Skip to content

Senate GOP budget bill has little-noticed provision that could hurt your Wi-Fi

Technology
72 43 2
  • Oh the legal system is pretty good at deciding intent, I mean what's the difference between manslaughter and murder?

    Thing is, it's not like there's radio police that are going to pull you over for encrypting. Other hams might turn you in if you're being annoying. If you send an encrypted email over Hamlink once, or say something like "Beefy Burrito this is Enchilada, the tamales are in the basket" on 33cm once, probably nobody's gonna notice.

    There's only ~3.7MHz worth of bandwith on the HF bands, another 4MHz on 6m. There's a lot of attention on the bands that propagate. If you want to secretly communicate with people, use Reddit, or the Fediverse.

    You know r/kitty? One of a trillion cat subreddits that had a gimmick that the only written word allowed was "kitty." All post titles and comments had to consist only of "Kitty." Arrange with the leaders of the other terrorist cells you're working for that if u/chudmuffin posts a picture of an orange cat, we attack at dawn, and if he posts a picture of a grey cat, lay low they're onto us.

    Encryption is legal and standard on the internet, where there's many orders of magnitude more traffic than on the ham bands. I can't send an encrypted email over Hamlink with a license, but I can host a Tor site without one.

    Oh the legal system is pretty good at deciding intent

    I wouldn't say it's good at determining actual intent, just good at deciding what intent is going to be assigned by the system.

    If you send an encrypted email over Hamlink once, or say something like “Beefy Burrito this is Enchilada, the tamales are in the basket” on 33cm once, probably nobody’s gonna notice.

    I've always wondered how much steganography is in practice - if it's being practiced well, nobody knows. Setup a HAM station that snaps a photo at sunset and a couple of other random times per day. Transmit the photo in a standard, open digital mode, but hide your message in the noisy lower bits of the 3 color channels 0-255 R G and B, you can easily modify 6 bits per pixel without visually distorting the image, drop that to 1 bit per pixel and nobody who doesn't know your scheme could ever find it. To the local hams, it's three chirps a day, with a reliable pretty picture of the sunset and a couple of more varied times. As a utility channel, that's three opportunities per day to secretly communicate something to a listener that nobody can identify. If the picture is just 2MP, that's 250kBytes of bandwidth per image.

    If you want to secretly communicate with people, use Reddit, or the Fediverse.

    Absolutely, though the "listeners" there are more readily identified, even via Tor.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I’m just glad we live in a country where politicians can also be experts in RF design/engineering and make policies based on their expertise.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    How would that work for the people already using 6 GHz routers?

  • Meshenger app and mesh networks would still work, back to the BBS times we go

    Who'd have thought WWIV was so prescient as to when it would become re-relevant.

    Time to dust off my SysOp skillset lol

  • For what it's worth, I think Cruz's proposal (all of it) was defeated 99-1.

    Yes, Rafael suffered a 99-1 loss. Guessing he's the 1, so a total loss.

  • You don't need one if there's an emergency, civil unrest would probably qualify as an emergency so non-licensed people can legally transmit.

    The FCC hasn't really punished anyone for not having a license other than those that are really bothersome/disruptive or are doing jamming. But like, if there's civil unrest, the laws probably don't matter anymore so you can just ignore the law.

    But if you don't have a license, you don't have a callsign, and thus others will refuse to talk to you during non-emergency peacetime.

    The FCC hasn’t really punished anyone for not having a license other than those that are really bothersome/disruptive or are doing jamming. But like, if there’s civil unrest, the laws probably don’t matter anymore so you can just ignore the law.

    Thanks for reminding me of this movie. 😄
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_Up_the_Volume_(film)

  • Yes, Rafael suffered a 99-1 loss. Guessing he's the 1, so a total loss.

    What a way to advertise your impotence.

  • Oh the legal system is pretty good at deciding intent

    I wouldn't say it's good at determining actual intent, just good at deciding what intent is going to be assigned by the system.

    If you send an encrypted email over Hamlink once, or say something like “Beefy Burrito this is Enchilada, the tamales are in the basket” on 33cm once, probably nobody’s gonna notice.

