[aprssig] APRS-IS authentication (Was: APRS-IS Passcode Generator On-Line)
Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)
ldeffenb at homeside.to
Thu Aug 19 11:56:29 EDT 2010
Georg Lukas DO1GL wrote:
>
> I am really sorry for the confusion I caused to you, and I would have
> been really glad to hear from you directly. I can remove the links to
> your site if you wish so (or mirror the data on my own if you are
> concerned about the traffic). However, as you pointed out, the
> information is freely available to anyonce capable of using google ;-)
>
Not if we can manage to get the on-line password generator hosts to take
their page down. That will at least make it harder, but not impossible
to locate callpass.c in the xastir distribution and compile it yourself.
> My primary concern with this reply however is the access barrier to
> APRS-IS. Once released to Android Market, APRSdroid will be available to
> a huge audience, consisting mainly of non-hams. Right now, the access
> barrier consists of a warning dialog at the first program start, stating
> that it is probably illegal to use without a license, and the
> requirement to figure out the APRS-IS passcode.
>
It is exactly that "huge audience" that prompted this thread to start with.
> On the other hand, requiring an authentication mechanism comparable to
> the one on EchoLink just to access a 16-bit hash number is neither
> efficient nor adequate. After all, other applications are just taking
> the callsign and silently calculate the passcode.
>
I'm only aware of one of those myself. And it's on a similar platform
with similar distribution potential, but fortunately not extremely
attractive I'm told. I don't use that platform personally and am
commenting on hear-say, never a good idea.
> What would be the adequate level of checking for this (or any other)
> APRS-IS application?
>
> The options I see so far are:
>
> * No checking, automatic passcode calculation (too easy for accidental
> abuse by non-hams?)
>
Cast my vote against this one!
> * Match the callsign against a regular expression
>
This is being proposed within the APRS-IS network servers, but could be
exclusive of callsign patterns that the program's author was unaware
of. Also, if the client itself matches and confirms validity,
brute-force attempts are easier. If the back-end quietly doesn't accept
updates, but still provides a feed, it can be harder, but again not
impossible to figure out a pattern match.
> * Require entry of the passcode, providing an online form for passcode
> generation
>
This is no different than the first one so it also gets a "No" vote from
me (if you're tallying).
> * Provide an online form requiring name, callsign and email address and
> logging the data for abuse management
>
Anything on-line is too easily spoofed. Unless you're building off of a
trust network like Google or Yahoo or something, but even that is weak
protection.
> * Require passcodes to be requested by e-mail (adds much work but does
> not really prevent callsign stealing)
>
This is the approach previously recommended for APRS-IS client software
authors and the one that I personally follow for APRSISCE/32 and now for
APRSBB on behalf of KJ4HPQ. Even if all 100,000 hams (or whatever the
number is) actually requested a passcode, this is still not unworkable.
> * Perform an EchoLink-like authentication check
>
While I'd love for this to be the case, the non-centralized insecurity
of the APRS-IS network itself doesn't seem to lend itself to this level
of complexity.
> I'd be glad to hear opinions and suggestions from this community!
>
That's my open opinion. Take it for whatever you consider it to be worth.
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32
More information about the aprssig
mailing list