Slashdot Mirror


Beware the Haunted Cordless keyboard

dr. greenthumb writes "The norwegian newspaper Aftenposten reports about an incident where a computer suddenly seemed to develop a life of its own. A game which the user could not remember using that day suddenly appeared on the screen. When he went over to shut it off the screen displayed a message asking him if he "really wanted to delete this file?" His computer was receiving keystrokes from another computer (with the same type of wireless keyboard) 150 metres away! Check out the full story and a follow-up, where experts warns against using wireless keyboards." /me plans to destroy Hemos' sanity...

122 of 285 comments (clear)

  1. see why... by intermodal · · Score: 5, Funny

    not all supposedly convenient technologies are necessarily better or more convenient. I like having a cord on my mouse and keyboard because 1) i know it's connected and 2) i know another isn't. Wireless keyboards etc. have no less a security risk involved as would a wireless network. Imagine being logged on as root and having the guy on the floor above you type in rm -rf /. while you hit the bathroom. even if your door is locked, you're still screwed.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    1. Re:see why... by kleinux · · Score: 3, Funny

      That would suck to explain to the boss. I didn't see the hacker because I was in the bathroom!
      On a side note, maybe now my roomate will stop suggesting that we go wireless. I think the stuff sucks mostly because of needing to by batteries for something as basic as a keyboard seems really off the wall to me.

    2. Re:see why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wireless mice arent much of a security hazard. if anyone is able to listen in on your wireless mouse, all they are going to get is cursor cordinates. unless you somehow enter your password using your mouse, theres not much usefull info to gain from a wireless mouse. It will also be very hard for someone else to do something to your pc though a cordless mouse, unless they can also see the screen. I cant stand corded mice anymore after owning a wireless mouse. Whenever i use corded mice in labs at school, or friends houses, i always find myself tugging on cords that get tangled up with something on or behind the desk or keyboard drawer. I however will never own a wireless keyboard. I had thought of security issues such as this long before this article appeared.

    3. Re:see why... by echophase · · Score: 3, Funny

      Imagine a little cluster of computers running an instance of Counter Strike, you'd have an army all through the commands of a single keyboard. Kind of like Mr. Dubya Bush.
      Forward men, we must kill the noobs!

    4. Re:see why... by PunchMonkey · · Score: 5, Informative

      I like having a cord on my mouse and keyboard because 1) i know it's connected and 2) i know another isn't. Wireless keyboards etc. have no less a security risk...

      Don't place too much confidence in the security of your keyboard, someone might slip one of these on.

      --
      I'll have something intelligent to add one of these days...
    5. Re:see why... by intermodal · · Score: 2

      That's what is called an insecure facility...if you have insecure facilities, you're still full of breaches.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    6. Re:see why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      They can just tie the wireless keyboard or mouse down with a small chain, problem solved :-)

    7. Re:see why... by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      well, not only that.. but imagine somebody running a keyboard logger to get your user logins to everywhere.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  2. 256 channels??? by g4dget · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The attitude companies have towards security is appalling. Wireless keyboards have to use strong cryptography or credit card numbers and personal information are being broadcast across the neighborhood. 256 channels isn't going to fix it.

    1. Re:256 channels??? by Nogami_Saeko · · Score: 2

      My logitech cordless desktop has a "Secure Mode" that can be enabled where the keystrokes between the receiver and the keyboard are encrypted.

      It's probably not any high-powered military strength security or anything, but I'm sure it's sufficient for my purposes.

      --
      "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
    2. Re:256 channels??? by piranha(jpl) · · Score: 2, Insightful
      For those of us in the audience that didn't notice:

      Särelind said the next generation of keyboards would use a new technology which would choose randomly between 256 available channels, and promised to send both Evjeberg and Helle a copy.

      The "256 channels" isn't for their existing wireless keyboards, it's for their "next generation" models.

      A bit shy of cryptographically secure, I'd say. Credit card numbers and personal information aren't all that's at stake; think about your passwords, PGP passphrases, etc.

    3. Re:256 channels??? by Nogami_Saeko · · Score: 2

      Because my purposes are watching DVDs and DiVXs hooked up to my TV ;P

      I really don't care if someone watches the keystrokes on that machine.

      Then again, I use one at work too to write emails and the like. I'm not particularly concerned, if someone thinks the stuff I write about at work is interesting enough to snoop my keyboard for, I pity da foo.

      --
      "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
    4. Re:256 channels??? by fidget42 · · Score: 2
      ...if someone thinks the stuff I write about at work is interesting enough to snoop my keyboard for, I pity da foo.
      Like passwords?
      --
      The dogcow says "Moof!"
    5. Re:256 channels??? by Isle · · Score: 2

      Because there are no secure drivers for linux, and because it is difficult to set up. And a pain to fix if the keyboard is broken and needs to be replaced.

    6. Re:256 channels??? by kasperd · · Score: 2

      So they got it wrong when implementing the thing. There should be a cable on the receiver which you can connect to the keyboard for keyexchange. Just plug in the cable and wait a few seconds, when you disconnect the cable again you will know that now this keyboard will be sending only to this single receiver, and this receiver will be accepting input from only this single keyboard. There is no need to limit the key to 8 bits, I'd choose 256 bit AES if I was the one to design a wireless keyboard.

      Or even better, whenever I don't use my wireless keyboard or mouse, I want to place it in the recharger connected to the receiver. Every time I need it, it will be fully charged and using a new random key.

      The missing driver problem sounds like bullshit to me. Wireless keyboard should be transparent to the driver.

      --

      Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
  3. FCC wont let me be by ++good-duckspeak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This must violate FCC requirements - you know that text on the bottom of your keyboard and mouse.

    --
    Why is Triangle Man so MEAN?
    1. Re:FCC wont let me be by Student_Tech · · Score: 2, Informative

      Part 15 says they have to take flak from other licensed services and that if 2 part 15 devices are interfering with one another, tough luck they have to take it. Now if a part 15 is interfering with a licensed non part15 device then you have a problem that must be fixed...

    2. Re:FCC wont let me be by lostchicken · · Score: 5, Informative

      To be more complete, a Part 15 device is a secondary (or tertiary, if there is already a secondary) user of the entire radio frequency spectrum. That means that they can use the RF spectrum, as long as they don't cause harmful interference to a user with higher priority.

      That means that if your device is hurting my ham radio operations on 146.880 MHz, then I sic the FCC on you, but if I interfere with you, I have primary user rights, so you're outta luck.

