Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Air-gapped industrial environments need routine cross-domain data transfer, yet the available mechanisms trade off poorly: certified unidirectional gateways require persistent inter-zone cabling that conflicts with the physical-isolation intent of classified-network regulations, while manual optical-disc shuttling is slow, procedurally vulnerable, and incurs per-transfer consumable cost. We present LightGuard, an optical transfer system that establishes a physically isolated, cable-free channel via a screen-camera pair, encoding data as color-QR-code (C-Code) sequences. Its core is a computational-offloading architecture that delegates all decode-intensive processing to a dedicated intermediary device, driven by a cost-benefit criterion (Criterion 1) and four deployment considerations spanning software heterogeneity, operator impact, camera-attachment compliance, and copy resistance; a three-stage pipeline (chunking, Zstandard compression, fountain coding) tolerates the lossy channel. Measured on real hardware, the system sustains 98.77 KB/s optical-link throughput (∼ 91 KB/s end-to-end)—a 2–15 × gain over prior QR-based visible-light systems under their reported optima—at 2.5–5 W. Direct endpoint decoding, by contrast, saturates the internal host (97% CPU) where the offloaded configuration needs 24% and runs 1.42 × faster, and 40/40 unattended transfers recover byte-identical files within a single playback loop. LightGuard is positioned as a cable-free complement to certified gateways, aligned with the isolation intent of standards such as China’s BMB17.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: