Terrorist Networks Use HF E-Mail

[N5PVL]

The URL of a webpage entitled Worldwide Terrorist Networks Heavily Use HF E-Mail (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Klingenfuss/terror.htm) came to me via e-mail, and I thought I would share it here as the page points out some disturbing mis-use of HF e-mail systems of all types.

WinLink is specifically mentioned in this report.

This is information that should be verified or debunked, not left to float around unverified and so not acted upon. If terrorists really are using WL2K systems to move their e-mail over HF and so avoid detection, perhaps we should discontinue the use of HF e-mail systems, denying terrorists this resource as thier transmissions would then tend to stand out, not get lost in the WL2K "crowd".

In light of this information, if true, would the ARESCOM plan to seed WL2K stations thoughout all amateur bands be a wise or responsible course for ARES to take?

Should the DHS be notified of the danger that the proliferation of these HF e-mail systems will pose to our country?

Why help out the terrorists by making it easy for them to utilize HF e-mail, something that amateur radio operators, of all people, can easily do without?

After all, we are at war.

If there is anything at all to this report, I'd like to see an immediate curtailment of all legitimate WL2K activity, in the interest of national security.

In the end, we may need to ban the use or transport of Internet e-mail over amateur radio, period. We should not be putting that kind of tool into the hands of terrorists.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

[KB1GYQ]

Give me a break! So you ban internet standards... then the terrorists will use automatic Morse.... we should ban that! Yes, that's the answer!

[k4ah]

I have a better idea. Ban phones, television, radio (commercial), internet, internet e-mail, CB radio, GMRS, ham radio ,cell phones, newspapers, magazines, and anything else a terrorists might use. I guess that also means all forms of transportation because terrorists have been known to use that also. Remember Oklahoma City (a truck),WTC and the Pentagon (jets).

Before I get blasted the above is tongue in cheek.

We have fought many wars and are fighting one now so we can enjoy these freedoms. If someone is bent on doing something you cannot stop them. Where there is a will there is a way.

[w3bny]

Chas,

What would you propose? You cant do/use encryption. And you really cant fault the whole standard. Terrorists have been using cell and land line phones for years. And what about the big "I" That has been the communications hub for terrorists since way back. Check out the usenet groups. you see wierd cryptic messages there all the time. Ok they are all in the binaries group (for the most part) but you see stuff there all the time.

And what about uhh, pure radio? I guess you havent heard Licolnshire Poacher, Cherry Ripe, CIA Cindy, The Polytones (they are just too cool) or any of the other "Radio Bingo Clandestina" stations from around the world.

I use Winlink. It has its faults/problems. It also has its advantages. In my short tenure in the Amateur community, and my varied experience in the Military community, I have learned that NOTHING is "Sailor Proof". I try not to trust any one standard and the only thing I will use. I try to keep up in many standards so if one fails, I can swap over. Yeah that normally means that I will be mediocre at best across the board but sometimes being a mediocre multi-mode operator is better than an ACE single mode operator who's "kung-fu" just got shot down. QSL?

Anyhow, thats this Junior Woodchucks take on the whole winlink thing.

[N5PVL]

K4AH says:
Quote[/b] ]

We have fought many wars and are fighting one now so we can enjoy these freedoms. #If someone is bent on doing something you cannot stop them. #Where there is a will there is a way.



Amateurs have done thier part in the past to help out in a wartime situation. - I do not see why we should refuse to do so now.

- But I still say the information in the report should be verified before we get our panties all in a twist, one way or the other.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

[N3HGB]

You are so right! ALL HF COMMS SHOULD BE BANNED!
When radios are outlawed, only outlaws will have radios. Then we can just DF to ANYONE with a transmitter and kil them on the spot. I have also noticed there are 250,000 aircraft in this country. We should destroy them all too, right after Ryder trucks. I know some people have "issues" with Winlink, but this is really going too far.

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (N3HGB @ Feb. 09 2005,02:56)]You are so right! ALL HF COMMS SHOULD BE BANNED!
When radios are outlawed, only outlaws will have radios. Then we can just DF to ANYONE with a transmitter and kil them on the spot. I have also noticed there are 250,000 aircraft in this country. We should destroy them all too, right after Ryder trucks. I know some people have "issues" with Winlink, but this is really going too far.
He is not saying all HF Comms should be banded.. Just those that use the internet as a medium.. As their is the weak link...
Pure RF used by HAMS on HAM bands, does not have the same vulnerability to this threat as the internet linked (Email system) used by WINLINk has...

So do not get all excited and start posting non-sense.

73 Jerry N9LYA

[N3HGB]

I am sure terrorist comms will all come to a halt as soon as winlink goes away. Give ME a break. If I were a terrorist the last thing on Earth I would do is run my comms through a bunch of ham stations run by nosey busybodies. BTW, free web pages on Compuserve are not exactly the gold standard of internet research.

[w3bny]

Even from this silly rabbits furry brain I can see why they are adopting winlink. Given the Internet model of survivability (this was designed to withstand WWIII remember....) the entire Internet backbone model wasnt/isnt supposed to crash, just re-align. So technically....in theory....someone....somewhere will have access to the Internet and we are just getting to that person via RF. and if the whole Internet fails (scary thought) Well bust out the brown paper sacks and pencils (as my mentor W3YVQ would say). We should know how to do traffic the old fashioned way. He (W3YVQ) seriously espouses Winlink but as we all know, he wrote the book on NTS traffic and tries to pass that on to us Junior Woodchucks on the MEPN. (sorry Im straying)

Anyhow, Winlink is cool, Winlink has problems, Winlink will work, If the ENTIRE internet isnt dead. and if it is, no ammout of NTS skills will save us cuz we are probably suckin really hard if the entire world Internet is dead!

[K0RGR]

Actually, you've stumbled onto the government's real plan to wipe out Al Qaeda. By encouraging the deployment of BPL, first as a ruse to sell Internet service to rural folk, and now as a way for power companies to control their own equipment to be paid for by the ratepayers, they will render all long-range HF radio communication useless. Osama Bin-Monster, in his cave in Pakistan, will no longer be able to communicate with his troops. Soon, he will have to travel to the nearest Internet connection, where our FBI will nab him!

