X-Message-Number: 533 From: (David Lubkin) Date: Fri, 8 Nov 91 09:49:20 EST Subject: POSTING Re: cryonics: #527 - #528 really paranoid, there are plenty of opportunities. A recent issue of a USENET publication called "Computer Underground Digest" mentioned a demonstration of "TEMPEST technology (picking up the radio waves from a monitor, and being able to display what's being typed up to 1.5 miles away)," so shielding of all monitors may be on the agenda of the most security minded. (Please let me know if this story about TEMPEST technology is just somebody's joke.) And don't forget the worst security threat of all, being so secure that no useful work can get done any more! :-) - KQB ] The kind of technology you are talking about is real. I used to work at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and it was taken into account when designing the security rules for DOE labs. TEMPEST computer equipment is properly shielded; it is also not, I believe, available for sale to the general public. But the other thing you can do is only use the equipment in a Faraday cage. If you're going to worry about computer security, you might as well worry about other kinds of security risks, e.g., someone breaking in, electronic surveillance (bugs, parabolic microphones, lasers 'listening' to a conversation by 'reading' the vibrations of windows, etc.), spies/saboteurs at Alcor (through infiltration, blackmail, or bribery), etc. How much caution/paranoia is justified? ...I don't know. On one hand, it's easy to sound lunatic. On the other hand, people have done a lot of heinous deeds for a lot less than, say, a major estate bequeathed to Alcor. On the other hand (which, as LeGuin says, I can say because I'm a science fiction writer), even with the level of security that DOE/DOD use, there are Jonathan Pollards. So even with an irritating level of precautions, you're still not secure. On my penultimate hand, it seems ludicrous to discuss this stuff on an open net. (Why aren't we using RSA or PGP now for the list? Is there a USENET rule against encrypted messages?) On my final hand, while it is prudent to keep one's security precautions secret, it is foolhardy to rely on security by obscurity. Your precautions must be secure against knowledgeable attack. -- David Lubkin. ------- Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=533