5 ms·
I’ve been wondering this for a while and maybe someone has a clue. Based on the very “bursty” nature of LoRA, how much does an adversary need to spend to radio
by ianpenney 8mo ago
I’ve been wondering this for a while and maybe someone has a clue.
Based on the very “bursty” nature of LoRA, how much does an adversary need to spend to radiolocate it? What’s the threat model there?
- comboy 8mo ago$20? These networks do not try to hide your location and triangulating known frequencies is trivial.
- golem14 8mo agoHow trivial is it, really? These are spread spectrum devices that could have very sparse duty cycles. If you sending only millisecond bursts a couple of times an hour, for telemetry and whatnot, it would seem pretty hard to get a good fix, especially when moving. I haven't analyzed lora traffic, so just talking out of my ass.
- wolvoleo 8mo agoLoRa uses chirping which are much longer than milliseconds. You can clearly see them in a spectrum display. It's a very slow protocol. Not as slow as WISPR or JT8 but still slow. The flip side is that it's robust (the chirping provides a lot of interference protection against fixed-frequency interference for example)
- esseph 8mo agoSdrs are super cheap these days. It wouldn't be hard. Note: did things in .mil
- 15155 8mo agoWith a couple of GPS-synchronized receivers stationed in an area, child's play. LoRA airtime is extraordinarily long for common spreading factors.
- Gigachad 8mo agoYou could get a rough location for free. Every time you send a message, “observer” nodes connected to the internet publish the packet, and in the packet is the repeater path taken, repeaters have known locations and the first repeater is going to be near you.
- nubinetwork 8mo agoIf its meshtastic, just keep sending traceroutes until you triangulate the node.