At 09:14 AM 03/10/2003 -0500, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote:
On the other hand, remember that the earliest Tempest systems
were built using vacuum tubes. An attacker today can carry vast amounts
of signal processing power in a briefcase.
And while some of the signal processing jobs need to scale with
At 11:43 PM -0800 3/10/03, Bill Stewart wrote:
At 09:14 AM 03/10/2003 -0500, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote:
On the other hand, remember that the earliest Tempest systems
were built using vacuum tubes. An attacker today can carry vast amounts
of signal processing power in a briefcase.
And while some of
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:43:28 -0800
From: Bill Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 09:14 AM 03/10/2003 -0500, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote:
On the other hand, remember that the earliest Tempest systems
were built using vacuum tubes. An attacker today can carry vast amounts
[...snip...]
At 9:35 PM -0500 3/8/03, Dave Emery wrote:
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:46:06PM -0800, Bill Frantz wrote:
The next more complex version sends the same random screen over and over in
sync with the monitor. Even more complex versions change the random screen
every-so-often to try to frustrate
At 10:46 PM -0800 3/7/03, Bill Frantz wrote:
It has occurred to me that the cheapest form of protection from tempest
attacks might be an active transmitter that swamps the signal from the
computer. Such a transmitter would still be legal if its power output is
kept within the FCC part 15 rules.
It has occurred to me that the cheapest form of protection from tempest
attacks might be an active transmitter that swamps the signal from the
computer. Such a transmitter would still be legal if its power output is
kept within the FCC part 15 rules.
Take, for example, the signal from a CRT
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:46:06PM -0800, Bill Frantz wrote:
The next more complex version sends the same random screen over and over in
sync with the monitor. Even more complex versions change the random screen
every-so-often to try to frustrate recovering the differences between
screens
