|
Hearing Telephone Conversations
About 10 years ago now, one sunday morning, I was tuning around the SW
Bands. (On a very common Panasonic Radio that had the basic SW frequencies. 6,000 - 19,000 approx.) It was one of my first forrays into SWL (and one which kept me hooked.) and after a while of tuning around I stumbled across what seemed to be a conversation with two people, in particular two elderly women. At first I thought it was a radio soap/drama as the conversation was full of gossip. (In fact one of the elderly women reported the death of a close friend, to which the other replied with arresting apathy.) About 5 minutes of this insued.. Then both parties said goodbye to each other and hung up, with a small beep to signal the end of the call. I waited for about ten seconds and I heard the ringing tone again (beep, beep..... beep,beep in case you didn't know.) The same voice was heard (she must have picked up the phone and dialled someone else.) And the conversation continued. (With the previous caller being gossiped about this time,) I know it is possible to listen into telecommunications, and they have designated frequencies, but I was surprised to hear that kind of thing at all so easily. I don't condone listening to private conversations, but this was a one off, which I was surprised by. Is this a common occurance? Has anybody else got any good stories of hearing this kind of stuff? |
Jason,I DO condone (in fact,I have a few "gadgets" here,they are legal)
listening to private conversations.You probally had your radio tuned to somewhere around the AM 800 band and you was picking up some regular telephone conversations on that band.Fairly common,it used to be.But what with the advent of digital spred spectum modern day telephones and cell phones (mobile phones) it is getting rare to pick up such conversations on radio. cuhulin |
Listening in on private telephone conversations is where you get the
best juicey dirt.I love it! I can tell y'all stories! cuhulin |
"Jason" wrote in message ... Is this a common occurance? Yeah, alot of the older cordless phones would put spurious emissions into the SW bands. The ones from the late 70s or early 80s used frequencies just above 1600 kHz for one channel. I think the later UHF type cordless phones are SW quiet. Has anybody else got any good stories of hearing this kind of stuff? Mostly it's just so much interference. But I did overhear some mope lie to his wife and sweet talk his girlfriend. That's as good as it ever got, and that was amusing for only a few minutes. Domestic phone just can't compete with domestic SW as entertainment. Frank Dresser |
If I recall correct from flipping through the Radio Shack catalog at the
age of 8 or so, to look at all the stuff I *couldn't* have, cordless phones used to be around 27 mhz, and also some were 49 mhz. Same went for Radio- Shack RC cars. The "better" models ran at 49 mhz. |
Conan Ford wrote in
3.159: If I recall correct from flipping through the Radio Shack catalog at the age of 8 or so, to look at all the stuff I *couldn't* have, cordless phones used to be around 27 mhz, and also some were 49 mhz. Same went for Radio- Shack RC cars. The "better" models ran at 49 mhz. Follow-up, a little history he http://www.affordablephones.net/HistoryCordless.htm It was probably an image of a 27 mhz phone. |
Yes, older cordless phones, maybe the first generation oof them,
operated around 1800 kHz, just above the MW band. The base (wall) unit transmitted both sides of the conversation at a stronger level than the handset, often for a couple miles or more. These phones are probably almost all replaced by now wth the later 49 Mhz, and then the 902 Mhz types. If there is not a lot of traffic on the 49 mHz frequency, they can also be heard for somewhat lesser distances, but most of the 900+ Mhz phones use encryption schemes and are not listenable. |
|
In article 9,
Conan Ford wrote: If I recall correct from flipping through the Radio Shack catalog at the age of 8 or so, to look at all the stuff I *couldn't* have, cordless phones used to be around 27 mhz, and also some were 49 mhz. Same went for Radio- Shack RC cars. The "better" models ran at 49 mhz. Back in the '70s and early '80s, cordless phones used, as I remember, 5 channels around 1600-1750 kHz for the base station, and 49 MHz for the handset. Both FM, but you could receive them fairly well on an AM receiver. Later they switched to 46 and 49 MHz. I heard one neighbor, in the 3.5 MHz ham band, complaining that her phone wasn't working well. It turned out to have a stronger signal on the second harmonic than on the fundamental. Some of them of them used frequency inversion scrambling which I found out was completely useless as, even though it was an FM transmission, it could be heard perfectly well on an SSB receiver. (Or at least on my R-1000 which can run SSB with the 12 kHz wide filter). Now they run on 915 MHz, 2.4 and 5.? GHz. Good riddance. I also remember reading that some "smart" phones put out a spurious AM signal on their microprocessor's crystal clock frequency. Pre-bugged phones. Mark Zenier Washington State resident |
You may have heard "ship to shore".
