Sarai Hannah Ajai Supplemental Incident Report Addendum for the Reported Verbal Statement from Common Stairwell Referencing “Stingray Device,” Rayhunter Detection, and Continued Concern Regarding Unauthorized Cellular Surveillance and Apple Device Interference
Subject: Reported Verbal Statement from Common Stairwell Referencing “Stingray Device,” Rayhunter Detection, and Continued Concern Regarding Unauthorized Cellular Surveillance and Apple Device Interference
Reporting Party: Sarai Hannah Ajai
Date of Incident: May 7, 2026
Approximate Time: Mid-afternoon
Location: Bedroom area inside residence; voice appeared to echo through bedroom wall from the common stairwell area
Related Devices / Accounts: Apple iPhone 17; Apple Mac Mini M1; Verizon wireless service; Verizon Orbic RC400L running EFForg/Rayhunter; home-network environment
Related Monitoring Tool: Verizon Orbic RC400L mobile hotspot running EFForg/Rayhunter version 0.10.2
Nature of Report: Supplemental personal incident record regarding reported verbal statement, suspected unauthorized cellular-surveillance concern, and evidence-preservation follow-up.
I. Supplemental Incident Summary
On May 7, 2026, during the mid-afternoon, while I was inside my bedroom area at my residence in *****, ***** ******, I heard a male voice echo through my paper thin bedroom wall from the direction of the common stairwell area. The male voice made a statement that appeared to reference a “Stingray device” and my recently installed Verizon Orbic RC400L Rayhunter monitoring device.
The statement I heard was substantially as follows:
“YOU BITCH WE HAVE TO TURN OFF THE STINGRAY DEVICE ON YOU BECAUSE WE HAVE DISCOVERED THE VERIZON ORBIC RAYHUNTER CAN DETECTS THE STINGRAY DEVICE.”
I was shocked by the statement because it appeared to reference the exact category of cellular-surveillance concern that led me to purchase and install the Verizon Orbic RC400L running EFForg/Rayhunter. For several months, I have experienced and documented abnormal behavior affecting my Apple iPhone 17, Apple Mac Mini M1, Verizon account environment, and home-network environment. These issues include suspected remote interference, abnormal device behavior, location irregularities, signal instability, and concerns consistent with possible unauthorized device mirroring, cloning, or cellular-session interference.
This supplemental report documents the statement as reported speech and as a potential corroborating indicatorrequiring preservation and further review. I am not stating that the verbal statement alone conclusively proves that a Stingray or IMSI-catcher device was present. I am preserving the statement because it directly referenced both a Stingray device and my Verizon Orbic Rayhunter device shortly after Rayhunter was installed and activated.
II. Relationship to Rayhunter Installation and Monitoring
On or about May 6, 2026, I installed and activated EFForg/Rayhunter version 0.10.2 on a Verizon Orbic RC400L mobile hotspot. Rayhunter is an open-source tool associated with detection of IMSI catchers and cell-site simulators. EFF describes cell-site simulators, also called Stingrays or IMSI catchers, as devices that masquerade as legitimate cell-phone towers and cause phones within range to connect to the simulator. (sls.eff.org)
The Rayhunter installation was completed for lawful personal cybersecurity monitoring, device-security review, and technical evidence preservation. After installation, the Verizon Orbic RC400L displayed the expected green Rayhunter status bar, and the Rayhunter dashboard became accessible through the Orbic Wi-Fi network at the local Rayhunter interface. The dashboard showed active recording, recording history, available download options, and expanded analysis results showing 0 warnings for reviewed captures.
The reported male-voice statement is significant because it appeared to reference Rayhunter’s ability to detect a Stingray-type device. This occurred shortly after the Rayhunter device had been installed and activated.
III. Specific Event Description
During the mid-afternoon on May 7, 2026, I was inside my bedroom. I heard a male voice echoing from the direction of the common stairwell area through my paper thin bedroom wall. The voice was loud enough for me to hear the words clearly.
The statement included hostile language and appeared to acknowledge the existence or use of a “Stingray device” against me. The statement also appeared to acknowledge awareness that my Verizon Orbic RC400L Rayhunterdevice could detect such cellular-surveillance activity.
The reported statement was:
“YOU BITCH WE HAVE TO TURN OFF THE STINGRAY DEVICE ON YOU BECAUSE WE HAVE DISCOVERED THE VERIZON ORBIC RAYHUNTER CAN DETECTS THE STINGRAY DEVICE.”
