Slashdot Mirror


New Radar Sees Through Walls

artemis67 writes "A small Israeli company has developed a radar system that uses ultra-wideband technology to produce three-dimensional pictures of the space behind a wall from a distance of up to 20 meters. The pictures, which reportedly resemble those produced by ultrasound, are relatively high-resolution and are produced in real time. Wow, it sounds like the potential benefits of this device are huge, saving lives of soldiers, firemen, or police; the potential for privacy invasion, however, is similarly large."

90 of 397 comments (clear)

  1. Our gratitude by andyrut · · Score: 4, Interesting

    On behalf of the Peeping Tom Society I say thanks, RadarVision!

    If it's not already Slashdotted, you can download the sample video off of the RadarVision website. The display doesn't give you Superman see-everything-in-detail-through-walls kind of powers (Lois Lane: "what kind of underwear am I wearing?"), but it's still pretty cool that this kind of thing can be done without using heat signatures and whatnot.

    1. Re:Our gratitude by DHR · · Score: 5, Funny

      wow, a glowing blob, what an invasion of privacy.

    2. Re:Our gratitude by Short+Circuit · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, I think a low-resolution system is a worse invasion of privacy than a high-resolution.

      A low-resolution system is liable to lead to much more subjective interperetation in court. So you see the shape of the blob change slightly while he's at his computer. Is he drinking coffee or is he getting off looking at child porn?

    3. Re:Our gratitude by SparklesMalone · · Score: 3, Informative

      Cool link, but it's the "old" Time Domain brand, not the newer Camero brand. The newer brand has better res according to the article. Here's a couple other news sites that popped out of Google:
      Isreali press and an investor announcement.

    4. Re:Our gratitude by geoffspear · · Score: 5, Insightful
      That's why we have that whole "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof thing.

      If they have a low-res recording of you building a bomb, your defense attorney can reasonably argue that the blob the jury sees could be doing anything. I doubt such images would ever even be considered admissible by the courts if they were of such low quality.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    5. Re:Our gratitude by WoodenRobot · · Score: 2, Funny
      Pfff. We've had the technology to look through walls for ages.

      It's called a 'window'.

      --
      ---
      "I did nothing. I did absolutely nothing and it was everything that I thought it could be."
    6. Re:Our gratitude by geoffspear · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The reasonable doubt provision does not aim to provide "perfect justice". Perfect justice would be if everyone who committed a crime was convicted and everyone who was accused of a crime he or she did not commit was acquitted.

      Fortunately, the authors of the US Constitution believed, as I do, that it's "good enough" to let some people who commit crimes get acquitted if the government can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they're guilty, to ensure that not a single innocent person is convicted.

      The real problem is that our law schools produce people who can, as Socrates was accused of doing, make the weaker argument appear to be the stronger, and convince juries to convict people who not only aren't guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, but who are later proven beyond any doubt whatsoever to be not guilty when new evidence or new techniques of analyzing evidence are used. Just having one person on death row exonerated by DNA evidence shows that the system is horribly broken.

      Of course, the sort of "strict constructionists" who believe that the government should never, ever, even think of overstepping the authority granted to it in the Constitution are, ironically, the exact same people who think it's a "technicality" when an alleged criminal is set free because the Constitution includes specific provisions to protect the People from abuse by the government.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    7. Re:Our gratitude by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Is he drinking coffee or is he getting off looking at child porn?

      That all depends... is he drinking the coffee in quick little sips over and over again, drinking faster and faster until he appears to spill some coffee and reach for some napkins to clean it up?

      Then he's just drinking coffee.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    8. Re:Our gratitude by EvanED · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The real problem is that our law schools produce people who can, as Socrates was accused of doing, make the weaker argument appear to be the stronger, and convince juries to convict people who not only aren't guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, but who are later proven beyond any doubt whatsoever to be not guilty when new evidence or new techniques of analyzing evidence are used. Just having one person on death row exonerated by DNA evidence shows that the system is horribly broken.

      Oh, bull. You seem to be arguing that having any false positives are unacceptable. What if all the evidence that *was* available pointed very strongly to the accused, but by some enormous coincidence was wrong? You can't have a 'proven guilty beyond no doubt' standard, or no one would ever be convicted...

    9. Re:Our gratitude by bckrispi · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You're kind of missing the problem here. The "blobs" being admissible in court isn't the issue. Using this technology to establish probable cause for executing a warrant *is*. Let me clarify this with a "real world" example that I read about a couple of years ago.

      "John" was suspected of growing Marijuana in his attic with intent to sell. The police tried to get a warrant to search John's house, but they hadn't established enough probable cause to get a judge to sign the warrant, even with John's house under surveilance(sp?).

      The police then used an Infrared camera to look "inside" John's house (without a warrant) to see what he was up to. They saw the heat coming of the growing lights illuminating what appeared to be a small forest of Home Grown. The police return to the Judge with this evidence. The judge signs the warrant, John's house is searched, the weed is found, and John is arrested.

      In a pre-trial hearing, John's lawyer challenged the legality of the search, on the grounds that the police effectively "searched behind closed doors" by using the infrared camera without a search warrant.