      The primary, secondary, etc. system is just a pecking order for RF users. You can interfere with those with higer priority all you want, but Part 15 is always at the bottom.

      --
      -twb
    3. Re:FCC wont let me be by machine+of+god · · Score: 2, Funny

      That means that if your device is hurting my ham radio operations on 146.880 MHz, then I sic [sic] the FCC on you, but if I interfere with you, I have primary user rights, so you're outta luck.

      I really have nothing valuable to say. I just wanted to do the sic sic thing.

  4. SecurityFocus Discussed This by Xenographic · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wireless keyboards have other security issues. Read up on the discussion that took place about this on SecurityFocus: http://online.securityfocus.com/archive/82/173944

  5. 150 meters ? by Tensor · · Score: 2

    WOW ! What kind of keyboard was it ??? My Logitech kb/mouse work AT MOST at 10~15 mts, and only if their batteries are full.

    I guess you might have a wireless presentation mouse, i have a gyromouse too, but i find it unlikely that 2 are used in the same office simultaneously.

  6. TV remotes do this too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have the same trouble with my tv remote. After the wife goes to bed, it turns to the TV-MA flicks on Cinemax and then clicks back to TLC or something whenever she walks in.

    1. Re:TV remotes do this too! by muzzmac · · Score: 2

      Her underwear.

    2. Re:TV remotes do this too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      That "last channel" function is pretty handy.

      Just a little difficult to explain why watching "Secrets of the Third Reich" gave you a hardon.

    3. Re:TV remotes do this too! by LupusUF · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you watch Friends, you will see the danger of this. If you wife is going to catch you jacking off...it had better be to porn...and not some shark attack show on the discovery channel.

    4. Re:TV remotes do this too! by Myco · · Score: 2
      Or even worse, caught jacking off to Friends.

      Or, um, just watching it at all really.

  7. This is only the beginning by ShawnDoc · · Score: 5, Insightful
    With Bluetooth finally making an appearance, expect to see a lot more of this. Since Bluetooth devices are supposed to automatically find each other and just "work", this is only going to become more common. Imagine giving a very important PowerPoint presentation when everything goes hawire when someone giving a presentation of their own the next floor up has their Bluetooth remote starting giving signals to your computer.

    I know there are security and other settings that when properly configured will help prevent these mistakes, but just look at the number of unsecured business wireless networks out there that don't even have WEP turned on. Its going to be nasty.

    1. Re:This is only the beginning by Tensor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Bluetooth is a close-range wireless protocol (about 10mts), and products are "bound" to each other, if you re using a wireless headset and walk close to some one using one they wont mix signals.
      I would be much more worried to someone "stealing" my emails/contacts from my bluetooth pda, using my cellphone to dial out, and eavesdropping on my conversations, than messing up presentations

    2. Re:This is only the beginning by ShawnDoc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      10 meters is about 30 feet. That'll easily cover 2 floors up or down from you.

    3. Re:This is only the beginning by Tensor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, well its open air 10mts so instead of 3 floors you have, at best, 1.5 floors centered on the device.

      Remember that, in offices, floors and ceilings are covered with cables for telephone & networking and electricity. Which also helps to cut down on the range.

    4. Re:This is only the beginning by Tokerat · · Score: 2

      But, as he stated, the signals are encrypted from the handshake on, and therefore won't mix. They may, however, interefere and cause packet loss.

      Could someone really get into a device over bluetooth without authorization? Aren't there passwords or signed ID or something that prevent this? Or at least an "OK" key on devices to confirm a link?

      It's that sort of thing that convinces me we are a bit ahead of ourselves at all times...

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    5. Re:This is only the beginning by evilviper · · Score: 2

      Since it's obvious no one here knows a thing about bluetooth, I'll throw my hat in to the ring...

      Although bluetooth is going to be a wireless technology, it does not compare to anything else we have right now. It is designed with reasonable security in mind.

      Think of it like your garage-door opener. The idea is that you type in your password on each of your bluetooth devices, then only devices with the same password can communicate. Now, it is up to the manufacturers to impliment this security however they see fit, but you can still bet it will be far better than our current wireless keyboards, mice, remotes, etc.

      That said, I know far too much about batteries (esp. rechargables), to use them unless necessecary... So, I'll be sticking to wired keyboards and mice wherever possible.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    6. Re:This is only the beginning by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2
      Although bluetooth is going to be a wireless technology, it does not compare to anything else we have right now. It is designed with reasonable security in mind.

      I read the specs after the Stanford folk gave me some advance notice on the WEP/802 thing. I was not at all impressed. Only reason that the scheme has not been broken is that it is not yet important enough to try.

      The Bluetooth folk have done several things that just scream amateur time. They have invented their own encryption algs, there is no requirements analysis. I find the documents very hard to follow and I write security standards

      I can't work out from the documents how the keying scheme works. I suspect that that is because it does not.

      Unfortunately the most common security argument on slashdot appears to be 'X is insecure, therefore Y is secure'.

      The problem is that the Bluetooth people tried to get reasonable security. They did not go to security specialists.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    7. Re:This is only the beginning by evilviper · · Score: 2

      For one thing, your inability to understand their security, and your assumptions based on that, are certainly not evidence.

      Besides that, bluetooth is not meant to be the next 802.11. It is meant to transfer files to your printer from your handheld, and similiar tasks... It does not need 128bit encryption to do so. Perhaps bluetooth will not be terribly secure, but I'd bet it is far more secure than any other small-device wireless communication method utilized now. Like I said... REASONABLE security.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    8. Re:This is only the beginning by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2
      For one thing, your inability to understand their security, and your assumptions based on that, are certainly not evidence.

      Most people involved in the design of security protocols know my work. I was the person who broke SSL 1.0 before Marc finished describing it.

      I have always considered 'I don't understand' to be a very significant criticism of a specification document, whether security related or not.

      Besides that, bluetooth is not meant to be the next 802.11. It is meant to transfer files to your printer from your handheld, and similiar tasks... It does not need 128bit encryption to do so. Perhaps bluetooth will not be terribly secure, but I'd bet it is far more secure than any other small-device wireless communication method utilized now.

      Strange that you would make that assertion without any knowledge of the specifications. I have read the specs. The number of keying bits is practically irrelevant in a well designed security protocol. 128bit WEP is hopelessly insecure, IPSEC with 56 bit DES can be broken with very expensive hardware.

      The bluetooth specs are full of dubious statements regarding security.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    9. Re:This is only the beginning by evilviper · · Score: 2
      I have always considered 'I don't understand' to be a very significant criticism of a specification document, whether security related or not.

