Threat modeling is the core discipline of the security industry. Every security measure requires some sacrifice, but through thoughtful assessment, you can ensure you never give up more than you gain.
Right now, the Federal Communications Commission is considering a threat mitigation that could jeopardize the physical security industry as we know it. The vulnerability in question is GPS, a critical system for which the United States has no backup. GPS underpins not just consumer navigation, but military and emergency services, high-tech agriculture, energy infrastructure, and financial markets.
GPS jamming and spoofing attacks are on the rise, and pressure is mounting to institute new positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) solutions. One of them would jeopardize practically every wireless device the physical security industry relies on.
But the urgent need for resilient alternatives and complements to GPS is not a license to destabilize the wireless systems that already protect life and property. That’s the trade NextNav is asking the FCC to make.
What NextNav Is Asking The FCC To Do
In 2024, NextNav petitioned the FCC to reconfigure the 902–928 MHz band by creating a 5 MHz uplink at 902–907 MHz paired with a 10 MHz downlink at 918–928 MHz, shifting incumbent operations into 907–918 MHz, and executing a spectrum “swap” that would convert NextNav’s existing holdings into a single nationwide 15 MHz flexible-use license under the new band plan. They propose to build a new, terrestrial PNT solution in that spectrum.
This is not a minor tweak. It is a fundamental reshaping of a band that has supported decades of low-power operations and a vast installed base. The lower 900 MHz band is foundational to a wide range of security and life-safety deployments.
That is no coincidence: sub-GHz signals penetrate building materials and cover premises more reliably than higher-frequency alternatives, while enabling sensors to transmit small bursts of data with multi-year battery performance.
The spectrum NextNav wants to reconfigure is currently used by wireless devices including alarm systems, door locks, smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, intrusion sensors, medical pendants, and gunshot detection systems—vital life-safety devices deployed by the millions.
These are unlicensed devices protected under FCC Part 15 rules, which allow them to coexist as long as they do not cause harmful interference. As noted by the Connected Devices for America Coalition, this proposal would “upend the 902–928 MHz band” to advance NextNav’s solution, leaving incumbents with limited protection or recourse.
The Part That Should Alarm Security Professionals
NextNav’s petition seeks removal of the requirement that it not cause unacceptable interference to Part 15 devices—protections that have enabled coexistence in this band for decades.
It also proposes changes to the “safe harbor” framework that protects compliant unlicensed operations. These protections are foundational to many public safety and critical infrastructure systems.
By removing these safeguards, the proposal shifts risk away from NextNav and onto existing deployments. If interference occurs, security providers may bear the cost of replacement. Conversely, if their devices interfere with NextNav’s system, they could be forced offline—creating a one-sided risk scenario.
“Interference” Doesn’t Have To Be Catastrophic
Even as it seeks to remove interference protections, NextNav has argued that harmful interference is unlikely. However, such assumptions often rely on ideal conditions—favorable separation, average power levels, and controlled environments.
In reality, reliability issues appear at the margins: intermittent packet loss, delayed signals, increased retries, and battery degradation. These issues are difficult to diagnose and can lead to costly operational and reputational impacts.
Public safety stakeholders have raised concerns that such interference could affect systems essential to life safety, including man-down systems, wildfire sensors, and traffic signal preemption technologies.
Core Questions Remain Unanswered
The FCC is being asked to reshape spectrum policy in ways that directly impact the reliability of security and life-safety systems. That raises critical questions:
- What happens if interference occurs?
- Who bears the cost of remediation?
- How quickly can issues be identified and resolved?
If the FCC proceeds with this proposal, the security industry must demand:
- Real-world, worst-case testing in dense deployment environments
- Retention of existing interference protections
- Clear accountability for remediation, including battery-life impacts
Resilience Should Reduce Risk, Not Reassign It
America needs resilient PNT solutions—but not at the cost of existing life-safety systems. True resilience strengthens security without introducing new vulnerabilities.
The federal government is already evaluating multiple PNT technologies and vendors. Notably, NextNav’s proposal is the only one requiring a major spectrum reconfiguration that primarily benefits a single entity.
The FCC should prioritize evidence-based engineering and broad evaluation of alternatives. This is not just a policy decision—it’s a question of public safety.
Avi Rosenthal serves as Chair of the Board for the Z-Wave Alliance, a global organization dedicated to advancing Z-Wave® technology as an open and internationally recognized ITU G.9959 standard for smart home and IoT solutions.
He is also Managing Partner at BlueConnect Partners, where he advises organizations across the consumer products and connected device sectors. With more than 25 years of experience in the connected devices industry, Avi brings deep expertise in the development, manufacturing, and commercialization of smart home and IoT technologies.
Internal Links URLs
https://security.world/market-insights/genetec-highlights-why-governance-defines-secure-cloud-adoption/
https://security.world/market-insights/hid-highlights-top-pki-trends-threats-and-innovations/
External Links URLs
https://www.fcc.gov/
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What is the main concern with NextNav’s proposal?
It could disrupt existing wireless systems used in critical life-safety and security applications.
2. Why is the 902–928 MHz band important?
It supports reliable, low-power communication for devices like alarms, sensors, and medical systems.
3. What is PNT?
Positioning, Navigation, and Timing systems that support GPS-like capabilities.
4. What risks does interference pose?
Even minor interference can cause system delays, failures, and reduced battery life in critical devices.
5. What should the FCC consider before approving changes?
Comprehensive testing, maintaining protections for existing devices, and clear accountability for any disruptions.