Chinese national arrest for drone surveillance

[mavic3usa]

The story: Chinese suspect arrested for flying drone over US military base
ETA: Story is covered here as well: Bay Area man arrested for flying drone over Space Force Base

Another arrest:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[GFields]

Thanks for sharing

 

[Chip]

Nice find Mavic3usa. This time the court file includes the probable cause affidavit of an FBI Special Agent assigned to counterintelligence. The guy was flying an unregistered Mavic 2 that he had altered to fly as high as 8,000 feet with no geofencing.

 

[Chip]

The suspect's statement about the maximum flight time of his Mavic 2 was "contradicted by the FBI's drone detection system" which recorded 59 minutes.

 

[Chip]

Transfer this agent from Santa Maria to New Jersey right away please! Maybe he can show his colleagues over there how to work their drone detection equipment. See summary of his work experience excerpted from his probable cause affidavit:

BACKGROUND OF FBI SPECIAL AGENT MIKE WOOD

I am a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) and have been so employed since January of 2015. I am currently assigned to the Santa Maria Resident Agency of the FBI’s Los Angeles Division, where I have worked counterintelligence matters since November of 2018. As part of my current job duties, I work closely with Air Force, Office of Special Investigations (“OSI”) Special Agents on national security matters pertaining to Vandenberg Space Force Base. In 2023, I executed a six-month temporary duty assignment during which I was posted overseas and embedded with Department of Defense partners and worked closely with officers from multiple branches of the United States military on matters of mutual Department of Defense-FBI interest. I am familiar with tradecraft and techniques utilized by foreign adversarial nations and the efforts those nations undertake to collect intelligence on elements of military infrastructure of their interest.

 

[EssenYVR]

Mavic 2 that he had altered to fly as high as 8,000 feet with no geofencing.

How easy is it to make this kind of alteration? I'm guessing it would require software changes, and I'd expect those to be difficult to accomplish since getting US certification would presumably require that the drones not be easily hacked.

The conspiracy theorist in me can't help wondering if it was actually DJI that altered the software on the say-so of the Chinese Communist Party.

 

[Chip]

How easy is it to make this kind of alteration? I'm guessing it would require software changes, and I'd expect those to be difficult to accomplish since getting US certification would presumably require that the drones not be easily hacked.

The conspiracy theorist in me can't help wondering if it was actually DJI that altered the software on the say-so of the Chinese Communist Party.

FBI Special Agent Mike Wood was on it. Here are some more excerpts from his report on that issue:

"A search of the DJI Drone pursuant to a federal search warrant revealed several photographs of VSFB taken from an aerial viewpoint on November 30, 2024. A search of ZHOU’s cellphone pursuant to the same federal search warrant showed ZHOU conducted a Google search approximately a month earlier for the phrase “Vandenberg Space Force Base Drone Rules” and messaged with another person about hacking his drone to allow it to fly higher than it could otherwise."

"ZHOU also admitted he purchased software on a particular website that allowed the DJI Drone to bypass
restrictions on altitude as well as no-fly-zone restrictions that would otherwise not allow his DJI drone to fly at VSFB. ZHOU expressed an understanding that drones operated in the United States had to comply with altitude limits and no-fly limits. ZHOU explained that the DJI mobile application featured a map that would outline for the user which areas contain a no fly zone restriction. ZHOU originally downloaded the bypass software in 2019 to get around the no-fly zones in Shanghai.

(NOTE: ZHOU told investigators he was previously arrested by Shanghai police for an illegal drone flight).

Referencing the bypass software and his UAS, ZHOU said, “Normally, if you didn’t have that software, it wouldn’t be able to take off from here.”

 

[MS Coast]

How easy is it to make this kind of alteration? I'm guessing it would require software changes, and I'd expect those to be difficult to accomplish since getting US certification would presumably require that the drones not be easily hacked.

The conspiracy theorist in me can't help wondering if it was actually DJI that altered the software on the say-so of the Chinese Communist Party.

