Skype protocol cracked

Discussion in 'UK VOIP' started by TheMgt, Jul 14, 2006.

  1. TheMgt

    TheMgt Guest

    TheMgt, Jul 14, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. TheMgt

    alexd Guest

    TheMgt wrote:

    > http://www.cio.com/blog_view.html?CID=22974


    From TFA:

    # [...] according to a statement from Skype. "Moreover, no amount of reverse
    # engineering would threaten Skype?s cryptographic security or integrity."

    So Skype are saying there's no problem with reverse engineering their
    protocol then ;-)

    # "Skype?s conversations are still secure, but what?s not secure is their
    # present business model of using everybody else?s computer to propagate the
    # Skype network," Paglee said.

    Why do people bang on about Skype stealing bandwidth? If you use Skype to
    have conversations with people, then *you* are using other people's
    bandwidth. It's not as if anyone's had a gun put to their head and been
    forced to install Skype, is it? If you don't want your bandwidth
    being 'stolen', don't install Skype.

    > Hopefully they don't keep this to themselves.


    I'm not convinced that this is really anything significant. Anyone who can
    install Skype can install X-lite or a million other free softphones and
    start making calls. So what if you can write Yet Another Softphone, that
    just happens to work with Skype? Skype is going to lose the battle to SIP
    and become just another proprietary VoIP protocol that fades into
    irrelevance when people see there's a better way. Although I guess if you
    live under a tyrannical regime, it's nice to be able to have anonymous
    secure conversations.

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    19:12:16 up 2 days, 9:52, 2 users, load average: 0.67, 0.64, 0.79
    This is my BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMSTICK
     
    alexd, Jul 14, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. alexd wrote:
    > TheMgt wrote:
    >
    > > http://www.cio.com/blog_view.html?CID=22974

    >
    > From TFA:
    >
    > # [...] according to a statement from Skype. "Moreover, no amount of reverse
    > # engineering would threaten Skype?s cryptographic security or integrity."
    >
    > So Skype are saying there's no problem with reverse engineering their
    > protocol then ;-)


    Just like kazaa lite didnt affect them.
    >
    > # "Skype?s conversations are still secure, but what?s not secure is their
    > # present business model of using everybody else?s computer to propagate the
    > # Skype network," Paglee said.


    At least skype is encrpyted which don think SIP is?

    > Why do people bang on about Skype stealing bandwidth? If you use Skype to
    > have conversations with people, then *you* are using other people's
    > bandwidth. It's not as if anyone's had a gun put to their head and been
    > forced to install Skype, is it? If you don't want your bandwidth
    > being 'stolen', don't install Skype.


    Its people not being aware of skype using bandwidth when they are not
    using it, with the chronic capped bandwidth deals some people are
    landed with they probably got a better deal on dial up.

    Adam

    >
    > > Hopefully they don't keep this to themselves.

    >
    > I'm not convinced that this is really anything significant. Anyone who can
    > install Skype can install X-lite or a million other free softphones and
    > start making calls. So what if you can write Yet Another Softphone, that
    > just happens to work with Skype? Skype is going to lose the battle to SIP
    > and become just another proprietary VoIP protocol that fades into
    > irrelevance when people see there's a better way. Although I guess if you
    > live under a tyrannical regime, it's nice to be able to have anonymous
    > secure conversations.
    > --
    > <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    > 19:12:16 up 2 days, 9:52, 2 users, load average: 0.67, 0.64, 0.79
    > This is my BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMSTICK
     
    Adam Aglionby, Jul 15, 2006
    #3
  4. TheMgt

    alexd Guest

    Adam Aglionby wrote:

    > alexd wrote:


    >> So Skype are saying there's no problem with reverse engineering their
    >> protocol then ;-)


    > Just like kazaa lite didnt affect them.


    Is that sarcasm?

    > At least skype is encrpyted which don think SIP is?


    You can encrypt RTP streams with SRTP, but anyone eavesdropping will still
    know who you're talking to. Not sure if SSIP is implemented. Probably
    easier to tunnel SIP+RTP through a VPN and use standard SIP user agents
    than trying to find user agents [and possibly a proxy] that support SRTP
    and SSIP.

