nanog mailing list archives
RE: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon
From: David Schwartz <davids () webmaster com>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 15:43:44 -0700
I'm sure that they have all sorts of methods. On the other hand, cellphones make devilishly difficult "bugs" to eliminate, especially the ones that are capable of automatically answering the call and activating the microphone without any audible ring. You can't just block all cellphones, because many people carry pagers that work on the same frequencies, and many people carry cellphones that they depend on.
You can, and they do. Most of the secure government facilities I've been into have a strict policy that absolutely nothing that can or does output a signal is permitted into the building. That means cellphones, two-way pagers, you name it. The official reason I was told was that such a device may 'accidentally' transmit classified information out of the facility. But I suspect the real reason is so that any signal they detect that they don't know about can be treated as hostile. DS
Current thread:
- RE: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon, (continued)
- RE: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Scott Granados (Aug 14)
- RE: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Brad Knowles (Aug 15)
- Re: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon David Lesher (Aug 14)
- Re: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Scott Granados (Aug 14)
- RE: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Daniel Golding (Aug 15)
- Re: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon David Lesher (Aug 15)
- Re: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Gerald (Aug 15)
- RE: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Brad Knowles (Aug 15)
- Re: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Brad Knowles (Aug 15)
- Re: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Brad Knowles (Aug 15)
- RE: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon David Schwartz (Aug 15)
- Re: $400 million network upgrade for the Pentagon Brad Knowles (Aug 13)