From: Doug Hughes <Doug.Hughes@Eng.Auburn.EDU>
To: perry@imsi.com
Message Hash: 58d22342bc8a5030fa2a2429405eed7f95804b8ac4aefdcc31bc6b86630d147b
Message ID: <doug-9506121515.AA0064320@netman.eng.auburn.edu>
Reply To: <9507121505.AA10601@snark.imsi.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-07-12 15:16:11 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 12 Jul 95 08:16:11 PDT
From: Doug Hughes <Doug.Hughes@Eng.Auburn.EDU>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 95 08:16:11 PDT
To: perry@imsi.com
Subject: Re: Don't trust the net too much
In-Reply-To: <9507121505.AA10601@snark.imsi.com>
Message-ID: <doug-9506121515.AA0064320@netman.eng.auburn.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
>
>Doug Hughes writes:
>>
>> Hmm.. I'm not sure I'd want to stand too close when one of those
>> things goes off, but it would be an interesting demo. :)
>>
>> Maybe behind an EM shield.. ;)
>
>What is it, exactly, that you imagine could happen to you? You realize
>that you can expose humans to pretty powerful electromagnetic fields
>without any noticable effect unless the frequency happens to be one
>that their tissues absorb.
>
I'm thinking better safe than sorry. None of the studies on EM fields
and their effects on humans are causal, but a lot of studies and advice
have concluded that caution and minimization may be advisable.
It's the un-noticable effects that I'm worried about. ;)
>> I think there was a question of some microelectronics being permenently
>> damaged because of fusion at the MOS level (burning through the
>> gate),
>
>To do that requires that you transfer energy from your device into the
>computer you are attacking. How do you propose to do that?
>
Just relating what I thought I'd heard. It may be wrong, or I may be
remembering it wrong. My EM theory is a bit rusty.
--
____________________________________________________________________________
Doug Hughes Engineering Network Services
System/Net Admin Auburn University
doug@eng.auburn.edu
"Real programmers use cat > file.as"
Return to July 1995
Return to ““Sean A. Walberg” <sean@escape.ca>”