Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Government Sometimes Jams Keyless Car Locks?

PizzaFace writes "The Washington Post reports that in certain towns (generally near military bases), on certain days (such as the day an aircraft carrier returns to port), keyless car entry systems and remote garage door openers mysteriously fail. While some frustrated motorists blame aliens, the FCC says the jammed frequencies belong to the U.S. military. The good ol' Post even tracks down a government contractor who all-but-confirms the source of the interference."

349 comments

  1. fp by Zorilla · · Score: 5, Funny

    first po#@)(^*ESDHLKS&^$#HLFSDIHF

    [JAMMED]

    --

    It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    1. Re:fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not funny, asshat.

  2. i knew this was going to happen by 2057 · · Score: 3

    There is only a select number of frequencies we can access and use, this was bound to happen.

    --
    For The Best Jazz/Hip-hop fusion > COlD DUCK
    1. Re:i knew this was going to happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Dammit man! If you knew, why didn't you tell somebody!? To think this could have all been avoided. Nice going, you lazy git!

    2. Re:i knew this was going to happen by connorbd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Whoever modded this a troll doesn't know much about how comm frequencies are allocated. The fact is that according to the article, keyless entry systems are secondary users on their allocated frequencies. Ask a ham what that means.

      For an excellent example, hams were in the last couple years authorized to operate on the 60m band. That probably means nothing to most people, but it's a specific band that is used by amateurs in other countries, with its own unique propagation characteristics. However, amateurs, who generally get the run of whatever band they're allowed, are limited to one particular operation mode (upper sideband) on five channels, one of which is shared with the UK making international contact on that band possible. The reason for the limitation: the primary users on that band are military and emergency-related, they use upper sideband on those frequencies, and they need to be able to clear the channel for their own use, so they have to be able to talk to other users. (It's an annoyance to hams, who are used to being able to operate any mode they wish, but c'est la vie.)

      What looks like the case here is that the remote systems are designed to operate under Part 15 rules, which govern general unlicensed transmission. They're the same rules under which a community low power AM station can broadcast, and are subject to the same terms. In this case, it was an unfortunate choice for car manufacturers, because the frequency chosen is apparently used for certain FCC-allocated classified purposes. Oh well.

  3. Da gubmint done it? by mr.scoot · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    And I thought it was just my flaky remote. Bah.

    1. Re:Da gubmint done it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/remote/hair/

  4. Medical devices by bmiller949 · · Score: 0

    I hope this dampening field isn't messing with medical devices like pacemakers, etc. I would like to think that this stuff is tested for all scenarios but, ...

    --
    <sig>no sig</sig>
    1. Re:Medical devices by pe1rxq · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Dampening field?
      I think you have been watching to much trek.
      They are simply using their assigned frequencies...

      The problem is that some guys thought they were smart assigning a frequency band used by others (like military or HAMs) for unlicensed use.
      (Same is happening at 2.4GHz)

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    2. Re:Medical devices by swdunlop · · Score: 3, Informative

      Any FCC Class A or Class B device must accept the possibility of harmful radio interference. If said devices were sensitive to radio transmissions on a particular frequency, and that frequency was delineated for that purpose, there's a possibility of it being a problem.

      That being said? I find it highly unlikely that a critical device like that would be left to "We can just sneak along on any frequency we want, because we put out less than 1w"

    3. Re:Medical devices by Rob+Carr · · Score: 5, Informative
      I hope this dampening field isn't messing with medical devices like pacemakers, etc. I would like to think that this stuff is tested for all scenarios but, ...

      This is one of the reasons medical devices have to go through some rigorous testing and use approved frequencies. Even so, mistakes do occur.

      When a pacemaker fails, it tends to get noticed. Early pacemakers had trouble with improperly shielded microwave ovens - mostly because the pacemaker itself was improperly shielded. Pacemakers that used a magnetic sensor for the on/off function ran into trouble if a strong magnet was waved over the patient's chest. Some of the early AV sequential pacemakers with the ability to change heart rate based on activity sensors would, if incorrectly programmed, suddenly throw the patient into an artificial 2nd degree heart block when the patient's heart rate exceeded a specific amount.

      Urban legends contribute to percieved problems. Notice all the hospitals with "No Cell Phone" signs. Then notice all the cell phones in use by the doctors and the EMS personnel walking around with Handi-Talkies. Oops....

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    4. Re:Medical devices by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      This is just my interpretation, but I think they have that FCC compliance note on the back of some electronics just to say that the applicance won't blow up when it receives a large amount of interference. If it ceases to function only for the duration of jamming, it's probably still acceptable.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    5. Re:Medical devices by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 5, Informative

      You don't need to delve into urban legend. Back in 1998, a dozen wireless heart monitors went offline at a major Dallas-area hospital when WFAA-TV turned on its HDTV transmitter for the first time.

      --

      I write in my journal
    6. Re:Medical devices by StalinsNotDead · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem is that some guys thought they were smart assigning a frequency band used by others for unlicensed use

      It could be that most if not all frequencies have been assigned. And these guys had a list of frequencies like this:
      Police Band
      Citizens Band
      Radio Broadcasts
      Television Broadcasts
      Military/Governemnt

      Note: This is fabricated list and no actual research went into its construction

      Out of a list like that the one that's least likely to present a problem to the largest number of customers would be military. There's not a military base in every city, but there probably are regular broadcasts that could interfere on the others.

      --
      Thanks to the internet, we can now all die alone together! -SomeWoman
    7. Re:Medical devices by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      I remember a warning on an old universal degausser (for tools, not floppies..) not to operate within 50' of a person with a pacemaker.

      It never said why of course :-)

    8. Re:Medical devices by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
      You don't need to delve into urban legend. Back in 1998, a dozen wireless heart monitors went offline at a major Dallas-area hospital when WFAA-TV turned on its HDTV transmitter for the first time.

      According to this report Baylor was using DTV9 on a secondary basis for the heart monitors! It cost them $200,000 to get new equipment. Now that's a fascinating screwup!

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    9. Re:Medical devices by MoOsEb0y · · Score: 0, Troll

      ummm. radio stations west of the mississippi rivir use K for their callsign. Not w. Nice try.

    10. Re:Medical devices by Rosonowski · · Score: 1

      Your point might hold true still, but last I checked, radio stations generally didn't run HDTV

      --
      01101001 01100001 01101101 01101110 01101111 01110100 01100001 01101100 01100001 01110111 01111001 01100101 01110010
    11. Re:Medical devices by swdunlop · · Score: 1

      That compliance note is a short blurb that restates the fact that the device is expected to fail safely in the presence of RF radiation. Class A also has additional provisions dictating the amount of RF interference it is allowed to produce, not that anyone really seems to pay attention anymore.

    12. Re:Medical devices by ptbarnett · · Score: 2, Informative
      ummm. radio stations west of the mississippi rivir use K for their callsign. Not w. Nice try.

      That rule was instituted after a number of W callsigns were issued to stations west of the Mississippi.

      The stations already holding W callsigns were allowed to keep them. Dallas has at least two:

      WFAA
      WRR

    13. Re:Medical devices by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 0, Troll

      radio stations west of the mississippi rivir use K for their callsign. Not w. Nice try.

      You don't even need Google for this one. Simply typing "WFAA" into your browser is enough to make you look like the world's biggest ass.

      (That comment about Photoshop being a Mac game, though? Funny. Keep up the good work.)

      --

      I write in my journal
    14. Re:Medical devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because it gives them an erection and pump all the blood out of their pacemaker. I should know, I'm the guy who patented old universal degaussers.

    15. Re:Medical devices by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      WFAA and WBAP both had "w" call signs before they split the country into K's and W's. At one time WBAP was the strongest AM station West of the Mississippi at 100K Watts. Interestingly enough,last winter one night in WV I was able to pick up a Dallas Stars game on WBAP between Charleston WV and Lexington KY on the way back to Dallas.

    16. Re:Medical devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Urban legends contribute to percieved problems. Notice all the hospitals with "No Cell Phone" signs. Then notice all the cell phones in use by the doctors and the EMS personnel walking around with Handi-Talkies. Oops....

      Where I live one of the local hospitals even has an array of cellular base station antennas on the outside of the building. The ER of course has it's obligatory "no cellphones" signs inside. I'd love the oppurtunity to point out the contradiction to them one day.
      "Oh, don't worry, my cellphone isn't transmitting too much rf, the antennas on *your* roof ensure it doesn't need much power to send a signal. What, you didn't know? There's a CELLULAR BASE STATION on the roof of your building!"

    17. Re:Medical devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The radios used by medical staff and the wireless phones carried by hospital staff on the internal phone network are all certified for medical use.
      I spent some time at a related company :)

      Like everyone else, hospital staff aren't allowed to use cellphones on premises except maybe in the cafetaria.

    18. Re:Medical devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And KDKA in Pittsburgh

    19. Re:Medical devices by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
      The radios used by medical staff and the wireless phones carried by hospital staff on the internal phone network are all certified for medical use.

      Trust me, the HTs carried by 1t Responders, EMTs, paramedics, Emergency Response physicians, police, and the occasional fire fighters and hazmat team members aren't. The output on those suckers is also a lot more than your average cell phone.

      And at least in any ER I've ever hung out in, the cell phones are the same ones you get at the various kiosks in the local malls - probably because that's where they came from.

      Now, the hospital paging systems...man, if anything was going to cause problems, it would be the transmitter for those bad boys. I don't know if it's that the systems haven't been kept up, but we're talking major splatter - enough to mess with the front end of my HT over quite a wide range of frequencies.

      I wonder what you'd actually find if you monitored cell phone usage by staff in a hospital. ...

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  5. This might explain why by evil+crash · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Mine don't work in the parking lot on the military base I work on, but the work fine at home.

    --
    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."-THG
    1. Re:This might explain why by DAldredge · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Because rader units just not float in the air. They have to be put someplace, what do you thing the control towers use?

    2. Re:This might explain why by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 5, Informative

      The interference is in the Military A-Band, which covers 233-403 Mhz. This is used for shipboard radars, as well as radar at airfields. You don't have to use Ghz frequencies for radar, in fact the first WWII radars used were around 100 Mhz, IIRC.

      My buddy has the exciter from a shipboard radar as his "Ham Radio" rig. This item generates 1000W CW and about 100 KW in pulse mode, which is what the radars use. It has 4 sections that each handle 1/4 of the band from 10 Khz to 1 GHz. That was then fed to a 10KW Power Amplifier and out. Just the exciter part sits in 3, 6-foot rack cabinets!

      The average pulse power in the radars is around 100,000 Watts, and can be pumped up several orders of magnitude to "burn through" jamming if necessary (peak pulse power levels around 1 GWatt!) That field is being constantly swept around the area looking for threats using phased array panels, much faster than the old "Battlezone" radars, so the RF field is effectively everywhere.

      Key fobs, RF remotes and Garage door openers are using the 330 Mhz junk band and are right in the middle of the Military A-Band. Doh! Unfortunately, they are also Part 15 users of the spectrum there, and are secondary users of those frequencies - they must not interfere and must accept any interference they experience. Double Doh!!

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    3. Re:This might explain why by RetroGeek · · Score: 5, Informative

      Key fobs, RF remotes and Garage door openers are using the 330 Mhz junk band and are right in the middle of the Military A-Band

      We had rock bands come to us (near a Canadian base).

      About 3-4 miles from the hotel was a NORAD RADAR. The pulse from the RADAR would manifest itself as a "BZZT" in the band's amplifiers (If was funny seeing the band try to locate the source.....). Heck, you could hear it on your car radio.

      Big wattage is NO joke. The spill-over into other freqiencies is a fact of life (anyone with a CB will know it as cross-talk).

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    4. Re:This might explain why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      BMW keys are switching over to 415MHz right now. I think the next model update for the Mini (or it might have been the last one - I know it was delayed, but I don't know how long for) are universally 415. So, provided the military play nice (!), everything should be funky.

    5. Re:This might explain why by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      (peak pulse power levels around 1 GWatt!)

      How long of a pulse was this? It can't be sustained for too long because IIRC ship generators run at around the megawatt output range. I'm guessing that the duty cycle would have been around 1:1000. I think I heard from a guy that the Ticonderoga class cruiser has 4MW power generation for the entire ship, which I guess is about medium size for the Navy's typical systems.

    6. Re:This might explain why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I understand that the bands used for radar and rock bands overlap. Is that correct?

    7. Re:This might explain why by HazE_nMe · · Score: 5, Informative

      I work for Chamberlain who makes the Liftmaster and Chamberlain garage door openers. Our newest units just started using 420MHz. I had an old 330MHz unit and my range sucked, so I installed a 420MHz logic board and my range more than doubled. I live right next to Davis Monthan AFB which gives me all kinds of RF interference. I suggest to anyone who has trouble with their Chamberlain, Liftmaster, or Sears GDOs then call Chamberlain and find out if you can upgrade to the 420MHz boards on your model. The price of the boards is crazy expensive ($70), but we here at Chamberlain can give discounts at our leisure. We sometimes will give one out for free if the conditions are right. (WHINE, WHINE, WHINE, "But I can't afford THAT!", "$70?!, The whole unit was $150!", etc)

    8. Re:This might explain why by rpdillon · · Score: 5, Informative

      A lot of posts to reply to, but basically, Naval Ship radars function on lots of bands, not exluding the A Band, mentioned above.

      Aircraft carriers have a good deal more power than one would think, and certainly more than a Tico, which is about medium size. One thing to note is that there is no "Medium" size for Navy ships, there are small guys, and big guys. CVN, LHD and LHA are going to have more power because they are bigger...the LHD I served on had 5 primary generators rated at 2500kW a piece, plus another 2 backups at 2000kW each. LHAs are similar, but CVNs have even more, mainly because they have fuel to burn, being nuclear.

      Oddly, in the radar category, its only the smaller ships in the Cruiser Destroyer community that have phased array radars, which have higher output than those found on other ships. On carriers, the primary high output radar is the SPS-48E (a rotating radar, as all are, with the exception of the SPY-1 series), and has such power because it is an Air Search radar that scans in 3-D. There are ranges at which we are required to turn off our radars in vicinity of land, but this is soley at the attentiveness of the watchstander, and we frequently got reports during Operation Iraqi Freedom thaty our 48E was jamming the airport radars in Kuwait, and we were requested to lower the power output.

      Anyway, a carrier pulling into town running a 48E could certainly jam such devices, but more frequently we get reports that devices start *operating* without warning (garage doors opening, etc.) Certainly you'd see these things more often if you worked on a Naval Base, since lots of ships tend to pull in and out there.

    9. Re:This might explain why by DataPath · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I grew up by a military base and there was a big sign at the entrance stating that certain types of radio emissions were prohibited, and I remember this from back in 1985 or so.

      Not surprised in the least, and I think it's perfectly within their rights.

      --
      Inconceivable!
    10. Re:This might explain why by cmallinson · · Score: 3, Funny
      BMW keys are switching over to 415MHz right now.

      So all we have to do is buy a new BMW to avoid this government inflicted inconvienience? What's all the fuss about then?

