Re: [Elecraft] K4 and Linux Infrastructure

[Jeff Scaparra]

Missed reply all.

At some level even if they do "only" have apps they will have this problem.
App developers will need to be able to modify and test things. Also I doubt
that there would be many apps if this is a separate process than mainstream
linux/windows. why would a hobby developer want to build a separate thing
just for one pretty expensive radio when they could just build the app for
linux or windows and support everyone.

Maybe they have some trick to make app onboarding easy.

My 2 cents
Jeff N6SDR


>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 5:45 PM Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT <
>> kx...@coldrockshotbrooms.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Seriously folks, think about the folks in Elecraft support and Service.
>>>
>>> Imagine spending an hour working through a problem just to find out that
>>> someone is running modified firmware (and this is firmware, not software
>>> for us to play with).
>>>
>>> It's an embedded system.  If you break it, you own both parts, and
>>> Elecraft would need a 100% reliable way to verify that you didn't
>>> introduce bugs.
>>>
>>> Let this idea go, folks.
>>>
>>> -- Lynn
>>>
>>> On 6/3/2019 3:31 PM, Dave Cole (NK7Z) wrote:
>>> > Based on the lack of ability to chance the CW rise times, I suspect
>>> > Elecraft will not give access to the processor, and OS.  I would not.
>>> >
>>> > Why?  If too many users change things, and break things, the radio
>>> will
>>> > get a bad rep...  If Elecraft is smart, they will lock the users out
>>> of
>>> > that level of access.
>>> >
>>> > 73s and thanks,
>>> > Dave (NK7Z)
>>> > https://www.nk7z.net
>>> > ARRL Technical Specialist
>>> > ARRL Volunteer Examiner
>>> > ARRL Asst. Director, NW Division, Technical Resource
>>> >
>>> > On 6/3/19 2:04 PM, Jeff Scaparra wrote:
>>> >> I believe these are all good points that elecraft should consider. As
>>> for
>>> >> myself I am a tinker-er and as such i can imagine many things i would
>>> >> like
>>> >> to do with the on board system. Personally I would like the option of
>>> >> "unlocking" access do that I could use the underlying linux system and
>>> >> would be willing to be responsible for the security of the system if
>>> I
>>> >> did
>>> >> so. I know there will be many who just want a good radio to operate
>>> and
>>> >> that is why I am suggesting that maybe this is a opt into thing with
>>> the
>>> >> caveat that if you unlock this your responsible to keep the radio
>>> secure.
>>> >>
>>> >> Jeff
>>> >> N5SDR
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 3:35 PM Dave New, N8SBE  wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Paul,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I believe you mistook the 'direction' of DDOS attack I was talking
>>> >>> about.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The K4 would not be the target of a DDOS attack, but rather an
>>> unwitting
>>> >>> participant in launching a DDOS attack as part of robot army of IoT
>>> >>> devices.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Thousands of hacked IoT devices are for rent on the dark web, for any
>>> >>> script kiddie that wants to attack a particular target.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Also, it may be popular to use hacked web sites, or various documents
>>> >>> with trojan horse loads to deliver ransom ware or bitcoin miners, but
>>> >>> there are other known vectors, including various open ports found
>>> while
>>> >>> scanning.  It may be the a router would be able to block access, but
>>> the
>>> >>> very peer-to-peer nature of the K4 (controlling other K4's or being
>>> >>> controlled by another K4 or PC, tablet, etc, means that routers would
>>> >>> need to allow certain inbound connections through the router or
>>> >>> firewall.  These allow for interesting attack vectors, which will
>>> >>> certainly be exercised, if possible.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 73,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> -- Dave, N8SBE
>>> >>>
>>> >>>  Original Message 
>>> >>> Subject: Re: [Elecr

Re: [Elecraft] K4 and Linux Infrastructure

[Jeff Scaparra]

Actually there is more to think about than security here as well. What
would elecraft do about users that break the system but misconfiguring
stuff, etc... if they allow users to opt in I would fully expect users to
have to agree to owning responsibility for any modifications. This would
mean that if you have a problem with the radio and send it in and the
problem is solved by reflashing the base image then you should be charged
for wasting their time. I would also expect to have the base image given to
users so we can fix our own mistakes.


I think this problem will exist one way or another. Quite likely elecraft
will be legally required to make available some or all of the base image of
the radio due to software licences. It is also likely that someone will
figure out how to get access to the underlying system. In my opinion
elecraft can get out in front by setting expectations and telling users if
you do this your on your own from a warranty perspective. It would be nice
of them to limit that but they could have that void the whole warranty.

It will be interesting to see how they handle this. This is precisely the
reason I got put my deposit for the second group. I want to see how this
shakes out before commiting which means I cant be the first one with the
radio.

Jeff N5SDR

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 4:04 PM Jeff Scaparra  wrote:

> I believe these are all good points that elecraft should consider. As for
> myself I am a tinker-er and as such i can imagine many things i would like
> to do with the on board system. Personally I would like the option of
> "unlocking" access do that I could use the underlying linux system and
> would be willing to be responsible for the security of the system if I did
> so. I know there will be many who just want a good radio to operate and
> that is why I am suggesting that maybe this is a opt into thing with the
> caveat that if you unlock this your responsible to keep the radio secure.
>
> Jeff
> N5SDR
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 3:35 PM Dave New, N8SBE  wrote:
>
>> Paul,
>>
>> I believe you mistook the 'direction' of DDOS attack I was talking
>> about.
>>
>> The K4 would not be the target of a DDOS attack, but rather an unwitting
>> participant in launching a DDOS attack as part of robot army of IoT
>> devices.
>>
>> Thousands of hacked IoT devices are for rent on the dark web, for any
>> script kiddie that wants to attack a particular target.
>>
>> Also, it may be popular to use hacked web sites, or various documents
>> with trojan horse loads to deliver ransom ware or bitcoin miners, but
>> there are other known vectors, including various open ports found while
>> scanning.  It may be the a router would be able to block access, but the
>> very peer-to-peer nature of the K4 (controlling other K4's or being
>> controlled by another K4 or PC, tablet, etc, means that routers would
>> need to allow certain inbound connections through the router or
>> firewall.  These allow for interesting attack vectors, which will
>> certainly be exercised, if possible.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> -- Dave, N8SBE
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4 and Linux Infrastructure
>> From: Paul Gacek 
>> Date: Mon, June 03, 2019 4:00 pm
>> To: "Dave New, N8SBE" 
>> Cc: Elecraft Reflector , Rick WA6NHC
>> 
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> DDOS is quite hard for any end point (PC, iPhone, K4 etc) to deal with
>> effectively. If a million zombie Macs decide to simultaneously attack
>> your end point your best chance is as Rick states, a device that makes
>> up the perimeter defenses such as a firewall or cyber security
>> alternative (i.e router, IDP). Most homes don’t have anything
>> particularly sophisticated deployed and are therefore somewhat
>> vulnerable. In truth DDOS attacks are quite rare and typically not aimed
>> at Citizen Dave or his neighbors. Protection albeit optimistic is really
>> in the realm of a corporate network but even then we have a few cases
>> where iconic sites get hammered and go dark. Enabling the K4 to defend
>> against DDOS is a little like building a house to withstand random bits
>> of ISS dropping in unexpectedly; not something I’m expecting to be
>> paying for.
>>
>> Unwanted ransomware or bitcoin mining programs are most likely the
>> result of an unwitting end user at and end point (PC, Android etc) doing
>> something that resulted in the malware ending up on their end point.
>> Could be surfing to a suspect web site (www.PawnStorm4U.com) or even
>> going to a compromised but reputable site such as NASA.gov.
>> Alternatively, it could be someone openi

Re: [Elecraft] K4 and Linux Infrastructure

[Jeff Scaparra]

I believe these are all good points that elecraft should consider. As for
myself I am a tinker-er and as such i can imagine many things i would like
to do with the on board system. Personally I would like the option of
"unlocking" access do that I could use the underlying linux system and
would be willing to be responsible for the security of the system if I did
so. I know there will be many who just want a good radio to operate and
that is why I am suggesting that maybe this is a opt into thing with the
caveat that if you unlock this your responsible to keep the radio secure.

