Slashdot Mirror


Verizon To Allow Skype Calling On Its Network

The Verizon press release begins: "At the 2010 Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Verizon Wireless and Skype today announced a strategic relationship that will bring Skype to Verizon Wireless smartphones in March." What used to be one of the most protective carriers anywhere has been opening up in major ways since the introduction of the Motorola Droid. Phandroid summarizes: "Starting next month, Verizon Smartphone users with data plans will enjoy free and unlimited Skype-to-Skype calls to anyone on the planet. And you’ll enjoy amazingly cheap Skype International calls as well. All this from Verizon Wireless’ 3G network." Some are wondering how the DoJ and law enforcement will react to a major upsurge in fully encrypted traffic.

29 of 98 comments (clear)

  1. NSA by in4mer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    fully encrypted, hahaha. yeah right.

    --
    enefesdi bhootparamdi

    if a thing is worth doing at all, it's worth doing right. -- H.S. Thompson
    1. Re:NSA by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      fully encrypted, hahaha. yeah right.

      My thoughts exactly. Nothing gets THAT large without some eyes and ears from our good "friends" in three-letter land...

    2. Re:NSA by MrNaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What stops anyone from just writing an Android app that is a properly, open sourced, encrypted SIP client? If that's possible, then unless they've broken either Diffe-Hellman or AES then we'd be good to go when talking about our plot to take over the world.

      --
      I hate printers.
    3. Re:NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      The NSA uses a program called Trireme that analyze data forwarded to them by Raptor boxes. To achieve throughput they essentially map every IP address into it's own FSA. To achieve the memory/speed footprint they need, it all runs on Itanium servers running 32gb ram. Racks of em. That business about a secret room @att in california: True.

      Now that Skype is firmly under US jurisdiction since eBay purchased them, tapping calls should be no problem. If you need encryption you MUST do it on your own end-to-end

  2. Data and unlimited plans by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More and more people are purchasing data plans. And it sure seems like every major network is pushing to move as many users to an unlimited plan as possible. Where many people used to have service in the $30-$40 range, more and more people seem to be paying closer to $100 (pre-tax) for cell service.

    Why complain about people using data when data plans are so profitable? And does it matter if they're not using minutes if they pay for an unlimited plan anyway?

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    1. Re:Data and unlimited plans by QuantumRiff · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It sure would be nice if you could only buy a data plan. Unfortunately, any I have seen seem to also want you to pay a minimum of $40/month for voice before they will connect you.. And then again, they seem think that SMS messages are neither Voice, nor Data... The only exception have been air-cards for devices, like the MiFi, but they seem to have much more expensive data plans, and don't pretend to call them unlimited.

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    2. Re:Data and unlimited plans by JSBiff · · Score: 4, Informative

      I would point out that the cost of data plans is gradually decreasing. I've avoided any 'smart' phones up until recently, because I refused to pay $80+ per month. But, I just got a plan with T-Mobile that is about $60/mo (it's actually a little less than that, but what the discount giveth, the taxes taketh away, so it comes to almost $60 exactly), gives me 500 voice minutes, unlimited text, unlimited data.

      My previous voice plan with Verizon, which I had from about 2003 - 2009 was about $45/mo (40 before taxes), gave me 300 minutes, and no text or data. So, I figured, $15/mo, with an extra 200 minutes, plus text and data, isn't too bad.

      Some will say that T-Mo has the worst network of the major carriers. That might be true, I'm not sure. In Ohio, where I live and work, the coverage seems excellent. I don't travel much, but in the little bit of travel I've done in the last 6 months with T-Mo phone service, I had coverage in most places, except for extremely rural areas. In some places, T-Mo gave me free roaming on AT&T's network (West Virginia seems to have absolutely no T-mobile coverage, but the phone used AT&T there).

      It's good enough for me, anyhow. YMMV.

    3. Re:Data and unlimited plans by hldn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you won't catch me paying that much. i pay $2.50/month for my cellphone and i'm happy with what that buys me.

      --
      http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    4. Re:Data and unlimited plans by MrNaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As an industry long timer (been running a retail store for about 10 years now) I can tell you that the cost of delivering services to you are no longer tied to how much you use. They could give everyone unlimited minutes, and as long as the 2% of crazies were kept in check*, it would make little appreciable difference to their bottom line.

      Use is only restricted for the purpose of tiered billing according to the amount of use each person desires, so that they can offer a set of distinguished products.

      Costs are wound up in administrative overhead, engineering and R&D expenses etc. They won't make a loss on a plan at all, ever, because total operating costs are now quite divorced from network usage, and this is only becoming more and more the case.

      * The only issue is ensuring that total network traffic remains below total network capacity, and the number of users that cause this to even be an issue is small. Keep them on a leash and capacity issues don't exist.

