News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Soli by GistNoesis on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @01:39PM (#21273063)
It is a nice piece of technology. It is a 60Ghz millimeter-wave radar. It is a privacy nightmare. It is already shipped.

Radar uses electromagnetic waves (like Wifi but higher frequency) so it can go through walls, and even typical range for gesture recognition is less than meter, It probably can go at least 10 times as far by boosting the gain of the amplifier, it is not constrained like a theremin would be because it is already working in the far field region of the antenna.

Because it work at such high frequency (but not so high that it can still go through walls), it has many very small antennas arrays, and sense sub millimeter movements even from far away. It also has beam-forming capabilities, meaning it can focus the direction in which to sense. Because it is radar, things which moves are of interests and are filtered easily from the background.

Typically this piece of technology already can or will soon be able to : sense how many humans are around it, where they are, how fast they breath, how fast the heart is pulsating, who they are by computing some heart-base ID.

It is low-power and always-on, 360° with focus-able attention. It is cheap because it can be made on a chip. (Edit: fixing typos)

Re:Soli by arghwhat on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @01:57PM (#21273300)
> 60Ghz millimiter-wave radar

> so it can go through walls

60 GHz RF doesn't really pass through anything, which is the entire reason that the frequency is used for radar. A radar needs powerful reflections to detect things. Penetration impedes its operation, and would be akin to a camera that is out of focus.

I'm also unsure if the resolution of this chip is noteworthy.

Re:Soli by mlyle on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @02:57PM (#21274066)
Yup, the range claims are silly, too. Radar has an inverse fourth power with distance, so to go 10x as far by adding power, you need 10000x as much power, which is quite a challenge at 60GHz.
Re:Soli by GistNoesis on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @03:40PM (#21274588)
You are right that Radar follows an inverse 4th power with distance (inverse 2th power for the light to go to the reflected object then 2th power for the reflected wave to go back to your antenna).

For 3$ https://fr.aliexpress.com/item/32786483344.html a 6Ghz radar that goes 12meters using 30mA, so my range claims are not that silly.

When there is no obstacle 6Ghz or 60Ghz doesn't matter.

Re:Soli by mlyle on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:34PM (#21275234)
> When there is no obstacle 6Ghz or 60Ghz doesn't matter.

Power amplifier efficiency for 6GHz and 60GHz is not the same-- not even close.

> For 3$ https://fr.aliexpress.com/item/32786483344.html a 6Ghz radar that goes 12meters using 30mA, so my range claims are not that silly.

This is a deflection and ridiculous. We're talking about spotting e.g. gestures. It falls apart with distance because of both angular resolution and inverse-fourth power.

I've been involved in the design of mmwave radars. If it was easy to spot and precisely track small objects at 10m, we'd be doing it...

Re:Soli by GistNoesis on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @06:41PM (#21276789)
>If it was easy to spot and precisely track small objects at 10m,

That's not the claim I'm making. I agree that this chip won't do the gesture recognition at 10m, but I'm quite convinced that it can pick up human movement signal if they try to do so.

>I've been involved in the design of mmwave radars

I don't have this level of expertise. But I'll be really surprised if we couldn't reach the same levels of amplification. Gaining 12 dB will double the range. We can extend the antenna array or use more expensive low noise amplifiers. For cars there are 30Ghz Doppler radar, and the distance can go at least 50m.

From the referenced paper ( A Highly Integrated 60 GHz 6-Channel Transceiver With Antenna in Package for Smart Sensing and Short-Range Communications https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1109/JSSC.2016.2585621 ) : "In this work a 60 GHz 4-channel receiver 2-channel transmitter packaged chip targeting high resolution sensing systems and capable of supporting large bandwidth communication channels is presented. The SiGe technology used offers a low 1/f noise which is essential to the functionality of the chip in frequency modulated continues wave systems (FMCW)and Doppler radar with a sensing range below 10 m."

"While we have not explored this in-depth we would like to highlight the similarities to re-cent work exploiting FMCW RF technology to coarsely ‘image’ users through a wall [1]"

Re:Soli by mlyle on Thursday October 17, 2019 @03:07AM (#21279606)
Your second quote seems out of context and doesn't occur in the paper you cite.

Your first quote says "sensing range below 10m".

Yes, it is possible to make long range 60GHz systems-- largely through antenna gain and lenses. Yes, we could build an entirely different radar to track peoples' gross movement--- and could have 20 years ago, too-- but that has largely nothing to do with the original system or your original claim.

If I wanted to image people at low resolution through a wall, 60GHz is about the last thing I'd pick. Drywall alone has an attenuation of about 3 dB/cm, and remember we have to cross the wall twice. You run out of loss budget really quick. Suggesting one can go 10x as far (10000x power alone) and through walls is... creative.

If you want to track people through a wall, use UHF. It works pretty well and is pretty easy.

Re:Soli by GistNoesis on Thursday October 17, 2019 @05:45AM (#21280317)
Sorry I mismanaged my tabs, the second citation is just above the conclusion in the referenced paper (https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2984565 ) "Interacting with Soli: Exploring Fine-Grained Dynamic Gesture Recognition in the Radio-Frequency Spectrum"

> Suggesting one can go 10x as far (10000x power alone) and through walls is... creative.

I was going for conservative. Typically thinking about open-space work environment. The device doesn't need line of sight like a camera would, it can be in your coworker pocket and listening to you.

They are well founded and doing their own radio chips, I give them the credit they deserve and assume they can replicate a somewhat similar technology (6Ghz radar).

It is better to use a logarithmic scale. The 10000x power (40dB gain) doesn't mean you will need to emit 10000x more power, in practice you will amplify the signal, by focusing the beam via antenna design, and amplifying which theoretically you can do relatively easily as long as you are above the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation noise. Then you need to do some trickery to trade bandwidth for signal strength (which they do : FMCW). Then you still can integrate over time. A radar typically scan its whole surrounding, but if instead you chose to focus it at one place you can gather for longer.

Re:Soli by GistNoesis on Friday October 18, 2019 @09:50AM (#21291323)
>10000x power alone

Sorry to dig this up so late, there is a usual misconception when reasoning with power (which you might suffer from) :

What matters is not power, what matter is what we measure. We are measuring electric field in volts whose square is proportional to the power. Going 10x as far, mean measuring a voltage 100x smaller. Even with just the dynamic range if your analog digital converter is reading you 8-bits values (values going to 256) with a 100x voltage reduction you get a smaller blip going from 0 to 2.

Re:Soli by mlyle on Friday October 18, 2019 @12:42PM (#21292830)
What matters is signal to noise ratio. There is not really background noise in UHF and up; instead there is thermal noise in the receive amplifier.

If you have SNR of 6dB over some integration interval which gave you acceptable results, and you have 40dB of additional path loss, you're now -34dB, and you need to make that up. There's no "taking half" because we're talking about only a 100x difference in receive voltage.

Put another way, we already "took half"-- our SNR of 6dB (quadruple the power) was already only double the voltage. Our metrics for SNR already take what you're talking about into account.

Dynamic range can be a factor, but you generally have some kind of automatic gain control that increases effective dynamic range (so that in absence of signal, you have noise much bigger than 1LSB showing up at the converter), and the conversion dynamic range "width" of the converter only matters when there are other in-band transmitters around you need to reject (because they limit how far you can turn up the initial gain before saturating the converter).

Note also, not that it relates to what we said at all-- you can detect signals much smaller than 1LSB because of dither.

Re:Soli by spyder on Thursday October 17, 2019 @05:51AM (#21280335)
> I'm quite convinced that it can pick up human movement signal

Yea, that's not new with the 60Ghz, it's already possible with wi-fi signals, even the pose can be estimated:

http://rfpose.csail.mit.edu/

Re:Soli by ozymandias12 on Thursday October 17, 2019 @09:57AM (#21282077)
Not an mmwave radar guy as well, but afaik, this little chip is quite capable of counting how many people are IN a room, if they're standing or laying down, etc, but of course, without the granular control of its factory NUI [natural user interface] proximity calibration.

And here I'm not even considering if this solid state radar chip cross reference its data with Wifi radio signals or the dot projector, boosting its ML recognition capabilities to be able to "blob" (and possibly identify) moving things as far as 50m.

Re:Soli by GistNoesis on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:27PM (#21275153)
I am not familiar with 60Ghz. I agree that it has more problem going through obstacles. But usually when going higher frequency we can compensate by using more bandwidth. (Terahertz antennas use this to do crazy stuff.)

The main reason it was chosen was to make it smaller to have everything integrated on a chip, and have an antenna array.

Walls are typically static, which means they won't appear in the hardware amplified Doppler-shift signal (below 100Hz) which detect moving objects. (Radar works by amplifying the low frequency beating that occurs when adding two signal of high but close frequency 60GHz and 60Ghz+50Hz, low pass filtering then amplifying.)

Typically the limits about power are dictated by how much attenuation (distance + obstacles) in dB *4 because inverse 4th power law, but as long as you are above the background noise you can amplify.

Also here it is not trying to form a focused image, it is just gathering some signal to run some pattern detection algorithm.

Even if there is a lot of noise we can integrate it with software fft over a long period of time, because we are trying to look for breathing movements (0.3Hz) which are even slower.

Re:Soli by arghwhat on Thursday October 17, 2019 @12:12PM (#21283517)
> Walls are typically static, which means they won't appear in the hardware amplified Doppler-shift signal (below 100Hz) which detect moving objects.

It will kill your SnR entirely, though. There will realistically be nothing to amplify.

