Would it theoretically be possible to design computers or hardware specifically for use in digital warfare against governments? A powerful physical LOIC of sorts
Inb4 knock on the door
Bump
Possible and already happening. On the hardware side, we already have ruggedized laptops for field use, and specialised software such as that documented by Snowdens leaks.
On a less subtle basis, you can look at china's attack on github utilising the great firewall infra to trigger a country scale ddos.
>>51965195
What the fuck does the ruggedness of a laptop matter? It's not an assault rifle
>>51965063
I'm pretty sure that's what quantum computers are being developed for, you can mess some shit up if it were possible crack any encryption in a matter of moments with the press of a button.
>>51965352
Return of the analog age when
>>51965063
Loic specifically no
Not how it works
But emp and jammers are essential that for the electromagnetic sphere
So yes?
You question assumes there is a deference between what plebs think of hacking and cyber warfare.
The two are the same.
And hacking doesn't really rely on hardware in the way you are talking. Its more protocol based and leans heavily on social engineering
>>51965352
This is not how quantum computers work. At all.
>>51967403
We was not explaining how quantum computers work. Just an application of the technology. Being able to factor large prime numbers quickly would cripple encryption. Stop being a cunt.
>>51965352
>crack any encryption in a matter of moments
No.
>>51967504
Yeah I dont know what anon is talking about. I dont see why quantum computers couldn't be used in that fashion.
But you could also use the quantum computer to make stronger encryption. Creating an interesting leap in the arms race
You should boycott government security services employees. Don't befriend them, don't serve them as customers, don't hire them etc.
>>51967562
>>51967692
You posted some ugly bitch. How am I supposed to react to this image? Why did you post it?
>>51965352
>any encryption
you mean, any encryption that depends on computational complexity, and not necessarily in a matter of seconds
>>51967850
I forget autists struggle with facial expressions.
Your idea is stupid sir, it is impractical and accomplishes nothing.
Did you understand that?
>>51967392
Translate to English please.
>>51969053
Is that in regards to it being too technical
or all my spelling mistakes or both?
>against governments
>the guys who have control over where and how internet cables are laid, and have recently passed law which allows even local police access to ISP records
>the guys who also have control over patents and therefore can figure out vulnerabilities to every piece of tech on the market
No. You'd need a private network that's isolated from the Internet and custom made tech out the ass. It's not possible.
>>51965293
because sometimes you're in a desert at a base that may or may take nightly rocket attacks and you need a laptop that won't get fucked by a hole in the wall and blowing sand.
Or worse, you're in a tent.
what the fuck did you think "field use" meant?
