civilian information exchange within a war zone

[Jesse Sanford]

Hello all, I am quite interested in the above topic for personal reasons but also for the benefit for all of us the future of democracy becomes more and more dependent on the free and open exchange of information. As we all know the words "free and open" carry a lot of weight and many overtones so let me just qualify them by saying that by free I mean uninterrupted, uncorrupted, not necessarily secret, but impervious to disruption by intermediary parties. By open I mean available to every single human being and completely transparent as in no part of the system composing the means for the communication is a mystery to any party wishing to use the system.

My question for the group is what systems fall within the above definitions. Obviously the internet that we currently use daily only partially fits the bill. Only via some routes are our communications guaranteed uncorrupted and even then we are not truly guaranteed that they are not disrupted. TCP as a network protocol only insures that if the receiver is alive and able to receive that your packets will get to the receiver eventually. But what if someone intentionally takes down a switch between you and your destination. Now what if someone takes down ALL switches between you and your destination? It seems to me that it would be impossible to rely on the internet as it is solely given an opponent with control over the infrastructure that your messages will travel on. So there would seem to be two approaches to deal with this situation. A) Hide your communications so that your opponent does not know what parts of the infrastructure you are using. B) use infrastructure your opponent does not have control over.

A) implies masking and possibly spoofing to hide in the ether.

B) implies a federated approach to the communication. Possibly to the point of using alternate physical means of communication (Point to point laser, microwave, Ham etc)

Does anyone have any experience with these types of scenarios? I know we saw a lot of internet disruptions in the mid east uprisings last spring. We all know that the trend will continue. How can we deal with this in the future? I do believe this is essential to the preservation of democracy here on earth. Without the ability for people to communicate at scale we cannot self govern.

Thanks,

Jesse

[Michael Shiloh]

Discussions around the tor project cover much of this ground. You might
want to join some of their mailing lists.

M

[Foxx D'Gamma]

A lot of what you describe has existed through the form of of BBS back in the 80s. I run a po'dunk BBS at my house mainly for the nostalgia and shits & giggles but the fact that its run "By the people, for the people" and the only ones that can censor or manipulate the content of information are the sysadmins in general. Granted we rely on an internet pipe via telnet and HTTP, its always possible to use telephone lines if those were ever blocked or start to reject BBS traffic, or perhaps block the ports needed. If all else fails we can fall back to Radio BBS (I am a ham operator as well) with limited range using local repeaters, or go to shortwave and propagate globally if needed. Believe it or not, a lot of what Ham Radio was back in the late 70's and 80's is still around today, even cheaper and easier to pull off. Its entirely a network of operators that rule their hardware under their own belief and morals, and could be just what you are interested in.

~ Foxx

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NYCResistor:Microcontrollers" group.
To post to this group, send email to nycresistormi...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nycresistormicrocon...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nycresistormicrocontrollers?hl=en.

[Jesse Sanford]

Yes I am aware of Tor and it is certainly a version of what I meant with the "masking spoofing" hiding in the ether kind of thing. But what if there is a massive shutdown of civilian internet providers within an area in need of communication.

I do realize that obviously no one answer is enough. There will need to be a tool chest of approaches available and used depending on the scenario at hand. It would seem that there could be a handbook of sorts (if there is not one already) that describes scenarios and when/how to escalate/switch tools.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NYCResistor:Microcontrollers" group.

To post to this group, send email to nycresistormicrocontrollers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nycresistormicrocontrollers+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Jesse Sanford]

Sorry I hope that didn't sound less than grateful for your responses. I appreciate them and am hoping for more thoughts on this topic!

Cheers,

Jesse

[Michael Shiloh]

No problem!

I have seen many excellent conversations on the larger picture in the
context of Tor, which is why I mentioned it.

M

>>> To post to this group, send email to nycresistormicrocontrollers@**
>>> googlegroups.com<nycresistormi...@googlegroups.com>.

