I've always wondered what it would take to make a really good encrypted coms system using one of these. However my understanding is that encrypted transmission on HAM is illegal.
For something like this to really get a crackdown you would need a watershed event like RC aircraft had with cheap drones. The point where very capable hardware became extremely cheap and accessible to people who know nothing about the hobby. The RC aircraft community effectively self policed for decades because the bar for entry was high enough that anyone getting involved had to engage with the community. Drones changed that. And the FAA had to step in and regulate. I think we are getting close with cheap Chinese radios. But even Baofengs still require programming and educating yourself. Devices like the flipper zero are far more damaging. Even though they are limited in their capabilities, they make it trivial for the user to make a nuisance of themselves in ways that are hard to ignore. Its probably a matter of time until a cheap radio hits Amazon that does everything for you and permits non hobbyists to ruin everything. Imagine something as capable as a HackRF but as easy to use as an iPhone. Then we have problems.
Like would a well-encrypted stream look indistinguishable to a bit of noise from a low-quality transceiver?
Obviously anyone can track my transmissions with “fox-hunting”. But my transmissions would superficially be valid and legal. How would they notice the well-encrypted communications which theoretically should look like random noise?
If you search for radio steganography or acoustic steganography you'll find a bunch of papers on the topic.
Trying to hide a transmission as background noise would be very difficult. I wouldn't say impossible but it wouldn't be easy. The modern technique is low probability of intercept, LPI. Which uses a combination of techniques including very rapid and complex frequency hopping as well as well as beam forming and making the transmission as efficient as possible to limit the required power. The lower power, and more more directional your transmission, the less likely someone unwanted will be able to pick it up unless they are between you and the intended recipient.
Handheld radios are mostly not useful in an urban setting (compared with a cell phone), and only other radio users can even be bothered by them.
Unlike "drone spotted in posh neighborhood looking into windows" as a headline, "Baofeng user briefly interferes with garage door opener" just doesn't have any edge.
I think the flipper zero/hack rf side of things is the bigger problem. Its very useful to whitehats but they also lower the bar for a lot of disruptive attacks. Get a flipper zero and war drive any neighborhood built in the 80's and its prime hunting ground for forcing garage doors. I'm surprised we haven't heard more of that actually.
It’s a bit of an information hazard. E.g. what if someone made sewer pumps run backwards. Meanwhile the level of exploit capabilities is on the level of Spectre. There is such a wide gulf between what is and what should be that we can’t properly discuss it.
Is it ok to speak in code, like a numbers station?
What about speaking in Navajo, like the Americans did in ww2?
What if it was a made-up tonal language with lots of clicks that sounded similar to a modem transmitting a bitstream?
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/part-97#p-97.113(a)(4)
It's intentionally broad, and gives exceptions for controlling satellites as the only real exception.
People try to fight that publishing encryption keys would mean that you are within the intent of the law, I struggled decades ago trying to create a digital voice mode while every OM told me I was trying to encrypt things. sigh.
It is not trivial to set up an HF antenna that can send a signal (halfway) around the world and be used to hear a response, and it is often not repeatable without the right sun / weather conditions. It is the nature of HF, which hasn’t changed since the 1930s (and will not).
Radios have become arguably cheaper, but electrons vibrating at 3-30MHz have not changed their behavior much.
>which hasn’t changed since the 1930s (and will not).
And that's the crux of my point. It got about as good as it was going to get nearly 100 years ago. I have a ham training/reference book from the 30's. And long range HF was a much more impressive feat back then. But if you go to youtube today basically every Ham channel has at least one video on how to do it "cheap and easy" now. One of the stated purposes for Ham from the FCC's pov was to foster innovation and development of radio technology. If that's true then it needs to evolve with the times because that is a moving target.
Good question. Probably yes but don't pin me on it.
> What about speaking in Navajo, like the Americans did in ww2?
Definitely 100% ok as long as you transmit your callsign in NATO english or send it in morse code. A language is not encryption. The ham community is super international. It's not a US English only thing.
It might cause some grumbling in your local area but it's not illegal. Especially now that repeaters are often connected to the whole world.
This is literally just a UX overhaul away for the HackRF Portapak system. As-is the UX is slightly too awkward for the casual user, but these things trend towards becoming more user friendly over time.
Honestly a Portapak with Bluetooth module and a phone app to control it would be pretty fucking cool, now that I think about it.
Looks like this may be in the works!
At least the normal layperson would need to understand RF to cause any damage.