I don't know. Maybe I'm just getting old. It seems this, like a lot of new tech these days, will end up offering little benefit while providing new malicious capabilities.

It's been the same throughout history. Invent a tool...use it to kill.

I wouldn't be as negative.

Frequently we create the tool in order to kill with it.

After that we also use to tool to create.

We're equally capable of good and evil and yes, we are frequently good, too.

It's not negative, it's true.

One thing I see 802.1bf ( Sensing ), along with 802.11be ( WiFi 7 ) could be used together in setting up consumer mesh WiFi Network. Home Wireless Networking is still pretty much an unsolved problem for average consumers.

Edit: Turns out there are other comments below mentioning this.

"Home Wireless Networking is still pretty much an unsolved problem for average consumers."

What do you mean? Most consumers have a wireless router, and that works for their needs.

If you live in anything other than an apartment, your wifi connection drops considerably once a few walls and a floor are in the way. Mesh networks solve this by repeating the signal halfway to your hard-to-reach devices, although it must be done in an intelligent way if you want seamless band switching and its performance might be greatly improved with wifi 7's sensing capabilities.

My router is in the basement. Reception is great throughout the house, including the second floor, and even decent out in the garage or on the deck. Similar setup and results for my in-laws who have a massive house (3000-3500 sqft).

Many houses and places of business have walls or floors made with thicker material that block/hinder the waves - things like solid wood floors, brick walls or concrete walls can do a number on even 2.4ghz signals.

The in-laws have hardwood floors on both levels. I haven't seen internal masonry walls in most places.

Even if that is a concern, I don't see sensing as being a benefit.

It's very scary shit. We could soon have no privacy at all in our own homes because of other people's WiFi networks. If the output is strong enough, all you have to do is connect to/crack someone's WiFi and use it to get a layout of all their neighbor's places.

This is a great example of why people don’t have privacy. Ethernet cables exist, and wholly forgo these problems. But, they are less convenient. Consumers complain a lot about privacy, but do little to really demand it. Of course manufacturers deserve much of the blame here for actually implementing these things, but it doesn’t seem as if consumers are trying to steer them in the right direction at all.

all you have to do is connect to/crack someone's WiFi and use it to get a layout of all their neighbor's places.

It's much worse: neither crack nor connection is required. The technology is entirely passive, it only uses reflections from Wi-Fi radios, same as radar. No connection to the router is required, hence the acronym DFWS (Device-Free Wireless Sensing).

To be clear, this can be done today with $20 ESP32 WiFi devices + custom firmware, i.e. any motivated attacker can already see through the walls of homes and businesses. The Wi-Fi 7 Sensing draft standard is proposing to make this available to everyone.

Perhaps we need a celebrity to help demo SENS transparency of their home walls, to help consumers and regulators understand the implications. That could motivate research investment in privacy controls.

More details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29901979

The Wi-Fi 7 Sensing draft standard is proposing to make this available to everyone.

As your sentence before this says, it already is available to everyone. The only thing wifi 7 opens up is someone with less technical know-how being able to flash openwrt and install some program that extracts and/or visualizes the sensing data, but $20 ESP32's isn't much of a cost to someone looking to use radio wave sensing maliciously right now.

To be clear, this can be done today with $20 ESP32 WiFi devices + custom firmware, i.e. any motivated attacker can already see through the walls of homes and businesses. The Wi-Fi 7 Sensing draft standard is proposing to make this available to everyone.

It's like you could make a magic flashlight that sees though walls, vs. flipping a switch that turns every wall to glass. It's not a perfect metaphor, sure, but the point is that it's kind of a big step to flip that switch, throw open those floodgates, and to do it with so little fanfare.

There is a difference between consumer benefits and maybe industrial benefits. Maybe it might make communication between sorting bots more accurate and quicker.

Who is actually asking for this? It can't be for consumers just wanting to use the internet right? I don't get it.

It's most probably meant for opportunistic sensing in industrial environments, where it might become quite useful. It's not something you're going to use at home.

https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents...

  Security
  Environment Control
  Wake on approach, walk away lock
  Conference room occupancy
  Gesture control
  Elderly monitoring
  Baby monitoring
  Smart housekeeping
  Advertisement signage efficiency
  Motion detection
  Proximity detection
  People counting
  Human activity recognition
  Vital signs (e.g. heartrate) detection

The big one is "heartbeat detection".