      Unfortunately, I can't remember for the life of me what the judge ruled on this motion, but it is very similar to what we're dealing with here. Essentially, it deals with what is considered 'plain sight' for an officer. It is accepted that an officer can use what he sees in his depth of vision as evidence. If you allow a policeman into your house, and he sees drugs lying in open on the table, you sure as hell will be arrested. But that same officer has no right to start opening drawers in your house looking for drugs. IR and Sonic technology "blur the line" on what is plain sight, and what is an intrusive search.

      --
      Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
    10. Re:Our gratitude by cheezit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The parent post's point was that for the *death* penalty the stakes should be almost impossibly high, because a mistake is not correctible in any way. I can't speak for the poster but I think it is only rational that non-death penalty cases would be held to a lower standard.

      --
      Premature optimization is the root of all evil
    11. Re:Our gratitude by Armando_Mcgillicutty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What if you have glass doors? The cop can see the drugs, but they're behind closed doors. Are you protected? Infared cameras can see through things like wood doors, and you're the source of infared energy and sending it outside. Sonic would (should?) be different, in that case, they're sending a signal *into* your home, in the form of a sound wave, I think they should have a warrant to do that for sure.

    12. Re:Our gratitude by bartle · · Score: 4, Informative

      Unfortunately, I can't remember for the life of me what the judge ruled on this motion, but it is very similar to what we're dealing with here.

      Your post would've been that much more worth reading if you could have remembered. The supreme court ruled that infared cameras and similiar uses of technology required the use of a warrant.

    13. Re:Our gratitude by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem is that this sort of evidence would be more than enough to get a search warrant and assuming they can get within range of your house without stepping on your property, it's use probably doesn't require one.

      This should already be covered under the ruling that using infrared to look into a house requires a search warrent.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    14. Re:Our gratitude by skeller · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Of course, the sort of "strict constructionists" who believe that the government should never, ever, even think of overstepping the authority granted to it in the Constitution are, ironically, the exact same people who think it's a "technicality" when an alleged criminal is set free because the Constitution includes specific provisions to protect the People from abuse by the government.
      Actually, I think you're more likely to find that strict constructivists hate the fact that the majority of said technicalities exist only due to activist intreprations of the Constitution. Consider the Miranda ruling or the various rulings creating the Exclusionary Rule (which says that evidence obtained without probable cause or a warrant is inadmissable in court). These are pretty broad interpretations of the Bill of Rights, and are even more broadly applied to the states when you consider that the restrictions in the Bill of Rights seem to apply primarily to the federal government.

      The people who would prefer that the Exclusionary Rule, which is one of those "technicalities" that "get tough on crime!" people tend to bemoan, be left up to individual states are off their rockers, but their claims are not without constitutional merit. At least not from a literal interpretation of the Constitution.

  2. That's something to remember... by teutonic_leech · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... next time I read the newest Playboy mag at home - LOL

    1. Re:That's something to remember... by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2, Funny
      Do I have to worry about this thing reducing my sperm count?

      No, but I'd keep all your microwave popcorn in tinfoil to avoid sudden 'pantry malfunctions'.

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
  3. Oh good by Aggrazel · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now if we can just condense this technology into a pair of glasses ...

  4. No fears... by swordboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    This stuff will never penetrate my Tin Foil Apartment!

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    1. Re:No fears... by SEWilco · · Score: 2, Funny

      What is the best brand of tinfoil for radar?

  5. I already tried this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When I was a kid, I ordered the X-Ray vision glasses advertised in the back of my comic book. I was not pleased with the results.

  6. terrahertz imaging by bobthemuse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't this similar to the terahertz imaging previously discussed? Also seen here and here?

    1. Re:terrahertz imaging by CXI · · Score: 2

      It's actually nothing like it if you watched the sample video. It's actually an Aliens motion tracker. And I mean exactly like it.

    2. Re:terrahertz imaging by CXI · · Score: 2

      Or maybe not, apparently someone linked to the wrong company. Radarvision is an Aliens motion tracker, not sure about the device the article was actually mentioning.

  7. Very cool by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I could see this being especially useful for counter-sniper sweeps. If you can see through buildings, you can do a helicopter sweep of the area and verify that no snipers are waiting to kill a VIP on the move.

    1. Re:Very cool by DrEldarion · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course, on the flipside, if you manage to integrate it into a scope, it could be a very useful tool for snipers as well.

    2. Re:Very cool by Mr.+Spontaneous · · Score: 3, Informative

      "All from 20 feet away?"

      the article says 20 meters.

      --
      Its all fun and games until someone loses an eye... then its just fun.
    3. Re:Very cool by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      All from 20 feet away? All you need is a building with a point 20 feet from the nearest walls, and the technology is rendered useless.

      The handheld unit does 20 feet away. A heli powered unit might be more powerful. Besides, the advantage to a helicopter is that you CAN get within 20 feet to check. It slows down the sweep, but at least you can make sure that your President or foreign national is safe.

    4. Re:Very cool by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's a bit more doubtful. One of the sniper's biggest advantages is his extreme distance (sometimes as far as miles away). Even a high powered military scope would have difficulty in finding the target at that range. However, that doesn't mean that you couldn't use it to target someone in the building next door. You'll have to be satisfied with increased risk, however.