If I were a terrorist, I don't think I'd hide my communications in the middle of a ham band where 10 of thousands of people are listening, although WINLINK does provide a small amount of privacy. I hope Al Qaeda is using it. Since the data is merely compressed, not encrypted, it should be very easy for our CIA to decode.

Too much wierd stuff in that web link to take it seriously.

[KB1GYQ]

One can always encrypt beforehand, just like was done with Morse transmittion in WWII, but with codes that are almost unbreakable. The mode used is NOT an issue, except to those with an axe to grind.

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (N3HGB @ Feb. 09 2005,03:11)]I am sure terrorist comms will all come to a halt as soon as winlink goes away. Give ME a break. If I were a terrorist the last thing on Earth I would do is run my comms through a bunch of ham stations run by nosey busybodies. BTW, free web pages on Compuserve are not exactly the gold standard of internet research.


Anyone up to a real discussion on this topic...

So far seems not..

Consider this.. PII and PIII (Used by Internet/HF-Emailers ) can not be monitored or decrypted unless you own one of the SCS $1000 modems.. So it is difficult for someone not dedicated to PII or PIII to justify the purchase... So unless their is widespread monitoring of the bands, by someone.. Just about anyone can abuse it and quite possibly get away with it...



73 Jerry

[w3bny]

I thought this was Jerry. Hey even I havent posted a picture....yet...But what are you trying to get at. I dont see how WL2K compromises "national security" more than your AOL/vanilla ISP email client does. And as for encryption again, when as amateurs are we allowed to encrypt a transmission or hide its contents. I would interpret that as the use of one time pads as well. Even in the MARS world, we cant pass "encrypted" traffic!

So Jerry, what are you getting at.

[KB1KIX]

Winlink or any other method is a joke - in this sense.

I spent some time in New York - I think that like my neighbors - they can use carrier pigeons as well.

Like was said, Ryder trucks, etc.

Email - like they don't have a poppy pub with email in every cave?

Encryption is readily available -if not, they can use their funds to take any kid in any major university studying crypto and deploy one of their methods of that as well - and once again - we will not be any wiser. This was the lesson we learned from the whole PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) debacle.

The technology is there in so many other forms. This can go on forever.

What if they use Steganagraphy? We can see a simple picture - but if they look at the picture in a text file, see a hidden message - not difficult to do - I demonstrated this at a conference as well.

So, with that in mind, do we shut down the entire internet?

btw, what is with terrorism and Ryder trucks, I could never figure that out - must be the branding!

Jonathan

[N5PVL]

KB1KIX says:

Quote[/b] ]

btw, what is with terrorism and Ryder trucks, I could never figure that out - must be the branding!

Jonathan



It must be the OK City bomber, I think he rented one of those.

Nice Dobbshead! - Always good to have one around.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

[N3HGB]

Quote[/b] (n9lya @ Feb. 09 2005,08:24)]Quote[/b] (N3HGB @ Feb. 09 2005,03:11)]I am sure terrorist comms will all come to a halt as soon as winlink goes away. Give ME a break. If I were a terrorist the last thing on Earth I would do is run my comms through a bunch of ham stations run by nosey busybodies. BTW, free web pages on Compuserve are not exactly the gold standard of internet research.


Anyone up to a real discussion on this topic...

So far seems not..

Consider this.. PII and PIII (Used by Internet/HF-Emailers ) can not be monitored or decrypted unless you own one of the SCS $1000 modems.. So it is difficult for someone not dedicated to PII or PIII to justify the purchase... So unless their is widespread monitoring of the bands, by someone.. Just about anyone can abuse it and quite possibly get away with it...



73 Jerry
Do we need to have a bake sale to get PIII modems for NSA??? Can the CIA not spring for a few of these if they are curious?
There are a number of hams who HATE any kind of internet-radio link. Obviously they think linking Winlink to terrorism will help their cause. Just what we need - get people to associate those "weird guys with antennas on their cars and houses" with Al Queda.

[N5PVL]

W3BNY says:

Quote[/b] ]

I dont see how WL2K compromises "national security" more than your AOL/vanilla ISP email client does.



All that is covered on the web-site I provided the link to. Actually its described very clearly, how HF e-mail is particularly useful to terrorist organizations.

It's about as much fun to read that stuff as watching paint dry, but there is a good deal of information there. My question is about the quality of the information, and what steps we should take if it turns out to be accurate.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (w3bny @ Feb. 09 2005,03:28)]I thought this was Jerry. #Hey even I havent posted a picture....yet...But what are you trying to get at. #I dont see how WL2K compromises "national security" more than your AOL/vanilla ISP email client does. #And as for encryption again, when as amateurs are we allowed to encrypt a transmission or hide its contents. #I would interpret that as the use of one time pads as well. #Even in the MARS world, we cant pass "encrypted" traffic!

So Jerry, what are you getting at.
Hello dude..
Thanks for asking
I agree... W2K is just as bad as my Internet account.. Just for the record I do not use AOL.. AOL is for beginners.. Butthat is another argument.. Not for here..

What I am getting at is PII and PIII code propriatory.. And unless you can monitor them for illegal content or QRM (Pay $1000 for a full blown modem). You have no way to know who or what they are transmitting.. SCS will not release the code even for recieve only.. And all W2K stations have been told to ONLY ID in PII or PIII.. Why would they do that usless they are hiding something...

Thats it in a nutshell... If you need more please ask..

Best 73 Jerry N9LYA
www.n9lya.com

[k4ah]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 09 2005,02:20)]Amateurs have done thier part in the past to help out in a wartime situation. - I do not see why we should refuse to do so now.
How is what I said refusing to help? In WWII the ham bands were shut down for national security. It did not stop the use of radio by the spies. I personally do not want that to happen again.

