Batboard

This is an interesting article. Looks to me like the wide scale implementation of P25 encryption is not nearly as far off as some pundits would have us otherwise believe. Notice the official's comments as to why state police need encryption to effectively do their job in today's new world of terrorism, etc. Quote: "In today's atmosphere where homeland security is paramount, law enforcement agencies must be able to communicate without the possibility that others can eavesdrop and hear communications to which they are not privy," Cox said. "The 800 MHz system is designed so that law enforcement and other government agencies can communicate with each other without concern lawbreakers and others can overhear those conversations."

I would think his argument would apply to all police agencies across the US. Hopefully the Fed will provide wide scale grants to build encrypted P25 systems to ease the economic pain of these up-conversions. The sooner that more and more PDs see the light and get with the avalanche of converting to P25, the sooner we can enjoy interoperability and enhanced public safety. The only downside reality is that we can then say "Buh-Bye" to scanners. A sad, but I think inevitable, day.

larry

http://www.cadillacnews.com/articles/20 ... news03.txt

jacksonville, florida - the nearest "big city" PD (actually an SO) encrypts every single law enforcement talkgroup on their system - even small towns using the system and a local college police force (University of North Florida PD). Fire and EMS is "in the clear". hacking a radio on this system is pretty much pointless - if your goal is to listen to PD comms you are SOL. Why bother with a spectra (10 channel scanner) - compared to a BC796d?

at first, I had some serious reservations about this, but unfortunately, in the day and age we live in - it's becoming increasingly common for the unscrupulous to exploit police communications for illegal acts.

the public "right to know" - which may not be a "law" or "right" - is still pretty important to me, regardless whether or not your particular state has a law supporting it. to me, it's just common sense that you should NOT have a taxpayer funded law enforcement agency running around without oversight.

i think a much better solution to the problem of balancing a "right to know" vs. homeland security issues is to allow access to people who have a genuine interest in such communications (hard to type this... but ARES/RACES comes to mind....sorry...i am gagging typing that.. including the news media).

in jacksonville, the news media was initially pretty pessimistic and vocal about their inability to obtain access to the system - resistance which disappeared once they were provided access to the zone dispatch channels (no tactical or car to car stuff that i know of). sad - as they could have gotten a much better picture had they fought for the average joe to also be screened and allowed access to the system.

keep in mind here that the SO/PD I am writing about (Jacksonville, Florida) constantly faces charges of excessive force and crimes committed by officers...recently the sheriff called in the FBI to investigate not one, but TWO deaths of prisoners at the hands of his officers. add this to all the various complaints of excessive force, cops convicted of murder, ad nauseum... you get the idea.

i think it's VERY important for civilian oversight of the activities of the police. while joe blow listening to the SWAT raid across the street - or a prostitution sting isn't necessary - communications involving the safety and general security of the public ARE important and should be able to be scrutinized by the public. jacksonville partly solves this problem with a VHF base system called "EARS" - where major incidents are broadcast in the blind (analog FM) to the media and public....of course, this requires a dispatcher to actually transmit and mash a few buttons on the console - so notification of significant events is spotty at best. it appears though that we get more access than orange county, california - where everything is secure and nothing is provided "in the clear".

in the case of the michigan system mentioned in larry's post - only certain talkgroups on that system appear to be encrypted (per radioreference.com) - mainly NARCO and AUTO THEFT stuff... things that you would EXPECT to be encrypted. it seems to me from the article text that the fire chief was more interested in obtaining some bargain priced equipment vice (long quote) fraudulently accessing a computer network to obtain between $1,000 and $20,000; and one count of unauthorized access to a computer network (unquote)

just like the poor guys in atlanta, the end goal was certainly just to keep track of what was going on in neighboring jurisdictions - but it's apparently from both the atlanta and now michigan indictments that there is a good way, and an (apparently) illegal way to accomplish the same goal.

as more and more advanced trunking systems come on line (especially 9600bps digital only systems) - you can bet that the scrutiny placed upon affliated radios gets higher and higher. no longer are you dealing with large trunked systems that go for years with 2000 "ghost" radios on the system... and hence the more advanced password protection/system key changes being incorporated into moto trunking systems and software.

i like what was said earlier by cow-tipper.... remember who motorola is interested in - THE PAYING CUSTOMER. Any attempt to defaud the customer - or access his network - is a defacto attempt to defraud motorola - as that's who gets blamed in the end (as in a pie in the eye). Ergo, cases where radios are programmed onto systems "illegally" - as in illegitimately - are like walking up to the sleeping giant and giving him a shot in the nuts.



doug

doug, you are absolutely correct in your comment about the new digital only 9600 bps P25 systems increasingly becoming the norm for new systems. No more analog legacy FM garbage! (This is the ASTRO section of the board, right?)

In terms of encryption and the public's "right to know" what its police are up to, it's interesting to see what is going on in the Seattle/Puget Sound area. I believe we will reflect the norm across the country in this regards. There has been much discussion about encryption on the huge Puget Sound area Public Safety trunked 800 MHz Motorola system that is shared by a large number of local Gov't agencies, especially in concert with its inevitable future uplift to P25. The local news media here has argued for the ability to monitor such future systems. The public safety folks have said they will allow legitimate news media organizations to purchase P25 radios that the County will program. This way, the various local Public Safety agencies can be monitored by the pros, who quite frankly are paid to pick up on little whiffs of stink a lot faster than you or I. Of course, the "average joe" (who might turn out to be a bad guy) will likely not be allowed to eavesdrop on these future systems.

IMHO, this seems like it will be an acceptable compromise, especially since I don't hold stock in any scanner company. On the other hand, if I were one of the few EE's at a scanner company, I'd be looking to transfer elsewhere within the company, and/or polishing up my resume.

larry

For what it is worth, file away the fact that "public's right to know," while a catchy phrase, is meaningless. (In fact, the phrase is the creation of the news media, designed to promote the news media's profit-motivated interest in selling advertising space; and that phrase was created by the same media that believes that unlike the rest of "the public," it has the right to ignore witness summonses, demonstrating that, at least where they are concerned, even the authors of the phrase "the public's right to know" believe that the public has no right to know.)

"Right" means a legally enforceable right, and there is no enforceable right of the public to know anything except insofar as such an enforceable right may be created by statute, generally in the form of "freedom of information" type statutes. None of those apply to radio communciations, and, even if they did, at the federal level section 2511 of the Safe Streets Act Amendments deals with the issue preemptively. Non-encrypted communciations in FM modes by public safety entities are in the public domain (which means you can legally listen, but not that you have an affirmative "right" to the information contained therein), but encrypted communications are not only not in the public domain, listening to them is a federal felony.

By the same token, "oversight" of police activities is limited to such means and methods as the government, as the duly elected representatives of the people collectively, determine to implement. The law has never recognized a "right" of individuals to become self-appointed "overseers" of police activities.

Yes, listening to this stuff may be fun and sometimes informative, and even on occasion legitimately userful. But do not spend a lot of energy getting riled about the supposed trampling of a non-existent "right to know."

It just seems that the encryption capability is being used in an "Overkill" fashion. Encrypting normal dispatched traffic is not really that necessary. Just having it in plain P25 digital will deter most "Thugs with a scanner" types. Listening to ASTRO takes a digital scanner and some programming know how especially if its trunked.
Most joe six-packs have no clue. The people listening to Astro are either High-Techie radio enthusiast ( like me ) or yes, a high tech criminal (kinda rare). I do agree that Narcotics, surveillance etc. MUST have voice security so that officers are not compromised. Just blindly encrypting every talk group makes no sense.

IMHO, this seems like it will be an acceptable compromise, especially since I don't hold stock in any scanner company.

The sad thing is really that news organizations either don't get it right, or have an apparant bias towards the items they cover. With 100% encryption, the only information getting out about anything of interest to the average citizen regarding police operations are from a police briefing itself - if the want to share it, and perhaps just a part of the story and perhaps a certain bias as well.

Being an informed, educated citizen is getting harder and harder!

Cheers,

Colin

"I know I'm being paranoid, but am I being paranoid enough?

here we go again.
more "because there are terrorists" out there we need to hide out government, secret trials, secret courts, starting to sound like the old Soviet Union. Pretty soon the mere posession of any radio device that isn't a celphone or an entertainment radio will be a violation of the "Patriot Act"

Now why does ROUTINE DISPATCH traffic need to be encrypted? I can understand the need and it is certainly justified to encrypt CID, special ops, SWAT, etc but mary and joe getting in a fight over who drank the most beer is "sensitive information"? What our local government does on a day to day basis IS our business. This "homeland security" horse manure is really starting to wear thin. Maybe if we had been doing our job by having CONTROLLED BORDERS terrorists wouldn't have gotten here in the first place...what a concept there. Now we want to create a police state. Boy we don't learn from history do we.

