From: Jonathan Cooper <entropy@IntNet.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 94 07:08:10 PST
To: Amanda Walker <amanda@intercon.com>
Subject: Cellular Privacy [Digital vs. Analog]
In-Reply-To: <9412161623.AA23186@chaos.intercon.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.941218095314.9467A-100000@xcalibur>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> Well, it is true, from a pragmatic point of view.  A neighborhood kid with a 
> Radio Shack scanner can't listen in on digital cellular calls.  You have to 
> actually hack a phone, which is a much less prevalent skill.

   True.  And the fact is, monitoring any _one specific call_ is rather 
difficult to do without specialized equipment - in my experience with 
modified analog phones, one has to hop between 50 cells at the minimum 
before they can hope to monitor a specific call.  I've yet to obtain a 
digital cellphone to modify, but with the recent legislation about 
cellular phone monitoring, I wouldn't be surprised if it were more 
difficult to hack them.  (and just from the size of them alone, I would 
guess that they're mostly surface-mount, which is a pain in the arse for 
most people without elaborate facilities)

> I still think that CDMA+DES is the way to go for secure cellular, but from a 
> purely pragmatic point of view simply going digital does increase privacy.  
> Using analog cellular is like using a walkie-talkie.

   Good analogy. 

-jon
( --------[ Jonathan D. Cooper ]--------[ entropy@intnet.net ]-------- )
( PGP 2.6.2 keyprint: 31 50 8F 82 B9 79 ED C4  5B 12 A0 35 E0 9B C0 01 )