I like radio and I like the Internet. Some self-important people seem to have decided that a mode they don't like should be banned because of it's possible use by terrorists. I personally wish we still had CW nets on MARS. I joined Navy MARS and they quit using CW at the same time.

I am just now exploring some of the digital modes with QRP but do not find them nearly as fun as CW.

I rambled a little there so I will post this so I can get shot down in flames for not doing my part.

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (N3HGB @ Feb. 09 2005,03:55)]Quote[/b] (n9lya @ Feb. 09 2005,08:24)]Quote[/b] (N3HGB @ Feb. 09 2005,03:11)]I am sure terrorist comms will all come to a halt as soon as winlink goes away. Give ME a break. If I were a terrorist the last thing on Earth I would do is run my comms through a bunch of ham stations run by nosey busybodies. BTW, free web pages on Compuserve are not exactly the gold standard of internet research.


Anyone up to a real discussion on this topic...

So far seems not..

Consider this.. PII and PIII (Used by Internet/HF-Emailers ) can not be monitored or decrypted unless you own one of the SCS $1000 modems.. So it is difficult for someone not dedicated to PII or PIII to justify the purchase... So unless their is widespread monitoring of the bands, by someone.. Just about anyone can abuse it and quite possibly get away with it...



73 Jerry
Do we need to have a bake sale to get PIII modems for NSA??? #Can the CIA not spring for a few of these if they are curious?
There are a number of hams who HATE any kind of internet-radio link. Obviously they think linking Winlink to terrorism will help their cause. Just what we need - get people to associate those "weird guys with antennas on their cars and houses" with Al Queda.
The key is hams are suposed to be self policing.. I am sure the CIA and crew will be able to monitor.. But who will monitor the PII and PIII users... for Part 97 rules and qrm violations?
Will each ARRL OOC and OO have one???

73 Jerry n9lya

[N5PVL]

K4AH says:

Quote[/b] ]

I personally wish we still had CW nets on MARS. #I joined Navy MARS and they quit using CW at the same time. #



I didn't know they had dropped the cw nets from MARS...

I was talking about all of us doing our part as amateurs, not you personally.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

[w3bny]

Quote[/b] (n9lya @ Feb. 09 2005,09:00)]Quote[/b] (w3bny @ Feb. 09 2005,03:28)]I thought this was Jerry. #Hey even I havent posted a picture....yet...But what are you trying to get at. #I dont see how WL2K compromises "national security" more than your AOL/vanilla ISP email client does. #And as for encryption again, when as amateurs are we allowed to encrypt a transmission or hide its contents. #I would interpret that as the use of one time pads as well. #Even in the MARS world, we cant pass "encrypted" traffic!

So Jerry, what are you getting at.
Hello dude..
Thanks for asking
I agree... W2K is just as bad as my Internet account.. Just for the record I do not use AOL.. AOL is for beginners.. Butthat is another argument.. Not for here..

What I am getting at is PII and PIII code propriatory.. And unless you can monitor them for illegal content or QRM (Pay $1000 for a full blown modem). You have no way to know who or what they are transmitting.. SCS will not release the code even for recieve only.. And all W2K stations have been told to ONLY ID in PII or PIII.. Why would they do that usless they are hiding something...

Thats it in a nutshell... If you need more please ask..

Best 73 Jerry N9LYA
www.n9lya.com
Sorry if you thought I ment you were an AOL'er...shudder.

Anyhow, that makes sense. I was not aware that the PII/III code was proprietary. Even the AOR digital voice modem (ham version) is an available code to prevent the FCC from thinking its a cypher. Wonder if the FCC has any say on that one. They probably have but I havent been following up on it. Heck, Im just barely playing with PACTOR I

Ren!

[W2LYS]

Couldn't they simply use PGP to encrypt the text of the message?

[w3bny]

Quote[/b] (W2LYS @ Feb. 09 2005,10:09)]Couldn't they simply use PGP to encrypt the text of the message?
again we are back to the we cant pass encrypted traffic or any traffic ment to hide its true meaning.

It would be like me sending NTS to someone like

Greetings, checking to see if the schnauser fits in the dog house. John has a large moustache and he will only fish on fridays.
=
88 Osama

What does that mean. could mean anything from lets have hot monkey sex in the pantry when I get back from Dayton to the dirty bomb mission is on Alahu Akbar. The messages true meaning is hidded within the plain text.

So PGP or anything else is still against da rules. So yeah I can see the point of why we cant "see" PII/III transmissions.

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (w3bny @ Feb. 09 2005,04:42)]Quote[/b] (n9lya @ Feb. 09 2005,09:00)]Quote[/b] (w3bny @ Feb. 09 2005,03:28)]I thought this was Jerry. #Hey even I havent posted a picture....yet...But what are you trying to get at. #I dont see how WL2K compromises "national security" more than your AOL/vanilla ISP email client does. #And as for encryption again, when as amateurs are we allowed to encrypt a transmission or hide its contents. #I would interpret that as the use of one time pads as well. #Even in the MARS world, we cant pass "encrypted" traffic!

So Jerry, what are you getting at.
Hello dude..
Thanks for asking
I agree... W2K is just as bad as my Internet account.. Just for the record I do not use AOL.. AOL is for beginners.. Butthat is another argument.. Not for here..

What I am getting at is PII and PIII code propriatory.. And unless you can monitor them for illegal content or QRM (Pay $1000 for a full blown modem). You have no way to know who or what they are transmitting.. SCS will not release the code even for recieve only.. And all W2K stations have been told to ONLY ID in PII or PIII.. Why would they do that usless they are hiding something...

Thats it in a nutshell... If you need more please ask..

Best 73 Jerry N9LYA
www.n9lya.com
Sorry if you thought I ment you were an AOL'er...shudder.

Anyhow, that makes sense. #I was not aware that the PII/III code was proprietary. #Even the AOR digital voice modem (ham version) is an available code to prevent the FCC from thinking its a cypher. #Wonder if the FCC has any say on that one. #They probably have but I havent been following up on it. #Heck, Im just barely playing with PACTOR I

Ren!
Hi Ren.. I knew you didnot.. But wanted to be clear.... No problem..

