Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

RE: WiFi question
From: Paul Schmehl <pauls () utdallas edu>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:40:51 -0600

--On Monday, November 22, 2004 02:26:35 AM +0100 Ake Nordin <rootmoose () telia com> wrote:

This (the preamble especially) is what _should_ eliminate
the motion sensors from the list. I'm out on this one (too
lazy to do the math), but is the 802.11b air interface that
resilient (does it really require that much redundancy)? It
should be, but that would also be some lost (usable)
bandwidth.

Agreed, and I'd like to see more discussion of that aspect from knowledgeable people.

Sorry.

1) The building will contain very much of that energy
(which never was very much on a metropolitan scale, FCC Part
15 and all that).

2) The noise characteristics as received by those services
would be intermittent, very bursty and come from many
different directions all over the city. No easy clues telling
what to complain about there.

3) I don't know about US emergency communication radios, but
typical European systems (before Terrestrial Trunked Radio)
are so bad anyway that this contributed noise hardly would
be noticed.

You may well be right, but keep in mind that the campus police would be operating *in and around* those building much of the time, so they might actually be affected by it, *if* thats possible.

I'm still not convinced that, more than a few feet from a device, the interference would even be detectable.

Paul Schmehl (pauls () utdallas edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
http://www.utdallas.edu

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]