      --
      I hate printers.
    5. Re:Data and unlimited plans by trapnest · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've been using tmo for years, I've had no problems with them. Far better then dealing with verizon... :\

  3. Not so fast by UndyingShadow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From gizmodo.com: However, it appears the service is pretty gimped as you can't call Skype out to regular lines domestically in order to save minutes. Even on AT&T (of all carriers), the fring iPhone app allows Skype-out calling (even though the Skype app still technically does not). When Verizon allows domestic Skype-out, we'll celebrate in full.

    1. Re:Not so fast by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, "international" means "outside the US".

  4. One guys twitter... by rwade · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is translated to "some are wondering"? Seriously, who is Christopher Soghoian and when did he become a bellweather?

    1. Re:One guys twitter... by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 4, Informative
  5. They'll probably be granted access. by BitterOak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the US at least CALEA requires carriers to allow lawful intercepts by law enforcement agencies of its phone networks. Skype has avoided running afoul of this since their Skype-Skype calls are really computer communications and not telephone communications. And Skype-out and Skype-in calls could be tapped at the POTS endpoint. But if Skype-Skype calls can be made on phones rather than computers now, then CALEA would probably apply, and Skype would have to modify their protocols to allow access to law enforcement. IANAL, so perhaps some lawyers could provide some insight here.

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    1. Re:They'll probably be granted access. by Lehk228 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      a smart phone is a computer, the skype app is a computer program accessing the internet via a mobile data connection

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    2. Re:They'll probably be granted access. by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But if Skype-Skype calls can be made on phones rather than computers now, then CALEA would probably apply, and Skype would have to modify their protocols to allow access to law enforcement.

      Except that Skype would not be the "telecommunications provider" in this context. Verizon (or other ISPs) would. Thus, Verizon is required to have backdoors to allow third parties to intercept ... *drumroll* ... the ciphertext.

      Don't be a provider. Be a software author. CALEA doesn't say anything about programmers or software vendors. CALEA is about the people in charge of the wires. CALEA is obsolete if people use modern tech.

      OTOH, surely Skype, the company that made a specially-modified government-approved version of their software for use in China, actually would cooperate. And that raises the question: who has audited how Skype does key exchange? Who certifies identities? Skype, that's who.

      The story here is VoIP in general. Skype itself is a specific sideline that will hopefully fade into history.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    3. Re:They'll probably be granted access. by EdIII · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly. Screw Skype. The big story here *IS* VOIP being allowed through Verizon in such an open manner.

      Personally, I don't care at all about the concerns of government and law enforcement. Ultimately, I think it is far far far far *FAR* worse for citizens to be monitored by their governments/law enforcement agencies than whatever Lions, Tigers, and Bears arguments used to justify such monitoring.

      What I look forward to is when I can run a ZRTP enabled client and establish endpoint-to-endpoint encrypted communications that make it impossible (without cryptanalysis) for the carriers to allow intercepts.

      There is no way I would ever trust Skype to protect my communications. I would never trust a proprietary closed source solution for that matter anyways.

      This seems like it will only be a matter of time till I can run the SIP client of my choice on my Verizon Wireless smartphone, and that, is very cool.

    4. Re:They'll probably be granted access. by EdIII · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My first computer that I bought only had 850mhz, and it was no slouch back at the turn of the century (wow, it's fun to say that :))

      Your name is 'kid' genius... LOL. Get off my lawn boy!!!

      You do make feel old though, my first system was an 8086 which was only FIVE mhz. I also had an Apple IIe, which was slower if I remember correctly.

      For some of us here on Slashdot the average Netbook/Smartphone seems like a portable freakin' supercomputer compared to what we had even 15 years ago. It's only the bloatware that slows it down now, which is not really fair, considering all the code it has to run in the background now to give you all that functionality you probably take for granted (nothing wrong with that)

      Crap, I remember when I saw my first true 1.6 million color video game way way back. I thought that was unbelievable at the time given my current experience was a Nintendo for graphics.

      Of course, somebody is going to come along and yell at both of us here shortly and remind us about punch cards.......

      I think you are entirely correct though. There is no such thing as a phone anymore. They are all just computers running some firmware that gives them access to the GSM/CDMA radios and abilities to place calls. Almost a secondary feature compared to all the other stuff they are doing now.

  6. I know how they will react by goldaryn · · Score: 4, Funny

    Some are wondering how the DoJ and law enforcement will react to a major upsurge in fully encrypted traffic.

    Place a large order for Post-it notes?

  7. Not likely to be a problem by SpooForBrains · · Score: 4, Informative

    This sounds like it's going to be essentially the same service that 3 mobile have been offering in the UK for a few years now. The Skype calls are handled through a gateway at the carrier. Between the carrier and the handset they function the same as a regular voice call (so they're nice and tappable).

