encryption on HAM radio
in [Cryptography]
|
Prev: CRC reverse engineering
Next: just amending in search of a stitch as the federation is too prospective for Bert to step it
From: The Shadow on 3 May 2007 10:49 > "Mindraker" <anon(a)anon.com> wrote in message > news:z%7_h.1337$7s5.852(a)newsfe03.lga... >> Why is encryption forbidden on HAM/amateur radio according to FCC >> regulations? This makes no sense at all to me. If the FCC is truly >> interested in increasing the appeal of HAM radio to the current >> generation, From Wikipedia In cryptography, encryption is the process of obscuring information to make it unreadable without special knowledge, sometimes referred as scrambling. Why would you use this in Amateur Radio - for what purpose? On the internet it is necessary to protect various aspects of Internet e-commerce. Amateur Radio cannot be used for business purposes. Do you really believe that laws and regulations have to "make sense"? Lamont
From: mgaerman on 3 May 2007 12:40 On May 2, 6:11 pm, "Mindraker" <a...(a)anon.com> wrote: > Why is encryption forbidden on HAM/amateur radio according to FCC > regulations? what exactly is forbidden? is it the encryption of the transmitted signal, or the broadcast of audible ciphertext ? if the broadcast of ciphertext is permitted, then there is a doable workaround: [1] ascii armor the ciphertext [2] use an 'alpha bravo charly ...' type of convention for reading the ascii characters [3] use speech to text on the receiving end, and a laptop to render the text back into the ascii characters, and then decrypt [4] on the transmitting end, use a text to speech program to read the ciphertext from the laptop [5] a simple script can be used to transform the characters into the corresponding words and back again the entire process can be automated, and if you want to get cute, there are some 'very interesting' digital voices available ;-) http://software.techrepublic.com.com/download.aspx?docid=234447 http://www.download3k.com/MP3-Audio-Video/Utilities-Plug-Ins/Download-Alive-Text-to-Speech.html http://www.digitalfuturesoft.com/texttospeechproductsforpocketpc.php http://www.textspeechpro.com/ http://www.softsea.com/review/Natural-Voice-Text-to-Speech-Reader.html as well as the free microsoft text to speech engines, and many others so, the radio operators can get on, make whatever small talk they want, and then say something like, "have been trying out some text to speech voice software, what do you think of this one?" and transmit one voice, and the receiver can respond, " ok, this is the voice i'm trying out" and then read the decrypted text on their laptops vedaal
From: Mindraker on 3 May 2007 15:39 A HAM regulation reads "25.2A Transmissions between amateur stations of different countries shall not be encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except for control signals exchanged between earth command stations and the space station in the amateur satellite service." So, one can use Q-codes, 10-codes, and morse code, for example, for one is not intentionally hiding the meaning, but simply using a different means of communication that may be more appropriate for speed, hardware, bandwidth, etc. Alice can send the message to Bob using morse, but Charlie can listen in and figure it out (if Charlie has learned morse). But, for example, Alice using a OTP with Bob to send information on 50 MHz would be forbidden -- the meaning is obscured -- Charlie can't figure it out, for Charlie does not know the OTP. However, Bob would be (theoretically) more inclined to use HAM radio if he could tell Alice his secret love messages without fear of Charlie ever figuring out what they actually said. (Of course, there are the logistical problems, like having to identify yourself every 10 minutes on the radio with your call sign, and other annoying nuisances.) -Mindraker <mgaerman(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1178210424.540622.164580(a)p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > On May 2, 6:11 pm, "Mindraker" <a...