Adding encryption and interoperability is a complete contradiction. You have key management to deal with. And of course the last thing you want to do is hand out keys to everybody? add this to the equation of proprietary trunking systems and you just went the complete opposite direction if the goal was interoperability.

Perhaps we should follow the lead of the Japanese Embassy, and go with D-STAR for Public Safety.

larry

bcradio wrote:

IMHO, this seems like it will be an acceptable compromise, especially since I don't hold stock in any scanner company.

The sad thing is really that news organizations either don't get it right, or have an apparant bias towards the items they cover. With 100% encryption, the only information getting out about anything of interest to the average citizen regarding police operations are from a police briefing itself - if the want to share it, and perhaps just a part of the story and perhaps a certain bias as well.

Being an informed, educated citizen is getting harder and harder!

Cheers,

Colin

"I know I'm being paranoid, but am I being paranoid enough?

Remember that all communications on dispatched channels (talk-groups) are recorded. As a private citizen you have every right to the traffic over a publicially funded system, but they don't have to make it accessable real-time. If you (or the press) feel that there was an issue that requires you to know what was said over the radio you can make an official request for a tape or CD of the incident.

If an agency has the funding and wants to go thru the headache of key management, then its their decision. Remember, the millions of dollars that are spent on these systems are not decided on in a vacuum. Public meetings are advertised and anyone with a concern should of stated so way before the contract is signed/awarded.

Remember that all communications on dispatched channels (talk-groups) are recorded. As a private citizen you have every right to the traffic over a publicially funded system, but they don't have to make it accessable real-time. If you (or the press) feel that there was an issue that requires you to know what was said over the radio you can make an official request for a tape or CD of the incident.

If an agency has the funding and wants to go thru the headache of key management, then its their decision. Remember, the millions of dollars that are spent on these systems are not decided on in a vacuum. Public meetings are advertised and anyone with a concern should of stated so way before the contract is signed/awarded.

All true, all true. I like to think of myself as more informed on the goings on in my town than 95% of the average citizen. This comforts me, as I have little trust in our local media (or national media) to get me the news accuratley. Maybe I'm a control freak that needs to know what's going on. It's too bad that this will become a thing of the past in the near future

All of these various philosophical human rights sorts of stories are very touchy/feely things. In the end, its ALL going to be AES encrypted, whether anyone of us thinks that is a good thing, or not. It's the reality of the post 9/11 world. The only question is how fast it will occur. I'm in favor of erroring on the side of enhanced security, so I say "AES it ALL TODAY." If you want to monitor repeater traffic, you can listen to the few Ham repeaters still on the air.

larry

of course, if you use mine, you better have OFB


doug

here we go again, "in the post 9/11 world we must sacrifice liberty for the illusion of security". 9/11 seems to be a convienient excuse to do things that otherwise the majority of people would object to.

it reminds me of how after a school shooting the gun grabbers go crazy calling for ban on "assault" weapons, more "gun control" laws et al. It is always a good time to pass ludicrous legislation right after something like this than it takes decades to get it off the books after people find out just how RETARDED it is.

AES? come on larry, you think Al Queada would have a problem getting a radio programmed and keyloaded on any PS system they want? These people have NO PROBLEM coming over here (thanks to our JOKE of a border system), getting government issued ID's, opening bank accounts, renting apartments and homes, buying cars, even getting credit cards with high limits from US Banks. and hell they could probabbly get jobs at your local 911 e-comm center to for that fact. Hiding government from the people isn't going to stop terrorism anymore than disarming law abiding citizens will stop felons from getting guns.

WC4RAV wrote:here we go again, "in the post 9/11 world we must sacrifice liberty for the illusion of security". 9/11 seems to be a convienient excuse to do things that otherwise the majority of people would object to.

it reminds me of how after a school shooting the gun grabbers go crazy calling for ban on "assault" weapons, more "gun control" laws et al. It is always a good time to pass ludicrous legislation right after something like this than it takes decades to get it off the books after people find out just how RETARDED it is.

AES? come on larry, you think Al Queada would have a problem getting a radio programmed and keyloaded on any PS system they want? These people have NO PROBLEM coming over here (thanks to our JOKE of a border system), getting government issued ID's, opening bank accounts, renting apartments and homes, buying cars, even getting credit cards with high limits from US Banks. and hell they could probabbly get jobs at your local 911 e-comm center to for that fact. Hiding government from the people isn't going to stop terrorism anymore than disarming law abiding citizens will stop felons from getting guns.

Amen brother....

No offense, but I don't see the word encryption mentioned anywhere in that article. I think it's a case of a non-technical/misinformed Attorney General. It sounds like he thinks that the system can not be monitored.

It sounds like the real problem was a small fire department trying to bypass normal procedure and USE radios on the system for the department, maybe with bogus or copied Unit Ids. I don't really think the case has much to do with monitoring.

Read this version:

http://www.freep.com/news/statewire/sw1 ... 041217.htm

Doug, AES is also OFB.

larry

The more that these systems become encrypted, the more people will want to break them. Keep only critical communications encryped and not many will bother. Encrypt it all and they WILL break it. Think it's impossible to break Motorola's precious encryption? Not at all. When Direct TV released the HU card, it took about 6 months to break 128-bit rolling encryption that was superior to anything in an APCO25 system. They broke it because there was a demand for it. With a $550.00 scanner and some additional hardware and software for a PC that is connected to the APCO25 compatible scanner, they will surely break any "secure" encryption that is added beyone the normal level.
You can be sure that once it's done, you'll be able to purchase the hardware/software from Jamaica and every other island that sells Echostar equipment right now.

I challenge anyone to please post proof of even one example of someone cracking AES, which has been out there for over two years now.

I rest my case.

larry

jim wrote:...it took about 6 months to break 128-bit rolling encryption that was superior to anything in an APCO25 system.

The SMALLEST key allowed in APCO-25 AES encryption is 192 bits. The largest is 256 bits.

2^192 is 6.277101735e+57 - assuming you could test a billion keys a second it would take almost 2.0*10^41 years to explore the whole keyspace. Even if you had an algorithm that could discard 99.9999% of the keyspace you are still going to be crunching when the last star burns out.

The DirectTV and Dish hacks involved defeating a poorly designed card interface, not cracking the code itself - they figured out how to make a card that ALWAYS reported that "things are fine - go ahead and decode".

Right on---AES Case Closed!

larry

Just to comment for the "encrypt it all now" crowd:

Encryption will solve nothing. All it does is keep the casual hobbyist out. I guarantee you that you could have the highest form of encryption on the planet in your PD radio's and a terrorist or professional criminal could be listening to you talk away on it within a matter of minutes. Yes that's right. Minutes. Maybe even seconds.

How? The answer is simple, albeit risky. But if you're a terrorist or a bank robber, the risk is quite negligible to you.

All one would have to do is steal a portable police radio (there's literally thousands of them to choose from all over the city) AND REPLACE IT with an identical radio, usually available on ebay or other sources online (easy to buy with a stolen credit card or on credit obtained via identity theft - actual cost to the bad guy: $0).

Think about it. If no one knows it's gone, no one will report it stolen, and no one will turn it off. Hmmmm. As for the radio you swapped it for? Well when and IF someone goes to use it, they will say "Hmmm.... must be broken" and turn it in to the radio techs, who will most likely toss it into a pile of "dead radios" and there it will sit for months. It might even end up in a surplus auction, never even looked at beyond the initial diagnosis of "broken". Meanwhile your newly acquired radio is chugging along great, even getting it's new daily encryption key thanks to Over The Air Rekeying. What a wonderful thing this technology is!

If anything, encryption INCREASES your risk that someone will say something stupid. If they think no one else is listening, crucial operational details could be given out over the air and intercepted just as I've described, compromising officer safety. In an open system, officers are aware that they can be heard and will be much more careful about what they say.

I'll summarize it like this: If you don't think this can happen to you then 9/11 taught you nothing. No one ever imagined in their wildest dreams that someone would be crazy enough to want to fly a fully loaded passenger jet into a building at full throttle, let alone FOUR of them. (Who knows how many others chickened out at the last minute, there could have been dozens of these in the air that day.) Now if a terrorist is capable of planning something like that, then stealing a police radio is kids stuff. If I can figure out how, then anyone can. Fact: IF SOMEONE REALLY WANTS IT BAD ENOUGH THEY WILL GET IT. It doesn't matter what you do, if you have something someone else wants bad enough to steal it from you, they will figure out a way - likely a way you never thought possible.

Oh and does anyone know how many scanners the 9/11 hijackers had in their possession that day? AFAIK, none of them even owned a scanner.

