rafaeld@teklabs.UUCP (Rafael De Arce) (09/26/85)
Yes! I agree. We all worked for our licenses to communicate with each other not passively easedrop. Ask your self if you would like someone else listening in on your conversations regardless wether the easedropper knew you or not. Let's drop this issue and move on to other things. Case in point... F.C.C. agrees that local government may not zone antennas out. I've been waiting for a decision on this for a while. That ruling is cause to celebrate. Of course, it's got to go thru the Supreme Court before it's offi- cial! Can someone tell me where I can read an article on this subject?
die@frog.UUCP (Dave Emery) (10/03/85)
> May I politely request that we table the monotonous discussions > of tvro eavesdropping ? Do you believe that Amateur Radio would > be better served by attempting communications between 'hams', > as opposed to listening to possibly illegal communications ? > If you do, please urge the other folks out there to relegate > the tvro discussion to the CB'ers and let's get back to producing > some innovations in communication, which we have been known for. > > Send threats, flames, invective, hate mail to me if you must. > As the author of the original article that started the discussion I agree that it has gone past the light into the meaningless heat stage. As such this is my last posting on that subject. To summarize my original purpose was to remind those out there in positions where communications security might be a relevant issue that the explosive growth of TVRO systems has made communications via satellite and microwave telephone trunk lines and particularly microwave PRIVATE LINEs very much less private and definately NOT SECURE. Many of these communications can be intercepted with very simple equipment widely available to average (and not even technical) citizens. This makes those circuits only slightly more private than the mobile and cellular telephone channels, a fact only fully grasped by a limited group of security experts, and not widely known by the user community (of professional computer types such as found on usenet who may be responsible for the secure transmission of confidential information over such lines) I do not and did not mean to suggest that it is either interesting, appropriate, worthwhile, or legal to listen in to other peoples telephone calls. It seems very clear that the intent of several state and federal laws is to forbid such invasions of other's privacy. I chose net.ham-radio as one of the groups to post the article in because there has been extensive discussion of listening in to cordless phones in this group, and because many hams are avid swls and may be interested in a discussion of the technical and legal sides of communications privacy. I hope that those reading all these words will come away with a slightly different idea of the security of "phone lines", and be warned that currently it is not illegal to intercept most kinds of DATA (which is what many of us computer types deal with on a day to day basis anyway rather than voice and video). In any case let me close with my constant refrain: with millions of potential receivers, encryption is a better solution than relying on a law that outlaws a secret act that leaves few traces. And elimination of interceptable transmission media is an even better solution. Enough said .... ---- David I. Emery Charles River Data Systems 983 Concord St. Framingham, MA 01701 Tel: (617) 626-1102 uucp: ...!decvax!frog!die -- ---- David I. Emery Charles River Data Systems 983 Concord St. Framingham, MA 01701 Tel: (617) 626-1102 uucp: ...!decvax!frog!die -- David I. Emery Charles River Data Systems 983 Concord St., Framingham, MA 01701 (617) 626-1102 uucp: decvax!frog!die