Newbee ..- encrypted calls/SMS

Ian Stirling OpenMoko at
Fri Apr 25 15:23:51 CEST 2008

Crane, Matthew wrote:
> Yes, I understand that, that is why I'm thinking of this approach.  My
> idea was to use analog voice transforms and their inverse with
> properties that would preserve most of the codec performance.  But it
> would be awfully difficult to sync up the inverse on the other end
> without a data connection, I expect that with voice calls that delay can
> be added and removed without warning. 

There are no simple voice transforms at all that will get through the 
codec, and actually encrypt.
Voice changing is possible, but encryption is not.

You _cannot_ - for example - exepect frequency inversion - to get 
through the codec chain.

More information about the community mailing list