Re: Hacker-run GSM network vs the current hack we call cellular

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Bob Frankston" <bob2-39 () bobf frankston com>
Date: August 19, 2009 10:43:03 AM EDT
To: <dave () farber net>, "'ip'" <ip () v2 listbox com>
Subject: RE: [IP] Hacker-run GSM network vs the current hack we call  
cellular

Another reminder of the diligence required to keep the current hack we  
call the cellular system from collapsing. As we see there is no magic  
– it’s not that hard to build one’s own. At least if one weren’t  
burdened with the gratuitous complexities of today’s cellular. Perhaps  
we’re about to see GSM tipped over like a cow – shouldn’t we be  
preparing for post-cellular connectivity?

Cellular systems evolved from the realization that the stronger FM  
(Frequency Modulation) signal would dominate the weaker one to today’s  
baroque digital system that tries to maintain all the privileges  
accrued to the owners of the old analog systems no matter what the  
cost. This issue again comes to the fore as we try to maintain this  
complexity unto the fourth generation (http://frankston.com/?name=4GAgain 
).

Internally it’s a hodgepodge of ISDN (SS7) mixed in with hobbyist  
Hayes Modem protocols (AT commands) and desiccated broken Internet  
protocols (MMS). Like X.400 it’s very concerned with maintaining the  
hierarchical system of privileges and charters granted to the children  
of the old PTTs. How many packets does it take to bill for each SMS  
packet? These kind of multipliers of costs and complexity are endemic.  
It took years to get simple things like roaming to work and if you  
have a glitch calls get dropped thus requiring very expensive coverage  
with the incredible cost of redundancy with each carrier having to  
have its own systems?

Why does an iTouch cost about $200 and an unlocked iPhone go for $800  
(on eBay)? Online I find unlocked Smartphones to be generally about  
$600 though a noncontract G1 at T-Mobile is $400. The phone versions  
may have additional radios and features but still, that’s steep  
premium. No wonder there is interest in using VoIP on an iTouch as an  
alternative.

And we know this is complexity unnecessary. But bad design being its  
own reward because it requires protecting the carriers from  
competition. The simple end-to-end design of VoIP systems are far more  
resilient. No wonder we favor bad design that creates scarcity and  
costs.

How much economic value would be created if we did away with the costs  
and limitations of this bad design and, in the US, honored the First  
Amendment by favoring free speech over privileges granted to carriers?  
How would our quality of life improved if we had the ability to simply  
communicate instead of having to petition for it each time?


-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 09:32
To: ip
Subject: [IP] Hacker-run GSM network



Begin forwarded message:

From: Randall <rvh40 () insightbb com>
Date: August 17, 2009 7:28:14 AM EDT
To: johnmacsgroup () yahoogroups com, Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com
 >, David Farber <dave () farber net>
Subject: Hacker-run GSM network

[[From the Telecom Digest]]

From: Thad Floryan <thad () DELETED com>
To: moder8 () telecom csail mit edu
Subject: Hacker-run GSM networks are coming [Telecom]
Message-ID: <4A88B360.7020506 () thadlabs com>

I have mixed emotions when I read something like the following
which appeared on Slashdot earlier today, especially given the
known GSM interference problems.

However, this is telephony and this is news (from Slashdot):

Harald Welte, who's been interviewed previously by Slashdot,
has written on his blog about operating an Open Source GSM
network:

<http://laforge.gnumonks.org/weblog/2009/08/14/#20090814-har2009_gsm_network
 >

at the recent HAR2009 conference:

<https://wiki.har2009.org/page/Main_Page>

Photographs and a description and of the setup, run under
license of the Dutch regulatory authority, are provided;
essentially the setup consisted of a pair of BTSs (Base
Transceiver Stations) running at 100mW transmit power each
and tied to a tree. In turn these provided access to the
Base Station Controller (BSC), in this case a Linux server
in a tent running OpenBSC:

<http://bs11-abis.gnumonks.org/trac/wiki/OpenBSC>

The system authenticated users with a token sent via SMS;
in total 391 users subscribed to the service and were able
to use their phones as if they were on any other network.

Independent researchers are increasingly examining GSM
networks and equipment, Welte's work proves that GSM is
in the realm of the hackers now and that this realm of
mobile networking could be set for a few surprises in
the future.

[ We need to keep an eye on this; "a few surprises" could mean
  many different things :-) ]

--
The war on privilege will never end. Its next great campaign will be
against the privileges of the underprivileged. H. L. Mencken





-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com