1994-07-06 - RE: TEMPEST attacks

Header Data

From: Jeff Gostin <jgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 2888220e79ab45623fcf557c3f3de647222a44045d0ecb32fa7bb2069bdb5ee5
Message ID: <940706092821E3Yjgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-06 13:50:27 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 06:50:27 PDT

Raw message

From: Jeff Gostin <jgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 06:50:27 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: RE: TEMPEST attacks
Message-ID: <940706092821E3Yjgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Mike Markley <mmarkley@microsoft.com> writes:

> How well does a Tempest attack work with multiple machines in the same 
> room? It seems to me that it would take additional equipment to filter 
> out the different machines that are being run. It also seems that it 
> should be trivial to create a noise generator that would make Tempest 
> useless. Kind of like using a spark plug to foil older radar guns.
     I agree. Don't all monitors generate slightly (italicized) different
frequencies of EM radiation, even on the scan freq? If they do, then it
shouldn't be TOO hard to filter it out. Wouldn't a noise generator, if on
the correct scan frequency, or, if on the right EM rad. frequency, cause
problems for the monitor? It's just conjecture, but does anyone more
knowledgeable know the answers?

                                   --Jeff





Thread