|
David wrote in
: A few additions. Modern scanners are pushing the 3.5 GHz range, so don't feel protected by the scanners that operate in the 2 GHz range. I stopped at a radio shack last year, and the manager had his salespeople telling their customers that the 2 GHz phones were secure since no one made a scanner that went that high. I informed him otherwise. As Pirate Bob says, unless it's digital, someone can probably hear it. On this point, please note that many manufacturers list "Digital" on the phone or packaging, but sometimes they are intentionally misleading the buyer, since the Digital reference may pertain to a "Feature" of the phone, like a Digital answering system. Some phones use simple "inversion" scrambling, and some scanners are available with a feature to unscramble such transmissions. If not part of the scanner, aftermarket items were/are available to permit these signals to be descrambled. Failing this, you can probably find the circuit design online and build it yourself. Other phones use a frequency jumping scheme to deter listeners. This, in some forms, was the most ludicrous idea that I have ever heard of, since the phone makes a series of beeps just before jumping. Since the phone may be latent on a particular frequency for a long time, too much information can be gleaned before the change occurs. Also, with a fast scanner and the right frequency steps, one can probably reacquire the desired conversation again. I bought an outdoor antenna years ago for my scanner, and installed it on the roof of my home (this was in a small town), to improve reception on the public safety bands. I also experimented with the higher frequencies. http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg...te.html#higher All Amateurs except Novices: 33 centimeter band. 902.0-928.0 MHz: CW, Phone, Image, MCW, RTTY/Data These are the same as the cordless phone frequencies. We had a cordless phone and I happened to come across my son speaking with his girlfriend. By the time I realized what I was hearing, my wife had also overheard the conversation, and was on the way to annihilate my son for the graphic nature of his and his girlfriend's speech. I stopped her, but became rattled that something so personal could be going out over the airwaves. We gave away our cordless phone and purchased true digital models. I have apprised my friends, family, coworkers, and occasionally even strangers at the electronic section of department stores that non-digital phones compromise their privacy. The usual answer is that they don't have anything to hide anyway. You would probably be surprised what can be gleaned by listening to conversations. I would not own a non-Digital cordless phone. It is against the law to monitor cordless phone frequencies. Regards, Dr. Artaud http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs2-wire.htm#1 "Can other people listen to my cordless phone conversations? Yes, depending on the kind of phone you use. In most cases, your cordless phone conversations are probably overheard only briefly and accidentally. But there are people who make it a hobby to listen to cordless phone calls using radio scanners. These devices pick up the full range of wireless transmissions from emergency and law enforcement agencies, aircraft, mobile systems, weather reports, utilities maintenance services, among others. Signals from analog cordless phones can also be picked up by other devices including baby monitors, some walkie-talkies, and other cordless phones. Newer digital cordless phones have better security, but cheaper or older phones have few if any security features. Anyone using a radio scanner can eavesdrop on older analog cordless phone calls, even if the phone has multiple channels. " http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs2-wire.htm#5 "LAWS REGARDING WIRELESS EAVESDROPPING Is it legal to intercept other people's cordless or cellular phone calls? The Federal Communications Commission (www.fcc.gov) ruled that as of April 1994 no radio scanners may be manufactured or imported into the U.S. that can pick up frequencies used by cellular telephones, or that can be readily altered to receive such frequencies. (47 CFR Part 15.37 (f)) The law rarely deters the determined eavesdropper, however. Another federal law, the Counterfeit Access Device Law, was amended to make it illegal to use a radio scanner "knowingly and with the intent to defraud" to eavesdrop on wire or electronic communication. (18 USC 1029) Penalties for the intentional interception of cordless and cellular telephone calls range from fines to imprisonment depending on the circumstances. (18 USC 2511, 2701)" On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 14:11:31 -0400, (RM MS) wrote: but most of the 900+ Mhz phones use encryption schemes and are not listenable. Dream on. Those boogers are a constant source of entertainment. Unless it's called ''digital'' they aren't encryted. |
There used to be a divorced woman who used to live next door to me
(there are six single sisters living in that house next door to me now,their ages range from 24 to 31 and a couple of them sisters once told me they would give me some Pussy any time I want it) and I used to listen to her telephone conversations on one of my Radio Shack scanner radios.A guy used to phone her and he would talk about picking up a chick at the mall and all about his sexual fantasies with the chicks. cuhulin |
