi-Fi jamming There are not only network access issues, but also network security issues. In order to maintain a good network environment, I started to install this kind of desktop wireless jammer in many places. It is used in some places to protect network security and prevent overuse of the network. Jammers are widely used in every country and region of the world and can be represented in schools, prisons, libraries, reading rooms and gas stations.

newest hidden mini cell phone jammer

While families use Wifi jammers, to secure the network and also allow your child to control using internet time, they are virtual, with physical and mental damage Don’t indulge in the world It’s very serious. In addition, the radiation family of wifi transmitters affects people’s health, can open jammer devices when not in use, radiation devices are very small.

If you’re still worried about your network and mobile phone usage, buying a high quality WiFi jammer is a top priority. From here you can get a desktop multi-antenna home jammer. We promised a 30-day replacement and a 1-year warranty. High quality products are always an effort, so you don’t have to worry about quality issues.

This is to maintain a healthy lifestyle with mobile phone signal jammers.

Law of jammer use in Italy

The radio frequency jammers are products capable of eliminating the cellular signal, in the range that goes from a few meters to about a kilometer, causing in some causes real inconvenience for anyone who happens to be in its range of action. Precisely for this reason they are products considered ILLEGAL in Italy and throughout the European community

“This product does not comply with the essential requirements identified by directive ; it is therefore not equipped with the correct and necessary CE marking and therefore cannot circulate on the European Community market, cannot be marketed, cannot be used.

Being an “illegal” product for common use in the European community (a private citizen cannot use a signal blocker because its activation would cause an “unauthorized interruption” of a telecommunication, and this is prohibited by Italian law), the JAMMER it can also be used by the Police Forces, Government and Military Bodies only in the case of special permits, in those specific cases in which it is necessary to “block” a certain specific type of Telecommunication. For example, interrupt telecommunications carried out by unscrupulous people to cause damage to things or people (eg terrorists, criminals, etc.).

portable wireless jammer

It is not strange to note that when a presidential convoy passes by (for example the President of the United States …), cell phones can sometimes malfunction near the moving presidential procession, and in some cases even the signals from the GPS network, in order to avoid potential terrorist acts through “remote controls” or mobile phones.

Many journalists define it as “the bubble”, that is an area in which most telecommunications are “inhibited”, but it is clear that others (for example those used only by escort personnel) are purposely let through.
The producers of JAMMER are many in the world, but it is also true that not all of them offer an “effective”, reliable and “high quality” product, and logically also with a good quality / price ratio.

The best wireless jammer both in terms of technology and “effectiveness” are those with adjustable power, because they allow the operator to manage and exploit the “disturbance power” emitted by the antennas in an optimal and precise way, sending it only to the point (in the frequencies) where needs and leaving suitable free spaces for service communications, thus obtaining the best possible effect, and putting “out of use” the potential “threat”. There are also JAMMERS that can be remotely controlled remotely increasing the safety and “discretion” factor.

It is clear that to obtain the same “effect”, it is also possible to use “non-programmable” type JAMMERS (therefore much cheaper), but much more power is needed to obtain the same desired result, and it is not easy to catch the “target ”And obtain the desired result.

Unfortunately, IEDs, or improvised explosive devices, have unfortunately become famous), and an excellent solution for their contrast is precisely the specific and targeted use of JAMMERS where the study of increasingly innovative technologies is producing more and more Elite and where Italy maintains an excellent record.

Research carried out by the Commission indicates that it is not currently permitted in Member States to block the reception and transmission of GSM signals. Although France has adopted a law that prepares the ground for the use of inactivation systems, there are still no technical implementing regulations that allow the legal use of such devices (jammers). The Commission is aware that inactivation systems are currently commercially available, in particular via the Internet. Such products are illegal and Member States are therefore required to take measures in this regard pursuant to the provisions of Council Directive 89/336 / EEC of 3 May 1989 for the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility or Directive 1999 / 5 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 concerning radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity, withdrawing them from the market. As the answer to Written Question P-2753/02 from Mr Caullery indicates, the Commission does not believe that activation is the right solution to solve the problem of inappropriate use of mobile phones. The Commission therefore does not intend to present legislative proposals aimed at legalizing the use of inactivation systems.

The limit on cell phone signal inhibitors for workers

A ruling that prohibits companies from using signal blocker to interfere with workers’ mobile phone communications at their workstations was recently issued by the Labor Directorate (DT).

The doctrine in this regard was established by ordinary 2315/54, which responds to a query about whether it is possible for a company to install devices that block workers’ cell phone signals within the company.

portable wireless jammer

The DT’s ruling concludes that said company “cannot interfere, intercept or interrupt the signal of the cell phones of the workers inside the company.”

To conclude, the DT turns to constitutional, labor and international norms, whose joint understanding is an active defense and promoter of the fundamental rights of workers, in this case, that of their intrinsic dignity.

Thus, it recalls that article 19 number 5 of the Political Constitution of the State assures everyone “the inviolability of the home and of all forms of private communication, linking it with article 5 of the Labor Code which provides that“ the exercise of the powers the law recognizes that the employer is limited by respect for the constitutional guarantees of workers, especially when they could affect their privacy, private life or honor ”.

Internationally, the statement includes the provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Both instruments affirm that “no one may be the object of arbitrary or illegal interference in his private life, his family, his home or his correspondence.”

For DT the term “correspondence” should be understood as a written communication form, given the time in which these international treaties were drawn up, and also because both standards protect fundamental rights and “should be interpreted in a broad manner, understanding that the protection contemplated the concept of correspondence encompasses all forms of communication ”.

Likewise, a report from 2002 is recalled that includes what was stated by the jurist José Luis Cea regarding the inviolability of private communications encompassing letters, telephone, audiovisual and even e-mail, “provided they are not open to the public” .

Thus, the DT maintains that for the privacy protection to be in force, communication must be a private act between specific or determinable persons who are the victims of an illegitimate or arbitrary interference in communications.

In the specific case, the DT also required a technical statement from the Undersecretariat of Telecommunications.

22 Antennas Wireless Signal Jammer

In its response, the Undersecretariat reported that “the so-called Inhibitors or Signal Blockers, also known by their English term“ wireless jammer ”, and consist of radio devices that produce an intentional interference or disturbance of a communication, in order to avoid the exchange of information, between two or more parties, thus not allowing calls or data transfers, such as messaging services, Internet access or similar ”.

Even the General Telecommunications Law 18,168 criminally penalizes interference, interceptions, interruptions or unauthorized captures of a telecommunications service.

In this way, concludes the opinion of the DT, “the installation of devices that interfere, intercept or interrupt any form of communication that workers have in the orbit of their private life within the company, not only constitutes a violation of rights fundamental, but also constitutes a crime of public criminal action ”.

Russian drones can interfere with cell phones 60 miles away

With new cell phone jammers, these drones can disrupt communications over a distance of 135 miles from their launch site.

The Russian Defense Ministry announced on Nov. 6 that the nation had extended the range of its drone-borne jammers to 100 km, or more than 60 miles. Drones as a platform, rather than just a target, of electronic warfare mean that the sight of a flying robot overhead can signal an incoming strike and a sudden inability to call for help.

“Russia has been using a UAV-mounted cell phone jammer for a number of years,” said Samuel Bendett, research analyst at the Center for Naval Analyzes. The drones work in a pod with two or three vehicles and a ground station, which are combined as an “empty 3” system.

indoor phone jammer

“When these UAVs fly in teams, one acts as a signal and communication relay while another acts as a jammer,” said Bendett. “At this point in time, these Leer-3 systems have been around for about two years.”

What is changed is the range of the jammer. The Orlan-10 drones already have a range of 75 miles, which means that with the latest update to the jammer, the drone pod can interfere with signals up to 135 miles from where the drone was launched. TASS reports that the 60 mile range is a 3.5 fold increase in distance from the original range.

Additionally, Bendett said that there is a chance that this ability, or an earlier version of it, has already been seen in conflict.

“The Ukrainian armed forces claim to have discovered Leer-3 systems in eastern Ukraine, while there is potential evidence that Leer-3 has also been used in Syria,” Bendett said. “The Russian Armed Forces are constantly training with empty 3 UAVs while they practice the suppression, identification and eventual destruction of enemy forces through enemy signals and cellular communication. Indeed, this type of training is part of the official tactics, techniques, and procedures in electronic warfare and other forces in the Russian military. ”

Advances in electronic warfare are a key component in developing autonomous systems for the military. Right now, drones are waging an electronic war on cellular communications, but it’s not difficult to imagine the same lessons being applied with new technologies. In this scenario, it’s easy to imagine other vehicles turning into jamming machines on future battlefields … and maybe even present ones.