No modifications required, no software modifications and no DJI/CCP conspiracy required to achieve 8000' altitude.

Support for Mavic 2 Enterprise Advanced - DJI

As the market leader in easy-to-fly drones and aerial photography systems, DJI quadcopters like the Phantom are the standard in consumer drone technology.

www.dji.com

 

[Chip]

I am not alleging DJI/CCP conspiracy. I am reporting on details set forth in the criminal complaint filed in federal court. The FBI searched ZHOU's phone and found the following:

"The phone contained a WeChat messaging service conversation between WeChat user wxid_mpqagydly8cp12, believed to be an account associated with the user of the phone, ZHOU, and WeChat user wxid_v9nttsu3fy1i12. In a conversation that took place on October 21 and 22 2024, communications focused on photographs ZHOU claimed to have taken with his drone. Specifically, starting at 11:58:47 PM on October 21, ZHOU shared five photographs that appeared to show a city and mountains from a high altitude. At 11:59:44 PM, ZHOU messages the other user, saying “first one taken from 1800 ft, the others about 8000 ft”.At 12:03:33 AM on October 22, the other WeChat user says to ZHOU “Oh wow that **** thing flys high”. At 12:04:20 AM, ZHOU then remarked “I hacked my drone. It’s not supposed to go that high lol”.

As set forth above, during my interview with ZHOU, he acknowledged that he downloaded software for his drone that allowed him to bypass UAS altitude restrictions."

 

[Chip]

@MS Coast here is one thing I am disclosing just for you, okay? You can even say I told you so but remember this is a very small sample size of one. In a nutshell, FBI Special Agent Mike Wood confirms the FAA UAV Registration Database worked properly.

EXCERPT
Investigation Regarding the Registration Requirement

"29. Based on my review of correspondence from the FAA, I have learned, among other things, the following:

a. On or about December 5, 2024, a Special Agent with the FAA searched the FAA small, unmanned aircraft system (“sUAS”) Registration Database to determine if any sUAS are registered to ZHOU. The search revealed that no sUAS is registered to ZHOU.

b. The FAA Special Agent also searched the FAA sUAS Registration Database to determine if sUAS with serial number 163CG98R0A18BW, i.e., the DJI Drone, is registered with the FAA. The search revealed that sUAS with serial number 163CG98R0A18BW is not registered."

 

[MS Coast]

I am not alleging DJI/CCP conspiracy. I am reporting on details set forth in the criminal complaint filed in federal court.

Not you, but post #6 did. "The conspiracy theorist in me can't help wondering if it was actually DJI that altered the software on the say-so of the Chinese Communist Party."

At 12:04:20 AM, ZHOU then remarked “I hacked my drone. It’s not supposed to go that high lol”.

Mr. Zhou obviously didn't read the specs on his drone.

As set forth above, during my interview with ZHOU, he acknowledged that he downloaded software for his drone that allowed him to bypass UAS altitude restrictions."

Per your post #7,
"ZHOU also admitted he purchased software on a particular website that allowed the DJI Drone to bypass
restrictions on altitude as well as no-fly-zone restrictions that would otherwise not allow his DJI drone to fly at VSFB."

Altitude limits and geofencing restrictions. Again, he was wrong about altitude limits. The software might have been able to remove geofencing limits, though.

 

[Cafguy]

