User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/30/2023 5:31:21 PM EDT
[#1]
So I am not 100% sure it is working on my radio...when I go to program in the keys, the radio takes the keys and software completes the upload. When I go to read the keys back from the radio I get a bunch of non-sense. I have a few other non plus 390 radios but I have no way to tell if they are really encrypted with AES256 or not....
I also noted that you can now select other encryption protocols under the "Universal" tab. None, ARC4, AES128 and AES256. I wonder if that is what they are speaking of in the BTWR video? My OCD got the best of me and I ordered a "Plus" model radio to experiment with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2023 5:46:24 PM EDT
[#2]
Be aware that, unless the rules have changed, it is illegal per FCC rules to encrypt amateur radio transmissions other than commands to a satellite.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2023 9:48:03 PM EDT
[#3]
I wish they would make some dual format P25/DMR units.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2023 11:56:57 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wish they would make some dual format P25/DMR units. The Viking VP8000 is currently analogue, P25, NXDN, and is planned to do DMR later this year/next year through a software update. But like all high-end Viking/EFJ radios...gonna be a pretty penny. I'd expect north of 2k for one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 2:33:48 AM EDT
[#5]
Very interesting, OP.
I too was wondering about this, as I have MD UV390 and 380, and thought it was odd they were advertising them as AES256. Mine use 32 digit keys, AES128 I guess. Was very happy to see a source other than Amazon for these, at any rate. I get alot of use out of my 390. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 4:42:56 AM EDT
[#6]
LetsGetReadyinc.com and BuyTwoWayRadios.com are two decent sources for the TYT products.
Through let's get ready I ordered what I thought was going to be two 2200mAh batteries and instead got much larger 3600mAh batteries. Pleasant surprise. https://letsgetreadyinc.com/tyt-2200mah-battery-for-tyt-390-680d-8200-series/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 9:12:48 AM EDT
[#7]
The most certain way to validate would be to capture some transmissions from a radio using a RTL-SDR and a valid commercial license and go through the decryption process offline using the key and industry standard libraries like openssl. This would be difficult depending on whether they use the standard cookbook encryption modes like CBC or ECB or you can get some insights from the firmware or manufacturer. There are packages like DSD and DSD+ that currently decode DMR packets. You could start with that and then see if they could be modified to decrypt as well. There's enough vendors doing this, so it should be possible. Also DSheirer's sdrtrunk has branched into DMR decoding and has some decryption as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 10:49:19 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Be aware that, unless the rules have changed, it is illegal per FCC rules to encrypt amateur radio transmissions other than commands to a satellite. well I dont think that is entirely accurate. just like HF digital modes and VHF / UHF digital comm and HF digital comm, I think if you publicly publish the encryption key it is probably legal. To my knowledge the rule does say no encryption, it says comm must be in the clear unless the means to decode is published. I cant currently find the actual wording but if I do I will post it. ETA: RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication Basically if you publicly publish the key, just like all digital comm it is difficult to show the purpose is to obscure the meaning as long as you can articulate a different reason for the encryption similiar to all voice digital comm, in my non-lawyer opinion which is probably wrong §97.309 RTTY and data emission codes. (a) Where authorized by §§97.305(c) and 97.307(f) of the part, an amateur station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using the following specified digital codes: (1) The 5-unit, start-stop, International Telegraph Alphabet No. 2, code defined in ITU-T Recommendation F.1, Division C (commonly known as “Baudot”). (2) The 7-unit code specified in ITU-R Recommendations M.476-5 and M.625-3 (commonly known as “AMTOR”). (3) The 7-unit, International Alphabet No. 5, code defined in IT--T Recommendation T.50 (commonly known as “ASCII”). (4) An amateur station transmitting a RTTY or data emission using a digital code specified in this paragraph may use any technique whose technical characteristics have been documented publicly, such as CLOVER, G-TOR, or PacTOR, for the purpose of facilitating communications. (b) Where authorized by §§97.305(c) and 97.307(f), a station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using an unspecified digital code, except to a station in a country with which the United States does not have an agreement permitting the code to be used. RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication. When deemed necessary by a Regional