Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

After 12 years of Development, E17 Is Out

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the unlimited-power dept.

Enlightenment 259

The Enlightenment front page bears this small announcement: "E17 release HAS HAPPENED!" The release announcement is remarkably spartan — it's mostly a tribute to the dozens of contributors who have worked on the software itself and on translating it into many languages besides system-default English. On the other hand, if you've been waiting since December 2000 for E17 (also known as Enlightenment 0.17), you probably have some idea that Enlightenment is a window manager (or possibly a desktop environment: the developers try to defuse any dispute on that front, but suffice it to say that you can think of it either way), and that the coders are more interested in putting out the software that they consider sufficiently done than in incrementing release numbers. That means they've made some side trips along the way, Knuth-like, to do things like create an entire set of underlying portable libraries. The release candidate changelog of a few days ago gives an idea of the very latest changes, but this overview shows and tells what to expect in E17. If you're among those disappointed in the way some desktop environments have tended toward simplicity at the expense of flexibility, you can be sure that Enlightenment runs the other way: "We don't go quietly into the night and remove options when no one is looking. None of those new big version releases with fanfare and "Hey look! Now with half the options you used to have!". We sneak in when you least expect it and plant a whole forest of new option seeds, watching them spring to life. We nail new options to walls on a regular basis. We bake options-cakes and hand them out at parties. Options are good. Options are awesome. We have lots of them. Spend some quality time getting to know your new garden of options in E17. It may just finally give you the control you have been pining for."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Congrats (1)

maestroX (1061960) | about 2 years ago | (#42366529)

Congrats, rasterman. (sorry, wmaker user)

Re:Congrats (2)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 2 years ago | (#42366547)

This was what first brought me to "Chips & Dips".

Re:Congrats (1, Insightful)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#42366941)

I'll use it, as soon as someone packages it.

No way can I be bothered to deal with all those source packages.

Re:Congrats (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367037)

want me to google it for you too?
Nah, just go to the homepage and click download?
I recommend CentOS rpm.
I got a better idea. don't use it. you are probably to lazy to configure it as well, and will endlessly complain while staring at a blank desktop.

god, the distros are LAZY, not him (5, Interesting)

cheekyboy (598084) | about 2 years ago | (#42367257)

Its time like these, that hopefully will change in 2020.

These stupid ass distros who are so hard up and anal, they should be the ones who find all these cool apps and programs, and re-package it up into their REPO servers ASAP, or on the day of the release.

If conical wants an app store, PUT all the damn cool shit on it. Not old shit, new shit.

Linux needs a none-distro specific Super Store.

Click download app - dont ask for what distro I am using, figure it out lame asses. Use a app store client that runs on 5 major distros. And can install app XYZ easily, that doesnt break other apps, and that wont stop and get stupid python errors, coz again some lame ass coded his scripts with 2.6, but fails in 2.7. Fix your shit, stop breaking old shit, stop removing old apis, you want to reduce bloat? then dont package up 167 languages that take 89 megs.

Re:Congrats (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367047)

Should be in debian stable in a couple years.

Re:Congrats (2)

DeTech (2589785) | about 2 years ago | (#42367425)

'Cause people in stable need a gui? Yeah Right.

Is this a Ted Nelson gig, per chance? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366531)

Is this a Ted Nelson gig, per chance?

2000 E was the absolute coolest looking WM (4, Interesting)

detain (687995) | about 2 years ago | (#42366537)

E was left behind in the window manager wars but it was probably the one that first featured alot of the UI changes that sparked the UI revolution that was the last 12 years. Its good to see they are finally out with a new version and I hope it gains some ground but it would be hard at this point to become the #1 WM. Im sure many of the people who used E in the past will want to try it again but beyond that I dont see it being adopted much. I would probably rather E over Ubuntu's Unity any day (Although i'd take just about any WM over Unity)

Re:2000 E was the absolute coolest looking WM (5, Insightful)

node 3 (115640) | about 2 years ago | (#42367035)

Its good to see they are finally out with a new version and I hope it gains some ground but it would be hard at this point to become the #1 WM.

Well, that's one of the great things about Linux, isn't it? That it doesn't matter if it's #1 or not. It just has to exist and be sufficiently interesting. And given the very low friction involved in switching between WMs, it actually can become #1, if it's good enough, even though it doesn't have to.

I, too, can't wait to try it out.

windows has its replacement shells too (1, Interesting)

cheekyboy (598084) | about 2 years ago | (#42367291)

There are numerous free and opensourced replacement desktop shells for windows. Some are old linux ports.

They are good, because they work and run inside the free MS HyperVisor VM. Which boots into a cmd line plain gui, but no shell. Its easy to install these new shells, to create a working desktop thats linux like, but in windows.

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/five-apps/five-replacements-for-the-windows-7-desktop/1327 [techrepublic.com]

Re:windows has its replacement shells too (5, Insightful)

DeTech (2589785) | about 2 years ago | (#42367439)

You sir are missing the point completely.

anti aliasing? (1)

canistel (1103079) | about 2 years ago | (#42366543)

Can I turn off the antialiasing feature? Last time I looked into this, Mr Rasterman basically said "it looks perfect the way we do because we do it right". Yeah, until I can turn it off I'm not touching it with a 10 foot barge pole...

Re:anti aliasing? (4, Informative)

sofar (317980) | about 2 years ago | (#42366607)

Font settings -> Advanced -> Hinting.

There's an option for everything.

Re:anti aliasing? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366711)

Font settings -> Advanced -> Hinting.

There's an option for everything.

Thank God.
Now, if the interface could be polished a little more I'd have no more complaints.

Re:anti aliasing? (5, Funny)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 years ago | (#42367055)

There's an option for everything.

How do I turn on Clippy?

Re:anti aliasing? (5, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 2 years ago | (#42367209)

How do I turn on Clippy?

Go to Settings/Advanced/Mu and switch the Polish slider from 62% down to the radio box marked 14.89%, then a checkbox marked "Microsoft Experience" will automatically appear on the left. Select it and type Ctrl-Enter.

A dialog window appears: "Are you Sure?" [OK] [Cancel]. Press OK with the mouse.

A dialog window appears: "Really?" [OK] [Cancel]. Press OK again.

A dialog window appears: "I don't think so. I can't let you do that." [OK] [Cancel]. Press Cancel.

You should now see the familiar Start button at the bottom of the page. From now on, Clippy will appear every second time you click the left mouse button. There are two cases:

If this dialog appears: "ZenClippy. It looks like the grasshopper can handle Enlightenment" [OK] [Cancel] you must press Cancel to not return to the default E17 mode.

If this dialog appears (about %50 of cases): "ZenClippy. It looks like the grasshopper can't handle Enlightenment" [OK] [Cancel], then you must press OK to not return to the default E17 mode.

To return to the default E17 mode, just type Ctrl-Alt-Del.

Re:anti aliasing? (2)

DeTech (2589785) | about 2 years ago | (#42367449)

This should be at (Score:6, Epic)

12 years to achieve..... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366545)

More bloated eye candy that confuses everyone, violates the previous standards of layout, doesn't actually do the jobs you need to do most often, destabilizes your working environment, and is entirely incompatible with any working Linux games.

Congratulations, developers. You've clearly reached a new Vista of software quality. (And justified why I still recompile and use vtwm by default on every Linux system i touch.)

Re:12 years to achieve..... (3, Interesting)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 2 years ago | (#42366655)

Your arguments seem pretty pointless to me. I've compared Enlightenment with all the other desktop environments, and E uses less resources, while doing a prettier and faster job. Run your own tests, against the major DE's. E beats them all.

Enlightenment doesn't compare as favorably against some of the older, lighter desktops, such as XFCE. But, those older lightweight interfaces don't offer quite the "experience" that the heavyweights offer, either.

Bloated eyecandy. Confuses everyone. Phhht. Nonsense. Violates standards? I never researched that - like most users, I'm not as interested in standards, as I am interested in results. Destabilizes the working environment? Needs citations - I've witnessed nothing like that. E is as stable as anything I've used.

Which games are incompatible with E? List them please.

My ONLY complaint with E17, is that it has taken so long. I've been fooling with it for years, impatiently waiting for this release.

Re:12 years to achieve..... (2)

gagol (583737) | about 2 years ago | (#42366849)

Just tried it, 15 minutes later I was back to my much more productive, elegant and less distracting XFCE. Animations for animation sake is not for me. That being said, people seeking eyecandy should give it a try. Thank god for gnu/linux flexibility!

Re:12 years to achieve..... (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 2 years ago | (#42366873)

Good that you tried it. I will note that people who find animations distracting can turn it off. Anything and everything is configurable. Of course, there is time involved in figuring out how to configure all that stuff. For my own personal tastes, there is a little to much eye candy enabled by default, but with a little effort I get things just the way I like them.

That said - no desktop can fit everyone's needs and preferences. Some people actually like Unity's out of the box configuration!

Re:12 years to achieve..... (5, Funny)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 2 years ago | (#42367021)

Some people actually like Unity's out of the box configuration!

[citation needed]

Re:12 years to achieve..... (1)

gagol (583737) | about 2 years ago | (#42367045)

Thank god for gnu/linux flexibility!

Re:12 years to achieve..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367181)

Some people actually like Unity's out of the box configuration!

[citation needed]

Me. I have zero complaints. All I do is change the background screen and then move on with my life.

Re:12 years to achieve..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367237)

I'm shocked. Have you ever used anything else to compare it with? Like... say, lxde or xfce or KDE or Cinnamon, or MacOs or Windows? Give them a try and come back and say you still like Unity.

Re:12 years to achieve..... (1)

collet (2632725) | about 2 years ago | (#42367357)

I think it's fine, really don't understand what ten people are complaining about, it's not buggy, it's not slow, looks fine (though I don't really give a fuck how it looks). I'm a keyboard shortcut whore and anything with "press Super -> type -> shit -> shit happens" works fine for me.

