Fashion Statement: Designer Creates Line of Drone-Proof Garments to Protect Privacy

As debate over the use of unmanned aerial vehicles in the U.S. rages on, a fashion designer introduces clothing that blocks drone-mounted infrared cameras














Share on Tumblr

drone,surveillance,privacy,infrared

STEALTH MODE: Adam Harvey's Stealth Wear line of hoodies, scarves and burquas (modeled here by Tate Morales) incorporate metalized fabric to block the wearer from infrared camera detection. Image: Courtesy of © 2013 Adam Harvey / ahprojects.com

As the U.S. government draws up plans to use surveillance drones in domestic airspace, opposition to what many consider an unwarranted and significant invasion of privacy is mounting across the country, from rural Virginia to techopolis Seattle. Although officials debate anti-drone legislation at federal, state and local levels, one man is fighting back with high-tech apparel.

A New York City privacy advocate-turned-urban-guerilla fashion designer is selling garments designed to make their wearers invisible to infrared surveillance cameras, particularly those on drones. And although Adam Harvey admits that his three-item Stealth Wear line of scarves and capes is more of a political statement than a money-making venture, the science behind the fashion is quite sound.

“Fighting drones is not my full-time job, but it could be,” says Harvey, an instructor of physical computing at Manhattan’s School of Visual Arts and the creator of the CV Dazzle project, which seeks to develop makeup and hairstyles that camouflage people from face-recognition cameras and software.

Harvey’s newest medium, metalized fabric, has been around for more than 20 years. It holds in body heat that would burn bright for infrared cameras—a characteristic that could prove attractive to those who do not want unmanned aerial vehicles spying on them.

Metalized fabric
Metal is very good at absorbing and scattering infrared light, says Cheng Sun, a Northwestern University assistant professor of mechanical engineering. In that sense there is nothing exotic in how metalized fabric works—it “would strongly attenuate the [infrared] light,” he says. The metal would dissipate heat to surroundings as well, making the wearer harder to pinpoint.

To date, the fabric has primarily been used in tape and gaskets to protect electronics and communications equipment from static electricity and electromagnetic interference, according to Larry Creasy, director of technology for metalized fabric-maker Laird Technologies, based in Saint Louis.

Here’s how metalizing works, at least at Laird: Woven fabric, commonly nylon or polyester, is coated with a special catalyst—a precious metal Creasy declined to specify—that helps copper bind to the fiber. Once dry, the fabric is submerged in a copper sulfate–plating bath and dried. A nickel sulfamate bath follows to help the finished fabric withstand the elements and abrasions. The result is a flexible, breathable fabric that can be cut with ordinary tools but that protects against electromagnetic interference and masks infrared radiation, Creasy says. The process adds weight to the original fabric. An untreated square yard of nylon weighs about 42.5 grams. Treated, the same patch weighs more than 70 grams.

The fashion
Harvey’s fabric is coated with copper, nickel and silver, a combination that gives his scarves, head-and-shoulders cloak and thigh-length “burqa” a silvery and “luxurious” feel. The material blocks cell signals, as well, adding an element of risk to tweeting, texting and other mobile activities, as the wearer must break cover to communicate.

Stealth Wear is sold only via a U.K. Web site. The burqa goes for about $2,300, the “hoodie” is $481 and the scarf is $565—luxury items, but so, too, is privacy today, Harvey says.

The impetus
The high cost and limited availability are significant drawbacks—Harvey says he’s only sold one Stealth Wear item online, a scarf. But the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) predicts 10,000 commercial drones will ply domestic airspace by 2017—almost twice the that of the U.S. Air Force’s current fleet of unmanned aircraft. The number of drones flying in the U.S. today is hard to pin down because not every company and agency that gets FAA approval to fly a drone actually puts one in the air. In fact, 1,428 private-sector and government requests have been approved since 2007, according to the FAA. A Los Angeles Times report states that 327 of those permits are still active. Meanwhile, President Obama signed a law in February 2012 that gives the FAA until September 2015 to draw up rules that dictate how law enforcement, the military and other entities may use drones in U.S. airspace.


Rights & Permissions

21 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. BillR 08:13 AM 3/7/13

    I think you may be getting a large order from the middle east soon.....

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. dbtinc 08:40 AM 3/7/13

    Is that a burqa?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. JimEdits in reply to dbtinc 10:47 AM 3/7/13

    That would be a burqa, yes. This world is truly a wonder.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  4. 4. cookchh 12:42 PM 3/7/13

    So the guys that used to cover themselves in tin foil to keep aliens from intercepting their brain waves have stepped it up a notch. Truly insane. What do you people have to hide from a drone?!?!? Your brand of underwear, nope the government can get that from your Target account.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  5. 5. huntershoptaw 01:10 PM 3/7/13

    Sooo, he's effectively marketed emergency blankets to the public. Congrats.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  6. 6. JimEdits in reply to huntershoptaw 01:57 PM 3/7/13

    OK, so to be clear, Harvey is making a political statement. He's aware of the oddness of this endeavor. I don't get the impression that he's looking to take advantage of paranoids (he's certainly not pricing the clothes for the average street-corner screamer).