Director to assure compliance with the FCC Rules, a station must: (1) Cease the transmission using the unspecified digital code; (2) Restrict transmissions of any digital code to the extent instructed; (3) Maintain a record, convertible to the original information, of all digital communications transmitted. [54 FR 25857, June 20, 1989, as amended at 54 FR 39537, Sept. 27, 1989; 56 FR 56172, Nov. 1, 1991; 60 FR 55486, Nov. 1, 1995; 71 FR 25982, May 3, 2006; 71 FR 66465, Nov. 15, 2006; 80 FR 53753, Sept. 8, 2015] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 12:20:25 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Be aware that, unless the rules have changed, it is illegal per FCC rules to encrypt amateur radio transmissions other than commands to a satellite. https://www.n5dux.com/ham/files/pdf/Data%20Encryption%20is%20Legal.pdf Edit: And Mach is correct. Published keys should be good to go. To comply with the spirit as well as the letter, you could have a CW or voice transmission in the clear with a link to the keys and documentation which would allow for development and experimentation in the open on ham frequencies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 1:00:44 PM EDT
[#10]
I am trying to read between the lines here;
Should I do a firmware update on my TYT-390 or does the new model have a hardware addition that is necessary? I have used encryption on the TYT-390 for business band but the other radios were also TYT-380/390s. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 1:05:56 PM EDT
[#11]
I can't quite tell so far.
Basically, my MD-UV390G accepted the programming for the AES256, but the encryption failed in the end and the transmission was in the clear. I ordered a "Plus" model to take a closer look at. TYT has not published an updated firmware on their page so if it is just a firmware thing, I can't access the firmware at this time to test. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 1:15:21 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can't quite tell so far. Basically, my MD-UV390G accepted the programming for the AES256, but the encryption failed in the end and the transmission was in the clear. I ordered a "Plus" model to take a closer look at. TYT has not published an updated firmware on their page so if it is just a firmware thing, I can't access the firmware at this time to test. Probably a dumb question, but did you use a valid hex key? Eta; mine dont have "universal" as an option. I only use enhanced. Edit2; i forgot I am also using EditCP to program these radios and not the TYT CPS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 2:57:29 PM EDT
[#13]
My older 390 with FW ver. 18.011 will accept a codeplug with a universal key but it comes through in the clear.
I may experiment with some custom fw from the opengd77 forum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 3:03:36 PM EDT
[#14]
I tried to setup a test, but my windows laptop is being a real pain right now.
Damn you windows USB drivers. Eta; OK. Got my TYT-2017 programmed for a digital channel with no encryption and the TYT-390 with the new AES256. The 390 does not transmit in the clear. Did you click the "write privacy" button after you entered your hex keys? That seemed to write something to my radio before a wrote the whole code plug over. * More testing is needed, and I think maybe the firmware is not cooperating fully. When I go back to read the radio things do seem to be messed up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2023 11:01:05 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: well I dont think that is entirely accurate. just like HF digital modes and VHF / UHF digital comm and HF digital comm, I think if you publicly publish the encryption key it is probably legal. To my knowledge the rule does say no encryption, it says comm must be in the clear unless the means to decode is published. I cant currently find the actual wording but if I do I will post it. ETA: RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication Basically if you publicly publish the key, just like all digital comm it is difficult to show the purpose is to obscure the meaning as long as you can articulate a different reason for the encryption similiar to all voice digital comm, in my non-lawyer opinion which is probably wrong §97.309 RTTY and data emission codes. (a) Where authorized by §§97.305(c) and 97.307(f) of the part, an amateur station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using the following specified digital codes: (1) The 5-unit, start-stop, International Telegraph Alphabet No. 2, code defined in ITU-T Recommendation F.1, Division C (commonly known as “Baudot”). (2) The 7-unit code specified in ITU-R Recommendations M.476-5 and M.625-3 (commonly known as “AMTOR”). (3) The 7-unit, International Alphabet No. 5, code defined in IT--T Recommendation T.50 (commonly known as “ASCII”). (4) An amateur station transmitting a RTTY or data emission using a digital code specified in this paragraph may use any technique whose technical characteristics have been documented publicly, such as CLOVER, G-TOR, or PacTOR, for the purpose of facilitating communications. (b) Where authorized