GPRS Can Be Hacked Easily, Claims German Researcher 50
hypnosec writes "A German technology researcher on Wednesday showed global mobile makers and technology firms how General Packet Radio Service can easily be tapped, intercepted, and decrypted with an average mobile phone and a few applications. According to the New York Times, Karsten Nohl, a computer engineer and mobile security researcher, demonstrated to fellow researchers gathered to attend Chaos Communication Camp, a Berlin-based hackers event, how to intercept the voice or data messages sent between mobile devices over GPRS easily, owing to weak protection provided by mobile network carriers for data information. Nohl, in collaboration with his colleague Luca Melette, tapped the information within a radius of five kilometers using a seven-year-old inexpensive mobile phone from Motorola." Computerworld also has an informative, link-laden account. If you are attending this year's CCC (only every four years, sadly), feel free to drop a line (with the submissions form) about cool projects you encounter there.
Aha! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You're confusing bad Germans with good Germans. They're not the same, you know.
Neither have a sense of humour.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wir sind die Guten!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yea, you go ahead and explain that to the NYT. We'll wait here for ya.
Re: (Score:2)
Good hackers are called anti-hackers according to CNN.
1995 called... (Score:1)
They want their outdated mobile data standard back (preferably with no shipping charges)
Re: (Score:2)
GPRS != GSM.
Re: (Score:2)
Very interesting (Score:2)
using a seven-year-old inexpensive mobile phone from Motorola
Yet another reason [slashdot.org] why I still use my RAZR. [wikipedia.org] MUHAHAHAHA!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which model do you have?
Yep, they (v3t GSM) still work for my queen ant and me for basic phone calls. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile my e815 is turning itself off rather than charge its battery. Three different chargers, two different batteries. Thankfully I was able to set up call forwarding before the first battery got too low to boot the phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Bad news for people out in the boondocks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
10 or 15 years ago this would have been a big issue, but these days I just can't see it.
Given the near-total disregard for security I feel in most mobile network operators, I think anything that draws attention to how laughably easy it is to intercept cell data is worth talking about. Most people just assume that their cell data is secure, when every year at DEFCON we see more exploits .. and they never seem to get patched.
With how ridiculously easy it is to encrypt internet traffic you'd think they could at least deploy some patches to fix some of these attacks... rogue towers anyone? They
Re: (Score:2)
You're talking about an industry which, until something like 2002, was still using unencrypted, 800 MHz AM transceivers and relying on laws passed by congress to force radio shack to cripple it's scanners...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
GPRS is fine for e-mail, IM and such. Better than nothing when you're out in the wilderness (i.e. 30km beyond city limits :p)...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can't say I've noticed much latency. Even tethered surfing (with Flashblock, NoScript and AdBlock Plus, of course) isn't really worse than flaky 3G (like on the train)... sure, Slashdot takes 20 times longer to load than at home, but when you're out in the boonies with nothing to do, 10 seconds to load the page of comments that you're going to spend 10 minutes reading isn't too bad ;)
Re: (Score:2)
sensational? (Score:2)
Now that's it's fairly inexpensive ($50) and abundant that you can get GPRS transceivers, and the wire protocol is widely known today.... it's not surprising that folks can hack into it.
I mean current technology R/C transceivers are more secure nowadays.
Re: (Score:2)
Secure cellular communications? (Score:1)
Also, are cellular communications inherently less secure than wired communications like a land line? Or are those even easier for say your phone company or government to listen in on?
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a tip: you don't have secure communications over the phone, period.
Unless you have something like a fritz chip (that isn't retarded) it isn't secure.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. If you're relying on any protocol or device you don't control, it's not secure. You want secure? Use a VPN with keyfiles where you control the devices on both ends. That's a secure connection, but if you run Skype through it, that Skype call is not secure.
I always considered phone calls, texts, and (at the very least) non-SSL cellular data traffic to be unsecure, so this news doesn't bother me.
Re: (Score:2)
At which time it's not really a phone conversation... but yes, that would be a way to manage it. Though you do have to trust the phone itself.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't I just say that? It's implicit in "Though you do have to trust the phone itself."
Re: (Score:2)
I assume you mean the specs are unreadable?
(The fact they are only available under NDA means nothing given the number of companies and people with access to it.)
Incorrect information (Score:2, Informative)
Karsten Nohl states - “One reason operators keep giving me for switching off encryption is, operators want to be able to monitor traffic, to detect and suppress Skype, or to filter viruses, in a decentralized fashion,” Mr. Nohl said. “With encryption switched on, the operator cannot ‘look into’ the traffic anymore while in transit to the central GPRS system.”
This is rubbish. Deep Packet Inspection for the detection of layer 7 applications such as Skype being used by mobil