      It's a valid criticism of a document, but not a mark of the security (or lack thereof) of the device it describes.

      I'd bet it is far more secure than any other small-device wireless communication method utilized now.

      Strange that you would make that assertion without any knowledge of the specifications.

      It's not really going out on a limb to say that it is more secure than the devices that now communicate with no security at all.

      Besides, just because I haven't read the specification itself, does not mean I am totally ignorant of the subject. There have been many reviews and summaries that have detailed bluetooth's security features.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    10. Re:This is only the beginning by evilviper · · Score: 2
      ok... but Bluetooh NEEDS to be secure.

      That depends what you mean. If you mean that no-one should be able to discover your password in a reasonable ammount of time, I would agree. If you think that bluetooth communication needs to be so strongly encryted that traffic can't be cracked within a short ammount of time, I would disagree.

      For some applications like a cordless phone, if privacy is a real concern, they could potentially add security on top. But for 99% of potental bluetooth applications, security is not significantly needed. Are you going to be seriously concerned if your neighbors can potentially figure out what you've printed, what buttons on your remote you've pushed? Even if so, bluetooth provides more security than the current wireless communication methods for those same devices.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    11. Re:This is only the beginning by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2
      Besides, just because I haven't read the specification itself, does not mean I am totally ignorant of the subject. There have been many reviews and summaries that have detailed bluetooth's security features.

      Ah so your reading of a review as a non security expert who has written zero security protocols gives a better security assement of the protocol than my reading of the actual specifications even though I have been the lead design and author of security secifications in IETF, WC and OASIS?

      By 'not at all clear', I mean that my reading of the specification sugests to me several ways that the Bluetooth security can be broken. If I was an enterprising postgrad looking to make a name for myself I would look at Bluetooth vulnerabilities. I have suggested to several people that they look at it.

      Empirically I have seen many security protocols that looked impressive that were quickly broken. I have yet to see one that looked like botch work that was robust.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    12. Re:This is only the beginning by evilviper · · Score: 2
      By 'not at all clear', I mean that my reading of the specification sugests to me several ways that the Bluetooth security can be broken.

      Well there is the source of the problem isn't it? I have no idea how this:
      I find the documents very hard to follow and I write security standards
      I can't work out from the documents how the keying scheme works.
      Could POSSIBLY be interpreted as meaning:
      my reading of the specification sugests to me several ways that the Bluetooth security can be broken


      But hey, I'm not an English professor, so that must mean I don't understand the language. *cough*

      My main point in this discussion was that bluetooth will provide security over what current short-range wireless devices do (in almost all cases).

      Of course, in a previous post, you did say that bluetooth does provide reasonable security. Your only complaint seems to be that the method of security is not totally unbreakable... which I certainly don't think it needs to be.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  8. Not quite as fun as VNC by zulux · · Score: 5, Funny


    VNC in an office environemnt is a lot of fun with all the Windows users that never notice the little VNC server icon in the 'systray' - right next to their Gator and Bonzi Buddy icons.

    I've got the keystrokes down just right

    [Ctrl]+[Esc] -> r -> notepad -> Do you want to live, human? -> [F4]

    under a second. Leaves the poor things troubeled. Confused. Hungering for the sweet realse of alcohol or a shotgun.

    Or just move the mouse subtely when they go to click on somthing.

    Of course, don't forget to tell them that it could be Bill Gates fucking with their computer - he's mad that they diden't forward the Windows 95 Beta email. He really wanted to give them $1000 and he's pissed his knickers.

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    1. Re:Not quite as fun as VNC by Christianfreak · · Score: 4, Funny

      And fortunatly there is even a Mac version of VNC, you should have seen the look on some of the graphic guys faces when their beloved Macs turned on them and told them to use PCs by order of Bill Gates at a web development company I worked at a few years ago :)

    2. Re:Not quite as fun as VNC by Hydro-X · · Score: 2

      This is all I need... I just spent the better part of a day removing some SubSeven-like hax0r-expl0it thing that some guy installed on a friend's computer. And the person who thought she could remove it ended up ruining the uninstall. Of course given that I live in a university rez, this is going to make for some revenge and, because I'm "the computer guy", I will probably be quite busy. If these people start playing with VNC and other things beyond their (apparently limited) scope of understanding, I may never graduate!

    3. Re:Not quite as fun as VNC by cybermace5 · · Score: 2

      Yes.

      It *is* quite fun to know the WAN-wide VNC password.

      *evil grin*

      No, I wasn't responsible for that little detail.

      --
      ...
    4. Re:Not quite as fun as VNC by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When I had pcAnywhere installed on my old machine it was pretty simple to fire it up on the old @home network and suddenly finding myself on a password-less PC. I also ran notepad but wrote, "Put a damn password on your pcAnywhere!"

      That's the nice thing about the open VNC apps, you can't run them without some password and if you try to brute force it (at least in tightVNC) it locks you out for x amount of time. Not to mention its free. Yes, I know there's no built in encryption, but that's besides the point.

    5. Re:Not quite as fun as VNC by /dev/trash · · Score: 2, Funny

      Graduate? Damn, with your skills, you couldmake 80k a year fixing idiots PC's.

    6. Re:Not quite as fun as VNC by zulux · · Score: 3, Funny

      pretty simple to fire it up on the old @home network and suddenly finding myself on a password-less PC. I also ran notepad but wrote, "Put a damn password on your pcAnywhere!"

      A frend of mine had @home - I spent a fun-filled evening attaching to pepoples printers and printing out porn, Jack Chick tracks, Gynocology Doctor remonder notices for their 8am discharge examination, and a 'turn you fscking Windows sharing off' how-too's. Annoying and yet, informative.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    7. Re:Not quite as fun as VNC by modecx · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can attest to the fun in the benevolent maleficence in messing with people's PCs. I took my home NAT box offline to do some work on it, and decided to hook up my laptop to raw ethernet over DSL in the meantime. I simply could not believe the ammount of computers that were wide open, with Admimistrator password left blank, and c:\ shared. Winders Messaging Service is also quite the source of entertainment.

      Being the nice guy I am, I made up an instruction sheet detailing how to fix the problem, and printed it to whatever shared printers existed.

      It's no wonder that 11 year olds are so able to DoS whatever they want. The truely scary thing is that one of the computers was property of my ISP.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    8. Re:Not quite as fun as VNC by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 2, Funny

      [Ctrl]+[Esc] -> r -> notepad -> Do you want to live, human? -> [F4]

      under a second. Leaves the poor things troubeled. Confused. Hungering for the sweet realse of alcohol or a shotgun.


