4 ms·
Wouldn't they be easy enough to triangulate quite precisely anyway?
by slx26 6y ago
Wouldn't they be easy enough to triangulate quite precisely anyway?
- BrianOnHN 6y ago*Insert joke about Qs using trig*
- yowlingcat 6y ago* Insert riff about Qs using non-euclidean geometry and circular reasoning *
- tanseydavid 6y ago* Insert GPT-3 generated Q-style mystery clues in vomit-haiku-meter.
- JakeStone 6y agoI think I love you. Don't worry, there's a shot for that.
- gruez 6y agonetwork distance =/= physical distance
- postalrat 6y agoNetwork triangulation =/= trig.
- fortran77 6y agoI would have thought so, too. But I know for certain that with enough accurate measurements around a network, you can determine the location of an unknown with pretty good accuracy. I've seen it done.
- Frost1x 6y agoThere were geostatistical methods that made certain assumptions about routing, network propagation speeds, etc. and with a large enough targeted sample using places with known geolocations, you could narrow down to a somewhere around 50 miles (this was many years ago). I imagine techniques have improved since then (as have counter measures to add noise to the data). If you know the general area you can probably use public satellite imagery to narrow it down a bit. I suspect there some other clever information you could use to find the locations if you really wanted to. Even with all the information I'm not sure how feasible it is for any small group to orchestrate a real disruption given how distributed data AWS centers are. Lots of failovers exist and probably a lot people outside AWS know little about.
- fortran77 6y agoYou can do _much_ better than that with PTP hardware in specific places around the network. And there are several companies doing this.