1998-12-23 - RE: Question about ‘TEMPEST’

Header Data

From: “Brown, R Ken” <brownrk1@texaco.com>
To: tcmay@got.net>
Message Hash: 1c3699f160c1f9fee6d48d5384e0fea23d491805a8c920c71db56daebe899560
Message ID: <896C7C3540C3D111AB9F00805FA78CE20313FB44@MSX11002>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1998-12-23 14:17:55 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 22:17:55 +0800

Raw message

From: "Brown, R Ken" <brownrk1@texaco.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 22:17:55 +0800
To: tcmay@got.net>
Subject: RE: Question about 'TEMPEST'
Message-ID: <896C7C3540C3D111AB9F00805FA78CE20313FB44@MSX11002>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Tim May wrote:

> The full TEMPEST specs are more or less classified, as might 
> be expected. (Because one does not lightly tell one's enemies
>  what one is measuring for.)

> Contrary to popular rumor, it is not "illegal" to shield
>  computers, to "use TEMPEST methods," as it were.

Rather hard to see how it could be, given that the details are supposed to
be secret!  If all of a sudden you got arrested for wrapping wet towels
around screens that would be a Big Clue....

(of course that assumes you live in a country where you get told what you;ve
been arrested for. Hmmmm....)

Ken





Thread