Optical Tempest? I have my doubts...
Major Variola (ret)
mv at cdc.gov
Thu Jul 17 12:46:43 PDT 2003
At 03:15 PM 7/17/03 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
>I dunno...I'm thinking that optical tempest is probably bullshit 99% of
>time, but what do I know?
There was an article on optical tempest based on reading modem-LEDs,
which are sometimes modulated with the data stream. For Mhz rates it
>But I still don't believe that specular reflection of smallish type
>monitor will have anything that is recoverable. Of course, this is
>be dependent on the quality of the wall material, but for most
>plaster/drywall painted surfaces, I just can't believe the appopriate
>spacial frequencies of the image are not scattered after that kind of
The idea of reading the *matte* reflection of the CRT beam is possible.
But its not *spatial* frequency, its using intensity vs. time.
At any one instant you have a single 1-D measurement.
This exploits the fact, as stated, that the phosphor is brightest under
(scanning) beam. There is no spatial info present. You simply need
a sensitive (contrast is low) and fast (raster rate) optical
>The conspiracy theorist is telling me there's some reason they floated
>optical tempest story, though I can't quite figure out what that reason
Its the Windowshade division of the Anti-Illuminati
Jewish Zealots were famous for offing (Jewish) Roman collaborators.
100 generations later, Arabic Zealots whack (Arabic) ZionistCrusader
"Pro-American Mayor, Son Killed in Iraq"
Of course Iraq isn't another Vietnam. They don't know how to make good
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy