Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

I purposely didn't even start down that road. But, Yes, they most certainly could, and for the most part would be easier. All of the same info rides the SigTran deployment as an SS7 A/E/F-Link, plus possibly more depending on what type of messaging you're talking about. However, it also

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

I haven't used SS7 in the voice world, only touched briefly on the messaging side of it. Would hackers be able to do the same similar attack via SIGTRAN? I would think it would be easier to get access to a poorly managed SIGTRAN device which would then give you SS7 access. Or even an Asterisk box

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

Joseph, I noticed that in Gmail (and perhaps other email systems), the longer reply I wrote for Kidd was hidden because it appeared after his text. Here's what I wrote... what's fascinating is the recent rise in end-to-end (e2e) encryption among IP-based communications platforms that include

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

I don’t know many places that encrypt their voice traffic. From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Dan York Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 2:45 PM To: Kidd Filby Cc: voiceops@voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] SS7 This is generally true if the calls are

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

This is generally true if the calls are *unencrypted* on VoIP... On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Kidd Filby wrote: > > Also folks, don't forget, the same outcome of recording someone's call is > MUCH easier to accomplish once it is VoIP. IMHO, of course. ;-) > ...

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

It's been a decade since I've touched SS7, and I barely remember what I had for breakfast, so it's like it's all new to me again. From what I read, it sounds like there may be a "proxy" function that can be injected which would bring both endpoints back to you so you can record both legs. The

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

You could do it by saying "hey, this handset is roaming on me" then directing the call back to the handset in question, I figure. It would be inbound only intercept, but i could see that working. -Paul On 04/21/2016 02:12 PM, Matthew Yaklin wrote: The part I was curious about and perhaps

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

The part I was curious about and perhaps someone can clarify who has more knowledge than I is... It appears in order to record calls the attacker has to be in very close proximity to the target. Like radio/tower range. You cannot record a conversation half way across the world. Matt

Re: [VoiceOps] Recommendations for high-cps SS7 OC-X gear?

Thank you to everyone that provided useful suggestions. I've reached out to a couple of recommended vendors that appear to have the solutions I'm looking for. Brooks Bridges | Sr. Voice Services Engineer O1 Communications 5190 Golden Foothill Pkwy El Dorado Hills, CA 95762 office: 916.235.2097

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

There is no VOICE traversing the SS7 network, so you cannot possibly record a conversation by having access to the SS7 network only. On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Matthew Yaklin wrote: > > In other words the hacker has to have working SS7 trunks or access to > someone

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7

In other words the hacker has to have working SS7 trunks or access to someone who does? That is how I understood it. Not exactly a remote hack from mom's basement sort of thing. Matt From: VoiceOps on behalf of Peter

[VoiceOps] SS7

FYI... U.S. carriers mum on 60 Minutes report on vulnerability in SS7 - http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/us-carriers-mum-60-minutes-report-vulnerability-ss7/2016-04-19 Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. 813.963.5884 http://rad-info.net * Need bandwidth or colocation? call me

Re: [VoiceOps] Recommendations for high-cps SS7 OC-X gear?

When was that? 1999? Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 20, 2016, at 10:41 PM, Alex Balashov wrote: > > ‎Having seen GSXs knocked over with 100-200 CPS, I'd be inclined to even > question that, though I don't doubt Sonus and friends make a big enough box > for those

Re: [VoiceOps] Recommendations for high-cps SS7 OC-X gear?

Avoid Meta at all cost. Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 20, 2016, at 10:35 PM, Paul Timmins wrote: > > You're going to handle 500CPS of legacy sonet based TDM and question dropping > 7 figures on the solution? *cringes* > > This is literally what platforms like metaswitch,