In case anyone is interested...

If I'm not mistaken the proposed faraday cage would have to completely surround the antenna, not just cover it, and it would need to be grounded or it wouldn't be all that effective. At that point, wouldn't it be easier to just disconnect the antenna cables at the head unit and install a resistor to knock down the RF transmission to damn near nothing?

 

I haven't tested any of it but as far as surrounding it, it might need to. Could just line under the shark fin with a separate liner so the bottom is full time covered and then pop the cover on and off.

Not sure what you mean by grounded though. I only know that term in reference to electronics and a Faraday liner doesn't have to be grounded. I have a pouch for my phone thats Faraday lined and it works great.

 

digging into it more, it looks like grounding the cage isn't necessary for its operation, only for increased safety as the charge can build up on the surfaces of the cage if the charge has nowhere to go. If it builds up high enough it could jump a spark gap and possibly cause issues with other electronics, so it's best to connect it to ground if possible/feasible.

 

What material exactly are you looking into? The faraday liners I'm talking about are just a polyester fabric woven with copper and nickel. They use it to line purses and wallets to prevent RFID scanners, among many other uses for it, and they definitely aren't grounding them electrically. They also make phone pouches lined with it to block all signal to your phone.

 

Apparently they don't build up enough of a charge for it to be a problem, or they have non-conductive material insulating the non-ferrous metals from being touched. Still, I think for the original suggestion, just disconnecting the antennas would be the better solution. Or in my case, just disable the DCM by pulling the fuse.

 

If ONLY I knew which channel to turn to, I could watch the whole thing! LIVE!

 

Would an impedance mismatch give a strong enough reflected current? Say 30 ohms or so.

Aw Heck, the frequency would need to be known.... Oh Well

 

Should be able to get the freq from the fcc filing related to the fcc id on the hardware. Or look up the bands that carrier uses.

 

That would be a bit whacky, to have a CB receiver that "feeds back" the "secret info" that your truck is sending out?

Of course, the way I heard it is.... If you have not signed up for the "Toyota total care" program, there is really no one listening to your truck's pleas for help and mercy. ;-)

 

Especially mine, I took it's voice box out if ya catch my meaning haha

 

There's a device (don't remember the term) that when you point it at something, it'll tell you the frequency.

 

It's called a frequency counter. You can get them off Amazon for around $60 these days.

 

Social media and that phone in your hand are quietly collecting more data about you than your truck ever will.

 

That’s great. But where are the pictures of the Helix?

 

I was thinking the same thing while I was reading this

 

You're not breaking anything to me. Reading and then replying to one post that is a reply to another, without overall context is foolish. Google isn't buying data from Toyota or whatever 3rd parties that also receive it to find out who's driving what vehicle, specifically. There is no $ in using all of that computing power just to find a single identity. It's possible, like I said twice before, but Toyota isn't doing any of that because it's of no use. Even if they were serving ads to owners via the infotainment system they would still id someone with a number. They don't care who you are as long as they know what they can sell you.

As for the selling info to anyone, no they cannot. They can only sell it for marketing and research purposes, per the contract that is agreed upon. Maybe they can fudge what that means, but again the $ isn't n selling driving info about single individuals for nefarious purposes. LE doesn't buy data. If they need data that is privately owned by Toyota or others, they certainly do need a judge to get that data. Call it a warrant or whatever else you want. LE doesn't have free/open access to these information database.

 

The same could be said about creating profiles for people that do not use your service. Yet Facebook creates accounts for users that don't exist. Your grandma may not know how to use the internet at all, and she likely has a profile on Facebook's servers. Google Facebook Shadow Profiles for more information on that. The tldr is it stores content friends and family have in your shadow profile that will be ready for you when you create an account. There is little computational power needed to store information to that profile. As for justifying it, they sell ads. Say an automotive warranty company wanted to sell their services. They contract Google for advertising. So google creates an algorithm to check driving profiles, and sends ads to people who use 75%+ of their throttle. Sound far fetched? Because that's short version of how google adsense works.

As for selling data and needing a warrant, that is a very grey area right now. The gov has been getting data from google so much that Google started charging them for it. They are supposed to require a warrant, but several times now that has been "mistakenly" overlooked. There was even a case where google gave them the wrong user's data, that user was found to be guilty of a crime, they used that information to conduct an investigation. The lawyer was able to get the google data removed as evidence, but they still prosecuted him in an otherwise cold case. THis was years ago, and all i could find trying to find it are a bunch of stories with a ton of politics in them. But you're correct, the government legally shouldn't/doesn't have free open access. Whether those laws are being followed, is in doubt. But it is odd that Google's new data centers are being built on government land.

 

Lol, the tinfoil is thick!

Toyota isn't selling ads, they are selling data to advertisers and marketing companies. Facebook and Toyota are not comparable in this context. Stop grasping at whatever you can to prolong this discussion and lay off the correlation = suspicion thing without having real info to draw suspicion from.

When Google, Facebook, etc provide data to LE it's just data and it's up to LE to verify/investigate. If the data was mixed up with other users or whatever that's on the investigators and lawers/prosecutors/defense to determine. There is no guarantee of anything, especially accuracy, when that stuff is made available. Any dipshit attorney would prove beyond doubt that the data used to prosecute or defend was belonging or applied to the person in question before even thinking about using it. That story sounds like some internet shit that was made a big deal of by those that don't know what they are talking about... When in Rome, I guess.

 

I work for big corp here , aerospace military and commercial.
We are not allowed to connect company cell phones into rental cars or personal cars data ports. If we must charge we can only charge into cigarette lighter port with adapter or wall socket.

Proprietary and intellectual property theft is what they worry about….so they say.