>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

>>> nycresistormicrocontrollers+**unsub...@googlegroups.com<nycresistormicrocontrollers%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>>> .
>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**group/**
>>> nycresistormicrocontrollers?**hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/nycresistormicrocontrollers?hl=en>
>>> .
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Matt Joyce]

I love that people seem to think the Internet is available in war zones.

Shit's hilarious.

googlegroups.com<nycresistormicrocontrollers@googlegroups.com>.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

nycresistormicrocontrollers+**unsub...@googlegroups.com<nycresistormicrocontrollers%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**group/**
nycresistormicrocontrollers?**hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/nycresistormicrocontrollers?hl=en>
.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NYCResistor:Microcontrollers" group.

To post to this group, send email to nycresistormicrocontrollers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nycresistormicrocontrollers+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nycresistormicrocontrollers?hl=en.

[Luke Schantz]

There is a project called Ronja that uses IR to create a line of sight network connection.

http://ronja.twibright.com/about.php

It certainly has its limitations and issues.  Rain, Snow and Fog can disrupt it.  It is used in places (mainly eastern europe) with out a local infrastructure.  Something like this could be useful in said scenario where the network is shut down on purpose or because of damaged infrastructure.  

Possibly something similar but more modern could be rigged up; a wifi version with axial mode antenna mesh network.

Luke

[David Tang]

ham/amateur radio comes to mind- it can be used in emergency/disaster when no other communications are available. not sure if you were aware of it, but it seems to be a good fit for what you are looking for. it's free, open, but strictly regulated. with licensing, you can operate in many parts of the world. you do need licensing, it isn't very difficult to get.

it is a dying hobby unfortunately, but there seems to be a ton of potential for improvements using digital technologies that weren't widely available years ago. 

one interesting new development in ham radio is D-star for internet access. but it's proprietary under Icom. other projects have been in the works to create non proprietary technologies. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-STAR

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_25

http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?106545-D-STAR

hope that helps..

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NYCResistor:Microcontrollers" group.

To post to this group, send email to nycresistormi...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nycresistormicrocon...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nycresistormicrocontrollers?hl=en.

[Matt Joyce]

HAM licenses are at an all time high.  ( Irony defined )

[David Tang]

http://www.sunjournal.com/news/approved/0001/11/30/ham-radio-licenses-hit-all-time-high/1122718 

indeed.. i stand corrected. :)

[Jeremy Charette]

"I love that people seem to think the Internet is available in war zones.

"Shit's hilarious."

Indeed.

I work in war zones, and I can tell you, connectivity is tenuous at best. Even on a good day, internet speeds sub-Saharan Africa could be bested by a 14.4k AOL dialup connection. That's in capitol cities. It's far worse out in the field. 

There's a very good reason that NGOs use HF radios to communicate in the field, and not cell phones. It's a seemingly far-fetched scenario, but if for "some reason" the internet and cell phone towers were turned off, HAM and HF would be some of the only viable options left.

[Matt Joyce]

Outside of insurrection... most military operations begin with strikes on communication and power hubs.

=/  The internet is a legitimate military target folks.

[Jesse Sanford]

This is a great discussion. Thanks everyone for continuing to chime in. I think that I should re-iterate that this is not specifically about the internet. This is about information exchange between civillian parties. Also it should be noted that war zone is a very loose term. If I could do so without starting an entirely new chain of emails I would reword the subject line to be areas of political unrest. This could be war zones of course BUT it could also mean anywhere the civilian population is subject to communications oppression/depravation. Take that how you will.

Thanks again to everyone who has contributed!

[Luke Schantz]

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-perfect-radio/

Seems as if we civilans are not the only ones having issues with communicating in war zones.

From Wired Danger Room Blog January 11, 2012:

"Over the past 15 years the Army has spent $17 billion on a doomed attempt to build a “universal” radio — that is, a single radio model capable of replacing the many different radio types in everyday use by front-line troops. After struggling for years with escalating size, weight and complexity, in October the Army finally canceled the Ground Mobile Radio, the main version of this so-called Joint Tactical Radio System.

