Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   WiFi-blocking wallpaper Tin-foil hat wearers rejoice   ( divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

12720 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jun 2004 at 1:17 PM (13 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

34 Comments     (+0 »)
2004-06-20 10:32:10 AM  
Interesting concept.... Since I install WiFi for a living, I guess that means I have to add another question to my site survey.
2004-06-20 11:11:24 AM  
Hah let's see you control my mind now, CIA!
2004-06-20 11:35:23 AM  
w00t! I just sealed my entire head with a layer...woozzy...

2004-06-20 01:20:36 PM  
meh. Saw it on /. 7 hours ago.
2004-06-20 01:21:37 PM  
If it's on one it's on the other PurpleTurkey.
2004-06-20 01:24:02 PM  
hahaha, this could seriously backfire. Here are some realities...

TINFOIL is a microware reflector. Hence the cliche with it being made into hats. Aluminum flyscreen makes a great reflector also. If you were to say, miss ONE WALL in your house or building, the only thing you'd accomplish is making a really big (all be it, messed up) waveguide antenna. That and anybody on your roof or in your basement would get an awesome signal. The smartest thing you can do for cheap is put your WAP in your basement. Ground absorbs the signal as apposed to reflecting/redirecting it. The punks that drive around (I'm one of them) looking for unsecured WAPS will be much less likely to find yours if the signal is coming from out of the ground at a 45 degree angle.
2004-06-20 01:25:51 PM  
Well even if this was cheap enough to outfit you home, how would you do it. How would you put it around your home so that reception inside your house doesn't go to the shiatter.
2004-06-20 01:28:58 PM  
hmmm ment to say shiatter
2004-06-20 01:29:50 PM  
Ah the fark filter, remeinds me of that south park episode, night of a thousand shiat's or something....hehe
2004-06-20 01:30:35 PM  

Only the inside of all outside facing walls. The problem is, what are you going to do? Take out divider walls and and put up this screen, the put the walls back up? That's just retarded. If there is a divider wall with a 2.9 inch or greater gap, the signal is going to go right through it, and more than likely it will be amplified after bouncing off of a bunch of reflective surface. Someone will just have to stand in the right place outside. Not to mention windows. What, are you going to get rid of windows? This is starting to look like snake oil to me. Microwave energy is reflected by metals, and absorbed by water. So it basically goes right through brick, dry wood, etc. The stuff people make houses and buildings with. Figure out a way to make a building with materials of high water content (including a glass replacement) and you'd block wifi.
2004-06-20 01:34:01 PM  
To be elegant, an igloo with no windows and an aluminum screen door on the outside would effectively block wifi.
2004-06-20 01:35:38 PM  
Well I think the article mentions that it can be applied to glass since it's so thin.
Heres what I'm pondering now though, does an amplified signal affect the occupants at all? Or will our corn be popped.
2004-06-20 01:38:42 PM  
So, in theory, if you set up the signal in the basement on the side of the house directly facing the street, you would be protected from that side completely, no? That would work well, if there was no street on the back of the house (i.e no neighbour to the back).
2004-06-20 01:41:11 PM  
It would be amplified slightly, but not focused. For that kind of corn popping power you need a parabolic dish. I've seen a pile of bird near a weather radar dish before. With a bunch of flat surfaces, the signal would bounce around and eventually attenuate or find an exit. It could improve the wireless signal significantly in your building. The wall behind you would become a huge directional reflector.
2004-06-20 01:41:50 PM  
It's an interesting idea, particularly the active version that can be switched on and off. Must be expensive as hell...
2004-06-20 01:43:37 PM  


As close to the floor as possible. Linksys Routers (usually) come with little 2.2db antennas. You can get better 5.5db (rubber duck) antennas for cheap. Put that in your basement on the floor near your street facing wall.
2004-06-20 01:52:22 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
5.5 db antenna
2004-06-20 01:52:47 PM  
I better cost a lot, poor security on wifi has been giving me net access for months now, but i guess if they dont secure the network they wont bother putting this stuff in either, ill stop stressing now and go back to work.
2004-06-20 02:05:32 PM  
Headline punctiation surrenders!
2004-06-20 02:12:59 PM  
5.5 dB antenna? It's amazing how people who should know better (the antenna manufacturers) still make stuff up.

