LTE is not the only possible transport.
5G has some low power IoT mode and actually, why restrict ourselves to mobile networks?
You could just broadcast a Bluetooth beacon intended to be transported...
I still think LTE is the most likely attack vector, and there's a reason the attackers chose it. Even purpose-built "low-power" cellular IoT chips draw hundreds of milliamps during transmission, well within the detection envelope of the proposed circuit.
Bluetooth is a more interesting counterargument, but it has two problems. First, its transmit current still spikes into the milliamps, so staying below our detection threshold isn't a given, especially with a deliberately constrained power budget. Second, it depends on a reliable third-party uplink.
The Apple Find My exploit is clever, but it's also a dependency Apple could disrupt with a protocol update requiring cryptographic proof of accessory authorization before relaying advertisements.
None of this makes the detector infallible but it does meaningfully harden defense. It does mean the attacker has to solve increasingly difficult problems to circumvent it.
Bluetooth is a more interesting counterargument, but it has two problems. First, its transmit current still spikes into the milliamps, so staying below our detection threshold isn't a given, especially with a deliberately constrained power budget. Second, it depends on a reliable third-party uplink.
The Apple Find My exploit is clever, but it's also a dependency Apple could disrupt with a protocol update requiring cryptographic proof of accessory authorization before relaying advertisements.
None of this makes the detector infallible but it does meaningfully harden defense. It does mean the attacker has to solve increasingly difficult problems to circumvent it.
1