Jeff
N5SDR

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 3:35 PM Dave New, N8SBE  wrote:

> Paul,
>
> I believe you mistook the 'direction' of DDOS attack I was talking
> about.
>
> The K4 would not be the target of a DDOS attack, but rather an unwitting
> participant in launching a DDOS attack as part of robot army of IoT
> devices.
>
> Thousands of hacked IoT devices are for rent on the dark web, for any
> script kiddie that wants to attack a particular target.
>
> Also, it may be popular to use hacked web sites, or various documents
> with trojan horse loads to deliver ransom ware or bitcoin miners, but
> there are other known vectors, including various open ports found while
> scanning.  It may be the a router would be able to block access, but the
> very peer-to-peer nature of the K4 (controlling other K4's or being
> controlled by another K4 or PC, tablet, etc, means that routers would
> need to allow certain inbound connections through the router or
> firewall.  These allow for interesting attack vectors, which will
> certainly be exercised, if possible.
>
> 73,
>
> -- Dave, N8SBE
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4 and Linux Infrastructure
> From: Paul Gacek 
> Date: Mon, June 03, 2019 4:00 pm
> To: "Dave New, N8SBE" 
> Cc: Elecraft Reflector , Rick WA6NHC
> 
>
> Dave
>
> DDOS is quite hard for any end point (PC, iPhone, K4 etc) to deal with
> effectively. If a million zombie Macs decide to simultaneously attack
> your end point your best chance is as Rick states, a device that makes
> up the perimeter defenses such as a firewall or cyber security
> alternative (i.e router, IDP). Most homes don’t have anything
> particularly sophisticated deployed and are therefore somewhat
> vulnerable. In truth DDOS attacks are quite rare and typically not aimed
> at Citizen Dave or his neighbors. Protection albeit optimistic is really
> in the realm of a corporate network but even then we have a few cases
> where iconic sites get hammered and go dark. Enabling the K4 to defend
> against DDOS is a little like building a house to withstand random bits
> of ISS dropping in unexpectedly; not something I’m expecting to be
> paying for.
>
> Unwanted ransomware or bitcoin mining programs are most likely the
> result of an unwitting end user at and end point (PC, Android etc) doing
> something that resulted in the malware ending up on their end point.
> Could be surfing to a suspect web site (www.PawnStorm4U.com) or even
> going to a compromised but reputable site such as NASA.gov.
> Alternatively, it could be someone opening a compromised PDF or
> Word/Excel attachment. The best protection here is to be cautious and
> mindful of what you do in the cyber world and absolutely make sure you
> are running the most uptodate OS (not XP) and to its most current patch
> level.
>
>
> Presumably but maybe not, the K4 won’t make available to the ham
> operator a browser that allows them to surf wherever nor an email client
> that they can read Excel attachments at the whim of the ham operator.
> That is best done outside of the K4.
>
>
> Hardening Linux, following best practices on coding and penetration
> testing are all things to be aware of and implement as appropriately.
>
>
> For those who might be interested in perusing details of some of these
> topics these links might be interesting;
> Secure Coding Practices
> https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/aa570401Hardening Linux
>
> https://www.computerworld.com/article/3144985/linux-hardening-a-15-step-checklist-for-a-secure-linux-server.htmlPenetration
> Testing https://www.tenable.com
>
>
> With Elecraft’s proximity to Silicon Valley and presumably contacts
> abounding, I’m optimistic the K4 will do us proud and I won’t have
> to rely on Rocky and Bullwinkle to keep nefarious foreign agents out of
> my K4.
>
>
> Paul
> W6PNG/M0SNA
> www.nomadic.blog
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 3, 2019, at 7:58 PM, Rick WA6NHC  wrote:
>
> Much of that protection can be implemented at the router level (>90% of
> all sites) and the internal linux (fairly bullet proof) will deal with
> the radio talking to the world.
>
> It shouldn't be too difficult for Elecraft to refine security to the
> radio, you'd only need a few ports of network access, which if required,
> could be coded to set values (MAC address) up to the menu level...  or
> limited access into the linux side of the radio.
>
> I'm confident it has been considered a

