FreeBSD doesn't implement OFDM in the kernel.
The various chipsets implement OFDM, not FreeBSD.
There's no "software" OFDM. The 802.11 chipsets out there take care of it,
not FreeBSD.
Adrian
On 7 March 2011 04:42, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 12:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>
On 06/03/11 12:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 18:19:31 Etienne Robillard wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>
>
>> yes, the difference with 'software OFDM' and hardware OFDM - as in
>> run(4) - is the latter
>> exploits 'objects' an
On 06/03/11 12:46 PM, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 12:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>
>> On Sunday 06 March 2011 18:19:31 Etienne Robillard wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>> yes, the difference with 'soft
On 06/03/11 12:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 18:19:31 Etienne Robillard wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>
>
>> yes, the difference with 'software OFDM' and hardware OFDM - as in
>> run(4) - is the latter
>> exploits 'objects' an
On Sunday 06 March 2011 18:19:31 Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> yes, the difference with 'software OFDM' and hardware OFDM - as in
> run(4) - is the latter
> exploits 'objects' and 'peoples' as subcarriers units with
> "bi-directional data" when
> sof
On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>> and finally I almost forgot...
>>
>> there seems to be another aspect of false security in OFDM design in
>> what bi-directional IIP packets could be transfered out-of-band using
>> ELF/VLF ranges
>> and reverse FFT functions..
>>
>
> My poi
On 06/03/11 11:46 AM, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 11:31:00AM -0500, Etienne Robillard wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/11 09:49 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>
>>> OFDM is part of 11g, 11a, and 11n (2/5ghz.)
>>>
>>> I don't understand why you're asking about it in a security context.
>>
On 06/03/11 11:31 AM, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 09:49 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
>> OFDM is part of 11g, 11a, and 11n (2/5ghz.)
>>
>> I don't understand why you're asking about it in a security context.
>>
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>>
>
and finally I almost forgot...
there seems to be
On 06/03/11 09:49 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> OFDM is part of 11g, 11a, and 11n (2/5ghz.)
>
> I don't understand why you're asking about it in a security context.
>
>
> Adrian
>
Approaching security can be seen with onion paradigm: True paranoids
will want
to have multiple layers of security wheth
I'm no expert in Wifi or in FFT so I'm forwarding your reply to the list
hoping
someone with experience with FFT could share lights on OFDM uses of
FFT functions below the 30khz range... In other words could FreeBSD be
used to control the
electromagnetic energy input from out-of-band VLF/ELF waves
.
> https://gthc.org/investigations/OFDM/72_armstrong_ofdm.pdf
>
> That paper is a basic paper. COFDM is being used just about everywhere now.
> OFDM was used in the Telebit modems of years gone by. To this day
> (last I checked) it is superiour to the v32.bis format used today on
> third world pho
I would appreciate if you try not to disrupt this thread anymore on
freebsd-current.
Thank you.
On 06/03/11 10:42 AM, Diane Bruce wrote:
> I've moved this off of freebsd-current into private e-mail folks.
>
>
>> Twisted pair? Sorry I don't understand this... Wireless USB dongles are
>>
I've moved this off of freebsd-current into private e-mail folks.
>
> Twisted pair? Sorry I don't understand this... Wireless USB dongles are
...
> This is out-of-scope but I respect your opinion to call me a name attempting
It is not an ad hominem when it is factually true.
These are not chem
ows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: e...@gthcfoundation.org
Subject: Re: can somebody explains OFDM in FreeBSD?
References: <4d7398c6.8030...@gthcfoundation.org>
<201103061533.32138.hsela...@c2i.net&
> No. It's twisted pair so will not radiate that far, it's not an antenna.
> DSL is sent via twisted pair as well and should not radiate very far.
Twisted pair? Sorry I don't understand this... Wireless USB dongles are
being
operating as EMF/RF devices and forcingly will radiate with objects
clos
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 09:56:05AM -0500, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 09:33 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > On Sunday 06 March 2011 15:23:02 Etienne Robillard wrote:
> >
..
>
> Yes, from a security perspective, could radiance from ELF/VLF operating
> devices as
> "ethernet-class s
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 03:33:32PM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 15:23:02 Etienne Robillard wrote:
> > Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
> > Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required for running run(4) ? Is there
> > any (saf
On 06/03/11 10:01 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> OpenBSD has driver support for OFDM chips. Anything that speaks 11a, 11g or
> 11n == OFDM.
>
> You'd have to speak to an RF related person about your definition of
> harmful. I mean, think about it - 802.11 devices are supposed to give off
> EMR that a re
OpenBSD has driver support for OFDM chips. Anything that speaks 11a, 11g or
11n == OFDM.
You'd have to speak to an RF related person about your definition of
harmful. I mean, think about it - 802.11 devices are supposed to give off
EMR that a receiver can decode. So your question about whether OFD
On 06/03/11 09:33 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 15:23:02 Etienne Robillard wrote:
>
>> Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
>> Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required for running run(4) ? Is there
>> any (safer) alternative to
OFDM is part of 11g, 11a, and 11n (2/5ghz.)
I don't understand why you're asking about it in a security context.
Adrian
On 6 March 2011 22:23, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
> Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required f
On Sunday 06 March 2011 15:23:02 Etienne Robillard wrote:
> Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
> Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required for running run(4) ? Is there
> any (safer) alternative to OFDM?
>
> If not, could the FreeBSD security team verify
Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required for running run(4) ? Is there
any (safer) alternative to OFDM?
If not, could the FreeBSD security team verify the the safety of OFDM
derived
drivers (in particular wireless ether
23 matches
Mail list logo
