4 ms·

And it would be unthinkable to say that hobbyists learning Linux cannot use SSH or HTTPS. Why is ham radio different? ("Limited spectrum" is definitely a poten

by geofft 7y ago

And it would be unthinkable to say that hobbyists learning Linux cannot use SSH or HTTPS. Why is ham radio different? ("Limited spectrum" is definitely a potential distinction. "National security," I think, makes no sense in either case—it was tried for Internet hobbyists and failed.)

Karunamon 7y ago
Because without that no-encryption rule, the ham bands would quickly turn into a commercialized free-for-all. The required openness prevents that particular class of abuse without ambiguity.
- geofft 7y ago
  I'm a little puzzled by this argument, honestly. It's clearly an illegal commercialized free-for-all, so - how would a viable white market develop? It would be patently obvious that the handy communications devices you're buying are using ham frequencies. - on the grey/black market, why do we think that banning encryption is sufficient to dissuade illegal use but allowing it and banning commercial use would not be? It's already the case that FCC enforcement is very weak and there are a ton of newfangled digital modes. You could get by for a very long time sending encrypted transmissions on ham bands without anyone being able to stop you.
  - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
    You can't prove that anyone is sending encrypted data vs random numbers. The latter is legal with current packet radio protocols.
    - sseagull 7y ago
      I don't believe random numbers (certainly long strings of random numbers) would be an authorized transmission. They would serve no purpose allowed by Part 97.
  - jdietrich 7y ago
    The amateur radio community already has a significant problem with unlicensed users on UHF and VHF, because cheap Chinese handhelds are widely marketed on Amazon and eBay with no mention of the fact that they're amateur-band equipment and require a license to use. If you search for "two-way radio" or "walkie talkie", most of the product listings make no distinction between FRS, MURS, GMRS and amateur band equipment. With wideband SDR devices falling rapidly in price, there is an impending threat to all licensed frequencies - it isn't illegal to buy or sell a HackRF One, but you can do a lot of illegal things with it if you're ignorant of or indifferent to the regulations. https://www.amazon.com/BaoFeng-BF-F8HP-Two-Way-136-174Mhz-400-520Mhz/dp/B00MAULSOK/ https://www.amazon.com/BaoFeng-BF-F8HP-Two-Way-136-174Mhz-40... FCC enforcement is light-touch and they don't have infinite investigative capacity, but they are more than willing to throw down a hefty fine if you're a flagrant violator. The encryption ban is essential in allowing amateur radio operators to monitor their own service; a large proportion of FCC enforcement actions are initiated in response to a complaint from another service user. https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/orders https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/orders
    - dependenttypes 7y ago
      > The amateur radio community already has a significant problem with unlicensed users May I ask why? Why would they care if some of the people that use ham radio are unlicensed?
      - vvanders 7y ago
        There are protocols and sequences that mush be respected if you don't want to say "DDoS" a repeater frequency or diverge from band plans. It's really common to have split frequency inputs on repeaters(+/- 600Hz or so on VHF) so even if a channel sounds clear you could be stomping on everything in a 40 mile radius. PL tones mitigate this somewhat but given the sparse, shared aspect of frequency allocations you want people who are properly educated.
    - KirinDave 7y ago
      I get that some bands are legally restricted but it seems like the HackRF or other SDRs are not going to be a significant problem for widespread spectrum congestion any time soon. Why mention them?
VLM 7y ago
The governments have not and would not in the future allow the goal of improving international goodwill if the data being passed were encrypted because that's essentially legalized spy radios. In the past governments have made ham radio illegal from time to time just because of one time pads for example. If the whole point of the service is to have a service that uses self policing such that it doesn't require extensive monitoring by spy agencies and as such should not be banned for budgetary reasons... Some non-USA governments have or had draconian postal and radio regulation such that it would be very tempting to bypass them via encrypted radio, such that they have an entire postal budget's worth of justification to enforce the general ham radio theme of "brief messages of a personal, non-commercial nature" The issue of "brief messages of a personal, non-commercial nature" is significant; take for example the message: "Have a nice day, geofft" 1) I mean it (like, why not?) 2) There's no logical argument how or why that message transfer would be improved by encryption. There's no possible way that info transfer could be improved by being sent as FGSHR HKSVN OSJVS SDFWE SAFDS AFDJS using an Enigma machine or similar tech. I mean, it would be kinda cool one time, but a pointless drag in the long run. 3) There are plenty of existing FCC regulated services to handle safely sending your credit card number over radio, so you have the burden of explaining why you won't use those existing services if you insist on giving me your credit card number instead of something more appropriate like "you too have a nice day". Like... if you want to transfer credit card numbers instead of having a polite conversation, why are you here anyway? A better analogy than SSH or HTTPS would be banning IRC vertical spam of encrypted text. If you want to pay your bills online, technically you could spam the heck out of a popular IRC channel by flooding with some kind of BASE64 encoded TLS stream connected to your bank and your web browser via two gateways, but if you try that you're going to get kicked from the IRC network and told to use HTTPS which ironically already exists and works perfectly and was designed for that specific task. Or even worse analogy, picture me flooding a HN article with posts containing TCPIP packets from me logging into my local electric company trying to pay my electric bill, while the rest of you are trying to have a perfectly normal English language conversation about radio regulation surrounded by my vertical spam. In summary the main difference is radio bandwidth is finite and we often operate at the limits, while internet bandwidth (from a human perspective) is essentially infinite. Also public utility land lines obey map and country boundaries, but radio waves can not.
unethical_ban 7y ago
I think limited spectrum, combined with the desire for it to be a welcoming hobby, is why.
brians 7y ago
My answer is about network effects and something like Metcalfe’s Law. If I spin the dial and find something, I should find it interesting and comprehensible. If half of transmissions are encrypted, I can’t even get the thrill of reading half a conversation and thinking about DX. To stay amateur radio, it has to be a “party line” chat room.