Cell phone jammers installed in Paris Health Prison

The Paris establishment, which has been closed for several years, is now “opening” its doors again and is now equipped with a new system of cell phone jammer, with fixed telephones installed in the cells.

Inaugurated in 1867, the 2.8 hectare health prison in the heart of the 14th arrondissement of Paris had become the most blatant symbol of the decay of French prisons over the years.

Camouflage handheld phone jammer

Healthcare, closed for several years for work, is reopening today by incorporating an important technological development at the prison universe level that, if it worked, could be used in other facilities.

In 2017, 40,067 phones and accessories were confiscated from the 70,000 inmates in 180 French prisons.

In addition, the government stated that the disruptive systems were largely ineffective.

During the renovation of the health prison in Paris, the authorities decided to develop and maintain a brand new jamming system for mobile phones for six people for the French company SAGI.fr.

At the same time, landline phones are now installed in the cells.

Telio, one of the leading European companies in this sector, has been granted a public-law license for landline telephony for ten years, reports the AFP.

“Access to the landline phone in the cell is an appeal to the detention center.

Detainees can call their families without restriction, “said the director of the institution, Christelle Rotach, quoted by the AFP.

Prisoners can only call pre-approved numbers.

No telephone will be installed in the isolation or disciplinary rooms.

In the case of landline telephones, Telio finances the entire investment and is compensated for by the price of calls paid by prisoners.

The cost of calling a landline is 0.08 euros per minute and 0.18 euros for a mobile phone on mainland France.

GIDAS’s real-time interference detection makes the navigation system safer

It is estimated that there are currently the same number of navigation receivers on Earth as humans. Positions, navigation and time signals from space-based constellations such as Galileo and GPS form an invisible, indispensable infrastructure that lays the foundation for many modern aspects of modern life (communication, energy, and transportation).

Satellite navigation is helping to control more and more planes, ships, trains and self-driving cars. At the same time, navigation-based time stamps can mark real financial transactions worth billions of euros and coordinate the synchronization of the grid. Satellite navigation is always active and available anywhere on the planet. Therefore, it is easy to take usability for granted. These signals from space are equally important, and they are also susceptible to ground interference.

Andreas Lesch of OHB Digital Solutions in Austria said: “It’s just a matter of output power.” “The navigation signal on the ground corresponds to the light of the 60-watt lamp on the satellite. For Galileo, its distance in space is about 23,222 kilometers. These weaker signals may be accidentally or deliberately destroyed by stronger local radio signals or even misleading false navigation signals (so-called deception).”

“We have developed a new GNSS interference detection and analysis system, GIDAS, to protect critical infrastructure from damage or deception by continuously monitoring important signal frequency bands. In this way, GIDAS can trigger alarms in real time, determine the nature of the failure, and then determine the cause of the failure. The location of those dangerous portable devices so that the authorities can take immediate remedial measures.”

Although at least three stations are required to locate interference sources connected to the entire monitoring center, GIDAS can provide interference detection and orientation through a single reporting station. Monitoring centers can also be connected to each other, which makes the GIDAS system easy to expand, from ensuring a single port, airport or key location of the system to the entire city or region.

Although at least three stations are required to locate the interference source connected to the entire monitoring center, GIDAS can provide interference detection and orientation through a single reporting station. (Photo: ESA)

gps wifi cell phone jammers

“People are only catching up with the severity of this problem now,” Andreas added. “In parts of Europe, the highest density surveys show about three to four signal jammers per hour.

These small devices are technically illegal, but can be purchased online for a few hundred dollars or less, and are usually sold as data protection devices. The sales range of the jammer is only a few meters, but the actual use range may reach tens of meters or more, which may cause unnecessary widespread interference. For example, the famous American truck driver takes the jammer while sailing at Newark Airport as long as he passes. Will shut down the system.

Could the police actually shut down a city’s cellular service?

