3 ms·

Encrypted communication is communication that is indecipherable if you know the encryption algorithm but don't have the key material. Not knowing the algorithm

Encrypted communication is communication that is indecipherable if you know the encryption algorithm but don't have the key material. Not knowing the algorithm is a separate thing. In the case of D-STAR, the algorithm is well known, it's just not analog FM. People with FM receivers would be just as upset to hear two people talking with SSB or CW, both perfectly legal on VHF. Over on HF, digital modes like FT8 are quite popular. You will never be able to decode that without a computer, but that doesn't make it illegal (or encrypted). The algorithm is well defined and it's ~100x more bandwidth efficient than SSB voice. Kenwood sells AES radios for non-amateur communications. It's perfectly legal for non-amateur licensees to encrypt their radio links. Your cell phone is doing it right now! Yes, you can use those on the amateur bands if you want. It's against the rules. The reason amateur radio exists is because we follow the rules. It can all disappear overnight if you violate them. There are a few well-known bad apples that make it harder for all of us. It's not to be encouraged.

giantg2 6y ago
Standard cell phones do not use encryption. You can intercept calls if you have receivers on the right frequency and using the right tech (believe they are trunked). I'm not advocating that they use true encryption in the ham bands, but it does exist. As I said before, there is information out there about how voice is digitized, how psuedo or weak encryption works (DMR, 40 bit, 56 bit), and then you can use standard encryption practices to encrypt it. The OPs question was about where he can find technical info on encrypting voice communications and I said this would be a good starting point. This is a valid contribution to his question. I am sorry if you do not believe that weak encryption (where you know all possible keys, or the keys are small) is not encryption.
- nullc 6y ago
  > Standard cell phones do not use encryption. Yes they do. Decades ago they didn't. Today there are devices that use active attacks to downgrade the encryption by impersonating a base station. It's also possible to crack the encryption used by GSM, but I believe the base station impersonation attacks are much more common.
- giantg2 6y ago
  Do you have any source for cell encryption? I believe they are not encrypted, but use a few thousand channels on a trunked system.
  - dahi1203 6y ago
    such a nice work modlelo.com
nullc 6y ago
> In the case of D-STAR, the algorithm is well known, it's just not analog FM For a long time the audio codec was only available in a chip (technically a readout protected microcontroller). There are patents on the audio codec, but they didn't disclose enough of it to decode it, only enough to make it unlawful for other people to publish compatible implementations (which, of course, kept the resources available for reverse engineering low). For a while I contemplated selling bespoke custom versions of Opus as a bit of performance art under licensing where the first copy cost $500 and all further copies cost $1,000,000 with some marketing copy about keeping lids off your repeaters. ... just to see how the FCC would react. Considering that they let AMBE use get away with it, as the old joke goes: We've already established what kind of licensing regime they'll permit-- pay to access encrypted audio-- my performance art differed only by the price. :) > The reason amateur radio exists is because we follow the rules. It can all disappear overnight if you violate them. There are a few well-known bad apples that make it harder for all of us. It's not to be encouraged. Personally, particularly on bands above 70cm, I think the prohibition against encryption is killing amateur radio. The lack of encryption for signals that would be naturally point to point anyway and disturb no one inhibits a lot community use, and the relative non-usage of these allocations risks use losing them. I'd much rather see a rule that allowed encryption on 33cm+ subject to the constraint that stations have to be identified, non-profit in nature, cooperate with local coordination, and act as secondary users to non-encrypted uses.
- zzo38computer 6y ago
  > I'd much rather see a rule that allowed encryption on 33cm+ subject to the constraint that stations have to be identified, non-profit in nature, cooperate with local coordination, and act as secondary users to non-encrypted uses. Yes, I think it is reasonable, although I don't know what bands to have that on, and of course it should not be interfering with non-encrypted uses. (And perhaps the same rule should be applied to proprietary codecs, too, so that they don't overload the radio with proprietary codes that you cannot figure out how to decode.)
Reelin 6y ago
> The reason amateur radio exists is because we follow the rules. It can all disappear overnight if you violate them. As an American this sort of sentiment is absolutely depressing to see. It seems to be incredibly common in a number of areas - radio, flight, and chemistry, to list just a few. I can only hope access to unencumbered computers doesn't fall victim to the same. WTF happened to our supposed ideal of freedom?

giantg2 6y ago

Standard cell phones do not use encryption. You can intercept calls if you have receivers on the right frequency and using the right tech (believe they are trunked). I'm not advocating that they use true encryption in the ham bands, but it does exist. As I said before, there is information out there about how voice is digitized, how psuedo or weak encryption works (DMR, 40 bit, 56 bit), and then you can use standard encryption practices to encrypt it. The OPs question was about where he can find technical info on encrypting voice communications and I said this would be a good starting point. This is a valid contribution to his question. I am sorry if you do not believe that weak encryption (where you know all possible keys, or the keys are small) is not encryption.

nullc 6y ago
> Standard cell phones do not use encryption. Yes they do. Decades ago they didn't. Today there are devices that use active attacks to downgrade the encryption by impersonating a base station. It's also possible to crack the encryption used by GSM, but I believe the base station impersonation attacks are much more common.
giantg2 6y ago
Do you have any source for cell encryption? I believe they are not encrypted, but use a few thousand channels on a trunked system.
- dahi1203 6y ago
  such a nice work modlelo.com

nullc 6y ago

> In the case of D-STAR, the algorithm is well known, it's just not analog FM For a long time the audio codec was only available in a chip (technically a readout protected microcontroller). There are patents on the audio codec, but they didn't disclose enough of it to decode it, only enough to make it unlawful for other people to publish compatible implementations (which, of course, kept the resources available for reverse engineering low). For a while I contemplated selling bespoke custom versions of Opus as a bit of performance art under licensing where the first copy cost $500 and all further copies cost $1,000,000 with some marketing copy about keeping lids off your repeaters. ... just to see how the FCC would react. Considering that they let AMBE use get away with it, as the old joke goes: We've already established what kind of licensing regime they'll permit-- pay to access encrypted audio-- my performance art differed only by the price. :) > The reason amateur radio exists is because we follow the rules. It can all disappear overnight if you violate them. There are a few well-known bad apples that make it harder for all of us. It's not to be encouraged. Personally, particularly on bands above 70cm, I think the prohibition against encryption is killing amateur radio. The lack of encryption for signals that would be naturally point to point anyway and disturb no one inhibits a lot community use, and the relative non-usage of these allocations risks use losing them. I'd much rather see a rule that allowed encryption on 33cm+ subject to the constraint that stations have to be identified, non-profit in nature, cooperate with local coordination, and act as secondary users to non-encrypted uses.

zzo38computer 6y ago
> I'd much rather see a rule that allowed encryption on 33cm+ subject to the constraint that stations have to be identified, non-profit in nature, cooperate with local coordination, and act as secondary users to non-encrypted uses. Yes, I think it is reasonable, although I don't know what bands to have that on, and of course it should not be interfering with non-encrypted uses. (And perhaps the same rule should be applied to proprietary codecs, too, so that they don't overload the radio with proprietary codes that you cannot figure out how to decode.)

Reelin 6y ago

> The reason amateur radio exists is because we follow the rules. It can all disappear overnight if you violate them. As an American this sort of sentiment is absolutely depressing to see. It seems to be incredibly common in a number of areas - radio, flight, and chemistry, to list just a few. I can only hope access to unencumbered computers doesn't fall victim to the same. WTF happened to our supposed ideal of freedom?