huawei

Sat Jun 15 03:13:39 UTC 2013

I was a "military guy"back in the day 31m and 31q to be precise.
On Jun 14, 2013 9:09 PM, "Michael Thomas" <mike at mtcc.com> wrote:

> On 06/14/2013 05:34 PM, Scott Helms wrote:
>
>> Is it possible?  Yes, but it's not feasible because the data rate would be
>> too low.  That's what I'm trying to get across.  There are lots things
>> that
>> can be done but many of those are not useful.
>>
>> I could encode communications in fireworks displays, but that's not
>> effective for any sort of communication system.
>>
>>
> You're really hung up on bit rate, and you really shouldn't. Back in
> the days before gigabit pipes, tapping out morse was considered
> a data rate beyond belief. Ships used flags and signaling lights well
> into the second world war at least. The higher the value of the
> information, the lower the bit rate you need to transmit it (I think
> this might formally be information entropy, but I'm not certain).
>
> You might think that there is nothing of particularly high value to be
> had within the confines of what a (compromised) router can produce,
> but I'd say prepare to be surprised. I'm not much of a military guy, but
> some of the stuff they dream up makes you go "how on earth did you
> think that up?". And that's just the unclassified widely known stuff.
> Part of the issue when you say "it could be done cheaper somewhere
> else" presupposes we know the economics of what they're trying to do.
> We don't, so we should assume that routers just like everything else are
> a target, and that you almost certainly won't notice it if they are.
>
> Mike
>