Re:12 years to achieve..... (1)

collet (2632725) | about 2 years ago | (#42367369)

I seem to have added in an extra arrow accidentally.

Re:12 years to achieve..... (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 2 years ago | (#42367157)

You can turn those off too. I use e17 at home mostly because the dual screen behaviour is a bit different to other WMs - you can page through multiple desktops on the left screen while keeping the right on the same desktop. You can also set it to change both at once if that's what you want.
I'm still on e16 at work with the same theme I've used since 1998 but I'll use e17 there sometime.

Re:12 years to achieve..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366859)

My only and major complaint regarding E17 is that it does not allow me to conquer a small country. Until such items are completed it should not be considered feature complete.

Re:12 years to achieve..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366911)

I'll stick with LXDE

Re:12 years to achieve..... (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#42367241)

against the major DE's there are a quarter dozen that do all you preach without being suck a decade behind

I aint using a 486 for a storage server, and my machine sure as shit a K6-2/500

that is what this instantly reminds me of, just smoother

Re:12 years to achieve..... (5, Informative)

deek (22697) | about 2 years ago | (#42367313)

E17 conforms well enough to the freedesktop.org standards. Even though it's not really a standards body, freedesktop.org is readily used by modern window managers, and is becoming a defacto standard. E17 does still store its config in the $HOME/.e directory though, instead of $HOME/.config/e . Can't wait until all unix utils use the .config directory, clearing out the dotfile clutter in the home dir.

Games run perfectly well under E17. I have dozens of games, bought via Humble Bundle, and every one I've tried has worked fine with E17 (barring game bugs, of course). I had a problem once, with keyboard only games not getting focus when they run fullscreen. It's working fine now.

I use E17 on my work computer. Have done so for years. Any instability in my working environment has generally come from me, not the window manager. I think it's only ever crashed once in that time, and even then, I could press F1 to recover (as instructed by the crash dialog), and the window manager restarted itself with all windows intact.

The parent post was trolling. Probably best not to feed the troll.

Out? (1)

UltraZelda64 (2309504) | about 2 years ago | (#42366553)

Am I the only one who interpreted "out" as meaning "abandoned" or "given up on?"

Re:Out? (4, Interesting)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about 2 years ago | (#42366623)

Am I the only one who interpreted "out" as meaning "abandoned" or "given up on?"

No. Enlightenment was a really promising window manager. I used it from the late 90's until the early 2000's. It was pretty nice even with all of the warts. They kept scrapping it and starting over so many times that I kinda gave up on it. Honestly, I thought it was dead years ago. I figured they finally officially threw in the towel.

Re:Out? (0)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#42367247)

if by promising you mean has no market penetration in over 20 years then yes, yes you are right

its promising, but does nothing to fulfill that ... at all, it just exists

Re:Out? (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about 2 years ago | (#42367409)

if by promising you mean has no market penetration in over 20 years then yes, yes you are right

its promising, but does nothing to fulfill that ... at all, it just exists

It probably would have helped if they hadn't kept scrapping it and starting over continually. That was the frustrating part. Nothing got fixed and the huge wait times for a new release because everything had to be re-written. In the late 90's when you could change the color of a window menu bar from gray to some other boring color in most window managers; Enlightenment allowed you to add ivy vines wrapped around a reflective chrome looking bar with a translucent window. At the time, that was pretty damn cool. I'm not sure anything has that level of customization even today. But I don't have the free time to look into such things these days.

Re:Out? (2)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 2 years ago | (#42366691)

No. It means homosexual by confession. :-)

Re:Out? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366863)

Probably. The rest of us interpreted "out" as in "out of the closet." Because it's obviously gay.

APK

Re:Out? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367533)

How many AC's have posted as APK?

APK :)

I gotta hand up over here... (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 2 years ago | (#42366603)

What's the difference between a window manager and a desktop environment?

Or was it "desktop manager" and "window environment"?

No, seriously, I don't know the difference.

Re:I gotta hand up over here... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366723)

Windows managers simply manage your windows. A desktop environment provides libraries, toolkits, services, applications, system configurations, etc. For instance GNOME and KDE are desktop environments that provide access to your hardware devices, network management, etc. Enlightenment is somewhere in-between since it offers some things like libraries to build applications with but I don't know of many native E applications out there. DE's focus on the whole user experience when using an operating system with a GUI while windows managers are mainly concerned with the user interaction with just the GUI and not the whole system.

Re:I gotta hand up over here... (1)

morcego (260031) | about 2 years ago | (#42366829)

What's the difference between a window manager and a desktop environment?

Or was it "desktop manager" and "window environment"?

No, seriously, I don't know the difference.

For the end user, not much. Technically, the different is big, and they can be completely separated. A Window Manager will offer a set of features for, literally, manage the Windows on the screen. Even a root menu are not required. A Desktop Manager will offer an application environment and so on. I remember using X11 + Gnome + Enlightenment a few years back. Gnome was a Desktop Manager that required a Window Manager (E was one of the option).

I know I'm not doing a good job explaining this, so if someone could clarify a little bit more. Anyway, I home the X11 + Gnome + E example was useful.

perfect match! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366629)

Perfect match to run Duke Nukem forever!

Re:perfect match! (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about 2 years ago | (#42366761)

on the gnu hurd kernel. but seriously duke already came back quiet a while ago.

Re:perfect match! (0)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42367089)

I thought Duke 4 was only for Windows, Mac, PlayStation 3, and Xbox 360, exactly the platforms that don't use an X11 window manager.

</comically-missing-the-point>

Meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366641)

Meh, it's a nicely performant well developed system but the interface is funky as shit and not really that nice to use. After the newness wears off you'll see what I mean.

Re:Meh (1)

digitalchinky (650880) | about 2 years ago | (#42367275)

After abandoning CDE, OLVWM, TWM, WindowMaker, AfterStep, and others back in the day for E16, aside from the eye candy there was nothing ever funky about it at all. It was in many ways like the transition between XP and Win7, a few odds and ends not quite how you like, but all in all a significantly better experience. It has been for me one of the most productive environments I've ever used. Virtual desktops, key mapping, sloppy mouse focus, what's not to like about it? E17 allows you to integrate compiz if that's your thing too.

Does anyone really care any more? (3, Insightful)

mfearby (1653) | about 2 years ago | (#42366643)

10 years too late, I reckon. We've all moved on from this kind of "gratuitous eye candy above all else philosophy" and it's all about consistency, usability, integration, and last but not least, features now.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (3, Informative)

LinuxGeek (6139) | about 2 years ago | (#42366701)

It has grown way beyond "eyecandy", check it out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tILWKo1RUI [youtube.com]

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366811)

Yes, it's where MacOS was..... 10 years ago.There is not a *single feature* in that demo that didn't exist in the standard Gnome or KDE window managers 5 years ago, and MacOS 10 years ago.

But it has new and entirely incompatible with existing software libraries! What a wonderful new core future!!!!

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (2)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 years ago | (#42367059)

Why does the video have a repeating "ling-ling-ling" sound in it? Also all that noice + 35 minutes long.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367179)

with an s.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (1)

psoriac (81188) | about 2 years ago | (#42367221)

I couldn't finish watching it because of that noise. I have no idea how the video author can stand it, unless it's something his recording software put in (trialware?).

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (1)

Microlith (54737) | about 2 years ago | (#42366777)

Indeed, things have changed. It's all about huge interface elements that waste space, as little configurability as possible (even if it throws away features that enhance usability) and catering to the lowest common denominator (i.e. people who aren't actually using Linux.)

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (1)

morian97 (1325925) | about 2 years ago | (#42366817)

i do care, i use e16 daily. minimal plain desktop, can start any app with a single mouse click anywhere on desktop. faster than anything else (start button or metro). will give e17 another (4th or 5th?) try now.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (2)

cockroach2 (117475) | about 2 years ago | (#42366827)

Just curious, have you compared it to other desktops? In particular I would be interested in knowing how it performs compared to Xfce and Awesome.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (1)

morian97 (1325925) | about 2 years ago | (#42366943)

my comments was regarding how one starts the applications - I love the ability to click anywhere on a desktop and open a cascading menue. that is fast. used to e16 (10+ years) and it does everything I need. yes, but XFCE and awesome would be my first choise alternatives. my Englsih sucks, sorry.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366971)

This features existed in the twm window manager. It's been built into the basic X server source code since ..... (Digging in Wikipedia....) 1987. That's 25 years ago, longer than the lifespan of most of the potential E17 victims.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 2 years ago | (#42367165)

Sounds like you ought to be using Window Maker.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (2)

Smauler (915644) | about 2 years ago | (#42367319)

can start any app with a single mouse click anywhere on desktop

Yeah, but how many people have a mouse with 342 buttons?

I personally just set up just about any OS like I like it. I just create directories or folders on the desktop, and have links to applications in these. Takes about 2 or 3 seconds to launch whatever I want. It takes about 20 seconds to set up a link. I personally think the GUI has done what it needed for me, in terms of launching applications, almost since it started.

Switching between running applications nicely is a different matter.

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (1)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | about 2 years ago | (#42366887)

Eye candy above all else is clearly not their philosophy. Check out their site: "Beauty without sacrifice, and all the options you can eat" is their philosophy. What a wonderful and needed philosophy to introduce into the linux UX ecosystem.

E17 is the only genuinely free option. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366951)

E17 does not compete with KDE, GNOME, Xfce, LXDE, ROX, Razor-Qt, EDE, MATE, Cinnamon, etc. For people who care about software freedom, it leapfrogs them entirely, by the virtue of being the only copyfree [copyfree.org] alternative. All other full-scale desktop environments (DE's) are marred by GPL!

