ARLA/CLUSTER: Fw: ARLB016 ARRL Urges Denial of Petition to Permit
Encryption of Some Emergency Communications
J Pais
rttydx gmail.com
Quinta-Feira, 11 de Julho de 2013 - 20:07:48 WEST
esta historia da PCivil é mto longa ... mas concordo com o jorge o nome
esta la o resto....
No dia 11 de Jul de 2013 14:24, "Jorge Santos" <ct1jib gmail.com> escreveu:
> Desculpa lá Paulo, mas desde quando é que o assunto "proteção civil"
> passou a ser tema de segurança nacional??? porque «...*encriptação mas só
> em certos assuntos mais sensíveis de ferir susceptibilidades...*», é
> proteção civil, diz o nome, quantos mais souberem de algo melhor, mesmo
> aqueles que só façam scan de frequências.
>
> Acho que este é um dos problemas da nossa (des)proteção civil, acham-se
> uma força militarizada e como tal passível de comunicações especiais (de
> corrida) e de agentes especiais.
>
> Por amor de Deus...
>
>
> 2013/7/11 Paulo Santos <ct4dk.santos gmail.com>
>
>> Bom dia colega Vilela,
>>
>> Não há luta nenhuma entre os Radioamadores nos USA e não pretendem tomar
>> de assalto o radioamadorismo essa afirmação deve ser a realidade Portuguesa
>> porque lá
>> por terras dos USA eles levam o serviço publico e a ajuda muito a serio e
>> os radioamadores que colaboram em incidentes sabem muito bem o seu lugar e
>> cumprem a sua
>> função de informar, não é como cá que já vi certa gente a propor mundos e
>> fundos às entidades de protecção civil só para terem um lugar de destaque
>> enfim andam a "lamber botas"
>> são os "generais de penacho" vivem à conta do protagonismo.
>>
>> Neste assunto da ARRL a minha posição é 50/50 pois concordo com ambas as
>> partes, entendo de que as comunicações de radioamadorismo devam ser sempre
>> sem encriptações
>> pois por vezes uma má interpretação pode ter consequências graves, também
>> concordo com a encriptação mas só em certos assuntos mais sensíveis de
>> ferir susceptibilidades
>> pois como por norma as comunicações de amador são em "claro" e há sempre
>> possibilidade de escuta por scanners, imagine uma operação conjunta entre
>> amadores e protecção civil
>> numa catástrofe em que passavam o relatório de "baixas" ou outra situação
>> mais sensível via radioamador, alguém mal intencionado poderia aproveitar
>> essa informação para fazer
>> circular o caos por entre a população, como conhecimento pessoal das duas
>> áreas (amador e Protecção Civil) dai eu entender a posição dos nossos
>> colegas Americanos.
>>
>> 73 de Paulo Santos, CT4DK
>>
>>
>> Em 11/07/2013 10:41, AV escreveu:
>>
>> Por cá a discussão é muito limitada mas lá nos EUA a luta entre os
>> radioamadores genuinos e aqueles que pretendem tomar de assalto o
>> radioamadorismo para fins de terceira ordem como a protecção pública, é
>> muito acesa.
>> Este é só mais um triste episódio, muito bem contrariado pela ARRL.
>>
>> 73,
>> António Vilela
>> CT1JHQ
>>
>> On 10 July 2013 23:50, ACViegas <ct2ixq radioamadorismo.pt> wrote:
>>
>>> Caros Amigos ,
>>> aqui vai a noticia na integra como me foi enviada.
>>> Cumps
>>> ACViegas
>>> CT2IXQ
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "ARRL Web site" <memberlist www.arrl.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 7:48 PM
>>> To: <acviegas hotmail.com>
>>> Subject: ARLB016 ARRL Urges Denial of Petition to Permit Encryption of
>>> Some Emergency Communications
>>>
>>> SB QST @ ARL $ARLB016
>>>> ARLB016 ARRL Urges Denial of Petition to Permit Encryption of Some
>>>> Emergency Communications
>>>>
>>>> ZCZC AG16
>>>> QST de W1AW
>>>> ARRL Bulletin 16 ARLB016
>>>> >From ARRL Headquarters
>>>> Newington CT July 9, 2013
>>>> To all radio amateurs
>>>>
>>>> SB QST ARL ARLB016
>>>> ARLB016 ARRL Urges Denial of Petition to Permit Encryption of Some
>>>> Emergency Communications
>>>>
>>>> The ARRL is calling on the FCC to deny a Petition for Rule Making
>>>> (RM-11699) seeking to permit the encryption of certain amateur
>>>> communications during emergency operations or related training
>>>> exercises. Don Rolph, AB1PH, of E Walpole, Massachusetts, petitioned
>>>> the Commission in March to suggest an additional exception to
>>>> §97.113, which currently prohibits "messages encoded for the purpose
>>>> of obscuring their meaning."
>>>>
>>>> "While Mr Rolph has concisely stated his argument, it is ARRL's
>>>> considered view that there is no factual or legal basis for the
>>>> assumption that encryption of transmissions...is necessary in order
>>>> to continue and enhance the utility of Amateur Radio emergency and
>>>> disaster relief communications," the League said in its comments,
>>>> filed today with the FCC. The ARRL also turned away Rolph's
>>>> assertion that the current prohibition in §97.113 "has impacted the
>>>> relationship of Amateur Radio volunteers and served agencies and
>>>> significantly limited the effectiveness of amateurs in supporting
>>>> emergency communications." The League said it's unaware of any
>>>> evidence that served agencies have been reluctant to utilize Amateur
>>>> Radio as part of their emergency or disaster relief communications
>>>> plans because of the encryption restrictions in Part 97. The Amateur
>>>> Service rule is based on a similar prohibition in international
>>>> telecommunication law, the ARRL noted.
>>>>
>>>> The League characterized as "erroneous" and "unfounded" Rolph's
>>>> assumption that encryption of certain information may be required
>>>> under the provisions of HIPAA - the Health Insurance Portability and
>>>> Accountability Act. "This mistaken assumption leads to the
>>>> conclusion that the inability of Amateur Radio operators to encrypt
>>>> the content of their transmissions in order to obscure the meaning
>>>> of the transmissions renders Amateur Radio less (and decreasingly)
>>>> useful to served agencies than it would be if encryption of those
>>>> transmissions was permitted," the ARRL said. The League also said it
>>>> was unaware of any instance in which state statutes have been cited
>>>> by any served agency or group as a reason not to employ Amateur
>>>> Radio for emergency communication.
>>>>
>>>> Radio amateurs, the ARRL countered, are not "covered entities" under
>>>> HIPAA, which applies only to health care providers, health plans and
>>>> health care clearinghouses. And, the League added, there is no
>>>> expectation of privacy in Amateur Radio communications.
>>>>
>>>> The ARRL said it's not possible to determine the validity of the
>>>> claim "that health care agencies subject to HIPAA are or might be
>>>> unwilling or reluctant to utilize Amateur Radio in emergency
>>>> communications and disaster relief planning" because of any lack of
>>>> privacy inherent in Amateur Radio. "Permitting encryption might
>>>> remedy the concern as a practical matter, if the concern exists,"
>>>> the League continued, but "the complete dearth of even anecdotal
>>>> evidence of the existence of that concern" makes it impossible to
>>>> justify the proposed rule change on that basis.
>>>>
>>>> "It is extremely important to insure that Amateur Radio remains
>>>> useful to served disaster relief and emergency communications
>>>> agencies, which include health care facilities," the League
>>>> stressed. "It is just as important to insure that regulatory
>>>> impediments to that volunteer work be minimized to the extent
>>>> consistent with the nature of the Amateur Radio Service." Amateur
>>>> Radio's utility to served agencies in supporting emergency
>>>> communication, the ARRL continued, "is high indeed, and is at the
>>>> present time unfettered by the inability to encrypt transmissions."
>>>>
>>>> However, the ARRL said that should it become necessary in the future
>>>> for radio amateurs to protect the privacy of individuals whose
>>>> medical data may be transmitted by Amateur Radio during or after an
>>>> emergency or disaster, "the Commission may be asked to revisit this
>>>> matter."
>>>>
>>>> "It is urgent that Amateur Radio continue to be an essential
>>>> component of disaster and emergency communications planning," and
>>>> that served agencies, including medical facilities, perceive the
>>>> utility of Amateur Radio as unhindered by regulations that prohibit
>>>> encryption, the League emphasized.
>>>>
>>>> More than 200 comments were filed on RM-11699, most of them tending
>>>> to support the ARRL's arguments.
>>>> NNNN
>>>> /EX
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CLUSTER mailing list
>>> CLUSTER radio-amador.net
>>> http://radio-amador.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cluster
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CLUSTER mailing listCLUSTER radio-amador.nethttp://radio-amador.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cluster
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CLUSTER mailing list
>> CLUSTER radio-amador.net
>> http://radio-amador.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cluster
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> 73's
>
> ***********************************
> *CT1JIB* / Jorge Santos
> QTH-Locator: IM58mo
> CQ Zone:14/ITU Zone:37
> Watch data in www.qrz.com <http://www.qrz.com/db/CT1JIB>
> QSL Via: Bureau or Eqsl:www.eqsl.cc
> REP Member# 1748
> ARLA Member# 070
> ARRL/LoTW Member# 2000232451
> AMSAT US Member# 36900
> EPC Member# 5302
> *
> Sysop of CQ0DSA, CQ0DAH, CQ0DCH, XRF040, DCS012
>
> Co-Sysop of CQ0DLX, CQ0DPT, CQ0DSM, CQ0DTV, CQ0DLR
> *
> D-Star FreeStar System
> ***********************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> CLUSTER mailing list
> CLUSTER radio-amador.net
> http://radio-amador.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cluster
>
>
-------------- próxima parte ----------
Um anexo em HTML foi limpo...
URL: http://radio-amador.net/pipermail/cluster/attachments/20130711/881e2892/attachment.html
Mais informações acerca da lista CLUSTER