nicholasbraker

21 ms·

91.
by nicholasbraker 5y ago
Ermm yeah. TEMPEST (as an acronym for Transient Electromagnetic Pulse Emanations Standard) has been around many decades and as such its mitigation by actors via various means. It is related to the RF emissions of hardware and ways to decode
92.
by nicholasbraker 5y ago
I can relate to this. I did some contracting work for a large bank (let's call them client #1) and had to deal with IBM mainframes connecting their OSA-adapters to an IP-network. These adapters talk OSPF to the network and we needed so
93.
by nicholasbraker 5y ago
Time to brush up those CV's folks!
94.
by nicholasbraker 5y ago
Actually they are still blockchains in their own ecosystem. The only one who bridges blockchains between old and new ledgers is Quant including replacing SWIFT.
95.
by nicholasbraker 5y ago
NATO Secret is one of the highest and you definitely need to have had extensive background checks and clearances to have access to this data. From my experience this is not the type of data your typical employee (uniformed or civilian) woul
96.
by nicholasbraker 5y ago
The middle ground is that it's fine to invest in stuff which is characterized by volatility as long as the consequences are on your own account and you can justify the reasons to do so. Apart from the fact that most media outlets thriv
97.
by nicholasbraker 5y ago
The problem I have with this story is that Bitcoin with all its specific issues regarding CO2 emmisions etc. is thrown on the same heap as other cryptocurrencies or blockchain developments which serve other goals, have less of an environmen
98.
by nicholasbraker 5y ago
Well, eat your own dogfood they say.
99.
by nicholasbraker 6y ago
Exactly this. If your threat model needs you to implement all of this then also use TEMPEST hardware to really lock things down. No use in hardening everything when an attacker can read your screen from a safe distance with some SDR-gear an
100.
by nicholasbraker 6y ago
If your use case is what the author describes then why consider Apple products anyway? Your threat model (whatever this is) defines your choice of hard- and software, not the other way around. Apple doesn't care its products don't