Call Security

Posts: 50 · Full Forum Member Joined: Jan 13, 2008 Posts: 50

tophtml wrote:

AGREED!

There is a lot of recent drama in many forums from people who have less than ten posts. They seem to provide incomplete information when instructed regarding the exact nature of the problem and information to provide, leaving those who are attempting to assist them, guessing at the problem and fishing for information. It is no surprise, then, when the solution to their problem remains elusive. There is, currently, a wealth of information regarding solutions to these stated problems in the Vonage help pages, however, these pages do not seem to be consulted by these individuals prior to consulting these boards. The information they provide about their problems is, generally, so sketchy as to be unusable, even when the request is made more than once by good natured folks who just want to help.

Regarding this situation in this thread, it just seems that any kidnapping and ransom threat would keep the victims too busy with law enforcement to back-handedly suggest on this board that Vonage security is, somehow, lacking. It was others who had to point out that there was a possibility that the Mexico end may be to blame. His premise never included a failing in the Mexican telecom and his presumption, at all times, was that the security failing was with Vonage. He has reported a Federal Crime in this forum, but has never said that he has contacted law enforcement to report it. It smells like . . . like . . . . ummm . . . RED HERRING!

PS: For those who would ask, "What does red herring have to do with this thread?", I would say - EVERYTHING!"

I am assuming the ps in this comment maybe directed at me. I completely understand what you are saying and looking back on it I have to admit I was a little naive in the sense I thought the guy needed help, clearly he is yanking our chain Mad

I was not getting what you and ed's posts meant until the old light bulb went on. Anyhow that is my last two cents on this thread. Very Happy

Posts: 174 · Vonage Forum Master Joined: Dec 06, 2006 Posts: 174

These individuals, clearly, have too much time on their hands or, in the alternative, may work for other, competing telecoms and VOIPs who are being paid to plant the seed-of-doubt about Vonage on this board. They seem to bash Vonage with fabricated problems that have no resolution. I'm not saying that there are not some very sticky and complex situations that need attention, it just seems that a minority of them may be the figment of an overactive imagination which may be fueled by a paycheck from a competitor.

You are right when you point out that, even to detect a 2.4 Ghz signal would require a high end scanner (the AOR AR8200 MK III is probably the cheapest at $579 from Grove and has an upper band spread of 3Ghz) the digital hiss would be unintelligible.

Posts: 7 · New Forum Member Joined: Mar 14, 2008 Posts: 7

Well i've read all the things posted in this thread and im am so disapointed that every one here thinks im some kind of lying fraud. I came to this forum to ask for help and yet no one seem to think im being serious. Shameful really. All I did was ask a question about security and open my experiance to others because it was requested, and yet im being penalized. Maybe I should have kept the details to myself to avoid ridicule. This is supposed to be a Vonage Tech Forum and yet 2/3 of the post here have to do with defrauding me just because my experiace seems false. Either way im going to go throught and buy a 5.8ghz cordless phone to replace the hunk of crap 2.4ghz that I own and hope to god that this never happens again. Hopefuly my 80 year old diabetic grandmother who ALMOST died because she thought that something bad had happen to me will be alright. I give thanks to all those who did try to help.

Posts: 4777 · Vonage Forum **MVM** Joined: Aug 30, 2005 Posts: 4777

Please ignore any posts that you think question your veracity. I for one don't. The message that most people are trying to convey is that the security breach you experienced is more likely to occur at either end of the line, through wire taps, intercepted cordless phone signals and so forth, than during the Voip part of the link. The reason for thinking that is, simply, that intercepting Voip is possible but difficult. Intercepting cordless phone signals and doing wire taps is easy.

For what it's worth, high security encrypted links suffer from the same issue. Compromises in security generally occur before encryption or after decryption.

Posts: 7 · New Forum Member Joined: Mar 14, 2008 Posts: 7

Steve48 wrote:

Please ignore any posts that you think question your veracity. I for one don't. The message that most people are trying to convey is that the security breach you experienced is more likely to occur at either end of the line, through wire taps, intercepted cordless phone signals and so forth, than during the Voip part of the link. The reason for thinking that is, simply, that intercepting Voip is possible but difficult. Intercepting cordless phone signals and doing wire taps is easy.

For what it's worth, high security encrypted links suffer from the same issue. Compromises in security generally occur before encryption or after decryption.

Well Thank you for response. So do you think changing my phone is a good decision?

Posts: 4777 · Vonage Forum **MVM** Joined: Aug 30, 2005 Posts: 4777

Can't hurt. And in a situation where I was concerned that a phone call was sensitive, I would avoid any cordless phone and use a simple corded phone.

Of course a real security person would say to never use any telephone other than an encrypted one for sensitive calls. Unfortunately, that isn't practical for most of us. We just do the best we can.

Posts: 831 · Vonage Forum Evangelist Joined: Jun 08, 2007 Posts: 831

isidro847 wrote:

Steve48 wrote:

Please ignore any posts that you think question your veracity. I for one don't. The message that most people are trying to convey is that the security breach you experienced is more likely to occur at either end of the line, through wire taps, intercepted cordless phone signals and so forth, than during the Voip part of the link. The reason for thinking that is, simply, that intercepting Voip is possible but difficult. Intercepting cordless phone signals and doing wire taps is easy.

For what it's worth, high security encrypted links suffer from the same issue. Compromises in security generally occur before encryption or after decryption.

Well Thank you for response. So do you think changing my phone is a good decision?

And don't forget peope just talking to each other, overheard in a face to face conversation, etc. remember the old WWII warning, "Loose Lips Sink Ships"