Best 73 Jerry n9lya

[W5HTW]

It may be we are lucky. In World War II ham radio was ended (almost permanently.) While we are at war today, hams have been allowed to operate normally (though I do not consider WinLink to be "normal.") It may be that one of the reasons we are NOT taken off the air is there are so many different methods of communications for our enemies, from telephone to cell phone to internet, and even the cotton' pickin' mail. We are simply one channel, where-as in WW-II we were a major one, for there was no internet, and mail was closely watched.

What's a poor ham to do?! If we cry too much, yes, the government could ban HF ham radio for "the duration." Not likely, but it is an option that could be considered and is indeed within their authority. They could also bad all modes but VHF FM if they so chose, again, for the duration, thus eliminating this PII and PIII stuff. Gosh, I hope they don't ban CW!

Seriously, folks, there's little anyone can do. I do think WinLink should be shifted to marine HF bands and require a marine license, and get the heck away from the ham bands. Then if they wanna send secret messages via HF email, fine, let 'em have at it. Ham radio is not secret. I hate to see the trend toward making it that way. I really think people who want to go to sea and use HF email need to get a marine HF radio. Those not at sea and wanting to send email can do it right here, on the internet. Let's get ham radio back to radio, and hamming.

Ah, but. Just one old ham operator's opinion.

Ed

[N8CPA]

The 10th anniversary of the last NMN CW transmission will be April 1 this year. MARS stopped using--nay, it was forbidden--shortly after. The last use of CW on MARS frequenices was during the 1996 Armed Forces Day--a one day only dispensation if I remember correctly.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Feb. 09 2005,16:25)]While we are at war today, hams have been allowed to operate normally (though I do not consider WinLink to be "normal.") # It may be that one of the reasons we are NOT taken off the air is there are so many different methods of communications for our enemies, from telephone to cell phone to internet, and even the cotton' pickin' mail. #We are simply one channel, where-as in WW-II we were a major one, for there was no internet, and mail was closely watched.
Ed: During WWII monitoring was a human job, one pair of eyes and ears at a time scanning frequencies. Today electrons in silicon chips have replaced those eyes and ears and monitoring is far faster, and far more "universal" than may at first thought be imagined. Our whole amateur spectrum can be monitored carefully and completely from many linked antenna sites. No need to ban us; contrary to the wild scenarios of the conspiracy freaks, it is far better to listen.

[K0RGR]

Instead of trying to shut down WINLINK, Charles, if the fellow behind this website has some real information to back up his rant, I think WINLINK logs everything it does, and that information should be of great interest to the authorities. I would imagine they would rather have Osama Bin Monster use a known communication channel than an unknown one. And, maybe I shouldn't point out that we still have impressive facilities for triangulating HF transmissions from anywhere on the globe.

>Greetings, checking to see if the schnauser fits in the dog house. John has a large moustache and he will only fish on fridays.<

Boy Ren, did you mess this message up. I copied that: it was a schnitzel, and that Ben was in the dog house for all the schnapps in his moustache. And it was not signed "Osama" but "yo' mama"

Jeezze can't you guys copy a little encription?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

LOL

Now, tell me more about the monkey you have locked in the pantry.....:rock:

I have been giving this encrypted terrorist messaging thing a lot of thought after …..pointed out that a bunch is going on. I decided that what we need is terrorist encryption detectors so we would all know when the terrorist use the ham bands to send encrypted message.

First I called the NSA knowing they would surely have something. The were nice, but said that they did not have an encryption detector and said I should call the CIA. I called the CIA and they referred me to the FBI. The FBI agent said that they were domestic only and that I should call RONCO. Ronco said that they could build some, but would want the TV and marketing rights.

So, we have the problem solved but we will need to buy 300,000 on the first run and then we can give them terrorists a real fit! It does have some side benefits however, as it slices, dices and cleans up in the dishwasher. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[w3bny]

Quote[/b] (w5jbp @ Feb. 09 2005,14:48)]>Greetings, checking to see if the schnauser fits in the dog house. #John has a large moustache and he will only fish on fridays.<

Boy Ren, did you mess this message up. I copied that: #it was a schnitzel, and that Ben was in the dog house for all the schnapps in his moustache. And it was not signed "Osama" but "yo' mama"

Jeezze can't you guys copy a little encription?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

LOL
And I thought I led us astray.... thats funny HAHAHA.

As for the monkey.... Only the monkey knows fer sure and he aint speakin under threat of being put in the grinder http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[kj5t]

..see guys.. even the ARRL president likes to have alittle fun..

[k4cjx]

Charles,

Your assertions that "kiddie porn" was being sent over Winlink didn't fly, your assault on the ARRL got a bit of attention, and now you are suggesting that Winlink is carrying terrorists email? And, I guess you assume that CW, SSB, PSK-31 and especially, HF Packet are not?,

My vote is that they are using drums.



Steve, k4cjx

[k4cjx]

>Consider this.. PII and PIII (Used by Internet/HF->Emailers ) can not be monitored or decrypted unless >you own one of the SCS $1000 modems.. So it is >difficult for someone not dedicated to PII or PIII to >justify the purchase... So unless their is widespread >monitoring of the bands, by someone.. Just about >anyone can abuse it and quite possibly get away with >it...



>73 Jerry n9lya


Jerry,

What about all those guys out there that cannot copy 45 WPM sloppy 6:1 vibroplex sent CW? Machines can't and hey, that doesn't take money, just skill. So, all those guys who cannot copy sloppy 6:1 CW at 45 wpm could be letting those who abuse Part 97 really get away with it! Copying that 6:1 ratio sloppy bug sending is certainly not wide spread...

But Jerry, I can copy it, so maybe the CIA will hire me as a sloppy CW copying consultant....



Steve, k4cjx

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (k4cjx @ Feb. 10 2005,22:11)]>Consider this.. PII and PIII (Used by Internet/HF->Emailers ) can not be monitored or decrypted unless >you own one of the SCS $1000 modems.. So it is >difficult for someone not dedicated to PII or PIII to >justify the purchase... So unless their is widespread >monitoring of the bands, by someone.. Just about >anyone can abuse it and quite possibly get away with >it...



>73 Jerry n9lya


Jerry,

What about all those guys out there that cannot copy 45 WPM sloppy 6:1 vibroplex sent CW? #Machines can't and hey, that doesn't take money, just skill. So, all those guys who cannot copy sloppy 6:1 CW at 45 wpm could be letting those who abuse Part 97 really get away with it! #Copying that 6:1 ratio sloppy bug sending is certainly not wide spread...

But Jerry, I can copy it, so maybe the CIA will hire me as a sloppy CW copying consultant....



Steve, k4cjx
No need for sarcasium.... No need for defensiveness.. Hereis the Skinny of it.

Problem #1
Winlink stands to intentionaly hide their activity... Unless we
NON-users spend $1000 for a fully functional modem ...

Solution to Problem #1>
Why does SCS not sell a receive only decoder for say $100..

It may have a positive effect on your service..

1) It may allow those who want to see what PII and pIII can do... Have a look before spending $1000 of hard earned cash..

2) Plus allow the average HAM the ability to monitor the mode... For pleasure or for OOC duties...

Problem #2

The Automatically Controlled Subbands are again in danger of being eradicated.. (posibley)..

Causing k4cjx to not want me to posty my comments here in open forum..

Problem #2 Solution

urge in written letter to the ARRL to retain the Automatically Controlled Digital

Stations in the rules as they exisit today..

Then I will leave the open forums on this subject and we can have peace...

Simple enough!!

73 Jerry N9LYA

[W3MIV]

Another foolish thread overflowing with conspiratorial nonsense in an effort to stir an agenda.

Do any of you seriously think that NSA or the FCC cannot read anything and everything being sent by the WinLinkers and any other PacTOR "whatever" users? Get real.

So far as you or I being able to read the message content, who cares? If you wanna, pony up for the bucks and shut up about it. Just like CW -- if you want to play, you have to pay (either dollars or effort, what's the deal?).

Enuff with the whining!

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Feb. 11 2005,00:25)]Another foolish thread overflowing with conspiratorial nonsense in an effort to stir an agenda.

Do any of you seriously think that NSA or the FCC cannot read anything and everything being sent by the WinLinkers and any other PacTOR "whatever" users? Get real.

So far as you or I being able to read the message content, who cares? If you wanna, pony up for the bucks and shut up about it. Just like CW -- if you want to play, you have to pay (either dollars or effort, what's the deal?).

Enuff with the whining!
MIV Why do you insist on never adding anything to the discussion... If you do not like the WHINNING... Go lay down..

As i said before SIMPLE ENOUGH!!

[W3MIV]

Discussion?

You call this series of threads whining about the realities confronting packet and other marginal modes a discussion?

All I have read in this thread is a bunch of nonsense that started with half-baked conspiracy theories put forth as a stump speech to influence the weaker minds among those readers who might believe such nonsense.

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Feb. 11 2005,01:28)]Discussion?

You call this series of threads whining about the realities confronting packet and other marginal modes a discussion?

All I have read in this thread is a bunch of nonsense that started with half-baked conspiracy theories put forth as a stump speech to influence the weaker minds among those readers who might believe such nonsense.
MIV...

Again don't like it leave.

Simple enough.


Or just keep whining about us whiners... Whatever

73

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (n9lya @ Feb. 11 2005,10:22)]Again don't like it leave.

Simple enough.


Or just keep whining about us whiners... Whatever

73
Not whining at all, OM. Just pointing out the nonsense being forwarded as "facts."

Leave? Not on your life. I will continue to bark at every intruder against reason as I see it. Folks on QRZ deserve to see every hot air balloon that is launched; and they also deserve to see them punctured by reason when they are nothing but hot air.

One other aspect: This whole "circle-the-wagons-against-any-challenge-to-packet" thing is entertaining. Tempest in a tea pot comes to mind.

[N5PVL]

Yes, MIV, it's cool that you keep this thread active and at the top of the list, where everyone gets a good chance to see it.

Good thinking!


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Feb. 11 2005,03:31)]Quote[/b] (n9lya @ Feb. 11 2005,10:22)]Again don't like it leave.

Simple enough.


Or just keep whining about us whiners... Whatever

73
Not whining at all, OM. Just pointing out the nonsense being forwarded as "facts."

Leave? Not on your life. I will continue to bark at every intruder against reason as I see it. Folks on QRZ deserve to see every hot air balloon that is launched; and they also deserve to see them punctured by reason when they are nothing but hot air.

One other aspect: This whole "circle-the-wagons-against-any-challenge-to-packet" thing is entertaining. Tempest in a tea pot comes to mind.
Hi MIV,

Nothing personal.. Lets keep it active...

I do not mind if thats what you want...

As far as facts.. We have submitted our to the bandwidth@arrl.org, Jim Haynie and our division directors...

And here in past threads...

Todate we have received no verifiable facst from the ARRL or anyone associated with the Proposal..
73 jerry n9lya

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 11 2005,12:10)]Yes, MIV, it's cool that you keep this thread active and at the top of the list, where everyone gets a good chance to see it.

Good thinking!


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)
Glad to oblige you, Charles.


And, if you Walter Cronkeit sends you WinLink intercept from Karl Rove to U b L, please post it so that we all can read it.

[N5PVL]

Quote[/b] ]

And, if you Walter Cronkeit sends you WinLink intercept from Karl Rove to U b L, please post it so that we all can read it.



Sorry, that didn't scan over here... Could you try again?

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

[n9lya]

Same here no go...

