[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
huawei
- Subject: huawei
- From: khelms at zcorum.com (Scott Helms)
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:20:40 -0400
- In-reply-to: <CAGWRaZZduutFiwNTSSR=uHayKCr_1ZKcWaBhQMTEA5xdB4zkQA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <2116700651-1371140872-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-420291214-@b4.c20.bise6.blackberry> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CAGWRaZZduutFiwNTSSR=uHayKCr_1ZKcWaBhQMTEA5xdB4zkQA@mail.gmail.com>
Not really, no one has claimed it's impossible to hide traffic. What is
true is that it's not feasible to do so at scale without it becoming
obvious. Steganography is great for hiding traffic inside of legitimate
traffic between two hosts but if one of my routers starts sending cay
photos somewhere, no matter how cute, I'm gonna consider that suspicious.
That's an absurd example (hopefully funny) but _any_ from one of my routers
over time would be obvious, especially since to be effective this would
have to go on much of the time and in many routers. Hiding all that isn't
feasible for a really technically astute company and they're not in that
category yet (IMO).
On Jun 13, 2013 1:10 PM, "Nick Khamis" <symack at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/13/13, Michael Thomas <mike at mtcc.com> wrote:
> > On 06/13/2013 09:35 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> >>
> >> I am assuming a not-Hauwei-only network.
> >>
> >> The idea that a router could send things through other routers without
> >> someone who is looking for it noticing is ludicrous.
> >>
> >
> > ::cough:: steganography ::cough::
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
>
> Well put!
>
> N.
>
>
- Follow-Ups:
- huawei
- From: mike at mtcc.com (Michael Thomas)
- huawei
- From: wbailey at satelliteintelligencegroup.com (Warren Bailey)
- huawei
- From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin)
- References:
- huawei
- From: patrick at ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore)
- huawei
- From: mike at mtcc.com (Michael Thomas)
- huawei
- From: symack at gmail.com (Nick Khamis)