At around 1 am on Monday, a strange tweet claimed that Washington, DC had been disconnected from the digital world. The Washington Post later reported that the Twitter accounts of only three followers were the first to report a suspected interruption. When people wake up and register online, #DCblackout is all the rage in the United States. The hashtag appeared in thousands of tweets, accompanied by reports of explosions, missing protesters and silencers of police rifles. What followed was a brief online chaos: Did the police really block the cell phone tower? What should the so-called failure cover? The local reporter quickly tweeted that they had not experienced any failures, and later that day, the rumors were thoroughly debunked. It turns out that a power outage is the highest level of error message. This also dispersed the interference of local protests. The local police used violent methods against the protesters all night, including pepper spray, rubber bullets and tear gas.

However, the prerequisite for the power outage is that the police (or the federal government) can completely shut down the communication network-this behavior has seriously affected the freedom of speech and assembly rights, as well as the safety of protesters and passersby. Although it did not happen on Monday, the joke raised the question of whether it is possible for law enforcement agencies to cause technical and legal power outages.

Americans tend to view deliberate service interruption as a dangerous strategy used by oppressive regimes abroad. In a speech by the American Civil Liberties Union, Jay Stanley, a senior political analyst for the Privacy and Technology Project, told me that interruptions in communication are often seen as “a terrible form of abuse” and are used worldwide to cover up repression of sexual violence and other violations. Human rights behavior. ”

But this form of censorship has occurred at least once in the United States. In 2011, the Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART) suspended cell phone service at a subway station in downtown San Francisco after hearing about plans to protest the BART police’s plan to kill a man. The purpose of BART is to prevent protesters from coordinating, but it is short-sighted, thus making the agency the center of freedom of speech controversy across the country. The Federal Communications Commission intervened, and BART’s actions were condemned by human rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (the incident was called the “BART La Mubarak in San Francisco” incident). The FCC investigated BART, but like Harold Feld, the senior vice president of non-profit public knowledge told me that the committee decided not to make a declarative decision on the incident. This boils down to a technical problem: BART actually shuts down the service by shutting down the equipment in the underground system instead of destroying the signal.

No similar incidents have been confirmed since, but in the 2016 Tateishi protests, Wired reported that tribal leaders believed that the police had blocked their phones. The problem with proving these claims is that it is difficult to determine whether malicious behavior is occurring or just a bad signal. Only agencies like the FCC have not yet investigated the claims to truly verify the occurrence of traffic congestion.

smartphone signal blocker

The BART controversy and, to a lesser extent, the Standing Rock controversy, both show how complicated the shutdown signal can be in the United States-and how we truly fail to understand and resolve the blueprint for current and future law enforcement blackouts. What we do know is that almost ten years later, it is still possible from a technical point of view. According to Joshua M. Pearce, a professor of materials science and engineering at the Michigan Technological Institute, there are two ways to cause ground blackouts. (Turning off BART is an unusual situation because the authorities can access the device themselves.) The first is to ask (or require) the service provider to shut down a specific set of cell phone towers. It’s as simple as flipping a switch

The second method (and the more difficult method) is to use jamming technology, which sometimes sends false signals, overwhelming the signal from the cell phone tower. Small short-range equipment can be purchased abroad (for example, equipment used by some overseas universities to stop fraud, which led to the suspension of a high school teacher in Florida in 2015). In theory, you can use a large number of such small devices to call neighbors, but this is not convenient. Pearce believes that signal jammer have greater coverage, but only organizations like the National Security Agency own them.

What are cell phone jammers trying to tell us?

Cell phone jammers prevent phones from working. They are used in cars, public places and exam halls.

Jammers are not new – they have been around for years – and they are illegal in many countries, including the United States, but jammers are becoming increasingly popular.

But are phones really the problem? And are jammers really the solution?

I think cell phone jammers are being used as a patch, the wrong solution, to solve three societal problems that should be solved by much better technology.

Here are the three biggest problems cell phone jammers are trying to solve, and what I think are the better solutions.

The “phones are dangerous” problem

A Florida man named Jason R. Humphreys wanted to save lives by preventing people on his daily commute from using their phones while driving. So Humphreys installed a cell phone jammer on the back of the passenger seat of his SUV. As far as Humphreys knew, the program worked for two years. But the police, whose own communications were occasionally interrupted by his jammer, were less than enthusiastic. So they tracked him down and caught him two years ago. Last week, he was fined $ 48,000 by the Federal Communications Commission for violating US law against jamming devices.

newest hidden mini cell phone interference

As I said at this point, I think that drivers distracted with smartphones would be distracted by something else without smartphones. In other words, smartphones don’t cause accidents, humans don’t.

The terrible reality is that human drivers kill around 1.24 million people worldwide every year. That is a far higher annual rate than the number of people who die in wars.

Humphreys’ misguided act was the wrong solution to the problem. What we really need is to switch to self-driving cars as soon as possible. The sooner we do it, the more lives will be spared.

Advanced drone jamming technology developed

Security forces around the world are facing a growing threat: radio controlled drones flying or hovering over crowded stadiums, prisons and places with high concentrations of people. The drones can spy on, record and broadcast unauthorized videos. They can also transport explosives, illegal goods, and other products. and even carry out terrorist attacks, murder VIPs, etc.

In response to these threats, a new unmanned aerial vehicle drone jammer was developed. Developed for military use, the DroneBlocker jammer can block small to medium-sized aircraft in a variety of ways.

handheld drone jammer light

The system developed by IACIT from Brazil can be used by the military who want to secure bases and airports. The Brazilian Army is currently using the jammer for a variety of confidential applications including protecting VIPs and important events, Henrique Nobre, IACIT general manager for sales and marketing, told janes.com.

The Brazilian Armed Forces reportedly used the system during the 2016 Rio de Janiero Olympics. The system has been successfully demonstrated in different countries in ten different infrastructures (airports, critical structures, etc.).

How does it work? The technology can disrupt a UAV’s Global Positioning System (GPS), forcing the aircraft to land gently. It can also force the UAV to return to its original location. Additionally, it can prevent imaging streams from returning to the operator, thereby thwarting the mission assigned to the UAV.

The innovative technology works with several sensors. The company developed an image processing algorithm that could detect targets such as UAVs based on the video from surveillance cameras installed along a perimeter. The camera subsystem detects the target and sends a message or trigger to the jammer subsystem to activate it.

A radio frequency (RF) sensor detects targets by receiving the RF signals with a database and looking for a signature protocol that matches the signal generated by the aircraft and / or its operator. According to the company’s website, there are two versions, the military 110 and the civil 0200.

The system consists of cameras, RF receivers, acoustic sensors (optional), radar (optional) and jammers, all of which are integrated. It offers 24-hour protection, completely independent operation (operators are not required) and the creation of event records. The configuration is flexible and offers product versions with an output power of 1 W, 10 W, 50 W and 100 W per channel.

The platform includes the installation of antennas on the roof of the structures to be protected or on portable masts for special tactical missions or for protection against major events.

The United States also regulates the use of jammers

Recently the United States bombed Syria

The National Broadcasting Corporation reported that, according to the statement of four US officials, the Russian military has disrupted US military drones that conduct combat missions in Syrian airspace, severely affecting US military operations.

Authorities said that a few weeks ago, after a series of chemical weapons attacks against civilians in the armed opposition zone of East Gutta, the Russians began to interfere with a few small American drones. Officials said the Russian military was concerned the US military would retaliate against the attack and start interfering with the global positioning system used by drones operating in the region.

Desktop high-power jammer

Republican Senator Ben Sasse reacted on Tuesday to reports of interference with Russia: “Russia wants to undermine our interests all the time.”

He said: “Those who think that Russia is not an enemy are crazy.”

According to Dr. Todd Humphries, director of the Radio Navigation Laboratory at the University of Texas at Austin, blocking or preventing drones from receiving signals from GPS satellites doesn’t have to be complicated.

He said: “Most GPS drone receivers can be very easily disturbed.”

Humphreys, an expert on GPS spoofing and jamming, has warned that it could have a major impact on drones in the United States, causing them to malfunction or even crash. He said that if the drone reports an incorrect position or is lost, “at least it can create confusion for unattended ground operators.”

According to Dr Humphries, four years ago, after the invasion of Crimea, US analysts first discovered in eastern Ukraine that Russian troops were interfering with drones. These GPS jammer “have had a significant impact on unmanned aerial vehicles deployed by the United Nations to carry out surveillance missions in the region.” The crew stopped for several days and were unable to collect information by air.

Pentagon spokesman Eric Paquin of the US Department of Defense will not stand up if such interference leads to drone crashes and has stressed that US military drones are currently operating safely. “The United States military has sufficient countermeasures and protective measures to ensure the safety of our unmanned and manned aircraft, our troops and the tasks they support.”

However, an official confirmed that such interference had an impact on US military operations in Syria.