VOIP over Wi-Fi subject to eavesdropping?

I use VOIP (Voicepulse) over my laptop while on the road, connected via
Wi-Fi hotspots.


My question- Are my phone conversations secure over these connections?
I am talking for "all practical purposes", absent CIA or KGB with
advanced technology.

THANKS!

"Steve" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>I use VOIP (Voicepulse) over my laptop while on the road, connected via
>Wi-Fi hotspots.
>
>My question- Are my phone conversations secure over these connections?
>I am talking for "all practical purposes", absent CIA or KGB with
>advanced technology.

Let me explain 10 important things about telephones to you...
which comes from 34 years, before retiring, in the telephone
long distance business.

1) Do *not* *ever* say *anything* on a telephone that you cannot
live with seeing on the front page of tomorrows local newspaper.

(Items 2 through 9 have precisely the same words as item 1.)

10) There is no such thing as a secure telephone connection,
unless *you* provide the encryption at both ends.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) (E-Mail Removed)

(E-Mail Removed) (Floyd L. Davidson) writes:

>"Steve" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>I use VOIP (Voicepulse) over my laptop while on the road, connected via
>>Wi-Fi hotspots.
>>
>>My question- Are my phone conversations secure over these connections?
>>I am talking for "all practical purposes", absent CIA or KGB with
>>advanced technology.

>Let me explain 10 important things about telephones to you...
>which comes from 34 years, before retiring, in the telephone
>long distance business.

> 1) Do *not* *ever* say *anything* on a telephone that you cannot
> live with seeing on the front page of tomorrows local newspaper.

>(Items 2 through 9 have precisely the same words as item 1.)

Since long range microphones are possible and bugs, I guess you should
change this to " Never say anything ever anywhere [that you would not want
to live to see published...].
Or since your actions could be filmed anywhere, do not do anything....
Or, the best way to cope with the uncertainties of life is to die.

Not for most of us very helpful advice and certainly not an answer to his
question.


> 10) There is no such thing as a secure telephone connection,
> unless *you* provide the encryption at both ends.

Similarly.


IF your VOIP is is not encrypted then yes it could be "overheard".
If the wireless link from your laptop to the access point is not encrypted,
then yes, it could be overheard. I have no idea if VoicePulse encrypts the
stuff.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Floyd L. Davidson
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>"Steve" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>I use VOIP (Voicepulse) over my laptop while on the road, connected via
>>Wi-Fi hotspots.
>>
>>My question- Are my phone conversations secure over these connections?
>>I am talking for "all practical purposes", absent CIA or KGB with
>>advanced technology.
>
>Let me explain 10 important things about telephones to you...
>which comes from 34 years, before retiring, in the telephone
>long distance business.
>
> 1) Do *not* *ever* say *anything* on a telephone that you cannot
> live with seeing on the front page of tomorrows local newspaper.
>
>(Items 2 through 9 have precisely the same words as item 1.)
>
> 10) There is no such thing as a secure telephone connection,
> unless *you* provide the encryption at both ends.
>

I assume that applies to the USA telephone system?

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ (E-Mail Removed) www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Unruh <unruh-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>(E-Mail Removed) (Floyd L. Davidson) writes:
>
>>"Steve" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>I use VOIP (Voicepulse) over my laptop while on the road, connected via
>>>Wi-Fi hotspots.
>>>
>>>My question- Are my phone conversations secure over these connections?
>>>I am talking for "all practical purposes", absent CIA or KGB with
>>>advanced technology.
>
>>Let me explain 10 important things about telephones to you...
>>which comes from 34 years, before retiring, in the telephone
>>long distance business.
>
>> 1) Do *not* *ever* say *anything* on a telephone that you cannot
>> live with seeing on the front page of tomorrows local newspaper.
>
>>(Items 2 through 9 have precisely the same words as item 1.)
>
>Since long range microphones are possible and bugs, I guess you should
>change this to " Never say anything ever anywhere [that you would not want
>to live to see published...].
>Or since your actions could be filmed anywhere, do not do anything....
>Or, the best way to cope with the uncertainties of life is to die.
>
>Not for most of us very helpful advice and certainly not an answer to his
>question.

*BULLSHIT*

Let me repeat that in terms you might understand:

Do not ever say anything on a telephone that you cannot live
with seeing on the front page of tomorrow's local newspaper.

You won't find anyone that has worked with the technical end of
the industry that thinks differently (unless they are brain
dead).

>> 10) There is no such thing as a secure telephone connection,
>> unless *you* provide the encryption at both ends.
>
>Similarly.
>
>IF your VOIP is is not encrypted then yes it could be "overheard".
>If the wireless link from your laptop to the access point is not encrypted,
>then yes, it could be overheard. I have no idea if VoicePulse encrypts the
>stuff.

So you are admitting it is exactly as I said. If *you* don't
provide the encryption, it is *not* secure.

And I *guarantee* you that on occasion there *are* people
listening.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) (E-Mail Removed)

Chris Hills <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Floyd L. Davidson
><(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>>"Steve" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>I use VOIP (Voicepulse) over my laptop while on the road, connected via
>>>Wi-Fi hotspots.
>>>
>>>My question- Are my phone conversations secure over these connections?
>>>I am talking for "all practical purposes", absent CIA or KGB with
>>>advanced technology.
>>
>>Let me explain 10 important things about telephones to you...
>>which comes from 34 years, before retiring, in the telephone
>>long distance business.
>>
>> 1) Do *not* *ever* say *anything* on a telephone that you cannot
>> live with seeing on the front page of tomorrows local newspaper.
>>
>>(Items 2 through 9 have precisely the same words as item 1.)
>>
>> 10) There is no such thing as a secure telephone connection,
>> unless *you* provide the encryption at both ends.
>>
>
>I assume that applies to the USA telephone system?

