The New Nexus 7 Tablet (2013) Supports AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile LTE In One Device

While in Europe, GSM, UMTS and LTE are used by all network operators, the US wireless landscape has always been much more diverse. This meant and still means that there always had and have to be several device variants to support different networks. But with the advent of LTE and advances in chip technology this may be about to change.

When Google recently introduced the 2013 version of the Nexus 7 tablet, it upgraded the cellular hardware to support 7 LTE bands. For details see Google's page on the Nexus 7 and AnandTech's mini review over here which has a somewhat different frequency listing. Apart from the stunning number of supported LTE bands it also supports the five major UMTS frequency bands.

The LTE band combination for the US is especially interesting, as band 13 is included for Verizon's LTE, band 17 for AT&T's LTE and band 4 for T-Mobile's LTE. This might very well become the future trend and will finally allow US consumers the same flexibility as in Europe to buy a device independent of the network operator or even change network operators over the life cycle of the device.

I'm not quite sure how Sprint fits into this equation!? From what I can tell they have LTE up and running in a 1900 MHz band and have taken over Clearwire's 2500 MHz TDD assets. While the 2500 MHz TDD band is not supported by the device I have no information which band Sprint uses with it's 1900 MHz assets. If you have some more information on that, please leave a comment.

Also interesting is the absence of CDMA support in the tablet. Probably not surprising for a tablet, as mobile telephony, if implemented on the user interface at all, is not a prime use case for a tablet. Also, unlike UMTS with it's great data rates, CDMA EvDo only offers limited speeds which are undesirable in a data heavy product as well. So why bother?

40% of UMTS Band 1 is Unused

While in the US, network operators were perhaps struggling with the amount of spectrum they had for their 3G services and thus rushed to jump onto the LTE bandwagon, Europe continues to enjoy very good data rates over 3G UMTS to this day (for details have a look here for example) in addition to the massive additional capacity now available on other frequency bands with LTE. So I was wondering a bit how much for the UMTS 2100 MHz band 1 spectrum is actually used today.

Cologne is one of the bigger cities in Germany so it is fair to assume that it is also a place in which the highest number of UMTS carriers are needed to satisfy demand. In total, band 1 can host 12 individual UMTS 5 MHz carriers. In practice, however, SDR-Sharp and my DVB-T stick show quite clearly that only 7 of those are used today. In other words, 40% of the bandwidth available for UMTS in this band are still unused.

It's interesting to also look at how many 5 MHz slots each of the four network operators has in Germany in the prime UMTS band. The distribution is as follows:

  • Operator 1: 2 channels
  • Operator 2: 3 channels
  • Operator 3: 3 channels
  • Operator 4: 4 channels

Operator 1 has both channels on air and thus, LTE in other bands is the only way to increase available capacity.

Operator 2 and 3 also have two channels on air and in addition have deployed 10 MHz in band 20 for LTE. If necessary, they could still extend their UMTS capacity with one extra channel.

Operator 4 is only using one of its four channels so far! That's in line with that operator always trailing all other operators in speed tests by quite a bit. As that operator does not have spectrum for LTE in the 800 MHz band I would not be surprised if they started with LTE in the 2100 MHz band with a 10 or 15 MHz carrier.

Probing Layer 1 – Part 4: LTE Up- and Downlink Observed

After having taken a look at GSM and UMTS signals on the physical layer, this post is about how LTE signals are visualized by SDR-Sharp.

Lte-down-webpageIn Germany we are in the comfortable position to have three network operators offering LTE services in the 800 and 1800 MHz bands so it is not difficult to find an LTE carrier signal. Like for UMTS, it's not possible to show the full 10 MHz (800 MHz band) or 20 MHz (1800 MHz band) LTE channel as the hardware and software are only capable of showing around 2 MHz at a time. But one can observe the edges of the signal or any particular part in between. The first picture on the left shows part of an LTE signal on the 1800 MHz band. All LTE signals I have observed feature the vertical stripes. While the stripes make sense due to the OFDM modulation using many individual 15 kHz carriers that for a 10 or 20 MHz channel I am not quite sure why there are strips that are marked in yellow while other parts are blue (i.e. a lower signal energy). I first thought that perhaps this might have something to do with the reference signals but they are evenly distributed through the carrier and are not only present in particular spots!? Another particularly interesting thing in the image is the reddish bars in parts which is actual data transmission occurring while I downloaded a web page. In other words, it's pretty easy to see on layer 1 how loaded a cell is.

Lte-up-startThe second image on the left shows an LTE uplink transmission from my UE. Again, keep in mind that the image only shows a fraction of the total bandwidth used for uplink transmissions. The transmission starts in the lower part of the waterfall diagram and was again recorded while downloading a web page. Once the page was fully loaded one can see very nicely how uplink transmissions become spurious and at some later point, not shown in the image, cease completely. A further detail worth mentioning is the absence of the vertical strips compared to downlink transmissions. This is because in the uplink direction SC-FDMA modulation is used.

