> Respectfully, this is not the kind of fiction that belongs in a discussion
> about security. It is not possible to read the "flux" of monitor and
> reconstruct any screen.
I'm going with "if you say so".
How do you feel about bouncing lasers off of windows and recreating the
conversations taking place within the adjoining room?
> And, were there some theoretical way to do that, it would not be "even
> easier" than reading keyboard keys, as you suggest.
Well, by "even easier" I meant that it could be done at substantially
greater distance, without physical access to the machine in question, and at
substantially lower cost.
Modern keyboards use such small voltages and amperages that it's getting
more and more difficult to discern what they're doing without either
installing a monitoring device, being so close that you've become a physical
security risk, or using hideously expensive equipment.
Still, you are correct in one way. The vast majority of us aren't worth the
effort and thus are unlikely to be the subject of such dedicated efforts.
And even if our information were worth harvesting, few of us have sufficient
physical security to make electronic spying worthwhile. Why use
electromagnetic eavesdropping when you can wait until someone goes (home |
to work | to lunch), clone their hard drive, and decrypt it at your leisure
(especially if you've already obtained their encryption keys)?
Short version: there is no such thing as perfect personal security;
fortunately most of us aren't worth the effort. All you can really do is
deter the casual cracker (and many of those people are attracted by
increased security).
mikel
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
