Export thread

http://www.gearlog.com/2009/11/sony...rlog-ziffdavis+(Gearlog)&utm_content=My+Yahoo

Wow.... this is pretty neat. Does anyone have any more info on this? I get some similar articles and it is "short range" but how short?

According to the TransferJet website the communication distance is "a few cm".

Reading the white paper, this tech bothers me. The description goes on and on about how there's no need for security because the connection range is so short. Devices that get close enough just do their thing, automatically and with no encryption. I really don't want someone to be able to take all the pictures off of my cellphone or camera simply by passing their device close enough to the pocket I've got it stored in. And "close enough" may turn out to be several feet or more, since RFID passports were thought to be safe because of short range as well, but hackers figured out how to read those from like 30 feet away.

To quote the whitepaper: "The attacker would have to be physically a few centimeters away in order to access the connection. If the attacker has to be that close, couldn’t they just as easily plug in a USB cable?" NO! Being able to connect to my phone while it's still in my pocket, just by standing next to me in a crowd is not the same as having to reach into my pocket and plug in a USB cable!

hmmm.. a few CM? that is pretty short. I was thinking it might be a couple of feet which mean you could have your whole wireless TV/DVD/Blu-RAY etc etc all wireless. I know that you can do it with Bluetooth, but I figure this thing has higher bandwidth.

I hope there will be implementing security. If you leave it open, someone will figure out a way to hack it.

Chibibar said:

hmmm.. a few CM? that is pretty short. I was thinking it might be a couple of feet which mean you could have your whole wireless TV/DVD/Blu-RAY etc etc all wireless. I know that you can do it with Bluetooth, but I figure this thing has higher bandwidth.

Click to expand...

Ultra-wide-band (UWB) is the technology that's hoping to become a high-speed replacement for bluetooth. They've currently got troubles getting approval for the tech, and there are a whole lot of stage performers (musicians, actors, etc.) who are claiming that UWB is going to ruin wireless microphone performance.

There are multiple competing standards for wireless HDMI and I think a couple for wireless USB as well.

figmentPez;307257][quote=Chibibar said:

hmmm.. a few CM? that is pretty short. I was thinking it might be a couple of feet which mean you could have your whole wireless TV/DVD/Blu-RAY etc etc all wireless. I know that you can do it with Bluetooth, but I figure this thing has higher bandwidth.

Click to expand...

Ultra-wide-band (UWB) is the technology that's hoping to become a high-speed replacement for bluetooth. They've currently got troubles getting approval for the tech, and there are a whole lot of stage performers (musicians, actors, etc.) who are claiming that UWB is going to ruin wireless microphone performance.

There are multiple competing standards for wireless HDMI and I think a couple for wireless USB as well.[/QUOTE]

I see. Well then if it is going to compete with Bluetooth, then the range would be around 10-20 feet (give or take) right? without security, you could essentially hack into someone's system via this system just walking by or even right outside the home/office. (i.e. next to a wall or something)

Chibibar said:

I see. Well then if it is going to compete with Bluetooth, then the range would be around 10-20 feet (give or take) right? without security, you could essentially hack into someone's system via this system just walking by or even right outside the home/office. (i.e. next to a wall or something)

Click to expand...

I'm assuming that all these other standards, besides TransferJet, have some sort of encryption and other security measures.

I can't find the link right now, but I recall a story from Defcon a few years ago about a guy who turned a supermarket RFID reader into a radio-based "sniper rifle" who could read snippets of people's RFID-equipped credit card information by "pinging" their pockets from a second-story window while they walked by.

Encryption-free is dumb.

That is all.

I'm amazed that vendors still don't think like hackers. So many of the things we implement here at work end up NOT have encryption on them. It's like, every developer is creating in a vacuum, inevitably, they have to go back to the drawing board to either encrypt data, or close obvious ports, etc, etc. Everyone seems to assume "Oh, no one would bother hacking that", or something similar.

If there's an unlocked door, someone will jiggle the handle.