happy new year people
as much as i like this project i need to publish my comments and let others
think about them too :

1- its claimed that "we are cracking A5/1 so the industry can replace it
with the newer A5/3" . this is wrong . industry can not change A5/1 with
A5/1 because we cracked A5/1 . to utilize A5/3 we need a UMTS network . most
networks around the world are 2G based , usually 2.75 . changes in operators
needs highly expensive procedure , law , regulations and alike . i know
people with academic only background dont get this but that's their fault .
this is not just about industrial profit , its also about people expenses
and the general wireless regulation and condition in a country . dont
bullshit people . phones that are made for 2G can not simply upgrade to
offer A5/3 as well . its not just possible . we can stand and cluelesslly
talk about it but its not possible . so the whole idea to present the danger
to shift the technology at operators side is just garbage

2- its claimed that GSM is now broken . GSM is broken but it does not have
anything to do with this project . this project is about A5/1 . A5/1 is not
GSM . GSM contains RF and Radio management and spectrum budget too . this
project didnt and in my opinion is never going to break GSM . at best we can
expect to break A5/1 . these are different things people . dont get yourself
fooled . its the same with Kasumi . maybe Kasumi is broken maybe not , i'm
not sure but i'm sure UMTS is not broken . GSM and UMTS are complicated
systems . its not just about the cryptography

3- its claimed finally somebody did it and now A5/1 is broken . this is also
wrong . this project never proved it has broken A5/1 . where is the proof ?
we have generated our tables , which they are partial and they are shared .
that's what happened . the presentation and all the media coverage , while i
respect them , dont offer anything new to the tables . seriously , how its
been proved A5/1 can be broken with the Tables that this project has been
generated and is going to be generated ? its all talks , speculations and
ideas . nobody even decoded a real GSM conversation with anything produced
by this project . i'd be more than happy if somebody can show i am wrong ,
not with idea and speculations but with a real GSM capture and a real decode
procedure filmed on youtube ! that's proof . the rest is just talk . so ,
why we are so excited about it ? because its wide now and most people who
didnt know a thing about GSM before know are hearing cool things about
the possibility of listening to ATM traffic for example . we all knew its
possible . its out there for years . but as for this project what have we
done ? we have reproduced THC's content and ideas on different site ,
different names and some tables that are just claimed to be true are
published . so what ?

4- its claimed this project will generate the tables fully then Airprobe
will build an interceptor using open or cheap hardware and this all together
will prove GSM is broken .
ok , so , until now we dont have all the tables we are not even sure the
ones that are generated are Ok and no one has proved it , we just talked
about it . great !
on Airprobe , we have some ideas its possible to capture GSM with USRP but
we didnt actually solve the Hopping problem , so in reality we dont have
even correct ideas how to capture real world GSM traffic and given the facts
i think that's not gonna happen anytime soon . if i am wrong please give me
a link to a page that filed the real GSM traffic has captured with USRP and
can be analyzed . anything else is just talk and talk is cheap

i will be more than glad to see people prove me wrong on these 4 items but i
think nobody can . what happened here was just a bunch of republications and
getting the information to a wider audience . nohl's work is good but i'm
also as an ex academic and current convict of industry can not just stand up
and applause for something i clearly see is half truth , in doubt , unproved
or maybe even wrong .

people are attacking GSMA . i think they have every right to do that but i
believe they are right on one thing . " the team has underestimated the..."

by the way there was another presentation at CCC about playing with RF
interface of cellphones . what a load of crap . i had high hopes and i saw
just a bunch of republications of THC work and some general knowledge .
nothing more . he said its possible to play around TI's calypso and control
it . so what ? you guessed that alone all by yourself that's possible ? good
job ! in A5/1 presentation its been said its possible to build an IMSI
catcher using open source stuff . how it is possible ? why would we lie
 about this ? openbts and openbsc and USRP alltogether can not do what IMSI
catchers do , not now and not in near future . so why would we publish some
general information we have on IMSI catchers ( widely available in
law enforcement and old articles like Barkan and biham also explained it )
and add some misinformation to it to make it legit ? that's not called
honest Academic work people

even if in another world all these were theoretically possible , we havent
done them yet . so ? its just all talk . how is talking about something is
equal to doing it ? i'm looking for people who can explain this to me

no offence intended
all the bests
_______________________________________________
A51 mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lists.reflextor.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/a51

Reply via email to