by geofft 7y ago

Karunamon 7y ago

Because without that no-encryption rule, the ham bands would quickly turn into a commercialized free-for-all. The required openness prevents that particular class of abuse without ambiguity.

geofft 7y ago
I'm a little puzzled by this argument, honestly. It's clearly an illegal commercialized free-for-all, so - how would a viable white market develop? It would be patently obvious that the handy communications devices you're buying are using ham frequencies. - on the grey/black market, why do we think that banning encryption is sufficient to dissuade illegal use but allowing it and banning commercial use would not be? It's already the case that FCC enforcement is very weak and there are a ton of newfangled digital modes. You could get by for a very long time sending encrypted transmissions on ham bands without anyone being able to stop you.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  You can't prove that anyone is sending encrypted data vs random numbers. The latter is legal with current packet radio protocols.
  - sseagull 7y ago
    I don't believe random numbers (certainly long strings of random numbers) would be an authorized transmission. They would serve no purpose allowed by Part 97.
- jdietrich 7y ago
  The amateur radio community already has a significant problem with unlicensed users on UHF and VHF, because cheap Chinese handhelds are widely marketed on Amazon and eBay with no mention of the fact that they're amateur-band equipment and require a license to use. If you search for "two-way radio" or "walkie talkie", most of the product listings make no distinction between FRS, MURS, GMRS and amateur band equipment. With wideband SDR devices falling rapidly in price, there is an impending threat to all licensed frequencies - it isn't illegal to buy or sell a HackRF One, but you can do a lot of illegal things with it if you're ignorant of or indifferent to the regulations. https://www.amazon.com/BaoFeng-BF-F8HP-Two-Way-136-174Mhz-400-520Mhz/dp/B00MAULSOK/ https://www.amazon.com/BaoFeng-BF-F8HP-Two-Way-136-174Mhz-40... FCC enforcement is light-touch and they don't have infinite investigative capacity, but they are more than willing to throw down a hefty fine if you're a flagrant violator. The encryption ban is essential in allowing amateur radio operators to monitor their own service; a large proportion of FCC enforcement actions are initiated in response to a complaint from another service user. https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/orders https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/orders
  - dependenttypes 7y ago
    > The amateur radio community already has a significant problem with unlicensed users May I ask why? Why would they care if some of the people that use ham radio are unlicensed?
    - vvanders 7y ago
      There are protocols and sequences that mush be respected if you don't want to say "DDoS" a repeater frequency or diverge from band plans. It's really common to have split frequency inputs on repeaters(+/- 600Hz or so on VHF) so even if a channel sounds clear you could be stomping on everything in a 40 mile radius. PL tones mitigate this somewhat but given the sparse, shared aspect of frequency allocations you want people who are properly educated.
  - KirinDave 7y ago
    I get that some bands are legally restricted but it seems like the HackRF or other SDRs are not going to be a significant problem for widespread spectrum congestion any time soon. Why mention them?

VLM 7y ago

The governments have not and would not in the future allow the goal of improving international goodwill if the data being passed were encrypted because that's essentially legalized spy radios. In the past governments have made ham radio illegal from time to time just because of one time pads for example. If the whole point of the service is to have a service that uses self policing such that it doesn't require extensive monitoring by spy agencies and as such should not be banned for budgetary reasons... Some non-USA governments have or had draconian postal and radio regulation such that it would be very tempting to bypass them via encrypted radio, such that they have an entire postal budget's worth of justification to enforce the general ham radio theme of "brief messages of a personal, non-commercial nature" The issue of "brief messages of a personal, non-commercial nature" is significant; take for example the message: "Have a nice day, geofft" 1) I mean it (like, why not?) 2) There's no logical argument how or why that message transfer would be improved by encryption. There's no possible way that info transfer could be improved by being sent as FGSHR HKSVN OSJVS SDFWE SAFDS AFDJS using an Enigma machine or similar tech. I mean, it would be kinda cool one time, but a pointless drag in the long run. 3) There are plenty of existing FCC regulated services to handle safely sending your credit card number over radio, so you have the burden of explaining why you won't use those existing services if you insist on giving me your credit card number instead of something more appropriate like "you too have a nice day". Like... if you want to transfer credit card numbers instead of having a polite conversation, why are you here anyway? A better analogy than SSH or HTTPS would be banning IRC vertical spam of encrypted text. If you want to pay your bills online, technically you could spam the heck out of a popular IRC channel by flooding with some kind of BASE64 encoded TLS stream connected to your bank and your web browser via two gateways, but if you try that you're going to get kicked from the IRC network and told to use HTTPS which ironically already exists and works perfectly and was designed for that specific task. Or even worse analogy, picture me flooding a HN article with posts containing TCPIP packets from me logging into my local electric company trying to pay my electric bill, while the rest of you are trying to have a perfectly normal English language conversation about radio regulation surrounded by my vertical spam. In summary the main difference is radio bandwidth is finite and we often operate at the limits, while internet bandwidth (from a human perspective) is essentially infinite. Also public utility land lines obey map and country boundaries, but radio waves can not.

unethical_ban 7y ago

I think limited spectrum, combined with the desire for it to be a welcoming hobby, is why.

brians 7y ago

My answer is about network effects and something like Metcalfe’s Law. If I spin the dial and find something, I should find it interesting and comprehensible. If half of transmissions are encrypted, I can’t even get the thrill of reading half a conversation and thinking about DX. To stay amateur radio, it has to be a “party line” chat room.