"Tactical suggests there are 14 heartbeats in the room"

"During the interview the candidates heart rate increased during questions on their reasons for leaving the last position"

ohhh. There is sooo much here :-)

During the interview the candidates heart rate increased during questions on their reasons for leaving the last position

That discussion is illegal under current laws. (you cannot use a lie detector in interviews) Well at least in the US, check your local laws.

Authorities aren't restricted from using a lie detector in the US, just from using the results in court. They're frequently used to pressure suspects in criminal cases during questioning, knowing the results are inadmissable.

The only real practical example is fall detection, what's the real purpose of this?

I worked briefly for a company working on WiFi sensing, and besides fall detection, nobody could give a compelling use case.

When pressed to come up with a motivating vision, the big idea was lights turning on automatically when you enter a room.

I guess? Like a lot of R&D, it seemed a solution in search of a problem.

I've long had an obsession with energy savings and heating, and I think the best way to save energy on heating is by heating people instead of building. With accurate person detection in a room, you could shine low intensity IR at their exact position to keep them warm without wasting energy on heating the rest of the room.

But yeah, I think we can all expect this will be used to monitor behaviour in stores, to spy on people in homes, to rob us and to throw more "relevant" advertising in our faces.

Saving lives isn't good enough for you?

The only real practical example is fall detection, what's the real purpose of this?

I can think of few real world applications. Eg. I have autism and air filter. Air filter working on full power is very uncomfortable for me, but with position sensing, it can be configured to run more often when I'm not in room. Motion sensing isn't exactly a solution, because I can be very still.

Automated light management is sensible too. It can also be used to automatically turn off lights if I fall asleep.

Is it just me, or does this seems like a really, really bad idea? The privacy implications here seem… disturbing.

Technology can't be stopped by individual engineers refusing to invent it, it can only be stopped by everyone agreeing on the ways it shouldn't be used. So it was for arson (fire), homicide (every weapon since the rock), and obscene material (all communications technology), and so must it be for privacy and the various techniques of monitoring us.

Since 802.11bf makes most existing walls transparent, it should lead to innovation in wall construction.

It may also increase market demand for light-based wireless networking (Li-Fi) which has the advantage of being stopped by existing walls.

People will need indoor cell repeaters to undo what's done by their shielded walls.

I think future home privacy will go beyond blinds. We will be lining the walls in RF blocking sheets.

Honest question: is wrapping a home in a Faraday cage even plausible?

Or on a room level? How do you control for RF leaks? How do you handle windows and doorways?

I’m fascinated.

It isn't just you, but it should be. The privacy implications are potentially disturbing and need to be address (I have no idea how). However there are also a lot of real uses for this that will make your life better. Some of those are things we haven't thought of yet.

Some WiFi systems [1] [2] already offer sensing capabilities for home security.

[1]: https://www.linksys.com/us/support-article?articleNum=317804

[2]: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20171114005542/en/Nex...

I agree with other comments that question the ratio of benefit vs. risk. But I’m an old fogey who feels similarly about other “smart” home devices.

In a related note, this week Google ATAP and Ford announced Ripple, a open standard for consumer radio sensing based on Project Soli (60 Ghz)

[1] https://github.com/CTA-Ripple/Ripple-v.0

[2] https://9to5google.com/2022/01/06/google-soli-radar-ripple/

Finally! X-Ray glasses like what the ads in the comic book promised!

I want my Wi-Fi to deliver me fast internet access, not track my position. Have a feeling this will be used for il-intent and monetized by future routers

+1

As many APs today are already cloud dependent I can totally see where all the sensed data will be stored and out of the owners control.

I’m skeptical there are customers really asking for this.

If there's one thing I learnt the last decade, it's to not underestimate how even the shittiest of tech, like a smart fridge or an iot juice press, will become must-haves for the consuming class. In this case, perhaps it's "find my keys", "alert me when my toddler wakes up", "metaverse body tracking", etc/whatever.

How would this be useful? Collecting the average distance away from an access point someone uses their phone or whatever?

But tracking your position allows it to give you fast internet access.

