|
|
|
|
|
by topspin
1705 days ago
|
|
You've got the basics right. An optimally coupled pair won't radiate. Nothing is optimal, however, so there is a small amount of RF radiation. Obviously this means not all RF energy from the environment is common mode as well. Thus the ever more substantial shielding that has appeared in later copper Ethernet cabling. The implication of this click bait is that ordinary traffic is being recovered from RF leakage. While that's theoretically possible given short range and a sensitive receiver, what we have here is someone creating a low frequency transmitter using copper Ethernet. That doesn't mean it is without interest or value; dismissing side channels like that has a poor track record. But it's not what you're led to believe with "attack reveals Ethernet cable traffic!" |
|
100BASE-TX would be a lot easier, since that just uses a single pair in each direction.
FWIW, this isn't a side channel, at least not the way he's presenting it. It's a covert channel. That's different; side channels leak (significant) information from uncooperating sources. Covert channels require a cooperating source. There's a huge difference. Covert channels are largely academic and almost never relevant in real life. This isn't like research on things like extracting RSA keys from CPU EMI emitted during OpenSSL operations, which is a real side channel and much more valuable research.