    >> Why do people bang on about Skype stealing bandwidth? If you use Skype to
    >> have conversations with people, then *you* are using other people's
    >> bandwidth. It's not as if anyone's had a gun put to their head and been
    >> forced to install Skype, is it? If you don't want your bandwidth
    >> being 'stolen', don't install Skype.


    > Its people not being aware of skype using bandwidth when they are not
    > using it, with the chronic capped bandwidth deals some people are
    > landed with they probably got a better deal on dial up.


    User's lack of bandwidth != Skype's fault. If you go to skype.com, click
    on 'Help' and put 'bandwidth' in the search box, you'll get the requisite
    information - although I noticed that they specify the usage in bytes, not
    bits [like the rest of the universe does when referring to bandwidth],
    which is a little disingenuous. Not sure if Skype's claims need to be taken
    with a pinch of salt or not, however.

    If bandwidth is *that* critical to you:
    a) You'll be watching your bandwidth use closely enough to notice it shot up
    when you started using Skype
    b) Get a better ISP
    c) Close the program when you're not using it

    Above all, Skype is free and no-one forces you to use it.

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    19:11:54 up 3 days, 9:51, 1 user, load average: 0.22, 0.23, 0.17
    This is my BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMSTICK
     
    alexd, Jul 15, 2006
    #4
  5. TheMgt

    Guest

    On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 18:25:52 GMT, alexd <> wrote:

    >Why do people bang on about Skype stealing bandwidth? If you use Skype to
    >have conversations with people, then *you* are using other people's
    >bandwidth.


    If you are conversing with someone else, and you are both behind NAT
    routers (which is normal) the call goes via a third party who does not
    have NAT addressing.

    You use your bandwidth, the person you are calling's bandwidth, and
    some unsuspecting third party's bandwidth.
     
    , Jul 15, 2006
    #5
  6. TheMgt

    Brian Guest

    On 2006-07-15, <> wrote:
    >
    > On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 18:25:52 GMT, alexd <> wrote:
    >
    >>Why do people bang on about Skype stealing bandwidth? If you use Skype to
    >>have conversations with people, then *you* are using other people's
    >>bandwidth.

    >
    > If you are conversing with someone else, and you are both behind NAT
    > routers (which is normal) the call goes via a third party who does not
    > have NAT addressing.
    >
    > You use your bandwidth, the person you are calling's bandwidth, and
    > some unsuspecting third party's bandwidth.


    If this third party is ignorant or unsuspecting of the use of their
    bandwidth they might have failed to read or understand the Terms and
    Policies of Skype Technologies SA. Nevertheless, they have agreed to
    accept them by downloading and installing the Skype program. Not being
    aware that they have given permission for their bandwidth to be used is
    hardly a reason for them or anyone else to imply there is a theft of
    resources involved.

    Brian.
     
    Brian, Jul 15, 2006
    #6
  7. TheMgt

    Guest

    On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 22:47:51 +0000 (UTC), Brian <>
    wrote:

    >If this third party is ignorant or unsuspecting of the use of their
    >bandwidth they might have failed to read or understand the Terms and
    >Policies of Skype Technologies SA. Nevertheless, they have agreed to
    >accept them by downloading and installing the Skype program. Not being
    >aware that they have given permission for their bandwidth to be used is
    >hardly a reason for them or anyone else to imply there is a theft of
    >resources involved.


    Just because someone agreed to T&Cs does not mean that they understood
    the technical implications.

    Given that Skype's main selling point is that you don't need to be
    technical to install and use it, I really don't think that the average
    user will understand the ramifications of proxying NATted connections
    via a third party, and won't grasp that this could use their bandwidth
    even if they are neither making nor receiving calls.

    But that does rather miss the point that many users do not "own" the
    network they are using, and they may not have to power to grant
    unlimited use of someone else's bandwidth.

    The fact that Skype works so hard to get round port blocks seems a
    sign that it knows it may not be a welcome guest.

    I'd bet that the majority of Skype users don't know about this, T&C's
    or not.
     
    , Jul 16, 2006
    #7
  8. TheMgt

    TheMgt Guest

    alexd wrote:
    > TheMgt wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.cio.com/blog_view.html?CID=22974

    >
    > From TFA:
    >
    > # [...] according to a statement from Skype. "Moreover, no amount of reverse
    > # engineering would threaten Skype?s cryptographic security or integrity."
    >
    > So Skype are saying there's no problem with reverse engineering their
    > protocol then ;-)
    >
    > # "Skype?s conversations are still secure, but what?s not secure is their
    > # present business model of using everybody else?s computer to propagate the
    > # Skype network," Paglee said.
    >
    > Why do people bang on about Skype stealing bandwidth? If you use Skype to
    > have conversations with people, then *you* are using other people's
    > bandwidth. It's not as if anyone's had a gun put to their head and been
    > forced to install Skype, is it? If you don't want your bandwidth
    > being 'stolen', don't install Skype.
    >
    >> Hopefully they don't keep this to themselves.

    >
    > I'm not convinced that this is really anything significant. Anyone who can
    > install Skype can install X-lite or a million other free softphones and
    > start making calls. So what if you can write Yet Another Softphone, that
    > just happens to work with Skype? Skype is going to lose the battle to SIP
    > and become just another proprietary VoIP protocol that fades into
    > irrelevance when people see there's a better way. Although I guess if you
    > live under a tyrannical regime, it's nice to be able to have anonymous
    > secure conversations.


    I'm hoping it makes a skype extension for asterisk more likely

    http://www.voip-info.org/wiki-bounty skype
     
    TheMgt, Jul 16, 2006
    #8
  9. TheMgt

    Brian Guest

    On 2006-07-16, <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 22:47:51 +0000 (UTC), Brian <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>If this third party is ignorant or unsuspecting of the use of their
    >>bandwidth they might have failed to read or understand the Terms and
    >>Policies of Skype Technologies SA. Nevertheless, they have agreed to
    >>accept them by downloading and installing the Skype program. Not being
    >>aware that they have given permission for their bandwidth to be used is
    >>hardly a reason for them or anyone else to imply there is a theft of
    >>resources involved.

    >
    > Just because someone agreed to T&Cs does not mean that they understood
    > the technical implications.
    >
    > Given that Skype's main selling point is that you don't need to be
    > technical to install and use it, I really don't think that the average
    > user will understand the ramifications of proxying NATted connections
    > via a third party, and won't grasp that this could use their bandwidth
    > even if they are neither making nor receiving calls.


    The Skype website does explain what they mean by P2P and devotes some
    space to talking about bandwidth usage. Their forums also have plenty
    of discussion on both topics. While I might agree with you about the
    average user not completely understanding the technical details there is
    sufficient information to indicate the software does utilise their
    bandwidth at all times. Now if they cannot be bothered to read what is
    there they have no chance of bettering their understanding.

    > But that does rather miss the point that many users do not "own" the
    > network they are using, and they may not have to power to grant
    > unlimited use of someone else's bandwidth.


    That's an important point and one which a Skype user probably doesn't
    give much thought to. The website P2P explanation rather gives the
    impression that bandwidth is a common resource to be shared at all
    times.

    I think there are some UK universities which restricted or banned the
    use of Skype but maybe they have relented. I am unware of any ISPs
    publically preventing Skype being used so can one assume they grant
    permission for some of their network resources to be devoted to handling
    the bandwidth demands from other than their own customers?

    Brian.
     
    Brian, Jul 16, 2006
    #9
  10. alexd wrote:
    > Adam Aglionby wrote:
    >
    > > alexd wrote:

    >
    > >> So Skype are saying there's no problem with reverse engineering their
    > >> protocol then ;-)

    >
    > > Just like kazaa lite didnt affect them.

    >
    > Is that sarcasm?


    Well Kazaa didn`t live long enuff to switch it off I suppose

    >
    > > At least skype is encrpyted which don think SIP is?

    >
    > You can encrypt RTP streams with SRTP, but anyone eavesdropping will still
    > know who you're talking to. Not sure if SSIP is implemented. Probably
    > easier to tunnel SIP+RTP through a VPN and use standard SIP user agents
    > than trying to find user agents [and possibly a proxy] that support SRTP
    > and SSIP.


    Er, in short, its not simple. Thanks have some reading to do obviously
    ;-)

    >
    > >> Why do people bang on about Skype stealing bandwidth? If you use Skype to
    > >> have conversations with people, then *you* are using other people's
    > >> bandwidth. It's not as if anyone's had a gun put to their head and been
    > >> forced to install Skype, is it? If you don't want your bandwidth
    > >> being 'stolen', don't install Skype.

