I have a cabin in the woods and would like to know when a new device enters the area. What would be a practical way to detect cell phones and log activity?
>>107916321buy a decomissioned 2G tower
there must be a way to do this. this must be viable. however, whether or not it could be done passively or would require something like a stingray is another question
>>107916321You could probably cobble something together with an appropriate SDR system, or a Bluetooth scanner. The former you’d have to listen for phones looking for towers, but I’m not sure how reliable it’d be. Modern cell standards use beam-forming, so if it’s already connected to a tower you might not see it immediately.Regardless whatever you end up with will be a passive listener
>>107916321>>107916686>>107916742They are called IMSI catchers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMSI-catcher
>>107916752Another link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_phone_trackerMaybe the bluetooth detection is viable. The average glowie is undoubtedly carrying around an iPhone and between 2.4Ghz (bluetooth, WiFi), there is likely *some* periodic broadcast from phones like this. Think about how FindMyiPhone or airtags work and then whether you could detect such devices. If you could somehow detect the relevant frequency from a distance with an esp32 then you could network them have essentially a digital tripwire system.
also this comes to mind. i don't remember if it is an IMSI-catcher or using RFID but if RFID maybe the range is too short. If I recall correctly, extending RFID range with antennas is quite expensive and limited. https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/russian-police-spy-on-peoples-mobile-data-to-catch-thieves/
>>107916752IMSI catchers aren’t passive, they actively pretend to be a functioning base station. This is cause they’re used to get IMEIs and shit, not just to determine the presence of mobile devices. You don’t need any of that to pick up mobile communications above a certain amplitude and ping a warning. Running an IMSI catcher is also very illegal, you’d get your local spectrum authority sniffing around in no time.>>107916783ESP32 has BLE built in, take a look at stuff like Bermuda triangulation or similar to see what people have done with it. But its range is limited, and if someone turns of Bluetooth the phone won’t make advertisements.
>>107916821how bout just using a directional antenna tuned to tbe gsm frequency?you keep rotating it, and you get discrete pings.the strength of the signal can even serve as an indication of the distance you got bw you
I think I found the solution for OP.https://github.com/MatthewKuKanich/ESP32-AirTag-Scanner/blob/main/AirTag_Scanner.inoYou set up a bunch of airtag scanners with $3 esp32 devices connected to solar panels in trees and shit, and have it report back to your cabin via wifi mounted on the roof (or go deep into the rabit hole and build a mesh network).Currently the source code only detects airtags, but you could have it just whitelist your devices then it detects everything.
>>107916861My nokia is invisible
>>107916874yes but if you have glowies encroaching upon your Ted tier cabin, you can bet the majority of their glowphones are going to be detected.
>>107916321if there's no off the shelf solutionbuy a hackrf (or something cheaper) and make a gnu radio script to do frequency sweeps over 3g/4g/whatever frequencies, then fft and check if any 3g/4g frequencies are over the noise threshold probably will take a lot of trial and error
just jam all the frequencies and set up bear trapsproblem solved
There was a thread about this a couple days ago>>107856344
>>10791692913.56Mhz can't be read "at over 100m" unless you have expensive antennas and shit
>>107916321>tfw you will never move into the forest and mercilessly hunt teenage campers who wander into it.
>>107916861this should detect any apple device that is energized (including airpods, iphones, and airtags), and detect any android device that has bluetooth enabled, at minimum, right? it could also detect some cars, shared scooters, etc>>107916963people like you are why the great outdoors no longer exists
>>107916321Or you could not live in a literal lawnmower shed in the woods like a poor African and instead move to the city with the rest of humankind.
>>107917070going bak to monkay is literally the only solution to having fallen for the learn2code meme
>>107917026>people like you are why the great outdoors no longer existsIt still exists just fine... maybe you should try going without your cell phone or any kind of communication device so you can really take in nature.
>>107917096>take in natureLMAO Fuck nature. We should pave over all of it. We don't need nature anymore. We have AI now
>>107916924>just commit some felonies so we dont have to waste time setting you up, tee hee.
>>107916321>would like to know when a new device enters the areaWhy do you care if a new device enters the area? Surely what you're interested in is a new person. Consider a camera.>What would be a practical way to detect cell phones and log activity?SDR perhaps. You should pretty easily be able to detect a nearby device transmitting, but I don't know how viable it is to pick the IMEI out of that, or any other unique fingerprint.
>>107916821>you’d get your local spectrum authority sniffing around in no time.Use it like bait to catch him and put him in a cage.
>>107917413kekbased denmark
>>107916321Wouldn't it be more practical to jam the signal and thus nobody wants to come in the first place?