I don't need more than a few hundred megabits on the go, thank you very much. If I want to go faster, and Ethernet cable is always a faster solution with less moving parts.

When it comes to consumer gear, modern WiFi equipment is often faster than even Ethernet. I agree with your overall point, though.

Not mentioned in the article but a futuristic guess would be to provide omniscient eyes for AI/robots.

Short term smart bots that can navigate and clean a cluttered household with little kids and toddlers knocking about.

Longer term, maybe nanobots.

It could be Rosie from the Jetsons but more likely it’s Amazon analyzing my poop density to sell me some goofball supplements.

This could inspire some clothing designs that weave in rf blocking or distorting materials to wear in retail or work places.

There seems to be a lot of FUD about this. Make no mistake, the malicious and privacy invasive applications are already being used; they just don't follow a IEEE spec and aren't associated with WiFi directly.

If a maliciously controlled router wants to track you it already can because your phone, smart watch, and laptop already broadcast themselves.

This technology may not seem useful to the purpose of WiFi on it's face but that couldn't be further from the truth. Knowing the population of a room in terms of devices but also people is useful for WiFi deployment planning and power level optimization. 2000 people with 2 devices is different from 4000 individual people.

People already have WiFi enabled lights and other sensors so providing a standard for object & people detection will make those use cases even better.

So there’s FUD about something we should already reasonably have FUD about?

When analysing FUD always use the ELMER acronym

E - Expectations

L - Lifetime

M - Motivation

E - Environment

R - Reward

:-)

Can you elaborate? What is this?

It's not FUD. There's nothing hypothetical about the danger.

The hypothetical in this is that this suddenly opens the door to RF-based physical sensing, when every attacker that can gain from this is already using it, just via custom equipment.

Nice...

SWAT teams, home burglars and the NSA will all be clients for the data.

Once the granularity gets fine enough, movements involved in prayers, sex and elimination of waste can all be monitored remotely by state actors.

Malware from around the world will now be able to transmit details of your body movements back to their controllers.

Imagine being able to blackmail you because malware detected you having sex when your partner was away or performing Muslim prayers in an islamophobic society.

I'm surprised that there's not a single comment here about 802.11ay which is also 60GHz. Each channel on that standard can do something like 40Gbps, which is nuts. From Wikipedia[0]:

The link-rate per stream is 44 Gbit/s, with four streams this goes up to 176 Gbit/s.

Yes, it can't penetrate walls, but is huge for point to point communication. Think VR headset bandwidth, file transfers between devices, wireless backhaul between buildings. It's not just for spying on your cat.

I think it's important to remember that it's not magic, it's just radio waves. You can "sense" with a lot more resolution if you use a camera and light bulb. There are plenty of eyeballs, cameras, and lights all around you right now. Even worse, someone could be looking in your window with binoculars.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ay

You can "sense" with a lot more resolution if you use a camera and light bulb.

(Visible) Light has a frequency of around 400-790 THz, which explains why it has a inherently better resolution.

https://www.rtinsights.com/li-fi-a-new-wireless-alternative-...

Li-Fi connections are broadcast over the air through a light-emitting diodes (LED) broadcaster and support rates up to 100Gbit/s ... Li-Fi can also serve to identify an object’s indoor position more accurately than Wi-Fi or GPS used today (less than 2cm and less than 3 degrees of orientation while it is providing real-time localization (less than 34ms). This accuracy is vital in multiple applications such as navigation In-Door Robots and Drones, Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Gaming, among others ... it cannot go through walls, and thus a private local area network (LAN) can be created by lighting up a closed room ... Any organization that needs to keep information within the four walls, such as military bases and banks, can use the technology to keep data restricted to a single room.

There's potential for visible-light networking but the Li-Fi people in particular are complete garbage. They claim visible light travels faster than radio waves and say Li-Fi is a hundred times faster than wi-fi but their thousand dollar router can only do 100Mb/s. They also rip off the Wi-Fi Alliance logo.

Oh, I have been dreaming about LiFi for some time, if what you're saying it's true, that's... disappointing. Do you have any sources about the current state of (real-world) LiFi ?

Literally their website.

Who specifically is "their"?

Which Li-fi people? AFAICT there are several groups, and li-fi.co (which I'll assume you're talking about) is less advertising for one specific group, and more advocating for the technology as a whole.

