>From - Sat Mar 02 00:57:29 2024
Received: by 10.216.134.40 with SMTP id r40mr470047wei.5.1320698398354;
Mon, 07 Nov 2011 12:39:58 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: tscm-l2006_at_googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.216.200.33 with SMTP id y33ls4271622wen.1.gmail; Mon, 07 Nov
2011 12:39:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.173.73 with SMTP id u51mr234349wel.0.1320698392944;
Mon, 07 Nov 2011 12:39:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.217.0.79 with SMTP id k57mswes;
Mon, 7 Nov 2011 10:45:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.204.151.81 with SMTP id b17mr3240728bkw.3.1320691507322;
Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:45:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.204.151.81 with SMTP id b17mr3240727bkw.3.1320691507308;
Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:45:07 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <de..._at_iki.fi>
Received: from mail.kapsi.fi (mail.kapsi.fi. [217.30.184.167])
by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v13si3319166bkf.0.2011.11.07.10.45.07
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:45:07 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of de..._at_iki.fi designates 217.30.184.167 as permitted sender) client-ip!7.30.184.167;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of de..._at_iki.fi designates 217.30.184.167 as permitted sender) smtp.mail̃..._at_iki.fi
Received: from lakka.kapsi.fi ([2001:1bc8:1004::1] ident̃bian-exim)
by mail.kapsi.fi with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
(Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from <de..._at_iki.fi>)
id 1RNUBu-0007m7-Gt
for tscm-..._at_googlegroups.com; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 20:45:06 +0200
Received: from decoy (helo=localhost)
by lakka.kapsi.fi with local-esmtp (Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from <de..._at_iki.fi>)
id 1RNUBu-0008P7-Cn
for tscm-..._at_googlegroups.com; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 20:45:06 +0200
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 20:45:05 +0200 (EET)
From: Sampo Syreeni <de..._at_iki.fi>
Sender: de..._at_kapsi.fi
To: tscm-l2006_at_googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [TSCM-L] {5784} demodulation capability in counter-surveillance
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1111030928360.32593_at_lakka.kapsi.fi>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1111072041060.12602_at_lakka.kapsi.fi>
References: <4EA4234A.30400_at_tscm.com> <CADzT6Siwo0sU8LbAuFWVX5z0oPhDEFdD+5=gLNQN0gKAWW10Og_at_mail.gmail.com>
<Pine.LNX.4.64.1111030928360.32593_at_lakka.kapsi.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; formatowed
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:1bc8:1004::1
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: de..._at_iki.fi
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.kapsi.fi); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
On 2011-11-03, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
> Tell me, what is the state of the art in dedicated TSCM demodulation
> and/or decryption, nowadays? And perhaps even more pointedly, do the
> top-of-the-pops use matched filtering/detection above simple passive
> listening upon an unequalised radio background?
I'm pretty sure you should rephrase your question into something more
specific. Like, thresholds for known RF-modulation methods or something
like that. Otherwise people are only going to have to refer you to very
weighty tomes in basic technology, be it RF or whatever.
> I ask this as a total amateur. I only have basic radio theory at my
> disposal, and it isn't as though my local library subscribes to some
> TCSM-periodical or such. :)
I'd say the general rule is that with enough time and effort, whatever
people do in LPI can still be detected. As for decryption of the
content, prolly not, if the encryption is done right. Often it isn't, in
LPI devices. But then, that's very much back of the envelope for me too,
as an amateur/wannabe.
--
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - de..._at_iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:29 CST