At 05:04 PM 9/8/2003 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote:
> David Honig[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 02:37 AM 9/9/03 +1000, Greg Rose wrote:
> >much more than a cellphone (without subsidies). Patenting the attack
> >prevents the production of the "radio shack (tm) gsm scanner", so that it
> >at least requires serious attackers, not idle retirees or jealous
> teenagers.
Why the heck would a government agency have to break the GSM encryption
at all? The encryption is only on the airlink, and all GSM calls travel
the POTS land line system in the clear, where they are subject to
warranted wiretaps.

Breaking GSM is only of useful if you have no access to the landline
portion of the system.

LE agencies have been known to eavesdrop on cellular communications over the air when a wiretap might cause trouble later. They are also thought to possess cellular spoofing equipment so targeted subscriber instruments can be captured by mobile "rouge" cell sites for fun stuff (I seem to recall Harris Communications made these).


A foolish Constitutional inconsistency is the hobgoblin of freedom, adored by judges and demagogue statesmen.
- Steve Schear

--------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to