High school student allegedly uses device to turn off nearby iPhones
A report that a U.S. high school student used a handheld device to crash nearby iPhones has prompted technical speculation that tools like Flipper Zero or cheap ESP32-based gadgets exploited quirks in iOS’s Bluetooth stack, an issue Apple has recently moved to patch. Commenters debate whether such stunts are harmless pranks or serious interference, raising legal concerns about jamming or disrupting wireless signals and potential risks to people relying on smartphones for medical monitoring. The incident also reignites broader arguments over smartphone use in schools, from distraction and learning impacts to how much responsibility institutions and individuals bear for resilience and backups.
Likely technical cause
- Most commenters think it’s Bluetooth-based rather than an EMP, since it appears iPhone-specific.
- Strong suspicion it was a Flipper Zero running a Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) spam script that can freeze or crash iOS.
- Links shared to Flipper custom firmware (e.g., Xtreme Firmware) and BLE spam code; also to coverage that Apple mitigated this attack in iOS 17.2.
- Others note a similar effect can be achieved much more cheaply with an ESP32 using open-source tools like EvilAppleJuice.
- Some recall older iOS bugs (Effective Power text, Bluetooth stack crashes) and even the helium MEMS oscillator issue, suggesting Apple’s wireless stack has had multiple fragilities.
Flipper Zero capabilities and hackability
- Flipper Zero is described as essentially an ESP32-based multi-radio gadget with NFC/RFID, sub-GHz, and more.
- Firmware is open source; device is “supremely hackable” with USB shell access, exposed IO/SWD, custom firmware, and a large community ecosystem.
- People mention using it mainly for cloning NFC/RFID keys, storing Amiibos, and experimenting with extended antennas.
Legality and consequences
- Several posts warn that intentionally interfering with wireless signals can be illegal.
- UK example cited: “deliberate interference with wireless telegraphy” can carry up to two years in prison and unlimited fines.
- Others joke about OPSEC and evasion but are reminded of pervasive CCTV and legal/moral responsibility.
Risk vs. prank framing
- Some view it as a harmless, funny student prank, similar to earlier school-era exploits and jammers.
- Others argue it can have serious implications: interfering with phone-dependent medical devices (e.g., continuous glucose monitors), or inducing panic in an era of school shootings.
- Counter-arguments claim critical medical functions shouldn’t rely on a single consumer phone and that users should have backups.
Phones in schools and “victims” debate
- Some celebrate the “benefit” of temporarily disabling phones for learning.
- Others highlight that many schools already ban phones or use “school mode.”
- There’s debate over calling affected students “victims” and over how much schools should restrict phone use, including perspectives from socially isolated students who find phones a coping tool.