5 ms·
I think this is the exception that swallows the rule. Let's say I observe two ham radio operators having a morse code communication. I decide to stop them from
by nickodell 10y ago
I think this is the exception that swallows the rule.
Let's say I observe two ham radio operators having a morse code communication. I decide to stop them from communicating, so I transmit "<callsign 1> QRT DE <callsign 2>", where callsign 1 and callsign 2 are the callsigns of the two ham radio operators.
Is this harmful interference, or did one of the ham radio operators just misinterpret my signal?
- punnerud 10y agoI wouldn't trust the "<callsign 1> QRT DE <callsign 2>" if it didn't contain a secret message, that couldn't be produced by a 3. party
- ptaipale 10y agoWell, I think then you'd be breaking protocol, because afaik, in ham code you must obey procedure, and QRT tells you to stop transmitting.
- Sanddancer 10y agoIn Ham radio, you can't use any sort of secret message like that. Everything needs to be plaintext.
- ryan-c 10y agoI don't think that's correct. Cryptographic authentication of messages should be allowed (ARRL agrees with me[0]), the language specifies you cannot "obscure the meaning" of the communication. 0. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7520928844.pdf https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7520928844.pdf
- nickodell 10y agoThat's correct. There's one exception to the encryption rule, which is when sending commands to a space station. (That does not allow you to encrypt the responses, though.) See 47 CFR 97.211, https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.211 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.211
- manarth 10y agoI decide to stop them from communicating, so I transmit "<callsign 1> QRT DE <callsign 2>" Is this harmful interference? On amateur radio, you're obliged to identify yourself, so this would be a breach of licence: failing to identify your station, or misrepresenting your station.