      This reminds me of something, once I was using VNC to connect to my home's win98 machine. You see, my funny little brother was using the computer at the same time, and when he saw all this windows pop-up automatically and shut-down...he literally went nuts. Lo and behold, he thought the computer had a virus and shut the computer off right way.

      Boy was I pissed when I lost my VNC connection; right about when I was ready to download "my stuff" queue on fridays.

  9. Latest hacking fad. by Defender2000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's right, WarKeyboarding! Boost the signal of your keyboard, and drive around town attempting to control random computers. Not seeing a screen is kind of difficult, but that's only a minor obstacle. Also use a tuned receiver to listen to keystrokes from around town. Passwords galore!

    --
    ...I'll procrastinate tomorrow...
    1. Re:Latest hacking fad. by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Actually, that's a fantastic idea. You could send them to a URL and download and install whatever trojan.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Latest hacking fad. by sheWhoWalksWithToesL · · Score: 5, Funny
      Ctrl + Alt +Del. Wait a few minutes.

      Crtl + Alt + Del. Wait a few minutes.

      Crtl + Alt + Del. Wait a few minutes.

      Laugh maniacally. Repeat.

      -SheWhoWalksWithToesLikeCobras

      --
      -SheWhoWalksWithToesLikeCobras Please enter any 11-digit prime number to continue...
    3. Re:Latest hacking fad. by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just drive around with a WarKeyboard in your trunk that just send out a very powerful ALT+F4 non-stop.

    4. Re:Latest hacking fad. by isorox · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ctrl + Alt +Del. Wait a few minutes.
      Crtl + Alt + Del. Wait a few minutes.
      Crtl + Alt + Del. Wait a few minutes.


      And this differes from normal use how?

    5. Re:Latest hacking fad. by Zakabog · · Score: 3, Funny

      The difference - Laugh maniacally. Repeat.

      Usually when you use windows it's -

      Ctrl + Alt +Del. Wait a few minutes.
      Crtl + Alt + Del. Wait a few minutes.
      Crtl + Alt + Del. Wait a few minutes.
      grab an axe, start laughing psychotically, scream "HERE'S JOHNNY!" and tear that piece of crap to shreads.

  10. Don't Wxorry about this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    My Log?tec keyboard hask been working for the law#tst two years witout any hi19tch.

  11. It wasn't me... by DrFatal · · Score: 5, Funny

    Finally I'll have a decent excuse why that webpage full of naked women was on the screen when my girlfriend walks into the computer room. "I swear honey, it wasn't me.."

  12. This is just funny... by SexyKellyOsbourne · · Score: 2

    Most wireless keyboards, like garage door openers, have their own unique codes and frequencies built in to them so one cannot interface with another in the same way.

    The guy has just probably been netbus'ed, back orificed, etc, or someone's playing pranks on him...

    1. Re:This is just funny... by aridhol · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In theory, yes. How many combinations of frequency and code are there? My uncle used to work in a Ford factory, and every car that rolled off the assembly line together used the same key. It's possible that they keyboards have a similar problem.

      --
      I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.
    2. Re:This is just funny... by spike+hay · · Score: 2

      My neighbor's garage door has a similar problem. Somebody one block down must have a garage door frequency the same as hers. Once in a while her door will go up or down on it's own.

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
    3. Re:This is just funny... by Osty · · Score: 2

      Most wireless keyboards, like garage door openers, have their own unique codes and frequencies built in to them so one cannot interface with another in the same way.

      According to the manual of my car, I can open some garage doors simply by revving my car's engine. I've not tried it, though.

    4. Re:This is just funny... by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Interesting
      People think you're kidding, but you're not. My brother's Toyota was 'stolen' by someone who got in the wrong locked car one night and drove it across campus. (Toyotas have one key for the door and ignition.) Same color, same year, same model...same key. In the light of day, they both reported their cars missing.

      Of course, almost any car can be unlocked by a slim jim anyway, so it's not worth worrying about. If you want your car to not be stolen, you need either to disable it (What I do.), or put a lowjack in it.

      It's usually not that hard to kept your car from running. If someone tries to steal my car, they'll find the ignition can be hotwired like normal, but for some odd reason it won't shift out of park...and no, I won't tell you why that is.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    5. Re:This is just funny... by OttoM · · Score: 2, Informative
      Most wireless keyboards, like garage door openers, have their own unique codes and frequencies built in to them so one cannot interface with another in the same way.

      You are a bit to confident:

      • Available channels for these type of devices are very limited, so they have to share.
      • Cheap mice and keyboard don't do unique numbers, because it makes the devices more expensive: you have to pair devices during manufacturing and packaging, for example.
      • Garage doors openers have a notouriously bad track record on security. Ross Anderson's "Security Engineering" contains lots of real life examples.
      So the story might have been true very well.
    6. Re:This is just funny... by tulare · · Score: 2
      Most wireless keyboards, like garage door openers..
      Hell, dude, didn't you ever go around town with your parents garage door opener and see how many doors you could open? We used to just leave the doors up (I know, I know... don't moralize in my general direction, OK?) to make the people freak out in the morning. Our record was five doors in one night. Thing is, garage door openers had three wheels with 0-9 on each, so there were only a thousand possible combinations available to them. In tract suburbia, this is trivial. Considering that HP said their newfangled, not-yet-released keyboard has 256 channels, they aren't even as secure as the dufus garage door openers we used to play with. RF is a pretty nice party line when it comes down to implementation.
      --
      political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
  13. Happens toH EmeY all the time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I uLse a LogUitecZh wirEelRess and mYouse. It's beOen happUening Rso muKch laEteYly, I'vSe gotAten uRsed to iEt. ThoRse meddUlinLg kiEds! GooDd thiDng they cOan't tRype as fKast at me.

    1. Re:Happens toH EmeY all the time by jigma · · Score: 3, Funny

      HEY LUZER YOUR KEYS ARE RULED DORK ...man, I though I was gonna get a password

      --
      "linux is only free if your time has no value" - Jamie Zawinski
  14. Not as bad as the haunted mouse... by telstar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Today's mice are well known to spiral the cursor in a circular motion around your screen at a high rate of speed, clicking the screen randomly when their internal circuitry begins to fry.

    I've witnessed it twice ... once at a colleague's desk, and another time during an application demo.
    It's great fun to explain that the problem is the mouse and not your app to a room full of speculative non-technical people.

    1. Re:Not as bad as the haunted mouse... by evilviper · · Score: 2

      I've never seen it happen with anything but MS Windows... I suspect it's not a matter of a poor mouse, but just poor software. Umm, I could be wrong. Has anyone had it happen on some other OS?

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    2. Re:Not as bad as the haunted mouse... by evilviper · · Score: 2

      *Ahem*... Please do not assume. If anyone knows for sure, I'd like to hear about it.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  15. I have one of these keyboards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've never Classified: had For Your problems Eyes with it Only.

  16. 150 meters? no problem. by updog · · Score: 5, Funny

    150 meters? that's cool... since i use inches and feet, i'm not affected.

  17. One Question by telstar · · Score: 3, Funny
    "His computer was receiving keystrokes from another computer (with the same type of wireless keyboard) 150 metres away!"
    • What's a meter?
    1. Re:One Question by tunah · · Score: 3, Funny
      For non-americans:

      A meter is something that measures - eg water meter, odometer, thermometer. Commonly confused with metre which is the SI unit of distance.

      For americans:

      A meter is either something that measures (see above) or a weird unit of distance only used by scientists and geeks. It is commonly confused with a metre, which is a conspiracy by the europeans to make everything two thirds smaller. They don't need double garages, because their car fits in one!

      --
      Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
    2. Re:One Question by PhxBlue · · Score: 2

      It's metre, you insensitive clod!

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    3. Re:One Question by (insert+nick+here) · · Score: 2, Informative

      What's a meter?


      A meter is a tool for measuring something.

      A metre is the length travelled by light in vacuum in 1/299 792 458 of a second. This is approximately the side length of a cube containing one ton (1000 kg) of water. Also, a litre is defined as 0.1^3 metres (same as one kg of water).

      The metre,kg and litre are part of the metric system, which is the standard in all civilized and most uncivilized countries.

      I've heard tales of a big country across the Atlantic, where they still measure stuff in units like feet, stones, pounds, gallons and grandfathers-length-when-he-died, but I have a hope that we someday will manage to teach them the metric standard, how to read and how to elect sane presidents.
    4. Re:One Question by Graabein · · Score: 4, Funny
      > What's a meter?

      You mean metre. It's a measuring unit used by NASA about half the time.

      --
      And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
  18. I'm using a Wireless keyboard by JabberWokky · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I've been using a wireless keyboard anpined mouse for ages and I've haHey baby, I miss you!d no problems siWanna get together tonight?nce I got them.

    Seriously, though. I've been using Logitech cordless desktops for years - I've had four in my apartment in close proximity with no problem, and used several at work as well. If a mouse or keyboard syncs with a base unit, it syncs to *that* unit. You can sync multiple devices to a base unit, but I have never seen a device sync to multiple base units. A nice little thing about Logitech's system is that they are all compatable - I like the simple diamond mouse and a keyboard without extra multimedia buttons, and detest the ergonomic "crashing wave" mouse. I can pick and choose my keyboard and mouse, walk over to a computer, hit the sync button and start using it at that terminal. The only problem I've ever had was when the living room computer was next to the multimedia computer and you sometimes synced to the wrong one... so you'd check before typing willy-nilly. :)

    Wireless keyboards and mouses are great - I swear by them. I change batteries maybe once every 4 to 6 months, and don't ever have to worry about cables. At home I type in my lap, and can have my phone right against the top of my mousepad, my monitor to the left, and a glass of tea to the right and not worry about the cord catching the phone cord or knocking over the tea.

    Now, I *would* like an encrypted signal, sure... but gimmie a break... who the hell cares to capture a few hours of my posting to Slashdot and writing rough drafts of lyrics? Certainly not *my* neighbors. Still, I ssh to my servers, and it would be really nice to have a secure connection to my keyboard. If I was really paranoid, I'd stick my monitors in a Faraday cage to prevent the video signal from being broadcast... everybody is sending *that* out (where everybody = really close to 100% of all computers).

    --
    Evan

    --
    "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    1. Re:I'm using a Wireless keyboard by JabberWokky · · Score: 2
      Hunh - I have never ever installed the software, even on my Win* machines. I wonder if there's software for Linux out there... to Freshmeat and Google, away! ;)

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  19. Errrr by Tensor · · Score: 2

    You know precisely when your wireless kb/mouse are connected.

    They are wireless to a base connected by cables to the mouse/kb mini-dins or to usb.

    That is, unless you have a blootooth-enabled motherboard and a BT kb & mouse

  20. hmmm by the_other_one · · Score: 2

    Has anyone considered selling wireless hardware that would let me generate my own keys. Then let me install my own keys in my own hardware.

    Preferrably with the option of selecting the encryption standard.

    --
    134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
  21. Batteries by Kenshin · · Score: 2

    That, and the bloody batteries won't run out in the middle of a very important task...

    --

    Does it make you happy you're so strange?

  22. Re:20 word summary by jericho4.0 · · Score: 2

    Thanks 20wordsummary! 20 words on the dot!

    --
    "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
  23. Three words.... by sheWhoWalksWithToesL · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nightvision infrared goggles.

    --
    -SheWhoWalksWithToesLikeCobras Please enter any 11-digit prime number to continue...
    1. Re:Three words.... by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2

      Heh. I figured they were "Line of Sight".

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  24. Well... by DAldredge · · Score: 5, Funny

    How are things at NASA these days?

  25. securing wireless technologies... by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 5, Funny

    If only we could secure wireless technologies. Maybe we could have the signals travel in a secure method - maybe down some sort of tube. maybe the tube would have to have some sort of "antennae" - maybe it should be of some conductive material - like copper.

    We should also make sure that these "tubes" are shielded in some way - with maybe a suple rubber coating.

    Then the wireless signals could travel through this "tube" from the keyboard to the computer - thus rendering them safe from nasty hackers that may be listening.

    1. Re:securing wireless technologies... by isorox · · Score: 2

      Maybe we could have the signals travel in a secure method - maybe down some sort of tube...rendering them safe from nasty hackers that may be listening.

      Quick! - patent it as a "secure form of wireless telecommunications"

    2. Re:securing wireless technologies... by evilviper · · Score: 2

      It wasn't funny on the last 50 stories about wireless security, and it's even less funny now...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  26. Bluetooth is much better by g4dget · · Score: 3, Informative

    Bluetooth security may not be perfect, but it's a whole lot better than this. Bluetooth devices are paired and can encrypt their communications. Furthermore, setting up Bluetooth security is much simpler than setting up 802.11b security, and many devices will simply not work unless the end user does. If all wireless keyboards switched to a proper Bluetooth implementation, security would be a whole lot better than with these random RF hacks.

