[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Recht auf geheime Kommunikation
- To: debate@fitug.de
- Subject: Re: Recht auf geheime Kommunikation
- From: "Ralf W. Stephan" <stephan@tmt.de>
- Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 14:38:57 +0200
- Comment: This message comes from the debate mailing list.
- In-Reply-To: <v0213051db1e7761159ef@[23.23.23.10]>; from Wau Holland on Fri, Jul 31, 1998 at 03:30:25PM +0200
- References: <v0213051db1e7761159ef@[23.23.23.10]>
- Reply-To: stephan@tmt.de
- Sender: owner-debate@fitug.de
Okay, das mit LCD war Unsinn, aber:
Wau, Lutz and me
> >- wireless ==> weniger Leitungen, die abstrahlen.
> >Warum wireless TEMPEST-sicherer ist? Spread-spectrum braucht geringere
> >Sendeenergie.> ...
> Die Abhoerbarkeit hat die Komponente Reichweite und Sicherheit.
> Sicherheit ist tendenziell Null.
> Dann muss man hacken und dann kommt Sicherheit dazu.
>
> NOKIA will noch dieses Jahr 58 GHz GSM vorstellen, PE ist da.
>... wireless ist leicher aufzufangen ...
Bitte nochmal lesen: spread-spectrum, nicht RF. Siehe dazu
http://sss-mag.com/globindx/index.html
"Spread-spectrum radio communications, long a favorite technology
of the military because it resists jamming and is hard for an enemy
to intercept, is now on the verge of potentially explosive
commercial development. The reason: spread-spectrum signals, which
are distributed over a wide range of frequencies and then collected
onto their original frequency at the receiver, are so inconspicuous
as to be 'transparent.' Just as they are unlikely to be intercepted
by a military opponent, so are they unlikely to interfere with
other signals intended for business and consumer users -- even ones
transmitted on the same frequencies. Such an advantage opens up
crowded frequency spectra to vastly expanded use.
...
ralf
--
http://www.tmt.de/~stephan/