home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.cellular      Devices for productivity & masturbation      20,339 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 20,293 of 20,339   
   Tweed to Woody   
   Re: Do these cellular amplifiers work fo   
   10 Apr 22 06:40:36   
   
   XPost: uk.telecom.mobile, misc.phone.mobile.iphone   
   From: usenet.tweed@gmail.com   
      
   Woody  wrote:   
   > On Sat 09/04/2022 17:08, David Woolley wrote:   
   >> On 09/04/2022 16:16, gtr wrote:   
   >>> Why would it be illegal to listen to ANY signal that is over the air?   
   >>   
   >> In this case, it is because they retransmit the signal in the vehicle.   
   >>   
   >> However there is an also expectation of privacy.  The default UK   
   >> position is that you need a licence to receive radio transmissions,   
   >> although there are some exemptions.   
   >>   
   >> Even the US makes it illegal to listen on cellular frequencies, even   
   >> though other frequencies, including the police, were open.   
   >>   
   >> I don't think either country has changed its legislation to reflect that   
   >> cellular systems are now encrypted.   
   >   
   > The default UK ruling is that you can only (in theory at least) listen   
   > to transmissions intended for public entertainment, information, or   
   > education. How anyone could be traced and/or prosecuted for listening to   
   > anything in open speech on any waveband just shows how little the   
   > establishment understands! Listening to civil aircraft is illegal but   
   > look see how many people you see standing around the perimeter fence at   
   > most major airports with scanners stuck on their ears! Radio amateur   
   > licences gave a much wider brief - they could legally listen to maritime   
   > transmissions for instance which is why in the UK it was necessary to   
   > take a 12wpm morse test so that you could identify marine distress   
   > calls. OfCom recognised some years ago that maritime comms is now   
   > largely VHF for short range and satellite for longer distance so did   
   > away with the morse test requirement: Japan retained the morse test for   
   > a long time but set the speed at 0 wpm.   
   >   
   > Always puzzled me why the US barred scanners from listening to cellular   
   > channels but would let you listen to police. The latter have now gone   
   > largely digital (mostly DMR) but with a suitable radio you can still   
   > listen to them even from the UK! Barmy IMO.   
   >   
   > For the record digital cellular has had over-the-air encryption from day   
   > one. Orange wanted a much greater level of encryption but OfCom (as   
   > instructed by GCHQ) would not allow it as it meant GCHQ would not be   
   > able to listen in - which was why Orange was so late to market.   
   > Curiously GSM cellular was only encrypted over the air but was decoded   
   > to a standard phone system data stream at the base station and passed   
   > over the carrier network unencrypted. Airwave (the emergency services   
   > radio system) on the other hand is end-to-end encrypted.   
   >   
      
   Why would GCHQ care about over the air encryption? The UK authorities have   
   remote interception rights at exchange level where they can intercept the   
   call in the clear from the comfort of their desk. I believe did insist on   
   weaker encryption for certain export markets.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca