Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
"Alexander Grigoriev" wrote in message link.net... Hogwash. Yep, that is all you have. Another such technology is called Quadrapole Resonance or QR. Originally developed by the Department of Defense to detect land mines, QR directs a beam of radio waves at an object. The radio waves will penetrate the object and infuse whatever is inside. When the radio waves pass through an explosive material, the molecules of that material will polarize or develop a small electrical charge. As the molecules lose their charge, they emit a very weak radio frequency signal that can be picked up and analyzed to detect explosives. Because it relies on harmless radio waves that are easy to produce and monitor, this technology is considered to be one of the most promising in the field. MRI detects primirily concentration of hydrogen atoms. It requires quite strong magnetic field with precise gradient. What you describe is using different principles. And another one that needs to keep up on technology Here are some links that will explain what I am talking about. http://gazette.gmu.edu/articles/4925/ Sauer's studies are focused on nuclear quadrupole resonance (NQR), a type of radio frequency spectroscopy that can help identify many substances without the use of a large static magnetic field http://www.americanscientist.org/tem.../assetid/39131 The phenomenon of nuclear quadrupole resonance is akin to nuclear magnetic resonance, which is the basis of magnetic-resonance imaging. But unlike MRI scanners, instruments based on nuclear quadrupole resonance are not required to generate strong magnetic fields. "Dana" wrote in message ... Hogwash. You seem not to understand what can be done with electronics. There are some devices that use the priciples of a MRI and shrink it down to a hand held sized device to scan for explosives. Since the compounds in explosives give off a unique signature after being exposed to a strong magnetic field, that signature is then stored in memory. Now your sensor emits a magnetic field, and the reciever looks for the signature of the explosives. So it is only a matter of expanding your signature library, and your receiver can be programmed to look for pretty much anything. This is only one of many new tools that are out. The semiconductor junction detector has been out for around 30 years. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
"kony" wrote in message ... On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 19:01:06 -0800, "Dana" wrote: "Alexander Grigoriev" wrote in message hlink.net... So it can tell semiconductor junctions of an MP3 recorder from semiconductor junctions of non-recording devices? Th OP question was detection not *any* semiconductor device, but a MP3 recorder. By the way, the recorder doesn't have to be in that room. Enough to have a connected cellphone in a pocket. Yep, and that can be detected. By that you must specifically mean the cell phone. No, by that I mean any electronic device, which may or may not be used to record conversations. What you do with the knowledge that the person has an electronic device that may or may not record is up to you and what you want to do. It's essentially useless information Nope, it will tell you that the person has an electronic device that may or may not be used to record your conversation or take pictures. This is where security comes in, and how much security you want to enforce. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
"kony" wrote in message ... On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 16:40:38 -0500, "Ken Maltby" wrote: But I would like to know if I can be detected if I do attempt to make a recording. Your last sentence is why "kony" won't get his "make&model" for such a detector. Or any more of a technical description than I have given him, of how they work. I would find any test of any existing piece of equipment, a great start towards proving an MP3 player can be detected (as an MP3 player, since it may not be enough to identify a mere presence of an electronic device). I note that he isn't supplying the "Make&Model" of his undetectable MP3 Recorder. Recall that I'd mentioned the issue of scenaro already. What is or is not detectable depends on scenario. Can they seize ALL unidentified devices? Will the person be in a random or controlled environment? Indoors or out? Will the person carrying on the conversation need have a concealed detector that monitors in realtime, and at what distance, or only an initial or point-of-entry scan? What other devices are known to be present in the vicinity? I have never suggested it was impossible to detect that someone electronic *exists* in general. Pinpointing the device, identifying it, or even finding that it exists in a specific scenario, let alone that it's recording, is what I dispute has not been proven or even reasonably suggested. Randomly pick a small battery powered MP3 player. Remember that I need not pick _ONE_ because such a concealed device is not limited to being only ONE type of recording MP3 player, the detection equipment would have to be able to detect any and (practically) all types of recorders, but not detect any other common devices, not excessive false positive alerts. He provides an argument that no such detector could exist, based totally on his theories of what is possible, Based on no details that are useful to discriminate what an MP3 player is and it's operation in recording. If the topic had been detecting a RF transmitter of some sort, or a know class of substance like explosives, that is a different matter. Both have a few known signatures. So I suggest that until you can describe what the unique signature is