6 ms·

Amateur radio, at least in the US, has a ban on encryption, so while we also have signal speed limits that may prevent it, secure sockets are forbidden. I'm not

by th0ma5 6y ago

Amateur radio, at least in the US, has a ban on encryption, so while we also have signal speed limits that may prevent it, secure sockets are forbidden. I'm not sure how some of the proprietary digital modes get away with it, but I guess money talks.

nucleardog 6y ago
My guess is that they're not, strictly speaking, "encrypted" any more than the first guys to use FM were "encrypting" their transmissions. They are receivable and decodable, you just need the right equipment. I agree that these things should be kept off the air, but I don't think it's a "money talks" situation.
- UI_at_80x24 6y ago
  This is it exactly. You may not try to hide the information that you transmit, but you sure as hell can make it obscure as fuck. Just imagine the fictional conversation: FCC/CRTC: On July the 1st at 14:00 you transmitted an undecipherable message on 28MHz. Amateur Radio operator: I used y-modem protocol to transmit an image using 7P1 (7bits Parity 1 Stop bit). FCC/CRTC: but's that's stupid! Nobody has used that in 40 years! AMO: But it wasn't encrypted. Good bye.
  - kawfey 6y ago
    This video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIyckKhZrpA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIyckKhZrpA) has a few good points on having private conversations via that don't "obscure the message" via ham radio, namely: - Use rare/odd frequencies that are hard to access with commercial off the shelf gear - use esoteric modes and modulations (like you mention)
  - siberianbear 6y ago
    Is this a thought experiment, or does the FCC really do this? It's hard for me to imagine that they have an army of radio engineers to go looking at all signals, figuring out which ones are "undecipherable", physically identifying the transmit locations and then determining who did it.
    - jki275 6y ago
      hams do it. The entire culture works hard to weed out anybody that doesn't follow the rules. If you do something you're not supposed to, there's a good chance someone will figure it out and report you. Foxhunting is a sport for them.
    - kayfox 6y ago
      Undecipherable signals in strange places present an interesting challenge that the ham radio community does rise to explore. During the cold war ham radio operators spent years analyzing and characterizing over the horizon radar systems (The Woodpecker) and other strange signals like numbers stations. Its especially common these days with the advent of software defined radio, spectral displays and large amounts of storage for operators to come across a strange transmission and record it for further analysis, often posting in forums and sending the recordings to other people for them to try and analyze it. And some times those recordings are sent to the FCC and the FCC sends out strongly worded letters. If it really gets bad, the FCC will act and IIRC they average about 20~50 or so fines a year.
- numpad0 6y ago
  I think what GP is saying is TCP/IP is fine but TLS is not.
paulgerhardt 6y ago
Tons of amateur radio links in the US are encrypted. Just look at literally any repeater. The myth that there is no encryption on ham channels is as wide spread as it is misunderstood.
- ta17711771 6y ago
  "...You may stop me, but you can't stop us all."
- adamtj 6y ago
  It is allowed to used an encrypted connection to administer a remote repeater, like for amateur satellites. Only the control link may be encrypted. The repeated signals may not, just like any other amateur transmissions.
- kawfey 6y ago
  I look at lots of repeaters. I'm a repeater engineer for our city radio club. Not one has any encrypted links, unless you're talking about echolink/allstar/D-Star/YSF, in which the audio is transmitted via the internet through various protocols to other gateways, repeaters, reflectors, conferences, and end users. Even the DTMF tones to control repeaters aren't encrypted. Some repeaters do obscure the re-transmission of the DTMF codes by muting the output, but this is legal.
  - paulgerhardt 6y ago
    Interesting. I’ll have to revisit this topic. My understanding was that the use of encryption was restricted while the parent was saying it is illegal. To clarify what percentage of your clubs repeaters are reachable through one or more encrypted connections?
gh02t 6y ago
Encryption is optional (or not available) in all of the proprietary digital modes used by amateurs, so amateurs simply don't use it even when the radio allows. As a practical matter enforcement can actually be quite difficult and I'm sure there are some folks doing it, but people on the amateur bands generally obey the rule in my experience.
- mmaunder 6y ago
  Except when they don’t. The PACTOR debate continues to rage. Sailmail is super valuable for its users, but is breaking the rules in various ways. I’ve been a user and am also a ham. https://www.rrmediagroup.com/News/NewsDetails/NewsID/17804 https://www.rrmediagroup.com/News/NewsDetails/NewsID/17804
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    Depending on latitude and the sailor’s pocket, I could see Sailmail users being driven to StarLink if the FCC doesn’t allow Sailmail’s continues operation in its current form.
  - gh02t 6y ago
    We're talking about encryption, though. Isn't the core of the PACTOR debate related to it being proprietary, not that it's encrypted? Transmitting in a format that is not readily decoded is also problematic legally, but to me there's a major difference between using a proprietary format and using actual cryptography to encipher a message. The latter is uncommon in amateur use in my experience, but I'm only an occasional ham so maybe I'm just not aware.
userbinator 6y ago
Arbitrary restrictions like that just make me want to get around them... and reminds me of this phrase I heard many years ago (in the era when encryption laws were far stricter): "What's the difference between encryption and steganography? You don't know."
- squarefoot 6y ago
  "What's the difference between encryption and steganography? You don't know." Plausible deniability.
- arghwhat 6y ago
  Don't. Follow the rules, and get them changed if you disagree with them. Amateur radio enjoys the privilege of pretty lax regulation, largely due to the players not making any trouble. Speaking as a fellow radio amateur, we don't want our hobby ruined just because someone wants to be a troublemaker.
  - teddyh 6y ago
    > Amateur radio enjoys the privilege of pretty lax regulation What. You literally have to have a license issued to you personally (no anonymity) by the government to even be allowed to do it. And the rules of what can and can’t be sent are, to my Internet-accustomed mind, excruciatingly onerous. No encryption? No foul language?
    - adamtj 6y ago
      Radio spectrum is a limited and shared resource. It makes sense that it's licensed and regulated. But compared to other parts of the spectrum, the license is cheap and easy to get and the regulations are minimal. It's a public space for experimentation. If you don't want to be seen in public, go to some other area of the spectrum.
    - arghwhat 6y ago
      The rules are extremely loose. 1. You need a personal license to identify you, as an operator of a radio station. This is similar to how radios on ships and airplanes work - you need to be able to identify every transmission (even cellphones are uniquely identifiable). This is not only part of the entire sport (we're trying to contact and identify each other), but is also used to identify problems. 2. Just like for airplanes and ships, there are some rules to what you can transmit, as your transmissions can be heard (and cause troubles) for tens, hundreds and even thousands of kilometers away. 3. You have countless frequency allocations available, all over the spectrum, despite the scarcity. 4. Unlike everyone else, holding that license permits you to build your own equipment and transmit with kilowatts with no certification needed. It's extremely easy to cause massive issues with this, such as interrupting cellular communication/gps/wifi an a large area, blowing up your neighbors stereos, and fun things like that. There's a reason that everything else needs to be tested, certified, and require dedicated band allocations - we avoid it by showing that we have the sufficient skills to practice our hobby and not cause trouble. Unlike everyone else, we can do pretty much whatever we want as long as we keep it around a kilowatt and talk nice. I consider that to be extremely relaxed rules.