    1. Re:Bluetooth is much better by evilviper · · Score: 4, Funny
      and many devices will simply not work unless the end user does.


      Muwahahahahaha!!!

      LUser: "My handheld called me an idiot then shut itself off."
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  27. Re:Forget that.... by amstrad · · Score: 2

    In British english:

    metre - unit of length
    meter - device for measuring

    In US english

    gee they're the same

  28. These things _have_ encryption by geddes · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I just picked up a Logitech Cordless Access Keyboard a week ago, and I am incredibly happy with it. The convenience of being able to sit in my bad and control divx movies in mplayer is great :-)

    I live in a dorm situation, so it is very possible kids who are nearbye will interfere/send keystrokes/recieve keystrokes from my computer. However, Logitech promises Cordless freedom through multi-channel digital radio technology with secure encryption.

    Loitech assures us that the kind of stuff mentioned in the article cannot happen:

    To avoid the chance of interference between cordless products, every Logitech cordless product integrates a 12-bit security ID, which allows the receiver to uniquely identify the emitter (i.e., the cordless device, itself) that it is listening to. The 12-bit ID provides 4096 unique combinations of digits, lowering the risk of interference to less than 0.25%. Additionally, in some Logitech cordless keyboards and mice, multi-channel RF technology allows the channel to be changed in the event of a conflict.

    To further minimize the impact of the already uncommon conflict or interference, some Logitech cordless keyboards now include secure encryption that protects the security of the data being typed on and transmitted by the keyboard.
    But I can't find any more details about this technology. So some logitech keyboard have encryption, some don't. I wonder how easy it is to add encryption to these thigns without latency. I don't want to press "a" and wait 2 seconds while the signal decrpyts for the a to appear on my screen. I wonder how simple or complex the encryption is on my cordless access keyboard. Is it a simple XOR like the AIM passwords or is it real encryption? I don't know. But frankly, I am not worried.

    Bottom Line: zero encryption with 12-but ID codes is good enough for me. If someone really wanted to get at my credit card numbers, they would probobly come into my unlocked room and find my wallet with my credit card in it instead of building a device to pick up the radio signals from my keyboard. Logitech claims a .25% chance of interference, and as long as my keyboard work, that is also good enough for me.

    1. Re:These things _have_ encryption by etymxris · · Score: 2
      The 12-bit ID provides 4096 unique combinations of digits, lowering the risk of interference to less than 0.25%.


      The only problem with this is that it represents the chance that any TWO such mice have the same 12-bit ID.

      Have you ever played that game where, in a room of 25 people or more, you proclaim that at least two people have the exact same birthday? The chance of two people sharing a birthday in a room of 22 people is about 50%. The chances get much greater as the number of people increase. You wouldn't think it, because the probability that any two random people share the same birthday is 1/365. But as you increase the number of people, this goes up greatly.

      For your mouse, there are 4096 possible combinations. So the probability that any two such mice will share the same ID are 1/4096. But if you have, say, 100 people, then there are 100*99 ~= 10,000 possible pairings. It's been a while since I took statistics, but I can wager that at least two of those people will share the same ID.
    2. Re:These things _have_ encryption by Tokerat · · Score: 2

      The convenience of being able to sit in my bad and...

      ...Yes, it was, wasn't it? ;-)

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    3. Re:These things _have_ encryption by Speare · · Score: 2

      They have IDs, they don't have encryption. They're like channels on the television, or channels between wireless home phones.

      When you connect the device, you push a little "I'm Here" button on the device and a matching little "Who is There?" button on the receiver. They lock in on the chosen channels until you play that game again. It remembers the match-up even when powering off the PC for a few days, or across typical battery-replacement interruptions in the device.

      If you're not TRYING to intercept or interject, it works fine. We have two computers in the same room with wireless Logitech mice and wireless Logitech keyboards. No interference.

      If you're TRYING to intercept or interject, it would be trivial to walk all 4096 channels. Once you "tune in" to the right channel, it's all cleartext. Again, that's not encryption.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
  29. 'across the neighborhood' by rebelcool · · Score: 2

    instances like the above case are extremely rare. like they say, 25 feet is a max range. My keyboard doesnt work beyond 10. Except for people living in areas with certain environmental conditions (which are intermittant), this isnt a problem. Unless the hacker decides to steal your info by getting in the same room as you (this is of course, after actually FINDING you) its simply not going to happen.

    --

    -

    1. Re:'across the neighborhood' by afidel · · Score: 2

      just because it only works at short range does not mean that it can't be detected at longer range. For instance 802.11b two way communications only works at about 100m with even decent cards (Cisco pcmcia nic talking to Cisco AP) but you can listen in at maybe a half kilometer with the proper high gain directional antenna. Any wireless communication that has the potential to carry any important information should use encryption.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  30. Logitech by Natchswing · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Speaking of logitech, I just bought the elite duo wireless mouse and keyboard. The keybaord has you go through some sort of securing process where it transmits a code to the keyboard then shows the code on the screen and asks me to enter it.

    Now, I really have no clue whether this is just for show of if it actually does something. Does anyone know?

  31. Scary Story... by Nanite · · Score: 2, Funny

    And there, in the computers disk drive... WAS A HOOK!

    Nanite

    --
    God is real unless declared integer.
  32. Alternatives? by phorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How about a wide-spectrum IR-type keyboard. You'd have to align the transmitter and receiver, but at least the signal wouldn't be escaping the confines of your house/apartment/etc.

    Also, how about security wireless mice? There's no password-sniffing risk, but I guess somebody could move the cursor around on your PC and delete files etc... not quite as bad as keybpard access though.

    Can anyone give any info on available IR mice/keyboards? Most checks in search engines seem to just links about mice using IR for movement detection, not transmission

  33. repeated mistakes by Alien+Being · · Score: 2

    This is the same kind of crap that went on with early cordless telephones.

  34. ...in the landfill, that is by ink · · Score: 2

    Speaking of which; why the hell do people want cordless mice/keyboards in the first place? What did the cord ever do to you? I can see 10 years into the future, where in addition to having kilowatt power supplies, we'll be filling up all the landfills with alkaline batteries to keep our mice and keyboards well fed; and for what -- to get rid of that ever-so-annoying.... cable? I just don't get it.