Re: [Elecraft] 4K Ultra High Def version of Elecraft K4 Q&A Video Posted by NG7M

[Jeff Scaparra]

Absolutely and I am very excited to see a top manufacturer giving what
looks like will be first class support for Linux. What I was most excited
to see though was that the radio looked like it might be running a
mainstream Linux distro. My personal opinion is that giving the consumer
the option to have access to that would really open up the possibilities
with this radio (and help many to justify the cost). If my radio can run
all the software I need for all my communications, logging, etc... I don't
have to worry how I have emergency power for the radio AND a laptop or
computer for field day or actual emergencies. I can only have a plan for
12V emergency power (battery, solar, ...) and I don't need an inverter or
generator or worry about boost/buck converters for my other non 12v
equipment. My only real fear is that before the release Elecraft would lock
that down so that the consumer doesn't have a way to at a minimum unlock
the underlying OS to use in this way. I fully understand that some won't
want to deal with the underlying OS but I also think there are many that
would. External monitors that run off 12 v are also easy found due to the
car market (
https://www.amazon.com/Monitor-Computer-Display-Security-Speaker/dp/B0779PM23K/ref=sr_1_8?keywords=12v+hdmi+monitor&qid=1559195100&s=gateway&sr=8-8
).

Jeff N5SDR.

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:33 AM Bill Frantz  wrote:

> I think it was Eric who said, in one of the recorded interviews,
> that the pad controlling the K4 at "Dayton" was running Linux,
> and that any device that could provide a virtual machine that
> could run Linux could run the control software.
>
> Also, Wayne posted that they would never run Windows in the K4.
> And I'll bet they don't have a deal with Apple to run MacOS/iOS. :-)
>
> 73 Bill AE6JV
>
> On 5/30/19 at 10:07 PM, j...@scaparra.com (Jeff Scaparra) wrote:
>
> >One thing I
> >noticed is the screen they have hooked up to the K4 looks like it is
> >running ubuntu.
>
> ---
> Bill Frantz| "I wish there was a knob on the TV to turn
> up the
> 408-356-8506   | intelligence.  There's a knob called
> "brightness", but
> www.pwpconsult.com | it doesn't work. -- Gallagher
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] 4K Ultra High Def version of Elecraft K4 Q&A Video Posted by NG7M

[Jeff Scaparra]

Wow the radio looks much more impressive in high definition. One thing I
noticed is the screen they have hooked up to the K4 looks like it is
running ubuntu. I find that very interesting. Either it wasn't hooked up to
the radio and it was hooked up to a linux box or we may have access to a
linux distro right in the radio. That would actually be cool as people
wouldn't have to use it but I would like to run logging software, WSJT-X,
fldigi for weird digital modes, etc right there on the radio. I really hope
they don't lock that down too much or give us experimenters a way to
"unlock" the radio to really exploit these features. In my opinion that is
one of the appeals for the MB-1 but the price, lack of diversity, and the
fact that it uses windows i think has turned a lot of people off.

Jeff  N5SDR.

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 5:29 PM M. George 
wrote:

> Hi everyone, I was surprised to see that Elecraft included a link to the
> YouTube video I posted of my quick Q&A with Eric WA6HHQ at Hamvention.  If
> I would have known Elecraft was going to share the link, I would have
> waited to upload the 4K version of the K4. :)  If you have 4K capabilities,
> you can now see Eric Swartz immortalized in 4K 60 frames per second
>  on your high computer or 4K
> capable big screen TV.
>
> Is this overkill for an interview / Q&A video, yes... but hey, it's 2019
> and the long awaited K4 has been announced, so it makes sense to have a 4K
> UHD video of the K4 (Palindrome  >).
> This version is a full frame version compared to the original video.  The
> quality is much better and you can select resolutions all the way up to 4K
> 60fps (if you have the hardware to view UHD video that is).
>
> On YouTube you can't replace a video and keep the same URL link, so I'll
> leave both versions up on my YouTube channel.
>
> Here is the new direct link if you want to see the higher quality version:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QakxQGFaDwA
>
> Max NG7M
>
> --
> M. George
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K4 DSP bit width

[Jeff Scaparra]

Comparing a 24 bit ADC at a 32 KHz sample rate to a 16 Bit ADC at 122 Msps
and saying it is less bits and therefore will have worse performance isn't
a great comparison. The high speed ADC would be highly oversampling the
signal at the second IF. This allows the ADC to use some neat tricks to
effectively get more bits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversampling
https://www.silabs.com/documents/public/application-notes/an118.pdf

I don't think we can determine theoretically if the K4 can perform better
or worse than the K3s from the current data that we have.

