Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Packet Juggling - Floating Data Storage

Posted by Hemos on from the utility-computing dept.

Filthmaster writes "I just saw an interesting paper that has been posted to bugtraq, full-disclosure and vulnwatch. It deals with the principles of stealthily using network infrastructure as either short-term or long-term storage. Not sure if I'm ready to implement it, but it makes interesting food for thought." There's also a mirror up.

8 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. Bandwidth? by shish · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Won't everyone pinging their gigabytes of data back and forth totally screw the net, a la slammer?

    --
    I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    1. Re:Bandwidth? by Oculus+Habent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I thought the "100-foot well" bit at the end of the article was a unique twist. 6 kilobits of data in 100 feet at 20KHz stored as sound...

      --
      That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
  2. BOFH by i.r.id10t · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Didn't the BOFH convince the Boss that you could store data on the network cables, causing him to order quite a few spools of the stuff?

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  3. Complexity, Risk Management, Cost by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Whilte it's good to see people exercising their minds like this, it's also good to keep in mind that some things should not be regarded as more than just exercises.

    With this particular scheme, the inherent complexity (needing interfaces to all of these common network protocols) and the risks (there must be a billion ways to lose data this way) basically mean that storage according to this scheme would be really high.

    Disproportionate storage costs per unit data automatically means no real-world application outside of brain exercising.

    --
    Blearf. Blearf, I say.
  4. the heck? by Frac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How does using a scarce resource (bandwidth) to create an abundant resource (disk space) make any economic sense?

    Headline: How to turn gold into copper! News at 11.

  5. I could buy a 80GB harddisk by kasperd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Or I could upgrade my internet connection to get the same amount of storage in other locations. In about three months the extra required capacity on the internet connection would have cost me as much as the harddisk. If I buy the harddisk now, in three months I will still have storage without having to keep paying. Besides, the harddisk is going to be more efficient and probably also more reliable.

    --

    Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
  6. Oh! The irony! by Inspector · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Filthmaster writes "I just saw an interesting paper that has been posted to bugtraq, full-disclosure and vulnwatch. It deals with the principles of stealthily using network infrastructure as either short-term or long-term storage. Not sure if I'm ready to implement it, but it makes interesting food for thought."

    There's also a mirror up.

    Sneaky bastards!

    --
    Michael Gentili
    - He's just some guy, you know?
  7. This is new? by jimfrost · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This is just a rehashing of an april fool's joke that went around on USENET some 15+ years ago. They were talking about using the UUCP transmission delay for archiving. I spent a few minutes trying to track down the original on deja.com, unsuccessfully, but trust me ... I remember it.

    It's also interesting that way back in the dawn of computing equipment they did use propagation delay as a way of doing storage. Mercury delay lines in particular. Not only that, the people that used them noticed that the tubes made noise and found ways to play tunes by saving the appropriate data. Google "mercury delay lines" and you'll find a few notes about the technology.

    --
    jim frost
    jimf@frostbytes.com