12 Aug
2006
12 Aug
'06
4:17 p.m.
Supposedly, non-clocked logic can also offer greater
security because
there's no clock signal for remote sensors to key on when trying to
sense what the CPU is doing. This seemed a little odd to me. Do
espionage types really try to sense what a processor is doing
remotely, based on the EM emissions from the chip?
Don't know about processors, but Tempest had a proof of concept for intercepting I/O
from kbd/video.
(Anyone else remember Tempest? for a while they were selling big "tinfoil hat"
type shields for monitors and then, suddenly,
it went away.) Was that NSA that came up with the POC?
P.S. - for the U.S. types - never would have thought it 15 years ago, but NSA now has
official mousepads you can buy.
12 Aug
12 Aug
4:39 p.m.
On 8/12/2006 at 6:17 PM Scott Quinn wrote:
P.S. - for the U.S. types - never would have thought it
15 years ago, but
NSA now has official mousepads you can buy.
Yup, as with most other branches, there are mouse pads, caps, coffee cups,
tie pins, etc. NSA, CIA, Secret Service, FBI, IRS CID...I've got a bunch
of that stuff.
However, I've never seen an NRO mousepad.
4:49 p.m.
Scott Quinn wrote:
I think the *monitor* is the biggest (and easiest) "leak" to tap.
IIRC, in the UK they have mobile units that wander around trying
to see how many televisions each home has (?)
Supposedly, non-clocked logic can also offer
greater security because
there's no clock signal for remote sensors to key on when trying to
sense what the CPU is doing. This seemed a little odd to me. Do
espionage types really try to sense what a processor is doing
remotely, based on the EM emissions from the chip?
Don't know about processors, but Tempest had a proof of concept for intercepting I/O
from kbd/video.
(Anyone else remember Tempest? for a while they were selling big "tinfoil hat"
type shields for monitors and then, suddenly,
it went away.) Was that NSA that came up with the POC?
P.S. - for the U.S. types - never would have thought it 15 years ago, but NSA now has
official mousepads you can buy. 
5:40 p.m.
On Saturday 12 August 2006 07:49 pm, Don wrote:
IIRC, in the UK they have mobile units that wander
around trying
to see how many televisions each home has (?)
I remember reading about that some time ago (decades?), and wondering since
then how much that whole thing had gotten messed up since computer monitors
had come into the picture.
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
10:23 p.m.
IIRC, in the
UK they have mobile units that wander around trying to
see how many televisions each home has (?)
I remember reading about that some time
ago (decades?), and wondering
since then how much that whole thing had gotten messed up since
computer monitors had come into the picture. 
13 Aug
13 Aug
12:41 a.m.
Roy J. Tellason wrote:
On Saturday 12 August 2006 07:49 pm, Don wrote:
Yeah, they've been around for years. It's illegal to have anything capable of
receiving TV broadcasts in the UK without having a licence (about 160GBP/year,
approx $140US). Doesn't matter if the equipment isn't switched on - if it's
capable of receiving a signal then a licence is needed.
The vans can only detect a switched-on set, of course. I don't know if they
can detect plasma screens or not - possibly, but not sure. Seem to recall that
they use a directional antenna and just pick up on certain frequencies
generated by all conventional sets.
IIRC, in the UK they have mobile units that
wander around trying
to see how many televisions each home has (?)
I remember reading about that some time ago (decades?) and wondering since
then how much that whole thing had gotten messed up since computer monitors
had come into the picture.
Not many people watch TV on a computer screen though. Who'd want to? They're
tiny in comparison to the average TV, plus the higher resolution of the
computer display actually makes for a worse picture
cheers
J.
1:08 a.m.
Hi,
Roy J. Tellason said:
On Saturday 12 August 2006 07:49 pm, Don wrote:
The detector vans looked for the local oscillator radiation from the tuner,
uhf for the past 20 years or so, using a pair of rotateable horn antennas
to get a precise fix on the set. I don't think they use them any more,
I've not seen one for years.
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb at dial.pipex.com
The future was never like this!
IIRC, in the UK they have mobile units that
wander around trying
to see how many televisions each home has (?)
I remember reading about that some time ago (decades?), and wondering since
then how much that whole thing had gotten messed up since computer monitors
had come into the picture. 
2:57 p.m.
On Saturday 12 August 2006 07:49 pm, Don wrote:
Nott quite. Since a TV license covers you for as many sets as you want
(you don't need a license per set), all they are looking for is the fact
that there is at least one TV receiving broadcast signals in that house.