I would assume it applies to telephones everywhere in the world,
though my experience was specifically in the US. Off hand I'd
assume the security is worse in other places!

You've perhaps never heard just how automatic switching came to
exist in the telephone industry? Back in the good old days you
picked up the transmitter, rang the line, and told the operator
who to connect you to.

Well a fellow named Almon Strowger was an undertaker in Kansas
City, and he became convinced that the local telephone operator
was "misdirecting" business calls to his competitor. The
operator was the wife of the other undertaker in town! So he
went to work on what he later called the "Girl-less Telephone".

He spend a few years working on it, and in the early 1890's came
out with the first automatic telephone switch, designed to get
rid of that pesky telephone operator. A 1901 advertisement
read:

THIS SYSTEM OF TELEPHONING
INSURES ABSOLUTE SECRECY

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) (E-Mail Removed)

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 02:23:01 -0800, (E-Mail Removed) (Floyd L. Davidson)
wrote:

>Do not ever say anything on a telephone that you cannot live
>with seeing on the front page of tomorrow's local newspaper.

This thread reminds me of the novel The Light of Other Days (Arthur C.
Clarke and Stephen Baxter.)

In the story, science creates a wormhole camera - a device that can open a
stable wormhole at any location on the planet, or in the universe, and
observe the goings on. That idea is uncomfortable enough; having to be
worried that you can be on camera even while sitting on the pot with the
door locked and no windows.

Then one clever guy figures out that if the wormhole camera can be sent out
to any location in space, even light-years away, then it stood to reason
that it could be sent years, or eons, back in time also.

At that point, people not only had to worry about being on camera at any
given moment, but they also had to fret about the fact that any action they
ever took in life could now be viewed, and there wasn't a thing they could
do about it.

Turned out to be great for proving beyond all doubt the guilt or innocence
of people in prison. They instituted a policy by which any prisoner could
request a wormhole examination of the crime for which he was convicted,
provided he consented to an examination of the rest of his life to see if
he committed any felonies for which he was suspected or accused, but never
charged. That greatly reduced the number of requests.

Solving previously unsolved crimes became a snap. Simply send a wormhole
cam back to the approximate time of the crime, then sit and watch it
happen.

Current crimes, of course, dropped to nearly zero.

Then the technology became affordable on the consumer level...

It was bad enough pondering the idea of God remembering everything you have
done... now we can imagine science saying "Hey, why not?"


--
PREHISTORIC, adj. Belonging to an early period and a museum. Antedating
the art and practice of perpetuating falsehood.

- Ambrose Bierce

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 02:42:39 -0800, (E-Mail Removed) (Floyd L. Davidson)
wrote:

>Well a fellow named Almon Strowger was an undertaker in Kansas
>City, and he became convinced that the local telephone operator
>was "misdirecting" business calls to his competitor. The
>operator was the wife of the other undertaker in town! So he
>went to work on what he later called the "Girl-less Telephone".

Neat story regardless, but the part about the operator being the wife of
his competitor is just weakly anecdotal and can't be verified. Other
versions claim the operator was the cousin of a competitor, or that all the
operators had conspired against him, suggesting bribery.

It is pretty much accepted that Almon was reportedly a paranoid nut. Either
way, nice going Almon!


--
At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled
children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and
useless. Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats.

- P.J. O'Rourke

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 11:32:36 GMT, CyberDroog
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 02:23:01 -0800, (E-Mail Removed) (Floyd L. Davidson)
>wrote:
>
>>Do not ever say anything on a telephone that you cannot live
>>with seeing on the front page of tomorrow's local newspaper.
>
>This thread reminds me of the novel The Light of Other Days (Arthur C.
>Clarke and Stephen Baxter.)

......<snip>

You might enjoy this short story:
<http://members.net-tech.com.au/alaneb/unknown.html>

Geo

CyberDroog <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 02:42:39 -0800, (E-Mail Removed) (Floyd L. Davidson)
>wrote:
>
>>Well a fellow named Almon Strowger was an undertaker in Kansas
>>City, and he became convinced that the local telephone operator
>>was "misdirecting" business calls to his competitor. The
>>operator was the wife of the other undertaker in town! So he
>>went to work on what he later called the "Girl-less Telephone".
>
>Neat story regardless, but the part about the operator being the wife of
>his competitor is just weakly anecdotal and can't be verified. Other
>versions claim the operator was the cousin of a competitor, or that all the
>operators had conspired against him, suggesting bribery.

Could be, but I've never seen *any* of those versions! The only
variation that I've seen on it was whether he actually *knew*
she was doing it at the time, or just suspected and only
confirmed it much later.

>It is pretty much accepted that Almon was reportedly a paranoid nut. Either
>way, nice going Almon!

Well, I don't know about "paranoid nut", but he was
certainly a "little strange"!

I mentioned that he called it the "Girl-less Telephone", but I
left out the rest of the description. The whole bit was,
"girl-less, cuss-less, out-of-order-less, wait-less" telephone.

Obviously Almon had issues with the telephone company... But
gee, a hundred years later and that would *still* describe about
half the population in the US! (Maybe across the pond people
love telephone companies, but that isn't generally the case
here.)

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) (E-Mail Removed)