Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Totally Secure Non-Quantum Communications

  • 12-12-2005 11:21am
    #1
    CathalMc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 225 ✭✭


    Technical Paper (Not by any stretch of the imagination difficult or indeed technical)
    University Article
    Slashdot Article

    This was on Slashdot a few days ago, and the usual elitest sector shot it down, in many cases without - I believe - an thorough understanding of its principles. Some of the "obvious" methods of breaking the system displayed a poor knowledge of electrical principles and/or stochastic noise theory.

    The best comments referred to inherent *difficulties* in implementation, rather than absolute problems in the scheme. For instance, although in practice it might be possible to monitor the transport medium at two points - as suggested by several people - it is theoretically impossible to do so without altering the system, however slightly. (Passive coils for example). There was an insightful comment on using natural gaps in detectability involving nyquist rates - again an implementation issue. The smug select postulated vaguely that theoretical absolute security just doesn't exist and that this is just another false dawn.

    What do the educated/unwashed masses of the engineering board think?


Advertisement