I for one was OK without a DE / widgets, using a light copyfree WM (ex wmii) + xterm + HTML5 (Opera, until the last remnants of gnushit are scraped off of WebKit). But for people who want both freedom and DE / widgets, E17 is now an option.

--libman

Re:E17 is the only genuinely free option. (0)

Nimey (114278) | about 2 years ago | (#42367049)

RON PAUL is the only free option.

(I'd originally typed "RPM PAUL" which sounds like an especially weird replacement for Yum).

Re:E17 is the only genuinely free option. (1)

undeadbill (2490070) | about 2 years ago | (#42367163)

Actually, it is only *mostly* BSD licensed. Mostly. There are components that are LGPL 2.1 (or 1.2?) licensed as well, which made me go WTF.

Re:E17 is the only genuinely free option. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367255)

>All other full-scale desktop environments (DE's) are marred by GPL!
Don't care. When am I going to publish a commercial OS containing those desktop environments? Never. That's when.

Seriously - when I publish open source software, I prefer to use BSD style licenses, but I don't shy away from GPL except when I might need to violate said GPL in order to get value from it. I just don't see that being an issue with desktop environments for Linux... at least not anymore.

Re:E17 is the only genuinely free option. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367531)

When am I going to publish a commercial OS containing those desktop environments? Never. That's when.

That thought doesn't even cross my mind - if I publish anything it is always as open source and "public domain".

Seriously - when I publish open source software, I prefer to use BSD style licenses, but I don't shy away from GPL except when I might need to violate said GPL in order to get value from it. I just don't see that being an issue with desktop environments for Linux... at least not anymore.

It's good that you prefer "BSD-style" (copyFREE) licenses [copyfree.org] . We need to explain to more people the drawbacks and dangers of copyLEFT [freestateproject.org] . Then, how far they would go in the name of software freedom [freetalklive.com] , is obviously up to them.

Using restrictively-licensed software won't kill you, but it is a step in the wrong direction. It matters more than you'd think, because use of open source software is a relationship - the more familiar you are with a project, the more likely you are to contribute code someday, or to be helpful on its mailing list / bug-tracker / forum / IRC channel, or promote it to friends who see you use it, or leverage it in another (hopefully copyFREE) project, etc. The software you use today is the software you may contribute to years from now, even if you currently don't plan on contributing.

                Watch your thoughts; they become words.
                Watch your words; they become actions.
                Watch your actions; they become habit.
                Watch your habits; they become character.
                Watch your character; it becomes your destiny.
                                            -- Lao Tzu [mises.org]

Experience with freer software makes you more free.

--libman

Re:E17 is the only genuinely free option. (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#42367261)

no one really cares except the people that make the stuff. joe wants cheap, simple and powerful, not some ideal preached to them based on the whims of a consortium

Re:E17 is the only genuinely free option. (-1)

mfearby (1653) | about 2 years ago | (#42367273)

How many people seriously choose a desktop environment based upon its license? I have *so* given up caring about all this licensing crap. In fact, the level of my interest in that crap now is demonstrated by the fact that I switched to Mac six weeks' ago. I just want a computer that god-damn well works, and works well, without me having to constantly move distros because bored-sh*tless developers decide to throw the baby out with the bath water every year or so. I've never been happier with a computer than I am with my new Mac. Sure, the Dock and the Finder are dumb, but there's Spotlight (way better than Nepomuk!) and ForkLift, and I don't mind paying $22 for a file manager, either, that's how much I've given up caring about FOSS :-)

Re:E17 is the only genuinely free option. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367471)

How many people seriously choose a desktop environment based upon its license?

The people who understand the harms caused by the socialist propaganda, hypocricy, and economic retardation of copyLEFT.

The software stack that I work with is a reflection of my character - everything in my life must be consistant and rooted in rational philosophy. The anti-capitalist philosophy behind GPL is utterly incompatible with that, and would be an egregious violation of my personal integrity!

Freedom is also the foremost reason why those people aren't running Windows or MacOS X. Going from Windows/Mac to Linux would be like the American colonists fighting off the British Empire, and then setting up an identical monarchy with Washington as king! FreeBSD is a major step forward, and a software stack that is completely free from claims to intellectual monopoly, "implicit contracts", and other legal threats and restrictions is the long-term rational ideal.

When it comes to desktop environments, the best thing to do is to learn to get by without them. Most GUI apps add little value to what can be accomplished with commands, and hopefully there will soon be a pure-copyFREE Web browser through which one would be able to do everything else.

Wikis are the new word processors. With HTML5+ (and perhaps something like the Google Native Client), there would soon be Web-based alternatives for everything, from Audacity to Gimp to ZSNES. In this new paradigm, the viral effects of GPL (on GTK, Qt, etc) will be bypassed, and copyFREE alternatives will dominate. When permissively licensed and properly designed, the client-server nature of Web apps wouldn't constitute a slightest hinderance: it would be as easy to clone an app (with all server-side code and data) to your local network as it is to install a GUI app with something like Synaptic.

I have *so* given up caring about all this licensing crap.

A license is a legal threat, which claims to have power over you whether you "care" about it or not. CopyLEFT is based on intellectual property and the insane idea of "implicit contracts", no less detached from reality than proprietary EULA's.

[...] that's how much I've given up caring about FOSS :-)

Proprietary software has its benefits (billions are spent on its innovation), and copyFREE software is an inevitable outcome of competition driving prices to zero (at which point the authors, having made as much money as they could, have an incentive to attract attention / patches / links / job offers by freely releasing the code). Proprietary and copyFREE software exist in perfect symbiosis!

By giving people more freedom, copyFREE software makes the software industry more competitive, and Microsoft would have far fewer challengers if they weren't able to leverage it (as Apple, Google, and others have done). CopyFREE is the great equalizer - it can be used by the smallest market player (a sole coder, who needs it the most) as much as the largest (who needs it the least). CopyLEFT ruins this, helping Microsoft retain its dominane while tying everyone else's hands, leading to stagnation of the software industry as a whole!

--libman

Re:Does anyone really care any more? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367091)

The same question was posed in the pre-release hype post on Slashdot, and it was one of the highest rated questions on the list. I don't see Rasterman's answers anywhere, why would I want to use this again? The Matrix hasn't been cool for a decade, neither has trying to emulate Hollywood's impractical notion of how a PC works.

Great, just in time for the world to end! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366671)

Oh well, I still have three hours.

Re:Great, just in time for the world to end! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366745)

My birthday is on Dec 22nd you insensitive clod!

Re:Great, just in time for the world to end! (1)

celle (906675) | about 2 years ago | (#42367205)

"My birthday is on Dec 22nd"

      So the party won't be long enough and you won't have enough time to sleep it off. Just like every year. My sympathies.

Thank You, however ... (2)

sk999 (846068) | about 2 years ago | (#42366713)

I'll stick with e16 - it does all that I need. Basically, I only use the e16 window manager, along with a GNOME desktop - kind of odd but it works. Even at that, the only features I rely on from e16 are edge-flip and "annihilate" - features that used to exist in Red Hat but were dumped long ago.

Just waiting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366733)

Obviously just waiting to see if December 21, 2012 was really the end of the world.

Re:Just waiting (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 2 years ago | (#42367183)

Obviously just waiting to see if December 21, 2012 was really the end of the world.

Sheesh! That was hours ago.

Next time they immanentise the Eschaton, try not to get too stoned, too early.

if rome wasnt built in a day (1)

cheekyboy (598084) | about 2 years ago | (#42367353)

Then destroying the earth will take a lot longer than that.

Just sayin... destruction could be a slow long process taking decades...

On a side note, we could never predict an incoming super nova gamma ray burst, or have very little warning if someones watching Betelgeuse or something hourly!!!

wow... (1)

ThorGod (456163) | about 2 years ago | (#42366735)

This ranks among many software-things that I never expected to see happen. (up there with a "new" BeOS (never happened *for real reals*))

ain't it time for (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366839)

i dunno.... version 1.0 ??

ESD? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366871)

Does it still require the Enlightenment Sound Daemon?

Re:ESD? (3, Informative)

deek (22697) | about 2 years ago | (#42367201)

Nope. Hasn't needed ESD for years. It works perfectly fine with ALSA or Pulseaudio.

Users don't want options (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42366875)

Users don't want options, don't these guys get it?

Yours Truly,
GNOME Development team

12 years in development? (1)

QuietLagoon (813062) | about 2 years ago | (#42366945)

So the product they just released is already 12 years behind? This is good, how?

17 (4, Insightful)

Myopic (18616) | about 2 years ago | (#42367053)

Can anyone explain why some open source* people have a fetish for tiny version numbers? If you are going to spend ten years developing a new version, is that REALLY not worth a primary version number? What is the attraction to having versions as near to zero as possible? In a dotted-decimal notation, why do some people think only the second decimal should be incremented, and at that only once per decade, and the first decimal should remain zero forever?

The primary decimal should be zero when the project is started and should be 1 when it reaches initial functional maturity. Major versions with substantial new features warrant primary-decimal increments. Minor features warrant secondary-decimal increments. Bug fixes warrant tertiary-decimal increments. Otherwise one of the main benefits of the dotted-decimal notation is lost.

* and not other open source cf. emacs

Re:17 (5, Insightful)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#42367269)

its a e-peen thing, the lower the version number, the less you screwed up

wrong at primary version # (1)

cheekyboy (598084) | about 2 years ago | (#42367393)

Unless your an attention seeker and its pure marketing.... then

Then the only time to move the primary number up, is if you have intruduced enough incompatibility or broken lagacy functions, that it warrants an indicator number, to show, what works with what.

Keep calling it 1.758 (Release 2012)

multi-screen win! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367057)

I've been using E17 for many years, and every time I try other WM/DE's I keep going back to E17 for one simple reason. The way E17 handles multi-monitors is such a vast improvement over others I don't know why everyone doesn't do it this way. Desktops on each monitor can be independantly switched!