    5. Re:Very cool by genner · · Score: 3, Funny

      Every counter-strike wall hacker would agree with you.

    6. Re:Very cool by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'll happily disagree with you just as soon as I figure out what you just said.

    7. Re:Very cool by tool462 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I imagine a system similar to AWACS, but for snipers. Imagine you're in an urban war-zone, enemy combatants hiding in bombed out buildings all over the place. You have a network of these radar devices (airborne or land units) connected to the scopes of sniper rifles. The scope feeds information about location and where the gun is pointing to the radar system and the system gives it a real-time image of what the gun is pointing at. As an added bonus, this location information can be used to identify friendly units in the scope, reducing unwanted casualties. A smart enough system could even provide automatic target acquisitioning--prioritizing targets based on either location, or direction of travel (i.e., hit the guy trying to blow up the embassy before he even rounds the corner).

      On second thought, more than just snipers would benefit from this. If every soldier had this built in to their equipment, they reduce the risk of being ambushed.

      These are just my non-sensical ramblings, but in all seriousness this could do for urban warfare what radar did for air combat and sonar for naval combat.

    8. Re:Very cool by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I could see this being especially useful for counter-sniper sweeps. If you can see through buildings, you can do a helicopter sweep of the area and verify that no snipers are waiting to kill a VIP on the move

      Even without range issues, I don't think that would really work that well. For example, suppose they had done that in 1963 along the Kennedy motorcade route. They would have found out someone was in the book depository. The problem is that someone being in the book depository is not suspicious. Without a lot more resolution than it sounds like this technology provides, you wouldn't be able to tell a sniper from anyone else.

      Sure, there might be some cases where it would work, such as when the sniper is someplace that no one should be, but thinking about most assasinations by sniper, the sniper is usually someplace where you'd expect to find people.

  8. Nobody cares about civil rights or liberty anymore by Skyshadow · · Score: 5, Funny
    C'mon, invasion of privacy? What is this, 1999 all over again? Didn't you get the memo? You can *trust* the government these days -- it's not like our leaders are so untrustworthy anymore that they might get a blowjob or two. That's why you won't be needing those pesky rights to free speech or due process anymore.

    Seriously, this sort of thing might be great for our soldiers in the field, and in my little optimistic heart I'd really like to think that something like this could exist in our country without being abused by the "Total Law Enforcement" crowd. I mean, the US *should* be able to operate that way, what with having Constitutional protections and all that.

    Given what's been going on recently, however, it seems like only a matter of time before somebody justifies using it on Americans on the grounds of terrorism prevention (after which, of course, everything will become terrorism of one kind or another). I mean, the USA is suddenly in the business of above-the-law prison camps, war without end and other awful little things like abusing the prisoner (in a non-masterbatory context), and all it took to get us to this point was the deaths of 3000 Americans.

    Does anyone really doubt that looking through the walls of people's homes will be next?

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
  9. saw it by reluctantengineer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I saw a demo of this at FPED '03, I was marginally impressed. The resolution is no where near what they lead you to believe.

  10. Radarvision Camero by CommanderData · · Score: 5, Informative

    Note that the small Israeli company mentioned above is not Radarvison/Time Domain. Radarvision is based out of Huntsville Alabama.

    The Israeli company is called Camero and the product they are developing is superior to the Radarvision product as you don't need to hold it up to a wall. It can be used up to 20 meters away from a wall, and will give more detail on the items/activity behind the wall...

    Camero does not appear to have a web site, as far as I could find in my brief googling.

    --
    Urge to post... fading... fading... RISING!... fading... fading... gone.
  11. Behind walls eh? by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Well what kind of walls? Drywall? Brick? Craypaper?

    The material the wall is made out of has a marked impact on the permeability of EM waves. And the frequency you select to get through the wall may pass straight through your intended target of viewing as well.

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    1. Re:Behind walls eh? by chris_mahan · · Score: 2, Funny

      You could actually look for the houses with the tinfoil.

      Weakling:
      Captain, of the 65 houses we scanned yesterday with the nondescript van, these two had some sort of shielding.

      Gruffo:
      "Obviously they have somehting to hide. Send your best team and put cameras in every room."

      Weakling:
      "What about a warrant, Sir?"

      Gruffo:
      "We'll get it. There's reason to believe these people are terrorists trying to build a dirty bomb..."

      Weakling:
      "Yes Sir!"
      (snaps his heels sharply and salutes)

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

    2. Re:Behind walls eh? by Lispy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Probably glass walls.

    3. Re:Behind walls eh? by uncommonlygood · · Score: 2, Informative

      "The material the wall is made out of has a marked impact on the permeability of EM waves." Not to nitpick, but I believe you mean permittivity.

      Not to be a smartass, but EM waves don't have permeability or permittivity, those two things are properties of materials, not waves. They do affect the waves though, as changes in wave impedance (which is dependant on wave frequency and material permeability, permittivity and conductance), may cause reflections - this is precisely the phenomenon that radar works off.

      Normally a wave that reflects off people you would also expect to reflect off walls, unless I'm very much mistaken, so using radar to see people through brick walls involves being pretty damn clever.

      I would expect the guys who designed this thing know a lot more than I, and a lot lot more than the grandparent, about EM waves, so they probably got a solution.

    4. Re:Behind walls eh? by ka9dgx · · Score: 2, Interesting
      My parent's house has tin foil backing on the insulation. It also has an layer of foam insulation with foil backing on both sides, on the exterior, under the siding. This thing would NEVER see through the faraday cage this inadvertantly creates.

      Also, most older buildings have steel mesh with plaster on them as a wall surface. It's frustrated quite a few hospital WiFi projects.

  12. Aluminium Foil by mbone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can't see through aluminium foil, if it is truly Al.

    My guess is that within 10 years we will see new homes / apartments boasting of how they form Faraday cages, to prevent all kinds of remote monitoring.

  13. In related news... by stoneymonster · · Score: 5, Funny

    the Department of Homeland Security advises citizens to stop using walls.

  14. WorldNetDaily?!?! by sakusha · · Score: 5, Informative

    Take this story with a huge grain of salt. WND is not a very reliable news source. It's right up there with NewsMax and Washington Times as lunatic fringe pseudojournalism.

    1. Re:WorldNetDaily?!?! by blincoln · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No kidding. I love some of the headlines on their main page:

      Filth, fraud, fascism: Exposing 'The Party of Treason' - How Democrats corrupt morals, steal elections, aid enemies

      Moore's film gets rave - from Communists -Stalinist Reds love 'Fahrenheit 9/11,' Maoists love it, too

      Divine intervention sought in presidential race - Get FREE copy of 'We Will Pray for Election Day' blockbuster

      The role of Iraq, Israel, USA in Bible prophecy - Limited time, get Michael Evans' stunning bestseller 'Beyond Iraq' FREE!

      Somehow I think I'll wait for independent confirmation of this "breakthrough." Especially since I routinely see articles proclaiming that Israeli scientists have invented everything from cold fusion to FTL drives and yet they somehow always fail to materialize in commercial form.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
  15. Eraser by Apocalypse111 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Railguns + Wallhacks = those spiffy guns from Eraser...

    --
    There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
  16. Walls... by eli173 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just as long as it lets me see where this pipe/conduit/wire goes in my wall. (And where the studs are...)

    Or looky here, we've got termites in this wall.

    So when does the hand-held consumer version of this come out?

  17. Interesting by arieswind · · Score: 3, Interesting

    New technology is quite amazing..

    I can see it being used when the military is doing raids on houses, bunkers, etc. They can see how many people are in the room and where they are, so they can come in gunning and not take so many casualties.

    Another use might be that when they are searching houses for weapons and stuff, they can see into the rooms before hand.

    But, like other technology of this nature, it opens limitless possiblities for abuse, so the government will have to keep a cloe eye on how it is used

  18. I wonder... by Patris_Magnus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What the radiation exposure to people on the other side of the wall would be. Operators of this type of equipment rarely understand the implications of its use. Just ask your xray tech what your equivalent whole body dose will be next time you get a chest xray.

  19. Re:didn't read the article, but what about timeDom by tprox · · Score: 2, Informative

    I know TimeDomain was pushing pretty heavliy into the Ultra Wide Band technology before it was fairly well known.

    Last I heard they were in litigation with one of the national labs over IP. I'm not sure what the outcome is, but from the look of their website it looks like they've been pushing ahead in their research for more than just radar, but also for comms systems.

  20. I hate these pseudo-tech articles. by a7244270 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Its been a while since I've done any RF, but theres some things in that article that are a little bit, odd, to say the least.

    Camero developed a certain kind of ultra radio wave that can be emitted to generate a high-definition image and also invented the technology that allows the enhanced wave to pass through virtually any wall.

    How exactly does one develop a "certain kind of ultra wadio wave", and how does one "allow it to pass through any wall". Perhaps they have a valid technology, but the person who translated this to layman's terms should be shot for creating a document that makes it sound like the company is selling smoke and mirrors.

    Actually, the part of the article that I found most interesting was

    ...an Israeli security source told WND that Israel recently developed proprietary technology that can discreetly put an electronic field around a building or area that gives users the ability to monitor and control every electronic emission within that field, from electronic can openers to fax machines, computers and cell phones.

    Seeing inside a room is one thing, but realistically, the potential for invasion of privacy is much larger with the wiretap field.

  21. Wall-hacks by nharmon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Next thing you know, the gamers will want devices to let them see through walls.

  22. fscking counterstrike newbs... by enigmathegreat · · Score: 2, Funny

    wallhackers!

  23. police busting parties by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Funny

    You modded this funny, but just wait till the police get their hands on this and start busting highschool and college parties. Think of the next generation. Think of the children. No more underage drinking, no more makeout sessions at the movies... what about when your mom gets one of these and catches you jerking off in the basement from outside the house. Yea, that's when the /. crowd will start saying "ummm... maybe this wasn't so cool"

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
    1. Re:police busting parties by red+floyd · · Score: 2, Informative

      IIRC, SCOTUS ruled that police couldn't use thermal sensors (without a warrant) to bust pot growers.

      I believe they used the "Reasonable Expectation of Privacy" argument.

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    2. Re:police busting parties by afidel · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually in Kyllo v. U.S. SCOTUS made a VERY broad generalization not at all a specific ruling on thermal imaging.

      Held: Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of a private home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a Fourth Amendment "search," and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.
      linky

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  24. Modern, urban warfare by El+Bromo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    These are exactly the types of technologies that will be needed to fight the multifaceted wars the US armed forces will find itself fighting in the next two decades. Urban warfare is a mode of fighting that has haunted armies for a couple hundred years now, and not very many improvments on the weaponry front have come along to *seriously* enhance an army's capability to fight in an urban setting. Modern communications, guns that can shoot around corners, and radar that can see through walls all help, but it still behooves a small, vastly-outnumbered army to hole up in a city they don't mind seeing destroyed and make the big army root them out one building at a time.

    If that big army is the US Army, it's going to put a premium on avoiding civilian casualites, and the bad guys can, will, and do exploit that doctrine. We can't just carpet-bomb the whole city, and it's very casualty-intensive to thoroughly search through urban centers looking for a handful of people.

    This is a problem that will occupy the best minds in the Pentagon, in other armies, and in defense companies for the next two decades. If we can find some good answers, we can prevent unnecessary casualties all around. If we can't, we'll continue to see bloodletting every time an urban warfare situation is encountered. For now, the best doctrine is simply to avoid urban warfare at all costs, and make do when it is forced upon you.

    1. Re:Modern, urban warfare by CHaN_316 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Urban warfare is a mode of fighting that has haunted armies for a couple hundred years now

      Actually, urban warfare has haunted armies since the days Sun Tzu. Hence his famous quote:

      "The worst policy is to attack cities. Attack cities only when there is no alternative." --Sun Tzu, The Art of War

      It's also interesting to see how military doctrine has fundamentally changed since world war 2. During WW2, civilians were legitimate military targets. The best way to take an enemy city was to bomb it to heck, and move your troops in to mop up. On another tangent, it's also interesting to see how the media has changed the way war is fought. The media can massively influence the public's opinion of a war. I'm reminded by a quote that went like, "If CNN was around during WW2, the allies would have lost." Nations just don't have the stomach for casulties when the media reports on the losses.

      --
      "There is no spoon." - The Matrix
  25. Fortunately.... by Vancouverite · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...there have been court decisions that would affect using this without either an 'active situation' (hostages, &c) or a court order. There was a case in Oregon where police were using passive IR monitoring to generate enough information on a potential pot growing operation inside a house. Their subsequent raid / arrest was thrown out as a violation of privacy. Somehow, I can't see *active* methods of surveillance being any less monitored.

    What?

    Did I hear someone in the audience mutter "Patriot Act"?

    --
    We are the Music Makers, and We are the Dreamers of Dreams...
  26. Brick walls by artemis67 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Go to the site and download the video, the demonstration is using a brick wall.

  27. right (was WorldNetDaily?!?! ) by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2, Funny

    Take this story with a huge grain of salt. WND is not a very reliable news source. It's right up there with NewsMax and Washington Times as lunatic fringe pseudojournalism.

    Right; be sure to check with FrontLine, The Nation and Xinhua first ...

  28. Re:Nobody cares about civil rights or liberty anym by JanusFury · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, let's forbid this technology because it might compromise our privacy.

    Also, let's forbid P2P file sharing because it might allow people to download music and movies and games without paying for them.

    *rolls eyes*

    --
    using namespace slashdot;
    troll::post();
  29. Re:Nobody cares about civil rights or liberty anym by maximilln · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Typically I like to run against the government grain simply because I don't believe Big Brother is a good concept. Overhead always causes problems: greed, graft, bribes, special interests, unaccountability. Ask the Soviet Union about it. Ask Afghanistan about it. Ask Cuba about it. Heck, ask Saddam Hussein about it. I'm sure he'll gladly point out that any overhead power is a ripe field for exploitation.

    So we have this ping-pong match of people who hold the government in dreamy-eyed awe and people who see only the ill uses of governmental power. Somewhere in between lies the truth. Sometimes Big Brother gets it right, sometimes Big Brother gets it for himself. The only real way to eliminate the problem is to turn Big Brother into little Brother or even microscopic Brother. That's a fine and dandy solution but Big Brother writes too many paychecks, makes too many people feel warm fuzzy and comfortable, and keeps too many bankers and politicians living a very easy luxurious life.

    As for prisoner abuse that's a touchy subject. I've heard that some of the fellows who were stacked up on each other were being disciplined for attempting to start an exercise yard riot. Some of the people who were blindfolded and threatened with dogs were guilty of assaulting prison guards or officials. Certainly there are some legitimate cases of abuse but, all in all, every society has it. The Taliban had it, it happens in Paris and Amsterdam, the British _definitely_ have some neat B&D equipment, and American civilian police are caught abusing and bullying citizens all the time.

    There is the hypocrisy to address. Well, crap, that's just part of life. I don't like it anymore than anyone else. The US likes to strut around the world and point fingers and meddle in affairs and tell everyone else how to run their nations when, in all reality, the US gov't isn't doing such a hot, fair, honest, or kind job within its own borders. Once again it's the Big Brother syndrome. The only way to fix it is to turn Big Brother into little Brother or even microscopic Brother. And, again, there are too many paychecks, too many leeches, too many bleeding hearts (who don't have what it takes to do something on their own but like to bleed with someone else's money), and too many comfortable and wealthy politicians, bankers, brokers, and attorneys.

    So what of this "see through walls" technology? What if it is used by the local police someday to scan each and every house as they drive slowly down the block? Unless we can fix the Big Brother problem there's absolutely no sense in working yourself into a froth over the obligatory abuses that come from Big Brother.

    Personally I'd like to get rid of Big Brother. I'm an advocate of small efficient government just like I'm an advocate of small efficient software. But just like Microsoft, Big Brother has a monopoly on the field and plenty of loyal (or at least contractually trapped) followers.

    --
    +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  30. Don't blame the tools by Alan+Cox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems odd to me that the same people who can follow that the DMCA is problematic because it bans the tools not the abuses of the tools can't make the connection when its non-computing related.

    Peering through neighbours walls (with this technology or drilling peepholes) is the offence. Would you argue that drills should be regulated because they could be used this way ?

    If anything the main reason to regulate it is likely to be because long exposures to low levels of radio frequency radiation seems to do bad things to human beings so operating one might require training, care and exposure limits.

    I'd also disagree its just a military tool. It has clear civilian usages including earthquake searches (because it can visualise spaces not just people so gives more info) and even boring stuff like inspecting buildings. Having had a large hole hacked in my house to see if a crack was structural I can certainly appreciate the civilian value of having tools to inspect it effectively without the mess, and the dust, and the redecorating.

  31. I can think of a few dictatorships.... by Eneff · · Score: 3, Insightful

    that would love this one.

    The Diary of Anne Frank would have been a lot shorter, though.

  32. Black Horn-rims? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 4, Funny

    You should see the viewing apparatus for this device: It's a pair of black horn-rims with swirls on the lenses...

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  33. Re:Invasion of privacy needn't involved your liken by paganizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Have they illegalized Jammers for this yet?
    If not, someone send me the frequency specs, i'll be able to whip one up pretty quick.

    As would any serious criminal equipment supplier, after they are illegalized...yet one more way to make sure everyone is a criminal, or can easily be proven to be one.

    --
    Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
  34. Blobs by niom · · Score: 5, Funny

    This device can tell someone how many people are in your house and give them some big hints about what they are doing (on blob on top of another, etc).

    This could mean the beginning of a whole new type of porn. I can see the popups: "Blobs doing things you never thought blobs could do!!! Subscribe to the BEST blob porn in the Internet!!!"

    Ok, I'll go take a cold shower now.

    --
    -- Repeat with me: "There is no right to profits".
  35. Re:terahertz imaging by marcello_dl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The article and the Slashdot summary talk about ultra-wide band while teraherz imaging should be about high frequency, so its difficult to say if those two methods are similar.

    AFAIK, if the israeli method uses wide-band (that is a wide interval of frequencies), it should be easier to detect if you are being scanned. Even without resorting to special purpose detectors, such radar scans may interfere with cellphone, sat tv, or wireless transmissions, so the target may know a scan is underway and react.

    --
    ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
  36. Radar Units by geomon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I use one quite a bit. The ground-penetrating radar is probably not much different than this device in physical principles. That means it is subject to the same problems as my GPR:

    1) high clay content can wash out any signal,
    2) metallic objects (aluminum foil has been mentioned) can render the device useless, and
    3) too many objects can interfere.

    There have been numerous examples posted here where you just spring a few moving decoys around the building and now the operator on the outside has just as much valuable information as they had without the $20KUSD device attached to their arm.

    This thing is a boat anchor.

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
  37. The benefits by quadra23 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ...[radar system that] uses ultra-wideband technology to produce three-dimensional pictures of the space behind a wall from a distance of up to 20 meters.

    Things I learned from this:

    • Forget about trying to use boss-mode Messenger Plus! at work at all!
    • No need to use a proxy server at work because your boss can use the information in the pictures taken of you playing games instead -- with blocked access you really don't know if the person is attempting the games just for kicks or because that's honestly what they want to do at work (in which case they wouldn't be as productive anyways).
    • This would help out with the Olympics and races since pictures can be taken around the corner.

    The pictures, which reportedly resemble those produced by ultrasound, are relatively high-resolution and are produced in real time.

    At least if a picture can be taken of it you know you will be able to see occurs in it for sure. The technology would be very self-defeating if they weren't clear and sharp. What good are pictures that can't be verified? They would be very similar to invisible ink on paper.

    Wow, it sounds like the potential benefits of this device are huge...the potential for privacy invasion, however, is similarly large.

    Yeah, but that pretty much goes without saying within technology. Most things in technology are double-edged swords (look at gov't reading your personal emails) -- while this technology can make improvements for all but it can also be readily abused when in the wrong hands (unless properly managed).

    In conclusion the only thing that is needed for this excellent technology is enforcable (without bias) measures that protect the rights of everyone fairly -- a comfortable medium that wouldn't be easy to obtain but would help out immensely to prevent lawsuits, etc (saves from possible damages) but still achieve the original goals (i.e. save lives).
  38. Conversations from a future archealogical dig... by cmdrwhitewolf · · Score: 2, Funny

    PFY Tech walking along reading the ground facing radar:"Gopher skeleton, pottery, pottery, building wall... Hey, I think we've got some neolithic skeletal human remains over here!"

