Thanks for the first practical answer . so , would you please capture one of your own conversations and upload it somewhere until we see if there is anybody out there can decode it ? i'd like to see that . see , that's the whole point of my first email . its just all talk and talks only interests people who dont already know about it . what do we have besides that ?
if there us anybody who can decode real world A5/1 protected conversation out there please answer to this thread and make it clear how to make a real air interface capture and give it you i'd do it and that's gonna be fun . right ? ;) On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 6:50 PM, javier falbo <[email protected]>wrote: > p q: Decoding third parties calls is an illegal activity. > > As you notice on CCC, there was a workshop that you could bring your own > GSM stream to be decoded. :) > Or just capture your own GSM Live Conversation, uploaded somewhere on > internet, and maybe someone from here, decoded and send you the audio in mp3 > format. > > What you are requesting is illegal. :) > > Javier > > ------------------------------ > Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:44:48 +0330 > Subject: Re: [A51] Truth about this work > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > > thanks Javier , how do you do ? ;) > do you notice you didnt do but talking ? you stated the very facts that i > already stated in my first emails that they are known to be out there . its > certain . so what are we doing here ? just republishing what's known ? you > just did it again in your email . i KNOW all these things are > either theoretically possible or are being used by law enforcement . you > know that too ? good . so we are just exchanging obvious things here , right > ? ;) > > > On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 6:40 PM, javier falbo <[email protected]>wrote: > > p q: Are you ok?? :) > > Encryption is the core of digital radio transceivers nowadays. Breaking the > algorythm is 90% of the actual mobile structure. > I have personally seen in real-time how GSM Voice Conversation are listen > in 2-3 seconds. (Since 2003, in my case) > > Frequency hoping is not a problem. I remember my first project on channels > hoping on Analog radios, where a BURST that increase the power from Base to > Moble, advice PREVIOUSLY the next channel. > More info, and updates here: > > http://wireless.agilent.com/rfcomms/refdocs/gsmgprs/egprsla_gen_bse_fhopping.php > (or use google). Frequency hoping is not a problem for the USRP, it is > SOFTWARE BASED!!! > > Tables are out there since 1998. Also THC project has finished his table, > but they do not want to distributed. (or maybe they are interested in $$$). > > A53 is useless nowadays, as KASUMI is academically broken (and computer > simulated). > > I heard that next February 2010, GSMA (Association) will call for an > immediately security update and check for a new stronger algorythm. > > My comments: NOWADAYS, it is IMPOSSIBLE to be secured. There are NO > algorythms capable of defending against a multiple CUDA distributed attack > with more than 150 CUDA MACHINES in a network. > Keep in mind, that the algorythm must have particularities: FAST, no power > consumption, easy to code, etc. > > Javier > > > > > > ------------------------------ > Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:18:09 +0330 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: [A51] Truth about this work > > > 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 > > > > ------------------------------ > ¿Cansado de borrar spam de tu bandea de entrada? ¡Ganá tiempo con el nuevo > filtro anti spam de Hotmail! <http://mail.live.com> > > > > ------------------------------ > ¿Te llegan demasiados emails? Organizate con Hotmail. ¡Creá carpetas para > todos tus correos! <http://mail.live.com/> >
_______________________________________________ A51 mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lists.reflextor.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/a51
