Re: [TSCM-L] {1529} Re: FHSS telephone security
-ed
At 01:43 AM 5/9/2007, you wrote:
>properly implemented FHSS "should" stave off the casual listener,
>primarily because he doesn't have the thousands of dollars worth of
>equipment to read the pattern.
>
>coderman wrote:
> > On 5/7/07, kondrak <kon..._at_phreaker.net> wrote:
> >> It IS secure...
> >
> > i would have to argue otherwise, in the sense that the only security
> > provided is based on the pseudo random hop sequence, which is easily
> > discerned. (secure against a baby monitor or narrow band scanner,
> > yes. but i don't think that's the nature of security in question
> > here.)
> >
> >
> >> I had a phone ... that used spread spectrum to communicate with the
> >> base station, while the conversation was in the clear.
> >
> > almost every FHSS phone system i've seen (excluding military units)
> > operate this way. hence the "security" is due to channel hopping, and
> > not any kind of transport privacy via encryption.
> >
> >
> >> I dont know why
> >> anyone would engineer a product that way
> >
> > economics. much, much cheaper to carry an analog voice stream over a
> > FHSS carrier than to implement good privacy via encryption.
> >
> > again, i would encourage use of a WPA2 VoIP phone instead of a FHSS
> > system. this gives you DSSS spectrum usage (possibly OFDM) and an AES
> > encrypted privacy layer on top to carry the conversation.
> >
> > best regards,
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:25 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Sat Mar 02 2024 - 01:11:45 CST