[VoiceOps] SS7

Fri Apr 22 21:28:14 EDT 2016

I didn't realize you can now connect to another company without ordering
the route-set from a third party. How does this work ? I feel old !

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:40 PM Kidd Filby <kiddfilby at gmail.com> wrote:

> Very well said Mike.
>
> Back In The Day... Interconnection between 2 companies had to occur via a
> 3rd party, like Illuminet.  Their had to be SS7 gateway providers and
> that's all they were allowed to do.  Route SS7 traffic between
> LEC/ILEC/CLEC networks.  Oh... do I remember the pains...
> Gateway-Screened... CNAM database corruption, LIDB services not
> provided.... Still makes my head hurt.
>
> Kidd
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Mike Ray, MBA, CNE, CTE <
> mike at astrocompanies.com> wrote:
>
>> It seems to me that this SS7 vulnerability issue is just the latest
>> result of all of the de-regulation that’s been going on for the past… two
>> decades or so.  There was a time that you could not buy commercial access
>> to the SS7 network; to get that access you had to be a real carrier.  Also,
>> back at that time, inter-company SS7 signalling could only occur on
>> established, ordered signaling routes where both parties placed an order to
>> open the route between them.  Therefore, this would not have been possible
>> back then because the carrier would not have ordered a route to the
>> hacker’s point code(s) and it therefore would not exist.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I am a US local carrier in 2001, I have no need to order a signaling
>> route to a German carrier either so even the hacker having full access to a
>> German carrier’s network would not compromise my network. (in response to
>> the nation-state issue)  To get a call to Germany, I signal to the access
>> tandem or IXC switch I’ve chosen to interconnect with in the US and that
>> switch signals upstream, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> If we were not on this path of de-regulation where whatever makes
>> commercial sense for one company can open up the whole SS7 network to
>> un-trusted parties, we likely wouldn’t be here.  At some point, a decision
>> was made somewhere to allow this loosy-goosy inter-company signaling over
>> the SS7 network between two point codes that would not, under the original
>> implementation of SS7, be able to talk to each other in the first place.
>>
>>
>>
>> If the drumbeat of “solve everything with IP!” continues, I hope that at
>> least it gets solved by establishing something close to what the VPF was
>> supposed to be, and not just a general dumping of all voice traffic across
>> the internet between carriers.  That certainly wouldn’t bode well for
>> reliability or security.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike Ray, MBA, CNE, CTE
>>
>> Astro Companies, LLC
>>
>> 11523 Palm Brush Trail #401
>>
>> Lakewood Ranch, FL  34202
>>
>> DIRECT: call or text 941 600-0207
>>
>> http://www.astrocompanies.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of *Dan
>> York
>> *Sent:* Thursday, April 21, 2016 3:45 PM
>> *To:* Kidd Filby <kiddfilby at gmail.com>
>> *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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20160423/d0668934/attachment-0001.html>