I am in IT and I have to carry a phone for on-call purposes. I have seen the transition to blackberries happen at my own work. On the sum of things, I believe that the blackberry has been somewhat more beneficial for me as compared to those with whom I work. Unlike a lot of them, I turn off all email notifications. Instead I rely on SMS alerts for emergencies, and only read email when I feel like it. This keeps me from feeling stressed about having to answer every single email right when it comes in. There are other things you can do to control the email flow (filters, important/normal flags, etc.). The blackberry has helped me as I am able to be somewhat useful even when I am on the bus traveling into work. Blackberries (as well as an increasing number of other phones) can do a lot of what a wireless radio enabled laptop can do. Instant messaging, web browsing (including corporate networks), bluetooth headphones, as well as SSH, VPN, telnet in a pinch.
There is one other method of encoding data, which would allow for more data throughput. The one I am thinking of is to make a subtle modification to a TCP/IP stack, so that it must send all IP packets twice for which it wishes to encapsulate data within. The first packet sent would have a sequence number which is made to look wrong, and the second packet would have the correct sequence number. The receiving host could have a similar modification made so that it recognizes when there is data to be found buried in the payload of the (seemingly) error ridden packet. With this method, you could potentially encode a larger percentage of covert data per byte of legitimate data sent.
There is one other method of encoding data, which would allow for more data throughput. The one I am thinking of is to make a subtle modification to a TCP/IP stack, so that it must send all IP packets twice for which it wishes to encapsulate data within. The first packet sent would have a sequence number which is made to look wrong, and the second packet would have the correct sequence number. The receiving host could have a similar modification made so that it recognizes when there is data to be found buried in the payload of the (seemingly) error ridden packet.
With this method, you could potentially encode a larger percentage of covert data per byte of legitimate data sent.
Slashdot Mirror
I am in IT and I have to carry a phone for on-call purposes. I have seen the transition to blackberries happen at my own work. On the sum of things, I believe that the blackberry has been somewhat more beneficial for me as compared to those with whom I work. Unlike a lot of them, I turn off all email notifications. Instead I rely on SMS alerts for emergencies, and only read email when I feel like it. This keeps me from feeling stressed about having to answer every single email right when it comes in. There are other things you can do to control the email flow (filters, important/normal flags, etc.). The blackberry has helped me as I am able to be somewhat useful even when I am on the bus traveling into work. Blackberries (as well as an increasing number of other phones) can do a lot of what a wireless radio enabled laptop can do. Instant messaging, web browsing (including corporate networks), bluetooth headphones, as well as SSH, VPN, telnet in a pinch.
This bears a striking resemblance to several points brought up in a recent article on freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/news/2000/ 06/03/960091140.html
There is one other method of encoding data, which would allow for more data throughput. The one I am thinking of is to make a subtle modification to a TCP/IP stack, so that it must send all IP packets twice for which it wishes to encapsulate data within. The first packet sent would have a sequence number which is made to look wrong, and the second packet would have the correct sequence number. The receiving host could have a similar modification made so that it recognizes when there is data to be found buried in the payload of the (seemingly) error ridden packet. With this method, you could potentially encode a larger percentage of covert data per byte of legitimate data sent.
There is one other method of encoding data, which would allow for more data throughput. The one I am thinking of is to make a subtle modification to a TCP/IP stack, so that it must send all IP packets twice for which it wishes to encapsulate data within. The first packet sent would have a sequence number which is made to look wrong, and the second packet would have the correct sequence number. The receiving host could have a similar modification made so that it recognizes when there is data to be found buried in the payload of the (seemingly) error ridden packet.
With this method, you could potentially encode a larger percentage of covert data per byte of legitimate data sent.