    --
    "The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
  8. If Verizon is now Skype-friendly... by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If Verizon is now Skype-friendly, then the next thing I want to see is for them to allow Skype calls from their FiOS set-top boxes. These boxes have USB ports and are already connected to the Internet. It would be a great way for Verizon to really stick it to those cable companies (whose anti-FiOS advertising has been getting downright nasty lately) -- imagine being able to just plug a $20 webcam into your set-top box and effortlessly videoconference with Skype users anywhere.

    C'mon Verizon, the infrastructure is already in place ... a few weeks of development and you'd have a killer advantage.

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    1. Re:If Verizon is now Skype-friendly... by Allicorn · · Score: 2

      Seems a reasonable bet that that sort of thing is on the near horizon. Recall Sony & Skype announcing a couple months ago that whole ranges of new Sony TVs will come equipped with Skype for video calling.

      --
      OMG!!! Ponies!!!
  9. Skype collaboration by DrYak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Specially since Skype are rather open about the fact they are ready to collaborate with governments if legally asked to.

    Once again : the only *true* privacy/security is complete end-to-end (deniable) encryption where the encryption is under the control of the sender and the decryption under that of the receiver, and everything in between only transits in encrypted form.

    Only opensource phones with publicly available and auditable source-code and that use ZRTP do qualify (like currently Twinkle. Probably Ekiga too at some point in future).
    Being closed source and thus not auditable, Skype doesn't qualify as *under control of sender/receiver*, unless the data it self is already encrypted at the time it is fed into Skype.

    (NOTE:
    Off the Record plugin + Skype4pidgin plugin does exactly that on Pidgin/Adium with text messages : if both ends of a conversation have OtR running, the message will be encrypted before it is transmitted to Skype API - even if there's a backdoor inside Skype the only thing it sees would be already encrypted text. OtR works with other networks, given the proper plugin. But currently can't work with sound/video, because Skype only accept raw media that have to be compressed)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:Skype collaboration by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even so, the PRNG on those devices is not random enough (due to processor constraints)

      If a device contains a microphone, a radio receiver, probably an SSD, and maybe an accelerometer, and is carried throughout the user's unique physical walk through life, has trouble generating truly random numbers, then something is terribly wrong.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  10. Re:How about SIP or IAX calling?? by daemonc · · Score: 4, Informative

    They sure don't.

    I use the awesome Sipdroid app to make and receive all the calls on my Droid over SIP, including to/from landlines.

    Also, you can already Skype from the third party app Fring.

    The point of this announcement is that Skype is promising to make a fully functional app for Blackberries and Androids, and Verizon is promising not to do anything to block it.

    --
    All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.
  11. Latency by bevoblake · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My 3G cell connection has nasty latency (200ish pings generally) and made for a poor skype experience when tethered to my computer. Delays in voice calls are pretty obnoxious when accustomed to cell and landline connections - I don't see this as a viable competitor to cell minute usage even if Verizon allowed skype over 3G to US landlines.

    Has anyone else had any contrary experience?

  12. Re:Latency by bevoblake · · Score: 3, Informative
    As a quick followup, here are some quotes on 3G call quality from the iphone blog:

    I’ve been using Skype over 3G ever since it came out (first with VoIPover3G, now with 3G Unrestrictor) and I have to say that quality sucks. I get dropped calls, sound dropping in and out, weird noises during the call, etc."

    We have the largest and fastest 3G network in the world here in Australia (44mbps downlink in the cities, 21mbps everywhere else – 99% of the population have 3G), and being a fairly small population – congestion isn’t an issue. VOIP over 3G works, but it totally sux. Like really, unless you can’t afford to make a phone call (unlikely if you have an iPhone) then it’s not worth the mucking about.

    Cellular data connections are very bursty with high amounts of latency. Fine for browsing the web, or streaming media where the player has a buffer, but pretty awful for having a real-time duplex conversation. Which is why I really am ok with just using Skype over wifi.

    A few people post quotes to the effect "quality is so-so but it's good enough for me," but most responses seem pretty negative towards the call quality.

  13. dancing in the streets, more likely by Eil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some are wondering how the DoJ and law enforcement will react to a major upsurge in fully encrypted traffic.

    With glee, probably. Since Skype won't talk about how its protocols and software work, it's entirely possible that they have methods of monitoring all calls made on the network. (In fact, one Austrian official admitted that they have no problem intercepting Skype communications.) Even if the full encryption spec is published for cryptographic review and is found to be sturdy, the clients are closed-source, meaning they could simply wait for a specific kind of packet and switch the call into an unencrypted or poorly-encrypted mode for easy wiretapping.