3 ms·

IANAL but, IIRC any sniffing seems to be fine in general? You'd only get in trouble if you transmitted anything. I don't even think you need a license to just

IANAL but, IIRC any sniffing seems to be fine in general? You'd only get in trouble if you transmitted anything. I don't even think you need a license to just listen to stuff. Also I think the paper mentions that many types of packets are in fact encrypted, and only certain control packets are sent in the clear. This seems to be not any more concerning than other Internet related protocols which also send a lot of coordination information in cleartext.

kube-system 3y ago
If someone doesn’t like what you’re doing, wiretap charges are legally plausible.
- autoexec 3y ago
  If all you're doing is passively listening to what's around you who would ever know?
  - kube-system 3y ago
    You could ask the same question about any wiretap. People usually get caught by creating some sort of evidence that they committed the crime. Maybe a recording, maybe they told someone, maybe they acted on the information, etc.
- aeonik 3y ago
  When I got my ham radio license they told us that listening is never against the law. decrypting anything or transmitting on unlicensed frequencies are major offenses, on the other hand.
  - kube-system 3y ago
    That’s probably a bit of a generalization — they likely said that thinking about the FCC rules that a new ham would be dealing with. Since the focus of those test/classes is to get an FCC license. As I understand, telecom traffic is a big exception to this because of wiretap laws which are not FCC regulations, they’re criminal law which the FCC doesn’t really have anything to do with. Try searching radioreference forums for “pager decoding” as a counter example. I didn’t spend a lot of time searching FCCs site but they do mention this parenthetically in this article: https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/interception-and-divulgence-radio-communications https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/interception-and-divulg... Of course, you should be able to follow wiretap law by listening to your own devices. They same way people use wireshark legally: run it on your own network.
    - aeonik 3y ago
      Thank you for the link. I definitely need to review the legislation. I definitely remember that the license let's me operatea police scanner while your driving. For example here in Michigan the law explicitly allows ham radio licensees more privileges: http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-508 http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-508
      - kube-system 3y ago
        Well, most states don't penalize anyone for operating a police scanner. It seems pretty important that MI would have that exception the way that statute is written, otherwise it would prohibit the ownership of ham radios. Because ... > a radio receiving set that will receive signals sent on a frequency assigned by the federal communications commission of the United States for police or other law enforcement, fire fighting, emergency medical, federal, state, or local corrections, or homeland security purposes. ... doesn't just describe police scanners. It describes basically all VHF/UHF ham radios.
- chaxor 3y ago
  I thought we already pay wiretap charges? ISPs charge you to collect all of your data don't they? /s

kube-system 3y ago

If someone doesn’t like what you’re doing, wiretap charges are legally plausible.

autoexec 3y ago
If all you're doing is passively listening to what's around you who would ever know?
- kube-system 3y ago
  You could ask the same question about any wiretap. People usually get caught by creating some sort of evidence that they committed the crime. Maybe a recording, maybe they told someone, maybe they acted on the information, etc.
aeonik 3y ago
When I got my ham radio license they told us that listening is never against the law. decrypting anything or transmitting on unlicensed frequencies are major offenses, on the other hand.
- kube-system 3y ago
  That’s probably a bit of a generalization — they likely said that thinking about the FCC rules that a new ham would be dealing with. Since the focus of those test/classes is to get an FCC license. As I understand, telecom traffic is a big exception to this because of wiretap laws which are not FCC regulations, they’re criminal law which the FCC doesn’t really have anything to do with. Try searching radioreference forums for “pager decoding” as a counter example. I didn’t spend a lot of time searching FCCs site but they do mention this parenthetically in this article: https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/interception-and-divulgence-radio-communications https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/interception-and-divulg... Of course, you should be able to follow wiretap law by listening to your own devices. They same way people use wireshark legally: run it on your own network.
  - aeonik 3y ago
    Thank you for the link. I definitely need to review the legislation. I definitely remember that the license let's me operatea police scanner while your driving. For example here in Michigan the law explicitly allows ham radio licensees more privileges: http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-508 http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-508
    - kube-system 3y ago
      Well, most states don't penalize anyone for operating a police scanner. It seems pretty important that MI would have that exception the way that statute is written, otherwise it would prohibit the ownership of ham radios. Because ... > a radio receiving set that will receive signals sent on a frequency assigned by the federal communications commission of the United States for police or other law enforcement, fire fighting, emergency medical, federal, state, or local corrections, or homeland security purposes. ... doesn't just describe police scanners. It describes basically all VHF/UHF ham radios.
chaxor 3y ago
I thought we already pay wiretap charges? ISPs charge you to collect all of your data don't they? /s