nanog mailing list archives
Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
From: David Barak <thegameiam () yahoo com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Encryption is insufficient - if you let someone have physical access for a long enough period, they'll eventually crack anything. Encryption makes the period of time longer, but let them try? As regards "roving," we are talking about Tyson's Corner here: that's pretty close (< 5km) to major offices of lots of folks who would care deeply about such matters. David Barak Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise: http://www.listentothefranchise.com --- On Tue, 6/2/09, Charles Wyble <charles () thewybles com> wrote:
From: Charles Wyble <charles () thewybles com> Subject: Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? To: "nanog () nanog org" <nanog () nanog org> Date: Tuesday, June 2, 2009, 1:57 PM Cheaper? To quote sneakers.... were the united states govt. we don't do that sort of thing. Martin Hannigan wrote:It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer ofsecurity withencryption vs. roving teams of gun toting manholewatchers.YMMV, Best! Marty On 6/2/09, Deepak Jain <deepak () ai net>wrote:No. And here's why: If you're a naughtyforeign intelligence team, andyou know your stuff, you already know wheresome of the cables you'dreally like a tap on are buried. When you hearof a constructionproject that might damage one, you set up yourinnocuous white panel trucksomewhere else, near a suitable manhole. Whenthe construction guy witha backhoe chops the cable (and you may wellslip him some money to doso), *then* you put your tap in, elsewhere,with your actions coveredby the downtime at the construction site. That'swhy the guys in the SUVsare in such a hurry, because they want toclose the window of time inwhich someone can be tapping the cableelsewhere.At least that's what I heard. I read itsomewhere on the internet.Definitely. Not at all a sneaky person. Nosir.And if you were a naughty foreign intelligenceteam installing a tap, or abend, or whatever in the fiber contemporaneouslywith a known cut, you couldalso reamplify and dispersion compensate for theslight amount of affectyour work is having so that when its tested later,the OTDR is blind to yourwork. Ah, the fun of Paranoia, Inc. Deepak Jain AiNET
Current thread:
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds?, (continued)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Martin Hannigan (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Martin Hannigan (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Peter Beckman (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Christopher Morrow (Jun 02)
- RE: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Eric Van Tol (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Leo Bicknell (Jun 01)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Martin Hannigan (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Jared Mauch (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Robert Bonomi (Jun 01)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Warren Bailey (Jun 01)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? David Barak (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Charles Wyble (Jun 02)
- RE: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Deepak Jain (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Charles Wyble (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? David Barak (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Charles Wyble (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Marshall Eubanks (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Michael Holstein (Jun 02)
- RE: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Deepak Jain (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Chris Adams (Jun 02)
- RE: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Deepak Jain (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Chris Adams (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Charles Wyble (Jun 02)