by th0ma5 6y ago

nucleardog 6y ago

My guess is that they're not, strictly speaking, "encrypted" any more than the first guys to use FM were "encrypting" their transmissions. They are receivable and decodable, you just need the right equipment. I agree that these things should be kept off the air, but I don't think it's a "money talks" situation.

UI_at_80x24 6y ago
This is it exactly. You may not try to hide the information that you transmit, but you sure as hell can make it obscure as fuck. Just imagine the fictional conversation: FCC/CRTC: On July the 1st at 14:00 you transmitted an undecipherable message on 28MHz. Amateur Radio operator: I used y-modem protocol to transmit an image using 7P1 (7bits Parity 1 Stop bit). FCC/CRTC: but's that's stupid! Nobody has used that in 40 years! AMO: But it wasn't encrypted. Good bye.
- kawfey 6y ago
  This video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIyckKhZrpA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIyckKhZrpA) has a few good points on having private conversations via that don't "obscure the message" via ham radio, namely: - Use rare/odd frequencies that are hard to access with commercial off the shelf gear - use esoteric modes and modulations (like you mention)
- siberianbear 6y ago
  Is this a thought experiment, or does the FCC really do this? It's hard for me to imagine that they have an army of radio engineers to go looking at all signals, figuring out which ones are "undecipherable", physically identifying the transmit locations and then determining who did it.
  - jki275 6y ago
    hams do it. The entire culture works hard to weed out anybody that doesn't follow the rules. If you do something you're not supposed to, there's a good chance someone will figure it out and report you. Foxhunting is a sport for them.
  - kayfox 6y ago
    Undecipherable signals in strange places present an interesting challenge that the ham radio community does rise to explore. During the cold war ham radio operators spent years analyzing and characterizing over the horizon radar systems (The Woodpecker) and other strange signals like numbers stations. Its especially common these days with the advent of software defined radio, spectral displays and large amounts of storage for operators to come across a strange transmission and record it for further analysis, often posting in forums and sending the recordings to other people for them to try and analyze it. And some times those recordings are sent to the FCC and the FCC sends out strongly worded letters. If it really gets bad, the FCC will act and IIRC they average about 20~50 or so fines a year.
numpad0 6y ago
I think what GP is saying is TCP/IP is fine but TLS is not.