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 12:08 AM Bill Frantz  wrote:

> A friend and I were discussing the K4HD and he said that it
> sounds a lot like the K3S. Well, we both agreed that since the
> K3S has world class receiver specs, that would not be a bad thing.
>
> I started comparing the information about the K4HD with the K3S
> manual and found:
>
> K3S   K4HD   Feature
> 8.215MHz  ~8MHz  First IF
> 15KHz  ? Second IF (if used in the K4)
> 24 16ADC width
> ~30KHz?   122MHz ADC sample rate (WAG for the K3S)
> 5 2+1Crystal filters (one empty slot is from a post
> on this list.)
>
>
> Note: In the K4 FAQ there are forward references to a K4HD
> section, but I couldn't find it on the web site.
>
>
> Analysis and wild speculation
>
> Both DSPs and ADC technology have had at least 10 years to
> improve between the K3S and the K4. WHile I don't track ADC
> tech, DSPs are computers and we all know what has happened in
> computers. The basic processors are somewhat faster, and there
> are many more cores on a chip. The K4 certain to have taken
> advantage of these improvements.
>
> The K3S uses a 32 bit floating point DSP, and I don't see any
> reason to change that specification for any of the K4 models.
> Not changing means that much of the K3 DSP code should easily
> port to the new DSP.
>
> I don't understand how the basic K4 can get good dynamic range
> with a 16 bit DAC. The K3's 24 bit DAC seems a better choice,
> although getting high speed and wide bit width at the same time
> is hard and expensive.
>
> In the wild speculation department, there seem to be several
> approaches for the K4HD. (1) Run a K3 like superhet with an
> ~8MHz IF and digitize that into the DSP. (2) Duplicate the K3's
> 2nd IF and use the 16 bit ADC at 15Khz. (3) Use a wider ADC at
> either 8MHz or at 15KHz. Note that one of the features of the K4
> is ease of upgrade to new ADCs.
>
> 73 Bill AE6JV
>
> ---
> Bill Frantz|"Web security is like medicine - trying to
> do good for
> 408-356-8506   |an evolved body of kludges" - Mark Miller
> www.pwpconsult.com |
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft SSB net results for 5/19/13

[Jeff Scaparra]

Wooowhooo! i made the list. i could barely make out the net but was happy
to stumble across it. QTH is Springfield VA and i was only using 5 watts.
Thanks for picking me up. Serial 3958.

Jeff N6SDR


On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Phil Shepard  wrote:

> Last Sunday's net was small, with only 22 participants.
>
>
> Participants  from the 5/19/13 net follow:
>
> Station NameQTH Rig S/N
>
> KJ6CBS  DaveCA  K3  4052
> K2SDScott   NC  K3  6286
> KD8DZ   MikeOH  K3  5905
> N8OQJim VA  K3
>  6534
> K4GCJ   Gerry   NC  K3  1597
> NZ0TBillKS  K3
>  1502
> WW4JF   JohnTN  K3  6185
> W0FMTerry   MO  K3  474
> W4RKS   Jim AL  K3
>  3618
> WV5IDwayne  TX  K3  5287
> K2UTBob NJ  KX3
> 1418
> KF7JZH  Ron ID  K3
>  2262
> W7NMD   Palmer  AR  K3  3779
> W0CZKen ND  K3  457
> KB6GRob CA  K3
>  1997
> VE3XM   Bob ON  K3  409
> WB9JNZ  EricIL  K3  4017
> N6SDR   KX3
> KD4PS   DaveIL  KX3 3389
> KE5VDT  Roger   TX  K3  6054
> WN4SLG  DougTN  K3  6433
> NS7PPhilOR  K3
>  1826
>
> 73,
>
> Phil, NS7P
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html