Connect with us

Your computer is never secure

Discussion in 'Electronic Basics' started by E, Dec 5, 2003.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. E

    E Guest

    I found out Electromagenetic waves emitted from computers can be read to
    conclude what activity is taking place.
    Curious about this, I placed an AM radio next to my PC and listened to the
    sounds taking place.
    It sounded alien-like, something out of sci-fi movie. Bleeps and bloops,
    morse code like.
    But, it validated the claim that signals do come out of your home pc.
    With that in mind, software security (firewalls, antivirus) seems futile.
    If signals come OUT, can they be taken IN?

    Since i'm not a scientist, nor well versed in electromagentism - I dont have
    this answer.
    Perhaps this is what Infrared does and worrying about someone zapping my
    computer to install spyware is paranoia.
    But, since a signals can be read and analyzed, it makes sense that Big
    Brother would keep the public uninformed as it relates to signal securing.
    Google this: 'TEMPEST'.
    Or see:

    The FCC is in cahoots with the pro-surveillance nazi's in the United States.
    Almost every electronic device now comes with an FCC label indicating that
    it must accept outside signals, in addition to its intended use. So, it
    seems Big Bro has managed to slip some laws to insure their unconstitutional

    What will Norton, Symantec, Microsoft do when such security breeches are
    well known? If you read about TEMPEST, you know its the governments pooch to
    secure THEIR data. I am unaware of the TEMPEST technology being available to
    nongovernments. In fact, this would violate the FCC rule which requires your
    computer be vulnerable to interference. I'm not sure what purpose this FCC
    rule fulfills other than to create a red carpet for would be electronic

    Be aware, that even though you may not be on the internet, your activity can
    still be monitored through this technique. Your only recourse is to shut
    your computer off.

    Or, does someone out there know what one can do to block the signals coming
    out of the computer?
  2. [crossposts trimmed to the more rational (?) groups. It's Friday
    afternoon or I wouldn't even bother...]

    Not unless they're strong enough to fry you. Radio receivers need only
    microvolts, but you'd need to induce several volts in a computer to
    affect its operation. Google this: "inverse square law".
    Hardly secret, then, is it?
    Nonsense. That says that it won't stop working just because you operate
    it near a transmitter. It has to _tolerate_ outside signals, not obey
    False premise, false conclusion.
    More nonsense. If you actually read the web site that you yourself
    cited, t you wouldn't make such silly claims.
    On the contrary it says it has to be _immune_ to interference, at least
    up to a certain level.
    It reduces the number of complaints of mutual interference they have to
    deal with.
    What about brain activity? Can't they monitor that, too? ;-)
    Lots of people.
  3. Guest

    Most people have known that for about 30 years. Where have you been?
    In the early days of the toy microcomputer, there were programs you ran
    that played tunes over your AM radio held next to the computer. Where
    have you been?
    No, they don't go in; it's one way.
    This has NOTHING to do with infrared ports, and yes, you are being paranoid.
    The concept is well known. What is kept secret is precisely what the
    government does to protect its computers and what it does to try to read
    other governments computers.
    What that little label means in plain English is, if your cheap Walmart
    cordless telephone, boom box, or baby monitor doesn't work correctly
    because of interference from a licensed and legally operating transmitter,
    that's just tough luck.

    It does NOT mean your computer has to be capable of accepting anything via RF.
    There is NO FCC rule requiring your computer to be vulnerable to interference.

    There IS a FCC rule requiring your computer to NOT interfere with other

    Read a little more closely.
    Since getting meaningful information via a TEMPEST technique requires you
    to be close and have a lot of rather sophisticated stuff, it is not very
    likely you are being spyed upon unless you are a hostile foreign government
    or some such thing.

    You think the government is going to spend a huge pile of money and deploy
    national security technology just to watch you download porno?
    Put your computer in a screen room if you're that paranoid.
  4. Out of your meds, again?
    "Tempest" is old technology.
    Bullshit! Part 15 has been in effect decades longer than personal
    computers have been available.
    Tempest hardened equipment is for use with top secret data. It is
    nothing more than well shielded cases, and low electromagnetic radiation
    What are you doing with your computer you need to worry about? Unless
    you are using a Tempest rated system, and are connected to a secure
    server, the data to and from your computer can be traced online.
    Spend $30,000 for a full Tempest rated system, or don't commit
    illegal acts with your computer.
    20 days!

    Michael A. Terrell
    Central Florida
  5. E

    E Guest

    Good response. Now heres mine:

    You assume those with such technologies, which are capable of violating
    computer privacy, are all civil, well meaning, people.
    There's mountains of data that contradict your assumption.
    Rogue employees exist everywhere. I cant and wont put it past someone to
    abuse this government technology to spy or harrass "undesirables", or
    someone they dont like.

