Re: [MLUG] Frame Relay or Better

[Vern Green <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

I thought Ethernet over power might be the only possibility for those
like me who have no other option.

If they can ever get the emergency bands out of the range the same
range it might happen. I know there was some people (power company
types) that were proposing to pay for retrofitting all emergency bands
to a higher frequency so they could have that frequency emiited by
using ethernet over power.

On Apr 7, 2005 10:15 AM, Jason McIntosh <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> Yes, that's definitely the case, although an interesting question then
> is what happens if you're using this and go to a website with SSL
> enabled?  That immediately means you don't want to use this to transmit
> ANY kind of sensitive data.  Talking yes, as long as it's like talking
> on the phone - expect that you're being listened to.  *grin* Makes me
> think of all the people who use phone's to give out passwords and
> information.  Most people don't realize it, but your cordless house
> phone is pretty easy to pick up and listen to.  Most of the older
> phones operated at around 800Mhz.  I remember a trip where I was
> scanning around and listened to conversations.  Was kinda entertaining.
>  Cell phones are supposed to use a different technology, and thus be
> much harder to listen in on - i.e. it's not standard voice
> communications, but I think compressed digital and as such, not
> something you can listen in on with a standard radio.
> Anyways, the end result - you could listen in with a standard radio, do
> packet capture of the signal, and figure out what was going back and
> forth pretty easily.  Interestingly enough, there's another app out
> there that does this on wireless....  EtherPeg for Mac OS X :)  Kinda
> entertaining to watch what happens:
> http://www.etherpeg.org/
> Jason
> 
> /--------------------------------------|---------------------------\
> | Jason McIntosh                       | CELL: 573-424-7612        |
> | Webmaster, thinker, Programmer, etc. | WORK: 573-884-3865        |
> | http://poetshome.com/                |                           |
> |------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |"How should I know if it works?  That's what beta testers are     |
> |for.  I only coded it."                                           |
> |(Attributed to Linus Torvalds, somewhere in a posting)            |
> \--------------------------------------|---------------------------/
> GnuPG Key:
> http://poetshome.com/about/jmcintosh_mlug.missouri.edu.gpgkey
> On Apr 7, 2005, at 11:54 AM, Jason McFarland wrote:
> 
> > Compression is fine as long as anyone listening can also decompress it.
> >
> > Hams operate under Part 97 of the FCC rules.  See
> > http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/47cfr97_04.html and look
> > at section 113 (Prohibited transmissions.) and look at A.4, "messages
> > in codes or ciphers intended to obscure the meaning thereof" are
> > prohibited.
> >
> > Jason
> > KC0EZP
> >
> > On Apr 7, 2005 11:36 AM, George Robb <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> >> Would compression be considered encryption?   Have compression /
> >> de-compression on both ends with a huge buffer and it might emulate
> >> faster speeds than 19.2?  but, I have never played with packet :)
> >>
> >> Anyone on the list know of a time line for broadband over power lines?
> >> I would love see that hit rural MO...
> >>
> >> George
> > _______________________________________________
> > members mailing list
> > EMAIL:PROTECTED
> > http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members
> 
> _______________________________________________
> members mailing list
> EMAIL:PROTECTED
> http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members
> 


-- 
Thanks
F Vernon Green
_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members