    11. Re:This might explain why by Desert+Raven · · Score: 3, Funny

      So all we have to do is buy a new BMW to avoid this government inflicted inconvienience?

      Yup, the government forced the garage door companies and the auto companies to use a frequency band that was already assigned to the military as the primary user. Yup, it's a conspiracy all right.

      Wanker.

    12. Re:This might explain why by flacco · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately, they are also Part 15 users of the spectrum there, and are secondary users of those frequencies - they must not interfere and must accept any interference they experience.

      ok, i'm a little stoopid - can you (or someone) explain what this means? 'must accept any interference'?

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    13. Re:This might explain why by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      Bullshit like this (And similar examples, like the french military intruding on 802.11's frequencies) is why spectrum allocation should be taken away from individual government bureaucracies (like the FCC and its ilk), and placed into the hands of an international body. I'm of the opinion that IEEE would be ideal, since they're the body that confirms many of these standards in the first place.

      And that "must accept any interference" clause should be outlawed. There should be no fscking interference in the first place. The military should stay on it's own damn part of the spectrum, and stay the hell OUT of everyone else's. Severe economic and political sanctions should be set in place for violating countries.

      cya,
      john

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    14. Re:This might explain why by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 4, Informative
      ok, i'm a little stoopid - can you (or someone) explain what this means? 'must accept any interference'?

      Basically, if a primary user's signal interferes with a secondary user, the secondary user is the one responsible for dealing with the problem (e.g., shielding their equipment, moving, etc). The primary users don't have to take any steps to avoid interfering with secondary users.

      Secondary users, on the other hand, have to avoid interfering with primary users. If a secondary user interferes with a primary user, the secondary user has to stop, shield their equipment, move, etc.

    15. Re:This might explain why by Cmdr+TECO · · Score: 1
      spectrum allocation should be ... placed into the hands of an international body.
      That would be the International Telecommunications Union.
      The military should stay on it's own damn part of the spectrum, and stay the hell OUT of everyone else's.
      The military are staying on their own damn part of the spectrum. The keyless remotes are using the military's damn part of the spectrum. Since it is the military's own damn part of the spectrum, the keyless remotes are allowed to stay the hell IN it only on the conditions that they "must not cause any damn interference" to the military, and "must accept any damn interference" from the military.
      --
      echo 33676832766569823265328479713269.8639857989Pq | dc
    16. Re:This might explain why by cmacb · · Score: 1

      "Basically, if a primary user's signal interferes with a secondary user, the secondary user is the one responsible for dealing with the problem (e.g., shielding their equipment, moving, etc). The primary users don't have to take any steps to avoid interfering with secondary users.

      Secondary users, on the other hand, have to avoid interfering with primary users. If a secondary user interferes with a primary user, the secondary user has to stop, shield their equipment, move, etc."


      Which is why the referenced article, as typical, GOT IT WRONG, since it leaves the distinct impression that AT&T or the military, or space aliens or just about anybody but the keyfob manufacturers are to blame for this. Maybe Jason Blair wasn't so bad. At least some of his made-up news had the ring of truth to it.

    17. Re:This might explain why by Ancil · · Score: 5, Funny

      peak pulse power levels around 1 GWatt!
      Careful with that thing. 210 MWatts more, and you could end up in the year 1955 making out with your Mom.
    18. Re:This might explain why by WebCrapper · · Score: 1

      I grew up on several bases as well and remember these signs. I'm still on bases as an adult and these signs are no longer around. Odd thing is, I spent 6 months at Norfolk VA and my remote would go haywire every few days... Its all starting to make sense.

    19. Re:This might explain why by HaloZero · · Score: 1

      No fuss. Might as well Throw in an iPod, too.

      --
      Informatus Technologicus
    20. Re:This might explain why by pete.com · · Score: 0

      I think that was 1.1 Jiga Watts... not Giga Watts.

    21. Re:This might explain why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice post.

  6. Tin Foil Hat Time ! by Jesrad · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hear you get good prices when buying tin foil in large orders. I'd probably need that for the garage door.

    --
    Maybe we deserve this world ?
    1. Re:Tin Foil Hat Time ! by ThisIsFred · · Score: 4, Funny

      Think again. One of the United State's largest manfacturers of aluminum products is Alcoa. They are [and their subsidiaries] also a military subcontractor. Your purchase would probably invite investigation. Now see, if you'd just been buying a little extra every week since before Y2K, you'd have enough to make an aluminum suit for you and your car for every day of the week.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    2. Re:Tin Foil Hat Time ! by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      I hear you get good prices when buying tin foil in large orders. I'd probably need that for the garage door.

      Should I file this under "missing the point"?

      Hmm...Let's remove the garage-door foil, and *then* use the remote to open it.....

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    3. Re:Tin Foil Hat Time ! by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      But this is one case where we don't want the tin foil hat to block a signal... we want our signals to work!

    4. Re:Tin Foil Hat Time ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go wrap the military base then. What can't come out can't block your signal, right?

    5. Re:Tin Foil Hat Time ! by Alan+Hicks · · Score: 1

      Please note that tin and aluminum are not the same thing.

      --
      Slackware, what else when it must be secure, stable, and easy?
    6. Re:Tin Foil Hat Time ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Despite that, "tin foil" really means aluminum foil, at least in the US. Foil made from actual tin is a bit harder to find.

      Of course, it's only true tin that stops the orbital mind control lasers. Aluminum is useless. All those dupes with the aluminum hats are just pawns of the government trying to discredit me.

  7. When you can't by dark404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    enter your car, and start it with just the key, the government may be to blame, but you need to be slapped.

    1. Re:When you can't by TWX · · Score: 1

      That doesn't help the morons who "shave" the door handles and door locks to make it all electronic. Of course, if they're dumb enough to do that then they get what's coming...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:When you can't by WormholeFiend · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if they can still open the door with the key, a number of them still need the remote to deactivate the alarm system and activate the secure ignition circuit.

      My brother had one installed, and I asked him what he'd do if his remote's battery ever went dead.

      He shrugged and said he'd buy new ones at the store... but stores arent always opened when Murphy's Law decides to apply itself.

    3. Re:When you can't by HoldenCaulfield · · Score: 1

      If you read the article, you would have realized that some of the newer cars require a wireless signal, in addition to the key, to start. While I hadn't heard of this, I'd imagine it's similar to keys with chips in them to prevent people from duplicating them . . . an electronic system working synergistically with the mechanical locking mechanism . . .

    4. Re:When you can't by miike · · Score: 1

      Some cars turn on the alarm if you open the door and don't unlock them with the remote control. The alarm doesn't shut off until you start the engine and, as far as I know, the keys electronical chip is verified. This has happened to me with an ~2000 Volvo V40

    5. Re:When you can't by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "enter your car, and start it with just the key, the government may be to blame, but you need to be slapped."

      Why? Because we designed the alarm system?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    6. Re:When you can't by kfg · · Score: 1

      . . .but stores arent always opened when Murphy's Law decides to apply itself.

      Or even any stores within a days walking distance through the blizzard/desert/what have you.

      KFG

    7. Re:When you can't by bwalling · · Score: 1

      He shrugged and said he'd buy new ones at the store... but stores arent always opened when Murphy's Law decides to apply itself.

      You don't even need Murphy's Law for that one. Assuming he spends more time at home or work than at a store that sells batteries, his odds are good that he will be in the wrong place when the batteries die.

    8. Re:When you can't by Tlosk · · Score: 5, Funny

      so buy the replacement now and stick it in the glovebox

    9. Re:When you can't by aiabx · · Score: 0

      This is funny, but subtle. Well done.
      -aiabx

      --
      Just this guy, you know?
    10. Re:When you can't by Grant29 · · Score: 1

      Almost all alarms are the same though. Enter with the key, put ket in ignition and turn to the on position and push the little button (usually under the dash). That will disable the alarm for that instance. You gotta know where the button is though. Most aftermarket alarm installers put them in the same position though...

      --
      Only 3 Gmail invitations left.

    11. Re:When you can't by gopherd00d · · Score: 1

      I wish someone had told my installer where that common position is...

      The geniuses at Best Buy put my "under-dash" override button in the engine compartment under the hood. They also didn't bother to tell me what secret number they programmed it for (you have to push it that number of times within two seconds or you're locked out).

      Result: I better not ever lose my remote or park near a military base.

    12. Re:When you can't by aiyo · · Score: 1

      This is why you should hang spare batteries on your keychain. OR you can do what I do: carry two remotes on the keychain to serve as a back up. As a last resort I take my feet with me everywhere I go so I can pick up new batteries if needed.

    13. Re:When you can't by roosterx · · Score: 1

      I don't think they make alarms/ignition kills without some kind of manual switch/bypass.

    14. Re:When you can't by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      First of all, the interference is only at range. If you get right next to your car, the remote should work just fine. Secondly, most alarms have override switches, usually placed under the dash, or some other obvious location that completely defeats the purpose of having an alarm. But we all know how effective a car alarm is in the first place.

    15. Re:When you can't by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      The override for my car's alarm is the ignition. If you trip the alarm, you have 10 seconds to put the key in the ignition before the alarm actually goes off. Mind you, the alarm isn't set off by touching the car, but by sitting in the driver's seat.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    16. Re:When you can't by nick0909 · · Score: 1

      Sometimes my keyless entry is jammed and even getting under the hood with it doesn't open it up. I can open the car with my key but then the alarm goes off, and the only way to reset the alarm is with the (jammed) keyless entry or punch in the damn numbers on the side panel. It happens so rarely that I always forget the numbers, but I just about have the pattern memorized with my thumb. Meanwhile I am pissing everyone off as my alarm rings and I smash the buttons on the side of my car until it stops.

      I guess living in San Diego does have a downside... Miramar, North Island, Pendleton, and who knows what else floating around at sea.

    17. Re:When you can't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, the alarm will go off when the door is opened manually, but if the vehicle has an immobilizer, the low frequency RF field provides enough juice to power the microcontroller in the fob. The system works fine with no battery at all. Then starting the ignition will deactivate the alarm. The embarrassing honks will force your brother to buy a new battery soon enough.

    18. Re:When you can't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some crappy security systems (Like the factory one in a 99 Saturn, for example) require the transmitter to disable the alarm. Put the factory key in the door, and it unlocks...and the alarm goes off.

    19. Re:When you can't by conway · · Score: 1
      so buy the replacement now and stick it in the glovebox

      That's actually a smart thing to do!
      The problem is after you get into the car using a regular key, you need to disable the alarm. Putting a replacement battery in the glove box will help you in exactly that situation!

      However, at least with my remote, I noticed that it starts giving signs of going a long time before it dies - the range starts decreasing, and you have to press the button repeatedly for it to respond. Thats a sign you need a new battery.

  8. Luddites rejoice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Horse and buggy remains unaffected by such measures.

    1. Re:Luddites rejoice by britneys+9th+husband · · Score: 0

      Only if the horse is wearing its tinfoil hat.

      --
      Hear recorded Slashdot headlines on your phone! New service beta testing. Just call (248) 434-5508
    2. Re:Luddites rejoice by neuraloverload · · Score: 1

      "Horse and buggy remains unaffected by such measures." until the horse convulses and falls over, dead of horse variant b.s.e.

  9. Forget part 15... by irving47 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Too bad part 15 of the FCC's guidelines can't apply. The whole "may not cause harmful interference" section might have been nice. My dad parked on a Navy base with his keyless entry-equipped Oldsmobile for a few years up in Washington. Whatever they had running was so strong, it completely fried the system.

    --
    I had a sucky sig.
    1. Re:Forget part 15... by SagSaw · · Score: 4, Informative

      Too bad part 15 of the FCC's guidelines can't apply.

      No, not really. The purpose of Part 15 in this case is to protect the military (or whatever individual/group/organization is assigned the particular frequency(s)) from interfearance that your keyless entry system might produce. It is not meant to protect your keyless entry system from others who may be using their assigned spectrum properly.

      --
      Come test your mettle in the world of Alter Aeon!
    2. Re:Forget part 15... by JTMON · · Score: 0

      Yeah but wouldn't that section apply to the FCC licensed user of the signal causing the issue? Must not cause any and must accept any etc...WTF are the FCC licensing guidlines useful for if the people using them don't adhere to the rules...oh wait it's uncle sam, that a-hole

    3. Re:Forget part 15... by Juggle · · Score: 1

      Exactly, Part 15 does apply and that's why this is no big surprise. The key remotes are unlicenced and operating on shared frequencies that are licensed for other uses.

      They can't interfeer wtih the licenced uses...but if the licensed use interfeers with them...tough there's nothing they can do.

      Part 15 is exactly what's happening here and it's happening exactly as should be expected.

      --
      --- Juggle juggle@hitesman.com
    4. Re:Forget part 15... by swdunlop · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It also must accept harmful interference.. So.. They're both in the wrong. ;)

    5. Re:Forget part 15... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Part of FCC 15 also says that it must also receive harmful interference if delivered.

      It fried. It did its job!

    6. Re:Forget part 15... by perlchild · · Score: 1

      the FCC licensed user in this case is the Military. The keyless car entry is the Unlicensed user, in this case, it's the BAD guy. A smart keyless entry system user might make a request for a small bit of spectrum, and market a "free from interference" keyless entry that works "even near military bases".

    7. Re:Forget part 15... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Informative

      Part 15 is the part that specifies the power limits for non-licensed users to protect the licensed users.

      So, it all comes down to what frequencies the car alarm makers are expecting to use. If they pick a miliatary frequency and are trying to use it at low power, then they can't really complain when a miliatary ship comes by and blows them out of the water bandwidth-wise. However, if they pick a frequency open to the public like the 900mHz band, then it's the military transmitting too strong on a low-power band, even if it's just the result signal splash from their attempt to use their assigned band at high power.

      So, in a sense, Part 15 does protect your keyless entry system from the miliatary. They're supposed to keep their RF operations away from your space just as much as you're supposed to stay away from theirs.

    8. Re:Forget part 15... by M.+Silver · · Score: 3, Funny

      Too bad part 15 of the FCC's guidelines can't apply.

      It should, just not in the way you're thinking:

      Whatever they had running was so strong, it completely fried the system.

      That's what the "must accept interference" part comes in.

      Of course, the idea of going to Olds and saying "Your stuff violated part 15 because it didn't accept FCC-legal interference. So replace it with something that does, or I'm siccing the FCC on you!" is probably not terribly workable.

      Might be fun, though.

      --

      Slashdot's token middle-aged housewife
    9. Re:Forget part 15... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 0, Troll

      The keyless entry system shouldn't have been using military frequencies. As noted, it IS covered by Part 15, the part you don't want applied because it must accept harmful interference from those that are specifically allowed to use the band.

      I'd say GM is at fault for building shitty electronics using frequencies that were allocated for other uses. I'm not surprised, my parents had a couple Oldmobiles and their electronics were the achilles heal of the car. Unless it was on max cool, occasionally the system would shoot heat at you, or if you want heat and it's not on max heat, it would occasionally run the A/C on you.

    10. Re:Forget part 15... by wx327 · · Score: 1
      Windows accepts harmful interference.

      Is Windows Part 15 compliant?

    11. Re:Forget part 15... by swdunlop · · Score: 1

      I believe the problem, here, is that it's far too accepting. =)

    12. Re:Forget part 15... by tcgroat · · Score: 2, Informative
      The 900MHz band (and 2.4GHz, 27Mhz CB, and more) are allocated to Part 18 ISM equipment on a primary basis in the US. These "Industrial, Scientific, and Medical" devices include diathermy heating machines, RF induction heaters, microwave ovens, and similar high-power devices that aren't for communication. Any other device operating on allocated ISM bands must accept (and expect) interference from the ISM equipment. Ironically the ISM bands are good places for unlicensed users, because the extremely high power commercial and military users aren't authorized to use the ISM "no-man's land" frequencies. ISM equipment has maximum field strength limits, while broadcasters must meet required minimum signal levels specified for their class of license.

      No matter what frequency they're on, Part 15 devices are the lowest class users. Basically the Part 15 rules say "Buyer beware!" (though in many more words, as is the habit of government agencies). So it's good engineering for the Part 15 designers to consider all other uses of the spectrum avaialble for their product, and select the frequencies where they will be most compatible. Somehow, I can't see how military radar bands would meet that criteria!

    13. Re:Forget part 15... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think that's bad, you should see the problems they have with the kiloatary frequencies!.

    14. Re:Forget part 15... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      It also must accept harmful interference.. So.. They're both in the wrong. ;)

      Heh. I doubt the US Navy transmitter was a Part 15 device.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    15. Re:Forget part 15... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, the idea of going to Olds and saying "Your stuff violated part 15 because it didn't accept FCC-legal interference. So replace it with something that does, or I'm siccing the FCC on you!" is probably not terribly workable.


      Olds is in compliance with Part15 if the system fries.
      Only case it would not be is if it sends out signals on the band which interfere with other signals from licensed users (like the military).
      Part 15 doesn't state the unlicensed equipment must not be damaged by transmissions from licensed transmitters, only that it cannot interfere with the operation of those transmitters.

      By frying, it can interfere no longer and therefore is in compliance :)

  10. Interesting... by NeoGeo64 · · Score: 2, Funny

    This reminds me of that movie Minority Report...

  11. Stratcom Jamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to work with an engineer who was a former air force tech on the Looking Glass. The Looking Glass missions were a group of USAF command/control aircraft that was always airborne to provide a redundant facility to the Strategic Air Command (SAC) in the unlikely event SAC ceased to exist from a USSR strike.

    He explained on several occasions that one of their amusements was lowering a long antenna and jamming garage door frequencies and other civilian applications (e.g. keyless door locks). I couldn't imagine why the air force would want to interfere with garage doors and he never had a good explanation other than they were told to do that and the crew always found it amusing.

    Urban legend? Looking Glass crew tall tale told to amuse their friends? Who knows, but they certainly had the ability to try and lord knows many friends have had their garage doors open by themselves in the middle of the night.

    1. Re:Stratcom Jamming by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      Did the orders to open garage doors coincide with strange-shape experimental aircraft low altitude fly-bys? /tinfoil

    2. Re:Stratcom Jamming by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      They wouldn't open, it would just be that they can't operate the garage doors by remote. Jamming involves sending 'noise' of a high enough amplitude and variance that the electronics can't 'see' the proper signal.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:Stratcom Jamming by M.+Silver · · Score: 1

      Actually, back in the olden days the garage doors *would* open. As I recall, they just waited for a signal (even noise) on a certain frequency. Nowadays they're a little more sophisticated.

      My folks had a heck of a time with one opening by itself all the time, and finally had to have Sears come out and fix it, by adjusting the frequency it was expecting to something that was *not* one used by a nearby airport or whatever.

      --

      Slashdot's token middle-aged housewife
    4. Re:Stratcom Jamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



      I'll confirm this one. Offutt air force base, Omaha, Nebraska, mid 1990s. Air crew from RC-135 Rivet Joints disciplined for using onboard spectrum analyzers to decode half a dozen common garage door opener signals, then blasting a mix of the signals on climb out. They did it for a while before they got caught ... every time they headed out about a third of the garage doors in Bellevue, Nebraska would open.

      They get up to other mischief, too, but its not as widely known as that event.

    5. Re:Stratcom Jamming by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      He explained on several occasions that one of their amusements was lowering a long antenna and jamming garage door frequencies and other civilian applications (e.g. keyless door locks). I couldn't imagine why the air force would want to interfere with garage doors and he never had a good explanation other than they were told to do that and the crew always found it amusing

      The proper response to that kind of thing is to analyze the interference and deduce interesting things and publicize them. If they are messing with garage doors and other stuff, then they are leaking information, and there is probably something in there that someone in the military is paranoid enough to want to keep secret.

      Do that, and they'll tell those crews to stop playing jokes on the civilians.

    6. Re:Stratcom Jamming by trg83 · · Score: 1

      It is not clear how or why you deduced that sending out a signal is equivalent to leaking information. Radar is sent out as a pulse of nothing but energy. There's no data or anything of value other than the reflection of the radar signal back to the craft.

    7. Re:Stratcom Jamming by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      It is not clear how or why you deduced that sending out a signal is equivalent to leaking information. Radar is sent out as a pulse of nothing but energy. There's no data or anything of value other than the reflection of the radar signal back to the craft

      OK, let's take radar. You can get the direction of the transmitter. Do that from a few different places, and you can get the location of the transmitter. From the energy of the pulse at your end, you can estimate the total power of the transmitter. Compare the pulse arrival times at several places, and you can find out how often the radar makes a sweep. The pulse duration and frequency distribution probably would tell you something about how the transmitter works.

      For radar in a plane, you could use the doppler effect to get the speed of the plane.

    8. Re:Stratcom Jamming by trg83 · · Score: 1
      OK, let's take radar. You can get the direction of the transmitter. Do that from a few different places, and you can get the location of the transmitter.

      Umm, we're talking about an aircraft moving in excess of 500 miles per hour. Unless you had a reliable mechanism to synchronize multiple receiving stations and triangulate at the same instant in time, it would be next to impossible to determine the location of the transmitter on the plane. Furthermore, even if could determine the latitude and longitude of the plane, altitudinal triangulation adds another dimension of complexity. Ground based radar would be far more effective for finding the plane. Admittedly, you would be trading a passive sensor for an active one, which would cause additional issues.

      From the energy of the pulse at your end, you can estimate the total power of the transmitter. Compare the pulse arrival times at several places, and you can find out how often the radar makes a sweep. The pulse duration and frequency distribution probably would tell you something about how the transmitter works.

      The challenge was to demonstrate how one could find information "leaking" from the plane. That is actually raw, nearly useless data. In addition, you can not reliably deduce transmitter power from signal strength. I am a licensed Extra class Amateur Radio operator. The signal strength between a 5 W transmitter signal and a 1,000 W signal can be indistinguishable given certain atmospheric conditions, antenna and cable gain or loss, etc. Finding out "how the radar transmitter works" is really pretty easy anyway. Consider this link to the Federation of American Scientists, for example: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/an-tps -75.htm Essentially, all you could effectively find from the plane's radar emissions would be that there was a plane somewhere.

      For radar in a plane, you could use the doppler effect to get the speed of the plane.

      Or, once again, you could use ground based radar with all the same, or better, results.

  12. Jams? by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jamming is a deliberate "denial of service" attack in the RF relm. Interference is the unintentional degradation or stoppage of service.

    When 2 ethernet NIC's transmit at the same time in normal operation we don't call it jamming. I doubt that what the government is doing is intentional.

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
    1. Re:Jams? by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Intent doesn't really matter in the RF relm. If you're radiating whether you know it or not you're reponsible for keeping your signal source within it's authorized bounds. Signal splash to the point that it exceeds the unlicensed power limit on any band is illegal... and there's no exceptions to that.

    2. Re:Jams? by kevlar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The military is operating within its authorized bounds. So are these remotes. The problem is that the military has blankey control over that spectrum, where as your remote can use it, but cannot interfere with anything else. Hence the "must accept any interference" clause.

    3. Re:Jams? by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Informative

      Being the "primary users" of bandwidth space gives you the right to jam out everybody else... "secondary users" are those whose use is tolerated but they must accept any interference from the primary users and shutdown if they're bothering any primary user.

      The car entry system makers picked a frequency that belonged to the military as the primary user... they can't really complain when the military comes to town and wants to use their channel.

    4. Re:Jams? by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually there are a couple of exceptions, one is in emergencies, and the other is *gasp* the military.

      The generally held concept for emergencies is "anything goes", but you better be prepared to answer for and justify your actions later on.

      The other is the military. They don't have "band limits" on their signals. They have generally decided on a band plan that doesn't interfere with other services, but any frequency that is not desginated as broadcast, amateur or public service is subject to them usurping any time at their discretion. Even some of the amateur frequencies are primarily military designation and amateurs are secondary users (parts of 440 Mhz and others).

      At the risk of being flamebait, remember, they're the U.S. Government and they can do whatever the hell they want.

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    5. Re:Jams? by evilviper · · Score: 4, Funny
      the military has blankey control

      I know that was just a typo, but I nearly wet myself laughing, anyhow...

      Somehow I picture Linus (the "Peanuts" character) as the captain of an aircraft carrier, exerting his "blankey control".
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    6. Re:Jams? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they're the U.S. Government and they can do whatever the hell they want

      Oh, like HAARP (High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program)?

      Parts of HAARP's usefulness include:

      - boiling portions of the atmosphere
      - conducting imaging through the earth
      - initiate electromagnetic pulses on the enemy thousands of miles away without nuclear weaponry to initiate the pulse
      - deactivate cell phones, radios and other communications for thousands of miles
      - cook french fries... 8,000 miles away.

      and other good wholesome Tesla fun!

    7. Re:Jams? by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      Lest anyone start posting about how this is a bad thing, note that allowing emergency and military use of any band is a Good Idea. Would you want a ham who arranged a spark-gap transmitter to send out an SOS to be called up for it? Would you want the military to be unable to co-ordinate ativities in the event of an invasion (well, some folks would, but their opinion hardly counts)?

      Anyone who relies on using someone else's frequencies deserves what he gets.

    8. Re:Jams? by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      Now now viper its RadioShack- you've got questions, we've got BlankStares.

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    9. Re:Jams? by Piquan · · Score: 1

      When 2 ethernet NIC's transmit at the same time in normal operation we don't call it jamming.

      I know what you're saying, but you may want to use a different example. From the comp.dcom.lans.ethernet FAQ:

      [5.3] What is jam?

      When a collision is recognized by a transmitting station, a bit sequence called jam is transmitted. This jam is 32 bits long, which is long enough to traverse the entire collision domain so that all transmitting stations can detect the collision.

    10. Re:Jams? by axonal · · Score: 1
      Somehow I picture Linus (the "Peanuts" character) as the captain of an aircraft carrier, exerting his "blankey control".


      Somehow I pictured the person prosecuting Michael Jackson instead.
  13. I think this says it all... by stoneymonster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "But unlike other more powerful radio signals, keyless entry remotes are not licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. They are allowed to operate on frequencies used by licensed customers as long as their signals are sufficiently weak and don't interfere with others. But because of this outlaw status, their own signals can be jeopardized." Tough. Get licensed, or have a working backup system that doesn't depend on radio. I honestly don't see the issue here. The situation isn't likely to change, so the unlicensed folk will have to work around it. Use spread-spectrum at low power or frequency hopping to get around this. -C

    1. Re:I think this says it all... by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      That still doesn't make sense. If a keyless entry signal was harmful, then I imagine a signal strong enough to jam that would be even more harmful to the licensed users of the frequency.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    2. Re:I think this says it all... by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      No, I dont think *you* get it, the Military has liscensed that frequency, it's theirs to do as they please. The keyless-systems have to accept any and all interference coming from the military because the military controls those frequencies.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    3. Re:I think this says it all... by fatboy · · Score: 1

      [Keyless entry should] Use spread-spectrum at low power or frequency hopping to get around this.

      The problem, I would be willing to bet, is the keyless entry systems are having front end overload. This means that the radar systems used by the military are producing so much RF, within the band pass of the receiver the keyless entry systems use, it is causing those amplifier stages to become saturated.

      Using SS or frequency hopping is not going to mitigate the interference if front end overload is the problem.

      --
      --fatboy
    4. Re:I think this says it all... by G-funk · · Score: 1

      Erm, I believe it is the licensees of the frequency that are jamming the keyless entry.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    5. Re:I think this says it all... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Infrared remote. Just like for your TV.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    6. Re:I think this says it all... by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1
      Okay, for the benefit of both of you, here's my logic:

      The military is the licensee of the frequency, therefore they may do what they wish with it (within the FCC's guidelines for that band). If they've licensed the frequency, they must be doing something with, right? Otherwise, why bother paying the fees.

      Now look at a quote from the parent:
      ...keyless entry remotes are not licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. They are allowed to operate on frequencies used by licensed customers as long as their signals are sufficiently weak and don't interfere with others

      So if the unlicensed, low-power transmitters are causing harmful interference, a high-power jamming signal would be even more harmful to the militaries receiving equipment. Whether they were using the frequency for two-way communication, or just to listen in, jamming it on purpose doesn't make sense. In a nutshell, my original post was asking the question: "What purpose would there be for jamming the frequency all the time?"
      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
  14. So that's what's been causing... by ||Plazm|| · · Score: 1

    I always thought it was the aliens causing me to become dellusional....I guess its just been the military jamming my garage door and keyless entry systems creating a cross-mojination of signals resulting in strange hallucinations in my brain.

  15. Conspiracy! by pyrrhonist · · Score: 5, Funny

    This will be in Michael Moore's next film. </satire>

    --
    Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    1. Re:Conspiracy! by wojie · · Score: 1

      That just made my day,

      Thank you.

    2. Re:Conspiracy! by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Frequency 311? :)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    3. Re:Conspiracy! by XgD · · Score: 1

      What's the frequency, Kenneth?

      Stipe et al

    4. Re:Conspiracy! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      I'd rather not say.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  16. hmm by HBI · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I happen to work at a base where the US Army Communications Electronics Command (CECOM) is headquartered. I have a keyless entry. So do many of the thousands of other people who work there. Never heard of a keyless entry problem.

    Weird.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:hmm by foidulus · · Score: 1

      From the article:
      Some of the devices that have failed in Waldorf operate on a frequency of 315 megahertz. Another common keyless entry frequency is 302 MHz. Both of these frequencies fall within a range licensed primarily for use by the military and the federal government.
      In a summary of radio spectrum use from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the frequencies in the range from 225 MHz to 328.6 MHz "are heavily used worldwide for critical military air traffic control and tactical training communications." Specific functions include "air-ground-air communications for combat weapons training carried out at and in the vicinity of all major air bases and military training areas worldwide."

      Perhaps you just aren't broadcasting on those certain frequencies(which are small compared to the large spectrum reserved for the military)

    2. Re:hmm by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well don'cha feel big, bro? Howd'ya come 'cross dis' information?

      (No way am I posting this with my account. [And please do notice the play on words before modding this -1.])

      --
      All rites reversed 2010
    3. Re:hmm by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 1

      ...Kill me now.

      --
      All rites reversed 2010
    4. Re:hmm by HBI · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but it just seems weird. There is a lot of comms activity going on there and nearby. If something was going to interfere, i'd expect it to crop up there. Houses butt up against the base, the whole area is prime real estate.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    5. Re:hmm by Octorian · · Score: 1

      Yeah, one thing I found pretty cool at Fort Monmouth was actually the little museum they had there. I found it quite fascinating to learn that we had developed counter-target-aquisition radars (radars that see incoming artillery and mortar rounds) back in the 50's. Probably highly classified at the time. Makes you wonder what they've got under the covers now.

      Also rather amusing to see newspaper articles from the 30's talking about some "mystery ray" the miltary was using to locate ships. ;)

    6. Re:hmm by sysadmn · · Score: 1

      That's cuz they never fuck with HQ. Don't want to piss off the general. Come visit the trenches!

      --
      Envy my 5 digit Slashdot User ID!
    7. Re:hmm by Paraflyer · · Score: 0

      Used to work up at Monmouth....worked with the GTE/RITA folks testing satcom gear.

      Been a loooong time!

  17. Rador Detectors at Air Force Bases by Zorilla · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At my last base, one day I was riding in a coworker's car on the way to our office. The road there wraps around a runway. His radar detector goes apeshit when going past there. Possibly due to ILS radio waves.

    The cops at the gate don't like to see radar detectors anyway, so it was usually best to keep it off the dash after you passed through, as it was useless.

    On the other hand, keyless remotes didn't pose too much of a problem.

    --

    It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  18. Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by hughk · · Score: 1
    I rented a Merc over the weekend. Very nice, but there is no actual key. There is a keyhole on the door, but they didn't give me a key, just the electronic thingy. No thingy, and you can't get in the door or disarm the alarm.

    Same for the ignition, but that is perhaps less vulnerable to interference as the key dongle must be placed inside a slot.

    These cars do work in the vicinity of significant ground radar. Otherwise people at the airport would have problems. I really don't know how the lock receivers can be totally swamped. This would normally take a lot of power and proximity to the transmitter.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
    1. Re:Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by avalys · · Score: 4, Informative

      Somewhere within the remote is an actual metal key for use when the electronics aren't working . There should be a button that flips it out or a hidden compartment that you can pull it out of. Look for extra seams on the sides.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
    2. Re:Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by Scoria · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, Mercedes-Benz is currently disposing of traditional flat keys. They are gradually being replaced by an IR/RF "SmartKey." As of 2004, the E-Class ships only with a flat "valet key" that independently locks the glovebox.

      --
      Do you like German cars?
    3. Re:Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Okay, I see the extra seams on the sides. I'm starting to slide it open and *kzzzz* .. "

      Maybe you should have warned him about the self-destruct too?

    4. Re:Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lexus has begun using RFID tags for entry and ignition. Ther are no keyholes, just one knob to start the car.

    5. Re:Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by Akaihiryuu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sounds similar to mine...I have a 2004 Toyota Prius hybrid. The "key" is just a transmitter, in fact you don't ever have to take it out of your pocket or even touch it to unlock and start the car. However, after being left idle for 2 days, the car's computer goes into sleep mode to conserve battery power. If that happens, the smart entry and start won't work. The key transmitter does have an actual mechanical key that can be used to unlock the door in that situation, then you place the transmitter in a slot in the dashboard (where the ignition key would be if there was one) to wake the computer back up.

    6. Re:Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not funny. Please cease to exist. Thank you.

    7. Re:Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by hughk · · Score: 1

      Interesting, but there is no key hole on the ignition. I don't know if they use RF or magnetics there for the plastic thingy.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    8. Re:Mercedes 200E - V. Nice but electronic key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just one knob to start the car

      The driver?

      (Sorry, this might be a bit UK-specific)

  19. Garage door remotes by scum-e-bag · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A few years ago a US ship visited my hometown Hobart/Ausralia and garage door remotes all over the city stopped working. The US Navy apologised.

    --
    Does it go on forever?
    1. Re:Garage door remotes by craXORjack · · Score: 2, Funny

      Was this US Navy ship by any chance named the USS Eldridge?

      --
      Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
    2. Re:Garage door remotes by mattjb0010 · · Score: 1

      You don't need to wait for the US to show up, just drive up to the top of Mt Wellington, park your car, and wait for Your ABC to do the trick to your car's immobilizer with their broadcasts.

  20. Alarms by AVryhof · · Score: 1

    Some (factory) alarms go off if you use your key instead of the remote... So, yeah, you can get into your car with they key, but then you either have the alarm going while your driving home, or you can't start your car.

    How sad.

    If you use remote entry systems, you support terrorism.

    1. Re:Alarms by Skater · · Score: 1

      They should automatically disable if the door is unlocked using the key. I think they're all wired that way because of the possibility of your key fob's batteries running down. What kind of factory alarms don't disable this way?

      Also, at least on my cars and others I know, starting the car will cancel the alarm, too.

      --RJ

    2. Re:Alarms by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      My '99 Camry will sound the alarm if I unlock the door with the key after locking it electronically. But as soon as I start the engine (with the key) the alarm turns off.

      If I lock the door with just the key, it doesn't set the alarm. I don't like the extra bulk in my pocket, so I only carry the key.

      I had to hide the remotes from my wife. She always uses the remote to lock the car, and every time she used my car she'd set the alarm.
      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    3. Re:Alarms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some german car manufacturer started making cars where unlocking the door would turn off the alarm. Big advantage for the car thiefs, no longer needing to find a way to disable the alarm, just use the usual lock picks to unlock the door.

  21. Who ever used that part of the spectrum by crovira · · Score: 2, Insightful

    for that purpose deserves to be bitch-slapped.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
    1. Re:Who ever used that part of the spectrum by rewt66 · · Score: 1
      Troll? Not a troll at all IMNSHO.

      Somebody designs a car that won't start without the secret RF handshake. That's fine; I'm all for anti-theft measures. But they do the RF handshake on frequencies that they don't control. That's stupid. They do it on frequencies that the military controls, which means there may be some extremely high-powered transmitters on those frequencies. This stupid design decision has the ability to (temporarily) turn a car into a $30,000 paperweight. When the parent states that those responsible for this blunder should face some consequences, some moderator labels it a troll. Hello?

  22. This happens to me all the time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live near Air Force Plant 42 (home of Skunkworks) and Edward AFB in northern LA County and I have ths happen to me all the time!

  23. In Eastern Europe... by rasafras · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...people don't interfere with it per se. Thieves armed with a laptop will nab your opener code at a gas station, and then follow you to a hotel or wherever your destination is. They steal the car at night, and are long gone with 3-4 hours head start. They're nice and useful, I'm sure, but not always appropriate.

    1. Re:In Eastern Europe... by SagSaw · · Score: 1

      That would only work if the system sends the same code every time (or if the same code can be used twice within a short period of time). IIRC, most current systems use "rolling-codes". In other words, the transmitter and receiver both contain a similar pseudorandom number generator. When you push the button, the transmitter sends the next number from the generator. The receiver then checks to see that the code received is one of the next n numbers in the sequence (this way, it still works if you press the button when out-of-range of the receiver). As a result, simply eavesdropping on the transmission is useless.

      A side-effect is that if you take somebody's key-fob and push the buttons lots of times, it may render the system inoperable. Usually there is a procedure that can be used to put the transmitter and receiver back in sync.

      --
      Come test your mettle in the world of Alter Aeon!
    2. Re:In Eastern Europe... by alienw · · Score: 1

      If the code is sufficiently short, it is possible to bypass the rolling code system by simply trying all possible codes. Also, many houses (including mine) have 80s vintage systems, which are usually designed with something like a fixed 6-bit code. Very easy to hack. Of course, picking a typical deadbolt lock is also very easy and takes less than a minute, so it's unlikely a thief would bother trying to open the garage door.

    3. Re:In Eastern Europe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of cars (certainly BMWs) have separate systems for entry and ignition, so you might have a chance at getting through the door, but you're no closer to having your way with the car itself. Besides, the rolling codes in both the doorlock and immobiliser systems have stupidly long periods, but quite forgiving validity windows. In general, in production, if something goes wrong associating the keys to the immobiliser system, they'll replace the lockset rather than try to re-sync or hotwire it. When you consider how much work that takes (car has to be finished being built, then taken apart again to get the locks off, then put back together again), that tells you something about the security of the system. It ain't just because it's obscure (although it is. I never met anyone who could explain it to me. It's not just confidential - no one understands the damn thing :-) ). It was a designed-in limitation.

      RF locking is different - you can associate any key to any BMW, if you know what you're doing, but you do need to be inside the car. Which, almost universally, isn't hard if you've got the wiring diagram.

    4. Re:In Eastern Europe... by SagSaw · · Score: 1

      If the code is sufficiently short, it is possible to bypass the rolling code system by simply trying all possible codes.

      Yes, but the attacker still gains no real advantage from listening to the signal.

      Of course, picking a typical deadbolt lock is also very easy and takes less than a minute, so it's unlikely a thief would bother trying to open the garage door.

      In my case, there is a key-switch on door. If the thief doesn't have a key, he can simply pry off the switch and short the terminals together with a coin. This implies that even the 6-bit code is serving it's purpose well: It is easier to break in by physically breaking in than it is to brute-force the access code.

      --
      Come test your mettle in the world of Alter Aeon!
    5. Re:In Eastern Europe... by tcgroat · · Score: 3, Informative
      The manufacturers anticipated this, and use (admittedly less-than-perfect) countermeasures. While the details vary from make to make, the following scheme is typical:

      The key fob and auto receiver use "rolling codes". Once the vehicle accepts a code as valid, it increments to the next code in the sequence. Likewise, each time the fob is pressed it increments to the next code in the sequence. The vehicle allows, say, +5/-0 codes in the sequence to allow for missed button presses. It will never open for the same code twice in succession. That defeats simple replay attacks, though if the attacker knows the code sequence alorithm that does allow attackers a toe-hold.

      If you use two fobs, there is a separate code sequence for each one. If you run out of retries or otherwise get out of synch with the vehicle, you must (shudder!) use the actual metal key to open the door.

    6. Re:In Eastern Europe... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      If the code is sufficiently short, it is possible to bypass the rolling code system by simply trying all possible codes. Also, many houses (including mine) have 80s vintage systems, which are usually designed with something like a fixed 6-bit code. Very easy to hack.

      I built a device that uses a timer chip and a bunch of chained flip-flops in place of the DIP switches in one of those universal garage door openers. I can open most Linear 8 and Genie 9 switch types in under two minutes, Multi-Code 10 switch in about five minutes, and old Genie 12 switchers in fifteen or so. No good against code-hoppers or the Genie Intellicode learning openers, but those remain fairly rare in commercial applications (I work for a locksmith who does mostly commercial/industrial work). It's a fun device because it looks like something a mad scientist would build. It's in a gray metal box with a fairly large (10") whip antenna on top and when you press the "search" button a row of 12 LEDs light up in binary sequence as it scans (so you know about where the code was found).

      Of course, picking a typical deadbolt lock is also very easy and takes less than a minute, so it's unlikely a thief would bother trying to open the garage door.

      This is true. Those cheap locks (cough)Kwikset/USLock/etc(/cough) are a joke. Then again, people are bizarrely worried about burglars picking locks. Picking locks is something you do when you don't want anyone to know you got in. Burglars are perfectly happy to knock out a window with a brick. So unless you have a problem with CIA spies or private investigators or stalkers or ninjas, you don't need to concern yourself so much with "pickability".

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  24. A story by iamdrscience · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My Dad was in the Navy years and years ago and apparently the radar on aircraft carriers is powerful enough to knock birds out of the air at a few hundred feet. One time a bunch of his repair crew buddies were doing work on one of these, so they turned it off and took out the fuses to ensure that it would not get turned on. While they're up working on the dish some guy comes along, sees it's not working and decides to put the fuses back in and turn it on. The guys are up there when it slowly starts to turn -- one of them jumps and slides down off the platform, and the other guy ducks the dish when it swings around and slides down after. I don't know what happened after that, but I bet the guy that put the fuses back in did not have a great time.

    1. Re:A story by Marko+DeBeeste · · Score: 1

      They didn't stick the fuses in their pockets when they pulled them?

      --
      Faith: n. -- That human impulse that drives them to steal appliances when the power goes out
    2. Re:A story by hughk · · Score: 4, Interesting
      There was an incident at AT&T sometime ago involving people (riggers) working on the long distance microwave links. In those days, they weren't so careful about microwave radiation - the riggers had numerous problems ranging from eye problems through to sterility.

      I am suprised at your story though. Navy procedure for radio links involved the fuses being put in control of the watch officer who ensures that they don'tr get returned until after everyone is down.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    3. Re:A story by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Some Navy ships can pump over 6,000,000 Million watts out their rader. And it can be focused on a small area, IOW it can be used as a weapon if need be.

    4. Re:A story by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      That should have been 6,000,000 NOT 6,000,000 Million.

      opps.

    5. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow! 6 Million Megawatts? That's... that's.... that's 6 PETAwatts!

      Somehow, I'm guessing you meant 6 MW, not 6 PW. Although it would be nice to be able to extract 1,000 thousand dollars from my bank account - think anybody'd notice?

    6. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      3-storey building at UK gov't site with an antenna on the roof, has safety instructions to the effect of "if this ever starts moving, it's safer to jump off the building than it is to be around when the antenna starts operating"

    7. Re:A story by Holi · · Score: 5, Informative

      In the Navy they use a system called a Red Tag systems. When you are working on equipment and you must kill the power to it you put a Red Tag on it and anyone who violates a red tag suffers severe consequences (up to court martial) So if your dad did not tag the fuse box and decided to work on the radar system (live radar will kill you if you stand in front of the dish) he was not following navy procedure.

      I've seen the outcome when the Red Tag procedure is not followed, it cost a friend of mine his hand.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    8. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's interesting, my father (a fire control officer on a destroyer in Vietnam) has similar stories; they'd keep the beam on birds until they dropped, for amusement. He also has a story when they were docked and for some reason the radar was spun up (I can't remember if it was on his ship or another, and I don't know if the beam was actually active); somebody saw it sweeping towards them and jumped.

      Another story he had is when they'd have planes towing metal targets on cables behind them, for the ships to practice anti-aircraft fire, except sometimes the radar would start tracking up the metal cables towards the planes, and they'd have to cut the cables loose and evade.

    9. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we get to hear the gory details?

    10. Re:A story by alienw · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not just the navy, it's a standard ISO safety practice, called Lock out/Tag out. Obviously, very important when working on dangerous equipment.

    11. Re:A story by Foo2rama · · Score: 1

      microwae radiation will not cause sterility.. that is an urban legend....

      --


      ---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.
    12. Re:A story by AaronW · · Score: 1

      Something like this happened to a friend of mine. He got partially cooked but survived. The weird thing was that after he recovered he was sensitive to radar. He could always detect a cop using a radar gun long before he could see it.

      My father told similar stories when he was in the navy about frying birds from the aircraft carrier he was on. He said that sometimes the sailors would intentionally cook the seagulls.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    13. Re:A story by Alsee · · Score: 1

      microwae radiation will not cause sterility.. that is an urban legend

      Sure it can. It could literally boil your testicles. Of course it would take some pretty unusual circumstances to do that without first killing the person involved. Maybe if some idiot were to sit naked on top of a directional microwave cone with his nuts hanging down over the lip. LOL.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    14. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Sounds like some of the safety procedures were ignored or bypassed.
      I was in the US Navy. We had Lockout/Tagout procedures designed to prevent this. We also had man-aloft switches near the appropriate systems that prevented rotation and radiation. We even had to coordinate with adjacent ships to ensure they didn't radiate us either. Our particular system had an alarm bell that sounded for 15 seconds before it would start up.
      We also had a watchstander who announced that workers were aloft on the PA (1MC) every 15 or 30 minutes. I think they said something like: There are men working aloft, do not rotate, radiate or energize designated electronic equipment while men are working aloft... etc.

      Of course safety procedures can be ignored...

    15. Re:A story by Scratch-O-Matic · · Score: 1

      "There are men working aloft onboard USS Humptyfratz. Do not rotate, radiate, nor energize any electronic equipment while men are working aloft onboard USS Humptyfratz." Repeated every 15 minutes or so on the shipwide PA system (the 1MC for you squids.) The safety procedures on Navy ships are numerous and many of them, unfortunately, are written in blood. Nowadays they make a VERY BIG DEAL about "tagging" equipment that you are working on, i.e. pulling the fuses and leaving a red tag on it that says, "Do no put these fuses back in because we are working on this equipment." Sounds like your dad was in before they started doing that.

      --


      Evil is the money of root.
    16. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    17. Re:A story by hughk · · Score: 1

      Forget the 2w mobile phone. These are multi-kilowatt horns Even if you don't fry yourself directly, you can suffer from a lot of other problems even from an indirect blast.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    18. Re:A story by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Interesting that the Navy just uses tags. In most industrial settings you use locks - and the only person with the keys is the person who placed the lock over the breaker. Without a bolt-cutter you can't energize the circuit being worked on. And of course messing with locks is grounds for termination. And no industrial worker would want to anyway - since their own lives depend on the system.

      Maybe the military uses just tags since in the event of a military emergency the commander on the scene might consider the risk to life worth taking and just energize the system despite it being worked on. After all, if you just picked up a dozen missles headed for your destroyer you'd want to start launching interceptors no matter who happened to be swabbing the deck next to the launch tubes. I'm sure they'd yell to get out of there in 5 seconds or they're toast first...

    19. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know someone who was accidently irradiated with ~800 watts CW at 1296MHz at about 1 foot from the antenna. He is now legally blind. The eyes apparently have the lowest density and are where the first damage appears. This stuff happens more often than you might think.

  25. Only in America by Timesprout · · Score: 1

    While some frustrated motorists blame aliens

    Who else in the world would blame aliens because they cant open their garage door.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:Only in America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because everyone else will just blame the Americans.

  26. semi-dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
  27. After by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    watching an allnight marathon of X-files, the last thing I need to wake up to are government conspiracy theories. 6 horus ago you could've told me my bunny was in a plot to kill me and was being controlled by aliens, and I would've believed you.

  28. Why?! by sockonafish · · Score: 1

    Do they think the average car bomber will be overcome with so much frustration when he's forced to use his keys that he'll be unable to attack the military base?

    I don't see any reason for this to exist, unless they're worried about people h4x0ring their way into government cars. It'd probably be cheaper to just rip out the keyless entry in those cars, though.

    1. Re:Why?! by shadypalm88 · · Score: 1
      [Why] do they think the average car bomber will be overcome with so much frustration when he's forced to use his keys that he'll be unable to attack the military base?
      This interference is accidental, not intentional, and is really the fault of the manufacturers of the remotes, not the military.
    2. Re:Why?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA.... EOF

  29. The manufacturers should be arrested! by 91degrees · · Score: 1, Troll

    They're using armed forces reserved RF frequencies for car doors!? I though that you needed a license from the FCC to broadcast at a given frequency.

    Aside from the inconvenience to car users who find their cars jammed, isn't it a little dangerous to allow the cars to interfere with military equipment? This could cause havoc with radar, missile guidance systems, and who knows what else. What are they going to say "Oh, sorry we blew up that hospital. We meant to hit a test target, but someone decided to oen their car door".

    1. Re:The manufacturers should be arrested! by Neophytus · · Score: 3, Informative

      RTFA. They are allowed to use those frequencies so long as the transmitter (in this case the keyfob) is so low powered that it shouldn't interfere with the licenced equipment.

    2. Re:The manufacturers should be arrested! by Minwee · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I though that you needed a license from the FCC to broadcast at a given frequency.

      Perhaps this might be a good time to read the article. Particularly the bit about how low power transmissions aren't regulated by the FCC.

      Take notes. There will be an exam at the end.

    3. Re:The manufacturers should be arrested! by SagSaw · · Score: 2, Informative

      IIRC, the key-fobs are part 15 devices. This means they use very low power and are allowed to operate so long as they don't cause interfearance to the licensed users of the spectrum. The flip side is that part 15 devices have no protection from interfearing signals from licensed users: Such as when the local military transmitter prevents your keyless-entry system from working.

      --
      Come test your mettle in the world of Alter Aeon!
    4. Re:The manufacturers should be arrested! by drawfour · · Score: 1

      I don't know the law, but I would assume that items for personal use do not follow the guidelines. For example, CD changers that broadcast on FM. The signals can/do leak to the surrounding cars, but they're not illegal. I'm sure that you can broadcast your own TV station within your house as long as it doesn't stream to your neighbors (or some number of feet outside the house). Of course, I could be wrong. :)

  30. something to think about by theskeptic · · Score: 1

    Why are people so baffled at this? The military/air force radios with more powerful signals broadcast in the same freq range.

    One question is: let's say you are at a military base. If you drive to and from the base, you'd probably be using civilian cars. Now the article stated 77 % of vehicles are remote equipped. That means a percentage of vehicles at the bases have remote locking.

    Have locksmiths, car dealers had to open cars at such bases, what have they encountered or is using remote locking not allowed at such bases?

    1. Re:something to think about by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      Don't forget, two days ago, Slashdot fell for it when some guy said he could jam commercial radio signals with his iPod FM transmitter.

      People got angry at me for calling Shenanigans!

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    2. Re:something to think about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh I'd like to see the link to that! iPod fanboys getting all wet at the prospect of their favorite soap mold jamming radio!

  31. Obligatory Spaceballs Quote by Zorilla · · Score: 5, Funny

    Radar Tech: "Sir. The car keys, sir. They appear to be... jammed."

    Dark Helmet: "Jammed? Raspberry. There's only one man who would dare give me the raspberry. Lone Starr!"

    --

    It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  32. Top 10 most stolen cars by chiph · · Score: 0, Troll

    Top 10 most stolen cars for 2004, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau, are:

    1. 1989 Toyota Camry
    2. 1994 Honda Accord
    3. 2000 Honda Civic
    4. 1992 Chevy full-size pickup
    5. 1997 Ford full-size pickup
    6. 1993 Jeep Cherokee/Grand Cherokee
    7. 1986 Olds Cutlass/Supreme/Cierra
    8. 1994 Dodge Caravan
    9. 1996 Ford Taurus
    10. 2001 Toyota Corolla

    None of these cars have the new RFID chips in the keys to prevent theft. So, you can either drive a car likely to be on the "most stolen" list, or put up with some occasional interference that prevents you from using the remote to unlock the car.

    Chip H.

    1. Re:Top 10 most stolen cars by rco3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Might I suggest you work on your cause-and-effect a bit more?

      I have three rocks in my garden. All of them are red. None have been stolen. Ergo, red rocks cannot be stolen.

      See how stupid it sounds? Dude - the top five cars on that list are also the TOP FIVE most common cars in the U.S. If you can establish a relationship between the theft rates of similarly-equipped cars, where the only variable is RFID or not, then you've got a case and you are welcome to tell us all about it. If you just wanna spout uneducated shit... ... well, OK, welcome to Slashdot!

      --

      Ce n'est pas un vrai mouvement de robot!
    2. Re:Top 10 most stolen cars by kfg · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, no 1909 Hupmobiles were stolen last year. Obviously the one to have despite their lack of electronic gizmos.

      KFG

    3. Re:Top 10 most stolen cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phrasing it like that almost sounds like you're implying that nearly every model belongs in the top ten. By chance could you explain how you can fit thousands of models of cars into ten spots?

      Oh, and can your method be used on filesystems as well?

      Seriously though, claiming that these rfid chips will protect a car and keep it from the top ten list is absurd. Give me a car that can be unlocked and started with a simple rf signal and I'll find you someone who will mass produce tranceivers for collecting that persons signal and reproducing it.

      Stealing cars will then rely on the availability of AA batteries and the skill to press two buttons.

    4. Re:Top 10 most stolen cars by jandrese · · Score: 1

      All of those cars are common as dirt. RFID chips are still pretty rare. Do you think this might be skewing your statistics a little?

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    5. Re:Top 10 most stolen cars by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1
      Top 10 most stolen cars for 2004, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau, are:

      1. 1989 Toyota Camry
      2. 1994 Honda Accord
      3. 2000 Honda Civic
      4. 1992 Chevy full-size pickup
      5. 1997 Ford full-size pickup
      6. 1993 Jeep Cherokee/Grand Cherokee
      7. 1986 Olds Cutlass/Supreme/Cierra
      8. 1994 Dodge Caravan
      9. 1996 Ford Taurus
      10. 2001 Toyota Corolla

      None of these cars have the new RFID chips in the keys to prevent theft. So, you can either drive a car likely to be on the "most stolen" list, or put up with some occasional interference that prevents you from using the remote to unlock the car.


      Did you ever stop to think about how freakin COMMON those cars are?

      Those figures are absolutely USELESS without knowing how many of them there are on the road.

      In other news, most people who died in car accidents last year were of average height. Whopp-tee-doo!

      See, if I parked my '86 Mazda RX-7 next to my '87 Buick LeSabre (same as Olds Cutlass, Pontiac 6000LE, etc). Which one do you think is more likely to ACTUALLY get stolen?

      Think about it this way....
      If every Ferrari Testarossa in the US we to be stolen, it still wouldn't make this list. The likelihood of YOU having YOUR car stolen would be 100%, yet it still wouldn't be listed as one of the "most stolen cars".


      My point is that list is absolutely USELESS by itself as a means of determining the theft-resistance of a particular car. A proper comparison would take into account how many of each type of vehicle is on the road.
      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    6. Re:Top 10 most stolen cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's true that those are all very popular vehicles, but also consider that thieves steal vehicles that they know are easy to break into. Most stolen vehicles fall into the early to mid '90s catagory where they're new enough to still hold some value, but old enough not to have any serious deterent to theft. Car thieves don't look at vehicles the way the rest of us do. Anyone of us would love the chance to profit from selling an exotic car. The average car thief gets $200 - $300 for the vehicle they steal. Stolen cars end up in chopshops and get parted out and resold where there is a market for those parts locally. What on earth is a car thief gonna do with heat-score Ferrari that the chop doesn't want to touch? The only time exotics ever get stolen is if it's an organized crime ring that is specializing selling them as legit vehicles (with false paperwork) or otherwise sending them in containers overseas. But only the pros do that, all the other car thieves just wanna buy their next hit of crack.

    7. Re:Top 10 most stolen cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always hated that list because it made my cherokee's insurance go higher, and the cherokee and grand cherokee are not even close to being the same car

  33. Eckerd drugstore by suprax · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This exact same thing happens at a local Eckerd drugstore here in NY. Anywhere in the parking lot you are unable to use your keyless entry to unlock your car. You can be inches away and it just does not work for anyone, ever.

    Although once your inside the car it will usually work, since your right on top of the receiver. It probably has something to do with Eckerd transmitting store information to a national databse or something.

  34. For sale.... by infernalC · · Score: 4, Funny

    Tin-foil key fob covers... patent pending.

  35. This Guy by mfh · · Score: 1

    > Who else in the world would blame aliens because they cant open their garage door.
    If you want to really know, try this guy.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  36. Not in my experience by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 1

    I served 8 years at Camp Pendleton CA and never saw anything like this. Of course the Marine Corps isn't really into high tech :)
    Now I did laugh every time there was a ceremony on base with a 21 gun salute and car alarms would go off left and right.

  37. Hmmm.... by bfg9000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hear the military is why Windows keeps crashing too. At least, that's what my Microsoft Rep just told me.

    --

    I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

  38. It won't just be keyless locks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just think what will happen when (if?) they deploy broadband over power lines. The same FCC rules state that BPL will have to accept interferance from ALL liscenced sources. This includes amatuer, police, fire, TV, short wave, broadcast and MILITARY signals. Furthermore BPL won't be allowed to interfere with those services.

    Another victim will be RFID tags. I guess buyer beware still holds.

  39. Related Article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot reported keyless entries were failing for no apparent reason - maybe this explains it.

    The article can be found here.

  40. In Soviet Russia by random_anonymous_guy · · Score: 0, Troll

    In Soviet Russia, keyless entry system jams military! err.. no... I for one welcome our keyless entry masters. nope.... FCC 9/11 a new film by M. Moore... ah fudge....

  41. Depends on the car... by igrp · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ... or on the quality of the keyless entry system used, for that matter.

    One of those shows that copy MTV's Punk'd concept did a thing like this with retail CB walkie-talkies. They went to one of the big parking lots downtown and when a car's owner approached his vehicle, they just hit the speak button on the CB radio and held it down. Then, when the car wouldn't open, they'd send a fake locksmith in who'd pretend to mess with the lock for a while, eventually give up and then offer to smash in one of the windows.

    In most cases, that one walkie-talkie was enough to "jam" the keyless entry system. The only cars it failed to work on were Mercedes, BMW and IIRC Audi models (maybe imports use a different frequeny - I dunno).

    Surprisingly, most of the people couldn't seem to figure out how to get in their cars without the remote (well, at least, of those people they showed). I sometimes wonder how those people manage to put their pants on in the morning.

    1. Re:Depends on the car... by Adam9 · · Score: 1

      I know that some of the Mercedes models use infrared signals rather than radio. Infrared should be able to avoid most interference.

    2. Re:Depends on the car... by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      As the article points out, some cars are designed in such a way that even if you could get inside the car with the old fashioned key, the engine would be locked unless you transmitted the unlock signal within seconds of trying to start the car. Therefore, even if they could get in it wouldn't do them much good.

    3. Re:Depends on the car... by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 1

      My 2004 Sunfire will open with just the key, but the alarm will still go off. Sometimes. I have no idea what the pattern is, but I stick to the remote now.

    4. Re:Depends on the car... by nsayer · · Score: 1

      Which is why there were stories a couple years ago of car thieves with IR equipped PalmOS devices that would brute-force those systems.

      The newer garage door systems use some sort of bidirectional handshake system. The car keyless entry folks could do the same if they really cared. Then it would be virtually impossible to fake it (even a replay attack would be no good). Such systems would fail-closed, of course. This is why they hide a button somewhere under the dash that lets you open the door with the key, setting off the alarm and activating the ignition interlock, then put the key in the ignition, turn it on, then find and hit the hidden button. That deactivates the alarm and the interlock and you're good to go.

    5. Re:Depends on the car... by prog-guru · · Score: 1

      If it is stock, your key might double as a switch, and turn off the alarm.

      The connection might be intermittent, I had that happen once. I had the door panel off for something else and noticed the connection was real loose.

      --

      chris@xanadu:~$ whatis /.
      /.: nothing appropriate.

    6. Re:Depends on the car... by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Surprisingly, most of the people couldn't seem to figure out how to get in their cars without the remote (well, at least, of those people they showed). I sometimes wonder how those people manage to put their pants on in the morning.

      That's nothing but TV magic. Who knows how many people just used the key when their remote didn't work? They edit those people out before the show airs, because the whole point is to show the people who need help from a fake locksmith.

      The same trick is used on TV psychic shows. When John Edward says "I'm seeing someone with a letter J in their name", how many people say "Sorry, I don't know anyone with a J"? When he says "Your grandma is looking down and she loves you", how many respond "No, grandma never liked me"? They edit out anyone who makes the host look bad, and only show the people who he can cold read.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    7. Re:Depends on the car... by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 1

      It is stock. My wife's 2000 Neon has a key that turns off the alarm (big honkin' thing with an RFID in it, I think), so that's what I thought mine was when it worked the first time.

      I'll complain to the dealer about it sometime, and ask them to check for a loose connection. Thanks.

  42. Could be fixed if they spent more on the receiver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to work in a lab where we did some (non-military, non-secret) radio work and it would sometimes cause problems in the car park. The problem seems to be that the receivers in the cars are built "on the cheap" using ceramic resonators rather than quartz crystals, so they are not very selective. That is, rather than being sensitive only to the frequency that the remote is transmitting on, they are also sensitive to adjacent (and not so adjacent) frequencies. They could easily be swamped by a powerful transmitter several MHz away, whereas a better-designed receiver would be imune. So I blame the remote manufacturers.

    The particular frequencies used depend on where in the world you are; the U.S. uses one set and the rest of the world uses another. Here in the "rest of the world" most remotes operate at 433 MHz. This is not far from TV frequencies - ever find your car remote doesn't work if you're parked next to a TV transmitter? Newer systems will probably be using 868 MHz (rest of world) or 913 (U.S.); this bit of the spectrum is better regulated and it would be difficult to get away with not using a crystal-based receiver. So hopefully these problems will go away.

  43. Are you a functional human being? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Keerap in a bucket. Just where do you think radars are located? You think the aliens are floating them aloft for us? UN black helicopters? Or maybe the AF and navy pilots spend all day aiming their radars at the ground, yeh that's the ticket.

    Yah right. Only the military has powerful radars. Airliners are tracked across country by emissions from illegal cell phone usage. The minute they make cell phones legal on airplanes, the thrill will be gone and there will be no way to track airliners because only the military has powerful radars.

    And weather radar, gosh, thank hevaens the military shares that powerful technology with us mere civilians.

    Flamebait -55.

    1. Re:Are you a functional human being? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you're denser than a round of depleted uranium, you know that dorkweed? It was a sarcastic reply, in case it still hasn't sunk in yet. Geesh.

    2. Re:Are you a functional human being? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flamebait -55.

      Is that the temperature at which the thoughts of Michael Moore and Ray Bradbury merge to form new and terrifying /. posts?

    3. Re:Are you a functional human being? by petecarlson · · Score: 1

      Ahh, I did not read the parent and missed the humor. Don't know what I was thinking.

  44. I once had a car alarm by earthforce_1 · · Score: 2, Insightful


    that went bezerk for almost 48 hours. It worked perfectly until out of the blue, the alarm would sound, doors would lock and unlock every second, and if I shut it off, it would turn itself on again a second later. The car was parked in my parents driveway at the time. I had to disconnect the battery to shut the damned thing off. I tried it again 24 hours later, same problem. The day after that, the problem went away, never reappeared.

    Co-incidentally, there was an airshow on in town during this time. When the airshow ended, so did the problems. I wonder what kind of super radar they were using that had this effect.

    --
    My rights don't need management.
    1. Re:I once had a car alarm by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your car most likely trigged whenever it heard a wrong sequence on its frequency, figuring that somebody was trying to steal the car by trying to guess the code.

      When the air-show came to town, there's usually some military aircraft included in the group whose favorite comminication frequency just happens to be the one your car alarm is tuned to.

      Therefore, the car alarm thinks it's always being challenged by the random noise that is really the pilots talking to each other...

    2. Re:I once had a car alarm by CharlieG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have fun with this one - One person who visits a neighbor has a car that trips the alarm is you transmit on 144.390 Mhz - Other hams will know what this frequency is - APRS (Automatic Position (or Packet) Reporting System) - I run an APRS station at home - every few minutes it digipeats some inbound packet, and off goes the guys alarm. Luckly, the guy turns out to be another HAM! We worked and fixed that one. Only happened if he parked right in from of my house - 2 houses away stopped the problem

      I've also seen it happen in parking lots - I'll key my radio, and someone's alarm will go off - just a bad alarm setup - I've had MY signal checked, and I'm running perfectly legal

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
  45. US Govt modded up my post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Are you using WINDOWS? If so, YOU MIGHT BE EVIL! Evil is UN-AMERICAN and AGAINST FREEDOM. Don't join the evil doers, USE LINUX!!! This important message brought to you by #cablemodemwarez

  46. Lockout procedure by nuggz · · Score: 1

    This is why you lock out the device when you are working on it.
    I find it hard to believe that such a dangerous piece of equipment doesn't have a lockout method.

    Every worker should have their own personal lock on a machine when they are working on it. They even make these funny looking multilock adapters that will allow you to have multiple padlocks on at the same time.

  47. Sorry, you're off-topic by LostCluster · · Score: 1

    The article deals with RF-based keyless entry systems, not the RFID-like chip on keys. Two completely different technologies...

    1. Re:Sorry, you're off-topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You're offtopic, too!

      --Pr0nster

    2. Re:Sorry, you're off-topic by chiph · · Score: 1

      Actually, after I clicked submit, I had an ohshit moment -- I forgot to tie a RFID-equipped key to people not being able to use their remotes to unlock their doors. The common thread is that both use RF technologies which could be affected by interference from military radio-based systems.

      I'm somewhat familiar with the problem -- at every base I was stationed at in the Air Force, any AM/FM radio I would try and listen to would get a "whenk" sound every few seconds as the local radar antenna would rotate & emit over my location. In the 80's, however, remotes for your car were a luxury, and so this particular problem never arose.

      Having owned a couple of cars now with RFID chips in the keys (Mercedes ML-320, MINI Cooper S), I can probably live without the technology (replacement keys are ~$140, ouch!), but it's nice knowing that some scumbag will have a tough time starting my car. With regard to the keyless entry systems, my favorite quote from "Cryptonomicon" is when Avi & Randy were walking to Avi's car, and he triggers the remote. The car turns out to have one of those embarassing talking alarm systems, which as Avi says "were the only cryptographically secure ones". The keyless remotes available today are far from secure -- the best ones are somewhat resistant to a replay attack, but the number of permutations are nowhere near what the manufacturers claim (from what I understand, the algorithm rotates through a sequence of 255 or so numbers -- the manufacturers err on the side of allowing their customers entry into their cars, despite however many times the buttons on the remote got pressed in their pockets).

      The military is being pretty good about this, really. I had a roommate in college who was a radar operator in the Navy, and they always turned down the power of the SPY-1 radar when they came into port, because otherwise it's 4+ megawatt power output could take out the town's electrical grid (as well as toast a few of the unfortunate local citizens).

      Anyway, enough rambling.

      Chip H.

  48. technophobe by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Troll

    Why don't you fax in your Slashdot posts?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:technophobe by TWX · · Score: 1

      "Why don't you fax in your Slashdot posts?"

      Because it's so much more fun to key them in on a telegraph!

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  49. Trying to understand by 455 · · Score: 1

    Are they doing this jamming on purpose? If so, I'm trying to figure out why they would do this... ...maybe it's so that people can't transmit other types of things on those frequencies, as they are probably the easiest to f#%sk with. Maybe it's to prevent the extreme case of a terrorist remote detonating a bomb or something using a garage door openener (??). Dunno.. just a thought.

    1. Re:Trying to understand by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      They own the frequeny and they don't want you on it. If you didn't want them to use the same frequency, too bad.

      You can use any frequency you'd like to detonate an IED.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    2. Re:Trying to understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't doing it on purpose. It just so happens that you have several factors converging:
      -Since 9/11 you have a dramatic ramp-up in military activities: training exercises, testing of equipment before/after deployments, and in general, s**t happening.
      -Many more cars have remote keyless openers than they used to.

      Until April of this year I worked on AF Radio Comm systems as a DOD civilian. Needless to say, my keyfob never worked on base or at my shop.

      If you live near a military base or a civilian airport that is also an Air National Guard or Reserve base the basic fact is: if you see military planes flying your consumer items will be sporadic. Small bases do not use many frequencies. Busy bases like Nellis, Eglin, Travis, Dobbins, Laughlin, etc may saturate the spectrum. As the article mentioned, the frequencies used are in air-ground-air comm, meaning this is what Air Traffic Controllers use to direct military air traffic. (FAA uses VHF band).

      Would you rather have your keyfob not working or a fighter jet smacking into a C5 over some neighborhood?

      If you live near a base with large scale exercises you have added headaches. Areas surrounding Fort Irwin, Ca, Nellis AFB, NV, Eglin AFB, FL, Fallon NAS, NV, etc will probably have interference more frequently than other places. Electronics Warfare craft send out broad spectrum jamming as part of those exercises.

      When they "jam," the "blue team" will be jamming the "red team"'s comm. They are jamming that slice of spectrum to deny the enemy team the use of their comm equipment. In return the other team will initiate ECCM and it goes to ECCCM and so on.

      No one really cares about keyfobs and garage door openers. It just so happens the auto manufacturers chose a bad slice of spectrum to leech.

      If you live near those areas, your local newspapers and news channels will carry warnings a week out prior to large scale exercises.

      http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf
      Th is shows who belongs where. In no instance does it say "auto door openers."

      Don't screech at the military, since they were there first. Everyone should demand an upgrade from their manufacturer. If enough people bitch, you will see progress.

  50. Hmm... by RoTNCoRE · · Score: 1

    The article mentions how the interference seems to arrive during times when a large ship is in port...maybe part of security policy changes resulting from the USS Cole bombing, since I'd assume the same technology for keyless ignition for a car can be used on an explosive if one had the knowledge. Another somewhat related anecdote - at the airport in Goose Bay, Labrador where they do lots of NATO air training, my father had the opporunity to talk to the crew of an AWAC radar plane, and found out that the crew was only able to have female offspring. I like my technology, but once it effects my gonads and their contents, it's a bit frightening.

    1. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my father had the opporunity to talk to the crew of an AWAC radar plane, and found out that the crew was only able to have female offspring.


      I don't buy it. I can't think of the remotest reason why EM radiation would affect spermatozoa with Y chromosomes, but not X. (For that matter, I can't think of how the EMF inside an AWACS plane is anywhere near strong enough to cause that kind of damage.) It's not like the crew of an AWACS is a large statistical sample; it could be pure chance that their children were all girls.
    2. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did this AWAC crew like to surf?

      Out east there are some hardcore winter surfers. Sounds insane but truth is there's only about a ten degree temp dif from summer with that chunk of the atlantic. Anyway, CBC did a little show on these guys and it turned out the all had daughters only.

      Radiowaves or icewater? ("I for one welcome our tinfoil thongs.")

  51. What's the frequency, Kennith? by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The cause of the problem is rather clear... keyless systems are Part 15-compliant flea power devices, and their makers have decided to pick radio frequencies used by the military. Since those frequencies are rarely used in most civilian areas, that bandwidth is usually in the clear. However, when a military ship is coming home, that's the frequency band most likely to be used to communicate with the base, and that's where the trouble starts...

    Why don't the car people put their systems on 900mHz, 2.4GHz, or 5.8GHz with the rest of the consumer device universe? They might have to deal with occasional interference from other things, but they can be assured that nobody will ever come in with a high-wattage use of that space that'll blow them out of the water.

  52. Recent Batttlestar Galactica Remake... by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 1

    I thought that was one of the neater twists in the recent Batttlestar Galactica remake - that the only Vipers immune to the Cylon override of their control codes were the ones that had been sitting down in the Galactica museum next to the gift shop.

    That, and, of course, the über-hot Cylon chicks...

    1. Re:Recent Batttlestar Galactica Remake... by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
      .... the only Vipers immune to the Cylon override of their control codes were the ones that had been sitting down in the Galactica museum next to the gift shop.

      many years ago, I read that the Swiss Civil Defence communication system depended on (even then,) ancient pulse-dial phone switching equipment. Why?? Because any EMP strong enough to disable those mechanical switches would pretty much crispy-fry the whole base, anyways.

      Then, of course, there are the NT-powered cruisers with wifi networking. (( oh-- but it's secure wifi! )) Talk about cruising for a bruising.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  53. Dont think garage door openers operate there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AFAIK most operate in the same frequency range as wlan.

  54. Same here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've had aircraft carriers visit here in Santa Barbara occasionally... My friend who runs a store loves it, because every time it happens there's a huge spike in his sales of batteries for people's garage door openers.

  55. Old News by Knacklappen · · Score: 1
    --


    Excellence: Moderate (mostly affected by comments on your karma)
  56. In Eastern Europe people simply use walky talkies by cowlum · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Using a walkie talkie in a car lot allows
    you to block many peoples remote central
    locking. A few people dont notice their
    car doesnt lock. Then when they are in the
    markets our theif is their car doing away with
    their valuables

    easy..

    And for those of us who have disable their
    locks on thei cars. Spare remote and batteries
    hidden deep under the car and battery
    terminal extensions hanging out below the car

  57. Frustrated motorist = lazy good for nothings by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

    Have people got so out of touch with reality that they can get so easily frustrated from not being able to unlock the door of their car with a push of a button? I wonder what the little key slot in the door does?!

    And for the RF signals from the key to the car... well... have people really gotten so lazy they won't push their cars out of range to start their cars?

    That's the real reason why America is +50% obese. LAZINESS!!!

    --
    Live forever, or die trying.
  58. Lawsuit: it's the American Way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Anyone remember seatbelt interlocks? Basically, the car wouldn't start until the seatbelt was fastened. A successful lawsuit by a woman who was raped because she was unable to start her car to flee her attacker put an end to the technology. Just wait for the first person raped, robbed, or otherwise ruined because their car wouldn't permit them entrance, or because their house was afire and the children couldn't exit through the garage. Laws of unintended consequences and practices of the unthinking + wronged party = lawsuit.