>>107917120Even the IMSI catcher is this, basically. If you don't want agents showing up to your door, which is far more likely to happen if you are fucking around on cell frequencies than if you are running even a FM pirate radio station with nazi propaganda these days maybe look into a more legal solution:https://www.amazon.com/AURSINC-Tinysa-Ultra-ZS407-100kHz-7-3GHz/dp/B0DSFYQDP8
>>107917422The FCC is a 3 letter agency. OP doesn't sound like he wants to be disturbed by the alphabet soup boys.
>>107917422nope.some governmental org is gonna knock on your door for polluting the airwavesafaik the only way you can jam signals is emitting noise on the same bandwidth as the signal youre trying to jambut that implies emitting a whole lot of noise, or concentrating the radiowave beamin either case, its like if you lit up a flashlight in the dark. youre dead easy to spot
>>107917096take in nature you mean take in wojak guy's dick after he kills me? im sorry but im safer in the basement.>>107917433thats only true because the FCC's enforcement is basically being defunded. i'd tune into your Mr Bond radio station.>>107916861reminder that this solution is (a) passive (b) effective (c) legal (d) cheap (e) allows you to do rudementary triangulation to find your glowie and terry davis him in minecraft
>>107917472Not just because they are defunded but because the telcos and the cell frequencies are treated as being of the utmost importance these days. They would hunt FM pirates with extreme prejudice before. Now if you dick around with cell phone stuff they will come at you faster and harder than they ever would have for anything else. That's where the money is. If you fuck with the money you get put in a bind.
>>107917495>irl shitpostis it the right frequencies, though? i vaguely remember something this emitting long wave radio
>>107917495>>107917750also that creates nitrous oxide. which turns into nitric acid when it comes in contact with humidity, like in ones lungs.better use that contraption in an extremely well ventilated place, i thinkim not sure of the yield, but i know using an arc and venting the gasses through organic matter is a low tech way of making nitrous fertilizer
>>107917495>please come arrest me glowbros, here's a massive invisible siren going off constantly to tell you where i am
>>107917822i think the FCC only goes after *intentional* interference but this contraption is so retarded that they would probably just assume it was unintentional industrial interference and ignore it
>>107917865how is a spark gap transmitter shitting up the spectrum "unintentional"? i don't think you've got a snowballs chance in hell of getting away with it
just tell them you were trying to create a perpetual motion machine
>>107917884thats an attenuating circumstance at best, not a free out of jail cardif you kill somebody with a gunand you say it was an accidentat best its requalified from murder to manslaughter, but youre not getting away with it
>at best its requalified from murder to manslaughter, but youre not getting away with itunless your name is alec baldwin. then your case gets dismissed
Just get a RF scanner capable of mapping the 2.4~5GHz rangesAll you need is some clever programming to analyze the signal in real time and it would be very easy to detect any phone in the vicinity.
>>107917495You can destroy ghosts with this btw. It interrupts their electromagnetic coherence
ITT idiots that can't into HAM radio and glow niggers that hate fun.
>>107916686i think you can build one with a hackRF. i recall it being easy
>>107919587>muh ham radioand what about it, huh?its not even the right frequencies you yidiot
>>107919587I'm only allowed halal radio.
>>107919799>its not even the right frequencies you yidiotIt's almost like HAM equipment is easy to modify.
>>107919830huhi bet you couldnt have been more cryptic fagwhat the point of posting if its to sabotage your own communication?also thats the tinkertrany solutionthe correct solution is to buy pigrelor build one yourself
>>107919830>>107919868actually the shit i posted is not enough for 5gfar from thatffffucki hate being wrong so fucking much
its kinda moot actually5g FR2 uses beamforming, has shitty penetration and short rangeits ,not gonna be used in a remote setting at all, and even if it was, it would be extremely hard to detect, if possible at all
>>107916321Use an RTL-SDR and monitor uplink frequencies. You cannot listen in but traffic analysis is plenty sufficient.>>107916938>13.56Mhz can't be read "at over 100m" unless you have expensive antennas and shitTheis wrong on a level so remarkable I am impressed.
>>107916321>cabin in the woodsWith this premise we know the highest frequencies will not be used since they have a far shorter range (a few 100 m). Monitoring sub-GHz frequencies will be sufficient. Bandplans are public information.
Finally, a good fucking thread.
>>107917822Could be ambush bait.
>>107919868>also thats the tinkertrany solutionThe entire point of the HAM radio hobby is doing "tinkertranny shit".
>>107916321>What would be a practical way to detect cell phones and log activity?A large dog that is very territorial, with a gps tracking collar. Along with a tall place and a rifle with a good scope.