by §§97.305(c) and 97.307(f), a station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using an unspecified digital code, except to a station in a country with which the United States does not have an agreement permitting the code to be used. RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication. When deemed necessary by a Regional Director to assure compliance with the FCC Rules, a station must: (1) Cease the transmission using the unspecified digital code; (2) Restrict transmissions of any digital code to the extent instructed; (3) Maintain a record, convertible to the original information, of all digital communications transmitted. [54 FR 25857, June 20, 1989, as amended at 54 FR 39537, Sept. 27, 1989; 56 FR 56172, Nov. 1, 1991; 60 FR 55486, Nov. 1, 1995; 71 FR 25982, May 3, 2006; 71 FR 66465, Nov. 15, 2006; 80 FR 53753, Sept. 8, 2015] Quote HistoryQuoted: well I dont think that is entirely accurate. just like HF digital modes and VHF / UHF digital comm and HF digital comm, I think if you publicly publish the encryption key it is probably legal. To my knowledge the rule does say no encryption, it says comm must be in the clear unless the means to decode is published. I cant currently find the actual wording but if I do I will post it. ETA: RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication Basically if you publicly publish the key, just like all digital comm it is difficult to show the purpose is to obscure the meaning as long as you can articulate a different reason for the encryption similiar to all voice digital comm, in my non-lawyer opinion which is probably wrong §97.309 RTTY and data emission codes. (a) Where authorized by §§97.305(c) and 97.307(f) of the part, an amateur station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using the following specified digital codes: (1) The 5-unit, start-stop, International Telegraph Alphabet No. 2, code defined in ITU-T Recommendation F.1, Division C (commonly known as “Baudot”). (2) The 7-unit code specified in ITU-R Recommendations M.476-5 and M.625-3 (commonly known as “AMTOR”). (3) The 7-unit, International Alphabet No. 5, code defined in IT--T Recommendation T.50 (commonly known as “ASCII”). (4) An amateur station transmitting a RTTY or data emission using a digital code specified in this paragraph may use any technique whose technical characteristics have been documented publicly, such as CLOVER, G-TOR, or PacTOR, for the purpose of facilitating communications. (b) Where authorized by §§97.305(c) and 97.307(f), a station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using an unspecified digital code, except to a station in a country with which the United States does not have an agreement permitting the code to be used. RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication. When deemed necessary by a Regional Director to assure compliance with the FCC Rules, a station must: (1) Cease the transmission using the unspecified digital code; (2) Restrict transmissions of any digital code to the extent instructed; (3) Maintain a record, convertible to the original information, of all digital communications transmitted. [54 FR 25857, June 20, 1989, as amended at 54 FR 39537, Sept. 27, 1989; 56 FR 56172, Nov. 1, 1991; 60 FR 55486, Nov. 1, 1995; 71 FR 25982, May 3, 2006; 71 FR 66465, Nov. 15, 2006; 80 FR 53753, Sept. 8, 2015] Quoted: https://www.n5dux.com/ham/files/pdf/Data%20Encryption%20is%20Legal.pdf Edit: And Mach is correct. Published keys should be good to go. To comply with the spirit as well as the letter, you could have a CW or voice transmission in the clear with a link to the keys and documentation which would allow for development and experimentation in the open on ham frequencies. Fair enough, I'm good with that. It's been decades since I read the actual rule and even with a few minutes searching I couldn't turn it up (thanks for finding it Mach). I should probably read through the rules more than once every 25 years or so but since I got my Extra in 1993 there hasn't been any reason to do so  Thanks for the correction guys. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2023 5:09:05 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I tried to setup a test, but my windows laptop is being a real pain right now. Damn you windows USB drivers. Eta; OK. Got my TYT-2017 programmed for a digital channel with no encryption and the TYT-390 with the new AES256. The 390 does not transmit in the clear. Did you click the "write privacy" button after you entered your hex keys? That seemed to write something to my radio before a wrote the whole code plug over. * More testing is needed, and I think maybe the firmware is not cooperating fully. When I go back to read the radio things do seem to be messed up. I tested it with anther MD UV 390. I wrote the key using the write privacy button and everything. When I turned encryption off on one radio while the other was using the universal AES256 programming they both still talked to one another. I should have more concrete information when the MD UV 390 "Plus" arrives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2023 6:51:12 AM EDT
[#17]
Try a few text messages while you are at it.