    --
    The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
    1. Re:...in the landfill, that is by _Spirit · · Score: 2

      I used to have a somewhat impractical desk in a previous home that almost forced me to go wireless. Extension cords were an option as well but silly enough not readily available (some people rather shop at big shiny stores that only sell boxes and not at smaller well-stocked stores that sell every cable conceivable and whatever else I would like to buy, hence in the city I used to live in only stores of the former persuasion remained)

      Now that I have moved and switched desks I can plug everything in again. I will be switching back to cords as soon as I have found my old mouse and keyboard (bit of a challenge that). Aside from the security risk, a cordless keyboard is ok. But a cordless mouse will drive you crazy, if the batteries aren't dead, some other apparatus in the house disrupts reception of the signals involved. In every case you're screwed. I am really fed up with em.

      --

      beauty is only a light switch away

    2. Re:...in the landfill, that is by Darren+Winsper · · Score: 2

      I'll tell you why, it's because the cable is fucking annoying, especially on the mouse. As for the battery issue, I suggest you look at the latest cordless mice, they have a basestation they can recharge on.

  35. In Related News by Kaz+Riprock · · Score: 3, Funny


    Southern New Jersey police dispatchers were wondering why they were receiving requests for New England Patriots, Boston Bruins, and Boston Celtics statistics on their monitors....

    --
    Mordor...a magical, mythical land where women are more rare than dragons--but where every man would rather find a dragon
  36. Re:Keyboards vs RC racers by tulare · · Score: 4, Funny
    However, you're right about the interference - if two radios had the same frequency crystals in, many funny things were bound to happen.
    No doubt. When I was little, we had a dog that apparently decided that my r/c cars were some strange version of cat she hadn't torn to shreds yet. Needless to say, we kept her in the back yard when we had our cars out.
    Happens that, right after Christmas (or maybe Christmas afternoon, I can't remember) one of the neighbor kids shows up with his shiny new rc-10 (mine was somewhat more scarred - see above). Naturally, I ran inside and got my car out so that we could race. What a disaster - my car did this stuttery thing and ended up in a flowerbed, while my friends' brand-new rc-10 went off full-throttle up our driveway, completely out of control, and then zipped right under the gate and into the waiting fangs beyond. By the time we got the gate undone, it was too late. Yeah, we checked, and yeah, both of us were on the same freq. What a scene - I'll never forget it :)
    --
    political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
  37. Beware the new technologies... by Ektanoor · · Score: 2

    Such incidents are prone to happen when things are new. One colleague nearly scared to death a University teacher in the beginning of the 90's, and guess how, using the fresh new and revolutionary remote control technology. Today we have all these Remote Admins, VNC, Terminal Services and so. Back then, people were only starting to see these things. And well, one colleague took control of a machine and started playing with it. I saw what was happening with the teacher while the show went on. Imagine someone in its late 40's, using a good suit, with a small Lenin-like beard and a good hair-cut. Now, this is not a joke, imagine how he went out the room - hair all up, his Lenin-like beard pointing forward, with the upper buttons of the shirt open, trembling and with wide eyes open...
    That's one of the first remote control jokes...

  38. beware also... by nirvanis · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    nirvanis
  39. My laptop was haunted once, too... by soccerisgod · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...when I was visiting a customer. We were working on something on my laptop, discussing changes to a website,
    when suddendly the mouse started to move around horizontally. We stared at it in amazement for a while, then I
    moved the mouse and it all stopped. My best guess is induction from a nearby power line, but I don't really know :)

    --
    If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
    1. Re:My laptop was haunted once, too... by Reziac · · Score: 2

      I once had an old BSR mouse with such extreme sensitivity that less than 1/4 INCH of physical motion moved the pointer all the way across the screen. (*Loved* it, once I got used to it. Made everyone else who touched it insane. And yes, it was the mouse, not the driver -- I use the standard M$Mouse v8.20 driver.) Sometimes just air motion from a nearby room fan, or vibration from passing trucks or aircraft, was enough to send the pointer slowly crawling across the screen.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  40. My experience with this... by zeno_2 · · Score: 2

    I recently had a job where I supported wireless keyboards and mice.. it was in a big cube farm, and alot of the other techs had this equipment to help troubleshoot it..

    Anyway, for about a week straight, every day when I would come in, I would have netscape open, emails open, etc..

    I had originally thought that someone was messing with my pc at work when I was gone, but at the end of the week, the offending person was there and used his mouse and it controlled my keyboard... With those first ones we had to, there were only 2 channels you could use, so its a bad idea for any sort of mid-large company..

    They are now making bluetooth keyboards / mice and are supporting them there, I don't work there anymore though so don't have much of an idea if it works better...

    1. Re:My experience with this... by zeno_2 · · Score: 2

      Heh.. Ok its late, his mouse controlled my mouse =P

  41. Re:Forget that.... by Isle · · Score: 2

    In farscape they use the term metres all the time. I think it is something like an AU in length.

  42. Logitech Encryption Driver Releases by handsomepete · · Score: 3, Informative
    This release includes an encryption feature for the Cordless Freedom(TM) Optical and Cordless Freedom(TM) iTouch(TM) keyboards only.
    You can snag 'em here. No Linux, and there appears to be only an encryption free version for OSX. Looks like the above are the only types of keyboards that support it.

    Now, will someone please explain to me how updating drivers for a 3 year old wireless keyboard will encrypt the path from the keyboard to the receiver? I'm honestly asking, because I don't get it. Or does it only work for recent revisions of these keyboards? I don't think this wasn't a part of the drivers when I bought it a couple years ago. I tried to ask LISA, their magical online support, but all I got was:
    "LISA I found no items pertaining to 'encryption'."
    1. Re:Logitech Encryption Driver Releases by Krelnik · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Now, will someone please explain to me how updating drivers for a 3 year old wireless keyboard will encrypt the path from the keyboard to the receiver?

      There could be a number of legitimate ways this happened:

      1. The encryption feature was there all along, but they didn't get around to supporting it in the software until now. This often happens in commercial hardware products, when you hit a deadline and the drivers just aren't ready. Although 3 years does seem a bit excessive.

      2. The driver actually downloads code to the controller in the keyboard, thereby "upgrading" it to include encryption.

      3. The hardware supported it all along, but they were having trouble getting their government paperwork to ship a product with encryption. So they just yanked the feature out of the driver until such time as the paperwork is done. Now its done so they are shipping the drivers.

