>From - Sat Mar 02 00:57:15 2024
X-BeenThere: tscm-l2006_at_googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.231.55.32 with SMTP id s32ls232843ibg.0.p; Thu, 04 Mar 2010
01:19:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.155.143 with SMTP id s15mr688209ibw.8.1267694383486;
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:19:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.155.143 with SMTP id s15mr688208ibw.8.1267694383447;
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:19:43 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <jm..._at_tscm.com>
Received: from smtpauth03.csee.onr.siteprotect.com (smtpauth03.csee.onr.siteprotect.com [64.26.60.137])
by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 24si41485iwn.9.2010.03.04.01.19.43;
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:19:43 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 64.26.60.137 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of jm..._at_tscm.com) client-ip=64.26.60.137;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 64.26.60.137 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of jm..._at_tscm.com) smtp.mail=jm..._at_tscm.com
Received: from [192.168.1.45] (unknown [71.174.16.205])
(Authenticated sender: jm..._at_tscm.com)
by smtpauth03.csee.onr.siteprotect.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79574103801F
for <tscm-..._at_googlegroups.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 03:19:42 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <4B8F7B2E.1060809_at_tscm.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 04:19:42 -0500
From: "James M. Atkinson" <jm..._at_tscm.com>
Reply-To: jm..._at_tscm.com
Organization: Granite Island Group
User-Agent: Thunderbird 3.0a1pre (Macintosh/2008022015)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tscm-l2006_at_googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [TSCM-L] {4807} YouTube - hand making vacuum tubes Part 1
References: <BLU149-DS9D736B56B1CB45D31DDD2BC390_at_phx.gbl> <4B8F70F3.6080500_at_phreaker.net> <1003040950010.0_at_somehost.domainz.com>
In-Reply-To: <1003040950010.0_at_somehost.domainz.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------050604090501080003040907"
--------------050604090501080003040907
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Yeah, the NLJD would illuminate the rust on the pins of the tube but
would otherwise show little love in regards to finding bugs using
vacuum tubes.
The Soviets were experts in building bugging devices that were the size
of your thumb, and which used vacuum tubes. No match for integrated
circuits or surface mount components, but wow were they making the bugs
small... and tough, real tough to find.
I though that the little Soviet encryption equipment that used vacuum
tubes, and no transistors, diodes, or integrated circuits were pretty
cool. There was quite a bit of Western services slamming the Soviets for
using vacuum tube, but they where not using them due to a lack of
technology, but more because they understood the the doctrine of
electronic warfare and espionage way better then their opponents.
They also used a wide range of eavesdropping devices which contained
phosphor, neon, or similar substances that they could use to get audio
or data to bypass protection circuits and devices. There were/are some
pretty snazzy vacuum tube devices in the Washington DC area that are
still spitting out intelligence, and which has frustrated attempts to
find the device for decades only it to get tripped across by an
electrician armed with little more then a flashlight (which of course
the USG sweepers were blind to finding).
Nothing beats a flashlight and a ladder, but only if the customer gives
you sufficient time to use them. Ultimately, all of the fancy equipment
all boils down to someone picking up a flashlight and climbing a ladder.
That said, I am for using any tool that can help you find a bug, be it a
NLJD X-Ray, Ouija board, chicken foot, red hair, etc. If the end result
it that you can find more eavesdropping devices, then more power to it.
Just do not get too carried away with pricey equipment over better tactics.
-jma
Thomas Shaddack wrote:
> What about something a bit more sexy? Something solid-state electronics
> still cannot entirely measure up to?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krytron
>
> Then there's the issue of vacuum tubes being inherently EMP-resistant.
> Old tech lacks some vulnerabilities of new tech.
>
> Thought... would a miniature vacuum tube be detectable by a NLJD?
>
>
>
>
>> Gag, Flemming valves, I'd be more impressed to see him buiild an OP-Amp.
>>
>> Its from Onion wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl-QMuUQhVM --
>>>
>
>
--------------050604090501080003040907
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Yeah, the NLJD would illuminate the rust on the pins of the tube but
would otherwise show little love in regards to finding bugs using
vacuum tubes.<br>
<br>
The Soviets were experts in building bugging devices that were the size
of your thumb, and which used vacuum tubes. No match for integrated
circuits or surface mount components, but wow were they making the bugs
small... and tough, real tough to find.<br>
<br>
I though that the little Soviet encryption equipment that used vacuum
tubes, and no transistors, diodes, or integrated circuits were pretty
cool. There was quite a bit of Western services slamming the Soviets
for using vacuum tube, but they where not using them due to a lack of
technology, but more because they understood the the doctrine of
electronic warfare and espionage way better then their opponents.<br>
<br>
They also used a wide range of eavesdropping devices which contained
phosphor, neon, or similar substances that they could use to get audio
or data to bypass protection circuits and devices. There were/are some
pretty snazzy vacuum tube devices in the Washington DC area that are
still spitting out intelligence, and which has frustrated attempts to
find the device for decades only it to get tripped across by an
electrician armed with little more then a flashlight (which of course
the USG sweepers were blind to finding).<br>
<br>
Nothing beats a flashlight and a ladder, but only if the customer gives
you sufficient time to use them. Ultimately, all of the fancy equipment
all boils down to someone picking up a flashlight and climbing a ladder.<br>
<br>
That said, I am for using any tool that can help you find a bug, be it
a NLJD X-Ray, Ouija board, chicken foot, red hair, etc. If the end
result it that you can find more eavesdropping devices, then more
power to it. Just do not get too carried away with pricey equipment
over better tactics.<br>
<br>
-jma<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Thomas Shaddack wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:10030..._at_somehost.domainz.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">What about something a bit more sexy? Something solid-state electronics
still cannot entirely measure up to?
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krytron">
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krytron</a>
Then there's the issue of vacuum tubes being inherently EMP-resistant.
Old tech lacks some vulnerabilities of new tech.
Thought... would a miniature vacuum tube be detectable by a NLJD?
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Gag, Flemming valves, I'd be more impressed to see him buiild an OP-Amp.
Its from Onion wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl-QMuUQhVM">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl-QMuUQhVM</a> --
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------050604090501080003040907--
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:15 CST