It is against the law to monitor cordless phone frequencies. How about smoking pot and listening to baby monitors while tearing off mattress tags? |
I have two of those Radio Shack Amplified Stereo Listerner devices.A few
weeks ago,I bought my second Radio Shack Amplified Stereo Listerner device model 33-1097 at the Radio Shack store at Metrocenter Mall www.metromalljackson.com just across Highway 80 from me.I do not own any illegal items at all! Whatever I can pick up on my legal to own radios and my legal to own scanner radios and my legal to own CB radios and my legal to own Transceiver radio is perfectly legal for me to listen to. cuhulin |
|
"Jason" wrote in message ... Is this a common occurance? Has anybody else got any good stories of hearing this kind of stuff? Several years ago I had just purchased a Drake R8B with the VHF adapter, and was demonstrating it to my brother-in-law. I was tuning across the cordless freqs when I heard a woman talking with a man and just sort of left the radio on while he and I discussed various other things. At some point I realized the female voice was my next door neighbor, who appeared to be having a conversation with her therapist (though this was around 9 or 10 pm). As we half-way listened she was mentioning her personal problems, and then the overheard phone conversation took a decidedly sexual turn, and that's when I realized that the guy she was talking to was her boyfriend she was having an affair with. This caught our attention and as we listened it went into all-out phone sex! I should mention that the woman on the phone was around 5 ft tall and easily weighed 300 lbs. I had nightmares for weeks.... |
A big fat woman to keep you warm in the winter and shady in the summer
:{) cuhulin |
David wrote in news:om9o61p8unot7i1t149tsfbfehqt5lk3d8@
4ax.com: On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 17:37:34 -0500, wrote: I have two of those Radio Shack Amplified Stereo Listerner devices.A few weeks ago,I bought my second Radio Shack Amplified Stereo Listerner device model 33-1097 at the Radio Shack store at Metrocenter Mall www.metromalljackson.com just across Highway 80 from me.I do not own any illegal items at all! Whatever I can pick up on my legal to own radios and my legal to own scanner radios and my legal to own CB radios and my legal to own Transceiver radio is perfectly legal for me to listen to. cuhulin That's not true. You are not allowed to listen to any conversations to which you are not a party, regardless of your radios' capabilities. The only exception is for Public Service communications in the clear (and broadcasters on their main channel.) It is even illegal to listen to an STL on an RPU. Really? What if you are having a CB conversation and the telephone conversation interferes with your conversation? How about then? Do you have to discontinue using the CB channel? What if you are a licensed amateur and the telephone conversation is smack in the middle of a band you are licensed to operate on? |
On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:32:30 GMT, Conan Ford
wrote: David wrote in news:om9o61p8unot7i1t149tsfbfehqt5lk3d8@ 4ax.com: On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 17:37:34 -0500, wrote: I have two of those Radio Shack Amplified Stereo Listerner devices.A few weeks ago,I bought my second Radio Shack Amplified Stereo Listerner device model 33-1097 at the Radio Shack store at Metrocenter Mall www.metromalljackson.com just across Highway 80 from me.I do not own any illegal items at all! Whatever I can pick up on my legal to own radios and my legal to own scanner radios and my legal to own CB radios and my legal to own Transceiver radio is perfectly legal for me to listen to. cuhulin That's not true. You are not allowed to listen to any conversations to which you are not a party, regardless of your radios' capabilities. The only exception is for Public Service communications in the clear (and broadcasters on their main channel.) It is even illegal to listen to an STL on an RPU. Really? What if you are having a CB conversation and the telephone conversation interferes with your conversation? How about then? Do you have to discontinue using the CB channel? What if you are a licensed amateur and the telephone conversation is smack in the middle of a band you are licensed to operate on? I'm pretty sure you have to stop listening. |
On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:21:03 -0500, wrote:
A big fat woman to keep you warm in the winter and shady in the summer :{) cuhulin A wool blanket eats less. |
David wrote in news:om9o61p8unot7i1t149tsfbfehqt5lk3d8@
4ax.com: http://www.strongsignals.net/access/content/laws.html Fortunately we live in a free country (sic). Look at this page for a summary of laws concerning use of scanners, as found in various countries. I list it as found, I do not know if it is accurate. Dr. Artaud That's not true. You are not allowed to listen to any conversations to which you are not a party, regardless of your radios' capabilities. The only exception is for Public Service communications in the clear (and broadcasters on their main channel.) It is even illegal to listen to an STL on an RPU. |
