Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
John Titor's Legacy
JT Foundation/Oliver Williams Research
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HuntTech" data-source="post: 10215" data-attributes="member: 147"><p><strong>JT Foundation/Oliver Williams Research</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I am very familiar with BugTraq. I don't think this is the forum for arguing pro or con Microsoft and it was my mistake for posting as such. Network and host security is a primary focus of my company and what I am hired to do. I take the stance that *none* of the operating systems are safe out of the box and must be tweaked and maintained by professionals... no matter what vendor published the operating system. IMHO, one must look at the problem that way and not be an O/S Evangelist of any sort. I stick to the 'What do you have and what do we need to do to fix it?' mentality.</p><p></p><p>Microsoft is a business that has a right to keep its software code private. However, they do provide source in their 'shared source initiative' and they do not adhere (as of yet) to the 'open source community' due to problems with the interpretation of the GPL or GNU license models if implemented into their current software models. Plus, when they attempted to post code recently on an open source forum (SourceForge), they were harshly criticized for doing so by the slashdotters and such as if it was the end of the world. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite38" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> I think that litmus test told them that the market wasn't ready for them to do anything like that. Anyway... enough of that. Sorry if I spoke out of turn when you intended Jedi to speak.</p><p></p><p>Do I think a 5100 series IBM would survive that kind of EMF... one large enough to move a vehicle and a person? No. CMOS components (even some TTL ones) have a large input impedence. A large EMF field would indeed expose the components to enough current that by Ohm's law the resultant voltage (E = I*R, where E is the resultant voltage from multiplying the current by the resistance or impedence.) would probably be enough to destroy the internal P-N junctions of the semiconductors. Hence, diodes and transistors would fail. Back then, the Peak Reverse Voltage of the P-N junctions would have been fairly low... maybe like 200 PIV. Doesn't take much current when applied to a very large input impedence to meet that rating. Remember, at the time the 5100 was designed, we were'nt only talking about semiconductors... there were still a bunch on discrete components to drive the devices... single transistors and diodes... I think they would have a high rate of failure after exposure to a large enough EMF.</p><p></p><p>Here's a link that it kind of en pointe... The TEMPEST problem is more closely related to my thoughts above, but the general EMP discourse also applies.</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-pamphlets/ep1110-3-2/toc.htm" target="_blank">USACE - Engineering and Design - Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and Tempest Protection for Facilities </a></p><p></p><p>Again, sorry for contributing to the off-topic discussion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HuntTech, post: 10215, member: 147"] [b]JT Foundation/Oliver Williams Research[/b] I am very familiar with BugTraq. I don't think this is the forum for arguing pro or con Microsoft and it was my mistake for posting as such. Network and host security is a primary focus of my company and what I am hired to do. I take the stance that *none* of the operating systems are safe out of the box and must be tweaked and maintained by professionals... no matter what vendor published the operating system. IMHO, one must look at the problem that way and not be an O/S Evangelist of any sort. I stick to the 'What do you have and what do we need to do to fix it?' mentality. Microsoft is a business that has a right to keep its software code private. However, they do provide source in their 'shared source initiative' and they do not adhere (as of yet) to the 'open source community' due to problems with the interpretation of the GPL or GNU license models if implemented into their current software models. Plus, when they attempted to post code recently on an open source forum (SourceForge), they were harshly criticized for doing so by the slashdotters and such as if it was the end of the world. :) I think that litmus test told them that the market wasn't ready for them to do anything like that. Anyway... enough of that. Sorry if I spoke out of turn when you intended Jedi to speak. Do I think a 5100 series IBM would survive that kind of EMF... one large enough to move a vehicle and a person? No. CMOS components (even some TTL ones) have a large input impedence. A large EMF field would indeed expose the components to enough current that by Ohm's law the resultant voltage (E = I*R, where E is the resultant voltage from multiplying the current by the resistance or impedence.) would probably be enough to destroy the internal P-N junctions of the semiconductors. Hence, diodes and transistors would fail. Back then, the Peak Reverse Voltage of the P-N junctions would have been fairly low... maybe like 200 PIV. Doesn't take much current when applied to a very large input impedence to meet that rating. Remember, at the time the 5100 was designed, we were'nt only talking about semiconductors... there were still a bunch on discrete components to drive the devices... single transistors and diodes... I think they would have a high rate of failure after exposure to a large enough EMF. Here's a link that it kind of en pointe... The TEMPEST problem is more closely related to my thoughts above, but the general EMP discourse also applies. [url=http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-pamphlets/ep1110-3-2/toc.htm]USACE - Engineering and Design - Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and Tempest Protection for Facilities [/url] Again, sorry for contributing to the off-topic discussion. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
John Titor's Legacy
JT Foundation/Oliver Williams Research
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top