While I Applaud FBI special agent Mike Wood for his work and investigation to confirm that indeed the FAA's Registration process works, Its not like I couldnt obtain that juicy tidbit of information myself........ but thanks Mike
I am glad to know that the FAA did not implement a Program that was simply a facade to wrestle 5 bucks out of my pocket.
My Point? what does registration or non registration have to do with anything.
Are you saying that the use of Drones should be restricted more than it is now if so how?
You seem to be reacting strongly to these Tactics introduced in the news thru the Anti Drone community by the way.
I am concerned just as any American about another countries ability to spy on our facilities BUT should we not ask for tighter security and a logical solution at the bases rather than blame the camera and the offender exclusively.
Its a shame that Vandenberg Security did not catch the guy for sure! It is well posted all over that side of Lompoc Ca. that civilian aviation activities are strictly prohibited not only for Vandenberg but the Prison as well. The guy knew he was Flying illegally and the Drone needed no modifications other than busting the Geo-Zone. In todays America, A Chinese Spy that somehow got into the country thru TSA Checks need only go to the nearest store for a "Spy Tool" I suppose (or google earth).
Should we raise that up as a flag to Restrict Drone sales. HECK NO!! Perhaps we should employ it as a monument to the Governments inability to handle their bases security without scaring half the country into thinking every DJI owner is a card carrying commie. MY 2 Cents...

 

[Chip]

While I Applaud FBI special agent Mike Wood for his work and investigation to confirm that indeed the FAA's Registration process works, Its not like I couldnt obtain that juicy tidbit of information myself........ but thanks Mike
I am glad to know that the FAA did not implement a Program that was simply a facade to wrestle 5 bucks out of my pocket.

There was a special context to my one post directed to @MS Coast. We had a discussion recently about registration and the efficiency of the FAA database. I was suggesting the database is not being managed well for various reasons including slow response to law enforcement. This is one example where the FAA and its registration database worked great for the FBI so I wanted to mention it. But also, I think it is important to know that flying a drone from Best Buy or Amazon or anywhere else and not registering it with the FAA before flight is a federal felony with up to three year prison term.

 

[Zbip57]

We had a discussion recently about registration and the efficiency of the FAA database. [...] This is one example where the FAA and its registration database worked great for the FBI so I wanted to mention it.

I thought the whole point of registration and RID was that it would somehow make the skies safe by allowing authorities to track down crooks doing illegal things with drones. But this case only proves that anyone intent on doing criminal things likely won't be registering their drones.

I think it is important to know that flying a drone from Best Buy or Amazon or anywhere else and not registering it with the FAA before flight is a federal felony with up to three year prison term.

The fear of prison terms or fines only means that non-criminal types, like ourselves, will obey and register our drones. On the other hand, people already intent on criminal activity are already risking lengthy prison terms, where a mere extra three years isn't an issue.

How is it a "success" for the FBI to demonstrate that the drone registration system didn't include a registration from ZHOU? Doesn't it just prove that the registration system failed to prevent an illegal activity?

 

[Chip]

I thought the whole point of registration and RID was that it would somehow make the skies safe by allowing authorities to track down crooks doing illegal things with drones. But this case only proves that anyone intent on doing criminal things likely won't be registering their drones.

Yes, I agree 100%. This idiot John Kirby told the public yesterday that there is no risk to public safety posed by an unregistered auto sized drone flying all over even though its an automatic felony and he claims to have no idea who owns it or their motive.

The fear of prison terms or fines only means that non-criminal types, like ourselves, will obey and register our drones. On the other hand, people already intent on criminal activity are already risking lengthy prison terms, where a mere extra three years isn't an issue.

Yes, I agree 100%.

How is it a "success" for the FBI to demonstrate that the drone registration system didn't include a registration from ZHOU?

Its a success in the sense that the FBI was able to get the FAA to promptly verify suspect was not in data base which allowed them to charge the felony.

Doesn't it just prove that the registration system failed to prevent an illegal activity?

Yes, I agree 100%.

 

[Cafguy]

I thought the whole point of registration and RID was that it would somehow make the skies safe by allowing authorities to track down crooks doing illegal things with drones.

