On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 01:12:19PM -0400, grarpamp wrote: > On 9/27/13, Eugen Leitl <eu...@leitl.org> wrote: > > I don't see how a ham running a repeater backbone can > > prevent end to end encryption other than sniffing for > > traffic and actively disrupting it. I'm not sure tampering > > with transport is within ham ethics, though they definitely > > don't understand the actual uses for encryption, at > > least the old hands (are there even new hands?). > > The mentioned tech has nothing to do with traditional 'ham'.
HamNet/AMPRNet is ham-only. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamnet http://www.amateurfunk-wiki.de/index.php/Linkstrecken_HAMNET > And without the crypto key they can't see it and can't disrupt Of course they can see it, it's a TCP/IP network routed through their hardware, which is stock (Mikrotik/Ubiquiti etc.). > it, it's background/spectrum noise/power to them. > Traditionally, presumably hams might discover non-in-the-clear > on a specific channel, perhaps triangulate, and report it to some > regulatory body (or DoS it). That's not applicable, by design.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
