Re: Fun with (In)Security

[Paul Schmehl <pauls () utdallas edu>]

--On January 28, 2006 9:21:43 PM +0000 Fergie <fergdawg () netzero net> wrote:

> Personally, I believe a 'dirty bomb' is much more realistic.
That's probably true.  The major problem that has to be overcome is weight. 
The radioactive material has to be encased in lead.  To get a quantity 
sufficient to do major damage would require heavy equipment (large trucks) 
and lift equipment to implant the device.  This could be done, but doing it 
without being detected somewhere along the way would be tricky.

> And the results could be pretty tragic...
That depends on a great deal of factors - wind speed and direction, time of 
day, population density, etc., etc.  There are many logistical problems to 
overcome and each one increases the risk of exposure before detonation.

Paul Schmehl (pauls () utdallas edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
http://www.utdallas.edu/
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.