I did not confront the person. I did not engage in verbal communication with the person. I am documenting the event for personal records, potential Verizon escalation, potential FCC, FBI and FTC complaint support, housing-management notice, and possible law-enforcement or attorney review.
IV. Evidentiary Significance
This statement is significant because it directly referenced:
- A “Stingray device”;
- Turning off such a device;
- The Verizon Orbic Rayhunter device;
- The possibility that Rayhunter could detect the device; and
- A hostile statement directed toward me.
The statement is also significant because it occurred after I had purchased, installed, and activated the Verizon Orbic RC400L running Rayhunter to address ongoing concerns about abnormal cellular behavior, suspected Apple iPhone 17 interference, suspected device mirroring or cloning, and possible unauthorized surveillance.
The reported statement may be relevant to:
- cellular-network integrity concerns;
- suspected unauthorized surveillance;
- possible unlawful interception or attempted interception;
- possible unauthorized access to devices or accounts;
- potential harassment or intimidation;
- possible attempts to avoid detection after Rayhunter activation;
- Verizon account-security review;
- FCC complaint documentation;
- and preservation of technical evidence.
V. Technical Interpretation
At this stage, the event should be described carefully as a reported verbal statement referencing a Stingray device and Rayhunter detection, not as final forensic proof that a Stingray device was present.
The presently known facts support the following careful interpretation:
- I installed and activated Rayhunter on a Verizon Orbic RC400L.
- Rayhunter appeared to operate normally and showed active recordings.
- Reviewed Rayhunter recordings showed 0 warnings.
- I later heard a male voice from the common stairwell area make a statement referencing a “Stingray device” and “Verizon Orbic Rayhunter.”
- The statement appeared to acknowledge awareness of my Rayhunter device and suggested concern that Rayhunter could detect a Stingray-type device.
- The statement is being preserved as a possible corroborating indicator, but further technical review is needed before any final conclusion can be made.
Possible explanations that should remain open include:
- actual unauthorized cellular-surveillance activity;
- a person making a threatening or harassing statement without technical basis;
- knowledge of my Rayhunter installation by persons nearby;
- attempt to intimidate or distress me;
- misunderstanding or misuse of the term “Stingray”;
- or a separate technical issue unrelated to the statement.
Because the statement referenced a specific surveillance technology and my specific Rayhunter monitoring setup, I believe it is serious enough to preserve.
VI. Federal Statutory and Regulatory Significance
The reported facts may implicate several federal legal concerns if later evidence confirms unauthorized interception, unauthorized access, device compromise, cellular surveillance, SIM/eSIM misuse, or carrier-account compromise.
A. Wiretap Act / Electronic Communications Privacy Act — 18 U.S.C. § 2511
18 U.S.C. § 2511 concerns unauthorized interception, disclosure, or use of wire, oral, or electronic communications. DOJ describes § 2511 as prohibiting unauthorized interception, disclosure, and use of wire, oral, or electronic communications, subject to statutory exceptions. (sls.eff.org)
If evidence later confirms interception or attempted interception of cellular communications, this statute may be relevant.
B. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act — 18 U.S.C. § 1030
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act addresses unauthorized access to protected computers. This may be relevant if evidence later confirms unauthorized access to my Apple iPhone 17, Apple Mac Mini M1, Verizon account, Apple account, or related connected systems.
C. Stored Communications Act — 18 U.S.C. § 2701
The Stored Communications Act may be relevant if evidence later confirms unauthorized access to stored communications, account records, cloud data, messages, or electronic records.
D. Customer Proprietary Network Information — 47 U.S.C. § 222
47 U.S.C. § 222 requires telecommunications carriers to protect customer proprietary information, including customer proprietary network information. Customer proprietary network information can include technical configuration, type, destination, location, and amount of use of telecommunications service. (sls.eff.org)
This is relevant to my request that Verizon preserve and review SIM/eSIM activity, device identifiers, account authentication events, line provisioning, and suspicious access indicators.
E. FCC SIM-Swap and Port-Out Fraud Protections
The FCC has adopted rules concerning SIM-swap and port-out fraud protections, including customer notification, account-lock options, fraud reporting, investigation, remediation, and documentation requirements for wireless providers. (sls.eff.org)
This is relevant to my request that Verizon review any unauthorized SIM/eSIM, port-out, account-access, or provisioning activity affecting my wireless line.