    Professor in charge of the dig:"Finally some proof of actual neolithic habitation."

    The supervisory tech was is now looking over the PFY techs shoulder:"False alarm, Everybody. It's just another buried mafia hit man. Remember jr, neolithic's didn't get buried with their guns and 1980 chevy malibu..."

    --
    [Now, I'm off to lift my le... Um, visit... at another place.]
  39. rejected by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It looks like everything that is interesting today is about small Israelly companies. (story was rejected on submission.) I wonder why these guys did not participate in the DARPA Grand Challenge?

    1. Re:rejected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In an interview on March 31, 1977, Zahir Muhsein, member of the PLO's executive committee, said:

      The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

      Now let me find a stopwatch with millisecond resolution, so I can time how long it takes for this post to be moderated (-1, Doubleplusungood)

  40. UWB has been around for a while. by pdmoderator · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Shortly after 9/11, we were looking at it for firefighter communications within buildings. Radar applications for locating victims were mentioned. I also learned that the spooks had had the technology for at least fifteen years before that.

    As often happens, it's just now making its slow way onto the civilian market.

  41. Could they be using Terahertz Imaging? by Junior+Samples · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This article certainly lacks any technical details, but it sounds like the device may use a form of Terahertz imaging. This is the region of electromagnetic spectrum between microwave and infrared (0.1 GHz to >2 THz).

    There has been a lot of recent activity involving Terahertz Imaging for medical and surveillance applications. TeraHertz Imaging

  42. So finally . . . by Phurd+Phlegm · · Score: 2, Funny
    . . . that X-ray glasses technology can be made workable.

    Now, will they be able to sell it for $3.98 through the back of comic books?

  43. Many applications! by ScottGant · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just think about putting this thing on like a helicopter...then also put some ultra-sensative microphones on it so you could also listen through the walls...

    Then have like a "whisper" mode on the helicopter so you could hover in relative silence while surveilling the structure that you happen to be..um...surveilling.

    Have a JAFO onboard to be in charge of the taping (to half inch videotape) and working the cameras.

    We could call this Helicopter something catchy...like "Red Lightening" or "Thunder Blue" or something like that...we'll think of something...

    --

    "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
  44. Yes, it may be an invasion of privacy by MalikChen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sure, the polics can use this technology to see through your walls and see if you are doing something illegal, but it probably won't be admissable in an American court.

    There was a case in which police used infrared scanners to see how hot/bright it was inside a house that they suspected having marijuana plants growing inside. When it came to trial, the attorney argued that because the police had no warrant to search the house, it was an illegal search. IIRC, the judge ruled that it was a violation of search and seizure laws. It's a good precedent, and because it sends out waves to spy (as opposed to passive scanning like the infrared did), it's even more invasive.

    So, just get a good lawyer, and you should be set. That is, in theory.

  45. Risk and Slealth and U.S. Taxpayer Dollars by ericlp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Be waiting for even more detailed results of the health risk. You have an emitter, what are the risks to humans inside?

    What would a counter measure be? A secondary wall with right angle shaping?

    Finally:

    "Israeli firms are well known for developing revolutionary technology, particularly in the defense fields."

    Yup. A big part of that is proped up by U.S. tax dollar military aid and leaked tech from U.S. Firms. How nice.

    --- quote from U.S. Military And Economic Aid Report

    In recent years, Israel remains the top recipient of U.S. military and economic assistance. The most commonly cited figure is $3 billion a year, with about $1.8 billion a year in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) grants from the Department of Defense and an additional $1.2 billion a year in Economic Support Funds (ESF) from the Department of State. In the last decade FMF grants to Israel have totaled $18.2 billion. In fact, 17% of all U.S. foreign aid is earmarked for Israel.

    Israel is one of the United State's largest arms importers. In the last decade, the United States has sold Israel $7.2 billion in weaponry and military equipment, $762 million through Direct Commercial Sales (DCS), more than $6.5 billion through the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program.

    source:

    U.S. Military And Economic Aid Report

    Of course we really don't "sell" much to Israel. It is mostly U.S. tax payers that pick up the tab. I don't have a problem with Israel defending themselves. I just don't see why I should pay for it.

  46. No. by Ninja+Programmer · · Score: 2, Informative

    Its a motion sensor. (The idea is even if you are "standing still" you move very subtly, and the radar can pick it up.) It aint going to help you find studs.

  47. Another project by bigberk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's a group in my graduating electrical engineering class that did their undergrad design project on something similar, Design, Construction, and Testing of a Microwave Radar System for Through-Wall Surveillance. It uses 1 - 3 GHz microwave frequencies and some pretty straightforward electronics to provide signals to a computer, which does the image resolution. I was able to see a first-hand demonstration of it, and it's impressive for an undergrad project! Just in case you thought this "New radar" in the article is revolutionary or something.

  48. Re:Used for "saving lives"? by nyekulturniy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Oh, Yassin was a politician. A murderous one, like Stalin, but a politician nonetheless.

