[aprssig] Authentication over APRS was: Ab)Use of APRS for telemetry? Anyone doing it?
Brian B. Riley brianbr at mac.comMon Dec 6 16:47:20 UTC 2004
- Previous message: [aprssig] Re: Authentication over APRS was: Ab)Use of APRS for telemetry? Anyone doing it?
- Next message: [aprssig] (Ab)Use of APRS for telemetry? Anyone doing it?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
This is one of the most misunderstood rules in Part 97. While it may seem I am just replaying your words, please read the next sentence and note the order in which I make the statement. "Encryption is prohibited for the purposes of 'obscuring the meaning' of a transmission." Encryption has always been permitted for security purposes; that is to say an encoded/encrypted password exchange system is perfectly valid to keep a remote control link secure from unauthorized access. The most common example in the ham community has always been the satellite command links. Its a matter of intent. You must use an accepted encryption scheme so the boys at Ft Meade can crack your system, but it effectively leaves 99+% of the population unable to screw with your equipment. -- Cheers ... 73 de brian, n1bq, underhill center, vermont On 12/6/04 10:43 AM, "James Washer" <washer at trlp.com> wrote: > > This brings up a question I've had for some time. As I recall, the FCC rules > prevent amateurs from using "encryption" or anything that obscurs the meaning > of a message. I don't recall the exact words.
- Previous message: [aprssig] Re: Authentication over APRS was: Ab)Use of APRS for telemetry? Anyone doing it?
- Next message: [aprssig] (Ab)Use of APRS for telemetry? Anyone doing it?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
