Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!noc.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!pipex!demon!gtoal.com!gtoal
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: gtoal@gtoal.com (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Do we need the clipper for cheap security?
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 10:03:36 +0000
Message-ID: <9304201003.AA05465@pizzabox.demon.co.uk>
Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk
Lines: 24

	gtoal@gtoal.com (Graham Toal) writes:
	>
	>In the UK, it's impossible to get approval to attach any crypto device
	>to the phone network.  (Anything that plugs in to our BT phone sockets
	>must be approved - for some reason crypto devices just never are...)
	>

	Whats the difference between a V.32bis modem and a V.32bis modem?

	I'm not being entirely silly here: what I'm pointing out is that the
	modems that they have already approved for data transmission will work
	just fine to transmit scrambled vocoded voice.

Absolutely.  I just meant that no secure *dedicated* crypto device has
ever been given approval.  Guerrilla underground devices should be well
possible with today's high-speed modems (not that I can think of many v32bis
modems that are approved either mind you - just the overpriced Couriers)

Can someone tell me if hardware compression is or is not needed to run
digital speech down 14.4K?  I think it is; I've heard it's not.  Lets
say 8 bit samples.  Would *raw* data at the corresponding sampling rate
be usable?  If not, how fancy does the compression need to be?

G