Correct .. RID may help the FAA catch REPEAT OFFENDERS. It is not a Drone tracking device and does not act as a transponder, this is the part of RID that is confusing to many if it transmits the Government should be able to see your drone in the Control tower. The fact is seeing an RID "blip" from a drone in a control tower is just never gonna happen, and creating a device that can read a drones RID number as it flies and then give the faa an owners name is science fiction.
Yes we have RID apps and they see your Drone but actually what they are seeing is simply a wi-fi broadcast and that can be "spoofed" very easily. I myself have built three RID spoofers How can an RID spoofer be legal you ask... because just like RID their signal is very week and you must be in the immediate area to see them. You cant see RID from very far away. My Drones DJI installed RID reads on a "karen" App at about 1000 yrds, My spoofers range is about 100 yrds.

 

[Chip]

Correct .. RID may help the FAA catch REPEAT OFFENDERS. It is not a Drone tracking device and does not act as a transponder, this is the part of RID that is confusing to many if it transmits the Government should be able to see your drone in the Control tower. The fact is seeing an RID "blip" from a drone in a control tower is just never gonna happen, and creating a device that can read a drones RID number as it flies and then give the faa an owners name is science fiction.
Yes we have RID apps and they see your Drone but actually what they are seeing is simply a wi-fi broadcast and that can be "spoofed" very easily. I myself have built three RID spoofers How can an RID spoofer be legal you ask... because just like RID their signal is very week and you must be in the immediate area to see them. You cant see RID from very far away. My Drones DJI installed RID reads on a "karen" App at about 1000 yrds, My spoofers range is about 100 yrds.

Cafguy, please watch this FAA video explaining the purpose and function of Remote ID. Are you saying that the system does not work as intended or advertised or just that it can be easily spoofed?

You state: How can an RID spoofer be legal you ask... because just like RID their signal is very week and you must be in the immediate area to see them.

I think you are saying that it is legal to spoof your identity and your flight because Remote ID is a weak signal anyway. So then, if you were flying a drone with a remote ID spoofer and a police officer came up to you and asked is your drone Remote ID compliant, what would you say? Refuse to answer the question or admit that you were using a spoofer because its not illegal? What if they ask why are you taking steps to mask your identity, location and flight path? How would you respond?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Chip]

The report of ZHOU'S interactions with "security forces" is instructive. ZHOU first lies about what he is doing:

"a. After detecting the DJI Drone, approximately four VSFB Security Forces traveled to Ocean Park to investigate the drone travel. There, Security Forces personnel saw two individuals, ZHOU and Individual-1. Security Forces personnel asked to speak with ZHOU and Individual -1. When Security Forces personnel began talking to them, ZHOU and Individual-1 walked away. Security Forces personnel again asked to talk to ZHOU and Individual-1, who stopped and began speaking to them. The personnel then asked if ZHOU and Individual-1 had seen any drones flying nearby and, if so, whether they had seen the pilot. ZHOU stated that he had seen a drone but that he did not see the pilot. While ZHOU and Individual-1 were speaking to Security Forces personnel, ZHOU had his hands inside his jacket. Security Forces personnel asked ZHOU to remove his hands from his pocket. After they did that, ZHOU removed his hands, exposing a drone underneath his jacket. Security Forces personnel asked ZHOU why he had lied about not seeing the drone pilot, and ZHOU responded that he was afraid because he believed that the Security Forces personnel were from the military."

NOTE: The mention of Individual-1. He may have been let go because he did not own, possess or control the drone. Individual-1 had just flown in from overseas for a short visit.

 

[Cafguy]

So then, if you were flying a drone with a remote ID spoofer and a police officer came up to you and asked is your drone Remote ID compliant, what would you say?

