[ARandomerDude]

I disagree. The trajectory of technology generally is:

possible -> prototype -> product -> common -> common and cheap

If Wi-Fi surveillance were to become common and cheap, other methods would be produced to make data harvesting common and cheap to the surveillance state/bigco. The best way to avoid that dystopia is to safeguard it early in the process.

[mk_stjames]

What I'm trying to get at is, even if this type of Wifi surveillance becomes commong and cheap, it still requires access at a low level to the wifi router itself. Which should be hands-off in the first place. It's like having cameras in your house on your local network... if the police could legally hack into your network, they could watch you on the cameras to see if you are committing crimes! But... the point is they shouldn't be able to do that, regardless if you have the cameras or not... the line is drawn at the access.

Same thing there. It shouldn't matter if the tech is possible, produced, cheap, and installed in your home.... it's all moot if the act of the surveillance isn't followed through. We need to work towards ways to prevent the acts themselves, as we simply aren't going to be able to prevent the possible sidechannel attacks from being possible. They are always possible.

[transpute]

> it still requires access at a low level to the wifi router itself

Nope, remote sensing only requires custom radio firmware on the passive surveillance receiver (<$20) that is monitoring Wi-Fi reflections from standard consumer routers which are "near" the target, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34480760

[wizzwizz4]

> Which should be hands-off in the first place.

Wi-Fi access points are often provided by ISPs. ISPs, especially in the US, are not to be trusted; https://security.stackexchange.com/q/71834 is just one example of that.

[vermilingua]

In Australia we have the Assistance and Access amendment to the Telecommunications Act 1997, which allows the government to demand that companies or individuals insert backdoors into their products for use by law enforcement. My WAP/router already tries to update its own firmware, what’s to stop the govt forcing in new firmware with full cooperation from the vendors that enable this passive sensing and allow access to the output?

[momirlan]

i don't think any safeguards will protect us from evils brought about by technology - it evolves too fast already for the society to catch up .

[ksey3]

Well someone has to pay for the tech. Its not free. And that puts an automatic upper limit on what happens.

People have no idea how much debt Police depts (lets not even talk about the military) have racked up playing with high tech toys and paying off compensation every 2 days for people they accidentally harm or kill. So whats funny here as Big Bro gets access to more and more tools the more broke he gets.

And guess what the financiers of this debt will do when it cant be paid off. Raid police pension funds. Thats how financialization of public service works

No free lunch big bro. Have fun with all the "cool toys" while the good times last.

[akira2501]

You are living in that dystopia already, then, and your efforts are equivalent to plugging a hole in the grand dam with your finger.