Incredible insight gained with a 20 Euro DVB-T receiver and the power of open source SDR-Sharp!

Raising the Shields – Part 6: The Onion Router (TOR) on Android

In the previous post in my series on how to protect your privacy online I've looked at the TOR software which hides your location from prying eyes and encrypts all data right until the TOR exit node. I was delighted how easy it has become in recent years to install and use the package so the next logical step was to see how usable the Android variant of the package has become.

Installation of TOR on Android is straight forwarded. All that is required even on non-rooted devices is to install Orbot for the basic TOR functionality and Orweb, the web browser that uses Orbot. Both are available from app stores or can be installed directly from here and here.

Tor-mobile1On non-rooted devices only the Orweb browser uses the TOR functionality provided by Orbot so all other applications continue to work as before and are obviously as unprotected as before. This can be both good and bad depending on the usage scenario. If TOR is only to be used for specific privacy sensitive web browsing sessions then this is the best setup as all security measures are automatically taken care of such as Java script being disabled, use of a generic browser ID when contacting web sites to prevent browser fingerprinting, no use of persistent cookies and no Flash. While this is perfect for privacy, such settings are likely to stand in the way for many everyday usage scenarios that are perhaps a bit less privacy sensitive. For these, the standard browser can be used as before as no settings are changed and Internet access is as direct as before.

If Orbot is installed on a rooted Android device it can be used as an Internet proxy just like on the PC and all programs that are capable of standard proxy functionality can use a TOR tunnel. This way, mobile email, instant messaging and other applications can be protected as well.

Mobile-tor2When starting Orweb, it offers the user to also start the Orbot background app if it hasn't been started before.  After a couple of seconds the secure TOR tunnel is established and while using TOR has somewhat of a a speed impact I found it entirely usable. Unfortunately there are some usability restrictions introduced by the privacy model. There's no browsing history in the browser from which a previously visited website can be quickly reached and there are also no bookmarks. While I can understand both measures I think there should really be a bookmark feature even if it is a compromise, perhaps with a warning to the user that using bookmarks could reveal privacy sensitive information when the device is stolen. A solution to the problem could perhaps be bookmarks stored somewhere on the web anonymously and reachable via a short bit.ly link?

To sum up, I found TOR a great privacy protection tool for mobile use. It's easy to install and use but as on the PC, privacy and security means there are some usability limitations. I therefore prefer using TOR like on the PC in a two browser setup, one for my standard web browsing needs and another one for stuff where I would like to guard my privacy.

Probing Layer 1 – Part 3: Further Thoughts on GSM 900 Use in Cities

Two years ago I used a mobile phone that could show me the GSM frequency channels to find out whether all GSM network operators in Germany make use of the GSM 900 MHz band. While the original two GSM network operators obviously made good use of their beachfront property, the other two network operators that came later and at first only had 1800 MHz spectrum made little to no use of the 900 MHz spectrum. With my SDR-Sharp + DVB-T Stick Layer 1 utility I now revisited the topic to have a look at the complete band owned by the original 1800 MHz carriers in the 900 MHz band to see if I had overlooked something or if something had changed in the meantime.

The result is pretty much the same as two years ago. One of the two operators makes a bit of use, I could observe at least one or two carriers in their 5 MHz part of the spectrum in Cologne (i.e. in the city). This is very little compared to the two original GSM network operators that have many many cells on air in the same amount of spectrum.

The second original 1800 MHz operator still doesn't seem to make any use of GSM 900 in Cologne. I could only see very faint 200 kHz signals and I am not quite sure what they are. Perhaps echos of other carriers nearby shown here by my tracing hardware which has its limitations? Or perhaps cells used outside of Cologne that are still visible here?

In any case, both make so little use of it that I wonder if one day one of them might just start with either a UMTS 900 or an LTE 900 carrier in this part of the spectrum.

A Duplex Gap Question – Answered



700-mhz-use-2In my post yesterday I've been wondering if there are large wastelands of duplex gaps hanging around in the US 700 MHz band that is currently used only by AT&T and Verizon for 10 MHz LTE channels. I received two very good responses that made it clear that the duplex gaps I was seeing are actually not there at all. Instead what I was observing is a combination so far unused spectrum, unauctioned spectrum, overlapping bands and unidirectional spectrum that has been sold between the players recently. The situation is best described with a little diagram that I drew up on a napkin and shown on the left. Also have a look at the diagrams in this post which are more precise but have less information in them.