Seriously, I don't know how anyone gets work done with multi-monitor any other way. Being able to switch the contents of a single monitor without switching everything on the other one is just what I always expected for desktop management, and can't understand a situation where I would want to switch both monitor virtual desktops simulaneously ALL the freaking time! This is very similar to getting use to virtual desktops on linux then trying to switch back to the single-desktop of ms windows systems.

Guess that point is not as imporant to most as to me, but I can't imagine doing it any other way without a feeling of something being wrong.

Congrats E17!!

Sneak in at night? (0)

matunos (1587263) | about 2 years ago | (#42367075)

More like squat in an abandoned house for 12 years.

I couldn't compile the release but the SVN was ok. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367103)

Just in case anyone else is just about to give up. I tried to do the right thing and clean install the files but had broken dependencies.
Eventually, I decided to revert to my tried and true SVN clone and just update that. It worked fine :)

Re:I couldn't compile the release but the SVN was (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367193)

We're not impressed by people who don't know what a fucking package manager is, right.

Released on 12-21-12 (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367167)

This is what the Mayans had in mind all this time.

I can't wait to install it on Hurd and see how it looks running Duke Nukem Forever.

17 Year In Development ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367213)

And 15 Years Behind !

Oh Dear.

Screenshot with guages (2)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#42367229)

I have a 4.2Ghz quad core AMD cpu, 16 gigs of 2ghz ram and a pair of SSD's in raid

so do I really give a shit about a graphic tachometer telling me that a text editor will bump that needle up by a fraction of a pixel?

yea I know its just a thing, and it can be removed, but from the first screen shot, I get the impression that this software is STILL stuck in 1996, and I am 16 years old

Re:Screenshot with guages (2)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 2 years ago | (#42367487)

Because the SAME window manager might run on your Android phone and there you DO care if your battery drains in 10 minutes?

bodhi linux (2)

RedHackTea (2779623) | about 2 years ago | (#42367293)

I thought Bodhi Linux [bodhilinux.com] was already using E17? Was that a pre-release? Does anyone know when Bodhi Linux will get this new release? I'm curious because I'm about to install the new version of Bodhi, and I don't want to install it and then have to re-install it with the newest version in just a couple of weeks.

Re:bodhi linux (1)

sgunhouse (1050564) | about 2 years ago | (#42367427)

E17 "previews" (betas or whatever you want to call them) have been available for years, I had it installed as a secondary desktop on both Mageia releases and on Mandriva before that ... but the official version number was 16.99. (For the record, KDE is my primary DE, but I also install Enlightenment, XFCE and fluxbox.)

No plans on building from source, I'm sure Mageia will have it up shortly.

Re:bodhi linux (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367525)

"Does anyone know when Bodhi Linux will get this new release?"

well you use it right

then you should know they have a web forum

where you can ask a question and receive an answer

so why ask here

----

TEMPEST Attacks! LCD Monitor leaks system noise to FRS
===
I don't operate any wireless equipment at my living location. This includes computers, computer equipment, routers, non-computer equipment, etc.

I'm having a problem with one of my LCD monitors.

It works without problems. That was until I picked up some heavy static noises from a hand held radio. I eliminated all sources of generating this type of noise until I came towards an LCD monitor. When the monitor is on and there is content on the screen the radio makes several types of garbage(static) sounds. As I manipulate contents on the screen, maximize and minimize windows, open different applications, the radio responds with scratchy(static) noises to match the activity on the screen. This includes typing and mouse movement.

When I switched the desktop background to a solid black color without wallpaper, the radio noise went down to almost nothing. But when I loaded any program with a white background, the noise from the radio exploded in volume.

When I passed the radio across different computer and non-computer electronic devices other than the LCD monitor, the wired mouse made a high pitched squeal sound within the static. None of the other computing devices such as the tower generated any noise.

I tried CRT monitors and separate computers attached to the CRT monitors but they did not generate any noise in the radio. On the computer connected to the net, I unplugged the cable leading to the router to rule this out but it made no difference, the LCD monitor is at fault.

While monitoring the radio noise, there were several instances where the noise on the channel being monitored stopped, and I switched to another channel and the same noise appeared. Why would the noise from the LCD switch channels during normal use of the LCD? Back and forth throughout the day the noise generated by the LCD would switch from one channel to the next and back to the first channel again.

The noise extends several steps within my living location. I'll test this another day to determine if it extends outside my living location and if so by how many feet.

The computer/monitor are grounded and attached to a surge protector. I'm not sure what I need to do to stop this, or if I should ignore it.

I assumed LCDs would be quieter than CRTs when it came to noise.

Unless I have a radio tuned to a specific channel, the LCD does not generate any noise which I can detect, unless it's above my hearing capacity.

The LCD monitor also functions as speakers, and while the sound cable is connected to the tower, I have disabled the onboard sound in my BIOS. The only other connection is the DVI cable to the tower.

How may I decrease this noise or eliminate it? It seems like the LCD is a mini radio station. When I turn it off the noise in the radio stops, if I blacken the screen the noise lessens. When I switch to a colorful background or load white screened applications like a web browser the noise jumps up loudly. I've tried grabbing and moving a browser window around the screen and the movement matches the noises in the radio.

Would any of this be considered normal?
==-
This certainly isn't unheard of, it's because some part of the monitor is unshielded. The more fix-it stuff is at the top of the following, with the technical backdrop that just might be good to know is at the bottom.

Unfortunately, the issue is most likely the panel charging the LCs. The only thing you can do is see if the manufacturer will replace it or upgrade you. Complain to the manufacturer, be sure to come up with some important thing it's interfering with(if I recall some medical devices use some sort of radio).

If the issue is actually internal wiring which is highly unlikely as detailed below, and it isn't in warranty, attempt to shield it yourself. To shield it yourself, you'll need thin foil(not kitchen foil) and electrical tape.

So, in any given monitor, there's 3 main parts. Input, logic, and output. Output, as previously mentioned, can't really be shielded. To shield both of the other sections, all you really need to do is manipulate the wiring to reduce the number of holes in the foil wrap needed to put it all back together. Obviously this will take some trial and error, and time.

USEFUL INFO THAT ISN'T REQUIRED:

Shielding wires can best be thought of as a encasing a wire in a Faraday cage, made of foil. If you want to see an example, Apple's iPod charging cords are all shielded, strip the insulation and see for yourself. This shielding acts doubly, keeping EM noise from messing with the signal, and keeps the signal's own noise from leaving.

WHY IT IS THE CHARGING PANEL AND NOT WIRING:
Because of the specific details you provided( bravo to you, the amount of data provided helped ), I can conclude that the charging panel(the array of electrodes responsible for producing the image) is putting out the interference. Three of your observations prove this.

First, you state the noise ceases completely when the monitor is turned off, which is consistent with it being EM noise.
Second, the noise's perceived pitch changes when the display is manipulated, which is to be expected, as the electrode charges would change as the display changes.
Third, a black screen is "quieter" than a white screen. Black is the lowest charge state, with the only power in use going to the backlight.

As for your questions:
Noise hopping channels isn't unheard of, though I don't know the science behind it. My best guess is that because the noise isn't an intended result of the electricity, small changes in voltage/amperage result in those hops.
(indirect question-ish) The mouse was likely the only other emitter because it has a fairly high density of wires + it emits light.
===-
@W00t:

What 1s the d1fference between - and where may 1 obta1n the non-k1tchen "foil" you ment1oned?

The d1sturbances sound l1ke a bugged env1ronment. The squeal com1ng from one area and/or dev1ce could mean the locat1on of the bug has been found - and 1 know adding a small dev1ce and/or mod1f1cation to a keyboard and/or mouse 1s s1mple enough - espec1ally for a quick 1n and out the door type bugging.

1s there an affordable method of sh1elding the equ1pment while not violating FCC/TEMPEST laws? Would a simple screen d1mmer attached to the monitor bring the no1se down? Or would 1t be best to put out the extra money requ1red by purchas1ng spec1al paint or wallpaper wh1ch blocks RF signals?

Whether or not 1t's a bug, at this point you are broadcast1ng your computer mon1tor and 1ts activ1t1es, down to the keyboard and mouse movements. What 1s the use of using Tor or any other l1ke serv1ce 1f you are pwned over the a1r waves?
====-
You could use kitchen foil, it's just more unwieldy to work with.

Yes, it could be a bug, I was running under the assumption you had no reason to believe you were bugged, and if you did you ran bug sweeps. If you believe you are bugged, you should definitely dismantle things to make sure a bug isn't simply piggybacking on the same power source.

Dimming the screen would reduce noise, but not completely eliminate it.
=====-
Thanks, W00t.

"Dimming the screen would reduce noise, but not completely eliminate it."

I have modified my browser to function with a black background and my choice of text colors and unchecked the option for all pages to use their own colors, so every page I visit is black with my choice of font/links colors. I'll rescan to determine if this lessens the noise. It's ugly, but tolerable. Coupled with a black theme for the desktop, including the background and system wide applications should also help - including disabling images in the browser.

You mentioned foil. I'm not an electrician, but wouldn't wrapping cords with foil and finishing the job off with a layer of strong black tape possibly conduct electricity? Are you suggesting I cover all wires leading to the computer(s) using this method? Wouldn't they each require special grounding? How many repeating layers of this and/or other material is needed? Have you tried "conductive tubing?"

While I want to shield enough to block noisy RF, I don't want to create a microwave type scenario where RF is contained but it still remains and is possibly amplified so as to add to the degeneration of my health, if that's possible.

1. Ferrite beads
2. Split beads
3. Toroids

CONDUCTIVE TUBING & FERRITE SNAP BEAD
http://www.lessemf.com/wiring.html [lessemf.com]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_interference [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation_and_health [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_shielding [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMF_measurement [wikipedia.org]

I could try some or all of the three options above in addition to your advice? TY
===-
Anyways this reminding me of Van Eck phreaking look it up, some pretty interesting stuff.

