4 ms·

Ham radio’s community is open. Part of the joy is being able to communicate with anyone on a Ham radio. Encrypting Ham radio doesn’t make any sense. While I ag

by Quenty 7y ago

Ham radio’s community is open. Part of the joy is being able to communicate with anyone on a Ham radio. Encrypting Ham radio doesn’t make any sense. While I agree with your overall sentiment of privacy, I think Ham radio shouldn’t be encrypted. When we talk about national security and Ham radio “secure” communication is not what we mean as a risk factor.

geofft 7y ago
And yet we're all talking on this community over encrypted connections.
- wil421 7y ago
  Do you broadcast your HAM radio password unencrypted before you login to HAM? Do you broadcast your bank account information and SSN over HAM? No you don’t on HAM, but if you use HTTP you do.
  - vvanders 7y ago
    No, because you don't do any commercial transmissions on ham radio. If you want to do that grab some Ubitqui gear or other Part 15 device and go crazy. Also you do transmit callsigns which anyone can look up and find out who you are + where you live. There's no expectation of privacy and never has been on the bands.
  - kawfey 7y ago
    This is a pet peeve of mine, but it's ham radio, not HAM. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ham_radio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ham_radio
- VLM 7y ago
  The internet bucket is too big, you got free for all http or secure (ish) https providing authentication, authorization, accounting, and encrypted data transfer. I'd argue that HN doesn't require encrypted data transfer at all, and encrypted data transfer is illegal on ham radio freqs anyway. The other three AAA words are what HN requires as a multi user BBS like service, and are legal under ham radio rules, or at most only need to be bent slightly into being legal. I was motivated enough to look up the Apache webserver docs to force a https ciper; apparently "SSLCipherSuite" lets you force a specific openSSL cipher name; then I checked openSSL docs and for better or worse "cleartext" is not an allowable cipher for openSSL. Via some code changes in browser and server you could technically implement something like HTTPS that would work legally over ham radio. Although this is a slight simplification, conceptually there's nothing wrong with the idea of accessing HN while using a cipher of cleartext. I really want to know that I'm not getting MITM'd when I read and post, and I want that CA proof that I'm talking to the genuine CA approved HN server. I really don't care if the general public can read the contents of this post so cleartext would be fine. Logging in by typing my password would be an obvious corner case to handle.
  - geofft 7y ago
    Yeah, recent versions of TLS don't specify a "null" cipher any more. One of the reasons I think we should allow encryption over ham links is that you can't run normal internet protocols - you have to do significant code changes/hacking to make things work. The internet community has decided (for reasons of national security, even!) that it's just not worth having the option.
  - tuxxy 7y ago
    > I'd argue that HN doesn't require encrypted data transfer at all I guess you're okay with sending your passwords in plain, then.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      With that one obvious little caveat. But that's an authentication issue, and does not require all other HN communication (posts, comments) to be encrypted.
      - tuxxy 7y ago
        But you're widely ignoring all the privacy issues that come with cleartext traffic. Why would you give up this clear win for consumers and users and relegate them to easily trackable, non privacy-preserving techniques? Do you not see that you're literally arguing against privacy here? Why should amateur radio not get the same benefits? All I hear are arguments in defense of regulation and Kafkaesque government bureaucracy.
        TeMPOraL 7y ago
        clears eyes. What? HN is a public board, viewable without logging in. There is no expectation of privacy in communications here.
        tuxxy 7y ago
        There's no need to be dense here... There are privacy implications _outside_ of User communications to this website. Arguing that there is no expectation of privacy on HN is a complete non sequitur.
godelski 7y ago
I disagree. Lack of encryption, imo, is going to kill HAM. People now aren't enticed by being able to talk to anyone anywhere. There are substantially easier and cheaper methods to do this with the internet and will connect you to more groups with more relevant interests. As a guy in his late 20's I don't really care much to talk to people on ham. But what got me in was a satellite project during my undergrad (everyone my age or under that I know with a licence has it for similar reasons). Being able to control systems is enticing though. I can't do that with the internet. But playing with iot devices, controlling robots, etc, THAT IS COOL! You aren't going to be about to do this with the internet and you can't get the range (I've never done this, but it is interesting, I just don't have time since I'm in grad school). There's also plenty of ideas I'd like to try that would require encryption (like making a server accessible over HAM frequencies). I talk to older HAMs and they are confused why the younger generation isn't interested. Well frankly times have changed. Hackers/Makers still exist (this site is proof!), we just aren't enticed just by being able to speak to others around the world. We've been doing that trivially since a young age. So I think it's silly to say that we don't need encryption. Without users HAM bands will go away. So let's start asking why the younger generation don't want to get in instead of saying "business as usual" when it is clear the business is dying (and dying fast). Edit: I also disagree with the premise that encrypted == closed. We access tons of https websites and we don't consider those closed.
- jdietrich 7y ago
  >But playing with iot devices, controlling robots, etc, THAT IS COOL! That's what the ISM bands are for.
- 420codebro 7y ago
  You are ignoring the bandwidth differential of RF v Fiber-based transmission systems. We don't care if some random unknown crypto session happens on the internet - there is near infinite bandwidth - and someone is paying a bill (on both ends). With amateur RF it is different - it is a shared, finite resource (in a given area/radius). Not allowing enciphered communications is a fairly easy way to be able to audit what is taking up the spectrum. If it all goes enciphered, you have no idea what is occurring, for what purposes.
msla 7y ago
Security is an essential social norm, because it reinforces the notion that, no, eavesdropping is not good, it is not acceptable, and we will not stand for it, regardless of the medium.