I wouldn't even think about having sex with a damn wool blanket.I prefer
my sex with them wimmins.Breaking News! This just in! Starting immediately! All electronic listening devices in canaDUH are to be confiscated by the canaDUHian govt! cuhulin |
Before the newly purchased scanners had blocked frequencies, in the
early nineties, a friend of mine bought one. He would bring it around, and all I cared to hear was telephone action. The only call I remember was between a man and a woman. He was begging for her to take him back. Begging. She was absolutely cool. He was a pathetic excuse for a man. I laughed out loud. I told my buddy if I ever spout off such spineless dribble, put me down like a defective horse. Darren http://hometown.aol.com/darren1965co...e/profile.html |
"? Dr. Artaud ?" wrote in message http://www.strongsignals.net/access/content/laws.html Fortunately we live in a free country (sic). Look at this page for a summary of laws concerning use of scanners, as found in various countries. I list it as found, I do not know if it is accurate. Dr. Artaud No. *I* live in a free country. Australia. You live in a country with 15 exceptions to scanners. Check out the list. Brad. |
"Conan Ford" wrote in message 3.159... It was probably an image of a 27 mhz phone. Maybe, but I've heard more than one which put spurious signals right in the SW spectrum. Frank Dresser |
Australia is a free Country? The govt over there grabbed y'alls shootin
irons and crime over there shot wayyyyy up! I don't call Australia a free Country. cuhulin |
www.advanced-intelligence.com (in Thailand,I think that is where they
are located) sells some gadgets.I don't see anything there that I want though. cuhulin |
I haven't heard any telephone conversations with my two Radio Shack
scanners (Pro-91 and a Pro-33) in about seven or eight years.I guess everybody in my neighborhood has spread spectum (or whatever it is called) telephones now.I never have heard them on any of my other radios before.Of course U.S.Mlitary and U.S.fed govt have some devices that lets them listen to any telephone conversations and there are U.S.Satellites wayyyyy up there that can do the same thing. cuhulin |
Even when your telephone is hung up,the phone operators can press some
switches and listen in to your phone.They can listen to sounds up to about thirty feet away from your phone.Just as easily as listening to music on the internet with computers and even webtv. cuhulin |
David wrote:
"Dream on. Those boogers are a constant source of entertainment. Unless it's called ''digital'' they aren't encryted." I never said there were none left to hear, just that newer ones being sold have been using spread-spectrum for at least 6 or 7 years already. |
So, what did you end up with Coon: the pussy, or a sore elbow?
|
In article ,
Dr. Artaud NoSuchThing @Notreal.com wrote: It is against the law to monitor cordless phone frequencies. The Federal Communications Commission (www.fcc.gov) ruled that as of April 1994 no radio scanners may be manufactured or imported into the U.S. that can pick up frequencies used by cellular telephones, or that can be readily altered to receive such frequencies. (47 CFR Part 15.37 You've got your wires crossed. Cell phones are not cordless phones. Cell phones operated under a different part of the regulations (Part 22?) than cordless phones which are under the license free regulations (Part 15). Since there are numerous part 15 devices like baby monitors and wireless speakers that operate on the same frequencies using the same modulation schemes as the cheaper cordless phones, there's no protection. Mark Zenier Washington State resident |
|
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:56:14 GMT, (Mark Zenier)
wrote: In article , Dr. Artaud NoSuchThing @Notreal.com wrote: It is against the law to monitor cordless phone frequencies. The Federal Communications Commission (www.fcc.gov) ruled that as of April 1994 no radio scanners may be manufactured or imported into the U.S. that can pick up frequencies used by cellular telephones, or that can be readily altered to receive such frequencies. (47 CFR Part 15.37 You've got your wires crossed. Cell phones are not cordless phones. Cell phones operated under a different part of the regulations (Part 22?) than cordless phones which are under the license free regulations (Part 15). Since there are numerous part 15 devices like baby monitors and wireless speakers that operate on the same frequencies using the same modulation schemes as the cheaper cordless phones, there's no protection. Mark Zenier Washington State resident You're not allowed to monitor cordless phones either. |
(Mark Zenier) wrote in
