Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

ericsson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 73 posts

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#11

Post by DuckyC »

kalleboo wrote: post #8
rodionos wrote: post #6

As an end-user, I'm ok with current 4G/LTE link speeds. What would be great is they could minimize TTFB on mobile devices. It takes a second or two for the first bits of content to appear in the browser/mail, especially after the phone has been in sleep mode.

The only reason the speeds seem fine is because due to data caps people are too afraid to actually use the data. With more capacity in the networks, data caps can rise, and usage will go up. I don't want to have to mess around with connecting to coffee shop WiFi networks all the time. Every computer should have a wireless chipset that simply uses the WWAN when a WLAN is not available, without you worrying about that…

In Denmark data caps are rising a lot. It's not unusual to have 30 or even 50 GBs of data. I don't know the reason why, but it's most likely not capacity since we are probably using the same system.

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#12

Post by kristoffer »

pjc50 wrote: post #9
kristoffer wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even 4G (LTE) is typically end to end encrypted. Unsure what you are trying to say or if you're just trolling.

Isn't it just mobile station to base station encryption, not true E2E encryption of calls (which would never be allowed)?

No the core network uses IPSec. Of course there is support for "lawful interception" though.

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#13

Post by yorwba »

johnchristopher wrote: post #7
neom wrote: post #5

I hope that the network vendors and the IoT vendors sit down and think about how the devices and the network can work to mitigate things like large-scale IoT DDoS etc. Even if this mean new protocoling or whatever. I'm not sure I'm thinking about this exactly correctly, but I feel there is something in there?

FWIW, in my country the historical ISP is pushing for a dedicated network for industrial and hobbyists connected devices. The pipes are already wired.

Can you give more information? From your description, it sounds like "Let's limit possible DDOS targets for hacked things to just factories.", which doesn't strike me as a solution.

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#14

Post by at-fates-hands »

kalleboo wrote: post #8
rodionos wrote: post #6

As an end-user, I'm ok with current 4G/LTE link speeds. What would be great is they could minimize TTFB on mobile devices. It takes a second or two for the first bits of content to appear in the browser/mail, especially after the phone has been in sleep mode.

The only reason the speeds seem fine is because due to data caps people are too afraid to actually use the data. With more capacity in the networks, data caps can rise, and usage will go up. I don't want to have to mess around with connecting to coffee shop WiFi networks all the time. Every computer should have a wireless chipset that simply uses the WWAN when a WLAN is not available, without you worrying about that…

>> With more capacity in the networks, data caps can rise, and usage will go up.

If I was a CEO at a major wireless carrier, I would be thinking that means we can charge people more per month, and generate more revenue. Anytime you increase usage, the carriers are going to find a way to squeeze some more money out of their users.

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#15

Post by intrasight »

kalleboo wrote: post #8
rodionos wrote: post #6

As an end-user, I'm ok with current 4G/LTE link speeds. What would be great is they could minimize TTFB on mobile devices. It takes a second or two for the first bits of content to appear in the browser/mail, especially after the phone has been in sleep mode.

The only reason the speeds seem fine is because due to data caps people are too afraid to actually use the data. With more capacity in the networks, data caps can rise, and usage will go up. I don't want to have to mess around with connecting to coffee shop WiFi networks all the time. Every computer should have a wireless chipset that simply uses the WWAN when a WLAN is not available, without you worrying about that…

The rising capacity will be offset by rising average page size. What the network giveth, the browser taketh away.

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#16

Post by hlandau »

pjc50 wrote: post #9
kristoffer wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even 4G (LTE) is typically end to end encrypted. Unsure what you are trying to say or if you're just trolling.

Isn't it just mobile station to base station encryption, not true E2E encryption of calls (which would never be allowed)?

From what I've heard (I may be mistaken here), 2G/3G had pretty poor radio link security. This resulted, of course, in Stingrays.

4G supposedly has actually secure radio links; I think to the extent Stingrays work on these devices, it's by forcing a downgrade to 2G/3G. So as it becomes feasible to drop 2G/3G support Stingrays will stop working, although of course this will take a long time.

That said, supposedly what encryption 2G/3G did use extended further into the core network, whereas the encryption that 4G uses terminates at the base station. Supposedly all providers which are implementing 4G are in practice encrypting the links from the base station to the rest of the network with IPsec, but this does mean that the traffic is unencrypted at the base station itself, which makes the base station vulnerable to physical compromise. Some people have criticised LTE's security over GSM/UMTS for this reason.

On the whole I think it's a net gain, though. Physically compromising a base station is a higher friction and higher risk activity than deployment of a Stingray. Moreover, I can understand that it would be potentially troublesome to have an encrypted channel from the handset to deep in an operator's core network, since it forces all traffic to travel via that route, which would necessarily increase latency. Although in practice IIRC 4G traffic might still take the same route anyway due to the weird tunnelling architecture GSM/UMTS/LTE uses, so that might be a moot point. But the article seems to imply they're focusing on reducing latency, so it's possible they're changing that for 5G. Anyone know?

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#17

Post by kristoffer »

kristoffer wrote: post #12
pjc50 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it just mobile station to base station encryption, not true E2E encryption of calls (which would never be allowed)?

No the core network uses IPSec. Of course there is support for "lawful interception" though.

Or rather has support for IPSec, not all operators chose to deploy it properly.

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#18

Post by goda90 »

yorwba wrote: post #13
johnchristopher wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, in my country the historical ISP is pushing for a dedicated network for industrial and hobbyists connected devices. The pipes are already wired.

Can you give more information? From your description, it sounds like "Let's limit possible DDOS targets for hacked things to just factories." , which doesn't strike me as a solution.

Plus it leads to too much trust. One factory doesn't have good air gap policies and suddenly the whole network is infected because some designers trusted the network too much.

Re: 5G Network end-to-end demonstration by Ericsson

#19

Post by goda90 »

intrasight wrote: post #15
kalleboo wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason the speeds seem fine is because due to data caps people are too afraid to actually use the data. With more capacity in the networks, data caps can rise, and usage will go up. I don't want to have to mess around with connecting to coffee shop WiFi networks all the time. Every computer should have a wireless chipset that simply uses the WWAN when a WLAN is not available, without you worrying about that…

The rising capacity will be offset by rising average page size. What the network giveth, the browser taketh away.

Its just like building highways to alleviate traffic.
Post reply on HN