Does TYT support 3 modes of text like Anytone: Motorola, Hytera, DMR Std ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2023 12:46:52 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Be aware that, unless the rules have changed, it is illegal per FCC rules to encrypt amateur radio transmissions other than commands to a satellite. I’d buy an APX-8000 in a heartbeat if it did DMR as well as analog/P25 phase 1+2. Eventually it’ll be done, but probably not by Big /\/\. The Viking does look promising. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2023 8:36:24 PM EDT
[#19]
Does the 256 work on both analog and digital?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2023 10:27:40 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Does the 256 work on both analog and digital? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2023 11:31:57 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It can't. AES256 work on bytes. So you have to convert the voice to bytes before you can encrypt. Which is by definition digital. Ah makes sense and didn’t think about it. I haven’t played much with digital modes and should have caught that. Thanks for the explanation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2023 6:56:42 PM EDT
[#22]
Scroll down to the at-d280 single band it’s the same radio with different firmware also boasting aes-256 from anytone hoping the usb-c battery comes out soon too.
New anytone radios |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2023 6:58:26 PM EDT
[#23]
If you know someone with an anytone 878 couldn’t you use the same encryption keys & see if they can talk to eachother then you would know it’s really aes-256
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2023 7:28:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Viking VP8000 is currently analogue, P25, NXDN, and is planned to do DMR later this year/next year through a software update. But like all high-end Viking/EFJ radios...gonna be a pretty penny. I'd expect north of 2k for one. DMR Tier 2 for the VP8000 was released about a month ago. Tier 3 trunking is on the roadmap, NXDN is a maybe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2023 11:54:49 PM EDT
[#25]
Any update?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2023 11:30:01 PM EDT
[#26]
So far I have not been able to get the "Non Plus" radio to take the AES256 keys. They radios look IDENTICAL execept a "Plus" sticker has been added to the back. I have plans to open the radios up and examine the hardware but I have not had the time. The "Plus" radio will take the ARC4, AES128 and AES 256 keys. I cannot get TYT to send out the firmware for the "Plus" so I am unable to flash it to the older radio to see if that enables the "universal" encryption (ARC4/AES128/AES256). Maybe with time? As far as AES 256 working with other radios, I have 2nd hand info from another purchaser of the Plus radio that he got the AES256 to work with other, non TYT radios running AES256....so it looks like we have some cross compatibility at least.
I am currently trying to get the TYT "ARC4" to work with Vertex Standard Enhanced Privacy, which I think is RC4/ARC4. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2023 4:29:31 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So far I have not been able to get the "Non Plus" radio to take the AES256 keys. They radios look IDENTICAL execept a "Plus" sticker has been added to the back. I have plans to open the radios up and examine the hardware but I have not had the time. The "Plus" radio will take the ARC4, AES128 and AES 256 keys. I cannot get TYT to send out the firmware for the "Plus" so I am unable to flash it to the older radio to see if that enables the "universal" encryption (ARC4/AES128/AES256). Maybe with time? As far as AES 256 working with other radios, I have 2nd hand info from another purchaser of the Plus radio that he got the AES256 to work with other, non TYT radios running AES256....so it looks like we have some cross compatibility at least. I am currently trying to get the TYT "ARC4" to work with Vertex Standard Enhanced Privacy, which I think is RC4/ARC4. Did he say what the other radio was? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2023 1:35:10 PM EDT
[#28]
Radiodity AT-10G, which looks an awful lot line an Anytone 878.
As far as the ARC4, I cannot get it working with Vertex Standard Enhanced Privacy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2023 11:27:42 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Radiodity AT-10G, which looks an awful lot line an Anytone 878. As far as the ARC4, I cannot get it working with Vertex Standard Enhanced Privacy. Yeah that’s the same radio with different software |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2023 6:58:00 PM EDT
[#30]
Guy on another forum confirmed the TYT MD-UV390 plus & anytone 878 work with aes-256 together
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2023 9:19:15 PM EDT
[#31]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2023 10:57:05 PM EDT
[#32]
Has anyone determined if it's just a firmware update, or if there are any hardware difference between the plus and non plus models?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2023 12:38:29 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Has anyone determined if it's just a firmware update, or if there are any hardware difference between the plus and non plus models? @UrsaMinor303 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2023 12:45:26 PM EDT
[#34]
Anyone know what is the cheapest ARC4 Hts on the market?
