dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
63696
naf
join:2017-12-12

2 edits

1 recommendation

naf to jsolo1

Member

to jsolo1

Re: Asterisk Google Voice SIP testing and technical discussion

said by jsolo1:

^^You're in for lots of hand holding then.

No luck applying for the beta?

nah, im not beta materiel i guess.

im thinking sniffing shouldnt be too complicated. just need to:
- install sslslplit on linux box (im assuming your distro has a package, apt-get/dnf/whatever)
- make a fake CA cert for sslsplit (and export public key in DER format for android)
openssl genrsa -out ca.key 4096
openssl req -new -x509 -days 1826 -key ca.key -out ca.crt
openssl x509 -outform der -in ca.crt -out ca.der.crt
 
- tell linux to forward all traffic like a regular gateway, except traffic from going to port 5061, which we will redirect to local port 5555 instead (where we will run sslsplit)
sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
iptables -t nat -F
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --src <PHONE IP> -p tcp --dport 5061 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 5555
 
- run sslsplit on port 5555
sslsplit -D -l connections.log -S logdir/ -k ca.key -c ca.crt ssl 0.0.0.0 5555
 
- install ca cert on phone by copying ca.cer.crt to root of phone's internal sd card and using the phone's Settings > Security > Install From Device Storage
- configure phone to get internet from linux box running sslsplit, by configuring the wifi to use a Static IP and setting the default gateway to the ip of the linux machine instead of the router

ok maybe its a bit complicated...
paid2kill
join:2018-06-27

1 recommendation

paid2kill to elphone

Member

to elphone
I'm simply adding to the sample size of people reporting back:

1. was working good
2. quit working so I switched obihai.telephony to chirp.telephony in my pjsip.conf
3. worked for a while until I found my 2 trunks rejected from registering
4. downloaded and extracted naf's certs, then in my pjsip.conf i changed chirp back to obihai and added two lines under my bind=0.0.0.0:5061 as told to
cert_file=/etc/asterisk/keys/obihainaf.crt
priv_key_file=/etc/asterisk/keys/obihainaf.key
5. now I'm back registered again
IntouchPc
join:2018-11-14
East Stroudsburg, PA

IntouchPc

Member

cp /etc/asterisk/pjsip_custom.conf /etc/asterisk/pjsip_custom.conf.old
sed -i 's|chirp.telephony.goog|64.9.242.173|g' /etc/asterisk/pjsip_custom.conf
sed -i 's|chirp.telephony.goog|64.9.242.173|g' /root/gvsip-naf/install-gvsip
amportal restart
 

Seems to be working perfect as of now

WhyADuck
Premium Member
join:2003-03-05

WhyADuck to RonR

Premium Member

to RonR
said by RonR:

For FreePBX:

.....

2. Rename cert.* obihai.*

.....

Shouldn't that be client.* rather than cert.* ?

Anyway even though it mostly seemed to be working using fi I went ahead and followed your instructions and now it all seems to be working great. Thanks much to you and of course to naf. I hope this will actually continue to work without the need to keep playing musical servers!

Anon6442a
@107.3.158.x

4 recommendations

Anon6442a

Anon

I appreciate the passion, but I need to flag this:

»www.google.com/googlevoi ··· ies.html

Note this section:

System Interference and Abuse
    Do not abuse the Google Voice Service, and do not interfere with other Google Voice
  • users’ enjoyment of the Google Voice Service. For example:
  • Do not use Google Voice to data mine phone numbers or other information.
  • Do not automate our system to place phone calls or send messages automatically.
  • Do not forward to phone numbers that aren’t your own or under your control.
  • Do not create multiple user accounts, and do not create user accounts by automated
  • means or under false or fraudulent pretenses.
  • Do not sell, trade, resell or otherwise exploit for any unauthorized commercial purpose
  • or transfer any Google Voice account or the Google Voice Service.
  • Do not modify, adapt, translate, or reverse engineer any portion of the Google Voice Service.
  • Do not remove any copyright, trademark, or other proprietary rights notices contained in or on the Google Voice Service.
  • Do not reformat or frame any portion of the web pages that are part of the Google Voice Service.


Note that violating our program policy can get your Google Voice account disabled. This approach is not supported and violates the program policy.