by Quenty 7y ago

geofft 7y ago

And yet we're all talking on this community over encrypted connections.

wil421 7y ago
Do you broadcast your HAM radio password unencrypted before you login to HAM? Do you broadcast your bank account information and SSN over HAM? No you don’t on HAM, but if you use HTTP you do.
- vvanders 7y ago
  No, because you don't do any commercial transmissions on ham radio. If you want to do that grab some Ubitqui gear or other Part 15 device and go crazy. Also you do transmit callsigns which anyone can look up and find out who you are + where you live. There's no expectation of privacy and never has been on the bands.
- kawfey 7y ago
  This is a pet peeve of mine, but it's ham radio, not HAM. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ham_radio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ham_radio
VLM 7y ago
The internet bucket is too big, you got free for all http or secure (ish) https providing authentication, authorization, accounting, and encrypted data transfer. I'd argue that HN doesn't require encrypted data transfer at all, and encrypted data transfer is illegal on ham radio freqs anyway. The other three AAA words are what HN requires as a multi user BBS like service, and are legal under ham radio rules, or at most only need to be bent slightly into being legal. I was motivated enough to look up the Apache webserver docs to force a https ciper; apparently "SSLCipherSuite" lets you force a specific openSSL cipher name; then I checked openSSL docs and for better or worse "cleartext" is not an allowable cipher for openSSL. Via some code changes in browser and server you could technically implement something like HTTPS that would work legally over ham radio. Although this is a slight simplification, conceptually there's nothing wrong with the idea of accessing HN while using a cipher of cleartext. I really want to know that I'm not getting MITM'd when I read and post, and I want that CA proof that I'm talking to the genuine CA approved HN server. I really don't care if the general public can read the contents of this post so cleartext would be fine. Logging in by typing my password would be an obvious corner case to handle.
- geofft 7y ago
  Yeah, recent versions of TLS don't specify a "null" cipher any more. One of the reasons I think we should allow encryption over ham links is that you can't run normal internet protocols - you have to do significant code changes/hacking to make things work. The internet community has decided (for reasons of national security, even!) that it's just not worth having the option.
- tuxxy 7y ago
  > I'd argue that HN doesn't require encrypted data transfer at all I guess you're okay with sending your passwords in plain, then.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    With that one obvious little caveat. But that's an authentication issue, and does not require all other HN communication (posts, comments) to be encrypted.
    - tuxxy 7y ago
      But you're widely ignoring all the privacy issues that come with cleartext traffic. Why would you give up this clear win for consumers and users and relegate them to easily trackable, non privacy-preserving techniques? Do you not see that you're literally arguing against privacy here? Why should amateur radio not get the same benefits? All I hear are arguments in defense of regulation and Kafkaesque government bureaucracy.
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        clears eyes. What? HN is a public board, viewable without logging in. There is no expectation of privacy in communications here.
        tuxxy 7y ago
        There's no need to be dense here... There are privacy implications _outside_ of User communications to this website. Arguing that there is no expectation of privacy on HN is a complete non sequitur.

godelski 7y ago

I disagree. Lack of encryption, imo, is going to kill HAM. People now aren't enticed by being able to talk to anyone anywhere. There are substantially easier and cheaper methods to do this with the internet and will connect you to more groups with more relevant interests. As a guy in his late 20's I don't really care much to talk to people on ham. But what got me in was a satellite project during my undergrad (everyone my age or under that I know with a licence has it for similar reasons). Being able to control systems is enticing though. I can't do that with the internet. But playing with iot devices, controlling robots, etc, THAT IS COOL! You aren't going to be about to do this with the internet and you can't get the range (I've never done this, but it is interesting, I just don't have time since I'm in grad school). There's also plenty of ideas I'd like to try that would require encryption (like making a server accessible over HAM frequencies). I talk to older HAMs and they are confused why the younger generation isn't interested. Well frankly times have changed. Hackers/Makers still exist (this site is proof!), we just aren't enticed just by being able to speak to others around the world. We've been doing that trivially since a young age. So I think it's silly to say that we don't need encryption. Without users HAM bands will go away. So let's start asking why the younger generation don't want to get in instead of saying "business as usual" when it is clear the business is dying (and dying fast). Edit: I also disagree with the premise that encrypted == closed. We access tons of https websites and we don't consider those closed.

jdietrich 7y ago
>But playing with iot devices, controlling robots, etc, THAT IS COOL! That's what the ISM bands are for.
420codebro 7y ago
You are ignoring the bandwidth differential of RF v Fiber-based transmission systems. We don't care if some random unknown crypto session happens on the internet - there is near infinite bandwidth - and someone is paying a bill (on both ends). With amateur RF it is different - it is a shared, finite resource (in a given area/radius). Not allowing enciphered communications is a fairly easy way to be able to audit what is taking up the spectrum. If it all goes enciphered, you have no idea what is occurring, for what purposes.

msla 7y ago

Security is an essential social norm, because it reinforces the notion that, no, eavesdropping is not good, it is not acceptable, and we will not stand for it, regardless of the medium.