someone listed the Antone 2023 product list above, cant find a number of those radios even being sold. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2023 5:17:51 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Anyone know what is the cheapest ARC4 Hts on the market? someone listed the Antone 2023 product list above, cant find a number of those radios even being sold. anytone won’t give dates but did say that the new models will be released one at a time & not all at once. The product .pdf pamphlet was a leak |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2023 4:44:32 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Anyone know what is the cheapest ARC4 Hts on the market? someone listed the Antone 2023 product list above, cant find a number of those radios even being sold. I am not certain exactly what encryption is used. They offer options for RC4 and AES256 but the CPS entered keys are too short. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/28/2023 8:36:53 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think Cotre wins the cheapest. $16-20 I am not certain exactly what encryption is used. They offer options for RC4 and AES256 but the CPS entered keys are too short. That’s a pretty small radio. Never seen one of them before. I have a baofeng 1701 and it has basic and enhanced neither of which work with rc4 or aes. I have gotten 878 aes to work with other Motorola units. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2023 5:03:18 AM EDT
[#38]
So I still cannot get the RC4 to work with my Vertex Radios for some reason.
I did pick up a second MD-UV390 Plus model. The AES256 works between the two of them just fine. I also noted the model I got this month came with a larger battery, 2800 mah,which also has a built in USB C charge port. There are three batteries I know of for this radio. The 2200 mah, the 3800 mah and now the 2800mah w/ USB C. Seems TYT is making small improvements here and there...no idea what is going on with the RC4 tho. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2023 8:26:17 AM EDT
[#39]
Will the aes work with other radios?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2023 1:12:27 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So I still cannot get the RC4 to work with my Vertex Radios for some reason. I did pick up a second MD-UV390 Plus model. The AES256 works between the two of them just fine. I also noted the model I got this month came with a larger battery, 2800 mah,which also has a built in USB C charge port. There are three batteries I know of for this radio. The 2200 mah, the 3800 mah and now the 2800mah w/ USB C. Seems TYT is making small improvements here and there...no idea what is going on with the RC4 tho. Why are you trying to make Arc4 work? It's very old and very easily cracked. If you have AES working, use that instead. Also encryption working between radios is dependent upon what standard they're built to. Radios that are built to be MOTOTRBO compliant tend to work with each other over encryption. Outside of that it's a crapshoot unless you're using a standardized mode like P25. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2023 1:27:04 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why are you trying to make Arc4 work? It's very old and very easily cracked. If you have AES working, use that instead. Also encryption working between radios is dependent upon what standard they're built to. Radios that are built to be MOTOTRBO compliant tend to work with each other over encryption. Outside of that it's a crapshoot unless you're using a standardized mode like P25. Anytone 878 Anytone 578 Btech 6x2 Radiodity AT-10G TYT md-390plus Maxon MDP-6000 Hytera All the HP series radios Any Motorola DMR radio that supports aes-256 ^ All the DMR aes-256 radios that are interoperable that I know of. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2023 9:51:37 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why are you trying to make Arc4 work? It's very old and very easily cracked. If you have AES working, use that . I’ve seen this said before but have yet to see anyone crack RC4 transmission on YT. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2023 12:37:52 PM EDT
[#43]
It would appear that the TYT MD uv390 plus has enabled Text Message encryption in AES256 mode.
I know this was missing in the Anytone578 and 6x2. Also was able to verify the Text Messages can be decrypted on the hotspot using standard software and the radio key. They are using the mode AES/ECB/NoPadding on each data block. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2024 2:23:37 AM EDT
[#44]
Wow. I have to wonder if the American Pioneer Corps (APC) had anything to do with prompting the addition of AES256 to the TYT. We had been in contact with them two years ago and offered to adopt their radio as standard nationwide for APC, but wanted AES256 encryption because we operate encrypted with a business band license.
