this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2026
48 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
88041 readers
2867 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Crossposted my comment from the crosspost:
They are basically introducing a carrier frequency that matches a frequency the device uses. By matching those, they are able to usr the devices own harmonics to amplify and return the signal.
They show that this can be done without any effects on the hardware, no trace. And can be done through 30cm solid concrete walls at a distance.
The tests, on wired and wireless audio devices return 100% usable and intelligible information in nearly every case and every situation.
The only situation they didn't seem to test was a victim using multiple identical devices. \ Eg. I'm a known target so i have 3 sets of headphones. 2 constantly playing random audio and 1 being the one carrying secrets.
Would they be able to differentiate between devices or would it all come back garbled? One test was transferability - the same model of device had the same vulnerable frequencies. If they 'injected' in a room full of the same devices, could they determine a single device?