VII. Judicial Authorization and Warrant Concern
I have not been served with any warrant, court order, notice, or lawful judicial authorization informing me that my Apple iPhone 17, Verizon wireless service, Apple account, Mac Mini M1, or related device environment is subject to lawful cellular-surveillance activity.
DOJ policy for federal law-enforcement use of cell-site simulators in ordinary domestic criminal investigations requires a search warrant supported by probable cause, subject to limited exceptions. (Department of Justice) DOJ materials also state that cell-site simulators used under that policy are not to be used to collect the contents of communications in covered criminal investigations. (Department of Justice)
Because I have no notice of any lawful judicial authorization and because the reported statement referenced turning off a “Stingray device,” I am preserving this incident as a potential unlawful-surveillance and unauthorized-interference concern requiring further review.
VIII. Relationship to Existing Incident Pattern
This May 7, 2026 statement should be viewed in the context of my broader documented incident history involving:
- suspected Apple iPhone 17 interference;
- suspected Apple Mac Mini M1 interference;
- Verizon account-security concerns;
- abnormal cellular signal behavior;
- suspected device mirroring or cloning;
- location-service irregularities;
- account authentication instability;
- home-network concerns;
- and repeated need for defensive security changes.
The statement adds a new layer to the existing pattern because it specifically referenced the type of cellular-surveillance device that Rayhunter was installed to detect.
IX. Recommended Evidence to Preserve
I should preserve the following evidence items with this addendum:
- Date and approximate time of the May 7, 2026 statement.
- Exact quote as remembered.
- Location where I was standing or sitting when I heard it.
- Direction from which the voice appeared to originate.
- Whether any common-area camera, Ring camera, doorbell camera, or building camera may have captured audio, movement, or presence near the stairwell.
- Rayhunter dashboard screenshot from May 7, 2026.
- Expanded Rayhunter analysis screenshot showing 0 warnings and “No warnings to display.”
- Photograph of Verizon Orbic RC400L with Rayhunter green bar.
- Any downloaded Rayhunter ZIP, PCAP, or QMDL files from the relevant time window.
- Orbic connected-device screenshots from the same day.
- Any Verizon account-security notes.
- Any Apple iPhone 17 symptoms or logs observed that same day.
- Written note that I did not receive a warrant, court order, or judicial notice.
X. Recommended Management / Preservation Request Paragraph
If you decide to notify property management in writing, use this careful version:
On May 7, 2026, during the mid-afternoon, while inside my bedroom, I heard a male voice from the direction of the common stairwell area make a hostile statement referencing a “Stingray device” and my Verizon Orbic Rayhunter monitoring device. I am documenting this as a serious safety, privacy, and evidence-preservation concern. I am requesting that management preserve any available common-area video, access logs, maintenance logs, stairwell camera footage, hallway footage, or incident records from the relevant time window. I am not requesting confrontation with any tenant. I am requesting preservation of records and written communication only.
XI. Recommended Verizon Addendum Paragraph
For Verizon, use this wording:
On May 7, 2026, after installing and activating a Verizon Orbic RC400L running EFForg/Rayhunter, I heard a male voice from the direction of the common stairwell area make a statement referencing a “Stingray device” and stating that the device had to be turned off because my Verizon Orbic Rayhunter could detect it. I am preserving this statement as reported speech and as a potential corroborating indicator in connection with my ongoing Verizon account-security and Apple iPhone 17 compromise concerns. I request that Verizon review my line for SIM/eSIM changes, device-authentication anomalies, provisioning changes, port-out activity, account access, and any unusual network events associated with my MSISDN.
XII. Preservation Statement
I am preserving this May 7, 2026 event as a supplemental incident record. The statement I heard directly referenced a “Stingray device” and my Verizon Orbic Rayhunter monitoring device. I did not authorize any person to monitor, intercept, mirror, clone, access, or interfere with my Apple iPhone 17, Apple Mac Mini M1, Verizon wireless service, Apple account, or home-network environment.
This addendum is prepared for personal records, evidence preservation, Verizon escalation, potential FCC complaint support, and possible attorney or law-enforcement review. The facts are preserved as reported observations and technical concerns. Further forensic and carrier-side review is needed before any final conclusion can be made regarding the presence, operation, or source of any cell-site simulator or unauthorized surveillance device.
Respectfully submitted,
Sarai Hannah Ajai
Date: May 11, 2026
Comments
Post a Comment