The way you get gain in an antenna is to make it directional. If your antenna is not directional at all, the gain is zero. A 6 dB gain antenna means it sends four times as much power in one direction, at the expense of other directions. A wipole whip antenna like this is not going to be that directional, and the 5.5 dB figure is a lie, or at least not being compared to an isotropic antenna.
2004-06-20 02:13:34 PM  
2004-06-20 02:41:35 PM  
[image from too old to be available]

Baby Jessica unavailable for comment
2004-06-20 02:52:12 PM  
I thought they developed this years ago, near the end of the cold war. Maybe it wasn't cheap or common, but I think they just found a use for old technology.
2004-06-20 03:02:52 PM  
glitch, the punctuation may be bad, but at least they can spell...
2004-06-20 03:32:22 PM  

Hmm, you mean to tell me that no omni directional antennas will ever work above 0db? Damn, I'll bt a lot of my customers that are currently connected to 8.5db omnis will be rather amused to here that.

Think reshaping of the vertical beamwidth.

As to the igloo idea, WiFi passes though snow and ice.

[image from too old to be available]

Believe it or not, these links were fully functional when these pictures were taken!
2004-06-20 03:32:32 PM  
Ebay surrenders.
2004-06-20 03:43:16 PM  

Hmm, you mean to tell me that no omni directional antennas will ever work above 0db?

Yes. Either it's omni directional, or it has gain in one direction. You can't have both.

A half-wave dipole antenna has 2.2 dB gain over an isotopic antenna because the energy is directed away from the direction that the wires point.

Here is a definition of the word gain. It sounds like these manufacturers are using the third definition, which is pretty bogus by itself -- `we're 5.5 dB better than this really sucky antenna!'

Also, these whip antennas are not omni directional anyways. They definately have some gain in a given direction (perpindicular to the antenna), though not 5.5 dB better than an isotropic antenna.
2004-06-20 04:19:29 PM  

Here is one of my favorite suppliers. As you can see they make several different omni directional antennas.

Is it that we are having a misunderstanding in terms here or am I missing something else? I am not trying to start a war here just trying to understand what you are saying.

2004-06-20 05:31:11 PM  
Just surround your house with a Faraday cage. Problem solved.
2004-06-20 05:55:42 PM  
glitch, the punctuation may be bad, but at least they can spell...

2004-06-20 07:03:15 PM  
throw the radio router away
buy a spool of Cat5
2004-06-20 07:42:19 PM  
No truer words have ever been spoken Fusor, Direct link is cheaper, more secure and easier to maintain. And if you dont like wires on your floor take the time to run them thru the walls. Dont know if haveing ethernet sockets in your walls raise the value of your house but it's got to help when selling.
2004-06-20 07:46:22 PM  
Best solution on the cheap. Aluminum Paint. One coat indoors, one coat outdoors. Paint over with the color of your choice. For even more protection, paint another layer of aluminum paint, then regular paint. The microthin insulating layer ought to act like a high frequency filter and the outside layer ought to filter the lower frequencies.

The two layers ought to royally screw up all radiowaves entering and leaving.

Get the underside of your roof and you ought to have 100% protection with little expense. Of course, you will require aluminum screens on your windows to shield those leaks or a screen around your RF emitters.

Of course, the linked product ought to be even better acting as a Faraday cage.
Ike [TotalFark]
2004-06-20 10:33:25 PM  

Unless you're doing installs for people who routinely buy quarter-million-dollar panels of special wallpaper without knowing what it's for, I wouldn't worry too much about it.

To the "I have a better cheaper idea" folks:
This isn't for people who want an air-secured building, they still want to be able to listen to the radio or watch portable TVs and use cell phones or mobile phones, maybe security guards or maintenace with brick radios, stuff like that. Full-spectrum white-noise or scrambling or even lead buffering would be closer to isolating them completely a lot cheaper.

I still don't understand, though, why anyone with such a demonstrable need for signals security would WANT to run said network wirelessly in the first place. I haven't snaked cable in a long, long time, but barring something stupid like mandatory PDA use (if there's a company like that, tell me where I apply)... Sh*t, even then, the damn cradles come with them, and they all have IRDa for PTP stuff anyway...
I mean, securing a wireless intranet isn't ALL that hard, at least against casual attacks, and if you have worries about a greater threat than that, don't farking run wireless! AAGH! Idiots!
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.