Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Special Forces Stuff Part II
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 14:17:28 -0500
Regarding cyber-radios for military personel, I can think of one good
reason (I thought I had 2, but I reread the rules...) that SF might buy
them: Keeping decryption keys secret. An external radio might be
captured, compromising security until the codes are changed (within a
day, probably). If you use a cyber-radio with the encrption keys stored
in delete-on-death headware memory, you are safer. .75 essence does
sound like a lot though... If you use a house rule that headware
communications don't require vocalization then it makes more sense.

Double-Domed Mike
Message no. 2
From: The Vagabond <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Special Forces Stuff Part II
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 12:24:38 PST
>Regarding cyber-radios for military personel, I can think of one good
>reason (I thought I had 2, but I reread the rules...) that SF might buy
>them: Keeping decryption keys secret. An external radio might be
>captured, compromising security until the codes are changed (within a
>day, probably). If you use a cyber-radio with the encrption keys
stored
>in delete-on-death headware memory, you are safer.

You willing to bet on that? If the enemy wants your encryption codes
bad enough, you think "getting his hands dirty" will stop him? I'm sure
he'd have no problem with breaking out a knife and carving out whatever
he wants... especially if it's another method to torture a captured
soldier.



-Vagabond <nomad74@*******.com> <ICQ 4297972>
___________________________________________________________
"My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I
am right."
-Ashleigh Brilliant


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 3
From: Danyel N Woods <9604801@********.AC.NZ>
Subject: Re: Special Forces Stuff Part II
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 08:49:19 +1200
(SLICE)
> Keeping decryption keys secret. An external radio might be
> >captured, compromising security until the codes are changed (within a
> >day, probably). If you use a cyber-radio with the encrption keys
> stored
> >in delete-on-death headware memory, you are safer.
>
Quoth Vagabond in response:
>
> You willing to bet on that? If the enemy wants your encryption
> codes
> bad enough, you think "getting his hands dirty" will stop him? I'm
> sure
> he'd have no problem with breaking out a knife and carving out
> whatever
> he wants... especially if it's another method to torture a captured
> soldier.
>
[Danyel N Woods] And how long will it be between the captor
'extracting' the codes and getting them to a SQUIDS rig for reading -
assuming they can be recovered intact? The delete-on-death memory would
also be blanked by removal of the code module from the implantee (or so
one would assume). And who's to say the codes aren't protected by a
small no-tamper charge? Remember, it may cost you a good trooper, but
which is more important - one grunt or your comm security?

Besides, the delay between extraction and decyphering will
likely be long enough to allow a code-change which renders the process
futile. Okay, they may get a glimpse of how your encyption system works
- simply switch to a newer/less-used/better cypher.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------
Hi, I'm Chucky. WANNA PLAY?
Message no. 4
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Special Forces Stuff Part II
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 19:25:47 -0500
At 02:17 PM 3/16/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Regarding cyber-radios for military personel, I can think of one good
>reason (I thought I had 2, but I reread the rules...) that SF might buy
>them: Keeping decryption keys secret. An external radio might be
>captured, compromising security until the codes are changed (within a
>day, probably). If you use a cyber-radio with the encrption keys stored
>in delete-on-death headware memory, you are safer. .75 essence does
>sound like a lot though... If you use a house rule that headware
>communications don't require vocalization then it makes more sense.

Another variation then: delete-on-death encryption in the
jacked-into-a-datajack radio. Cheaper on essence, easier to upgrade the
radio, cheaper maintenance on the cyber. And you can put a better radio in
a strap-to-your-side pack than you can inside the body, by far.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Special Forces Stuff Part II, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!