Yep, had the same thought.

Countermeasures are detailed in the article on TEMPEST, the NSA's standard on spy-proofing digital equipment. One countermeasure involves shielding the equipment to minimize electromagnetic emissions. Another method, specifically for video information, scrambles the signals such that the image is perceptually undisturbed, but the emissions are harder to reverse engineer into images. Examples of this include low pass filtering fonts and randomizing the least significant bit of the video data information.
====-
can someone please point me to techie LCD monitor internal guides? If I'm going to take it apart I'd like to know what to expect. I've read more about Van Eck and Tempest than anyone can teach me here. Now I'm looking for LCD guides of what's inside.
===-
To be honest, its not the whats inside the LCD monitor you should be worrying about if you want to phreak LCD's . You should be worry more about the RF side of things, and figuring out the spread spectrum clock signal so you can pick up the signal. Top if off background noise is going to be bitch when it comes to LCD. Old CRT monitors are way easier to phreak those thing throw off EM radiation like nobody business.
===-
The noise coming from the LCD monitor is appearing on FRS channels:

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Radio_Service [wikipedia.org]

It continues for several minutes before it jumps to another channel then after a few minutes jumps back to the original channel. One of my concerns is the ability for others to pluck this noise from the air (Van Eck/TEMPEST) and monitor my activity, or possibly use an attack against the computer somehow. A recent UN report mentioned a high tech method(s):

* U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

"Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

- http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf [unodc.org]
- http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/ [hacker10.com]

In addition, I don't want my LCD monitor constantly sending monitor and/or system activity to a FRS channel(s) for others to hear. I choose wired over wireless for a reason, and there shouldn't be any noise coming from my LCD monitor and appearing over FRS, unless there is a bug or problem with the monitor. All of my
CRT systems are silent on FRS.

When I position the radio near different components, the power supply doesn't emit any noise on FRS, but it could be a problem, I don't know, I'll move to that once I resolve the LCD monitor problem, unless the PSU is the problem and not the monitor.

I may take apart the LCD monitor, I'm looking for a good list of what I'll find if I do.

I peered inside the vents on the top/back left hand side with a strong flashlight and came across a strange piece of silver tape inside, here's how I describe it:

OOGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG__

OO = a small thin black material coming out from underneath the silver piece of tape
GG = the strip of silver tape
__ = the bottom right hand portion of the silver tape is raised enough to allow a pinky finger entry

The silver tape/material/opening under tape is on the top left corner inside the monitor. The rest of the length and area inside that I can see contain no tape or black material. I've seen photos of planted bugs in people's living spaces and most if not all of the invasive ones are wrapped/covered in silver foil. I've found no other reason for that strip and material to be there, but what do I know.
=====
In addition, my CDROM drive light blinks once every second, sometimes with a second or 1/2 second in between, and I found this:

http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/19.60.html#subj9 [ncl.ac.uk]

"I'd worry about a Tempest virus that polled a personal computer's
CD-ROM drive to pulse the motor as a signalling method:

* Modern high-speed CD-ROM drive motors are both acoustically and
electrically noisy, giving you two attack methods for the price of one;

* Laptop computer users without CRTs, and the PC users that can afford
large LCD screens instead of CRTs, often have CD-ROM drives;

* Users are getting quite used to sitting patiently while their
CD-ROM drives grind away for no visibly obvious reason (but
that's quite enough about the widespread installs of software from
Microsoft CD-ROMs that prompted Kuhn's investigation in the first place.)"
===-
I don't think there should be anymore blinking if you remove the CD/DVD inside.
If it keeps blinking, find out which process uses it.
Anyway, you can disable it when you're not using it, if it's bothering you.

And shield your monitor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_shielding [wikipedia.org]
====-
"I don't think there should be anymore blinking if you remove the CD/DVD inside."

Does Tails support this at boot?

If not, is there a Linux LiveCD which allows this and does not give you root access at boot?

I've looked at several different distributions which allow you to boot into RAM and remove the CD, but they all give you root and that's a very insecure environment to run TBB in!

"If it keeps blinking, find out which process uses it."

It doesn't blink on the several distros which boot into RAM, but I don't want to run Tor as root or reconfigure the permissions/PAM/etc. just to use TBB. As above, with Tails and many LiveCDs which don't boot into RAM, 99% of them have this blinking light issue. The actual INSTALLS I've done to HDD experience constant light activity too, even more so, without anything to explain them.

For Linux, I've ran rkhunter, chkrootkit, tiger, and other tools and nothing malicious is found. Without a deep binary analysis I don't know what else I could do.

For Windows, I use a few programs in the SysInternals Suite and they display strange usage on the system and reference programs which cannot be found with a search on the system, references to impersonation, spoofing, and more. I've ran almost every N.American scanner on the Windows systems, including command line only rootkit detectors and I've seen some strange 'strings' of binaries mentioned, but have no idea on how to clean the system.

I prefer to run LiveCDs because all installations, Windows and Linux, contain unexplainable frenzies of blinking lights, far worse than the blink every second on most LiveCDs. I'm wondering if this is firmware malware on my NIC or the CDROM itself. This has existed for years and never goes away, no matter what system I use, this strange baggage seems to re-infect everything.

"Anyway, you can disable it when you're not using it, if it's bothering you."

Disable what?

"And shield your monitor."

Thanks. I'm investigating and most of the guides require specific addons to the computer's cabling system. Most of the guides appear incomplete, or are in another language other than English.

Any comments on the Tempest/blinking light possibility?

Any comments on why it's spewing out noise to FRS stations and freq hopping?
===-
More comments from elsewhere:

@kb2vxa:

"You're making a mountain out of a mole hill."

I respect your opinion and I don't wish to argue against it, but please look at it from the way I and some others have. I want to eliminate the noise created by the LCD monitor. If this was such a common experience, I would expect at least one of the dozens of other electronic equipment to generate some noise, however faint, on FRS - but they do not.

"You are under the wrong impression that somehow RF hash from the back light can somehow carry data. A liquid crystal display (LCD) does not generate its own light like a CRT or plasma screen and requires a light source to make the display visible. Even those that do cannot transmit computer data being none reaches the monitor."

The LCD is connected to a tower, which other devices connect to. Under testing I've heard the CDROM drive accessing data noises within the FRS channels, along with mouse movements and keyboard activity, along with other noises. When I disable the LCD monitor, all of these disturbances vanish. This means the weakness is in the monitor, and my tower is well shielded or shielded enough so as not to generate any noise in radios I can notice. The reference I made to the strange tape and material within the back side of the LCD monitor at the top could be a sign of some type of antenna or device for amping.

"Their FRS radios will only hear what yours does, RF hash, no data whatsoever THAT IS if one is standing outside your house tapping the radio and scratching his head wondering what's the matter with his radio. You and only you know what it is and where it's coming from."

And what of experienced and curious sysadmins? Rogue crackers? Bored HAMs?
Are there any remote radio injection attacks against systems? This is something I'll research later, as I do believe it was mentioned in at least one whitepaper on side channel attacks.

"Thanks for the chuckles, if the report reveals secrets it would not be published but sent by secret courier to the KGB in Moscow."

I'm not aware of any secrets revealed within the document. But it did raise an interesting point without exposing the method(s) delivered to us from an interesting party. This wasn't just some random article written by some anonymous, disturbed fellow and posted to a pastebin or conspiracy minded blog or forum. And one cannot deny the dozens of TEMPEST attacks available today.

"So... all this and no word on moving the radio farther from the monitor. Why don't you try talking somewhere besides in front of the computer if it bothers you so much?"

Thank you for considering conversation as my reason for posting this, but it is not. I would not choose a noisy channel to talk on. Clear conversation is not the point of this thread. I desire the elimination of this garbage coming from the LCD monitor. I don't care if no one in the world can pick up on it and hear it, I would like to properly resolve it and not ignore it.

One can also dredge up the subject of EMF on health, too, but I have not experienced any disturbance of health from exposure to this noise and most people would argue any possible EMF effects on health to be one of one's over active imagination and not real world application.

[-]

A continued discussion was posted elsewhere, this may be useful in the voyage to remove this "noise":

[-]

In addition, my CDROM drive light blinks once every second, sometimes with a second or 1/2 second in between, and I found this:

[-]

http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/19.60.html#subj9 [ncl.ac.uk]

"I'd worry about a Tempest virus that polled a personal computer's
CD-ROM drive to pulse the motor as a signalling method:

* Modern high-speed CD-ROM drive motors are both acoustically and
electrically noisy, giving you two attack methods for the price of one;

* Laptop computer users without CRTs, and the PC users that can afford
large LCD screens instead of CRTs, often have CD-ROM drives;

* Users are getting quite used to sitting patiently while their
CD-ROM drives grind away for no visibly obvious reason (but
that's quite enough about the widespread installs of software from
Microsoft CD-ROMs that prompted Kuhn's investigation in the first place.)"

[-]

Any comments on the silver tape and material inside the back of the LCD? ...Disconnection of the LED CDROM and HDD lights could be something I should do to relieve one possible issue.

[-]

Some articles with examples:

"If everything is just right, you can pick up signals from some distance. "I was able to eavesdrop certain laptops through three walls," says Kuhn. "At the CEBIT conference, in 2006, I was able to see the Powerpoint presentation from a stand 25 metres away."

uhn also mentioned that one laptop was vulnerable because it had metal hinges that carried the signal of the display cable. I asked if you could alter a device to make it easier to spy on. "There are a lot of innocuous modifications you can make to maximise the chance of getting a good signal," he told me. For example, adding small pieces of wire or cable to a display could make a big difference.

As for defending against this kind of attack, Kuhn says using well-shielded cables, certain combinations of colours and making everything a little fuzzy all work."

