Wrong...

Encryption, even if prevent access by non-licensed users, is verboten 
under Part 97.309(4)(c).

ILLEGAL are:  WEP, WPA, and WPA2 -- are encryption methods meant to 
obscure the meaning of transmissions.  The descriptive phrase, "WEP uses 
the stream cipher <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_cipher> RC4 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RC4> for confidentiality 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidentiality>," says it all concerning 
this early security measure(3).  WPA and WPA2 are later and stronger 
methods of 802.11 wireless encryption.
Ref:  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wired_Equivalent_Privacy#Encryption_details

Despite the publicizing the method and key in your log or on the Web, 
enabling encryption methods, for whatever so-called reason or reasons 
given, IS ILLEGAL.  The fact that you enabled ENCRYPTION on amateur 
bands, per regulation, IS ILLEGAL. 

...

If, indeed, a WiFi network is set up under Part 97 rules, as Rotolo 
proposed in a previous CQ article, then the encryption he seeks would be 
used to sequester the entire network by the use of a WEP or WPA 
encryption system, thus preventing any and all monitoring of the traffic 
passing over that network. This is the issue that I understood his 
comment about being "already legal" was aimed at. His stated purpose 
was, as I recall (and as I understood it), to obviate any intrusion by 
"non-hams" into the network, and not as a means of obfuscating the 
traffic over it.

This is thin gruel, methinks. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for 
the gander, and the obfuscation occurs regardless of whom it was 
designed to foil.

I think it best to avoid these kinds of issues by avoiding the entire 
concept. "If DHS wants to encrypt stuff, let DHS do it and leave us out 
of it."  We are not other radio services, the military, or other 
government forms. 

Next, please...



Kipton Moravec wrote:
>
> We can use any and all of standard encryption (WEP, WPA etc.) on our 2.4
> GHz routers that we convert to ham use, because the purpose is not to
> obscure or hide the meaning of the transmission, but to prevent
> non-licensed users access to our Amateur networks with part 15
> equipment. The requirement is that if you do, you have the key or
> password written in your log book or published.
>
> It is similar to encrypting satellite control commands. You are not
> encrypting to obscure or hide the meaning of the message but to prevent
> unauthorized users from getting access.
>
> Kip
>
> On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 17:03 -0500, Mathaeus (Matthew Fonner) wrote:
> > Steve and all,
> > Working as a nurse, I understand and follow HIPAA.
> > I agree with Steve, we would need consent from the protected person (
> >
> >
> -- 
> Kipton Moravec AE5IB
> "Always do right; this will gratify some people and astonish the rest."
> --Mark Twain
>
> 

Reply via email to