AllThumbs
join:2006-02-07
Charleston, SC

2 edits

6 recommendations

AllThumbs

Member

Gotta love anonymous posters. Such backbone! From the same fine folks that initially proclaimed GVSIP to be an open platform for all... until it wasn't and all remnants of the comment were removed both from the initial posting and then from the Google search results as well. Never knew DNS lookups were considered reverse engineering. And, if Google is using GPL SIP components under the covers as they most certainly are, they will be hard-pressed to complain about others using their GPL-based platform and components. Here's an idea: Don't Be Evil.
awiesen
join:2018-11-15
Santa Clara, CA

5 recommendations

awiesen

Member

Sorry, created an account to confirm who I am.

I'm not sure what you're referring to about GVSIP comments, since I just was made aware of this recently. But our program policy is pretty clear here. Appreciate the enthusiasm though!

hapollo
join:2007-05-13
WesterOS

3 recommendations

hapollo to AllThumbs

Member

to AllThumbs
said by AllThumbs:

Gotta love anonymous posters. Such backbone!

Way to go... Calling Alex Wiesen Head of Engineering, Google Voice someone with no backbone. Wouldn't it be better to have him play nicely with the community here?
OzarkEdge
join:2014-02-23
USA

1 recommendation

OzarkEdge to Anon6442a

Member

to Anon6442a
said by awiesen :

Note that violating our program policy can get your Google Voice account disabled. This approach is not supported and violates the program policy.

The terms can be construed uncertain, but this closing is clear. GV doesn't like what's going on with Asterisk GV SIP.

OE

AllThumbs
join:2006-02-07
Charleston, SC

4 recommendations

AllThumbs to hapollo

Member

to hapollo
said by hapollo:

said by AllThumbs:

Gotta love anonymous posters. Such backbone!

Way to go... Calling Alex Wiesen Head of Engineering, Google Voice someone with no backbone. Wouldn't it be better to have him play nicely with the community here?

It would indeed. So let's begin with the history including Google's previous position about all of this which you will find on page 3 of the attachment (posted by Dave the Google Voice Community Manager)... until it disappeared.
tm1000
join:2003-01-03
Anaheim, CA

1 edit

4 recommendations

tm1000 to AllThumbs

Member

to AllThumbs
said by AllThumbs:

if Google is using GPL SIP components under the covers as they most certainly are, they will be hard-pressed to complain about others using their GPL-based platform and components.

Nothing about SIP is "GPL". SIP is an RFC. Don't mix up GPL (a code license) with an RFC (Request for Comments ). You can write proprietary software against an RFC. RFCs do not say "MUST BE GPL" or "MUST BE OPEN SOURCE"

Anondb710
@185.220.101.x

Anondb710 to awiesen

Anon

to awiesen
this is very disappointing... after all the effort that has gone into gvsip
Samot
join:2018-11-15
United State

6 recommendations

Samot to AllThumbs

Member

to AllThumbs
OK, so what is the actual argument/point being made here? I see a post from someone at Google roughly 3 months before the platform was even going public/live. A post that supports your position.

It is entirely possible that the comment was made before a final position was even decided. Or perhaps the position changed before it went live. Company's have been known to change their Terms of Service or policies in general over time. So perhaps that person went back and removed that post because of that change and to not have it out there for new eyes to see.

It also really doesn't matter what one person randomly said 8 months ago on a forum. What matters is what the actual Terms of Service / Policies are at this _very moment_ in regards to GV. At this _very moment_ everyone has been told "This is not allowed. Please stop or bad things can happen with your service".
Samot

1 recommendation

Samot to Anondb710

Member

to Anondb710
said by Anondb710 :

this is very disappointing... after all the effort that has gone into gvsip

Funny thing is, in other forums and chats people have been told since like July "This project violates GV's ToS" by numerous people (me being one of them).

The reaction was basically "Shut your mouth, you're stepping all over what FOSS is about" plus one person sending me private messages threatening my well being.

So really, it's not disappointing. It was expected and foretold.

hapollo
join:2007-05-13
WesterOS

hapollo to Samot

Member

to Samot
said by Samot:

.

It is entirely possible that the comment was made before a final position was even decided. Or perhaps the position changed before it went live. Company's have been known to change their Terms of Service or policies in general over time. So perhaps that person went back and removed that post because of that change and to not have it out there for new eyes to see.

Agreed. A screen capture at any moment in time is just that. And in the case of google posting, a fleeting moment.

AllThumbs
join:2006-02-07
Charleston, SC

3 recommendations

AllThumbs to naf

Member

to naf
All anyone has asked FOR YEARS is that Google be open about it's policies with respect to use of Google Voice. Still waiting...
awiesen
join:2018-11-15
Santa Clara, CA

4 recommendations

awiesen

Member

So yeah, this violates the program policy. Hope this helps clarify things.

hapollo
join:2007-05-13
WesterOS

2 edits

1 recommendation

hapollo to AllThumbs

Member

to AllThumbs
said by AllThumbs:

All anyone has asked FOR YEARS is that Google be open about it's policies with respect to use of Google Voice. Still waiting...

