Side Channel

About the blog 

   Turns out there's already a term given to some of the things described in this blog.  They originated (supposedly) as ways to extract information from computers without leaving any forensic evidence.  Because of that they're probably used more often than we might guess.

   Why would an attacker worry about getting caught when their method leaves no evidence?

   The term used to describe them is a Side-Channel attack.

   Here's more links than usual because once you're read them I'll try to explain how they've ended up being used directly on people:

• Electromagnetic attack on Wikipedia
• What is a side channel attack?  How these end-runs around encryption put everyone at risk on CSO Online
• Hacker Lexicon: What Is a Side Channel Attack? on Wired

   Let me sum up those articles from personal experience...

   An AC magnetic field (in my case every square inch of my apartment) and one or more sources of RF (there's several in my apartment) are used together to get information off a computer.  I'd also suspect that cables connecting peripherals can be targeted the same way.

   If you care about privacy - even a little - there's not much about that to like.  If you care about how people are treated there's even less to like about it.

   You might be wondering what's meant by that last sentence.

   There's some secondary effects that can occur when an AC magnetic field and RF are used that way.  With a little extra intent they can be used directly on a person.  So ithe real world use compared to how it's described online is backwards.

   One way it's done uses a desktop or laptop display by way of something called Transient Electromagnetic Pulse Emanation Standard.

   What happens to a person in front of their computer when this attack is attempted?

   You'll find some of those effects described in the post Thrall.