Re:Soli by eutropia on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @01:59PM (#21273334)
> In the case of Pixel 4, the model runs on device, never sends sensor data to Google servers, and helps it interpret the motion to Quick Gestures.

From the "Technology" page linked at the top.

Personally, I don't see how it is meaningfully any worse for privacy than the always on microphone in the google assistant. And I look forward to what it will enable for VR and AR tech!

Re:Soli by schmichael on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @03:46PM (#21274663)
"Never sending raw sensor data to Google" and "Never sending inferences made from sensor data to Google" are massively different claims.

"Never sending raw sensor data to Google" is an efficiency claim that means little with regard to protecting privacy.

Re:Soli by drusepth on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @03:55PM (#21274778)
It's pretty trivial* to sniff traffic and find out what data is actually being sent to Google once people have devices in their hands, no?

It doesn't seem like the kind of thing a company would try to underhandedly sneak in after explicitly saying the sensor runs on-device and "never sends sensor data to Google servers".

* Trivial in the sense of someone who actually knows what they're doing -- of which we only really need one person in order to "leak" what's actually happening.

Re:Soli by Arelius on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:20PM (#21275055)
No, it's not. Between encryption and a high background communication noise of the cellphone already it's hard to discern exactly what is being sent.

I don't think anyone thinks that they are, or will be sending all the sensor data to the servers. But they don't need to, they only need to send back what is determined due to that data.

Specifically consider what is most likely for an ad company, a few differentiated markers to help with targeting, that can easily be packed into a few bits. And can be trivially stored to be sent later on with some other packet that has a valid reason to be sent. (Appstore update check, anyone?) Accounting for every bit that leaves the phone sounds like a nigh impossible task.

I'm not saying this is definitely happening, but I don't think it's practical to rule out the possibility, with any amount of packet sniffing.

Re:Soli by victoro0 on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:15PM (#21274985)
Are you serious?

Because I'm pretty sure there is some random "user experience checkbox" checked by default that somehow means some of the data is sent to Google so they can "improve their products and services" and what not, but don't worry because it is probably "anonymized" and will only be seen by "humans" or "AIs" depending on what feels less bad for the general public once discovered.

Re:Soli by kabacha on Thursday October 17, 2019 @05:59AM (#21280375)
> the model runs on device, never sends sensor data to Google servers

Would you by any chance be interested in buying a bridge in Brooklyn?

Re:Soli by JamyDev on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @01:49PM (#21273194)
Not that I don't believe you, but I would like to see some sources on some of these claims you're making...
Re:Soli by GistNoesis on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @02:29PM (#21273713)
I read the referenced papers : https://atap.google.com/soli/technology/

About 60Ghz technology : https://www.embedded.com/why-60ghz-mmwave-is-moving-into-the...

I've played with some 6Ghz 2$ microwave radar sensor and Software Defined Radios though I have not yet used 60Ghz.

Electromagnetic Waves are kind of magic when used in not conventional ways. I remember seeing the 2015 disney EM-sense video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpKDNle6ia4 which is a non-radar way to listen to the environment.

Re:Soli by BinaryIdiot on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @01:58PM (#21273319)
I mean, in theory you setup 3 WiFi base stations and you can use WiFi in roughly the same way. No where near as accurate, of course, but you can easily figure out which areas of the house a person is in.

I don't see why this wouldn't be an even better way to do the same thing.

Re:Soli by SketchySeaBeast on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @02:24PM (#21273650)
Assuming all this tech is actively and deliberately spying on you, wouldn't your phone in your pocket provide the same information?
Re:Soli by r1ch on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @02:23PM (#21273640)
Given that it's always-on, I wonder how much it interferes with 802.11ad (WiGig) which also uses 60 GHz.
Re:Soli by cma on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @03:33PM (#21274516)
Are you sure? 60Ghz is used for low latency video streaming and doesn't penetrate anything.
Re:Soli by gniv on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @05:40PM (#21276137)
I should start a business. Faraday Sleeves.

... and of course it exists. Only $90: https://silent-pocket.com/products/faraday-cage-phone-sleeve

Re:Soli by tibbon on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @02:11PM (#21273484)
Time to make a theremin app!
Re:Soli by markandrewj on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @03:35PM (#21274539)
Somewhat ironically, in context of the thread about privacy, the inventor of the theremin is also known for creating this soviet listening device.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device)

Re:Soli by pstuart on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:04PM (#21274863)
And once you add in MicroExpression comprehension (https://www.paulekman.com/resources/micro-expressions/), and voice audio analysis and you've got a real working, portable lie detector.

That will be, um, interesting.

Re:Soli by cmroanirgo on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @02:09PM (#21273463)
It seems like they need some humans to tweak their algos, by playing a game no less:

>* Headed South is an experience that introduces Pixel’s new touchless interface to users in a playful and engaging way. Through your journey, learn, practice and master the use of Motion Sense gestures to gather a flock of birds and fly South to escape the storm.