Why? Do you feel they have an obligation to be open about their policies? Even then policies change.

Face it, this is all coming to an end soon. Policy posted or not. Alex Weisen is here to set the record straight.

WhyADuck
Premium Member
join:2003-03-05

5 recommendations

WhyADuck to awiesen

Premium Member

to awiesen
said by awiesen:

Sorry, created an account to confirm who I am.

I'm not sure what you're referring to about GVSIP comments, since I just was made aware of this recently. But our program policy is pretty clear here. Appreciate the enthusiasm though!

What I don't get is why Google would be opposed to offering a legitimate means to connect. I say that for two reasons:

First, people are going to to what people are going to do. Google could be playing whack-a-mole forever (or until they discontinue the service entirely). When Google shuts one door, some creative person will find another. They really should consider legitimizing this activity, and then they will have a much better handle on what is happening.

But second, and it amazes me that Google seems to miss this point, it saves Google money when people connect in this way. It would be so easy to just forward all incoming Google Voice calls to a DID and forget about it, but then on every call that goes through Google Voice they'd be paying a small amount of money to the DID provider. If that's what they really want, that's probably what will happen, because if they keep changing things up then at some point people are going to get tired of trying to make this work reliably.

At this point my opinion is that if someone is speaking for Google in an official capacity then they need to specifically state that and include their name and title. Otherwise it's just like every other Google employee that's posted a statement about something or other here and there on a forum. As AllThumbs has pointed out, half the time people can't even believe what Google employees say on their own pages. No one really knows whether they are speaking as an official representative of the Google corporation or just as one cog of the wheel, giving their own particular interpretation of Google's intent or policy.

Part of the whole problem is that Google has never seemed willing to communicate directly with those who are interested in this stuff in any official capacity; all anyone ever hears are vague statements and occasionally veiled threats or warnings, for some reason never communicated by anyone on an official Google letterhead or in any manner that would lead people to actually believe that someone is speaking official Google policy that has been approved by Google corporate. And given how often Google statements have contained outright falsehoods (as when a Google employee posted that XMPP support would end on a specific date in May, two or three years before it actually did), many people just don't pay much attention to anything written by Google employees anymore. There are proper ways to communicate with people, but Google doesn't seem much interested in using any of them, if in fact they actually do care about this.

Does Google have something against having an actual dialog with users?

geek3point0
code monkey
join:2015-04-28

geek3point0 to naf

Member

to naf
POLICY:

System Interference and Abuse
Do not abuse the Google Voice Service, and do not interfere with other Google Voice users’ enjoyment of the Google Voice Service. For example:

Do not use Google Voice to data mine phone numbers or other information.
Do not automate our system to place phone calls or send messages automatically.
Do not forward to phone numbers that aren’t your own or under your control.
Do not create multiple user accounts, and do not create user accounts by automated means or under false or fraudulent pretenses.
Do not sell, trade, resell or otherwise exploit for any unauthorized commercial purpose or transfer any Google Voice account or the Google Voice Service.
Do not modify, adapt, translate, or reverse engineer any portion of the Google Voice Service.
Do not remove any copyright, trademark, or other proprietary rights notices contained in or on the Google Voice Service.
Do not reformat or frame any portion of the web pages that are part of the Google Voice Service.

Source: »www.google.com/intl/en/g ··· ies.html

I guess that isn't clear.... INAL but I bet this was written by one....

WhyADuck
Premium Member
join:2003-03-05

WhyADuck

Premium Member

said by geek3point0:

POLICY:

System Interference and Abuse
Do not abuse the Google Voice Service, and do not interfere with other Google Voice users’ enjoyment of the Google Voice Service. For example:

Do not use Google Voice to data mine phone numbers or other information.
Do not automate our system to place phone calls or send messages automatically.
Do not forward to phone numbers that aren’t your own or under your control.
Do not create multiple user accounts, and do not create user accounts by automated means or under false or fraudulent pretenses.
Do not sell, trade, resell or otherwise exploit for any unauthorized commercial purpose or transfer any Google Voice account or the Google Voice Service.
Do not modify, adapt, translate, or reverse engineer any portion of the Google Voice Service.
Do not remove any copyright, trademark, or other proprietary rights notices contained in or on the Google Voice Service.
Do not reformat or frame any portion of the web pages that are part of the Google Voice Service.

