>From - Sat Mar 02 00:57:24 2024
Received: by 10.141.52.14 with SMTP id e14mr3622030rvk.7.1249933268544;
Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:41:08 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <eric.s..._at_gmail.com>
Received: from mail-pz0-f187.google.com (mail-pz0-f187.google.com [209.85.222.187])
by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 22si454921pzk.4.2009.08.10.12.41.07;
Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eric.s..._at_gmail.com designates 209.85.222.187 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.222.187;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eric.s..._at_gmail.com designates 209.85.222.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eric.s..._at_gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) head..._at_gmail.com
Received: by mail-pz0-f187.google.com with SMTP id 17so1407361pzk.1
for <TSCM-..._at_googlegroups.com>; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from
:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=9anES4DRfBXqJz8Kz2txfy8n/JNN8pUHs7RByKsYZm8=;
b=TxuKqqTW91ogz92fgB6ksH3z+eZXZOFRTdkZbwaSnKAHPLEKo98Jv0FEBNpAOe9rRL
4C0M7/37OehLZS/n/7/ixfRwC8Rf/GFumf/8mhckRhyeP45gPr5x1kllut16oe6zVauu
8zdBJ2jySko0G6N5nOKFgI1OunHZ2FruSx5X0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
b=XJj3BhDwrlBtYmmwo2aToMtrPza+riWlO+pqKC7HXqaOdj5TYYAK0lH0oYcGqy5437
IEVC9X+EkQOSa3BT6Vz/gWdK3slDha8hx/LrV8gh2yReymxdWBww0tCWkgDo3ypNp5G2
IGvBDuwkGdMtaliNHUy+x9188aFwCDtBTQusQ=
Received: by 10.114.154.1 with SMTP id b1mr2191506wae.28.1249933267395;
Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <eric.s..._at_gmail.com>
Received: from dsl-203-33-166-499.NSW.netspace.net.au (dsl-203-33-166-499.NSW.netspace.net.au [203.33.166.246])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k37sm7825983waf.7.2009.08.10.12.41.04
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A8077CC.5020707_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 05:41:00 +1000
From: Eric Schmiedl <eric.s..._at_gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
To: TSCM-L2006_at_googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [TSCM-L] {4102} Re: TSCM Question
References: <aadbd07a-e805-49d3-96ff-60cf4bc8b18e_at_d23g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> <392011.60275.qm_at_web110212.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <b06e1e7d0908100809m2eec26bap63f29dc4e37bf026_at_mail.gmail.com> <BLU149-DS18F351D5B2BDFFBFAFAE46BC060_at_phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU149-DS18F351D5B2BDFFBFAFAE46BC060_at_phx.gbl>
It sounds like just the opposite -- a very sophisticated bug found where
one would more expect a jerry-rigged baby monitor.
Its from Onion wrote:
> It all goes back to 'know your clients threats.' Yes, they are out there
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Sub Rosa <mailto:subr..._at_gmail.com>
> *To:* TSCM-..._at_googlegroups.com <mailto:TSCM-..._at_googlegroups.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, August 10, 2009 10:09 AM
> *Subject:* [TSCM-L] {4099} Re: TSCM Question
>
> Dan,
>
> Thanks for the info, now i know that at least sombody found a bug
> above 6Ghz!
>
> Scott
>
> On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 10:37 PM, taylo..._at_yahoo.com
> <mailto:taylo..._at_yahoo.com> <taylo..._at_yahoo.com
> <mailto:taylo..._at_yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
> scott,
>
> yes once in the 30 years a device at 10.525ghz xband it was
> during a domestic and no one was more surprised than me.
>
> dan
> taylor group
> --- On *Sun, 8/9/09, subrosa /<subr..._at_gmail.com
> <mailto:subr..._at_gmail.com>>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: subrosa <subr..._at_gmail.com <mailto:subr..._at_gmail.com>>
> Subject: [TSCM-L] {4092} TSCM Question
> To: "TSCM-L Professionals List" <TSCM-..._at_googlegroups.com
> <mailto:TSCM-..._at_googlegroups.com>>
> Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 7:25 AM
>
>
> Greetings List Members,
>
> I have only been following this list for about a month now,
> but I
> would like to ask a question that may have already been
> answered, that
> I may have missed;
>
> Has anyone on this list ever experienced an electronic
> surveillance
> threat "find" above 6 Ghz ???
>
> Just wondering because I don't believe I have ever read or
> spoken with
> anyone who has.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:24 CST