  43. same problem with the PCjr a few years ago... by call+-151 · · Score: 3, Funny
    This issue is not brand-new, at least not to a lesser extent. The wireless keyboard on the PCjr from the mid 80s had line-of-sight IR connections that you could do all kinds of fun tricks with. I remember a few gems:
    • Writing a 'burglar-alarm' program that sat there expecting the space bar to be pressed constantly. Then putting the keyboard across the way with a book sitting on the space bar. If anyone walked by and interrupted the beam, the alarm would go off. Fun to do across people's cube entryways. (Yes, I was writing software that was supposed to work on those things...)
    • Normal TV remotes would interfere with the keyboard signal and cause the PCjr to beep annoyingly and not recognize commands. I have fond memories of taking a remote to computer stores and surreptitiously pointing it from my pocket at the PCjr when the salesman at Sears was demonstrating the wonders of the wireless keyboard to someone. (Yes, I was an Apple II/Mac partisan and actually thought there was some danger the PCjr was going to take over the world... How could I have known that it was going to be one of the most remarkable flops of all time? )

    --
    It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
  44. How about 2 mice? ;-) by FyRE666 · · Score: 2

    A couple of years ago I spent an enjoyable couple of days driving the graphic designer mad at a web-dev house where we worked. She used an Apple G4 which was positioned directly across the desk from me (so our monitors backed onto eachother). I sneakily plugged a spare mouse into one of the unused USB ports on the monitor and let the fun ensue ;-)

    A few times a day I'd listen for frantic clicking, and hold down the left button, whilst listening to the enraged artist screaming "THIS F*CKING BUTTON KEEPS STICKING!!!" etc. I eventually moved on to ever so slowly moving the mouse around, to more curses. Every so often, colleagues would be invited to try and work out what the problem was (at which point I obviously stopped messing about). I was eventually found-out after failing to supress my laughter at a particularly violent tirade after drawing a big black line all over an image (unknowingly).

    I don't work there any more...

  45. Reminds me... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 3, Funny
    One day, the TV started changing channels wildly. And we couldn't find the remote.

    Turns out it fell between two of the couch cushions, which were depressing the "next channel" button...

  46. forget wireless by scharkalvin · · Score: 2

    I won't use a wireless home network, or an rf wireless keyboard. I also will only divulge private information over a landline hard wired phone. Cordless phones and even cell phones are NOT good security. True landline phones can be tapped into, but there are some ways to detect this.

    Now IR wireless keyboards should be ok. The range isn't as good but it is good enough for the couch potato.

  47. Threat awareness by CrystalFalcon · · Score: 2

    Ever seen the movie "Sneakers"?

    If you are or aren't using strong crypto on the air for keyboards is a non-issue as long as you haven't made a threat assessment.

    In general, a leaked credit card number isn't the world. You get a couple of bogus charges, you challenge them with the bank, the bank refunds your account and files fraud charges for the police to pursue the perpetrator. End of story as far as you are concerned.

    Same thing with personal information. Very few people would actually want to read your medical record. I am not one of them.

    My point is this: if you have information somebody else wants, not having wireless keyboards is not going to stop them from getting it. They'll videotape you through the window as you type your password from the building next door (that's my "Sneakers" reference). They'll eavesdrop on RF leakage from your wired network (you'd be surprised how much RF a normal network generates - why do you think the military only uses fiber, end to end?). They'll even tune in RF from your monitor and read your screen contents. All this can be done from across the street with fairly professional equipment.

    So if you have sensitive information, take it all the way and do a real threat assessment. If you don't have sensitive information, nobody is really going to care about wireless leakage from the keyboards in particular. Except, possibly, those who use the computers which accidentally share frequencies and therefore appear totally haunted. :-)

    1. Re:Threat awareness by KjetilK · · Score: 2
      Well, I foresee this scenario: There is this bad guy on your block who sets up a box catching up all the keystrokes everybody on the block types on their keyboards. After looking around, he determines who has quite a lot of money, and he determines what passwords they use. Then, he goes around "borrowing" the smartcards of those persons, and uses the smartcard and the passwords to make certain transactions. There are those willing to knock a neighbour over the head or even kill him to pay his drugs or gambling debt, those things are hard to investigate as they are, in this is not going to make it easier, but the risk for those who do that kind of stuff probably lower.

      There are several companies here in Norway working on smart-card solutions for Joe Average, and I hope they're paying attention, because they should be scare shitless by this. If a few remote keystroke loggers are found in the wild, it will be sufficient to undermine the credibility of the digital signatures they are providing. But, I fear they are not paying attention, because they have been known to favour security through obscurity in the past.

      The problem is the possible scale, and that only minor breaches will undermine the credibility of certain systems such as digital signatures for Joe Average. Another aspect is that it is so easy to compromise, as opposed to catching the RF (yeah, I know, it is huge), which is not something just anybody could do.

      And given it should be really, really easy to install symmetric encryption on the keyboard sender and receiver, this shouldn't really be a topic.

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
  48. Birthday attack/collision by TheLink · · Score: 2

    If there are 2^12 random possibilities, after about 2^6 tries there's a 50% chance of a collision/match.

    Basically for 2^x different possibilities, the 50% chance is hit at about 2^(x/2). For more accuracy try 1.2 * 2^(x/2).

    So in a LAN party of about 80 people using the same model wireless mouse mentioned, don't be surprised there's a 50% chance of a collision.

    That's not exact, but it's good enough in most cases. Usually the stuff is broken so badly that you won't care how broken it is. Or you have a rough idea of the orders of magnitude.

    For details see:
    http://mathworld.wolfram.com/BirthdayProblem .html

    Whenever a consumer electronics marketing material says encryption, they mean encoding. Unless they mention standard crypto algos, in which case read "bad implementation of standard crypto". Because those that actually care, aren't fooled and aren't in their target markets.

    --
  49. Simple... by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

    Because they haven't discovered the Mouse Bungee yet.

    I used to have a cordless mouse. I swore by it, even after it went to 1/3 its original range for some reason (New batteries didn't fix the problem)

    Eventually, it broke. I splurged on an MS Intellimouse Explorer (Back when it was the only optical mouse that didn't need a special mousepad a la Sun opticals). Loved the optical, loved the smoother response in games (Cordless mice have a low update rate, which is why I'll never go back), esp. when using the mouse in USB mode.

    Couldn't stand the cord... But I lived with it until I bought a Mouse Bungee. Haven't had cord tangle problems ever since. :)

    I don't remember the URL, but the MBs run $12-20 and worth every penny. (For those that don't know what it is - It's a weighted stand with an elevated cord holder on a spring that keeps your mouse cord neatly organized.)

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?