Last time I heard about how it was done, they looked for the local
oscillator radiation. Therefore computer monitors wouldn't affect it,
now, in theory, would a TV set tuned to channel 36 (the conventional
output of UHF modulators over here at that time).
-tony
IIRC, in the UK they have mobile units that
wander around trying
to see how many televisions each home has (?)
I remember reading about that some time ago (decades?), and wondering since
then how much that whole thing had gotten messed up since computer monitors
had come into the picture.
12 Aug
12 Aug
5:38 p.m.
On Saturday 12 August 2006 07:17 pm, Scott Quinn wrote:
Yeah, I remember it. Some of the service work I did back when was on a local
Navy base.
Along with those boards I posted about, there were some other weird bits,
which I think I sitll have around someplace -- panels with some standard
connectors but which were *seriously* shielded, and grounded, and with some
interconnecting cables (the stuff they connected to wasn't with the junk)
that were also shielded as well. Rather odd stuff, that. I'm guessing it
was part of some kind of a setup that was designed to counteract that way of
gathering information...
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
Supposedly,
non-clocked logic can also offer greater security because
there's no clock signal for remote sensors to key on when trying to
sense what the CPU is doing. This seemed a little odd to me. Do
espionage types really try to sense what a processor is doing
remotely, based on the EM emissions from the chip?
Don't know about processors, but Tempest had a proof of concept for
intercepting I/O from kbd/video. (Anyone else remember Tempest? for a while
they were selling big "tinfoil hat" type shields for monitors and then,
suddenly, it went away.) Was that NSA that came up with the POC? 
7:41 p.m.
Don't know about processors, but Tempest had a
proof of concept for intercepting I/O from kbd/video.
(Anyone else remember Tempest? for a while they were selling big "tinfoil hat"
type shields for monitors and then, suddenly,
it went away.) Was that NSA that came up with the POC?
All you need to do is listen with a laser, and you can tell what
someone is typing - each key sounds just a bit different...
There are some interesting Tempest goodies out there, but I havbe not
seen any lately. DEC made a VT100 TEMPEST, and IBM made Tempest
versions of the PC.
--
Will
13 Aug
13 Aug
1:03 a.m.
Hi,
Scott Quinn said:
You can buy clock-chip oscillator modules with a built-in random jitter
to make this sort of interception more difficult. I came across them
in a catalog a while back. ISTR a note saying they were not available
in the US :-) You can buy motherboards with this feature too.
The monitor is the easiest device to read remotely, I saw a demo on
tv a few years back. Of course networking, especially wireless, has
made snooping much easier.
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb at dial.pipex.com
The future was never like this!
Supposedly, non-clocked logic can also offer
greater security because
there's no clock signal for remote sensors to key on when trying to
sense what the CPU is doing. This seemed a little odd to me. Do
espionage types really try to sense what a processor is doing
remotely, based on the EM emissions from the chip?
Don't know about processors, but Tempest had a proof of concept for intercepting I/O
from kbd/video.
(Anyone else remember Tempest? for a while they were selling big "tinfoil hat"
type shields for monitors and then, suddenly,
it went away.) Was that NSA that came up with the POC? 
9:07 p.m.
As I recall, when I was with NSA, we had an OCR with a "screco" circuit that
produced a random character that would interfere with receiving the true
signal. A lot of fun to work on.
Paul
On 8/12/06, Scott Quinn <compoobah at valleyimplants.com> wrote:
Supposedly, non-clocked logic can also offer
greater security because
there's no clock signal for remote sensors to key on when trying to
sense what the CPU is doing. This seemed a little odd to me. Do
espionage types really try to sense what a processor is doing
remotely, based on the EM emissions from the chip?
Don't know about processors, but Tempest had a proof of concept for
intercepting I/O from kbd/video.
(Anyone else remember Tempest? for a while they were selling big "tinfoil
hat" type shields for monitors and then, suddenly,
it went away.) Was that NSA that came up with the POC?
P.S. - for the U.S. types - never would have thought it 15 years ago, but
NSA now has official mousepads you can buy.
6706
days inactive
6708
days old
11 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
cclist＠sydex.com -
compoobah＠valleyimplants.com -
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
mouse＠Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA -
rtellason＠verizon.net -
stanb＠dial.pipex.com -
THX1138＠dakotacom.net -
useddec＠gmail.com -
wdonzelli＠gmail.com