    He's aware that you could get the same IR-blocking effect by walking around with a rescue blanket. But he wouldn't get the same attention if he told people to wear foil hats, and he wants to get our attention.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  7. 7. Fred Bauder 02:29 PM 3/7/13

    Would that be M-5 or M-6 in the UK?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  8. 8. Fanandala 02:43 PM 3/7/13

    Every order posted on the 1st of April gives you a free tinfoil hat.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  9. 9. cccampbell38 03:07 PM 3/8/13

    Just about the worst torture that I can possibly inflict on any drone operator is to allow them to see me "virtually" naked. Bring it ON!!!

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  10. 10. ChapsBoy 01:07 AM 3/11/13

    This will adversely affect the ability of infrared equipped automobiles to detect people on the road at night or in a fog. You could also increase your chance of being hit by lightning. A large umbrella would be a better choice for this technology. You would still be at risk of a lightning strike however.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  11. 11. bongobimbo 11:51 PM 3/12/13

    I have several "space blankets" for camping and possible emergencies. They are metallized mylar, and their purpose is to hold in heat. Wouldn't these work, too? Each one is the size of a twin bed blanket.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  12. 12. JimEdits in reply to bongobimbo 03:30 PM 3/13/13

    You're right, bb. The difference is that you'd probably pass out after 10 minutes of evading The Man wrapped in a space blanket. The fabric would dissipate some of your heat, at least in theory.

    Keep in mind that the designer is making a statement, not really making a solution.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  13. 13. tonynemo@att.net 05:07 PM 3/13/13

    The authorities will no doubt keep a log of all who purchase the makeup designed to frustrate face recognition.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  14. 14. Mr Mistoffelees 08:05 PM 3/13/13

    You jokers seem to have missed the point. The point is not to hide your nakedness from government surveillance; the point is to hide your *identity* from government tracking, or indeed, the tracking of any corporation or private individual that cares to launch a drone. And you want to hide your identity because it keeps such people from determining your current location and your current activity. And doing so 24 hours a day. Such information can be used to create a database about you and what you do, including your social network.

    This information, by itself, is a direct attack on privacy because you are always being watched. And this goes well beyond simply being seen in public for it allows you to be *tracked*, and tracked surreptitiously and with impunity. Beyond indulging in psychological fixations, such surveillance can be used to plan assaults, abductions and thefts.

    And you don’t want the government involved in this activity either, for its only purpose is to police. It is a tool of social control, and has no place in a free society.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  15. 15. kfinel 04:32 AM 3/14/13

    I consider Mr. Harvey a criminal, aiding and abetting the enemy, possibly treason. He is in the same genre as an illegal arms dealer, sharing advance technology with our enemies. The US Govt should prosecute him as such.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  16. 16. edprochak in reply to kfinel 09:17 AM 3/14/13

    to kfinel
    this is hardly advanced technology.

    This issue of drone surveillance is serious. See the comments by Mr Mistoffelees.

    If there is any treason here, it is being committed by a government that feels it needs to watch its citizens. And it doesn't seem to matter which party is in power.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  17. 17. JimEdits in reply to kfinel 12:42 PM 3/14/13

    By this logic, anyone selling door locks, anti-intrusion software for home computers or, indeed, wide-brimmed hats and sunglasses would be guilty of treason.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  18. 18. JimEdits in reply to kfinel 12:42 PM 3/14/13

    By this logic, anyone selling door locks, anti-intrusion software for home computers or, indeed, wide-brimmed hats and sunglasses would be guilty of treason.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  19. 19. asxcjlfhkberil 02:44 AM 3/15/13

    Wearing burqas will stop people from knowing you are there?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  20. 20. iwiwaxastronaut 12:34 PM 4/14/13

    Since the clothing holds in the heat, you won't be able to wear it long, except perhaps in a blizzard or drenching rain. Then you're not likely to need the garment.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  21. 21. presto 06:24 AM 5/2/13

    if , for the sake of a stealthy jaunt one might like to obfuscate the signals of ones rfid implants then these would be suitable.Bear in mind that one would still be subject to the Eyes of Texas. Its more than just an ELF cloak it also cloaks Hi freqs as well as high freaks!

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital
  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Fashion Statement: Designer Creates Line of Drone-Proof Garments to Protect Privacy

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X