    It's the American way.

    1. Re:Lawsuit: it's the American Way... by seann · · Score: 2, Funny

      halarious.

      she must of been in a convertable?
      or else she could of just locked her door?

      Of course I'm not a girl, and i've never been raped, and I don't drive down the highway for 100 miles because my gas pedal is stuck and the brakes don't work, mostly because i'd turn the car off after the police star chasing me..

      --
      I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
    2. Re:Lawsuit: it's the American Way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only hilarious part of your response is your utter surety that in a dangerous situation, with adrenalin flooding your every vein, you would know exactly what to do? Bosh. Utter bullocks.

      I have a test for you. Untie both your shoes. Have a friend stand 15 meters distant with a sharp knife. Now, try to tie your shoes as he advances on you at a walk shouting ephithets on how he's going to cut you open. If he arrives at his location before you finish; he gets to stab you. (Not really. Some friend, right?) Chances are, you won't be able to tie both your shoes, even though you are very practiced at it, have done it many times, and know there is no real danger. You may be extremely coordinated, but you'll be surprised at how quickly that 15 meters translates into shoe tying time.

      The shoes, in case you've missed it, represent everything you can do while being stalked and menaced. Now think of the woman in that car, who is in genuine fear of injury? She cannot even remember to fasten her seatbelt, and you wish her to remember to lock the door? I'd say you expect too much of people.

      Enough though. It doesn't matter what you think. You weren't on the jury. True story, remember? The case was tried half a decade before you were born and it's a little late to criticize the just rendering now.

      Horse ---> barn ---> zoom.

    3. Re:Lawsuit: it's the American Way... by Scratch-O-Matic · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't normally waste time pointing these things out, but since you thought it "halarious" that a woman was raped, I will say that:

      - It's 'hilarious', no 'halarious'. OK, so a mispelling, but then...

      - 'Could of'. 'Could OF'? What are you, 13? Could HAVE! HAVE!

      --


      Evil is the money of root.
    4. Re:Lawsuit: it's the American Way... by sharkey · · Score: 1
      or else she could of just locked her door?

      Because car windows are so resistant to impact from various objects a would-be rapist might use to try and break them?

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    5. Re:Lawsuit: it's the American Way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every idiot knows that tying shoes is harder/takes longer than slamming a door (which is the logical thing to do when you want to block an attacker) and pushing a pin.

      Thus I assume that in her haste to get the car started, she simply forgot to lock the door. (Where'd she put her key?)

  59. Agreed by hotspotbloc · · Score: 1
    enter your car, and start it with just the key, the government may be to blame, but you need to be slapped.

    Since some autos have a RFID chip in the key (that's required for starting) could these prepored jamming signals cause an auto not to start? Reading the article it seems that the guy couldn't get into his car. Does any standard car builder have an remote lock without a key lock? On the same vein does a factory alarm/lock system require the use of the remote transmitter with no bypass method like placing the key in the ignition within a preset time?

    It seems a little shortsighted to solely depend on a remote transmitter to access an auto. Something I have yet to personally hear of, but suspect someone here has.

    --
    "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
    1. Re:Agreed by prog-guru · · Score: 1

      The new C6 Corvette is keyless only.

      --

      chris@xanadu:~$ whatis /.
      /.: nothing appropriate.

    2. Re:Agreed by hotspotbloc · · Score: 1
      Is that keyless entry only or completely free of mechanical keys (for both door and ignition)?

      I guess the next question is how do you (or your mechanic) get in if your battery goes dead (and the hood latch is inside)? Are you stuck using a "slim jim" (if that even works)?

      --
      "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
    3. Re:Agreed by mbtokig · · Score: 1

      I belive that is is both keyless entry and ignition it uses some form of rf device on the keyring which lets the car know when it is within range and is started by simply pressing a button on the dash.

  60. I don't trust those things. by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My cars have those keyless entry things.

    None of you will believe me, anyways.

    One day, I parked near a friends house, around Southport/Addison (chicago). I was (at the time) driving a 1998 Black Sebring.

    When I came back to pickup my car, there was a white saturn in front of it.

    Push unlock. The headlights, and the horn on both cars flash/beep.

    Weird.

    Push lock. The headlights, and the horn on both flash/beep twice.

    Weird.

    Repeat.

    Wow... It kept working.....

    What are the chances against that? 80 billion to 1?

    Craziness..

    Why can't I win the lotto, instead?

    --
    WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    1. Re:I don't trust those things. by suprax · · Score: 1

      I believe it, a few months ago my buddy had a Ford Escape. He was at a supermarket and when he came out he hit unlock he heard another Escape unlock. He locked and unlocked and both Escapes kept doing the same thing.

      Theres an article on HowStuffWorks that explains how its possible.

  61. Doesn't matter. by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 3, Funny

    Here's a scary story:

    I worked at a branch of the military for a while. During one of the status reports, I heard this story:

    Two repair techs lock out the machine they're working on with padlocks and put the keys in their respective pockets. Once they're done the repair, they go to turn the lockout off, and...

    "What the [pretty flowers]? The [fluffy bunnies] padlocks are [cute kitten] missing!"

    They searched the ship, and they found a drawer full of bent, broken, and damaged padlocks. It didn't belong to anyone, but it was a real WTF moment. Not only did someone ignore the lockout routine, but the guy pried open the padlocks to turn the locked out machine on.

    They never found out who did it.

    --

    ---
    ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  62. I don't need the government. I can jam myself by Grax · · Score: 1

    Not long my assistant and I were faced with a mystery. Our wireless doorbell was going haywire and our keyless entry remotes had ceased to function.

    We unplugged the doorbell's receiver and pondered the problem. Eventually I came to the conclusion that the doorbell's transmitter was causing the jamming. I opened it up, blew out the water from the recent rain, and restored all functionality to the doorbell and to our keyless entry remotes.

  63. Ship Radio Range by Supernoma · · Score: 1

    The reason that these huge ships jam remotes is simple... look at the range they're radios and other communication devices have to go when they're at sea. I'd sure hope they'd be big and powerful.

    --
    I'll Find You Peer, If It's The Last Thing I Do!!!!
  64. San Diego Airport by kst · · Score: 1

    I've sometimes had problems with my keyless entry system (no idea what frequency it uses) in the parking lot at San Diego International Airport. I had assumed it was interference from the airport's radar, but there are several military bases in the immediate vicinity.

  65. Tinfoil hat wearing Fort Knox spokesman by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

    You know, it sure is funny that when the higher ups at a military base dont trust what their told, it's
    called "Safe and Secure"

    When I don't trust what I'm told, it's called paranoia.

    Wonder what those military types would think if Coke put an RFID chip in the fucking cans.

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
    1. Re:Tinfoil hat wearing Fort Knox spokesman by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      When I was doing it, we often called it paranoia too. It's just we're fully trained professional paranoids, while you are, at best, a talented amateur.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  66. Who to blame by Skapare · · Score: 1

    Unless they arranged to get protected frequencies from the appropriate government agency (FCC in the USA), then it is up to the manufacturers of the cars and/or the products being incorporated into the cars, to see to it that the signals operate on frequencies where they won't be subject to the kind of interference that causes them to fail to operate. Of course they are also subject to the power limitations for unlicensed transmitters which ensures that they are very weak. It would be easy for someone to set up a radio transmitter that did jam those frequencies, and it wouldn't take much power at all to overcome the few milliwatts used for car door locks. A watt or two would wipe out an entire mall. So even if the car manufacturers got their own frequency, it would be hard to prevent jamming (not impossible, but very expensive).

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  67. Read the fine article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was the parent too lazy, I wonder, to read the first to paragraphs of the article? This sentence leads the second paragraph (highlighted for emphasis):

    His keyless entry remote control, the device that unlocks the doors and also is required to start the engine of his car, had gone haywire again.

    and here from further down the first page. Just in case readers require repetition:

    In most cases, remote control failure is little more than a curiosity, as drivers can simply use their keys to unlock the doors. Some cars, however, require the device to deactivate an alarm or start the engine.

    No wonder 75% of Americans have a fifth grade reading level and the attention span nature granted a gnat? They cannot even finish the fine article before posting their misplaced ire on Slashdot!

    1. Re:Read the fine article. by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

      I said push their car out of range such that the jamming no longer a factor... do you get it? Not push a car... lazy... ... forget it... the post is lost on you.

      Apparently humour is not a quality you possess.

      --
      Live forever, or die trying.
    2. Re:Read the fine article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a very good attempt at humour. I stick by my original assessment.

  68. So what is AT&T up to? by d-ude · · Score: 1

    I've seen many of the towers they are talking about in the article. Many are being sold off as business bunkers or dismantled due to fiber optics being the medium of choice these days. The towers belong to what was called the 'long lines' division of AT&T.

    The primary purpose of these towers was to relay AT&T's transcontinental long distance communications but they also seemed to be a source of backup communications for govt. sites around the US, including the Congressional Relocation Facility, hidden under the Greenbriar Hotel in SE West Virginia. Another use was to serve as a network feed for many local TV stations, a need that requires high bandwidth. This is of course before satellite took over for that purpose.

    I have noticed that many sites have 4 identical antennas at the very top in a square shape. This is a configuration I recently observed on the rooftop of what I can assume was a secret service Chevy Suburban that was leading the motorcade for VP Dick Cheney. I saw the motorcade in Pittsburgh on Saturday as I exited the Fort Pitt tunnels on to the Parkway West, they were coming down the hill about to enter the tubes and go in to the city. I also saw another suburban behind the first that appeared to have a large dome on the roof, possibly a radar of some kind.

    Some really good links with in-depth descriptions including interior photos of the bunkers:
    http://www.drgibson.com/towers/
    http://long-lines.net

    1. Re:So what is AT&T up to? by d-ude · · Score: 1

      Oh, and I noticed that on one of the sites it described the 4 antennas at the tower top for "communicating with Air Force One." That may be the source of some interference. Wonder if it's air-to-ground data link or just a 'remote base' of sorts for voice comms.

  69. must accept? by CaptainPinko · · Score: 1

    what exactly does must accept any interference they experience entail? does this mean installing shielding (eg strapping on large slabs of lead) is illegal?

    --
    Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
    1. Re:must accept? by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just the opposite; it means shielding is your only recourse.

      In other words, "If you don't like it, lump it" (I think that's how the old saying goes), or "this is the world's smallest violin...", but in legalese.

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
  70. Musharraf's Motorcade by KidSock · · Score: 1

    I absolutely beleive they can and do block such things. Recall when some extreemists in Pakistan tried to blow up Musharraf's car as it drove over a bridge but because they were jamming the signal it didn't go off until shortly after it passed by?

  71. Solution by ironicsky · · Score: 1

    We already have a band used for misc wireless technology. This is the 2.4Ghz band. Cordless phones, Wifi, and why not keyless entry systems?
    These signals barely interfere because of the difference in channel modulation they use. Just make another channel for keyless entry, and problem solved.

  72. Re:A story - Canada? by nightwing2000 · · Score: 1
    I alsop heard a story (years ago) from a friend in the Canadian "Navy". Similarly, a tech had disabled and locked out the radar while working on the dish.

    A know-it-all ahole officer (probably a lieutenant) came along, said "why is this off" took off the tag-out and turned it on. Apparently the guy lost most use of his one arm.

    Also heard the story of the US Navy (a real Navy)that sailors used to stand in front of the dish for a few seconds before going on shore leave, to avoid the possibility of child support payments. Apparently the had found that it left them sterile for several days.

    Unfortunately, it was later found that repeated exposure resulted in permanent sterility, not just a few days of "no swimmers".

  73. GEP - Ground Entry Point by thefatz · · Score: 1
    Per: http://long-lines.net/places-routes/Lyons_NE/

    Those antennas served as a Ground Entry Point (GEP) for the UHF air-ground radio system code-named "Combat Ciders", which provided communications to the Post-Attack Command and Control System (PACCS) aircraft. Those planes, such as "Looking Glass", were flying command posts on continuous airborne alert, capable of delivering orders to launch nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles. In addition, the UHF network was used by Air Force One when the plane was within the system's range.

    --
    http://www.freebsd.org
  74. NATO jammed my garage door opener! by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1
    Last October, there was a NATO conference held at a hotel three miles from my house. For most of the week they were here, my garage opener didn't work. Once the conference was over, it started working again. This was documented here, among other places.

    Apparently you don't need your tinfoil hat any more, as the government will jam the thought-control rays for you (at least when important officials are in town).

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
    1. Re:NATO jammed my garage door opener! by gd23ka · · Score: 1

      Maybe they had a SAM at that site, the same way they protected the G8 Summit in Genoa...

      A 6.5-kilometer no-go zone has been established around Kananaskis Village and three anti-aircraft missile batteries set up, as a last line of defence should a plane evade the CF-18 fighters that are policing a 150-kilometer radius no-fly zone.

  75. A simple explaination for such interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Navy requires certain (very powerful) radars to be put into stow mode when approaching port so that the effective radiated EM energy does not propagate horizontally.

    Of course you have a 19 year old high school dropout operating the equipment, so every now and then, you can expect him or her to fail to follow proceedures.

    The military has no hidden motive to interfere with such simple systems.

    If you want a key-less entry system that always works, then design one that can compensate for a rogue interfering signal with a long pulse delay.

    BTW, you may not want to use a key-less entry system in the first place because the transmit code is not encrypted. I recon it would be easy enough to design a system that listens and records your code when you get out of your car. The thieves could then play back that code when you're out of sight. Bye bye car.

  76. Why in the first place? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems to me that putting a key in the lock isnt all that hard - the fact that this is becoming such a big deal doesn't speak very highly for us.

    Besides, how hard would it be for someone to intercept your signal and gain the ability to unlock your door? they couldnt start the car, because you still need a key for that (i beleive), but they can walk off with your stereo or anything else you had inside... All they need is an antenna and a recording device, and a little time and patience.

    Now, it would be different if you made your OWN remote locking mechanism and your own keyfob - but using a mass-production version and then complaining when it doesnt work seems a little immature in thought.

  77. Re:Musharraf's Motorcade - Baghdad Too? by nightwing2000 · · Score: 1
    Apparently cellphones and remote doorbells are the preferred way to exercise your vote in the Middle East. However, most targets of any import are wise to this, and do the jamming. If the Musharaf thing was a cell phone, I guess the guy didn't hang up soon enough?

    Similarly, the Al Queda wannabe's in Iraq are reduced to using real doorbells, with wires. Apparently many convoys have local jammers to foil the wireless technique.

    And, ... where was I reading that whenever Air FOrce One comes to town, the garage doors and other remotes just go nuts... Ditto, AF1 have a very good collection of remote jammers for protecting POTUS-W.

    Also, rolling codes are now common on garage door openers to foil the old trick - hook a 555 timer to a digital counter, and hook that to a transmitter, and drive around looking for garage doors to open. Originally, their code was only 3 digits long and it was easy to hit the right one within range while driving by and continually repeating the count.

