Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole
Mark Rasch, 2002-04-22

Those cheap wireless video cameras hawked by annoying pop-up ads can be intercepted by anyone with a few hundred dollars and a voyeristic bent. There's no federal law against it, but there should be.

Expand all | Post comment

Here we go again -- trying to plug a security hole with legislation instead of technology 2002-04-22
Anonymous (2 replies)

Here we go again -- trying to plug a security hole with legislation instead of technology 2002-04-23
Anonymous

Here we go again -- trying to plug a security hole with legislation instead of technology 2002-04-23
Mark Rasch (2 replies)

Here we go again -- trying to plug a security hole with legislation instead of technology 2002-04-24
Anonymous

Here we go again -- trying to plug a security hole with legislation instead of technology 2002-05-02
Anonymous (1 replies)

Here we go again -- trying to plug a security hole with legislation instead of technology 2002-05-04
Mark D. Rasch

It's a sad day 2002-04-22
Xenophon Fenderson, the Carbon(d)ated

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-04-22
Anonymous (2 replies)

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-04-22
Anonymous (1 replies)

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-04-23
Anonymous

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-05-03
Mark Rasch

less government - more corded cameras! 2002-04-23
Anonymous

former Justice Dept official wants job back 2002-04-23
Anonymous

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-04-24
Anonymous

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-04-24
Anonymous (1 replies)

I think that Mark Rasch has really missed the mark here. I have seen several points addressed here, but perhaps we should recognize that these "cheap wireless video cameras" inhabit a frequency spectrum shared with many other services. In fact, X-10 cameras are not the primary allocated user of this frequency band (~2.4GHz). Should the primary users of this band (wireless cable, wireless LAN, amateur radio operators, military and shuttle comms, etc) be required to shoulder the prohibitive cost that legislation of this kind would certainly add to the already high cost of doing busines in this spectrum! NO! NO! A thousand times NO! Enough already! If X-10 users want privacy, the cost of providing it to them should fall on the users of that service, X-10's customers, and not other inhabitants of the spectrum!

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/76/12081#12081

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-05-04
Mark D. Rasch

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-04-25
Anonymous

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-05-08
Richard S. Keirstead

Closing the Spycam Sniffer Loophole 2002-05-09
Kevin White