    --
    Nyekulturniy... Proudly confusing readers and editors since 1981!
  49. Re:Used for "saving lives"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
    That's not "interesting" at all, nor is it accurate. If you have a better way of fighting terrorists, please feel free to share it, but the Israel bashing I see on Slashdot sickens me. I don't agree with many of Sharon's policies, I don't want to see any Palestinian territories occupied, I would love it if the Palestinians could live and let live and have their own state, their own government, and get plenty of aid funding and help rebuilding their economy.


    The sad part is that's where things were back in the late 90s when things were rapidly improving for the Palestinian people, many Palestinian expatriots were considering returning and reinvesting in the economy and a lasting peace seemed around the corner. Can you tell me, for 10 points please, who ended that possibility? Was it Sharon? Was it Bush? Was it Clinton? No. It was the Palestinians who brought this on themselves when they started the Al Aqsa Intifada, and used as justification Sharon's daring to visit a site in Jerusalem on the Temple Mount.


    I hate to see the terminology of liberalism and peace hijacked by Palestinian warmongers and bought into whole hog by so many American liberals because they hear words like "genocide" and "war crimes" being bandied about.


    I have met several former Israeli soldiers, by the way, and none of them were people who wanted to our would ever take part in killing innocent civilians knowingly. They shot because they were fired upon or because they caught somebody planting a bomb. I won't say that nobody innocent gets killed, surely it happens, but you need to look at who is choosing to keep making the area a war zone and who started the Al Aqsa Intifada in the first place and who perpetuates it - it's surely not the Israeli government, with a populace that overwhelmingly wants a peaceful solution with the Palestinians. Look at the people whose financial interests and power are tied up with keeping the fighting going - like Hamas, which would lose its political power and fundraising abilities in the rest of the Arab world with a peace settlement. Look at Arafat who clings to his autocracy and apparently fears the creation of a stable, economically solvent democracy for the Palestinian people.


    The most shameful part is that I have to post this anonymously because experience has taught me that the liberal forces on Slashdot have bought into this twisting of liberal terminology so much that to post reasonable, moderate discourse on this issue invariably gets you moderated into oblivion. And that is a particularly sad statement.

  50. Re:Used for "saving lives"? by Behrooz · · Score: 2, Informative

    In a typical Israeli missile attack against "Terrorist leaders", the collateral damage includes an average of three to seven innocent bystanders. How many lives are saved by killing terrorist leaders again?

    Let's go with some statistics regarding the current intifada:

    ...meaningful figures show that Israel is responsible for some 733 Palestinian noncombatant deaths, while Palestinians have killed 546 Israeli noncombatants.

    That count is based on the IDF's own estimates, completely disregarding the even more shocking statistics recorded by international human rights organizations.

    Or perhaps a listing of the non-combatant deaths among children might impress you with the military force being used against the Palestinians.

    If you take into account the ridiculously imbalanced effects of the property damage and impoverishment of this ongoing conflict, the Palestinians are getting screwed on every level. There is no sufficient justification for the actions of Israel's military, and I'm sick and tired of hearing 'terrorism' as the rallying cry of those who defend collective punishment and making war on entire populations.

    --
    "We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
  51. Re:Used for "saving lives"? by jafiwam · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Killing people by attacking civilians trying to get to work or enjoying a cup of coffee just because of their ethnicity or religion.

    Killing known-combatants using their own families as shields for their bomb making operations, while happening to miss a few times, causing unfortunate deaths.

    Real moral equivalency there.

    From elsewhere in the article you linked, coming to the exact opposite conclusion you did:

    The statistics show that Israeli noncombatants over the last 23 months have been killed essentially at random, as Palestinian terrorists have chosen to attack whichever civilian targets were accessible. Palestinian fatalities, however, have been strongly concentrated within a particular population segment - teenaged boys and young men.

    and....

    In contrast, Palestinian noncombatant fatalities have been overwhelmingly young (but over the age of 11) and male. This pattern of Palestinian deaths completely contradicts accusations that Israel has "indiscriminately targeted women and children." It is clear that the vast majority of the Palestinians killed did not die as the result of random Israeli attacks on inhabited areas, or on mixed-sex crowds at roadblocks and the like. There appears to be only one reasonable explanation of this pattern: that Palestinian men and boys engaged in behavior that brought them into conflict with Israeli armed forces.

    Why don't you just add:

    "YALLA YALLA YALLA JIHAD!ALLAH IS GREAT! DIE INFIDELS!!!" to your sig. That way you can be an extremist asshole with EVERY post instead of just this one.

  52. Are you sure this is good? by KingReuben · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Soldiers and police are increasingly becoming the same thing. Their job, basically at the end of the day, is to kill poor people and protect the wealth of the worldwide elite. You guys may think this is a nifty idea because it will "save soldiers and police lives" but in the long run it is just another tool at their disposal to keep us oppressed and in check.

    No sir, I don't like it.

    --


    --
    om Shanti
  53. Re:saving lives? by heby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...or even civilians for that matter because the person using the radar will not be able to tell the difference.

  54. Forget saving lives... by Trogre · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... I want one of these so I can trace thepaths of cables and pipes inside my friggin walls!

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  55. saving lives of soldiers? by matdodgson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This thing comes from Israel - meaning it was designed to make killing Palestinians easier.