    The reason these technologies CAN be abused is because of useful idiots who
    correlate exposers to the mentally ill. Suppose such an operation were
    taking place where each hand all the way up the command hierarchy was
    involved in a social sting operation to rid the world of "undesirables", you
    would be their useful idiot maintaining the myth that such technologies are
    NEVER abused.

    The model is perfect, and its used by the fascist right wing.

  6. Guest

    Raving paranoia...

    The US government doesn't have the wherewithal to round up the real bad
    guys, you know, the ones that blow up buildings and such.

    You think some agency is going to spring the resources to spy on some
    local dufus and his computer usage?

  7. E does bring up a good point. Where do the "bad guys" get the technology to run
    operations such as I am experiencing? I see where you make reference to our ability
    to read a rf emitted from a hardwired video source.
    I know this to be true as I have several dome cams on my cctv system that are
    virtually impossible to tell where they are pointing unless you are looking at the
    monitor. Not only can these hoodlums see which direction they point but they are
    seeing in detail what's on my screen.

    I'm sorry but I can't fathom that sort of equipment being available at radio shack.
    Rogue gov. employees, possibly or maybe our govt. is allowing this technology be used
    by certain non-government organizations so that arguments such as this one will leave
    controversy as to who is responsible. If the govt. is the only one with such
    technology when a scandal arises they are the only ones that can be blamed.
    Therefore they must allow it to be used in the private sector so as to keep the
    waters a little muddy....just a thought

    Cotton Eye Joe
    California where the waves come
    sweepin thru your brain....
  8. This will keep you guys busy for a while.

    18 days!

    Michael A. Terrell
    Central Florida
  9. Guest

    TEMPEST technology is classified.

    Have you a clue on the repercussions of leaking classified information?
  10. E

    E Guest

    ooh, so classified the NSA shows a Tempest endorsed product list on their
    web site:

    Quick, someone call Homeland Security. NSA has classified technology on
    their website!

  11. It's also illegal to start fires, unless your the fire dept. doing it for a purpose.
    Yes I have some idea as to the ramifications of breaching security polices, but it's
    my position that if it is being leaked it is done so by the very people that enforce
    the rules with regard to security clearances.
  12. Guest

    That's TEMPEST as in the product doesn't leak information via RF that is
    interceptable by TEMPEST techniques.

    This is not equipment that intercepts the RF from other equipment and
    reconstructs what information is being processed.

    Dolt; learn to read.
  13. Guest

    Best you put your aluminium foil hat on and get in the bunker now that they
    know you know.
  14. Baphomet

    Baphomet Guest

    Wouldn't the receiver have to be in relatively close proximity to the
    monitor? Computers, monitors et al are not designed to be transmitters, even
    though they all emit some spurious electromagnetic radiation.
  15. The older monitors had higher emission, and you could pick up the
    horizontal sweep, and the video, amplify it, and feed it to a monitor to
    see an image. There is more shielding in newer monitors, and they use
    less sweep power. I built a WWVB loop antenna about 10 years ago. I
    lived WAY out in the country, yet I could pick up the horizontal sweep
    of a TV set about a half mile away. 15.73434 KHZ * 4 = 62.93736 KHz. At
    night the guy would leave it on, and after the TV station went off the
    air it would drift right through 60 KHz, and wipe out my frequency
    standard. The antenna was a simple shielded, tuned loop with an op amp
    at the antenna. The signal would have been much stronger sitting in his
    17 days!

    Michael A. Terrell
    Central Florida
  16. Baphomet

    Baphomet Guest

    "yet I could pick up the horizontal sweep of a TV set about a half mile

    Wow, I'm really surprised it would travel that far.
  17. I don't understand, why the smart ass remarks? If someone has an opinion that doesn't
    support your theory
    all you can do is reply like a smart alec little child?
    See my remark to someone like you is you need a good
    ole fashion ass whoopin. One day you will make a smarty ass remark like that to
    someone who doesn't cotton to smart ass's, and teach you a little respect or do you
    only to it on line. Where I was raised men don't talk like that to other men, unless
    they expect to step outside to settle it. Show some respect son, it will take you
    farther. These are serious issues, lives are at stake, your comments are not taken

    Cotton Eye

  18. My question is are they seeing my monitor via the emission for the monitor its self
    signal coming from the cabling? And if for some reason they have it hard wired, is
    there a way to detect that? Any defensive measures I can take to defend a hard wire
    or a remote tap?


  19. My question is are they seeing my monitor via the emission for the monitor its self
    signal coming from the cabling? And if for some reason they have it hard wired, is
    there a way to detect that? Any defensive measures I can take to defend a hard wire
    or a remote tap?


  20. My question is are they seeing my monitor via the emission for the monitor its self
    signal coming from the cabling? And if for some reason they have it hard wired, is
    there a way to detect that? Any defensive measures I can take to defend a hard wire
    or a remote tap?

Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day