Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Canadian "spy coin" tech revealed!
Canadian "spy coin" tech revealed!
#1
(Sorry, I can't find the original thread.)
Remember a few months ago, when the US Defence Department warned its contractors about nanotech listening devices implanted in Canadian coins? Well, research has been done, and the nano-material... is clearcoat paint.
More here, here, and here.

-Rob Kelk
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012
Reply
Re: Canadian "spy coin" tech revealed!
#2
I read about this in the Metro yesterday. I'm still not certain how to respond.
--
Ah the sweet smell of running a component at >10 times it's max-rated
power dissipation. Brings back memories...
-- James Riden
Reply
Re: Canadian "spy coin" tech revealed!
#3
I think the only appropriate response is howls of derisive laughter.---
Mr. Fnord
http://fnord.sandwich.net/
http://www.jihad.net/
Mr. Fnord interdimensional man of mystery

FenWiki - Your One-Stop Shop for Fenspace Information

"I. Drink. Your. NERDRAGE!"
Reply
Canadian Spy Coins
#4
(boggle)
You mean, some people actually believed this?!
What would be the point of radio tracking a coin? All you'd get is the location of the coin, not who it belonged to or how many times it had exchanged hands...
(shakes head)
Reply
Re: Canadian Spy Coins
#5
The concern wasn't radio tracking, it was radio eavesdropping.
(As if something the size of a quarter would be able to hold a battery large enough to make that practical... )

-Rob Kelk
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012
Reply
Re: Canadian Spy Coins
#6
Cheez it, they're onto us!
...
Stand down men, they haven't figured it out yet.
--
Christopher Angel, aka JPublic
The Works of Christopher Angel
"Camaraderie, adventure, and steel on steel. The stuff of legend! Right, Boo?"
Reply
Well, actually...
#7
Y'know, it's not *totally* beyond the realm of possibility.
The Soviets did something roughly similar once, during the Cold War (late '50s, I think this was), that was well-documented. The bug in that case was a hanging plaque of some kind that was presented to an American embassy staffer and hung on the wall in his office. No batteries, no wiring, just (IIRC) a pair of tubes that made the aural part of a resonant RF circuit. If it was 'illuminated' by a radio beam at the right frequency, it would re-radiate a fractional-power reflection of that signal with whatever the voices of anyone speaking in that office modulated on top of it. Took forever to find the darn thing, b/c the remote operators could hear the bug-sweeping crews running and kill the illumination beam. Even after it was found, they couldn't make heads or tails out of it until the diagram was shown to one of MI-5's technical whiz kids.
So, pulling the same trick with a coin-sized object might not be totally out in tinfoil-hat country. We already have RFID tags working at very small sizes and w/o any internal power, so there's no reason we couldn't layer a microphone and some superhet circuitry atop an existing RFID base. Of course, it might not be worth the effort -- clarity would be poor, and countersurveillance techniques take that kind of thing into account these days. But probably the biggest hazard would be the humble vending machine: after all, how do you keep the target of your bug from getting thirst and dropping the coin into the nearest Coke machine?
Reply
RE: Well Actually
#8
I remember a related story from a TEMPEST advisory I read a few years ago.
The American embassy in Russia was being bombarded by very strong Radio Signals and it took them quite some time to figure out why they were doing that "old" trick again.
What they finally discovered was that while the security rated cords from the keyboards to the computers didn't normally radiate a signal that cord would resonate at a specific radio frequencies when there was a very strong radio signal applied.
What made this resonant signal from the cord bad was that it was also slightly modulated by the binary signals sent from the keyboard to the computer as the person typed.
In other words if you wanted to read most of the keystrokes of what someone was typing all you had to do was set up a couple of large parabolic or yagi type antennas that are well isolated from each other and in one of each others nulls or blindspots.
Then focus both on the known location of the computer your wanting to spy on and while one antenna beamed a radio signal the other antenna would pick up the modulated resonant signal from the computer's keyboard cord.
Because most keyboard cords are standardized you don't even have to know where the computers are in the embassy just bombard the entire embassy with the radio signal and use several other isolated antennas to scan for the resonant returns until you have the building mapped.
howard melton
God bless
Reply
TEMPEST
#9
Sorry I used a acronyme I've seen used more in terms of Shakespear and just realized some of you might not know it's a government code word.
Also the declassified material can be fun to read and useful when you are having problems with consumer electronics.
Here is a webpage that has a overview and intro of what TEMPEST is and help you in defining your search if it interest you.
-------------------
www.eskimo.com/~joelm/tempestintro.html
-------------------
I got interested in TEMPEST equipment and procedures back in the mid to late 1980's when electronics like Monitors, computers, faxes, VCRS and other electronic stuff migrated into the Radio Room(The entire house) and often did not make happy campers or house mates.
howard melton
God bless
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)