They claim visible light travels faster than radio waves

I wasn't able to find it on the lifi website but seems like some poor copywriter got something wrong

their thousand dollar router can only do 100Mb/s

Who's they? In any case, since lifi.co is advocating Li-Fi as a whole so it makes sense they talk about theoretical speeds, whereas a specific router from some manufacturer might not be able to reach those speeds, considering how new the technology is

In the end, I imagine Li-Fi doesn't have much of a future outside of niche markets because it has to compete with wifi which is everywhere (and it can't supplant wifi because e.g. it doesn't work in your pocket)

So if I don’t want anyone taking a WiFi “photo” of me on the throne I should put up aluminum foil curtains?

Wear a tin foil hat. And take a photo of yourself anyways cause a guy on the throne with a tin foil hat on sounds hilarious

It's not just for spying on your cat.

Can we stop downplaying privacy issues please?

Not trying to be provocative, but how is this any worse than existing cameras or motion sensors?

With cameras and motion sensors you more or less know how they'll be used and as a user you can choose to disable them (or at the very least block them if you can't disable them).

With this technology, it will be integrated into your router (and clients?), so turning those off will mean to turn off WiFi altogether. Added to that, I'll bet that most people wouldn't even begin to imagine that WiFi could be used for sensing people, and they'll continue using WiFi without being aware for the grave privacy implications.

With this technology, it will be integrated into your router (and clients?), so turning those off will mean to turn off WiFi altogether.

It's rather unreasonable to think that you won't be able to turn off band on router. Especially given fact that 60Ghz is heavily shielded by _doors_, so any usable router would require fallback 2.4/5/6 Ghz connectivity.

802.11bf Wi-Fi 7 Sensing works with all frequencies, 2.4 and up.

Even if Neighbor 2 turns off their router, Neighbor 1 could passively use the radio waves from Neighbor 3's router to surveil reflections from Neighbor 2, including keyboard typing, heartrate/breathing, location and physical activity.

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27123493

The problem with this neighbor-spying fear is that "complex math using data from radio waves to sense stuff" is already possible and readily available by anyone willing to study and put in the world of building it, wifi 7 isn't suddenly enabling that part of rf analysis or mathematics.

Your next door neighbor’s wifi will know your every movement, and can probably image it too. End of privacy within closed doors.

This is hyperbole. 60GHz cannot penetrate walls and closed doors. 2.4GHz and 5GHz lack the resolution to image you, especially if your adversary only has control of one AP. There are already tons of side channel attacks with existing WiFi and Bluetooth that reveal when someone is in the area. Your neighbour could already be tracking your devices, for all you know.

Here are 400 research papers on Wi-Fi sensing with 2.4/5Ghz, https://dhalperi.github.io/linux-80211n-csitool/#external

Sure, can privacy advocates stop down playing what we lose because we value privacy though?

There needs to be a balance, location information will be very useful for a lot of things, but only if we have it fully implemented. I want things to sense when I fall and call for help for me. (If I was at a big risk I'd have a button, but for the average young person the risk is non-zero but very small). I want my home automation stuff to figure out where they are and configure themselves. I want my routers to suggest that I'd get better coverage by moving it.

Yes there is privacy concerns and they need to be addressed, but don't lose the good with it.

I think we're all being a little maximalist here? I think it's fair to say this article's focus is on the tech, so it doesn't discuss the cool stuff (incredible VR experience, sci-fi like gesture apps) or the bad stuff (Google knows when you scratch your ass). I think it's reasonable to read an article that doesn't mention any usage restrictions, look at the track record of tech, and worry about the privacy implications.

The Verge includes a whole section on stuff you agree to when purchasing a new laptop when reviewing them. Maybe it's a good idea for us to start insisting on some level of privacy regulation on new tech. This is purely regulatory right, nothing preventing things like VR--just preventing FB from knowing everything you're doing while using their VR headset, and selling that information to others. Maybe that creates an economic constraint, but this seems like a choice consumers can make. For example Amazon sells 2 versions of every Kindle: ad supported and not.

It's starting to feel like the #1 go-forward privacy law needs to be a mandatory opt-in choice requirement, with a viable refuse option.

