10 Apr
2021
10 Apr
'21
4:42 a.m.
Pierre,
2.4 GHz open channel -1, what means one channel below 2.4 GHz, I would go lower so that my
pass-band doesn't overlap
the beginning of that ISM band, as I want to avoid any interfere for a permanent link or
hackers :-)
Bob VE3TOK
On 2021-04-09 13:29, pete M via 44Net wrote:
--
When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change
Max Planck
You can
operate it under your ham licence when you remove the encryption at the proper frequencies
and according to the amateur regulations. The law is clear.
And then you can use
the frequency allocation for ham, with the max bandwith/power setting granted by the ham
licence.
Like they said with greater power you have greater responsability. ;-)
So for ham group that decide to run a kind of backbone to links ham site and ham user
together, the best is to stay within the ISM band for the transport layer and keep
encryption on to protect the space from unwanted users. And to drop to other frequency
specific to the ham band usage like the 900MHZ or just lower then the 2.4ghz band and run
unencrypted there, anyways those are local distribution.
One question do arise still. What about security of the communication to a router or a
device that need credential to run on the network? of course there is always the TELNET
possibility. or HTTP vs SSH and HTTPS But that is looking for trouble. The credential will
be in plain text and that is a no no in any type of situation. Lets imagine a young hacker
finding that on the tower close to his home there is a 2.4ghz open channel at -1 without
encryption. He can sniff the packet all day long till he find something interresting. Some
will say that we can use mac adress white listing, yes, but mac adress can be spoofed and
when a user disconnect, the young "researcher" will be able to connect posing as
the disconneted ham. From there he will have access to the whole network and who knows
what he will try to do.
As the control operator of those network we have the responsability to protect them from
wrong utilisation. I think that this need to be brought way higher into the realm of the
legislators.
Now Can I ask if any canadian did start to bring it to the legislator playground?
Pierre
VE2PF
________________________________________
De : 44Net <44net-bounces+petem001=hotmail.com(a)mailman.ampr.org> de la part de
Boudewijn (Bob) Tenty via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
Envoyé : 9 avril 2021 12:25
À : 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org
Cc : Boudewijn (Bob) Tenty
Objet : Re: [44net] Encrypted links on 5.8ghz. (WPA)
You cannot use it under you ham licence when it is encrypted. If you use it use for
instance to link your gateway with whatever ham radios then still that encrypted link
doesn't
operate under your ham licence. You can operate it under your ham licence when you remove
the encryption at the proper frequencies and according to the amateur regulations. The law
is clear.
Bob VE3TOK
On 2021-04-09 11:35, pete M via 44Net wrote:
I dont know what is the status of this case but I
am asking here if anyone had some factual information on this.
As we are using the frequency that are into the ISM band, We are also using device that
are type accepted for that band.
Those device are used legally with encryption by normal lambda user. If we dont modify
the device power and frequency would it be legal for ham to also encrypt the signal?
I understand that if we would use a higher power, different channel I would understand
that we are now out of the ISM band rules.
Pierre
VE2PF
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
--
When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change
Max Planck
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net