    >
    > > Its people not being aware of skype using bandwidth when they are not
    > > using it, with the chronic capped bandwidth deals some people are
    > > landed with they probably got a better deal on dial up.

    >
    > User's lack of bandwidth != Skype's fault. If you go to skype.com, click
    > on 'Help' and put 'bandwidth' in the search box, you'll get the requisite
    > information - although I noticed that they specify the usage in bytes, not
    > bits [like the rest of the universe does when referring to bandwidth],
    > which is a little disingenuous. Not sure if Skype's claims need to be taken
    > with a pinch of salt or not, however.


    Lies ,damned lies and statistics suppose. Is there an average figure
    for SIP bandwidth use?

    >
    > If bandwidth is *that* critical to you:
    > a) You'll be watching your bandwidth use closely enough to notice it shot up
    > when you started using Skype


    Lot of low bandwidth package buyers may not be the most technically
    adept, anticpating their needs to be communication based possibly,
    email and a few Skype calls, and may have no idea how to monitor usage.

    > b) Get a better ISP


    Bingo, lot of the capped deals are apalling value for money, vote with
    your cash.

    > c) Close the program when you're not using it


    Makes receiving calls kind of tricky.

    >
    > Above all, Skype is free and no-one forces you to use it.


    Absolutely, its robust , will work on dial up at a push, hops round
    firewalls, is encrypted end to end and non technical users can install
    and use it with minimum of fuss.

    Would think that allowing some sort of API or protocol to access skype
    for incorporation into other products would help though.

    Adam

    >
    > --
    > <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    > 19:11:54 up 3 days, 9:51, 1 user, load average: 0.22, 0.23, 0.17
    > This is my BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMSTICK
     
    Adam Aglionby, Jul 17, 2006
    #10
  11. TheMgt

    Guest

    On 16 Jul 2006 17:44:31 -0700, "Adam Aglionby" <>,
    wrote:

    >> Above all, Skype is free and no-one forces you to use it.

    >
    >Absolutely, its robust , will work on dial up at a push, hops round
    >firewalls, is encrypted end to end and non technical users can install
    >and use it with minimum of fuss.
    >
    >Would think that allowing some sort of API or protocol to access skype
    >for incorporation into other products would help though.
    >
    >Adam


    With the final cross protocol of MSN/Windows Messenger and Yahoo
    Messenger being released with free PC to PC and their pushing of BT
    Communicator with calls from 1.25 min Skype will need to allow some
    incorporation or go with the tide. M$ & Yahoo have taken years to
    agree their cooperation and put out a package. Trillian was I think a
    big push to get them thinking. M$+Yahoo will hopefully be the push
    that Skype needs. I am sure that there will be millions of users
    worldwide that will benefit in the end. Regardless of whatever the
    resulting application is called or who is actually the distributor.

    Wik
     
    , Jul 17, 2006
    #11
  12. TheMgt

    Mark Guest

    On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 16:29:29 +0100, wrote:

    >On 16 Jul 2006 17:44:31 -0700, "Adam Aglionby" <>,
    >wrote:
    >
    >>> Above all, Skype is free and no-one forces you to use it.

    >>
    >>Absolutely, its robust , will work on dial up at a push, hops round
    >>firewalls, is encrypted end to end and non technical users can install
    >>and use it with minimum of fuss.
    >>
    >>Would think that allowing some sort of API or protocol to access skype
    >>for incorporation into other products would help though.
    >>
    >>Adam

    >
    >With the final cross protocol of MSN/Windows Messenger and Yahoo
    >Messenger being released with free PC to PC and their pushing of BT
    >Communicator with calls from 1.25 min Skype will need to allow some
    >incorporation or go with the tide. M$ & Yahoo have taken years to
    >agree their cooperation and put out a package. Trillian was I think a
    >big push to get them thinking. M$+Yahoo will hopefully be the push
    >that Skype needs. I am sure that there will be millions of users
    >worldwide that will benefit in the end. Regardless of whatever the
    >resulting application is called or who is actually the distributor.


    The Yahoo-MS interop is for IM only, thus far. No plans for VoIP
    interop have been mentioned, to my knowledge.
     
    Mark, Jul 17, 2006
    #12
  13. TheMgt

    Guest

    On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:03:56 +0100, Mark <>,
    wrote:

    >>With the final cross protocol of MSN/Windows Messenger and Yahoo
    >>Messenger being released with free PC to PC and their pushing of BT
    >>Communicator with calls from 1.25 min Skype will need to allow some
    >>incorporation or go with the tide. M$ & Yahoo have taken years to
    >>agree their cooperation and put out a package. Trillian was I think a
    >>big push to get them thinking. M$+Yahoo will hopefully be the push
    >>that Skype needs. I am sure that there will be millions of users
    >>worldwide that will benefit in the end. Regardless of whatever the
    >>resulting application is called or who is actually the distributor.

    >
    >The Yahoo-MS interop is for IM only, thus far. No plans for VoIP
    >interop have been mentioned, to my knowledge.


    Only my opinion based upon Yahoo advert
    http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/
     
    , Jul 18, 2006
    #13
  14. TheMgt

    tracy Guest

    we offer skype phone,memory card,USB card reader, ipod accessories,Web cam, Blue tooth headset,Blue tooth adapter,MP3 and MP4 player

    Glamour marketing group


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dear my best friend,

    TAIWAN Glamour marketing group.
    http://www.GMG888.com

    http://www.gmg888.com/catalog/index.php

    I'd like to offer you an ideal business opportunity!!


    We are one of specialized and rapidly developing maufacturer of


    USB Skype phone
    Web Cam

    USB Card reader

    Flash Card

    iPod accessories

    MP3 & MP4 Player

    Mobile phone accessories

    and are enjoying an excellent reputation through Eight year's business
    experience.

    Company Outline:


    1.We providing global buyers and supplies with expert services,
    including
    Product information collection
    Market analysis
    Procurement
    Product design
    Packaging and marketing
    Translation
    O.E.M & O.D.M


    2. Excellent qualities,Competitive Prices,Satisfied Service, Experience
    and efficiency.

    3. We are also very pleased to act as an Internation Purchasing Office
    for you:

    provide the service as below: Q.C, Purchasing, Shipping, Information
    ,ect

    Best Regards

    Tracy

    E-mail:

    MSN:

    Skype: Glamour-Marketing-Group

    http://www.GMG888.com
     
    tracy, Aug 12, 2006
    #14
  15. TheMgt

    Ivor Jones Guest

    Re: we offer skype phone,memory card,USB card reader, ipod accessories,Web cam, Blue tooth headset,Blue tooth adapter,MP3 and MP4 player

    "tracy" <> wrote in message
    news:
    > Glamour marketing group


    If you say so.

    > Dear my best friend,


    No you're not. My best friend buys me beer every weekend, you've never so
    much as turned up at the pub..!

    > I'd like to offer you an ideal business opportunity!!


    Don't want one.

    > We are one of specialized and rapidly developing
    > maufacturer of
    >
    > USB Skype phone


    Don't want one.

    > Web Cam


    Don't want one.

    > USB Card reader


    Got one.

    > Flash Card


    Got two.

    > iPod accessories


    Don't have an iPod.

    > MP3 & MP4 Player


    Got one.

    > Mobile phone accessories


    Got all I need.

    > and are enjoying an excellent reputation through Eight
    > year's business experience.


    But not punctuation experience. There is no apostrophe in "years" in this
    context.

    > Company Outline:


    [snipped rest of crap spam]

    > Best Regards
    >
    > Tracy


    Best regards will be when you stop spamming.

    Ivor
     
    Ivor Jones, Aug 12, 2006
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. news.comcast.giganews.com

    Protocol Chart - Learn how to use a Protocol Analyzer

    news.comcast.giganews.com, Aug 21, 2004, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,978
    news.comcast.giganews.com
    Aug 21, 2004
  2. Georg Schwarz

    Skype protocol details/strategy?

    Georg Schwarz, Sep 12, 2003, in forum: VOIP
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,916
    VoIPer
    Sep 25, 2003
  3. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    669
  4. dianasun via HWKB.com
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,673
    alkis
    Sep 14, 2009
  5. dianasun
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    955
    spammersarevermin
    Nov 17, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page