Re: 'Sunday Times' article on GSM changes
:(Thug writes) : :> According to what I read it seems that the whole issue of cellular radio :> signal encryption is really a non-issue. They could have the most secure :... :> What makes you think they don't have the same kind of REMOB/BLV capability :> to the cellular telephone switches? I mean, if a conversation is scrambled :... Eric Fogleman writes: : :If getting around GSM encryption is no problem, then why are governments :pushing the issue? This actually hits on one of my favorite rant topics. The feds like to scream about how hard it is to tap a phone line with digital switching et al, but don't talk about the fact that anyone with half a brain can tap a line using the phone company's LMOS. The only rational theory I've come up with to explain this is that the feds aren't worried about court-ordered wiretaps, but about illegal wiretaps. I bet there's a *lot* of monitoring going on out there that they can't get a court order for, so they're doing it themselves. Monitoring without the cooperation of the phone company will get harder when the company starts paying more attention to security -- whether through encryption or simply using a shredder. :-) Loyd *************************************************************************** * loydb@fnordbox.UUCP Call the Fnordbox BBS * Loyd Blankenship * * GEnie: SJGAMES 2 v32bis lines, 24 hrs * PO Box 18957 * * Compu$erve: [73407,515] 512/444-2323 * Austin, TX 78760 * * cs.utexas.edu!dogface!fnordbox!loydb * 512/447-7866 * ***************************************************************************
participants (1)
-
fnordbox!loydb@cs.utexas.edu