Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site yojna1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!aplcen!cp1!yojna1!wb6rqn
From: wb6rqn@yojna1.UUCP (Brian Lloyd)
Newsgroups: net.lan,net.dcom
Subject: Re: More on Fiber Enet Rptrs
Message-ID: <130@yojna1.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 13-Nov-85 13:26:40 EST
Article-I.D.: yojna1.130
Posted: Wed Nov 13 13:26:40 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 16-Nov-85 09:51:33 EST
References: <377@nrcvax.UUCP>
Organization: Yojna1 Amateur Radio Packet Unix System; Germantown, Md.
Lines: 20
Xref: watmath net.lan:1150 net.dcom:1478

> 	[...] yet it is TEMPEST
> 	certified. This leads to an interesting paradox - why TEMPEST certify
> 	the box which is attached to an unsecured net, with non TEMPEST
> 	tranceivers ?? Someone must need this certification...
> 
> 	[...]
> 
> Geoffrey Baehr -  N6LXA			Network Research Corp
> 					

I have had the unfortunate experience of dealing with the TEMPEST environment.
You are allowed to operate non-TEMPEST equipment in a TEMPEST-required
environment if the building is fully shielded.  Imagine someone running an
Ethernet within a shielded room/building and wishing to connect to another
such Ethernet somewhere else, where the interconnection must pass through
a non-shielded area.  In this case it makes sense to have a TEMPEST connection
between two non-TEMPEST LANs.

Brian Lloyd
...![bellcore!cp1]!yojna1!wb6rqn