    I've always wondered how much steganography is in practice - if it's being practiced well, nobody knows. Setup a HAM station that snaps a photo at sunset and a couple of other random times per day. Transmit the photo in a standard, open digital mode, but hide your message in the noisy lower bits of the 3 color channels 0-255 R G and B, you can easily modify 6 bits per pixel without visually distorting the image, drop that to 1 bit per pixel and nobody who doesn't know your scheme could ever find it. To the local hams, it's three chirps a day, with a reliable pretty picture of the sunset and a couple of more varied times. As a utility channel, that's three opportunities per day to secretly communicate something to a listener that nobody can identify. If the picture is just 2MP, that's 250kBytes of bandwidth per image.

    If you want to secretly communicate with people, use Reddit, or the Fediverse.

    Absolutely, though the "listeners" there are more readily identified, even via Tor.

    Well on some popular image board like one of the hundreds of cat subs on Reddit, how do you identify a "listener" who is looking for a particular user to upload a picture of an orange cat? Thousands of people will view that post perfectly innocently.

  • Well on some popular image board like one of the hundreds of cat subs on Reddit, how do you identify a "listener" who is looking for a particular user to upload a picture of an orange cat? Thousands of people will view that post perfectly innocently.

    The point is: IP addresses that download the content are traceable (and spoofable, but that leaves trails too...) Yeah, you might be one of thousands, but every day you log in you increase your odds of being spotted.

    Listening to longwave radio? Yeah, basically anybody anywhere on the planet with a receiver. Even local broadcasts it is nigh impossible to know who is listening where within the broadcast radius and the average person walks around with several radio receivers on them all the time now.

  • The point is: IP addresses that download the content are traceable (and spoofable, but that leaves trails too...) Yeah, you might be one of thousands, but every day you log in you increase your odds of being spotted.

    Listening to longwave radio? Yeah, basically anybody anywhere on the planet with a receiver. Even local broadcasts it is nigh impossible to know who is listening where within the broadcast radius and the average person walks around with several radio receivers on them all the time now.

    So...let's actually set up a pretend scenario here. Pretend. We are pretend red teaming here; any resemblance to actual terrorist plots living or dead is purely coincidental.

    Let's pretend our terrorist cell is going to spit up, travel to 10 places around the United States, and we're going to do a coordinated strike on 10 government buildings. Probably the smartest thing to do is just...do it at a planned time and not communicate after we split up. But for some convoluted Ocean's Umpteen reason we need to communicate and coordinate. I see 3 possible scenarios here:

    1. Leader just needs to say GO to the rest of the team, expecting no reply. So one, very brief, one-way communique.
    2. Leader needs to send several detailed instructions over a long period of time, expecting no reply. Repeated, large, one-way communiques.
    3. The team is going to gather some intelligence and report back, and based on all their observations the leader will say go. Full on two-way communication.

    In all three cases, the internet is the better tool for this.

    You are correct in that it is difficult or impossible to remotely detect radio receivers, no matter what the BBC tells you. There's no machinery making a log of who accesses what over analog radio. But the realities of radio equipment and propagation are going to eat into that advantage somewhat.

    If we're talking truly coast-to-coast, you're going to need HF. MF/longwave won't reach far enough, you need skywave propagation, and you get that on HF...mostly at night mostly during favorable sunspot activity.

    I bet you're imagining most of the team using one of those handheld commodity shortwave receivers that does AM/FM and shortwave, about the size of a pencil case with one of those telescoping whip antennas. That might do for 1 and 2, people hear hams on those sometimes.

    The bosses transmitter would need to be a reasonably serious bit of kit. At the very least something like an Icom 706 mobile HF rig plus power supply and at least a two element yagi for 20 or 40m. This is an antenna that's 30 to 60 feet wide. Hams do routinely make do with less, but when you're talking to someone with those crappy little antennas, probably inside a building, I'd want to focus my beam at least a bit. A wire in a tree ain't gonna do.

    Oh, and, let's say Boss is in Washington DC. It's possible he can make himself heard in Los Angeles but not Wichita, because the "optics" of the ionosphere doesn't bounce his signal down to the ground in the middle of the continent.

    One communique of "Baker this is Oven: Preheat complete, insert the bread. Repeat: Insert the bread." might not be noticed. Or some ham somewhere will hear it and go "What the hell, who's horsing around?" If you don't transmit again, you're probably not going to be direction found. But that big radio tower you've got is a weird thing to have.

    If you need to make routine transmissions, well now you're going to have to try some steganography crap. They did recently relax the baud restrictions on HF, but you're still talking about 2.8kHz of analog bandwidth that MIGHT get through. It's gonna look really weird if you're repeatedly sending digital pictures to...no one in particular on a regular basis. Now, to blend in, you'll need some genuine callsigns, because the FCC amateur radio license database is a matter of public record. You use a bogus callsign and you'll be found out. If you're transmitting a lot, people will find you, possibly out of curiosity.

    Especially if you're talking about everyone in the terrorist cell communicating, well now EVERYONE has to have an amateur radio license from the government, and fairly large, fairly conspicuous radio hardware. There have been spies caught with shortwave radio equipment, and said equipment was used as evidence against them. Entering the US with a smart phone and laptop is utterly normal, entering the US with a shortwave radio is weird.

    OR

    Get accounts on Reddit, and post cat memes. Compared to sitting around listening to static on an HF set, that looks way more normal these days. Yes, there probably is a log of what IP addresses sent and received what, but it's really easy to make two-way secret communications look like perfectly legitimate traffic. The equipment required doesn't draw as much attention. Keep the steganography subtle or a matter of "which picture I post" and not doctor them at all, well now it's 100% indistinguishable from people having casual fun. Some guy posts a picture of an orange cat, it gets 30,000 views 975 likes and 75 comments, and ten IRS buildings explode. Do you think the authorities make the connection to the cat meme in the first place?

  • How would that work for the people already using 6 GHz routers?

    Presumably given they’ve all been released in the past few years and are still getting updates the manufacturers would release an update disabling the functionality to comply with law. Same with end user devices removing the functionality via software update.

    You’d have a small percentage of holdouts who have auto updates off and also refuse to apply it manually and who also have non-updated computers or smartphone. They’d leave it up to whoever buys the spectrum to locate illegal use like this based on detected interference in their usage, report it to the FCC and they send you a nasty letter followed by debilitating fines and a legal order to seize your equipment if that fails.

    In practice people who go out of their way to avoid the updates that disable it will probably see no consequences but decreasing benefits as well and will eventually update or replace devices.

  • So...let's actually set up a pretend scenario here. Pretend. We are pretend red teaming here; any resemblance to actual terrorist plots living or dead is purely coincidental.

    Let's pretend our terrorist cell is going to spit up, travel to 10 places around the United States, and we're going to do a coordinated strike on 10 government buildings. Probably the smartest thing to do is just...do it at a planned time and not communicate after we split up. But for some convoluted Ocean's Umpteen reason we need to communicate and coordinate. I see 3 possible scenarios here:

    1. Leader just needs to say GO to the rest of the team, expecting no reply. So one, very brief, one-way communique.
    2. Leader needs to send several detailed instructions over a long period of time, expecting no reply. Repeated, large, one-way communiques.
    3. The team is going to gather some intelligence and report back, and based on all their observations the leader will say go. Full on two-way communication.

    In all three cases, the internet is the better tool for this.

    You are correct in that it is difficult or impossible to remotely detect radio receivers, no matter what the BBC tells you. There's no machinery making a log of who accesses what over analog radio. But the realities of radio equipment and propagation are going to eat into that advantage somewhat.

    If we're talking truly coast-to-coast, you're going to need HF. MF/longwave won't reach far enough, you need skywave propagation, and you get that on HF...mostly at night mostly during favorable sunspot activity.

    I bet you're imagining most of the team using one of those handheld commodity shortwave receivers that does AM/FM and shortwave, about the size of a pencil case with one of those telescoping whip antennas. That might do for 1 and 2, people hear hams on those sometimes.

    The bosses transmitter would need to be a reasonably serious bit of kit. At the very least something like an Icom 706 mobile HF rig plus power supply and at least a two element yagi for 20 or 40m. This is an antenna that's 30 to 60 feet wide. Hams do routinely make do with less, but when you're talking to someone with those crappy little antennas, probably inside a building, I'd want to focus my beam at least a bit. A wire in a tree ain't gonna do.

    Oh, and, let's say Boss is in Washington DC. It's possible he can make himself heard in Los Angeles but not Wichita, because the "optics" of the ionosphere doesn't bounce his signal down to the ground in the middle of the continent.

    One communique of "Baker this is Oven: Preheat complete, insert the bread. Repeat: Insert the bread." might not be noticed. Or some ham somewhere will hear it and go "What the hell, who's horsing around?" If you don't transmit again, you're probably not going to be direction found. But that big radio tower you've got is a weird thing to have.

    If you need to make routine transmissions, well now you're going to have to try some steganography crap. They did recently relax the baud restrictions on HF, but you're still talking about 2.8kHz of analog bandwidth that MIGHT get through. It's gonna look really weird if you're repeatedly sending digital pictures to...no one in particular on a regular basis. Now, to blend in, you'll need some genuine callsigns, because the FCC amateur radio license database is a matter of public record. You use a bogus callsign and you'll be found out. If you're transmitting a lot, people will find you, possibly out of curiosity.

    Especially if you're talking about everyone in the terrorist cell communicating, well now EVERYONE has to have an amateur radio license from the government, and fairly large, fairly conspicuous radio hardware. There have been spies caught with shortwave radio equipment, and said equipment was used as evidence against them. Entering the US with a smart phone and laptop is utterly normal, entering the US with a shortwave radio is weird.

    OR

    Get accounts on Reddit, and post cat memes. Compared to sitting around listening to static on an HF set, that looks way more normal these days. Yes, there probably is a log of what IP addresses sent and received what, but it's really easy to make two-way secret communications look like perfectly legitimate traffic. The equipment required doesn't draw as much attention. Keep the steganography subtle or a matter of "which picture I post" and not doctor them at all, well now it's 100% indistinguishable from people having casual fun. Some guy posts a picture of an orange cat, it gets 30,000 views 975 likes and 75 comments, and ten IRS buildings explode. Do you think the authorities make the connection to the cat meme in the first place?

    Sure, the internet is more practical, and the odds of being caught in the time required to execute a decent strike plan, even one as vague as: "we're going to Amerika and we're going to hit 50 high profile targets on July 4th, one in every state" (Dear NSA analyst, this is entirely hypothetical) so your agents spread to the field and start assessing from the ground the highest impact targets attainable with their resources, extensive back and forth from the field to central command daily for 90 days of prep, but it's being carried out on 270 different active social media channels as innocuous looking photo exchanges with 540 pre-arranged algorithms hiding the messages in the noise of the image bits. Chances of security agencies picking this up from the communication itself? About 100x less than them noticing 50 teams of activists deployed to 50 states at roughly the same time, even if they never communicate anything.

    HF (more often called shortwave) is well suited for the numbers game. A deep cover agent lying in wait, potentially for years. Only "tell" is their odd habit of listening to the radio most nights. All they're waiting for is a binary message: if you hear the sequence 3 17 22 you are to make contact for further instructions. That message may come at any time, or may not come for a decade. These days, you would make your contact for further instructions via internet, and sure, it would be more practical to hide the "make contact" signal in the internet too, but shortwave is a longstanding tech with known operating parameters.

  • The Really Dark Truth About Bots

    Technology technology
    4
    79 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    H
    I definately feel this way. Outside of the federation my use of the net now is just paper work, technical work, meida streaming, and video games. Which is a lot of but the fediverse goes tits up and nothing like it comes to pass my only social media involvment will be as necessary (my condo has a facebook page and job searching sites are technically [and creepily] social media but I just put in applications and don't look at the feed I don't want.)
  • 161 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    real_squids@sopuli.xyzR
    Why are you using quotations marks? On a serious note, Google's bloat isn't inherent to android, their stuff is added on top as apps and services.
  • New "subguides" on my guide to Pocket alternatives

    Technology technology
    1
    5 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • 1k Stimmen
    145 Beiträge
    58 Aufrufe
    P
    Not just that. The tax preparation industry has gotten tax more complex and harder to file in the US You get the government you can afford. The tax preparation industry has been able to buy several governments
  • 146 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    D
    Self hosted Sunshine and Moonlight is the way to go.
  • Data Bill: First They Came for Trans People

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    35 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 325 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    roofuskit@lemmy.worldR
    It's extremely traceable. There is a literal public ledger if every single transaction.