Researchers find deliberate backdoor in police radio encryption algorithm | Vendors knew all about it, but most customers were clueless.::Vendors knew all about it, but most customers were clueless.

  • bkmps3@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Bingo. All of these technologies are controlled by ITAR.

    I have zero doubt this was for clandestine use internationally and it was almost inevitable. Outside of a back-door there is no way you’re getting access to properly encrypted net with some of the higher end technologies.

      • bkmps3@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure ETSI are responsible for the encryption standard.

        And Motorola is free to use that standard on radio handsets made with components of ITAR controlled items.

        The use of any component controlled via ITAR will have the entire unit controlled.

        Having used a Motorola product covered by ITAR on “the wrong continent” many times.

        • Yendor@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          ETSI isn’t responsible for “the encryption standard” - they’re responsible for the TETRA standard. TETRA isn’t encryption - it’s a type of radio system, that has encryption as one small part of it. (I know plenty about TETRA - I’ve designed transmission networks for TETRA systems.) I’ve worked on DAMM and Leonardo systems, they’re completely European designed and built, there’s no ITAR regulations on them.

    • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah, yes. European radios made by European manufacturers to specifications created by a European agency primarily intended for use in Europe are, in fact, actually being controlled by the US. Am I understanding that correctly?

    • smegger@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      For sure. There are plenty of historical prevents for this exact situation. Makes you wonder why anyone would trust exported “secure” technology from America

      • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ah, I see you’re having trouble finding the article. No worries, the link is right up there at the top of the page! I know you’d never intentionally comment before reading the article unless you were struggling to find it; only a redditor would comment without knowing what was being discussed.