that is unique to recording MP3 players, there is no way to detect them, and only them, selectively. but then complains that no one will provide him with more than a basic theoretical description of the workings of a device, that its makers, sellers (usually the same people) and users, don't want working details generally available. There is no basic theoretical description that has been provided relating to an MP3 player- the whole purpose of the thread. This is a key detail that cannot be overlooked. That some generalized similar concept of "detecting" some other thing is possible, can only be held true if there are unique detectable, in the specific scenario, attributes common only to MP3 players, or perhaps by extension, all small digital recorders but not other devices. Counter-surveillance devices are like alarm systems, you don't want to tell anyone the details of how one works. No one, who knows, is going to provide "kony" the "proof" he is demanding. So what we have is a generalized concept of "it works for a secret reason". Sorry but that is anything except a reasonable argument, let alone proof of concept alone. We have to have at least 3 things: 1) A specific, exact scenario. 2) A method for discriminating recording MP3 players from everything else, in the exact scenario. Not some vague concept of detecting semiconductors, a mere HF signal or anything else that is not unique to a multitude of different MP3 players. 3) A device that can reliably use that method in that scenario. #2 is the linchpin, #3 may indeed be possible after #2 is resolved to #1. So it is with any purpose built device. All this proves is that you have not read or understood my earlier posts. I described the way actual devices operate to detect any device that is detecting audio. It shouldn't be hard to realize that any device that is responding to a pattern of sound is a threat. For a recorder, of any kind, to record the audio in a room it must detect it, and amplify the detected signal. These processes can be detected, if this processing matches the on and off timing of a known pattern of sound, (which you control) you can isolate the device. (Your "2" above.) I hope you aren't going to say that while this type of detector can detect that there is a device responding to the sound in the room, and help you locate it; this hasn't identified the device as an MP3 recorder. I would think even you realize that it is of no importance what the device is, that is responding to the audio pattern, it would need to be considered a live threat. You might check into why the most expensive "White Noise Generators" include a means to inject a user supplied signal into them. Luck; Ken |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
"Alexander Grigoriev" wrote in message link.net... Many cellphones have dictophone capability. How do you tell if the cellphone in the visitor's pocket is not recording? The phone could be also simply connected to another remote one, which would do the actual recording. Detecting and locating any device intentionally transmitting an RF signal is trivial in relation to this discussion. But the kind of device I have described can certainly detect that it is responding to the audio pattern, and locate it. Luck; Ken |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 02:08:05 -0500, "Ken Maltby"
wrote: 1) A specific, exact scenario. 2) A method for discriminating recording MP3 players from everything else, in the exact scenario. Not some vague concept of detecting semiconductors, a mere HF signal or anything else that is not unique to a multitude of different MP3 players. 3) A device that can reliably use that method in that scenario. #2 is the linchpin, #3 may indeed be possible after #2 is resolved to #1. So it is with any purpose built device. All this proves is that you have not read or understood my earlier posts. I described the way actual devices operate to detect any device that is detecting audio. You made a suggestion that was not resolvable to a difference in operation of an MP3 player. With a constant current and constant bitrate output, you'd essentially be suggesting that from a distance you can discriminate which bits are flowing on the bus to the memory, in what is likely a shielded case. I find this highly unlikely. It shouldn't be hard to realize that any device that is responding to a pattern of sound is a threat. Sure, but even ignoring the issue of whether it's feasible to have test sound patterns at all, we don't have any evidence a digitally recording MP3 player will have a detectable response in particular scenarios, if in any at all. For a recorder, of any kind, to record the audio in a room it must detect it, and amplify the detected signal. The recorder does not necessarily need amplification prior to digitization, it is commonly a single chip solution that would not have to output to headphones either in this use. These processes can be detected, if this processing matches the on and off timing of a known pattern of sound, (which you control) you can isolate the device. (Your "2" above.) "IF" the process existed, and "IF" the detection device was suitable sensitive, and "IF" the scenario allowed proximity, then perhaps it's possible. None of these three IFs can be assumed yet. I hope you aren't going to say that while this type of detector can detect that there is a device responding to the sound in the room, and help you locate it; this hasn't identified the device as an MP3 recorder. Not at all, I'm going to say the device won't detect the MP3 player recording at all in most scenarios, that it might detect "something" electronic is in the room but that's all, it won't ID it as an MP3 player nor that it is responding to sound in the room. "Maybe" if you had it right up against the recorder, but do you expect that scenario? I would think even you realize that it is of no importance what the device is, that is responding to the audio pattern, it would need to be considered a live threat. You're drifting down a tangent that has not yet been reached. I never argued that a detected response to an audio pattern wasn't suspicious enough to draw a conclusion about the operation of a device. It still doesn't get us where we need to be, to detect a recording MP3 player reliably and discriminate it from other non-recording electronic devices. This is not the same as a tape recorder. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
