Hacker News Reader

Comment by barbazoo | Hacker News Reader

If that means you need to at least be physically present then I'd say that's a lot of protection already. Means someone in a foreign country can't simply get lucky fuzzing.

View on HN

Alternatively, small drones exist, and so do low power devices you could slingshot/shoot into a secure area and set to auto wipe after they've done their job. Maybe could even build it out of biodegradable material so it'll clean up in short time.

If you've got secret agents on enemy soil who can get near targets with drones, you're probably just bombing them.

Unless you're running out of munitions.

And nuclear isn't exactly a great option.

Modern warfare is sneaky. What's the worst you can do without starting an actual war? Plus what's the point of retaliating if the actual combatant was just "an insane person from another country". IE - There's no way to prove he's working for the CCP or IRGC, for example, maybe he's just a crazy person.

Why bomb something, which carries its own risk profile and success criteria, when you can make some piece of equipment malfunction just enough to wear out in a year instead of 20 years?

hell, you could even fedex them your own remote hands a la LTE modem tied to an rpi.. you could do what you need to by the time someone gets around to opening the box

You just need to be able to remotely take over a system with a compatible radio within range.

That’s why I’m so concerned about Bluetooth

Looking at whats happening in europe, thats not a barrier. all it takes is a few hundred euros, some time on a dipshit forum and you have a willing gopher who'll go to a given location and run an unspecified payload.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com