(a)anon.com> wrote: >> Why is encryption forbidden on HAM/amateur radio according to FCC >> regulations? > > what exactly is forbidden? > > is it the encryption of the transmitted signal, > or > the broadcast of audible ciphertext ? > > > if the broadcast of ciphertext is permitted, > then there is a doable workaround: > > [1] ascii armor the ciphertext > > [2] use an 'alpha bravo charly ...' type of convention for reading the > ascii characters > > [3] use speech to text on the receiving end, > and a laptop to render the text back into the ascii characters, > and then decrypt > > [4] on the transmitting end, > use a text to speech program to read the ciphertext from the laptop > > [5] a simple script can be used to transform the characters into the > corresponding words and back again > > the entire process can be automated, > > and if you want to get cute, > there are some 'very interesting' digital voices available ;-) > > http://software.techrepublic.com.com/download.aspx?docid=234447 > http://www.download3k.com/MP3-Audio-Video/Utilities-Plug-Ins/Download-Alive-Text-to-Speech.html > http://www.digitalfuturesoft.com/texttospeechproductsforpocketpc.php > http://www.textspeechpro.com/ > http://www.softsea.com/review/Natural-Voice-Text-to-Speech-Reader.html > > as well as the free microsoft text to speech engines, and many others > > so, > the radio operators can get on, > make whatever small talk they want, > and then say something like, > > "have been trying out some text to speech voice software, > what do you think of this one?" > > and transmit one voice, > and the receiver can respond, > > " ok, > this is the voice i'm trying out" > > and then read the decrypted text on their laptops > > > vedaal > >
From: Bob D. on 5 May 2007 17:39 A conversation that needs to be encrypted does not belong on the ham bands! IMHO, encryption and scrambling would totally destroy amateur radio as both a hobby and a public service! I don't even like PL on FM (slippery slope). Suppose you're in an emergency situation. You hear a QSO on a repeater but you can't break in because you don't know the frequency of the subaudible tone (or you have an old rig). If you want a privacy use the telephone. -- Bob D. ND9B "Joseph Ashwood" <ashwood(a)msn.com> wrote in message news:DoSdnb9aNsihv6TbnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d(a)comcast.com... > "Mindraker" <anon(a)anon.com> wrote in message > news:z%7_h.1337$7s5.852(a)newsfe03.lga... >> Why is encryption forbidden on HAM/amateur radio according to FCC >> regulations? This makes no sense at all to me. If the FCC is truly >> interested in increasing the appeal of HAM radio to the current >> generation, it should stop fretting about whether or not people have to >> learn morse code, and start worrying about things like why you can do >> basic things like authenticate a user and encrypt your data on the >> internet, but not on the radio. >> ... but that's just my opinion. The HAM community needs to appeal to a >> younger populace to stay alive, which it isn't really doing by not taking >> innovations in computer technology into account. > > The historical reason given has always been because HAM is supposed to be > about open conversation, encryption is rather by definition closed in some > manner. > > Also the current young generation seems to have quite the firm grasp of > privacy implications. Admittedly, there are those that open their life > completely and get articles written when they die, but in general they > tend to be quite reasonable in their choices. The problem with HAM is that > it doesn't fit their model of communication, there are faster models, > broader models, and they don't require passing any tests. HAM never really > was something everyone was into, it has always had a relatively high > threshhold for entry, it's just that now there are other methods that have > lower threshholds and are visually more appealing. > Joe >
From: Jan Panteltje on 6 May 2007 06:07
On a sunny day (Sat, 5 May 2007 17:39:52 -0400) it happened "Bob D." <bobmgtd(a)insightbb.com> wrote in <5IydnV5TB9g4ZKHbnZ2dnUVZ_vWtnZ2d(a)insightbb.com>: >A conversation that needs to be encrypted does not belong on the ham bands! >IMHO, encryption and scrambling would totally destroy amateur radio as both >a hobby and a public service! I have to disagree. For example in case of occupation by a Bad Invader amateurs could transfer encrypted data 'as a public service', and the ability to decrypt enemy data (having experience with encryption methods and the equipment for that) is a great public service to your country. Also in case of natural disasters to be able to send data about persons without just anybody from the press being able to listen in and publish it, is a _must_. EU some years ago recommended everybody encrypts their email, sure I have heard amateurs discussion things that were in fact about their jobs that others should _not_ hear (industrial espionage). I am not saying amateur radio (whatever that means to you) _must_ be encrypted. But encryption is just a part of modern communications that they should master. Just like it is a no no to only be able to decode CW, you need to be able to do some more modulation systems like SSB, etc.. requiring special equipment anyways. So encryption just adds a bit overhead. G |