[wa6ube]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 09 2005,05:47)]The URL of a webpage entitled Worldwide Terrorist Networks Heavily Use HF E-Mail (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Klingenfuss/terror.htm) came to me via e-mail, and I thought I would share it here as the page points out some disturbing mis-use of HF e-mail systems of all types.

WinLink is specifically mentioned in this report.

This is information that should be verified or debunked, not left to float around unverified and so not acted upon. If terrorists really are using WL2K systems to move their e-mail over HF and so avoid detection, perhaps we should discontinue the use of HF e-mail systems, denying terrorists this resource as thier transmissions would then tend to stand out, not get lost in the WL2K "crowd".

In light of this information, if true, would the ARESCOM plan to seed WL2K stations thoughout all amateur bands be a wise or responsible course for ARES to take?

Should the DHS be notified of the danger that the proliferation of these HF e-mail systems will pose to our country?

Why help out the terrorists by making it easy for them to utilize HF e-mail, something that amateur radio operators, of all people, can easily do without?

After all, we are at war.

If there is anything at all to this report, I'd like to see an immediate curtailment of all legitimate WL2K activity, in the interest of national security.

In the end, we may need to ban the use or transport of Internet e-mail over amateur radio, period. We should not be putting that kind of tool into the hands of terrorists.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)
Trish http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

Since Amateur radio stations are required to have a control operator... perhaps winlink message traffic should be approved by a moderator before it passes across the boundary between winlink and the Internet.

[N5PVL]

Apparently the WinLink folks do not care about the possibility of Amateur Radio being utilized by terrorist organizations any more than the president of the ARRL does.

Looks like they've got thier heads so firmly planted up each other's kiesters that there is not much else they can see.

But when you consider the fact that WinLink operates illegally in the first place, providing an Internet email service in direct competition with a number of existing commercial providers, I guess after that it is not such a big step to provide commo for islamofascist terrorists, is it?

I mean, if the rules of Amateur Radio ( PART97) do not count for anything with these folks, why should the rules of civilized behavior and good sense be any kind of a barrier?

Maybe this explains why WinLink being specifically mentioned in this report (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Klingenfuss/terror.htm) means nothing to the WinLink folks - or to the clownish "Mr. Haynie".

Maybe it's just me, but doesn't it seem a bit inappropriate that the president of the ARRL would respond to reports of Amateur Radio being utilized by terrorist organizations with twerpy hillbilly humor?

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] ]and now you are suggesting that Winlink is carrying terrorists email? #And, I guess you assume that #CW, SSB, PSK-31 and especially, HF Packet are not?,

How do you know it's not?
As for CW, SSB, PSK-31, and HF Packet those are all monitored easily with either the human brain or with freeware applications. How exactly does the regular Joe Ham monitor PII and PIII transmissions without spending $1000.

The PIII protocol may be published but that doesn't mean you can do anything you want with the info. Go ahead and write a sound card app for decoding it and see how long it takes for WinLink/SCS's lawyers to jump all over you like white on rice.

It's a proprietary encryption scheme that should be banned on Ham frequencies till SCS truly open sources the protocol.

[kf6rdn]

Anything communications methods used on ham bands should HAVE to be open source, it's the nature of it - "...not for pecuniary interest".

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] ]Anything communications methods used on ham bands should HAVE to be open source, it's the nature of it - "...not for pecuniary interest".
And if I'm not mistaken the prohibition against using "encryption" on the Amateur bands is still in effect. The entire bandwidth proposal is nothing more than an attempt at an end run around and FCC rule they know shouldn't and most likely never will be changed.

I don't know why the FCC has let US Hams get away with it this long.

[W3MIV]

C'mon fellas, let's get back to earth.

Does anyone here seriously think that the government does not have the means to monitor PacTOR in any flavor?

Does anyone here think that the least reason to suppose that an email containing some heinous scheme will not receive some attention.

Anybody out these following this NSA fiasco that is currently the darling of the weak-bladder set?

[n2nh]

If this happened in 2001, it's already over 4 years old. Besides, why would anybody want to use Ham Radio when it's so 19th Century? A source is "Says somebody"?? Just how reliable is that? PRESENTLY, If we've got thousands of troops in Afghanistan and they can't find him, what's that got to do with ancient history like this? Try to mess up on these modes and see how long it takes to get a pink slip. I find this very hard to believe.

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] ]Does anyone here seriously think that the government does not have the means to monitor PacTOR in any flavor?

Of course THEY can but the regulation against encryption on the Ham bands is still there. We are supposed to be a self policing service right. How exactly do we do that with encrypted signals?

[N5PVL]

W3MIV says:
Quote[/b] ]
Does anyone here think that the least reason to suppose that an email containing some heinous scheme will not receive some attention.

Apparently Albert, you are not aquainted with basic text encryption technique. An e-mail to Aunt Fazzy talking about whether or not to water the pansies in the window box could be carrying a communication that would ( or would not ) be an order to set off a dirty bomb in Times Square.

If Aunt Fazzy is asked to water the pansies, 10,000 or more New Yorkers plus anybody downwind gets radiation sickness, some fatal, some not.

That's how an email containing some heinous scheme might not be recognized as such.

WinLink is particularly vulnerable to this kind of activity because unlike its commercial competitors, no billing address or verifiable identification is required in order to obtain service... Stop by at QRZ and come up with ID info on a random callsign, and you're in like Flynn. - It's that simple.

Winlink is particularly attractive for this kind of activity because of the reasons outlined above, plus the fact that it can be accessed from random outback locations where terrorist cliques must hide, making such a message difficult if not impossible to trace.

"Armchair email" for Osama!

To recap: It is secure, there is no verification of ID or billing address required, and it works almost anywhere... What terrorist could ask for a better deal than that, and where else could he get all of those terrorist-friendly features? #

Only with WinLink.

[kg4dci]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 09 2005,06:47)]The URL of a webpage entitled Worldwide Terrorist Networks Heavily Use HF E-Mail (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Klingenfuss/terror.htm) came to me via e-mail, and I thought I would share it here as the page points out some disturbing mis-use of HF e-mail systems of all types.

WinLink is specifically mentioned in this report.

This is information that should be verified or debunked, not left to float around unverified and so not acted upon. If terrorists really are using WL2K systems to move their e-mail over HF and so avoid detection, perhaps we should discontinue the use of HF e-mail systems, denying terrorists this resource as thier transmissions would then tend to stand out, not get lost in the WL2K "crowd".

In light of this information, if true, would the ARESCOM plan to seed WL2K stations thoughout all amateur bands be a wise or responsible course for ARES to take?

Should the DHS be notified of the danger that the proliferation of these HF e-mail systems will pose to our country?

Why help out the terrorists by making it easy for them to utilize HF e-mail, something that amateur radio operators, of all people, can easily do without?

After all, we are at war.

If there is anything at all to this report, I'd like to see an immediate curtailment of all legitimate WL2K activity, in the interest of national security.

In the end, we may need to ban the use or transport of Internet e-mail over amateur radio, period. We should not be putting that kind of tool into the hands of terrorists.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)
Please, give it a rest we all know how you feel about WinLink, but this mission your own is now gone beyond making you look silly and has moved into just being annoying.

Please just drop it.

[N4AUD]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Dec. 27 2005,15:48)]W3MIV says:
Quote[/b] ]
Does anyone here think that the least reason to suppose that an email containing some heinous scheme will not receive some attention.

Apparently Albert, you are not aquainted with basic text encryption technique. An e-mail to Aunt Fazzy talking about whether or not to water the pansies in the window box could be carrying a communication that would ( or would not ) be an order to set off a dirty bomb in Times Square.

If Aunt Fazzy is asked to water the pansies, 10,000 or more New Yorkers plus anybody downwind gets radiation sickness, some fatal, some not.

That's how an email containing some heinous scheme might not be recognized as such.

WinLink is particularly vulnerable to this kind of activity because unlike its commercial competitors, no billing address or verifiable identification is required in order to obtain service... Stop by at QRZ and come up with ID info on a random callsign, and you're in like Flynn. - It's that simple.

Winlink is particularly attractive for this kind of activity because of the reasons outlined above, plus the fact that it can be accessed from random outback locations where terrorist cliques must hide, making such a message difficult if not impossible to trace.

"Armchair email" for Osama!

To recap: It is secure, there is no verification of ID or billing address required, and it works almost anywhere... What terrorist could ask for a better deal than that, and where else could he get all of those terrorist-friendly features?

Only with WinLink.
It sounds like you are talking about a code phrase. There is nothing you can do about those. It's the same type of thing the Allies used on the BBC during WWII to communicate with the resistance in occupied countries, seemingly innocent or non-sensical messages that when issued direct someone to do something (or not do something). The only way you can break a code phrase is with an informant. When a particular phrase has a meaning only to the sender and recipient, there's nothing to decipher. You and I could agree that if I send you an email that says "I need a new watch battery" that you will get up and run around the room 3 times. Unless someone else is told what it means, there is no way for anyone to know what that phrase means, if anything. I could send you 20 pages that are insignificant, with that one sentence you are to act upon thrown in the middle. The problem with this type of code is that you have to have one for every forseeable event. There is no way to account for infinite variables to an operation, so other cyphers are needed, and those can be broken...except for the "one-time" pad type cypher. You'd have to get access to the pad, or get extremely lucky.
I think I had a point, but I don't remember what it was. Oh, shutting down winlink isn't going to stop these people from sending messages to each other. Matter of fact, we have a better chance of catching them if we know they are using it, don't we?

[W3MIV]

You are wasting your time, Audie. The exercise has no place for reason.

[w4glm]

PVL - Charles,

I have sent the link to DHS security, if there is reason for

follow-up, I will send the info to this board.

I am Elec Tech with DHS.

Thanks for the info.....Mac

[N5PVL]

Thank you, Mac. I have been to the DHS website, but was not certain about who to talk to there.

[N5PVL]

WA6UBE says:
Quote[/b] ]
Since Amateur radio stations are required to have a control operator... perhaps winlink message traffic should be approved by a moderator before it passes across the boundary between winlink and the Internet.


Email over Ham Radio was first done a little bit over ten years ago, on the Packet network. At that time, there were several amateurs who provided this service, and they did as you suggest, with each email manually scanned for inappropriate materiel by a moderator. WinLink later came in as one of these email outfits, at that time working cooperatively with other amateurs as part of the global Packet Radio network.

Over a period of time, it became apparent that manual scanning was the only way to avoid inappropriate material in the email messages, as non-hams have no prohibition against commercial use or foul language in email, and this illegal stuff inevitably crept in.

The problem with manual review though, is that if you move any appreciable amount of email at all, your moderator quickly burns out, moving on to other aspects of life besides reading other people's email all day long. In fact, all of the email outfits on Packet eventually threw in the towel and dropped the idea of an email over Ham Radio service because of this. - All except WinLink, which found a different solution...

The WinLinkers quit using Packet instead, switching over to PACTOR, which is effectively impossible to monitor. They decided that by hiding behind a propietary mode that could not be casually monitored, it no longer mattered if illegal or inappropriate materiel was transported by WinLink.

Screw the rules if you can arrainge to avoid being caught, in other words. - That's the WinLink attitude in a nutshell.

Much is made of PACTOR's speed advantage over Packet, but when you consider the fact that WinLink abandoned the use of a global Packet network that served thousands of locations in order to start up a new net with only dozens of them, it is hard to credit that any gain in efficiency was won by changing over. - The obvious advantage WinLink gained was freedom from scrutiny by other Amateurs monitoring thier signals.

WinLink may claim to review the email they pass but if they do, they are obviously lying as they already carry a much heavier traffic load than what burned out manual reviewers in the past, and have plans to carry much more. Remember that all email on the WinLink system goes through a central server, making it impossible to share the task of reviewing the email they transport.

WinLink does not review the email they transport and what's more - they will not do so in the future as it would severely curtail thier operations and eventually shut them down. Can you imagine anyone voluntarily reviewing other people's email all day long for any great length of time? How good of a job could we depend on them to do, and for how long?

