4 ms·
> Hmm, maybe you need something even more secure. How about air gap? If your device doesn't have a network connection, you must be %100 protected, right? Wrong,
by Wowfunhappy 4y ago
> Hmm, maybe you need something even more secure. How about air gap? If your device doesn't have a network connection, you must be %100 protected, right? Wrong, there are multiple demonstrations about extracting information through sound, magnetic forces and light.
Eh, they're all pretty bogus though, with ridiculously contrived scenarios I mostly can't imagine happening in the real world.
USB sticks and the like pose a more realistic danger to air gapped machines, but they're also easy to avoid if you're conscientious.
Air gaps are really, really good and we should be using them more.
- mrtksn 4y agoFor most people a fingerprint scanner is just enough, an awful lot of people don't have any password or biometrics and even they just do fine. It's all about the threat, there's no right answer about how much security is enough security without assessing the threat factor.
- Wowfunhappy 4y agoI'm not arguing that point. But I think focusing on these frankly-stupid "look we can transfer data using light" papers severely undersells the effectiveness of air gaps, for people who do need them. It should be obvious to anyone who has used a QR code that it's possible to transfer data over other channels, but it's pretty obvious it's happening.