On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:48:32 -0800, "Dana"
wrote:


You man there actually is something which will detect MP3 recorders?

There are devices that can detect when electronic devices are being used.
There are devices that can be made that can detect almost any known material
If said mp3 player is made of that material it can be detected.



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.

Detecting electronics devices in general, is it useful? We
dont know the exact scenario, what the result would be of a
positive detection but as above, cell phones and pagers
would tend to be caught and are going to be far more common
and innocuous than a recording device, though in the former
case, the phone may have recording capability too.

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:48:32 -0800, "Dana"
wrote:


You man there actually is something which will detect MP3 recorders?

There are devices that can detect when electronic devices are being used.
There are devices that can be made that can detect almost any known
material
If said mp3 player is made of that material it can be detected.



Which is not entirely applicable,

Sure it is

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.

Yep, and all are detectable, and all have signatures.

Detecting electronics devices in general, is it useful?

Depends on who you ask
The OP is not the only one who wants to ensure no one is able to record
conversations, or hear conversations they should not be hearing.

We
dont know the exact scenario,

He gave the scenario.

what the result would be of a
positive detection but as above, cell phones and pagers
would tend to be caught and are going to be far more common
and innocuous than a recording device, though in the former
case, the phone may have recording capability too.

True enough, but the technology is there to do what is being requested. Now
if the OP can afford it, or even obtain it is a different issue.

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 14:22:57 -0500, Mitch Crane -three
wrote:

Joey wrote in :

You say, "search them physically"? I have to tell you that I don;'t
work in the sort of environment where that kind of behaviour is
considered acceptable!

Would an all nude work environment be acceptable? It would make hiding such
devices difficult so you wouldn't have to do anything untoward like
searching people.

You'd be surprised where people can hide things:

http://www.dailymotion.com/blog/vide...ht.blogs.co m

Caution! NSFW!

max

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:48:32 -0800, "Dana"
wrote:


You man there actually is something which will detect MP3 recorders?

There are devices that can detect when electronic devices are being used.
There are devices that can be made that can detect almost any known
material
If said mp3 player is made of that material it can be detected.



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.

And what is a common item to circuit boards, IC's, cell phones, pagers, MP3
players, etc.
There are devices made to detect the presence of semiconductors, and these
have been out for ages.
And now with the war on terror going on, you would not believe what kind of
sensors they are coming up with.
Minor modifications of some of these units would not be very difficult to
detect a mere MP3 in someones pocket.
But then these would not be cheap either, if you can even get one.


Detecting electronics devices in general, is it useful? We
dont know the exact scenario, what the result would be of a
positive detection but as above, cell phones and pagers
would tend to be caught and are going to be far more common
and innocuous than a recording device, though in the former
case, the phone may have recording capability too.

Well shielded (for example, wrapped to copper foil), 1.5V AAA powered device
will give EMI below ambient level. If its clock generator employs spread
spectrum, it's even more difficult to detect.

"Joey" wrote in message
...
Suppose someone visited your office or home and tried to make a voice
recording using a hidden recorder.

If they used a older-style dictation machine based on tape then you
could detect the electromagnetic transmissions from the dictation
machine when it was recording.

But how would you detect if someone was secretly recording with an MP3
player that recorded to flash memory?

Is there some transmission which could be detected?
Perhaps some low power ultra high frequency from chip refresh cycles?

Aly wrote:
Joey wrote in message
...
Suppose someone visited your office or home and tried to make a voice
recording using a hidden recorder.


Your only real option is to hold your meetings in the middle of field, and
for everyone to be naked.


Just think what could be done with a parabolic microphone and a
telephoto lens.



Aside from that, unless you work for MI5 or have alot of money then the
above would be far easier. If it was that important you wouldn't be asking
the question here.

Joey wrote:
On 11 Oct 2006, Aly wrote:

Joey wrote in message
...
[...]

Sorry for my rather unhelpful reply, I'm having one of my moments
where I only talk to microcontrollers.


No problems.

Seriously though. There's very little in world that's so
important. I've worked with people that would *record* meetings
thinking they were of vital importance when in actual truth, no one
could care less.

I guess it would just cause people to be more careful about what
they say. I'm unable to view those videos you've supplied as this
is a development machine without any clutter on it.

eBay could be a good place to buy such things though. All sorts of
stuff comes out of the AsiaPac.


This is to document something quite serious.

Are you the trying to be the documenter, or trying to avoid being the
documentee?
Or both?

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Joey wrote:
On 11 Oct 2006, Dana wrote:


"Ken Maltby" wrote in message
...

"Joey" wrote in message
...
On 10 Oct 2006, kony wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:51:51 +0100, Joey
wrote:


You say, "search them physically"? I have to tell you that I
don;'t work in the sort of environment where that kind of
behaviour is considered acceptable!


Then the only practical alternative remaining is to have
them consent to and go through a metal detector, and of
course it has to be actively manned to discriminate a
potential recorder from some other device, object, etc.

If you find what might be an MP player, you won't be able to
determine if it's recording, rather than playing, or if
recording off the radio. Unless MP3 players become
illegal devices, or at least clearly posted as banned on
private premises, you can't justify a search or seizure
either (depending on laws in your locale). If private
property, the other party may still refuse a search and
seizure attempt.

Even scanning for such a device's radiated energy at
entrance to an area, that wouldn't prevent them from turning
on the device later. Unless you have the expectation that
you can seize such equipment, you should follow the same
guidelines you should have otherwise- not saying anything of
importance in the presence of someone who can't be trusted
not to repeat, reproduce, etc., in any way.

Ultimately going to such extra lengths will tend to make
people suspect you have something to hide and put your
activities under more scrutiny.


Thanks Kony. So the MP3 recorder is essentially undetectable
during its operation. OK. Thanks.

Maybe that explains why I can't find any follow-on products for
tape recorder detection while many of the the older devices are
no longer available.

It should not come as a surprise, that security concerns that
deal in high level technological detection devices, don't
advertise to the general public that much. Search harder.


I hinted at that a couple of days ago.
It has been amusing watching some of the replies from some of the
people here.




You man there actually is something which will detect MP3 recorders?

Detection is a minor problem. Correct identification is the
issue. This is likely infeasible, unless you have the
specific recorder in question beforehand. And remember
that you wanted to know whether it is recording. Even more
difficult....

Arno

max wrote in
:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 14:22:57 -0500, Mitch Crane -three
wrote:

Joey wrote in :

You say, "search them physically"? I have to tell you that I don;'t
work in the sort of environment where that kind of behaviour is
considered acceptable!

Would an all nude work environment be acceptable? It would make hiding
such devices difficult so you wouldn't have to do anything untoward
like searching people.

You'd be surprised where people can hide things:

http://www.dailymotion.com/blog/vide...yuv3g7lzul2w64
rs1iaad00kom8c0ii3&play=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fsus iebright.blogs.com

Caution! NSFW!

Sure, but I don't think the MP3 recorder would work very well in there, so
the point is moot.


--
ybbxvatyvxrnobeantnvayvivatyvxrnurergvpyvfgravatgb neguheyrrerpbeqfznxv
atnyylbhesevraqfsrryfbthvyglnobhggurveplavpvfznaqg urerfgbsgurvetrareng
vbaabgriragurtbireazragnertbaanfgbclbhabjohgnerlbh ernqlgborurnegoebxra

On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:43:46 -0800, "Dana"
wrote:


"kony" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:48:32 -0800, "Dana"
wrote:


You man there actually is something which will detect MP3 recorders?

There are devices that can detect when electronic devices are being used.
There are devices that can be made that can detect almost any known
material
If said mp3 player is made of that material it can be detected.



Which is not entirely applicable,

Sure it is

Nope, not without the scenario.



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.

Yep, and all are detectable, and all have signatures.

You have not established that the signature (difference) of
such a device can be discriminated from a different device.
The scenario has not been defined enough to know if the
device will be turned on within the distance of the
scanner/other detection device.

Random ideas that "something" similar is possible is not
same as application in a specific scenario.



Detecting electronics devices in general, is it useful?

Depends on who you ask
The OP is not the only one who wants to ensure no one is able to record
conversations, or hear conversations they should not be hearing.

We
dont know the exact scenario,

He gave the scenario.


No. A hint, but not a full scenario might include something
like what happens if "something" is detected, both the full
purpose and result.



what the result would be of a
positive detection but as above, cell phones and pagers
would tend to be caught and are going to be far more common
and innocuous than a recording device, though in the former
case, the phone may have recording capability too.

True enough, but the technology is there to do what is being requested. Now
if the OP can afford it, or even obtain it is a different issue.

You have not established this. That some fields can be
detected, that it can be known if something is running, is
not same thing as knowing a digital recorder is running.
This difference is quite important in many scenarios because
OTHER types of devices are far more common in modern society
than digital recorders.