paulgerhardt 6y ago

Tons of amateur radio links in the US are encrypted. Just look at literally any repeater. The myth that there is no encryption on ham channels is as wide spread as it is misunderstood.

ta17711771 6y ago
"...You may stop me, but you can't stop us all."
adamtj 6y ago
It is allowed to used an encrypted connection to administer a remote repeater, like for amateur satellites. Only the control link may be encrypted. The repeated signals may not, just like any other amateur transmissions.
kawfey 6y ago
I look at lots of repeaters. I'm a repeater engineer for our city radio club. Not one has any encrypted links, unless you're talking about echolink/allstar/D-Star/YSF, in which the audio is transmitted via the internet through various protocols to other gateways, repeaters, reflectors, conferences, and end users. Even the DTMF tones to control repeaters aren't encrypted. Some repeaters do obscure the re-transmission of the DTMF codes by muting the output, but this is legal.
- paulgerhardt 6y ago
  Interesting. I’ll have to revisit this topic. My understanding was that the use of encryption was restricted while the parent was saying it is illegal. To clarify what percentage of your clubs repeaters are reachable through one or more encrypted connections?

gh02t 6y ago

Encryption is optional (or not available) in all of the proprietary digital modes used by amateurs, so amateurs simply don't use it even when the radio allows. As a practical matter enforcement can actually be quite difficult and I'm sure there are some folks doing it, but people on the amateur bands generally obey the rule in my experience.

mmaunder 6y ago
Except when they don’t. The PACTOR debate continues to rage. Sailmail is super valuable for its users, but is breaking the rules in various ways. I’ve been a user and am also a ham. https://www.rrmediagroup.com/News/NewsDetails/NewsID/17804 https://www.rrmediagroup.com/News/NewsDetails/NewsID/17804
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  Depending on latitude and the sailor’s pocket, I could see Sailmail users being driven to StarLink if the FCC doesn’t allow Sailmail’s continues operation in its current form.
- gh02t 6y ago
  We're talking about encryption, though. Isn't the core of the PACTOR debate related to it being proprietary, not that it's encrypted? Transmitting in a format that is not readily decoded is also problematic legally, but to me there's a major difference between using a proprietary format and using actual cryptography to encipher a message. The latter is uncommon in amateur use in my experience, but I'm only an occasional ham so maybe I'm just not aware.

userbinator 6y ago

Arbitrary restrictions like that just make me want to get around them... and reminds me of this phrase I heard many years ago (in the era when encryption laws were far stricter): "What's the difference between encryption and steganography? You don't know."

squarefoot 6y ago
"What's the difference between encryption and steganography? You don't know." Plausible deniability.
arghwhat 6y ago
Don't. Follow the rules, and get them changed if you disagree with them. Amateur radio enjoys the privilege of pretty lax regulation, largely due to the players not making any trouble. Speaking as a fellow radio amateur, we don't want our hobby ruined just because someone wants to be a troublemaker.
- teddyh 6y ago
  > Amateur radio enjoys the privilege of pretty lax regulation What. You literally have to have a license issued to you personally (no anonymity) by the government to even be allowed to do it. And the rules of what can and can’t be sent are, to my Internet-accustomed mind, excruciatingly onerous. No encryption? No foul language?
  - adamtj 6y ago
    Radio spectrum is a limited and shared resource. It makes sense that it's licensed and regulated. But compared to other parts of the spectrum, the license is cheap and easy to get and the regulations are minimal. It's a public space for experimentation. If you don't want to be seen in public, go to some other area of the spectrum.
  - arghwhat 6y ago
    The rules are extremely loose. 1. You need a personal license to identify you, as an operator of a radio station. This is similar to how radios on ships and airplanes work - you need to be able to identify every transmission (even cellphones are uniquely identifiable). This is not only part of the entire sport (we're trying to contact and identify each other), but is also used to identify problems. 2. Just like for airplanes and ships, there are some rules to what you can transmit, as your transmissions can be heard (and cause troubles) for tens, hundreds and even thousands of kilometers away. 3. You have countless frequency allocations available, all over the spectrum, despite the scarcity. 4. Unlike everyone else, holding that license permits you to build your own equipment and transmit with kilowatts with no certification needed. It's extremely easy to cause massive issues with this, such as interrupting cellular communication/gps/wifi an a large area, blowing up your neighbors stereos, and fun things like that. There's a reason that everything else needs to be tested, certified, and require dedicated band allocations - we avoid it by showing that we have the sufficient skills to practice our hobby and not cause trouble. Unlike everyone else, we can do pretty much whatever we want as long as we keep it around a kilowatt and talk nice. I consider that to be extremely relaxed rules.