ProxyHam Debunked and Demoed At DEFCON 38
darthcamaro writes: Last month, the ProxyHam project talk for DEFCON was mysteriously cancelled. In its place as a later edition is a new talk, in which the ProxyHam approach will be detailed and debunked — in a session called '"HamSammich". In a video preview of the talk, Rob Graham and Dave Maynor detail the flaws of ProxyHam and how to do the same thing with off the shelf gear, legally. "Our goal is to show that ProxyHam did not actually enhance security," Maynor said. "It does the exact opposite, causing more trouble than you can fix."
Transcript Please (Score:5, Insightful)
I can read. I don't need to watch two retards mumble their way through a poorly shot video.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Transcript Please (Score:4, Insightful)
But how else are they supposed to make money from their youtube channel? That's the real reason everyone wants a 10 minute long video to relay two sentences of value.
Re: (Score:1)
You mean there are other ways to convey simple information than to make long youtube videos?
Ugh, this trend is literally killing me by wasting my time. Once I just wanted to know the damn code to get diagnostics on my phone, most of the results were 10 minute youtube videos showing me how to type in the magic 6 digits. Or, you know, they could have just left the number in the description...
IF they eventually answer it (Score:4, Interesting)
The paragraphs of fluff "introduction" has always bugged me, but lately I've run into a few articles which have all the fluff, then completely forget to address the question, to EVER get to the point. Stuff like:
HOW TO BOOT DIAGNOSTIC MODE IN ANDROID
Android is the world's most popular ... ...
Cell phones are now more popular than PCs
Diagnostic mode should be used with care ... ...
Some carriers disable diagnostic mode
THE END
Hey asshole! You forgot to say how to boot into diagnostic mode!
Re: (Score:3)
Didn't watch the video either, but according to TFS it tells you how to build your own, and that's not hard to figure out:
* Go to Google and type in "900 MHz ethernet extender", click on one of the ads an buy one. ...
* Connect it to a wireless router, and set the router to "bridge" mode.
* Congratulations, you now have a ProxyHam
*
* Profit!
Re: (Score:2)
2.00 in is about 900MHz been useful in the USA, out of the main wifi sniffer app, tool range, a few testing apps for 900MHz.
3.00 "boosting signal" and US cellular services range.
5.00 Line of sight for range beyond the wifi parts.
5.30 Header packets and ip. Tracking radio bearing, hill over a town, 5 miles away 3mb to 6 speed, a good link and line of sight.
7.00 900MHz is good for some tree, building issues.
8.40 FCC limitations? Off-the-shelf 900MHz radio transmitter, normal defa
Re: (Score:1)
They might let the ham folks toy with you for a little while before they step in with guns, arrest, and fines. The FCC has been a bit devious in the past and has allowed some vigilante behavior to go unnoticed.
Re:DISINFORMATION (Score:4, Informative)
The difference is mainly in legal vs illegal. It's not illegal to hide yourself, but it IS illegal using the previous method. Broadcasting all over a licensed band is a quick way to end up in trouble. HAMs self report, no FCC required. Hell, we'd grab the YAGIs and make a game out of finding the prick.
Re: (Score:1)
and if y'all are being POLITE said prick might land up in the local jail.
if not ... (insert theme to BONES)
Re: (Score:2)
and if y'all are being POLITE said prick might land up in the local jail.
For what, using a legal data radio link in a way that doesn't require a license and isn't causing you any interference?
if not ... (insert theme to BONES)
If not, YOU wind up in jail for assault and trespass, and the FCC yanks your ham license for failing to abide by the Part 97 rules that say you must accept interference, if any, from the guy you beat up, and for a demonstrated lack of moral character that has cost other felons their licenses.
Y'all need to take a breath and realize that there are other authorized users of ham frequencie
Re:DISINFORMATION (Score:4, Interesting)
The difference is mainly in legal vs illegal. It's not illegal to hide yourself, but it IS illegal using the previous method. Broadcasting all over a licensed band ...
1. It's not "broadcasting", it's point-to-point data.
2. It's unlicensed for the devices that were being used.
HAMs self report, no FCC required. Hell, we'd grab the YAGIs and make a game out of finding the prick.
Yeah, go track down a legal secondary user of a band where you are a secondary user yourself and Part 97 (97.301 [ecfr.gov] and 97.303(e) [ecfr.gov]) tells you that you must accept interference from, and then what? Force them to stop their legal use of the frequencies you want to call your own?
The "previous method" is no different than the current one. You didn't bother to read any of the discussion about this in the earlier /. dust-up and conspiracy party, did you? It was pointed out by several people, myself included, that the ProxyHam hardware shown in the pictures they released were simple 900 MHz unlicensed data radios and cheap Yagi-Uda antennas. That's not illegal. They weren't shut down by some awful FCC or NSA conspiracy to stop some dangerous hacking activity, because it was both legal and the intended use for the commercial products they were using.
Re: (Score:2)
You miss the point about broadcast or point to point. The point to point link still must "broadcast" energy in the RF spectrum to work.
No, I used the term correctly. The radio transmits, but it is not a broadcast.
Does the 900MHz band in use have bandwidth available to transmit the signal?
Of course it does. They were using a COMMERCIALLY PRODUCED data radio with FCC approval for sale in the US. If you mean "are there hams trying to use the bandwidth", then it doesn't matter. It is a SHARED RESOURCE, and as an ISM device hams are legally required to accept any interference there might be from it. Damn unlikely to be any, though, given the low power and narrow radiation pattern being used.
Re: (Score:2)
... and then once you found me, I'd make a game out of it from there that you would neither like nor be prepared to handle.
900MHz *is* monitored (Score:2)
it's the GSM mobile band.
Oh yes, I think the FCC might have something to say about that.
Re: (Score:2)
GSM operates on the same 850-MHz band as other cellular services, not 900 MHz. Properly-functioning 900-MHz equipment should stay well away from the cellular band...about the only equipment (other than a phone) you're likely to run across that tunes into the cellular band are old TVs (built up to the mid-'80s or so) that tuned up to channel 84, and they're receive-only.
Re: (Score:2)
E-GSM uplink is 880-925MHz, downlink 925-960MHz. This technology is used in Europe and Brazil.
CDMA-800 is only used in the Americas except Brazil. 850 is Band V CLR used for roaming with compatible quad band handsets. Tri-band uses 900, 1900 and 2100MHz. The rest of the world (not the Americas or Europe) uses only 2100MHz.
This is why 934MHz switched gear is illegal to operate. Because you're talking unrestricted (it never was restricted, I still have a 200 Watt burner and a firestick capable of radiating it
Re: (Score:2)