[Fwd: Re: [Scan-DC] Cell Phones/Cordless Phones]

Mon, 29 Jul 2002 21:48:48 -0400

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Cell Phones/Cordless Phones
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 21:32:47 -0400
From: Shawn Crossland <[email protected]>
To: "William D. Rossiter III" <[email protected]>
References: <000001c23743$bd863160$6a483144@cp47609b>

William/Bill,
This kind of ties back into yesterday's email about images.  Because
scanners
typically have a wide front end bandwidth (i.e. they can tune over a
broad range
of frequencies), this makes them susceptible to picking up image
frequencies
from cellular towers.  You typically can pick up base to handset, analog
cellular transmissions in the lower 900 MHz range of your scanner
(assuming it
can tune that high).  Usually around 900 to 910 MHz.  The cellular "B"
range of
frequencies are in the 880 to 890 MHz.  If you add 10.7 MHz (or 21.4 for
some
scanners) you'll be in the upper 890's or lower 900 frequency range that
isn't
block.

However, I must point out that listening to cellular transmissions is
illegal.
Period.  Cordless telephones are illegal too.  The original Electronic
Communication Privacy Act banned listening to cellular.  It was amended
in '98
(?) and cordless was banned as well.  However, I don't believe the sale
or
manufacture of scanners that cover cordless phones was banned.  My guess
is the
low band VHF public safety band surrounds the cordless phone band.
I'm doing this from memory so I'm probably wrong.  The ECPA amended US
Code
Title 19 subchapter 115.  Or was it title 32?  At any rate, it's the
same US
code that covers wiretapping if you want to look it up. I think I found
it at
www.thomas.loc.gov.   I'd look it up myself but I'm on my P-166 notebook
and I'd
probably be here until tomorrow morning.
How do I feel about it?  No communication is secure.  Encryption only
buys
time.  Time while the big supercomputers crunch the numbers to break the
code.
The Cellular Telephone Industry Association (CTIA) gave big bucks to
Billy
Tauzin (D-LA?) to sponsor the ECPA. There was other legislation they
were behind
too, but I don't have the bill numbers with me.  The CTIA wanted this
legislation passed so consumers would feel secure that somebody with a
scanner
isn't listening to their conversation.  Those consumers would buy more
handsets
from cellular carriers who all belong to the CTIA.  So now you have
consumers
buying handsets and service, providing money to both the cellular
carrier and,
in turn, the CTIA.  Everybody's happy, right?  Well, how does law
enforcement
enforce the ECPA?  How do you prove I listened to your phone call?

With the Newt Gingrich cellular phone taping incident (and that wasn't a
just an
ordinary couple with a scanner from Radio Shack as they tried to
portray), and
the current terrorist paranoia, the ECPA will probably never go away.
That's ny thoughts.
-Shawn

"William D. Rossiter III" wrote:

> According to my understanding, any person can listen in on cordless phone
> conversations by themselves as long as they (1) do not record the
> conversation, and (2) do not divulge the contents of any phone conversation
> to anyone who does not own the scanner.
>
> Also according to my understanding, listening to any cell phone frequencies,
> or even owning a scanner that is capable of doing so, is ILLEGAL.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong on any of these laws.
>
> My question is, why does the FCC care so much about cell phone privacy
> rather than cordless phone privacy.  If one is capable of listening to cell
> phones, they will hear random calls of people they dont even know (some will
> be hundreds of miles away).  And now a days, if your scanner is capable of
> listening to cells, one will only hear a few conversations because most
> people use digital trunked cells.
>
> All I am saying is, if a criminal really wanted to get personal information
> such as credit cards, passwords, bank accounts, etc., it would be a whole
> lot easier to get the info from cordless rather than cell.
>
> I know that this is a touchy subject, and it could possibly offend some of
> the SCAN-DC members, but I'd really like to know what people think about all
> of this nonsense.
>
> Also, is the FCC planing on making any further rules on cells/cordless
> phones in the future?
>
> Reminder:  I don't want to start any flame wars, I just want to know what
> people think.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scan-DC mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc