Before President
Bush visited London last month, the English press indulged in
frenzied speculation about the extraordinary security measures
that would be taken to protect him. The papers fretted about
a number of humdrum potential hassles (street closures, monstrous
traffic jams), but they also raised a more peculiar concern:
Would the government of Britain selectively block cell-phone
signals along President Bush's route?
If they did—whether
they switched off the cellular networks along his path or jammed
local cell-phone signals—nearby mobile phones would become
inoperable. As it turns out, they didn't jam cell phones. But
this arcane-sounding precaution was no figment of the English
imagination. Cellular Phone Jammers—already available on
the Internet to security honchos and average Joes alike—are
a surprisingly useful (and widely used) tool, and they could easily
become as popular as cell phones themselves.
A cellular "security
bubble" in London could have protected Bush from a very
real threat: terrorists who use cell phones to detonate bombs
from miles away, or even another country. By connecting a cell
phone to hidden explosives, and then calling that phone, one
can detonate a bomb (the electrical charge that activates the
ringer on the cell phone serves as the triggering signal). In
May 2002, Palestinian militants in Tel Aviv nearly caused a
major explosion when they placed a bomb wired to a cell phone
in a fuel truck headed for Israel's largest fuel depot. (The
bomb detonated, but the fire was put out.)
The physics of jamming
a cell phone are actually quite simple. Cell phones operate by
sending signals along a range of the electromagnetic spectrum
reserved for their use. (In the United States that part typically
is measured as either 800 or 1,900 megahertz; in Europe it's usually
900 or 1,800 megahertz.) All a cellular phone jammer needs to
do is broadcast a signal on those same frequencies, and it will
interfere with any devices trying to transmit in that range. The
net effect for a hapless cell-phone user? The phone's screen will
simply indicate that no signal is available. Odds are most people
won't even notice that their phones are being jammed. They'll
just assume that they're in a dead spot—and feel annoyed.
It is possible
for intrepid consumers to acquire the same technology that's
used to create security bubbles around traveling dignitaries.
Sites offer a wide range of cellular jammers at reasonable prices.
For instance, the mini cellular jammers is a portable cellular
jammer that sells for $293. The mini cellular phone jammer will
get you a security bubble of about 30 feet, and it's camouflaged
to look like a cell phone, so you can leave it out on a restaurant
table and no one will know you're the source of the blissful
silence in the room.
Those seeking a more
robust alternative can purchase a bigger cellular phone jammer,
which will cover a radius of about 100 feet. Law-enforcement officers
use the big cellular jammers to cut off mobile communication in
volatile situations, isolating hostage-takers and other baddies
from the outside world. And corporate security folks can use them
to thwart innovative industrial spies, who have several neat new
tricks. These days, a boardroom Mata Hari can purchase a specially
designed cell phone that will answer incoming calls while appearing
to be switched off. In a business meeting, she could casually
leave her phone on the table while excusing herself to go to the
bathroom. Once she's gone, she can call the phone she left behind
and eavesdrop on what the other side is saying in her absence.
Sound farfetched? Perhaps, but this threat is the marketing hook
for a new product, the e-mobile, which supposedly can detect hidden
cell phones in a room. The same logic calls for installing a cell-phone
jammer as well, to ensure you have complete privacy in your offices,
or at least in conference rooms where important negotiations occur.
In the United States,
actively jamming a cell-phone signal is illegal. The FCC, which
is the government agency in charge of regulating the airwaves,
has established severe penalties for doing so. If you're caught
at your local restaurant with the mini jammer, it's possible you
could face an $11,000 fine and a one-year jail term. Possible,
but apparently highly unlikely. It seems that the FCC has never
charged anyone with this crime, even though the American market
is one of the most important when it comes to selling cell-phone
jamming equipment. One distributor (who wished to remain anonymous)
told me they've exported approximately 300 jammers to the United
States this year, more than to any other country. The exporter
claims that buyers include restaurants, schools (including some
universities, which have installed the technology to stop students
from wirelessly diddling away on their phones during lectures),
and personal users.
According to the
FCC, cell-phone jammers should remain illegal. Since commercial
enterprises have purchased the rights to the spectrum, the argument
goes, jamming their signals is a kind of property theft. But there
are countries with less draconian rules. France, for instance,
seems to turn a blind eye to the active use of cell-phone jammers
in movie theaters, and countries such as China, Russia, and Israel
either permit use of these technologies, or are very lax when
it comes to enforcing restrictions.
Americans seeking
a legal way to jam cell phones can look into "passive"
jamming technologies. For instance, lining your office in lead
should ensure that no signals get in or out. But if lead is
too industrial to suit your décor, a more genteel alternative
exists: You could install "magnetic wood" paneling
throughout. A Japanese scientist, Hideo Oka, has invented a
new kind of building material, saturated with magnetic particles
made of nickel-zinc ferrite that supposedly deflect 97 percent
of mobile-phone signals.
Oka's hope is that
Home Depot and the like will eventually sell the stuff by the
board-foot. Since blocking signals this way doesn't require active
broadcasting on a commercially leased frequency, it seems to be
legal, though the cellular industry's trade association, the Cellular
Telecommunications and Internet Association, doesn't think any
jamming should occur, whether active or passive.
But the CTIA is unlikely
to see a ban on passive jamming any time soon. The problem is
that cell phones aren't just for talking anymore. And as the industry
continues to provide futuristic gadgets with dizzying capabilities,
it will be tougher to make a case against all forms of interference.
The prevalence of camera phones, to cite just one example, poses
a new problem for industrial security experts eager to keep espionage-minded
shutterbugs in the dark. One company, Iceberg Systems, is beta-testing
a new technology that will remotely turn off the cameras in cell
phones.
While the legality
of this technology is unclear, odds are that the demand for
cellular jammers will surge in the near future, as analysts
predict that within five years there could be up to 1 billion
camera phones in circulation worldwide. We may find ourselves
in a "bottom up" surveillance society, where anyone
can record anything, and send sound and image out to the Internet
for those who want to watch and listen in. This is happening
already: On Nov. 18 a club-goer snapped a picture of an allegedly
vomit- and urine-soaked toy gorilla strapped to the grille of
a police car parked in front of a popular hip-hop club in Portland,
Ore. The picture triggered a minor scandal, forcing the Portland
police department to explain why the incident wasn't racist.
In this climate,
where anything can be photographed or surreptitiously recorded,
the desire for privacy, and "security bubbles" of our
own, will likely mean that the once-esoteric world of cellular
phone jamming will become increasingly mainstream. And why not?
After all, if it's good enough for the president, isn't it good
enough for the rest of us?