"kony" wrote in message ... On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 02:08:05 -0500, "Ken Maltby" wrote: 1) A specific, exact scenario. 2) A method for discriminating recording MP3 players from everything else, in the exact scenario. Not some vague concept of detecting semiconductors, a mere HF signal or anything else that is not unique to a multitude of different MP3 players. 3) A device that can reliably use that method in that scenario. #2 is the linchpin, #3 may indeed be possible after #2 is resolved to #1. So it is with any purpose built device. All this proves is that you have not read or understood my earlier posts. I described the way actual devices operate to detect any device that is detecting audio. You made a suggestion that was not resolvable to a difference in operation of an MP3 player. With a constant current and constant bitrate output, you'd essentially be suggesting that from a distance you can discriminate which bits are flowing on the bus to the memory, in what is likely a shielded case. I find this highly unlikely. I was suggesting no such thing. I find your idea that an ungrounded MP3 recorder has any significant shielding, very unlikely. The recorder to be a threat and to respond to sound must let sound waves through, even if it is a contact microphone/sensor/transducer, and they require significant amplification in their operation. It is not necessary to know "which bits are flowing on the bus to the memory", the detection takes place before that is even an issue. If you are going to pretend you understand how the device I described operates, try to approach it from a different angle than; finding a way it couldn't work, then deciding that is what I must be describing. It shouldn't be hard to realize that any device that is responding to a pattern of sound is a threat. Sure, but even ignoring the issue of whether it's feasible to have test sound patterns at all, we don't have any evidence a digitally recording MP3 player will have a detectable response in particular scenarios, if in any at all. So now you doubt that it's possible to generate a controlled pattern of sound? (You wouldn't be responsible for Rap "Music", would you?) I'm no giving you "evidence". But I must have missed your "evidence" that the device I described doesn't work. Evidence is something besides your opinion, or your interpretation of High School Physics and needs to be based in proven limitations. Try the following: http://www.testequipmentdepot.com/ra...ipment/rf1.htm it's the cheapest way to even start to examine this issue with an attempt to establish some "evidence", you should be able to detect some response from a recording device. This is nothing like the device I was describing, but if you can see a result with this, even you would have to admit that much more sophisticated devices can do what I've described. For a recorder, of any kind, to record the audio in a room it must detect it, and amplify the detected signal. The recorder does not necessarily need amplification prior to digitization, it is commonly a single chip solution that would not have to output to headphones either in this use. Almost all audio detectors/sensors require amplification, and those that don't, carry a significant bias current that gets modulated, more than enough to be detectable with modern equipment. These processes can be detected, if this processing matches the on and off timing of a known pattern of sound, (which you control) you can isolate the device. (Your "2" above.) "IF" the process existed, and "IF" the detection device was suitable sensitive, and "IF" the scenario allowed proximity, then perhaps it's possible. None of these three IFs can be assumed yet. Isn't it fortunate that no one needs your agreement that it's possible, to make and use such devices. I hope you aren't going to say that while this type of detector can detect that there is a device responding to the sound in the room, and help you locate it; this hasn't identified the device as an MP3 recorder. Not at all, I'm going to say the device won't detect the MP3 player recording at all in most scenarios, that it might detect "something" electronic is in the room but that's all, it won't ID it as an MP3 player nor that it is responding to sound in the room. "Maybe" if you had it right up against the recorder, but do you expect that scenario? I say that such devices can detect any device that is responding to a supplied audio signal pattern. Any device that is detecting the audio pattern. They can detect anything electronic, that generates electrical noise or signal when it detects acoustical energy. There is a great deal more some of these devices can do in the hands of a skilled operator/analyst. It looks like we have established that you are going to just deny the possibility. You can believe what you wish, it has no impact on reality what so ever. I would think even you realize that it is of no importance what the device is, that is responding to the audio