Source: »www.google.com/intl/en/g ··· ies.html

I guess that isn't clear.... INAL but I bet this was written by one....

It could legitimately be argued that most of us have done none of those things. And that is all I will say about that for now.
awiesen
join:2018-11-15
Santa Clara, CA

12 recommendations

awiesen to WhyADuck

Member

to WhyADuck
I'm Alex Wiesen, Head of Engineering for Google Voice. I am speaking for Google Voice when I say that this project is in violation of our program policy.

hapollo
join:2007-05-13
WesterOS

2 recommendations

hapollo to WhyADuck

Member

to WhyADuck
said by WhyADuck:

Otherwise it's just like every other Google employee that's posted a statement about something or other here and there on a forum. As AllThumbs has pointed out, half the time people can't even believe what Google employees say on their own pages. No one really knows whether they are speaking as an official representative of the Google corporation or just as one cog of the wheel, giving their own particular interpretation of Google's intent or policy.And given how often Google statements have contained outright falsehoods (as when a Google employee posted that XMPP support would end on a specific date in May, two or three years before it actually did), many people just don't pay much attention to anything written by Google employees anymore. There are proper ways to communicate with people, but Google doesn't seem much interested in using any of them, if in fact they actually do care about this.

I don't think you're going to get more official than a dialogue here with Alex Wiesen who is Head of Engineering of Google Voice.

Whatever becomes of this, I'm just glad we've gotten someone officially up on the Google Hierarchy to hopefully start a meaningful dialogue.

WhyADuck
Premium Member
join:2003-03-05

1 recommendation

WhyADuck to awiesen

Premium Member

to awiesen
said by awiesen:

I'm Alex Wiesen, Head of Engineering for Google Voice. I am speaking for Google Voice when I say that this project is in violation of our program policy.

May I ask what prompted you to wait until now to speak up about this, instead of allowing people to work on this for months and only now showing up to make a statement?

And will you consider providing some official way to connect? As I said, it will save your company money in the long run.

geek3point0
code monkey
join:2015-04-28

2 recommendations

geek3point0

Member

I wish there was a way to validate this is who they claim to be.
NorthAntara
join:2018-11-15

NorthAntara to WhyADuck

Member

to WhyADuck
said by WhyADuck:

May I ask what prompted you to wait until now to speak up about this, instead of allowing people to work on this for months and only now showing up to make a statement?

Did anybody ever ask them to make one?
awiesen
join:2018-11-15
Santa Clara, CA

1 recommendation

awiesen to WhyADuck

Member

to WhyADuck
I found this thread this morning.

We don't have an official way to connect directly, although you can connect to an Obi adapter. I know some folks who are doing this and are happy with the setup.

hapollo
join:2007-05-13
WesterOS

hapollo to geek3point0

Member

to geek3point0
said by geek3point0:

I wish there was a way to validate this is who they claim to be.

Verify this user or verify who Alex Wiesen is?

»www.linkedin.com/in/alexwiesen/

»www.google.com/search?q= ··· +google&

Mods would have to somehow verify this username is in fact Alex Wiesen but I see no reason to not believe he is who he says he is.

xrobau
Premium Member
join:2015-05-26
Gladstone, Q

3 recommendations

xrobau to WhyADuck

Premium Member

to WhyADuck
said by WhyADuck:

instead of allowing people to work on this for months

You know, LOTS of people have been linking to that exact policy for months now. Including me. It's not like Google have tried to keep this secret.

I have even pointed out that even if it WASN'T breaking their ToS, the amount of effort entailed costs massively more than just paying a VSP $5 a month.

WhyADuck
Premium Member
join:2003-03-05

WhyADuck to NorthAntara

Premium Member

to NorthAntara
said by NorthAntara:

said by WhyADuck:

May I ask what prompted you to wait until now to speak up about this, instead of allowing people to work on this for months and only now showing up to make a statement?

Did anybody ever ask them to make one?

If not it's only because Google makes it so hard for ordinary people to communicate with them. In the past they have had a tendency to make "drive by" posts in forums, even in their own forums, but have never really seemed willing to have a dialog with people or communicate in any official capacity. Honestly I don't think any of us would have known how to request a statement or clarification on this, because it's like trying to get someone to communicate with you over the walls of a high fortress.

Plus there is the fact that they have ignored projects like Bill Simon's Google Voice gateway for all the years he ran it, and he was certainly easy enough to find and communicate with. So I wonder, why now all of a sudden?