Good radios for the price, glad to see them moving forward! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2024 11:42:25 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’ve seen this said before but have yet to see anyone crack RC4 transmission on YT. Quote HistoryQuoted: I’ve seen this said before but have yet to see anyone crack RC4 transmission on YT. Just because you haven't seen it on Youtube doesn't mean it can't be done. From my (admittedly smaller) understanding of cryptography, this is a KSA which means that the 4-character (!!) key is put into a FPGA and generates pseudorandom arrays, which are then XOR'd over the plaintext material. Since this is a 4-bit key, accepting values from 0-F, that means there's up to 1820 combinations of keys. At that point it becomes trivial to bruteforce it. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-89754-5_4 Also all of this is assumed without knowing what implementation of RC4 they're using. There's a reason it's being ditched. Quoted: Wow. I have to wonder if the American Pioneer Corps (APC) had anything to do with prompting the addition of AES256 to the TYT. We had been in contact with them two years ago and offered to adopt their radio as standard nationwide for APC, but wanted AES256 encryption because we operate encrypted with a business band license. Good radios for the price, glad to see them moving forward! Probably not as much as you think. It's probably just a push to MOTOTRBO standard, which uses AES crypto. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2024 1:03:07 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It would appear that the TYT MD uv390 plus has enabled Text Message encryption in AES256 mode. I know this was missing in the Anytone578 and 6x2. Also was able to verify the Text Messages can be decrypted on the hotspot using standard software and the radio key. They are using the mode AES/ECB/NoPadding on each data block. Can you upload a video of this are you sure it’s being encrypted? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2024 8:37:42 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can you upload a video of this are you sure it's being encrypted? I am quite sure the tyt 390+ texts are encrypted, since I could get regular texts only until I added the decrypt functions. My 6x2 and at578 can only send/receive plain texts, and the tyt 390+ does send encrypted texts when enabled. If you want to verify my work, just send me a pcap of your 390+ sending an encrypted text and the key used and I could send you the result after each stage of de-interleave, FEC, IPoverDMR fragment reassembly, and decryption. Remember to spoof your personal radio Id, MMDVMHost has a check for radio ids that are not in the HAM range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2024 5:50:23 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow. I have to wonder if the American Pioneer Corps (APC) had anything to do with prompting the addition of AES256 to the TYT. We had been in contact with them two years ago and offered to adopt their radio as standard nationwide for APC, but wanted AES256 encryption because we operate encrypted with a business band license. Good radios for the price, glad to see them moving forward! Well good on you if it did. This is a very useful development for an already useful radio! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/7/2024 12:44:57 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just because you haven't seen it on Youtube doesn't mean it can't be done. From my (admittedly smaller) understanding of cryptography, this is a KSA which means that the 4-character (!!) key is put into a FPGA and generates pseudorandom arrays, which are then XOR'd over the plaintext material. Since this is a 4-bit key, accepting values from 0-F, that means there's up to 1820 combinations of keys. At that point it becomes trivial to bruteforce it. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-89754-5_4 Also all of this is assumed without knowing what implementation of RC4 they're using. There's a reason it's being ditched. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I’ve seen this said before but have yet to see anyone crack RC4 transmission on YT. Just because you haven't seen it on Youtube doesn't mean it can't be done. From my (admittedly smaller) understanding of cryptography, this is a KSA which means that the 4-character (!!) key is put into a FPGA and generates pseudorandom arrays, which are then XOR'd over the plaintext material. Since this is a 4-bit key, accepting values from 0-F, that means there's up to 1820 combinations of keys. At that point it becomes trivial to bruteforce it. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-89754-5_4 Also all of this is assumed without knowing what implementation of RC4 they're using. There's a reason it's being ditched. RC4 is 40 bits or 128 bits, not 4 characters. As implemented by Motorola based on my recollection it's generally 40 bits. It also doesn't work the way you've described it. There are a number of published attacks, it shouldn't be too hard to build a device to crack it at a 40 bit key length. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/7/2024 12:46:24 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’ve seen this said before but have yet to see anyone crack RC4 transmission on YT. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Why are you trying to make Arc4 work? It's very old and very easily cracked. If you have AES working, use that . I’ve seen this said before but have yet to see anyone crack RC4 transmission on YT. I don't know of any cryptographers who post their work to YouTube. There are numerous papers on how to crack RC4, it's generally considered a completely broken system. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
