Re: Cell Phone Encryption/Security in The USA
From: clem (clem_at_numeral.com)
Date: 05/30/03
- Next message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: Breaking Huffman Codes"
- Previous message: Jean-Luc Cooke: "Re: question about 4.2 Multiplication in AES document(FIPS 197)"
- In reply to: Lassi Hippeläinen : "Re: Cell Phone Encryption/Security in The USA"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 08:12:47 -0700
On Fri, 30 May 2003 09:50:13 GMT, Lassi Hippeläinen
<lahippel@ieee.orgasm-research.invalid> wrote:
>clem wrote:
>>
>> Cell phone security: Non-existent or pretty good?
>>
>> This is a basic question that has me baffled after doing some googling
>> around the net... yeah and its probably OT, too...
>
>Security is a complex thing. It also depends on which phone technology
>you happen to use. I don't know of any compilations of security issues
>that would cover the field :-(
>
>As a rule, anything older than GSM is broken, because authentication is
>broken. GSM introduced the SIM card that separates phone and user
>identities, and that provides an extra layer of security.
>
>But GSM isn't secure either, if the enemy is determined. You have to run
>an ecrypted session over it, which in practice excludes voice over IP,
>because there is no standard way of doing it with only 14400 kbps.
>
>-- Lassi
Thanks for your comments.
It sounds like you are confirming that most, if not all, normal cell
phone conversations are not secure and that it is trivial to listen to
conversations with off-the-shelf equipment.
If I have this wrong please let me know. Thanks again.
- Next message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: Breaking Huffman Codes"
- Previous message: Jean-Luc Cooke: "Re: question about 4.2 Multiplication in AES document(FIPS 197)"
- In reply to: Lassi Hippeläinen : "Re: Cell Phone Encryption/Security in The USA"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|