[HN Gopher] Person-in-WiFi: Fine-Grained Person Perception Using...
___________________________________________________________________
Person-in-WiFi: Fine-Grained Person Perception Using WiFi [pdf]
Author : RCitronsBroker
Score : 92 points
Date : 2023-11-29 16:19 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ri.cmu.edu)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ri.cmu.edu)
| verdverm wrote:
| I find these applications intriguing for VR/AR/XR, but there are
| also the privacy concerns. I can see internet providers and big
| tech really wanting to leverage this data for profit
| RCitronsBroker wrote:
| the privacy concerns are really something. Background emission
| is pretty much as abundant as ambient light these days, at
| least within the radius of day-to-day living. even in less
| developed countries. Western signals intelligence gathering
| already reached critical mass, the decision to deploy dragnets
| collecting the tons of data we all produce every day, has
| already been made.
|
| Just frightening to think about the never ending increase in
| detail and variation when it comes to the data to be collected.
|
| but look, 300 bucks for the privilege of inviting a self-
| propelled LiDAR scanner, complete with internet connection and
| non-optional user registration, into your domicile! It can
| vacuum too? Sound like a deal to me!
| verdverm wrote:
| I'm less worried about the govt surveillance and more so
| about abusive advertising, though I wonder how much
| additional insights it will really provide. The amount the
| data brokers and scientists can infer already is pretty
| astounding
| ifyoubuildit wrote:
| Why not both? Both are bad and both should be minimized.
| verdverm wrote:
| The government has ample ways to get the same data via
| other means and probably more sophisticated tech. I would
| imagine they are well beyond this
|
| I also don't do things that would have them watching or
| worrying about me, so not really concerned personally and
| only see the upside to the government / military having
| this capability, with appropriate oversight (which I'm
| sure many will imply is non-existant)
|
| There is a valid product offering for ISPs, monitoring
| people for medical emergencies. I suspect this will be
| how it gets accepted by many people
| ifyoubuildit wrote:
| Would you say this is any different from the classic "I
| have nothing to hide" argument?
|
| Edit:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument
| qiine wrote:
| I wonder if at some point the amount of data each individual
| produce would be so large and contradicting that it would be
| almost unusable by all but the most advance tech department
| and with great resources.
| Ruthalas wrote:
| Though only tangentially relevant, I can recommend Valetudo
| as a way to take control of your vacuum's firmware.
| nashashmi wrote:
| Why should privacy be the objective of the scientist?
| iinnPP wrote:
| It's where the truth lives.
| verdverm wrote:
| I'm not faulting the the scientists here, they aren't the
| first to do this. I remember seeing similar from a US
| university research a few years back. This reminded me about
| the latest wifi-6E(?) that's going to make this easier for
| ISPs to obtain similar tracking capabilities.
|
| I for one always own my wifi/modem stack rather then renting
| the one from the ISP
| terminous wrote:
| I mean, why should any scientist think about ethics? [INSERT
| $GOLDBLUM_QUOTE HERE]
|
| Also, when you start to invent new technology, you're not
| just a dispassionate objective scientist pushing the
| boundaries of knowledge. You're an engineer whose products
| are also engineering society.
| polygamous_bat wrote:
| Missing (2019) in the title.
| Flockster wrote:
| Yes, the paper linked to by firebirdn99 is much more recent and
| shares an author.
| firebirdn99 wrote:
| I remember seeing many posts about this in the last few yrs, one
| - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34423395
| mhb wrote:
| Well the paper is from 2019.
| eximius wrote:
| Does anyone know of a way to replicate these results at home,
| even at lower fidelity? I've never found code I could run and it
| seems to always involve extra bespoke antennas/drivers.
| antoniuschan99 wrote:
| This is similar but should be enough to get you started!
| https://github.com/espressif/esp-csi
| demondemidi wrote:
| At Intel, Bob's contributions to Northwood were credited as "the
| first x86 architecture that can no longer be comprehended in its
| entirety by a single individual." Basically it was his Swan Song
| proving there is a limit to how far you can push x86 CISC before
| it implodes.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Wrong article
| riffic wrote:
| great, now what are the applications and how will this be
| commercialized into a torment nexus?
| awakeasleep wrote:
| The same way police go directly to Amazon to get home security
| camera footage from Nest devices, they will be able to work
| with your ISP (if you rent a modem-router-ap) or cloud-based-
| network-gear provider to pull this data from people's houses
| when serving no-knock warrants or investigate crimes.
| oldge wrote:
| You mean ring? Nest is a google property. Doesn't even use
| aws, so pretty sure Amazon would just give the police a dumb
| look if they were asked for footage from nest cameras. Also
| last I checked nest was one of the better players in this
| regard requiring warrants and had rigid public data retention
| processes in place to limit what could be pulled.
| imhoguy wrote:
| https://xkcd.com/538/
|
| but seriously, ISPs can already provide MAC addresses of all
| active client devices at the building at any time, no need to
| tell the dog from the owner puzzle by sci-fi tech.
| Uehreka wrote:
| I was looking into this recently, because I recalled seeing the
| video of this on Twitter a few years back and wanted to see if I
| could reproduce it. But the WiFi signal strength tools they used
| appear to be abandonware, and according to this researcher they
| may not have even accomplished this task at all:
| https://medium.com/@tsardoz/researchers-misrepresenting-the-...
|
| Archive link: https://archive.is/MnOv0
| jimmySixDOF wrote:
| You don't have to wait too long this functionality has been
| baked into WiFi7 with SENS 802.11bf
| mlhpdx wrote:
| I hope folks understand what this means - there will be an
| IEEE standard that makes using Wi-Fi sensing, to some degree,
| hardware agnostic and thereby drives it into mainstream.
| 3np wrote:
| Wild. These seem to be decent intros.
|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.14918
|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.04859
| riedel wrote:
| Actually I last month reviewed also a wifi sensing paper and
| somehow it also did not really elaborate on the validation
| scheme. It seems that still some better standards need to be
| estaished. Often it is to good to be true.
| JRKrause wrote:
| Using neural networks to solve inverse-scattering problems (like
| wifi scattering off a human body, for example) seems to have a
| lot of potential. The lack of phase-information (i.e. not just
| signal intensity but instantaneous phase of the EM wave) captured
| by traditional receivers makes this class of problems so
| difficult to approach since you are blind to a significant
| portion of the available EM information. Mitigating this by
| constraining your solution-space to 'reasonable' outcomes is
| practically very difficult... for a human. Very cool to see such
| a practical demonstration of a neural network seeming to
| accomplish exactly this.
| cchance wrote:
| Wasn't there something like this a while back where somehow had
| designed an "xray scanner" that used peoples wifi routers to do
| it?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-29 23:00 UTC)