: Hi Mark, as always, the following states emphatically that listening to cordless phones is illegal, then opens the issue to ambiguity in its closing paragraph. You have got to love law. The following was from the listed link. Regards, Dr. Artaud http://grove-ent.com/LLawbook.html "Initially, cordless telephone conversations were not included in the definition of an "electronic communication." That anomaly has now been removed. After making a blanket prohibition of intercepting all electronic (i.e., radio) transmissions, the statute lists the exceptions. The first exception is that it is legal to listen to all radio transmissions which are "readily accessible to the general public." This term used to be defined in the statute to mean radio signals which are (1) not encrypted, scrambled, carried on a subcarrier or other signal subsidiary to a radio transmission; (2) not transmitted over a common carrier communications system (such as the phone company); (3) not special transmissions such as point-to-point private relay transmissions for the broadcast services, not meant for reception by the general public. However, on October 25, 1994, Public Law 103-414 was enacted. This law amended the ECPA to provide equal treatment to cordless telephone conversations as cellular ones. However, it also amended the definition of "readily accessible to the general public" to exclude all "electronic communications." As noted above, electronic communications include virtually all radio communications. And so, as the law now stands, there is virtually no radio communication that is "readily accessible to the general public." In essence, the lawmakers have closed up tight this most useful exception to the general rule. The federal government has cracked down hard on radio listening. At this point the only legal listening outside the broadcast bands is: (a) a communication relating to ships, aircraft, vehicles or persons in distress; (b) a broadcast by any governmental, law enforcement, civil defense, private land mobile or public safety communications system, including police and fire; (c) transmissions on the amateur bands, citizens band or general mobile radio services as well as any marine or aeronautical communications system; (d) satellite transmissions of cable programming as long as the transmission is not encrypted, there is no monetary gain by the viewer, and there is no marketing system available (meaning no one is selling the rights to view the programming via satellite). (e) a radio transmission which is causing interference with any lawfully operating station (including ham radio operators), or is causing interference with any consumer electronic equipment, to the extent necessary to identify the source of the interference. What if you are tuning around your general coverage receiver and come upon something not contained on the federal "approved listening" list? In order for a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 2511 to be successful, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the listener intentionally intercepted a protected transmission. Since even attorneys are unsure what frequencies are off limits, how can the government hope to prove that a listener who happens upon one of these federally-legislated minefields in the radio spectrum, actually intended to do so? In fact, the Senate Judiciary Committee report on the ECPA states flat out that "the inadvertent interception of a protected communication is not unlawful under this Act." (Senate Report 99-541) Case law appears to bear this out. In United States v. Townsend, 987 F.2d 927 (2nd Cir. 1993), the court said that the word "intentionally" in the ECPA means that a jury must find that the defendant acted purposefully and the defendant's act must have been the product of the defendant's conscious objective, rather than a product of mistake or accident." You've got your wires crossed. Cell phones are not cordless phones. Cell phones operated under a different part of the regulations (Part 22?) than cordless phones which are under the license free regulations (Part 15). |
Every once in a while when I am listening to my Radio Shack scanner
radio (it is not modified in any kind of a way,it is just like it was when it came from a Radio Shack store) I hear a man (sometimes it is a lady's voice I hear) or a wonan dialing a pager messenger service in the Jackson area and they leave a message on that pager service.What most people do not know is,U.S.Citizens have the Right to listen to any and all electronic messages.Regardless of what the so-called fcc says.Anything I hear on my radios,my computers,my telephones,my tv sets,my Radio Shack Amplified Listerner devices or anything else I own,I have a perfect Right to listen to! cuhulin |
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:00:27 -0500, cuhulin wrote:
Every once in a while when I am listening to my Radio Shack scanner radio (it is not modified in any kind of a way,it is just like it was when it came from a Radio Shack store) I hear a man (sometimes it is a lady's voice I hear) or a wonan dialing a pager messenger service in the Jackson area and they leave a message on that pager service.What most people do not know is,U.S.Citizens have the Right to listen to any and all electronic messages.Regardless of what the so-called fcc says.Anything I hear on my radios,my computers,my telephones,my tv sets,my Radio Shack Amplified Listerner devices or anything else I own,I have a perfect Right to listen to! cuhulin Unfortunately that is not true any more.... -- Korbin Dallas The name was changed to protect the guilty. |
OH YES! it is TRUE too! Anything that comes on my radios that is
interesting to me,I AM GOING TO LISTEN! cuhulin |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:00 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com