3 ms·
you'd be surprised. when specifications get passed around in the endless maze of defense affiliated sub contractors and sub sub contractors, they may be impleme
by ech 9y ago
you'd be surprised.
when specifications get passed around in the endless maze of defense affiliated sub contractors and sub sub contractors, they may be implemented in all kind of creative ways.
and i entirely agree that the operational issues of enforcing the air gap are by far the most challenging cost in this kind of environment.
the culture of business environments is by and large ill suited to the kind of strict enforcement these environment require.
if RF leaks are part of your threat model, then i would definitely not class them as "proximity attacks". without adequate shielding, antenna black magic and a rented apartment on the other side of the street work perfectly well to capture signals of interest.
- otp124 9y agoCould TEMPEST attacks be defeated by defenders transmitting RF noise around the target within the same frequency spectrum?
- ech 9y agoabsolutely. raising the noise floor would make it harder for the adversary to pick up valuable signals. but why bother with complicated jamming setups that require you to cover a very wide spectrum, at high power, while taking care of not interfering with your own equipments, and still have signals going out that with sufficient means and motivation, a sophisticated attacker may still intercept (we're pretty good at extracting valuable signals from noise) when you can just put on your RFP to stick the lot in a faraday cage, use optical connectivity inside it, forbid wireless HIDs, buy shielded monitors and shielded phones, and put a couple of scary bald men in front of the door.