- http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/2007/04/seeing-through-walls.html [newscientist.com]

=!==-!=
TO EASILY VIEW THE PDF files below:
=!==-!=

Online viewer for PDF, PostScript and Word:

"This is an online viewer, with which you can view PDF and PostScript files as browsable images and Word documents as web pages. Given a URL on the net or a file on your computer, the viewer will try to retrieve the document, convert it and show it to you. No plugin software is required."

http://view.samurajdata.se/ [samurajdata.se]

The viewer software is open source, licensed under the GNU Public License.
=!==-!=

Electromagnetic eavesdropping risks of flat-panel displays
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/pet2004-fpd.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

=

Eavesdropping attacks on computer displays
- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iss2006-tempest.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

=

Compromising emanations: eavesdropping risks of computer displays
- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-577.html [cam.ac.uk]
- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-577.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

=

Compromising emanations of LCD TV sets
- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/emc2011-tv.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

=

"Q: Can I use filtered fonts also on flat-panel displays

My experience so far has been that with LCDs, the video cable is the most significant source of radiated information leakage. Where an analogue video cable (with 15-pin VGA connector) is used, low-pass filtered fonts have the same benefits as with CRTs. Where a purely digital video cable is used (DVI-D, laptop-internal displays with FPD/LVDS links, etc.) only the last step, namely randomizing the least-significant bits, should be implemented.

Where the video signal is entirely encoded in digital form, the low-pass filtered step will not have the desired effect. In fact, it can actually increase the differences between the signal generated by individual characters, and thereby make automatic radio character recognition more reliable."

- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/emsec/softtempest-faq.html [cam.ac.uk]

=

Remotely Eavesdropping on Keyboards (and read the comments!)

"The researchers from the Security and Cryptography Laboratory at Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne are able to capture keystrokes by monitoring the electromagnetic radiation of PS/2, universal serial bus, or laptop keyboards. They've outline four separate attack methods, some that work at a distance of as much as 65 feet from the target.

In one video demonstration, researchers Martin Vuagnoux and Sylvain Pasini sniff out the the keystrokes typed into a standard keyboard using a large antenna that's about 20 to 30 feet away in an adjacent room."

- https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/10/remotely_eavesd.html [schneier.com]

=

Video eavesdropping demo at CeBIT 2006
- http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2006/03/09/video-eavesdropping-demo-at-cebit-2006/ [lightbluetouchpaper.org]

=

Optical Emission Security â" Frequently Asked Questions

"Q: What about LEDs?

For devices with RS-232 serial ports, it is customary to provide a status indicator LED for some of the signal lines (in particular transmit data and receive data). Often, these LEDs are directly connected to the line via just a resistor. As a result, anyone with a line of sight to the LED, some optics and a simple photosensor can see the data stream. Joe Loughry and David A. Umphress have recently announced a detailed study (submitted to ACM Transactions on Information and System Security) in which they tested 39 communications devices with 164 LED indicators, and on 14 of the tested devices they found serial port data in the LED light. Based on their findings, it seems reasonable to conclude that LEDs for RS-232 ports are most likely carrying the data signal today, whereas LEDs on high-speed data links (LANs, harddisk) do not. Even these LEDs are still available as a covert channel for malicious software that actively tries to transmit data optically.

I expect that this paper will cause a number of modem manufacturers to add a little pulse stretcher (monostable multivibrator) to the LEDs in the next chip set revision, and that at some facilities with particular security concerns, the relevant LEDs will be removed or covered with black tape.

The data traffic on LEDs is not a periodic signal, and therefore, unlike with video signals, periodic averaging cannot be used to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. The shot-noise limit estimation technique that I used to estimate the CRT eavesdropping risk can even more easily (because no deconvolution is needed) also be applied to serial port indicators and allows us to estimate a lower bound for the bit-error rate at a given distance. I have performed a few example calculations and concluded that with a direct line of sight, and a 100 kbit/s signal (typical for an external telephone modem), at 500 m distance it should be no problem to acquire a reliable signal (one wrong bit every 10 megabit), whereas for indirect reflection from the wall of a dark room, a somewhat more noisy signal (at least one wrong bit per 10 kilobit) can be expected to be receivable in a few tens of meters distance.

- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/emsec/optical-faq.html [cam.ac.uk]

=

Ancient Story on Slashdot: Coming to a Desktop near you: Tempest Capabilities

"New Scientist has an interesting article about a new toy we will all want. It's a card that plugs in one of your PCI slots and allows you to scan the EMF spectrum and read your neighbours terminal. In about 5 years you might be able to get one for just under £1000. (Modern Tempest Hardware costs about £30000) "

http://www.yro.slashdot.org/story/99/11/08/093250/coming-to-a-desktop-near-you-tempest-capabilities [slashdot.org]

=

"Any unshielded electrical device with a variable current (including LCDs) will give out EMF radiation. It's the nature of the beast.

For that matter, light is EMF radiation, so unless you have your LCD in a coal-mine, it's reflecting EMF all the time it's switched on.

Then, there's the fact that screen monitoring isn't the only monitoring you can do. I used to use a radio, tuned into the bus for the PET, as a sound card. Worked surprisingly well, for all that very clunky metal shielding. What's to stop a much higher-quality receiver from seeing the data, in an unshielded box, being sent TO the LCD, or to any other device on the machine?

It's a mistake to assume that Tempest technology is single-function and that that single-function only works in a single situation."

- http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2333&cid=1553178 [slashdot.org]

=

800Mbps Wireless Network Made With LED Light Bulbs
- http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/08/02/1322201/800Mbps-Wireless-Network-Made-With-LED-Light-Bulbs [slashdot.org]

=

There are a lot of other files, many in PPT format, which can be found easily on this subject of LCD monitor (and other computing devices) TEMPEST sniffing.

===

Sources for this discussion:

- http://forums.radioreference.com/computer/255488-lcd-monitor-broadcasts-noise-radio-why.html [radioreference.com]
- http://clsvtzwzdgzkjda7.onion/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10919 [clsvtzwzdgzkjda7.onion] .onion link above requires a running Tor client session in order to view. (https://www.torproject.org)

This on-going discussion backed up to Pastebin(s) in order to retain it as an artifact. Many of these
types of discussions are REMOVED from the net because of the nature of the discussion (TEMPEST).

Just imagine... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367397)

All this effort could've gone towards something we actually needed.

TEMPEST Attacks! LCD Mon leaks system noise to FRS (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42367493)

TEMPEST Attacks! LCD Monitor leaks system noise to FRS
===
I don't operate any wireless equipment at my living location. This includes computers, computer equipment, routers, non-computer equipment, etc.

I'm having a problem with one of my LCD monitors.

It works without problems. That was until I picked up some heavy static noises from a hand held radio. I eliminated all sources of generating this type of noise until I came towards an LCD monitor. When the monitor is on and there is content on the screen the radio makes several types of garbage(static) sounds. As I manipulate contents on the screen, maximize and minimize windows, open different applications, the radio responds with scratchy(static) noises to match the activity on the screen. This includes typing and mouse movement.

When I switched the desktop background to a solid black color without wallpaper, the radio noise went down to almost nothing. But when I loaded any program with a white background, the noise from the radio exploded in volume.

When I passed the radio across different computer and non-computer electronic devices other than the LCD monitor, the wired mouse made a high pitched squeal sound within the static. None of the other computing devices such as the tower generated any noise.

I tried CRT monitors and separate computers attached to the CRT monitors but they did not generate any noise in the radio. On the computer connected to the net, I unplugged the cable leading to the router to rule this out but it made no difference, the LCD monitor is at fault.

While monitoring the radio noise, there were several instances where the noise on the channel being monitored stopped, and I switched to another channel and the same noise appeared. Why would the noise from the LCD switch channels during normal use of the LCD? Back and forth throughout the day the noise generated by the LCD would switch from one channel to the next and back to the first channel again.

The noise extends several steps within my living location. I'll test this another day to determine if it extends outside my living location and if so by how many feet.

The computer/monitor are grounded and attached to a surge protector. I'm not sure what I need to do to stop this, or if I should ignore it.

I assumed LCDs would be quieter than CRTs when it came to noise.

Unless I have a radio tuned to a specific channel, the LCD does not generate any noise which I can detect, unless it's above my hearing capacity.

The LCD monitor also functions as speakers, and while the sound cable is connected to the tower, I have disabled the onboard sound in my BIOS. The only other connection is the DVI cable to the tower.

How may I decrease this noise or eliminate it? It seems like the LCD is a mini radio station. When I turn it off the noise in the radio stops, if I blacken the screen the noise lessens. When I switch to a colorful background or load white screened applications like a web browser the noise jumps up loudly. I've tried grabbing and moving a browser window around the screen and the movement matches the noises in the radio.

Would any of this be considered normal?
==-
This certainly isn't unheard of, it's because some part of the monitor is unshielded. The more fix-it stuff is at the top of the following, with the technical backdrop that just might be good to know is at the bottom.

Unfortunately, the issue is most likely the panel charging the LCs. The only thing you can do is see if the manufacturer will replace it or upgrade you. Complain to the manufacturer, be sure to come up with some important thing it's interfering with(if I recall some medical devices use some sort of radio).

If the issue is actually internal wiring which is highly unlikely as detailed below, and it isn't in warranty, attempt to shield it yourself. To shield it yourself, you'll need thin foil(not kitchen foil) and electrical tape.

So, in any given monitor, there's 3 main parts. Input, logic, and output. Output, as previously mentioned, can't really be shielded. To shield both of the other sections, all you really need to do is manipulate the wiring to reduce the number of holes in the foil wrap needed to put it all back together. Obviously this will take some trial and error, and time.