I would ask the officer what kind of Drone the officer owned and if he would like to fly sometime. and then I would say "sure I guess so, my app says so" What else should I do? even if I was flying without it (and I wouldnt), They have no way of knowing that even if the Drone was in their hands. I would have to teach them how to find it.
A local police officer has no way of knowing if you have remote ID nor do they have the equipment or training to use it.
Name 1 instance in where the authorities used RID to find the owner of a Drone and confront them while they were flying. There are non because its really not possible..Unless you have a chain of RID readers every quarter mile or so everywhere and a Budget that allows you to pay thousands of employees to watch this equipment. The myth that the airport tower can see you or that somehow the local tower can pinpoint your location and I.D. you by the number is just ridiculous if the government ever decides to do that, You will be strapping a Transponder onto your Drone not an RID module.
and again a local police officer will only ask for your TRUST card, that is all they have the authority to do and they know if you dont have it they can ground you.
RID Spoofers do not hide your ID number.... Nor will they disguise your flightpath. They simply add more Drones around you (or the spoofer device) If the person with the RID app is standing within 200 feet of you! Kinda like RID itself, only you get a lot more range with RID. Spoofers are legal simply because the person you are "spoofing" has to pretty much be standing next to you for the app they are using to see the spoofed drones. If the person walks away the spoofed drones go away and your RID remains on the screen. I don't use a spoofer I simply built one as an experiment a ways back, I also asked about the legality of doing so and there is no law against using them.
I fly legally at all times and do my best to follow FAA regulations.

 

[Chip]

I would ask the officer what kind of Drone the officer owned and if he would like to fly sometime. and then I would say "sure I guess so, my app says so" What else should I do? even if I was flying without it (and I wouldnt), They have no way of knowing that even if the Drone was in their hands. I would have to teach them how to find it.
A local police officer has no way of knowing if you have remote ID nor do they have the equipment or training to use it.
Name 1 instance in where the authorities used RID to find the owner of a Drone and confront them while they were flying. There are non because its really not possible..Unless you have a chain of RID readers every quarter mile or so everywhere and a Budget that allows you to pay thousands of employees to watch this equipment. The myth that the airport tower can see you or that somehow the local tower can pinpoint your location and I.D. you by the number is just ridiculous if the government ever decides to do that, You will be strapping a Transponder onto your Drone not an RID module.
and again a local police officer will only ask for your TRUST card, that is all they have the authority to do and they know if you dont have it they can ground you.
RID Spoofers do not hide your ID number.... Nor will they disguise your flightpath. They simply add more Drones around you (or the spoofer device) If the person with the RID app is standing within 200 feet of you! Kinda like RID itself, only you get a lot more range with RID. Spoofers are legal simply because the person you are "spoofing" has to pretty much be standing next to you for the app they are using to see the spoofed drones. If the person walks away the spoofed drones go away and your RID remains on the screen. I don't use a spoofer I simply built one as an experiment a ways back, I also asked about the legality of doing so and there is no law against using them.
I fly legally at all times and do my best to follow FAA regulations.

Do you recall the thread started by @Parkerjh -- FBI & Air Force OSI knocked on my door
You asked a great question:
How did they know it was you? Did they find your info somehow? How?
The answer:
Aeroscope. Which sort of penalizes the people who register their drones ironically.
You asked:
Were is your Letter from the FAA for busting the reg. If the FAA is giving your personal info to the Air force they must be investigating also?

What did you mean when you asked Where is your Letter from the FAA for busting the reg? How do you think the FBI and OSI were able to ID @Parkerjh if not from a radio signal? It seems to me that the government has excellent drone detection equipment to protect certain areas and has mobile units and mobile repeater stations which amplify signal and coverage. They certainly had no problem tracking ZHOU'S entire Mavic 2 flight and the exact location of the controller.

P

Thread 'FBI & Air Force OSI knocked on my door'

Feb 6, 2024

Had a business card of an FBI agent taped to my house front door this morning.
On the front, hand-printed, "Cell on back".
No other message.

My wife called with this info right when I got a call from an unknown Virginia number.
He asked me if I was home and I said, "May I ask who is asking?"
He identified himself as an FBI agent and asked if we could meet.
We arranged to meet at a Starbucks half-way between us.

When he arrived, he was with an OSI officer from the Air Force.

After a couple of pleasantries, they said they were there to talk to me about a flight that I had made at the end...

• Parkerjh
• Replies: 96
• Forum: General Discussions

• 
•