On the vertical axis I've drawn the 700 MHz frequency band in 5 MHz increments. There's the lower 700 MHz band and the upper 7000 MHz band separated by the dotted line about one third up in the diagram. The lower 700 MHz band is currently used by AT&T for a 10 MHz LTE channel in what is called the 3GPP Band 17 or B+C block in FCC speak. Band 17 is a subset of band 12 which is 2×15 MHz (note: the scale of band 12 and 17 in my drawing is not quite accurate, 17 should be 2/3 the size of band 12 but is drawn a bit smaller). The reason for the sub-banding is quite interesting and described in more detail in this post which I was pointed in one of the comments to my post yesterday.

The 10 MHz duplex gap in the lower 700 MHz band is the FCC D+E block and was bought by Qualcomm for their MediaFlow streaming services. The service never saw the light of day and in the meantime, Qualcomm has sold the 10 MHz patch to AT&T who plans to use the spectrum one day for LTE with LTE-Advanced Carrier bundling. That leaves me wondering a bit of how much of this spectrum will be usable as I suppose at least some gap is required between the uplink and the extended downlink. But AT&T paid close to two billion dollars for it so I guess they knew what they were doing.

The upper 700 MHz band is currently used by Verizon with a 10 MHz LTE carrier in what is called band 13 (The FCC upper C block). The gap between downlink and uplink contains band 14 which nobody wanted during the last spectrum auction and some additional spectrum that was never on the auction block at all. Also interesting in the drawing is that in the upper 700 MHz band, uplink and downlink are reversed from how it is usually done. This was done, from what I read between the lines to have band 17 and band 13 downlinks together to prevent interference between up and downlink of bands 17 (AT&T) and band 13 (Verizon).

To summarize: Yes, the large gaps I've been observing are there but they are not really unused duplex gaps but rather unused spectrum that might one day be taken into good use once AT&T figures out how to use Qualcomm's ex-Media Flow duplex gap spectrum in the lower band and once band 14 spectrum in the upper 700 band is sold.

A Duplex Gap Question

When I was recently looking at frequency band assignments to US carriers in the 700 MHz band by the FCC I noticed one thing that, from a European perspective, looks a bit odd. Perhaps somebody can enlighten me?:

LTE bands 12, 13, 14 and 17 in the 700 MHz frequency range are assigned to different network operators and each comes with an individual 20 MHz duplex gap. 10 MHz for uplink, 10 MHz for downlink and 20 MHz for the duplex gap, 40 MHz together. Multiplied by 4, that's 80 MHz for duplex gaps.

In Europe, band 20 in the 800 MHz range that is used by three network operators with 2x10MHz channels each only has a combined duplex gap of 11 MHz. To me that looks a lot more economical then spending 80 MHz for duplex gaps!? But perhaps I am missing something!?

Are those duplex gaps in the US used for anything or are they just wasted space?

Update: Thanks for the comments below, I have followed up on this thanks to them in this post.

Probing Layer 1 – Part 2: UMTS Layer 1 Visualization With SDR-Sharp

Since introducing SDR-Sharp in a previous post, I've had a lot of fun discovering a lot of stuff on layer 1 all throughout the spectrum. This post shows a couple of screen shots of UMTS carriers in the uplink and the downlink direction.

Umts-downOne limitation of the tracing solution is the maximum tracing bandwidth which is limited to around 2 MHz. While this is good enough to show several 200 kHz GSM carriers on the frequency axis it is by far too narrow to show a full 5 MHz UMTS carrier. But what it can show quite nicely are the signal flanks at either end of the 5 MHz channel or the gap between two 5 MHz adjacent carriers. The later is shown for the downlink direction in the first image on the left. Forget the pseudo signal energy in the middle of the diagrams as this is introduced by the hardware and is not received over the air. Apart from identifying clearly that there are two adjacent carriers on air the image also shows data transmissions on the two carriers. While taking this screenshot my mobile was on the left carrier and I downloaded a mobile web page which left the redder and broader streaks in the middle of the screen. As even this light load can be seen it can be assumed that at that time both carriers were pretty much idle.

Umts-upThe second image shows the same channels in the uplink direction somewhat lower on the frequency axis. At the bottom of the waterfall diagram both uplink channels are unused. Then about 40% into the waterfall I clicked on a link in the web page to start a download. This requires data transmission in the uplink. In this case my mobile transmitted on the carrier on the right. There is some signal energy on the left of the waterfall diagram but this seems to be a reflection of the right carrier, again introduced by the receiver and not really on the air. One can also see quite nicely where actual data was transmitted (the red parts) and where only radio signaling information was exchanged with lower energy (the yellow parts). Also it seems my mobile was redirected as it started uplink communication on the left carrier (the somewhat more solid small yellow line) but the network then took the communication to the second channel.

In case you want to try yourself and wonder where to find UMTS carriers, this UARFCN calculator page gives you the needed details. Have fun!

