[RTTY] About encryption: an example

[Dave Greig]

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment_search/execute?proceeding=RM-11699
This information on this link is incorrect. HIPAA only talks about
specific *patient
names* and the correlation of that data to sickness or injury.  Body count,
how many injured, how many people have an illness can be transmitted in the
open un-encrypted.
As for The HIPAA, the law is all about interpretation. The short paragraph
out of the 950 or so pages of the HIPAA act, that talks about encryption
say that data must be encrypted. Does matter if it is 1 bit encryption or
256M encryption.

*Sorry for the subject change.  It just shows how UNINFORMED our law makers
and ARRL are*.

Thank You!
Dave Greig N3BUO
*801 Tactical*
Phone: (682) 422-6667
http://www.801tactical.com
 Google Plus: gplus.to/801Tactical
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/801Tactical
Twitter: @801tactical


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:28 AM, aflowers at frontiernet.net <
aflowers at frontiernet.net> wrote:

>
>
> Hi Friends,
>
> The talk about encryption is an interesting issue and in fact came up last
> year in a petition to the FCC.  You can read that and the comments to get
> an idea about what the motivation is and the issues involved:
>
> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment_search/execute?proceeding=RM-11699
>
> It's very helpful to understand who wants this and ostensibly why.  Not
> necessarily all bad, but I would ask the question whether this is a
> bridge-to-far for amateur radio.  The FCC seems to think so and you can see
> their reasoning.  For those of you concerned about winlink and why
> encryption is "necessary" I suggest you look up some of the more prominent
> names in that organization and look at their comments.  Here's a starter:
> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520927665
>
> But I'm not really all that interested in winlink per se, but rather the
> philosophy driving some of the decisions you are now seeing, and that's not
> why I'm writing.
>
> All this email is intended to do is to show you a concrete example of
> encryption being sold to hams *today*, lest anyone think this is simply an
> existential discussion.
>
> SCSmail is a personal email program that is freeware to go with your
> pactor modem.  The product is designed for low-cost personal email service
> independent of any networks. In other words, this is so you can use ham
> radio for your own private email server:
>
> "It is not the intention of SCSmail to replace or to interfere with
> existing professional HF email providers with their highly sophisticated
> solutions and services. Its purpose is just to give private users and small
> organizations the chance to quickly install an own, private email service
> without additional costs and without the need to subscribe to an existing
> provider and thus being dependent from an external service."
>
> http://www.scs-ptc.com/downloads/scs-mail
>
> Its about low cost email service with privacy.  Not a bad thing in
> itself.  I like free stuff too....but *why* is ham radio a market for
> this?  That's a serious question.
>
> If you look at the SCSmail 2.0.1.4 manual it clearly explains that there
> is session encryption key unique to each pactor connection.  The download
> shows the OpenSSL license in the bundle so I can assure you that its using
> Public/Private key pairs to exchange a key just like you do when you manage
> your bank account over HTTPS on the internet.  This is not just encrypting
> login information (authentication purposes have special exceptions, at
> least in the US and most other countries and for good reason), but
> encryption of everything including the content of the messages themselves.
> The manual makes this clear.
>
> Of course, you don't have to use encryption, and to SCS's credit they
> point out that you need to follow the rules of whatever service you have.
> Nonetheless you have someone specifically marketing a product to the
> amateur service for private email communication that has encryption as a
> key feature.  Lets not pretend there isn't an interest in this as can be
> seen from the discussion of RM-11699....is it being used on amateur radio
> bands right now?  Better questions:  (1) Is it important for you to
> know and (2) How would you know?
>
> Oh, and encryption is on by default when you run the program.
>
> Its there, its ready, and its already wrapped in an unpublished code by
> any reasonable interpretation.  Like I said, this is for information only
> and it may be helpful in understanding some of the broader issues and
> drawing your own conclusions.
>
> Andy K0SM/2
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>