 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Sprint PCS / February 2006Are Sprint PCS Calls Encrypted?
I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls are encrypted. Is it possible for casual eavesdroppers to monitor Sprint calls? Specifically, is there any encryption used between the handset and the tower? I'm concerned about things like my credit card numbers or personally-identifiable information being intercepted by small-time crooks, not with whether the CIA or NSA can listen to my calls. Thanks.  SignatureNewsgroups are the trailer parks of the internet and are best ignored. Regular posters often just have mud-slinging contests to show how much smarter they are by calling the other guys idiots. I could answer the question, but based on the statement at the bottom of your posting, why bother? > I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T > Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls are [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Thanks. >I could answer the question, but based on the statement at the bottom of > your posting, why bother? And I could tell you to "f.ck off" but I'd rather just say: "P-L-O-N-K" > Subject: Re: Are Sprint PCS Calls Encrypted? > From: "Jeremy" <jeremy@nospam.com> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > "P-L-O-N-K" Trying to live up to the image you created in your footer? >> Subject: Re: Are Sprint PCS Calls Encrypted? >> From: "Jeremy" <jeremy@nospam.com> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Trying to live up to the image you created in your footer? I asked a legitimate question, and I asked politely. What is your problem, a.shole? > <snip> > > I asked a legitimate question, and I asked politely. What is your problem, > a.shole? While your question was polite, you then went and insulted people that, potentially, could/would answer it. Notan >> <snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Notan The two obnoxious responses were not meant to respond to the question I asked. Read them again, and tell me why they posted those unwelcome remarks. > >> <snip> > >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > asked. Read them again, and tell me why they posted those unwelcome > remarks. It had to do with your sig, essentially calling newsgroup posters, "trailer trash." Notan > Subject: Re: Are Sprint PCS Calls Encrypted? > From: Notan <notan@ddress.thatcanbespammed> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Notan And yes ... mine was in direct response to your posting. And yes, it had everything to do with the footer on your original query. In any event, I do think that others have adequately responded to your post. I hope it helps you. > It had to do with your sig, essentially calling newsgroup posters, > "trailer trash." > > Notan Don't forget to mention Cingular Bashing Trash in the alt.cellular.cingular NG. >> Trying to live up to the image you created in your footer? > > I asked a legitimate question, and I asked politely. What is your problem, > a.shole? I asked a legitimate question, and I asked politely. Who has the problem? (Hint: Check out your tagline in your first message) >> Trying to live up to the image you created in your footer? > > I asked a legitimate question, and I asked politely. What is your problem, > a.shole? You seem to have a borderline personality disorder raging. The response to your footer was rather benign and you respond with malignant profanity. Weren't you a problem in this group once before? SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T >Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls are >encrypted. >Is it possible for casual eavesdroppers to monitor Sprint calls? >Specifically, is there any encryption used between the handset and the >tower? They are not encrypted, but are modulated spread-spectrum. Unless you have the same algorithm on your listening device as employed by sprint, you're not going to be able to put the packets back together. A scanner will not work. > I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T > Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls > are encrypted. > > Is it possible for casual eavesdroppers to monitor Sprint calls? Yes, if you use the phone in a restaurant I can hear every word you say from the neighboring booth. <g> > Specifically, is there any encryption used between the handset and the > tower? Encryption? Well it is using encoding and CDMA with a specifically keyed algorithm to do the encode and decode. You really think small time crooks are going to bother to capture all the cell traffic and separate the streams then manually listen to your converesation to grab a credit card number? > I'm concerned about things like my credit card numbers or > personally-identifiable information being intercepted by small-time > crooks, not with whether the CIA or NSA can listen to my calls. ..and your older TDMA phone with Cingular was different how? It is not possible for anyone other than the CIA or a government agency with sophisticated equipment to monitor your call. p >> I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T >> Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > ..and your older TDMA phone with Cingular was different how? > It is not possible for anyone other than the CIA or a government agency with > sophisticated equipment to monitor your call. > > <snip> Possible? Yes. Probable? No. Notan I don't want anybody listening in on my cell calls to find out what I am getting on my pizza. >I don't want anybody listening in on my cell calls to find out what I > am getting on my pizza. Then Don't use any form of electronic communication. Landline, Cellular, or computer.. Make sure you are wearing your Aluminum foil hat with the shiny side out as well. > It is not possible for anyone other than the CIA or a government agency with > sophisticated equipment to monitor your call. That's going a little far. There are probably dozen and perhaps even hundreds of engineers/technicians/etc. around the US with the appropriate test equipment and knowledge to eavesdrop on your call -- they need such equipment to test out what they're designing or deploying. Realistically, though, a modern cell phone is arguably a lot more secure than a traditional landline phone (barring someone simply pointing a highly directional microphone at you, which works just as well regardless of the type of phone you're using). They could only intercept the call if they could access the "shared secret" each subscriber device has with the network. > It is not possible for anyone other than the CIA or a government > agency with sophisticated equipment to monitor your call. > p ...because an anonamly such as a non-government agency/person with sophisticated equipment doesn't exist? Honestly, how naive. It could possibly exist, however, it would be very cost prohibitive. For that matter, even if the data was encrypted (which it isn't), it is possible to break encryption codes. Therefore, if you want to be really paranoid, nothing is safe even wired phones. There was a story on the national news last evening about a private detective that paid phone company technicians to do wiretaps on famous actors. >> It is not possible for anyone other than the CIA or a government >> agency with sophisticated equipment to monitor your call. >> p > > ...because an anonamly such as a non-government agency/person with > sophisticated equipment doesn't exist? Honestly, how naive. Ok. Back to the old cup and strings. I'm all about setting up a cup and string network, but need some funding for overseas access. Goodday. > It could possibly exist, however, it would be very cost prohibitive. For > that matter, even if the data was encrypted (which it isn't), it is [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> ...because an anonamly such as a non-government agency/person with >> sophisticated equipment doesn't exist? Honestly, how naive. As soon as you setup your cup and string network, someone will string-tap your network and it will not be secure. > Ok. Back to the old cup and strings. I'm all about setting up a cup and > string network, but need some funding for overseas access. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >>> ...because an anonamly such as a non-government agency/person with >>> sophisticated equipment doesn't exist? Honestly, how naive. It's cheaper just to tap the land based infrastructure. >> I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T >> Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > ..and your older TDMA phone with Cingular was different how? My TDMA phone has a menu option for "Privacy," but AT&T Wireless did not offer that service in Philadelphia (I was told that it was available in New York City). Depending upon the menu settings used, my phone would beep a warning before connecting to a non-encrypted channel or it would go ahead and connect regardless of whether encryption was available, with no warning tone. I read that GSM calls had a base level of encryption built in--perhaps not strong encryption, but enough to thwart casual listeners that wanted to monitor the cellular frequencies. Call setup with GSM is a major security weakness. Someone could hijack your session and make a call, appearing as though it was your phone making the call, and easily listen in on the conversation. > Call setup with GSM is a major security weakness. Someone could hijack > your session > and make a call, appearing as though it was your phone making the call, > and easily listen > in on the conversation. My original inquiry was concerned just with the casual snooper--the kind of guy that might buy scanning equipment at Radio Shack. I recall back in the analog days that there was a big business in harvesting cell phone ESNs and programming them into other phones which were then used to bill fraudulent calls to an unsuspecting customer's bill. That problem went away when cell phones incorporated authentication. It may have spurred development of digital, because I believe that the wireless companies were losing their shirts. The criminals would park a van at the exit of a tunnel, and as the cars came out their phones would all log back on to the networks. They were harvesting ESNs by the ton. They would use them for a couple of weeks and then replace them with still other ESNs--by the time the customer got his bill, they would have gone on to another victim. So you gonna go with Sprint? Cause the cup and strings seem to be less secuse. Not 100 percent sure people won't string tap us. >> Call setup with GSM is a major security weakness. Someone could hijack >> your session [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > then replace them with still other ESNs--by the time the customer got his > bill, they would have gone on to another victim. > I recall back in the analog days that there was a big business in harvesting > cell phone ESNs and programming them into other phones which were then used [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > couple of weeks and then replace them with still other ESNs--by the time the > customer got his bill, they would have gone on to another victim. Fortunately, the advent of A-Key and (in CDMa's case) the rolling PN offset took care of that problem for the most part. Now, you CAN have a customer's ESN and MDN (mobile device number), and it won't matter. The clone would still need to know the correct A-Key, and in the case of CDMA, the phone's band mask *and* iteration for the next PN roll in order for the call to go through successfully. As none of that info is shared over the air, there are only two real chances to compromise its security: either the thief must gain access to the handset and special test equipment to retrieve this data, or someone on the inside has to obtain it from the switch side. SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. > Call setup with GSM is a major security weakness. Someone could hijack > your session > and make a call, appearing as though it was your phone making the call, > and easily listen > in on the conversation. This is correct. I think that there are efforts to address this weakness of GSM, but CDMA is much more secure. > I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T > Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls are > encrypted. Short answer: Yes.... kinda. The Long answer: CDMA calls aren't EXPLICITLY encrypted, in other words, a separate encryption algorithm just for the sake of encryption and security isn't applied. However, the CDMA process used to make more calls fit on one channel actually WAS and IS used as a form of encryption in certain applications. So in a way, they are IMPLICITLY encrypted, even though the encryption is not intentional. The difference is important because if you really don't want people to listen to your calls, then the call should be encrypted end-to-end (all the way from your handset to the other person's handset). When you rely on CDMA though, ONLY the paths where the call travels through the air in CDMA are encrypted. All landline and backhaul segments of the call are unencrypted, and open to wiretapping. > Is it possible for casual eavesdroppers to monitor Sprint calls? No. If Joe Blow goes into a RadioShack and buys a scanner that can tune into Sprint's PCS frequencies, he'll only hear static if he tries to listen in. > Specifically, is there any encryption used between the handset and the > tower? See above. CDMA in and of itself is seen in some circles as adequate encryption to deter the casual (and sometimes not so casual) listener. There IS a specification within CDMA to add additional encryption layers, but they are not enabled on the Sprint network (or any US network that I know of for that matter). It's generally viewed that right now, there's no need to bother with it, because CDMA is enough. > I'm concerned about things like my credit card numbers or > personally-identifiable information being intercepted by small-time crooks, > not with whether the CIA or NSA can listen to my calls. Then you should be perfectly fine, and I wouldn't worry. SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. >> I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T >> Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Then you should be perfectly fine, and I wouldn't worry. Thanks! If you happen to go into analog roam then you're in the clear to be picked up by a scanner. > I'm transferring to Sprint from an old TDMA plan that I had with AT&T > Wireless, before Cingular bought it out. Just wondering if CDMA calls are [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Thanks. > -- > Newsgroups are the trailer parks of the internet and are best ignored. > Regular posters often just have mud-slinging contests to show how much > smarter they are by calling the other guys idiots. You're peeing in the swimming pool. this was your initial message - with your bottom signature... and the subsequent replies - directed to the sig, not your question, which you must have noticed, since it didn't appear in latter messages, so you either turned it off, or negated the random sig generator... > -- > Newsgroups are the trailer parks of the internet and are best ignored. > Regular posters often just have mud-slinging contests to show how much > smarter they are by calling the other guys idiots. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.