Take a look at the amount of email WinLink claims to move now, and plan to move after expansion, and you will see what I mean. - The only thing that keeps them on the air is the effective ( if not actual ) encryption they gain from using an un-monitorable, proprietary digital protocol.

"Screw the rules if you can arrainge to avoid being caught" is the only thing that keeps WinLink on the ham bands.

It also creates a gaping security hole that, according to the article I posted this link (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Klingenfuss/terror.htm) to, terrorists are taking full advantage of.

We should all be asking our ARRL Division Directors (http://www.remote.arrl.org/divisions/) why the ARRL is associating itself with this inappropriate attitude, and whether allowing WinLink to use Amateur Radio to transport Internet Email is really worth endangering the lives of US citizens for.

[G0GQK]

I've heard that terrorists are now using mobile phones.

Mel G0GQK

[N5PVL]

They use Mobile phones, cell phones, regular phones, and apparently HF Email.

Basically, you can figure on terrorists using whatever is available and might not get them caught. HF Email via WinLink is the communications method being discussed here, but you can rest ( assured? ) that the terrorists will use anything that is available to them.

WinLink is especially attractive to terrorists because it provides service in outback areas terrorists hide in, provides global communications, there is no requirement for a billing address or other verification of ID as there is with WinLinks's many commercial competitors, and all that is needed in order to utilize the service is a callsign. ( bogus, "stolen" from a callsign database, or actual )

[KI4IJQ]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Dec. 30 2005,18:20)]They use Mobile phones, cell phones, regular phones, and apparently HF Email.

Basically, you can figure on terrorists using whatever is available and might not get them caught. HF Email via WinLink is the communications method being discussed here, but you can rest ( assured? ) that the terrorists will use anything that is available to them.

WinLink is especially attractive to terrorists because it provides service in outback areas terrorists hide in, provides global communications, there is no requirement for a billing address or other verification of ID as there is with WinLinks's many commercial competitors, and all that is needed in order to utilize the service is a callsign. ( bogus, "stolen" from a callsign database, or actual )
haha, you know, I have read some far-out stuff here, but this one takes the cake so far...

have a great year, dont forget your tin-foil hat

[N5PVL]

Wrong topic... Try this one (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=7;t=110829)out to see the tinfoil hat action. # #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[ae1x]

I agree that these terrorists will use whatever means is available. They believe that they have a mandate from the Lord to perform these acts. He will protect them.

While they may feel safe and we are upset about not being able to monitor the activities or WL2k, NSA can crack just about anything. Be assured that the traffic passing over that network can and is being monitored for content. Besides, once it gets on the InterNet it isn't protected anymore is it?

Ken

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (ae1x @ Jan. 04 2006,03:26)]I agree that these terrorists will use whatever means is available. They believe that they have a mandate from the Lord to perform these acts. He will protect them.

While they may feel safe and we are upset about not being able to monitor the activities or WL2k, NSA can crack just about anything. Be assured that the traffic passing over that network can and is being monitored for content. Besides, once it gets on the InterNet it isn't protected anymore is it?

Ken

If I am a WL2K guy, I'd want to take my software out of the consideration loop for anything "secret" or being in competition with any commercial software. So I guess the issue for me is pretty simple. If everyone (including over 300k Amateurs) can decode/read data messages, then using data modes for anything unusual or illegal gives you no advantage over plain text. The bad guys simply must go some place else to do their communicating. NSA hi-tech systems not needed.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (w5jbp @ Feb. 09 2005,16:20)]I have been giving this encrypted terrorist messaging thing a lot of thought after …..pointed out that a bunch is going on. I decided that what we need is terrorist encryption detectors so we would all know when the terrorist use the ham bands to send encrypted message.

First I called the NSA knowing they would surely have something. The were nice, but said that they did not have an encryption detector and said I should call the CIA. I called the CIA and they referred me to the FBI. The FBI agent said that they were domestic only and that I should call RONCO. Ronco said that they could build some, but would want the TV and marketing rights.

So, we have the problem solved but we will need to buy 300,000 on the first run and then we can give them terrorists a real fit! It does have some side benefits however, as it slices, dices and cleans up in the dishwasher. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
That our ARRL leadership would make light of fundamental open communications is not suprising. Maybe RONCO makes a voting machine that members can use to get our collective opinion on subjects in front of the Amateur Secret Society in Newington.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Jan. 04 2006,12:18)]That our ARRL leadership would make light of fundamental open communications is not suprising. Maybe RONCO makes a voting machine that members can use to get our collective opinion on subjects in front of the Amateur Secret Society in Newington.
Losing your sense of humor is the first step to becoming a noodge.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Jan. 04 2006,13:54)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Jan. 04 2006,12:18)]That our ARRL leadership would make light of fundamental open communications is not suprising. Maybe RONCO makes a voting machine that members can use to get our collective opinion on subjects in front of the Amateur Secret Society in Newington.
Losing your sense of humor is the first step to becoming a noodge.
And the ARRL shnook gives me a hard time??

[N5PVL]

I for one have no sense of humor at all about threats to our national security, not to mention threats to lives and property here in the United States.

The WinLink group has operated within a shroud of secrecy by thier choice of a virtually un-monitorable digital mode, in hopes of being able to compete with existing commercial HF email services without getting caught at it. The fact that this "screw the PART97 regs, as long as we don't get caught" attitude is aparrently being taken advantage of by other kinds of lawbreakers including terrorists makes what this WinLink group is doing much worse, as the potential threat to lives, property and our national security is definately there. It will continue to be there until WinLink's irresponsible defiance of both the letter and spirit of the PART97 regulations comes to a halt.

Creating a threat to lives, property, and our national security so that the PART97 regulations can be flouted is most definately not what Amateur Radio is all about.

In view of this, it is obvious that no Amateur Radio operator worthy of the title would have anything to do with WinLink, or the way that group conducts itself.