Raising the Shields – Part 5: The Onion Router (TOR)

Using the Internet privately and anonymously with an off the shelf web browser is next to impossible. The combination of IP address, cookies, what the browser willingly tells web servers about you, add-ons such as Flash communicating with a remote server outside of the browser context, etc. etc., leaves little privacy and anonymity. There's a project, however, that promises help and it's called 'The Onion Router', or TOR for short.

TOR is based on a network of relay nodes that forwards encrypted data packets to and from a client to a TOR entry node, nodes in between and an exit node. Before a packet is sent, it is encrypted several times and each TOR node can just remove one encryption layer. Imagine the layers of an onion and you understand why the project has chosen this name. This way each node only knows its direct neighbors and hence your original IP address is concealed.

I tried TOR a number of years ago for the first time and at the time it was far too slow for my taste for everyday use. When I recently tried it again, however, I noticed that even during high times during the day, speed is acceptable for web browsing. Don't expect multi megabit speeds though. In addition to web browsing, TOR can also be used with email programs such as Thunderbird to anonymize the location from which you access your emails and also other programs that can handle proxying such as for example SSH for remote server management and Instant messaging clients such as Pidgin.

While a number of years ago, setting up TOR was a bit of a tricky exercise, things have become much easier these days. The TOR website features a browser bundle that is easy to install and comes preconfigured for immediate use with Firefox in a separate directory from your main Firefox installation. A single click starts the TOR software and once a connection to the TOR network is established the package automatically loads the TORified Firefox that has no plugins except for NoScript to disable JavaScript. Also, it starts no external programs when requested by the web page to ensure there is no information leakage via IP connections established outside the browser context.

While Panopticlick says my normal browser is unique among 3 million other users, which means that even without cookies I am instantly recognizable by web servers, the TORified Firefox browser is only unique among 1500 others. A pretty good value.

One thing to keep in mind when using TOR is that one can't be certain if the exit node is hosted by a white hat or a black hat. Therefore beware of using usernames and passwords in SSL connections as the exit node could produce valid SSL certificates for websites on the fly if they have access to a certificate authority and thus could launch a man in the middle attack on you. There's ways to detect this, too, such as removing all SSL certificates in the TORified Firefox which triggers an alert each time an HTTPS protected web page is visited and each time a certificate is changed afterward.

All things considered, I'd say TOR is very simple to use on a PC today and being aware of its limitations in terms of exit node security it can provide anonymity while still being fast enough. In a follow up post I will have a closer look at the Android version of TOR and a TORified browser.

Probing Layer 1 GSM, UMTS and LTE with a €20 DVB-T Stick and Cool Software

Back in 2007 I ran a post about probing Wi-Fi on Layer 1 with Wi-Spy (yes, it was really 6 years ago). I've used it many time since whenever I wanted to know who else and what else was online in the ISM band. All that time I wished I had a similar tool to also visualize cellular signals. Now I have one, and all it takes is a DVB-T stick for 20 Euros with cool open source Windows software.

Rtl-usbInspired by this talk at the recent Sigint 2013 conference I decided to have a closer look at SDR# (SDRSharp), an open source software that uses a DVB-T USB stick to visualize layer 1 data from a couple of megahertz up to 2.2 GHz. In the lower bands it can even decode AM and FM radio out of the IQ data the stick delivers but that's not what I was after of course. What I wanted to use it for is to hunt for GSM, UMTS and LTE carriers. There are a number of supported DVB-T sticks with different kinds of hardware and this page on Osmocom Hardware gives further details which hardware supports which frequency ranges and the products they are built into. As I wanted to visualize cellular channels in the  750 – 2200 MHz range I needed a stick with an Elonics E4000 front end so I got a Terratec Cinergy T Stick as shown on the left which costs around €20 online.

Installation of the Windows based software is pretty simple and also works well for my purposes in a Virtualbox VM with Ubuntu as host and Windows 7 as a guest OS. There's no need to install the drivers or any other software that comes with the stick, as a driver for accessing the Realtek chip on the device is part of the SDRSharp installation process described in more detail here. Once the driver is installed, SDRSharp can be started and after selecting a center frequency in the GSM 900 band (or the GSM 850 frequency range) one can immediately see signals like in the second picture on the left.

Gsm-waterfallAs you can see the channel bandwidth of the three main channels in the picture is 200 kHz, so yes, that's really GSM signals! Also interesting is the different waterflows the channels leave. I assume that the fat red channel on the left carries a broadcast channel (BCCH) and hence all timeslots are active all the time. The other channels in the picture seem to be additional carriers of this or other cells without a broadcast channel, as the signal strength varies sharply over time which could be because some timeslots are not used when I took the screenshot.

So much for observing GSM cells. In further posts I'll have a closer look at how UMTS and LTE uplink as well as downlink transmissions can be observed and how they look like in SDRSharp.

Kudos to all people who worked on the various parts of SDRSharp and the rtlsdr library, this is really cool stuff!!!