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

Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 94 posts

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#81

Post by mmirate »

_9vzr wrote: post #31
leetbulb wrote: post #4

> With amateur packet radio anyone can pretend to be anyone else. With Chattervox, you can be sure you're chatting with the person you intend to. This is a great idea, for both the community and as a hobby project. Has there been any other attempts at similar protocols for amateur radio?

You can run just about anything over AX.25 since it's just the data link layer in the OSI model. You could run HTTP on top of IP on top of AX.25 with TLS/SSL message encryption turned off so you don't run afoul of FCC rules. The authentication would still be there but everything would be in the clear. You could also run IPsec with just the authentication field in the header, no encryption. Even if you didn't want to…

Wouldn't they need to significantly decrease the transmission power in order to use the ISM bands, making that application more LAN than WAN? And if the result is both legal and technologically superior to existing WiFi hardware then why hasn't the IEEE picked up on it?

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#82

Post by nanomonkey »

emptybits wrote: post #40
brians wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more hams in the US, and more active hams, than ever before. That's a funny sort of dying! Joe Taylor's work on below-the-noise signal extraction has revitalized shortwave: https://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/wsjtx.html , particularly at the nadir of the sunspot cycle. That's a funny sort of dying! Amateur satellites are accessible for $100 in parts: https://www.n2yo.com/satellites/?c=18 ; with the sa…

> There are more hams in the US, and more active hams, than ever before I apologize for repeating the doom and gloom then, because I know it can be self-fulfilling. The AARL has optimism but it also tells us net licenses are up http://www.arrl.org/news/more-than-30-000-new-ham-licensees-... A decentralized, no-carrier/ISP, disaster-tolerant medium for private communication would be amazing. I am not a licensed ham so…

https://disaster.radio

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#83

Post by mycall »

vvanders wrote: post #30

Does this do any sort of FEC? One of the things that makes stuff like this tricky(and APRS in general) is that one flipped bit throws off the whole decode. From what I've seen out there would be a 40% improvement[1] in just base APRS if there was some form of basic FEC built into the protocol. Sadly most of "state of the art" is stuck back in the 80s. [1] http://eludium.stensat.org/mcguire/projects/FX-25/FX-25_perf..…

Could FEC be considered a form of encryption?

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#84

Post by atomical »

ysleepy wrote: post #28

Maybe messages should include a coarse timestamp to prevent replay of old messages by some adversary. Someone could resend a month old "yes" with your valid signature to a question someone asks now. Also it might be beneficial to include sequence numbers or message IDs and for example echo the last 4 ids in following messages so recipients can detect holes. - The chat could insert some placeholder to notify recipient…

Or a nonce?

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#85

Post by mycall »

emptybits wrote: post #7
Cyph0n wrote: post #2

Cool project! I have always been interested in the amateur radio scene. So encrypting amateur radio comms is illegal in the US? Is there a particular reason for this?

It's also illegal in Canada. With amateur radio "dying" as an interesting hobby (my opinion, but widely held) it is often speculated that if encryption was permitted in amateur radio communications, there would be quite a resurgence in interest. I predict a new generation would start to pick up the hobby and find untold uses (and abuses) for it.

I prefer the other idea.. open up more frequencies to amateur radio with different restrictions. When I scan the frequencies, there is SO much that isn't being used.

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#86

Post by myself248 »

mycall wrote: post #83
vvanders wrote: post #30

Does this do any sort of FEC? One of the things that makes stuff like this tricky(and APRS in general) is that one flipped bit throws off the whole decode. From what I've seen out there would be a 40% improvement[1] in just base APRS if there was some form of basic FEC built into the protocol. Sadly most of "state of the art" is stuck back in the 80s. [1] http://eludium.stensat.org/mcguire/projects/FX-25/FX-25_perf..…

Could FEC be considered a form of encryption?

No, just like speaking in phonetics isn't encryption. It doesn't hide the content of the message, it just adds extra data to make it easier to recover in the case of noise.

FEC could be mistaken for encryption if the algorithm wasn't published, but the same could be said for pretty much any other digital mode. Even Morse...

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#87

Post by leetbulb »

_9vzr wrote: post #31
leetbulb wrote: post #4

> With amateur packet radio anyone can pretend to be anyone else. With Chattervox, you can be sure you're chatting with the person you intend to. This is a great idea, for both the community and as a hobby project. Has there been any other attempts at similar protocols for amateur radio?

You can run just about anything over AX.25 since it's just the data link layer in the OSI model. You could run HTTP on top of IP on top of AX.25 with TLS/SSL message encryption turned off so you don't run afoul of FCC rules. The authentication would still be there but everything would be in the clear. You could also run IPsec with just the authentication field in the header, no encryption. Even if you didn't want to…

Never thought about that. Very cool! Thank you!

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#88

Post by brians »

mmirate wrote: post #80
janoc wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want that, there are plenty of ISM bands and loads of cheap equipment you can use to build such "decentralized, no-carrier/ISP, disaster-tolerant medium for private communication" (aka internet ...) HAM radio bands are meant for R&D work, learning and basically hobby stuff, not to replace internet or phone services - in fact, the regulations explicitly forbid such use.

Then why is it the hams from whom we hear about such feats as "ionosphere skipping", and not any makers of 2.4GHz equipment?

Well, in part because the maximum usable frequency of the ionosphere tops out around 30-60 MHz?

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#89

Post by mmirate »

brians wrote: post #88
mmirate wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why is it the hams from whom we hear about such feats as "ionosphere skipping", and not any makers of 2.4GHz equipment?

Well, in part because the maximum usable frequency of the ionosphere tops out around 30-60 MHz?

Got it, so a meshnet using ISM bands is limited by the radio horizon, meaning that unless the equipment is produced in very high numbers, the links won't be close enough to connect at all, outside urban areas or perhaps a few towns.

Re: Show HN: A new protocol for packet radio including ECDSA and compression

#90

Post by rtkwe »

kawfey wrote: post #55
jimktrains2 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The amateur public radio bands are supposed to be open and useful to everyone so the broadcasts in those spectra are supposed to be readable by everyone as part of the accessible part. Except that proprietary voice codices are allowed :(

This is a dead horse but it isn't encryption.

Yeah there's a big difference between encryption and a codec. Anyone can decode and use the proprietary digital voice codec with appropriate equipment which the licensing board has at least assured won't become a monopoly for one radio equipment company.
Post reply on HN