[VoiceOps] SS7

Thu Apr 21 18:35:50 EDT 2016

I purposely didn't even start down that road.  But, Yes, they most
certainly could, and for the most part would be easier.  All of the same
info rides the SigTran deployment as an SS7 A/E/F-Link, plus possibly
more.... depending on what type of messaging you're talking about.
However, it also lacks voice content, like the SS7 network.

Kidd

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Jared Geiger <jared at compuwizz.net> wrote:

> I haven't used SS7 in the voice world, only touched briefly on the
> messaging side of it. Would hackers be able to do the same similar attack
> via SIGTRAN? I would think it would be easier to get access to a poorly
> managed SIGTRAN device which would then give you SS7 access.
>
> Or even an Asterisk box running SS7 trunks.
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Dan York <dyork at lodestar2.com> wrote:
>
>> Joseph,
>>
>> I noticed that in Gmail (and perhaps other email systems), the longer
>> reply I wrote for Kidd was hidden because it appeared after his text.
>> Here's what I wrote...
>>
>> what's fascinating is the recent rise in end-to-end (e2e) encryption
>> among IP-based communications platforms that include voice.
>>
>> WhatsApp, for instance, just completed the rollout of e2e encryption on
>> April 5, and not just for messaging, but also for voice and video calls as
>> well as file transfers (
>> https://blog.whatsapp.com/10000618/end-to-end-encryption ).  Just
>> yesterday the team behind Viber announced that they will soon have e2e
>> encryption for all clients.  The app Wire ( http://wire.com ) also does
>> e2e encryption for voice, video and group chats.
>>
>> In a US Congress hearing this week, a Congressman asked a Dept of
>> Homeland Security representative if e2e encryption available in apps would
>> have prevented this interception that happened via SS7. The DHS answer was
>> that it would mitigate the interception of the content, although the
>> location meta-data would still be available.  (You can view the exchange
>> via the link in this tweet:
>> https://twitter.com/csoghoian/status/722854012567969794 )
>>
>> The end result is that we're definitely moving to a space where the
>> communication over IP-based solutions will wind up being far more secure
>> than what we had before.
>>
>> Interesting times,
>> Dan
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Joseph Jackson <jjackson at aninetworks.net
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I don’t know many places that encrypt their voice traffic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of *Dan
>>> York
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, April 21, 2016 2:45 PM
>>> *To:* Kidd Filby
>>> *Cc:* voiceops at voiceops.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] SS7
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is generally true if the calls are *unencrypted* on VoIP...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Kidd Filby <kiddfilby at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Also folks, don't forget, the same outcome of recording someone's call
>>> is MUCH easier to accomplish once it is VoIP.  IMHO, of course.  ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ... BUT... what's fascinating is the recent rise in end-to-end (e2e)
>>> encryption among IP-based communications platforms that include voice.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> WhatsApp, for instance, just completed the rollout of e2e encryption on
>>> April 5, and not just for messaging, but also for voice and video calls as
>>> well as file transfers (
>>> https://blog.whatsapp.com/10000618/end-to-end-encryption ).  Just
>>> yesterday the team behind Viber announced that they will soon have e2e
>>> encryption for all clients.  The app Wire ( http://wire.com ) also does
>>> e2e encryption for voice, video and group chats.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In a US Congress hearing this week, a Congressman asked a Dept of
>>> Homeland Security representative if e2e encryption available in apps would
>>> have prevented this interception that happened via SS7. The DHS answer was
>>> that it would mitigate the interception of the content, although the
>>> location meta-data would still be available.  (You can view the exchange
>>> via the link in this tweet:
>>> https://twitter.com/csoghoian/status/722854012567969794 )
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The end result is that we're definitely moving to a space where the
>>> communication over IP-based solutions will wind up being far more secure
>>> than what we had before.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Interesting times,
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dan York
>>>
>>> dyork at lodestar2.com  +1-802-735-1624   Skype:danyork
>>>
>>> My writing -> http://www.danyork.me/
>>>
>>> http://www.danyork.com/
>>>
>>> http://twitter.com/danyork
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dan York
>> dyork at lodestar2.com  +1-802-735-1624   Skype:danyork
>> My writing -> http://www.danyork.me/
>> http://www.danyork.com/
>> http://twitter.com/danyork
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
>

-- 
Kidd Filby
661.557.5640 (C)
http://www.linkedin.com/in/kiddfilby
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20160421/4123f81d/attachment.html>