  78. A lotta ambient energy. by FauxReal · · Score: 1

    When some ships rolled into Portland during the Rose Festival, I saw this guided missile cruiser and it had 3 antennas on the back of it in a triangle about 25 ft. apart from each other. If you looked into the center of the antenna array everything was hazy. It was like looking through a giant version of heat waves on the street. That much juice running through the air and interfering with other things doesn't surprise me.

  79. Probably true. by stoneymonster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was assuming it was more narrow band interference. But given that several classes of devices are affected, it must be wider. The other thing this article seems to be is heavy into blaming the military. How about blaming the car manufacturers for producing an unreliable technology with no backups and depending on the military to only occasionally encroach on these frequencies? -C

    1. Re:Probably true. by Melkman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Having seen the effect of a radar sweep of a dutch frigate while in the harbour i think you can forget about shielding for this. (No, it is not allowed to use the ships main radar while in the harbour. But sometimes it is done by some asshole anyway). These thing are insanely powerfull. Crt's crumble, radio's yank, computers reset etc. Granted this was at about 500 meter from the ship but designing so thus has no effect will be costly. Most likely to costly for door openers

    2. Re:Probably true. by fatboy · · Score: 1

      I was assuming it was more narrow band interference. But given that several classes of devices are affected, it must be wider.

      Well, that's the thing. See, the front end in the radios used for the keyless entry systems are rather wide. A strong signal many 10s of MHz away could still cause front end overload.

      The other thing this article seems to be is heavy into blaming the military. How about blaming the car manufacturers for producing an unreliable technology with no backups and depending on the military to only occasionally encroach on these frequencies?

      I agree 100%

      --
      --fatboy
  80. It could be worse... by raehl · · Score: 1

    It could have been raspberry jam.

  81. How bout this by robogun · · Score: 1

    One time I got in and started the motor before realizing I was in someone else's car. It was a 1972 240Z. Those were common as hell once. Of course, there are probably fewer key combinations with physical locks.

    1. Re:How bout this by Artifakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Physical locks vary a lot, not just by the model but from year to year.
      In the 88 to 89 Toyota trucks, the vast majority of them could be opened with a Toyota key with all notches cut about 1/32nd inch deep.
      Around this time, you could get a new key to fit your Volvo, Mazda or Saab by giving the dealer the last 3 digits of the VIN, visable through the windshield. Some dealers checked to see if the requestor actually owned the car, most didn't.
      Mustangs around '79 had a lot of different ignition keys, but only half a dozen or so trunk keys.
      I don't remember which vehicle it was, but there was one make and model year about 1990 where your key would match 1 out of every 8 such cars. Most mechanicallly keyed cars today are more in the range of 1 in 200 or better, but even that doesn't sound very reliable.
      Most electronic keys use some variant on a pseudo-random generation approach. In a typical design 256 codes are sent each time, and a new one generated by boxes in the car and installed in the key device as the oldest one is dropped. That way, if little Jimmy plays star trek with daddy's new electronic key, he has to phaser his buddies 256 times, out of reach of the car, before the key and the in-car chip no longer have a code in common. If they still share at least one code, they will resync withhout a service call. 256 common codes out of several trillion possible is still very good overall odds.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  82. So carry some chciekn wire by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 1

    wrap it in a big ball around your hand, the transmitter and the reciever on the car.
    Press the button.
    For additional effect, get the transmitter touching the reciever.

    Our car has an RF door-unlock. It also has a key incase your battery runs out... that in itself should be a reason to have a proper key, let alone the frequency getting blocked by someone else using it.

    --
    FGD 135
  83. Re:Could be fixed if they spent more on the receiv by pe1chl · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, 433 MHz is in a band allocated to amateur radio (HAM radio) and radiolocation (radar and positioning equipment).
    Unlicensed lowpower devices are allowed to use a small part of this band, but they have to accept interference from the other services.

    Many radio amateurs are allowed to output about 100 Watts at this frequency, which of course completely swamps the milliwatt signal of the car keys.
    The radio location service can output megawatts of pulse power.

    The frequency is also used by many other lowpower wireless devices. Interferences is very often a problem. Don't buy products using this technology.

  84. Doesn't anybody have a spectrum analyzer? by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Anybody with a spectrum analyzer can see what's going on in a case like this. Many advanced hams have one. Cell phone and cable TV service operations usually have one around. Even a handheld multiband radio with a signal strength meter is enough to get a clue. Ideally, you'd want one of these. Anybody with a sizable WLAN operation probably should have one of those around. It's not like RF interference isn't well understood.

    If you're getting interference with a keyless entry device at very short range, the interference source is probably nearby. Very nearby, like tens of meters. There's an inverse square law, remember. Somebody in that parking lot has something that's emitting.

    Sure, an Aegis battlecruser could point its phased array radar in your direction, hold the beam stationary. and send a few megawatts down a narrow beam out to the horizon, but that's unlikely. Few smaller radars have that kind of power, directionality, and steerability. You still have to have near line of sight, anyway.

    Get a directional antenna and a signal strength meter, and you'll find the source.

  85. Not funny? by the_bard17 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Apparently the moderators didn't think so ;o).

  86. Same thing with Garage door openers by pmsyyz · · Score: 1
    --
    Phillip
  87. And... by hkb · · Score: 1

    Yeah well, we also used to fly our ECM sorties while people our were driving into work on base.

    What did our ECM ops practice their jamming skills on? Yep, you guessed it, the cop's RADAR guns...

    --
    /* Moderating all non-anonymous trolls up since 2004 */
  88. Boost your signal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A little trick I learned a few years ago is that you can point teh remote at your chin and it functions as a reflector to focus the signal. Simmilar in concept to the diy cookware wifi antenna. I realize that given the nature if the interference caused by military use this might not help in this kind of scenario but it is still a useful trick

  89. To find out comments I've made: by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

    To find my comments, just click on my name. The comments will have links to the articles.

    I don't know why I'm responding to an AC, but what the hell...

    --

    ---
    ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  90. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN - LIAR! Re:This might explain w by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This has been moderated down, but I've heard a rumour now that in addition to US Citizenship and good character, prospective recruits to the airforce must now be posessed of "good" Karma or higher.

  91. It happens every day in San Francisco by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 2, Informative
    I live near the sutro tower, and my wife's unlock remote for her Audi A4 simply doesn't work.

    We complain - audi says it's not their fault, City says it's not their problem.

    When I grow an extra head from the radiation I will go to the office of the Sutro Tower people and eat one of their faces.

    RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  92. From Professor Avi Rubin by goBU18 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Professor Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins University spoke about the whole fiasco of eVoting at the USENIX '04 conference in Boston last week. He spoke of his experiences working on this issue in a panel session "The Politicization of Security," along with Gary McGraw of Cigital, Professor Ed Felton of Princeton, and Jeff Grove of the ACM. From what Professor Rubin said, the electronic voting is a very politically charred issue. Companies like Diabold developing technologies have strong political ties, and yes, the system is targeted for abuse. Professor Rubin spoke of how difficult it was to work with the government. He received tons of phone calls from both sides, Democrats and Republicans questioning him left and right. Professor Rubin's goal is to be partisan, and it's incredibly hard to do because the Democrats and Republicans can't sit on the same table together at all. There's so much fighting and bickering over the issue from both parties because the notion is "we don't want the other guy to win." Professor Rubin was called to testify in front of Congress about the technology and limitations of eVoting and the meeting time has been changed or cancelled so many times. The punchline from Professor Rubin was "Partisanship has never been worse."

  93. Chances are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    those fuckers are doing it with the two laptops they stole from me.

  94. I was in the navy. This is true. by lordDogma · · Score: 1
    I don't know what causes it, but when I was stationed at NAVSTA San Diego two yrs ago the keyless entry on my car didn't work sometimes. It depends on a number of factors, like where you're parked on the base and what not. But its definitely true. Its not a rumor.

    Also, its not just aircraft carriers that cause it. In San Diego the A/C carriers are berthed at Green Island, *not* at the main naval station. So they aren't responsible for it. But there are still dozens of frigates, destroyers, cruisers and amphibious ships that could be causing it.

  95. Reverse engineering... by crashnbur · · Score: 1

    So if the government can interfere with the proper function of your keyless entry device, then with proper amplification, you could really have some fun! (p.s. don't try this at home, or don't tell them i told you to.)

    1. Re:Reverse engineering... by karlm · · Score: 1

      Yes, you could soup-up your keyless entry keychain and jam the aircraft carrier, but I doubt the military would be able to prosecute. You will cook your head trying to jam an aircraft carrier's radar with a 100 MW home-brew keyless entry amplifier. Welcome to the Darwin awards.

      --
      Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
  96. horn honking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Years ago (mid 70's) I spent one year living and working in key west. Whenever I drove by the boca chica naval air station, the horn on the van would honk at approximately 5 second intervals. First time it happened it was hilarious! I had NO idea what the heck was going on! Considering this was a real old van at the time (a 65 econoline) with nothing computerised in it, it always made me wonder how powerful that signal was, and what the heck it was for.

  97. When remotes go on the blink.. by metaverse · · Score: 1

    it is advisable to use the key to unlock the door like it was intended to... not sit and wait 20 minutes like Vernon Garrison did in the above linked story..

  98. Could be a security measure by newxeroline · · Score: 1

    It's quite possibly a WARLOCK anti-IED system.

    1. Re:Could be a security measure by gd23ka · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I wonder to what evil uses a WARLOCK detector could be put to... BTW... a little anecdote from WWII. German aircraft were fitted with elektronik jamming devices as a countermeasure against british radar. This practice was discontinued after a few weeks when the Germans found out that the british were homing in on their jammers. I can imagine, Reichsmarschall Goering was very pissed but let's join a small band of Iraqi "Freedom fighters" in a not so distant future...

      Abdul El Hassan: "Kull wahad! There are infidel near! Look at the warlock scanner!" Hassan El Abdul: "Good! Today brothers paradise awaits us!"

  99. Repeat topic by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

    Didn't we see this basic topic covered a few months ago? Yup, thought so.

    For those who don't want to read the link:
    Hoompini-Ting writes "Some accuse area 51, but in any case many folks were stranded when keyless locks failed or their car computers malfunctioned. No technical explanation but I'm sure slashdotters have theories. Similar to the failure in Seattle 3 years ago. See the Las Vegas Review-Journal for more details."

    And just to compare, the link in this thread is the same.

    Usually, double-posts on Slashdot are a few days apart ... things must be improving if it takes a few months to re-post the same article.

  100. A possible solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give the user the ability to change frequencies. Have a little switch on the key and another in the car. Flip both to red, and the system uses one frequency. Flop both to blue, and the system uses another frequency.

  101. at the copa by ed1park · · Score: 1

    I've had the same problem with my car over on 34th Street by the Copacabana on the west side by the Javits Center. Does that mean there is some military base nearby?

    1. Re:at the copa by phuturephunk · · Score: 1

      Its probably the fact that LIRR, Amtrack and NJT operate right across the street from the Copa. Notice the big cement wall that pretty much encapsulates those two blocks..those are the railyards beneath you.

    2. Re:at the copa by ed1park · · Score: 1

      why would the stations interfere with my car remote?

    3. Re:at the copa by phuturephunk · · Score: 1

      Well, I would theorize that since they have so much heavy equipment down there, something may be suspect. They could very well be testing some kind of equipment to prepare for the RNC.

  102. Jamming the enemy by zekt · · Score: 1

    I can see it now, enemy soliders wondering why their tank doesn't go 'bowip!' one morning...

    --
    In my next incarnation, I hope to come back as a code monkey.
  103. Lookup sidelobes sometime by hughk · · Score: 1
    It really depends on the kind of radar. The one I was thinking of was ground-control radar as it is downward looking and generally quite close. It has certainly been known to interfere with computers. Long range surface radar on ships tends to go from the top of masts and therefore doesn't affect very much that is close by unless the antenna has some serious problems with downward sidelobes. Further away the power shouldn't cause major problems.

    Maybe the issue with aircraft carriers is that they have better radar coverage.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
  104. Gory details featuring Frank the unlucky radar eng by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    Hmmm... looks like I need to take a closer look at the transmitter. There's something on it, I gotta get closer... What the hell is this?? Damm there is little space in here. Geez I hate working on these things. I wonder what would happen if one of those stupid temp dicks turned on the juice now...

    BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!! What the FUCK!!!! TURN IT OFF!! BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!! OH FUCK!! TURN IT OFF!!!!! TURN IT OFF!!! FUCK THIS HURTS!! BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!! ARGGGGHHHH!! BUZZZZZZZZZZ! ARRRGGGHH TURN IT OFF!!.

    "Hey sorry dude, we thought you were already down. Hey! Nasty sunburn you got there, next time bring some sun lotion to work!". Damm! I feel dizzy and nauseaus! Uh oh... I'm gonna throw up. UAAAAAAHHHRGH!! Got it all over my pants. Fuck. Uh oh.. I'm gonna pass out, oh shit...



    Where am I?? Why is it dark in here? "Hey! Someone help! Where the hell am I???". "Calm down you're in a hospital" "I can't see! I can't see". "That's because of all the microwave radiation you got. The good news is that there's a 2% chance that you will regain some sort of limited viewing capability but since your eyeballs were literally cooked with microwaves.. tell you the truth, we just don't know right now."



    A couple of months later: "Sorry Frank, I know this is really hard to take but you're not alone with this and we caught this one early. Male breast cancer happens to thousands of men each year and the survival rate is just as good as with female breast cancer. If you're lucky we can maybe get around a mastectomy but its still to early to say. What I'm a little more worried about is that lump on your liver I noticed on the other X-ray..." "Geez doc, I already have lung cancer and intestinal cancer, you removed my testicles, you took off both of my legs dammit what's next??". "Frank.. you are one of few TV-dinners that was heated in a microwave and lived to talk about it. What do you expect?"

    Gory details enough for you?? :-)

  105. Doesn't have to be the military by frog51 · · Score: 1

    If I park at my nearest petrol station, I have to make sure I'm far enough away from the automatic door, otherwise my key fob fails and I can't start the car or disable the alarm. Pushing the car about 10 feet away fixes the problem.

    Noisy and embarrassing - but at least that one is simple. I have heard stories of a more general issue near some coastguard stations - where a tow truck was needed to move the car far enough away:-)

  106. So this is how IEDs work by tjstork · · Score: 1

    You have a garage door open that you know will be interfered with by military frequencies, and so you attach explosives to it. It's almost the perfect trap.

    Clever people, those Iraqis.

    --
    This is my sig.
  107. You always can, surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The last seven cars I've owned (since 1988) have had a manual override to clear the alarm / immobiliser (either the ignition key, another key or some sort of pin code). Mind you - this is in Europe. Maybe some people are just too lazy to read how to clear the alarm without the remote?

  108. "Halarious" by Cybrr · · Score: 1

    It might be a right wing extremist brainwashing streak. ;)

    --
    Why did GEAR crush RDP?
  109. SHould have bought infrared by psych-major · · Score: 1

    Available on keyless entries from Jeep and Mercedes in the nineties. Plus you can hack it with a PDA or universal TV remote!