pattern, it would need to be considered a live threat. You're drifting down a tangent that has not yet been reached. I never argued that a detected response to an audio pattern wasn't suspicious enough to draw a conclusion about the operation of a device. It still doesn't get us where we need to be, to detect a recording MP3 player reliably and discriminate it from other non-recording electronic devices. This is not the same as a tape recorder. You have been provided a description of how these devices can do just that, your only answer seems to be that you don't believe a device could work as I described. You provide no explanation (much less evidence) of why it couldn't work. You seem intent on saying "No they can't work." I know that they most certainly do work. What point is there in further argument, on that basis? Luck; Ken |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
In article , Mitch Crane wrote:
Yeah, good point. I never considered an external mic. I guess the nude office will have to ban labial studs. They should also ban scrotal studs in the interest of fairness. There's a relatively common type of mechanical treatment for impotence in the shape of an implanted rod which can be extended in the corpus callosum to ... Oh, I'm sure that you can work out the details. So, Albert was spying on Vikki. I'm surprised the recordings weren't included with the rest of the Diana Tapes. -- Aidan Karley, FGS Aberdeen, Scotland Written at Sun, 15 Oct 2006 12:10 +0100, but posted later. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
In article , Dana wrote:
There are some devices that use the priciples of a MRI and shrink it down to a hand held sized device to scan for explosives. Since the compounds in explosives give off a unique signature after being exposed to a strong magnetic field, That signature ... would it be from the azide bonds in a heavy metal azide, from the nitrate bonds in RDX or PETN cubane nitrate, or from the nitrate bonds in the current scare-of-the-month acetone derivatives? It would be a breath of fresh air if it were. (If your chemistry isn't good enough to spot the trap in this question, be very, very careful.) -- Aidan Karley, FGS Aberdeen, Scotland Written at Sun, 15 Oct 2006 12:14 +0100, but posted later. |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
In article , Kony wrote:
Which is not entirely applicable, since plenty of non-recorders are made of circuit boards, ICs & other discretes, and some plastic. Cell phone and pager are two quite common ones. More to the point, since someone was talking about an office-like setting, would be things like SCR (triode) dimmer switches built into the walls of the room, for perfectly good reasons. The phrase is "false positive", and if anything they're even more corrosive of ones confidence in the usability of a detection system than are false negatives. (Had a bad week last week with a poison gas detector system going off every couple of hours. Every false positive meant that I had to kit up with the breathing apparatus and go to check the situation out.) -- Aidan Karley, FGS Aberdeen, Scotland Written at Sun, 15 Oct 2006 20:46 +0100, but posted later. |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
How detect if MP3 player is recording in your room? [OT]
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 09:32:39 -0500, "Ken Maltby"
wrote: You made a suggestion that was not resolvable to a difference in operation of an MP3 player. With a constant current and constant bitrate output, you'd essentially be suggesting that from a distance you can discriminate which bits are flowing on the bus to the memory, in what is likely a shielded case. I find this highly unlikely. I was suggesting no such thing. I find your idea that an ungrounded MP3 recorder has any significant shielding, very unlikely. Define significant. Many have grounded copper foil in them. It's not as though this is a high powered device to begin with, though, and would commonly have to be detected at a distance. The recorder to be a threat and to respond to sound must let sound waves through, even if it is a contact microphone/sensor/transducer, and they require significant amplification in their operation. No, you are thinking of older devices. There needs be no amplification prior to the digitization chip which can run at constant current, very low voltage and no easily detectable response to room noise from a distance. We might consider it mere coincidence that it is recording something, because the means to that end are different than in a recording device with a different (end) medium and analog amplification. It is not necessary to know "which bits are flowing on the bus to the memory", the detection takes place before that is even an issue. You mean "IF" it could, it would. If you are going to pretend you understand how the device I described operates, try to approach it from a different angle than; finding a way it couldn't work, then deciding that is what I must be describing. I'm not going to pretend anything, I'm suggesting you are not describing an MP3 player in recording mode. All the rest of your supportive argument hinges on being able to detect a signal that may not exist at all, or in cases where it does, are not sufficient strenth to measure at any distance. Remember it is not enough to find one particular MP3 player, nor a dissimilar device like a tape recorder, that can be detected- it has to be effective against the entire class of devices, or at the very least the common ones available on the market. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Recording the back of my scanner ... weird voices | Shortwave | |||
Roger Wiseman's Greyhound Men's Room Band | General |