It can be asked once at the device level, but regulated information needs to be specified at the highest level (e.g. "location information about an individual"), and then the concrete technical implementation left unspecified.

"Does it, or does it not?" is more important than "How?" Because legislation specifying "How?" will always lag technology by decades.

(But then again, this probably should have been done in the mid-90s, once it was apparent which way cookies were going)

I cant see through walls with a lightbulb. I can with wifi.

This standard makes my wifi router into an internet connected, closed source blob, light bulb and camera that is impossible to obscure (without killing my internet connection).

Sure, I can wire my whole house for ethernet. And, while I’m behind the drywall, I might as well rip off all the drywall put a layer of Al.

Here’s a business idea - drywall with aluminum fibers embedded in. For those of us who don't want our sexy times recorded by our router.

EDIT: made wifi’s ability to see through walls explicit per _jal’s comment.

To put a slightly finer point on it, I can't see through your walls with my lightbulb, but I probably can see through your walls with my router.

Your creepy neighbor in the apartment next door is getting a new toy.

2.4GHz, 5GHz, and 6GHz have decent wall penetration, but 60GHz doesn't. It can bounce off walls to get around corners, so it doesn't necessarily need line of sight.

Wi-Fi Sensing works with 2.4/5/6 GHz which pass through walls, it is not specific to 60Ghz.

Yes, and? 5 and 6 GHz already struggle with thick walls (like those found between units in apartment buildings). Presence detection is one thing, but you can't see what I'm having for lunch through several walls with a single 2.4 GHz AP.

500 terahertz = 600 nm (visible light)

60 gigahertz = 5 mm

6 gigahertz = 50 mm

5 gigahertz = 60 mm

2.4 gigahertz = 125 mm

“Yes and”

- Unless 2.4 and 5 GHz are taken off the standard, my router will see me through the walls.

- At 60 GHz, if I have wifi, my router can see me

- To make our concerns clear to you, even at 125 mm resolution, you can tell if I like my wife to drill my bottom with a strap on. Or you can tell if I piously say my prayers at night (something that is increasingly political). Or if the immigrant next door spanks his kids. Or if his 15 year old daughter is “exploring” her body.

And for what benefit exactly?

So an ad agency can track me and know Im struggling with my diet, hovering over the fridge door?

Another idea in the opposite direction: somebody should build a $20 firewall/tappable ethernet cable with some kind of builtin eBPF support + a universe of community packages.

The community would then share privacy-enhancing I/O profiles for every kind of device. If years later e.g. my adversarial lightbulb pivots to brokering kompromat SIGINT, I want to filter that out, and I want not to be the first one to write a filter like that..

Does it change the internal state of the lightbulb’s logic? No.. but hopefully it would even be able to simulate the state loop of the lightbulb well enough to guess what to filter out.

Of course there may also come a time when somebody starts to sell $20, 60 ghz-spectrum-only-visible “human activity fakers” to disrupt the collection of such data. Maybe with a “Honey, I’m home!” package being the most popular, lol

When I read this comment and the username that wrote it, I can't help but wonder if it's a reference to Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash.

(2021) privacy comments on Wi-Fi 7 standards work for 802.11bf, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.14918.pdf

it has been shown that SENS-based classifiers can infer privacy-critical information such as keyboard typing, gesture recognition and activity tracking ... since Wi-Fi signals can penetrate hard objects and can be used without the presence of light, end-users may not even realize they are being tracked ... individuals should be provided the opportunity to opt out of SENS services – in other words, to avoid being monitored and tracked by the Wi-Fi devices around them. This would require the widespread introduction of reliable SENS algorithm for human or animal identification.

Would this require a worldwide database of biometric signatures for each human that opts out?

No, the future is decentralized. In the US, you will always be tracked because of regulatory capture of the FCC. In Europe, your phone will display a tracking consent pop-up everytime you go into a cafe. If you don't comply, you will have to get your coffee and free wifi elsewhere.

This has nearly zero non-orwellian use-cases inside a home.

Please dance the Amazon Verification Dance.

I cannot fathom any good use for this technology.

Adaptive ventilation and maybe even heating of rooms depending on the number of people present.

You can add a 100 euro CO2 sensor to control your HVAC.

There isn't a use case for this that isn't abusive outside an industrial setting.