USEFUL INFO THAT ISN'T REQUIRED:

Shielding wires can best be thought of as a encasing a wire in a Faraday cage, made of foil. If you want to see an example, Apple's iPod charging cords are all shielded, strip the insulation and see for yourself. This shielding acts doubly, keeping EM noise from messing with the signal, and keeps the signal's own noise from leaving.

WHY IT IS THE CHARGING PANEL AND NOT WIRING:
Because of the specific details you provided( bravo to you, the amount of data provided helped ), I can conclude that the charging panel(the array of electrodes responsible for producing the image) is putting out the interference. Three of your observations prove this.

First, you state the noise ceases completely when the monitor is turned off, which is consistent with it being EM noise.
Second, the noise's perceived pitch changes when the display is manipulated, which is to be expected, as the electrode charges would change as the display changes.
Third, a black screen is "quieter" than a white screen. Black is the lowest charge state, with the only power in use going to the backlight.

As for your questions:
Noise hopping channels isn't unheard of, though I don't know the science behind it. My best guess is that because the noise isn't an intended result of the electricity, small changes in voltage/amperage result in those hops.
(indirect question-ish) The mouse was likely the only other emitter because it has a fairly high density of wires + it emits light.
===-
@W00t:

What 1s the d1fference between - and where may 1 obta1n the non-k1tchen "foil" you ment1oned?

The d1sturbances sound l1ke a bugged env1ronment. The squeal com1ng from one area and/or dev1ce could mean the locat1on of the bug has been found - and 1 know adding a small dev1ce and/or mod1f1cation to a keyboard and/or mouse 1s s1mple enough - espec1ally for a quick 1n and out the door type bugging.

1s there an affordable method of sh1elding the equ1pment while not violating FCC/TEMPEST laws? Would a simple screen d1mmer attached to the monitor bring the no1se down? Or would 1t be best to put out the extra money requ1red by purchas1ng spec1al paint or wallpaper wh1ch blocks RF signals?

Whether or not 1t's a bug, at this point you are broadcast1ng your computer mon1tor and 1ts activ1t1es, down to the keyboard and mouse movements. What 1s the use of using Tor or any other l1ke serv1ce 1f you are pwned over the a1r waves?
====-
You could use kitchen foil, it's just more unwieldy to work with.

Yes, it could be a bug, I was running under the assumption you had no reason to believe you were bugged, and if you did you ran bug sweeps. If you believe you are bugged, you should definitely dismantle things to make sure a bug isn't simply piggybacking on the same power source.

Dimming the screen would reduce noise, but not completely eliminate it.
=====-
Thanks, W00t.

"Dimming the screen would reduce noise, but not completely eliminate it."

I have modified my browser to function with a black background and my choice of text colors and unchecked the option for all pages to use their own colors, so every page I visit is black with my choice of font/links colors. I'll rescan to determine if this lessens the noise. It's ugly, but tolerable. Coupled with a black theme for the desktop, including the background and system wide applications should also help - including disabling images in the browser.

You mentioned foil. I'm not an electrician, but wouldn't wrapping cords with foil and finishing the job off with a layer of strong black tape possibly conduct electricity? Are you suggesting I cover all wires leading to the computer(s) using this method? Wouldn't they each require special grounding? How many repeating layers of this and/or other material is needed? Have you tried "conductive tubing?"

While I want to shield enough to block noisy RF, I don't want to create a microwave type scenario where RF is contained but it still remains and is possibly amplified so as to add to the degeneration of my health, if that's possible.

1. Ferrite beads
2. Split beads
3. Toroids

CONDUCTIVE TUBING & FERRITE SNAP BEAD
http://www.lessemf.com/wiring.html [lessemf.com]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_interference [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation_and_health [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_shielding [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMF_measurement [wikipedia.org]

I could try some or all of the three options above in addition to your advice? TY
===-
Anyways this reminding me of Van Eck phreaking look it up, some pretty interesting stuff.

Yep, had the same thought.

Countermeasures are detailed in the article on TEMPEST, the NSA's standard on spy-proofing digital equipment. One countermeasure involves shielding the equipment to minimize electromagnetic emissions. Another method, specifically for video information, scrambles the signals such that the image is perceptually undisturbed, but the emissions are harder to reverse engineer into images. Examples of this include low pass filtering fonts and randomizing the least significant bit of the video data information.
====-
can someone please point me to techie LCD monitor internal guides? If I'm going to take it apart I'd like to know what to expect. I've read more about Van Eck and Tempest than anyone can teach me here. Now I'm looking for LCD guides of what's inside.
===-
To be honest, its not the whats inside the LCD monitor you should be worrying about if you want to phreak LCD's . You should be worry more about the RF side of things, and figuring out the spread spectrum clock signal so you can pick up the signal. Top if off background noise is going to be bitch when it comes to LCD. Old CRT monitors are way easier to phreak those thing throw off EM radiation like nobody business.
===-
The noise coming from the LCD monitor is appearing on FRS channels:

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Radio_Service [wikipedia.org]

It continues for several minutes before it jumps to another channel then after a few minutes jumps back to the original channel. One of my concerns is the ability for others to pluck this noise from the air (Van Eck/TEMPEST) and monitor my activity, or possibly use an attack against the computer somehow. A recent UN report mentioned a high tech method(s):

* U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

"Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

- http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf [unodc.org]
- http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/ [hacker10.com]

In addition, I don't want my LCD monitor constantly sending monitor and/or system activity to a FRS channel(s) for others to hear. I choose wired over wireless for a reason, and there shouldn't be any noise coming from my LCD monitor and appearing over FRS, unless there is a bug or problem with the monitor. All of my
CRT systems are silent on FRS.

When I position the radio near different components, the power supply doesn't emit any noise on FRS, but it could be a problem, I don't know, I'll move to that once I resolve the LCD monitor problem, unless the PSU is the problem and not the monitor.

I may take apart the LCD monitor, I'm looking for a good list of what I'll find if I do.

I peered inside the vents on the top/back left hand side with a strong flashlight and came across a strange piece of silver tape inside, here's how I describe it:

OOGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG__

OO = a small thin black material coming out from underneath the silver piece of tape
GG = the strip of silver tape
__ = the bottom right hand portion of the silver tape is raised enough to allow a pinky finger entry

The silver tape/material/opening under tape is on the top left corner inside the monitor. The rest of the length and area inside that I can see contain no tape or black material. I've seen photos of planted bugs in people's living spaces and most if not all of the invasive ones are wrapped/covered in silver foil. I've found no other reason for that strip and material to be there, but what do I know.
=====
In addition, my CDROM drive light blinks once every second, sometimes with a second or 1/2 second in between, and I found this:

http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/19.60.html#subj9 [ncl.ac.uk]

"I'd worry about a Tempest virus that polled a personal computer's
CD-ROM drive to pulse the motor as a signalling method:

* Modern high-speed CD-ROM drive motors are both acoustically and
electrically noisy, giving you two attack methods for the price of one;

* Laptop computer users without CRTs, and the PC users that can afford
large LCD screens instead of CRTs, often have CD-ROM drives;

* Users are getting quite used to sitting patiently while their
CD-ROM drives grind away for no visibly obvious reason (but
that's quite enough about the widespread installs of software from
Microsoft CD-ROMs that prompted Kuhn's investigation in the first place.)"
===-
I don't think there should be anymore blinking if you remove the CD/DVD inside.
If it keeps blinking, find out which process uses it.
Anyway, you can disable it when you're not using it, if it's bothering you.

And shield your monitor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_shielding [wikipedia.org]
====-
"I don't think there should be anymore blinking if you remove the CD/DVD inside."

Does Tails support this at boot?

If not, is there a Linux LiveCD which allows this and does not give you root access at boot?

I've looked at several different distributions which allow you to boot into RAM and remove the CD, but they all give you root and that's a very insecure environment to run TBB in!

"If it keeps blinking, find out which process uses it."

It doesn't blink on the several distros which boot into RAM, but I don't want to run Tor as root or reconfigure the permissions/PAM/etc. just to use TBB. As above, with Tails and many LiveCDs which don't boot into RAM, 99% of them have this blinking light issue. The actual INSTALLS I've done to HDD experience constant light activity too, even more so, without anything to explain them.

For Linux, I've ran rkhunter, chkrootkit, tiger, and other tools and nothing malicious is found. Without a deep binary analysis I don't know what else I could do.

For Windows, I use a few programs in the SysInternals Suite and they display strange usage on the system and reference programs which cannot be found with a search on the system, references to impersonation, spoofing, and more. I've ran almost every N.American scanner on the Windows systems, including command line only rootkit detectors and I've seen some strange 'strings' of binaries mentioned, but have no idea on how to clean the system.

I prefer to run LiveCDs because all installations, Windows and Linux, contain unexplainable frenzies of blinking lights, far worse than the blink every second on most LiveCDs. I'm wondering if this is firmware malware on my NIC or the CDROM itself. This has existed for years and never goes away, no matter what system I use, this strange baggage seems to re-infect everything.

"Anyway, you can disable it when you're not using it, if it's bothering you."

Disable what?

"And shield your monitor."

Thanks. I'm investigating and most of the guides require specific addons to the computer's cabling system. Most of the guides appear incomplete, or are in another language other than English.

Any comments on the Tempest/blinking light possibility?

Any comments on why it's spewing out noise to FRS stations and freq hopping?
===-
More comments from elsewhere:

@kb2vxa:

"You're making a mountain out of a mole hill."

I respect your opinion and I don't wish to argue against it, but please look at it from the way I and some others have. I want to eliminate the noise created by the LCD monitor. If this was such a common experience, I would expect at least one of the dozens of other electronic equipment to generate some noise, however faint, on FRS - but they do not.

"You are under the wrong impression that somehow RF hash from the back light can somehow carry data. A liquid crystal display (LCD) does not generate its own light like a CRT or plasma screen and requires a light source to make the display visible. Even those that do cannot transmit computer data being none reaches the monitor."

The LCD is connected to a tower, which other devices connect to. Under testing I've heard the CDROM drive accessing data noises within the FRS channels, along with mouse movements and keyboard activity, along with other noises. When I disable the LCD monitor, all of these disturbances vanish. This means the weakness is in the monitor, and my tower is well shielded or shielded enough so as not to generate any noise in radios I can notice. The reference I made to the strange tape and material within the back side of the LCD monitor at the top could be a sign of some type of antenna or device for amping.

"Their FRS radios will only hear what yours does, RF hash, no data whatsoever THAT IS if one is standing outside your house tapping the radio and scratching his head wondering what's the matter with his radio. You and only you know what it is and where it's coming from."

And what of experienced and curious sysadmins? Rogue crackers? Bored HAMs?
Are there any remote radio injection attacks against systems? This is something I'll research later, as I do believe it was mentioned in at least one whitepaper on side channel attacks.

"Thanks for the chuckles, if the report reveals secrets it would not be published but sent by secret courier to the KGB in Moscow."

I'm not aware of any secrets revealed within the document. But it did raise an interesting point without exposing the method(s) delivered to us from an interesting party. This wasn't just some random article written by some anonymous, disturbed fellow and posted to a pastebin or conspiracy minded blog or forum. And one cannot deny the dozens of TEMPEST attacks available today.

"So... all this and no word on moving the radio farther from the monitor. Why don't you try talking somewhere besides in front of the computer if it bothers you so much?"

Thank you for considering conversation as my reason for posting this, but it is not. I would not choose a noisy channel to talk on. Clear conversation is not the point of this thread. I desire the elimination of this garbage coming from the LCD monitor. I don't care if no one in the world can pick up on it and hear it, I would like to properly resolve it and not ignore it.

One can also dredge up the subject of EMF on health, too, but I have not experienced any disturbance of health from exposure to this noise and most people would argue any possible EMF effects on health to be one of one's over active imagination and not real world application.

[-]

A continued discussion was posted elsewhere, this may be useful in the voyage to remove this "noise":

[-]

In addition, my CDROM drive light blinks once every second, sometimes with a second or 1/2 second in between, and I found this:

[-]

http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/19.60.html#subj9 [ncl.ac.uk]

"I'd worry about a Tempest virus that polled a personal computer's
CD-ROM drive to pulse the motor as a signalling method:

* Modern high-speed CD-ROM drive motors are both acoustically and
electrically noisy, giving you two attack methods for the price of one;

* Laptop computer users without CRTs, and the PC users that can afford
large LCD screens instead of CRTs, often have CD-ROM drives;

* Users are getting quite used to sitting patiently while their
CD-ROM drives grind away for no visibly obvious reason (but
that's quite enough about the widespread installs of software from
Microsoft CD-ROMs that prompted Kuhn's investigation in the first place.)"

[-]

Any comments on the silver tape and material inside the back of the LCD? ...Disconnection of the LED CDROM and HDD lights could be something I should do to relieve one possible issue.

[-]

Some articles with examples:

"If everything is just right, you can pick up signals from some distance. "I was able to eavesdrop certain laptops through three walls," says Kuhn. "At the CEBIT conference, in 2006, I was able to see the Powerpoint presentation from a stand 25 metres away."

uhn also mentioned that one laptop was vulnerable because it had metal hinges that carried the signal of the display cable. I asked if you could alter a device to make it easier to spy on. "There are a lot of innocuous modifications you can make to maximise the chance of getting a good signal," he told me. For example, adding small pieces of wire or cable to a display could make a big difference.

As for defending against this kind of attack, Kuhn says using well-shielded cables, certain combinations of colours and making everything a little fuzzy all work."

- http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/2007/04/seeing-through-walls.html [newscientist.com]

=!==-!=
TO EASILY VIEW THE PDF files below:
=!==-!=

Online viewer for PDF, PostScript and Word:

"This is an online viewer, with which you can view PDF and PostScript files as browsable images and Word documents as web pages. Given a URL on the net or a file on your computer, the viewer will try to retrieve the document, convert it and show it to you. No plugin software is required."

http://view.samurajdata.se/ [samurajdata.se]

The viewer software is open source, licensed under the GNU Public License.
=!==-!=

Electromagnetic eavesdropping risks of flat-panel displays
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/pet2004-fpd.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

=

Eavesdropping attacks on computer displays
- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iss2006-tempest.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

=

Compromising emanations: eavesdropping risks of computer displays
- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-577.html [cam.ac.uk]
- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-577.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

=

Compromising emanations of LCD TV sets
- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/emc2011-tv.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

=

"Q: Can I use filtered fonts also on flat-panel displays

My experience so far has been that with LCDs, the video cable is the most significant source of radiated information leakage. Where an analogue video cable (with 15-pin VGA connector) is used, low-pass filtered fonts have the same benefits as with CRTs. Where a purely digital video cable is used (DVI-D, laptop-internal displays with FPD/LVDS links, etc.) only the last step, namely randomizing the least-significant bits, should be implemented.

Where the video signal is entirely encoded in digital form, the low-pass filtered step will not have the desired effect. In fact, it can actually increase the differences between the signal generated by individual characters, and thereby make automatic radio character recognition more reliable."

- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/emsec/softtempest-faq.html [cam.ac.uk]

=

Remotely Eavesdropping on Keyboards (and read the comments!)

"The researchers from the Security and Cryptography Laboratory at Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne are able to capture keystrokes by monitoring the electromagnetic radiation of PS/2, universal serial bus, or laptop keyboards. They've outline four separate attack methods, some that work at a distance of as much as 65 feet from the target.

In one video demonstration, researchers Martin Vuagnoux and Sylvain Pasini sniff out the the keystrokes typed into a standard keyboard using a large antenna that's about 20 to 30 feet away in an adjacent room."

- https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/10/remotely_eavesd.html [schneier.com]

=

Video eavesdropping demo at CeBIT 2006
- http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2006/03/09/video-eavesdropping-demo-at-cebit-2006/ [lightbluetouchpaper.org]

=

Optical Emission Security â" Frequently Asked Questions

"Q: What about LEDs?

For devices with RS-232 serial ports, it is customary to provide a status indicator LED for some of the signal lines (in particular transmit data and receive data). Often, these LEDs are directly connected to the line via just a resistor. As a result, anyone with a line of sight to the LED, some optics and a simple photosensor can see the data stream. Joe Loughry and David A. Umphress have recently announced a detailed study (submitted to ACM Transactions on Information and System Security) in which they tested 39 communications devices with 164 LED indicators, and on 14 of the tested devices they found serial port data in the LED light. Based on their findings, it seems reasonable to conclude that LEDs for RS-232 ports are most likely carrying the data signal today, whereas LEDs on high-speed data links (LANs, harddisk) do not. Even these LEDs are still available as a covert channel for malicious software that actively tries to transmit data optically.

I expect that this paper will cause a number of modem manufacturers to add a little pulse stretcher (monostable multivibrator) to the LEDs in the next chip set revision, and that at some facilities with particular security concerns, the relevant LEDs will be removed or covered with black tape.

The data traffic on LEDs is not a periodic signal, and therefore, unlike with video signals, periodic averaging cannot be used to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. The shot-noise limit estimation technique that I used to estimate the CRT eavesdropping risk can even more easily (because no deconvolution is needed) also be applied to serial port indicators and allows us to estimate a lower bound for the bit-error rate at a given distance. I have performed a few example calculations and concluded that with a direct line of sight, and a 100 kbit/s signal (typical for an external telephone modem), at 500 m distance it should be no problem to acquire a reliable signal (one wrong bit every 10 megabit), whereas for indirect reflection from the wall of a dark room, a somewhat more noisy signal (at least one wrong bit per 10 kilobit) can be expected to be receivable in a few tens of meters distance.

- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/emsec/optical-faq.html [cam.ac.uk]

=

Ancient Story on Slashdot: Coming to a Desktop near you: Tempest Capabilities

"New Scientist has an interesting article about a new toy we will all want. It's a card that plugs in one of your PCI slots and allows you to scan the EMF spectrum and read your neighbours terminal. In about 5 years you might be able to get one for just under £1000. (Modern Tempest Hardware costs about £30000) "

http://www.yro.slashdot.org/story/99/11/08/093250/coming-to-a-desktop-near-you-tempest-capabilities [slashdot.org]

=

"Any unshielded electrical device with a variable current (including LCDs) will give out EMF radiation. It's the nature of the beast.

For that matter, light is EMF radiation, so unless you have your LCD in a coal-mine, it's reflecting EMF all the time it's switched on.

Then, there's the fact that screen monitoring isn't the only monitoring you can do. I used to use a radio, tuned into the bus for the PET, as a sound card. Worked surprisingly well, for all that very clunky metal shielding. What's to stop a much higher-quality receiver from seeing the data, in an unshielded box, being sent TO the LCD, or to any other device on the machine?

It's a mistake to assume that Tempest technology is single-function and that that single-function only works in a single situation."

- http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2333&cid=1553178 [slashdot.org]

=

800Mbps Wireless Network Made With LED Light Bulbs
- http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/08/02/1322201/800Mbps-Wireless-Network-Made-With-LED-Light-Bulbs [slashdot.org]

=

There are a lot of other files, many in PPT format, which can be found easily on this subject of LCD monitor (and other computing devices) TEMPEST sniffing.

===

Sources for this discussion:

- http://forums.radioreference.com/computer/255488-lcd-monitor-broadcasts-noise-radio-why.html [radioreference.com]
- http://clsvtzwzdgzkjda7.onion/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10919 [clsvtzwzdgzkjda7.onion] .onion link above requires a running Tor client session in order to view. (https://www.torproject.org)

This on-going discussion backed up to Pastebin(s) in order to retain it as an artifact. Many of these
types of discussions are REMOVED from the net because of the nature of the discussion (TEMPEST).

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?