The ill-fated JTRS — or “Jitters,” as it’s known — isn’t the military’s most expensive gear-buying faceplant. Not by a long shot. But it is a uniquely damaging one. For while the Army tried and failed to replace many radios with one, combat units have had to make do with outdated systems that have left them vulnerable on the battlefield. Today, as in years past, soldiers have to slow down or even stop in order to deploy their vast, complex arsenal of old-fashioned radios."

[michael lowry]

I find this discussion particularly interesting. In our current age, we depend so much on cellular and internet communications, and even wired land line telephones, and seem lost without them. Even satellite based communications are vulnerable to being compromised by an oppressive government or invading force. Even back in the days of the Telegraph, communications tech has been used to suppress revolutions and control the flow of information.

HAM radio has an appeal because of the open nature of the platform. The stations can be set up and used cheaply, and they are rather effective. They also have the tradition of giving power of free speech to people in all kinds of socio-political climates. This tradition is worth perpetuating and keeping alive.

Most other types of communication require some sort of infrastructure to work with. Wires, towers, and satellites all fall within this realm. However i think there's a possibility of shorter range point to point networked wireless communications, where various nodes would create a mesh network and communicate using the nodes as an impromptu infrastructure. The devices would obviously subjected to some of the same difficulties of many of the others, but it's a concept systems like Xbee/Zigbee exhibit, and other wifi platforms. I don't know enough about the technical of how specifically this thing could be pulled off, but one of these days, i think it can be done. I would appreciate any comments from those who have worked with these or similar technologies.

Michael Lowry
Research Assistant

NYU Minimally Invasive Surgery Lab

423 E 23rd Street, New York, NY 10010

Office: (212) 686-7500 X6441
Cell: (201) 787-8633

mt...@njit.edu

[Darcy Whyte]

networked flashlight morse code?

[Matt Joyce]

There is a reason HAM radio was an integral component in Civil Defense response scenarios in the 50s.

[doug brantner]

Re: Wifi/Xbee/Zigbee-

In the book "Little Brother" by Cory Doctorow, the kids put up an
ad-hoc secret internet using xboxes and riding on open wifi
connections. It's an interesting idea. The book is a great read for
anyone interested in this topic, and a good intro to encryption &
privacy for non-hackers as well.

It's available as a free e-book on the author's website, craphound.com
I think. I read the whole thing as a txt file on my blackberry :)

>>>> years<http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/04/of_all_the_high/> with

>>>> escalating size, weight and complexity, in October the Army finally
>>>> canceled the Ground Mobile Radio, the main version of this so-called
>>>> Joint
>>>> Tactical Radio System.
>>>>
>>>> The ill-fated JTRS — or “Jitters,” as it’s known — isn’t the military’s
>>>> most expensive gear-buying faceplant. Not by a long

>>>> shot.<http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/joint-strike-fighter-13-flaws/>

--
Sent from my mobile device

Doug Brantner
doug.b...@gmail.com
pretendtodiy.blogspot.com project blog

[David Tang]

i agree totally.. i think ham is in a great position now with all the new advances in digital.

there was a trend a few years ago, when repeaters were going down as fewer people were using them, and the knowledge needed to connect/retransmit was painful. I'm not sure about now.. but hopefully, enthusiasm for this will pick up again- especially w the digital tech we have now. 

if we had more repeaters active around the world, we would be in a stonger position in general. obviously not everyone would want to get licensed, but at least they could receive messages if something was readily available to the general population. like an fm receiver, but for ham freqs which should be ok since they won't be transmitting.

apparently routers can be used w ham- would be great to see people experimenting with this if they're so inclined.. the first thread basically describes why dd-wrt is relevant w ham and the second link is the official dd-wrt site.

  

http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?106545-D-STAR

http://www.dd-wrt.com/site/index

I don't have a background in this unfortunately.. so the most i can do is paste relevant links i find at this point :)