I think if ISPs push for these in routers we will see comeback of rewiring houses with ethernet points.

I can see ISPs forcing you to use their modem with this WiFi built in. Then even if you put it in bridge mode, the WiFi stays active while it tracks you.

If an exclusive/monopoly ISP took that approach, the modem could be surrounded by copper mesh which allows air circulation for cooling, but impedes RF.

And if everyone in the world setup TOR gateways and used TOR for everything then the survailiance and ad instry would collapse overnight.

Back in the real world it would be frightingly effective.

Buying copper mesh from shop is far more accessible to average user than setting up TOR relay.

You can find out if TOR is work8ng by typing in 'what is my IP' into google.

How do you know if your sepf made faray cage is leaking?

Are you going to get an expensive spectrum analiser? Do you know how to use it?

I can go on the street and find a random person who understands networking withing 10 minutes. I have never met a RF engineer in my life.

This is not a future I'd like to see. What bothers me even more, is that if the neighbors above me decide to join an "Apple Security Sensing Program" by toggling it on, it may as well be sensing and logging my activity.

Other than that, I do have a lot of ESP32s at my place sensing for activity via IR as well as by creating an FFT-"audio" log. No sound just FFT aggregated over one second, but all these devices store the data on my home server, not in some cloud.

Tell us more about the home sensors why ir? And what is the fft data for?

I feed fft data into machine learning system for signal classification. It’s a nice real time system with midrange Xilinx ZynQ SoC. Some Xilinx IP blocks with hand written classification engine.

I guess author wants to classify sounds in his environment too.

Correct, the ultimate goal is to perform automatic activity logging.

For example my bathroom has two IR sensors (https://www.amazon.de/dp/B08LBDYPYD), one inside the shower, one outside of it. This lets me log the time and duration of when I take a shower or how often I shave.

It also has an I2S MEMS microphone which collects the data for the FFT where the goal is to replace the IR in the shower with it since the water sound is enough information.

Also temperature and humidity, where the latter also gives a good indication of when I showered and when I forgot to close the window some time after showering.

My bedroom also has the same "setup", where the FFT shows me how big of a problem I have with snoring. Eventually I can add some logic on the server to slightly wake me up if I snore, but currently I'm just logging. The PIR serves as a measurement of how much I'm moving at night without requiring a camera for this. Though I have another ESP32 under my bed fixated at the slatted frame which contains an 9dof-IMU and logs any significant movement which may be related to quality of sleep. Also the magnetic field which is why I have a strong magnet attached to my bed tablet, so I know when it changed position. Even though the tablet knows that itself because it is logging its own accelerometer every minute.

I live alone, so all of this is no problem.

At this point I'm mostly only logging, and only using the shower and bed data to see when I used them, which I can then see in Grafana. I think the data will only gain value when watched over a long time frame.

I remember seeing a Hackaday post that uses FFT/spectogram to infer IoT things such as boiling kettle without cameras. Is this related?

No, it's not related. I'm trying to get notified when my noodle water has started boiling, but even with an humidity sensor in the kitchen it's pretty hard to tell when it's about to boil, so that the heat can be lowered before it splashes around. And the FFT in the kitchen is somewhat broken so I can't use it, there may be a lot of noise in the mains or something like that. In any case I've planned to replace the setup in the kitchen months ago, but never moved on to doing it.

I remember when first contactless payment options appeared, many people started buying anti-RFID wallets and bags. I'm not sure if they're still a thing, but the people who need "radio-privacy" will definitely find a way.

I have a few wallets with alleged RFID blocking. For those its mainly to stop arse grabbing attacks where card info (or security badge info) could be cloned with a little badge reader held in someone's palm.

What bothers me even more, is that if the neighbors above me decide to join an "Apple Security Sensing Program" by toggling it on, it may as well be sensing and logging my activity.

60 Ghz is heavily blocked by walls, glass and doors, even more than 5Ghz, so that's very unlikely scenario.

Wouldn't this have to be constantly transmitting to work? I can't imagine the amount of interference this would create. The lower frequencies are already congested enough...

This could easily fall within the realm of the Supreme Court's decision in KYLLO v. UNITED STATES where it was ruled that a thermal imaging search of a home is a violation of the US 4th amendment.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/kyllo.h...