I'll leave you with those happy thoughts. Good day!
-AZ

AZ, based on your logic, police may just as well not carry guns, as someone might steal one. What you may not realize is that stealing an encrypted police radio is not an easy matter. Depts running heavy duty encryption, such as the 3 and 4 digit Fed Agencies, protect their encrypted radios with their life. And, if one goes missing, they re-key the system immediately via OTAR.

Your comments might play well with the media, but you are dreaming if you think you are going to "swap" a radio and fool an agency running heavy duty encryption. One of the costs of such user agencies running encryption is that they establish a very stringent process for protecting these rasdios, since they do assume they are talking on encrypted channels.

larry

AZScanner

Although it may seem as simple as swapping a radio to enable a way to listen to encrypted traffic it just isn't possible.
Sure, it may work for a while until someone notices that it is missing but really how practical is that?

If it's smartnet system the radio must affiliate to operate. It wouldn't be long before it's remotely killed.

As for the dummy radio that replaced it..... no damn way!

If they had enough info to duplicate the original enough to fool anyone then they wouldn't need to make the swap to begin with.

Think about it. What about serial numbers, trunking ID's, OTAR shadow keys......etc........


From what I've heard around here the FBI is encrypted (still securenet analog) 24-7. I have only heard four or five clear transmissionsn in over five years and I see no reason for them to ever be in the clear. It just doesn't make sense why they ever would. Why run partially in the clear then go encrypted if you can do it all the time. All you do is raise a huge flag that something big is going down. It's called traffic analisys.

The fact that some of the FBI is still running almost 20 year old A3 X9000's proves to me that they don't have many fears of it being compromised very easily.

We try to run our surveillance channels encrypted whenever possible. (Thanks jcobb and firmedic) The only exceptions are when range is an issue. It give me that warm and fuzzy feeling knowing I have a communications path that's more secure than my crap ass nextel phone.


mancow

I have ben reading this thread and really wanted to add my $.02.

Working for a small rural area PD that doesn't have access to encrypted radios to use, and who are stuck with analog only I have to say that the "right to know" attitude is crap. Almost every dirtbag that I deal with has a sscanner and knows were coming way before we get there. Several of us got ahold of Astro portables on our own so we could use at least one channel or two on Astro and let these jokers eat digital carrier.

I can see why Jacksonville, and OCSO use their encryption all the time. The went to the expense to buy the equipment, make the best use of it, and get the most out of it, use it all the time. Might have ben easier to justify the expense that way. I would love to have a 9600bps P-25 trunked system to use, but it iwll never happen here...not in my lifetime anyway. THe old timers that run things here are too cheap.

Thats my .02 anyway.

Although it may seem as simple as swapping a radio to enable a way to listen to encrypted traffic it just isn't possible.
Sure, it may work for a while until someone notices that it is missing but really how practical is that?

If it's smartnet system the radio must affiliate to operate. It wouldn't be long before it's remotely killed.

As for the dummy radio that replaced it..... no damn way!

If they had enough info to duplicate the original enough to fool anyone then they wouldn't need to make the swap to begin with.

Think about it. What about serial numbers, trunking ID's, OTAR shadow keys......etc........

Dude, are you for REAL? I'd like to know what dreamworld you are from.

This is how things occur in reality: Suppose a detective walks up to a charger, grabs a radio and turns it on and it doesn't work. Is he gonna start checking the serial numbers and wondering who stole his radio? I think not. He's gonna mutter "piece of sh-t new radios. Dead already." slam it back in the charger and grab another one so he can go do his job. Eventually word will circulate through the squad "that radio's broken" so some genius will probably put a sticky note on it that says "10-7" or "Broken, do not use". Maybe in about 6 months someone will get an epiphany and turn it in to the radio guys. The radio guys will then simply toss it on a pile of other broken stuff to look at later, send in for repair or auction off. I've seen this happen too. Maybe a month or two later, someone will go "hey.... this isn't our radio!" if they happen to catch it and don't have 600 other things to do that day. But I'm guessing probably not. Even if they do, they then need to find out which radio IS missing. In a fleet of 6000+ radios it would take months. Meanwhile, they blast out a new OTAR key to CYA but guess what? Your stolen radio will obediently accept the new key and you'll still be monitoring them. After all, it doesn't know it's stolen yet!!

And even if your dream world scenario was true and all the above happens in a week (ha ha yeah right) do you think joe bad guy is gonna sit idly by just listening to the cops? Or do you think he's gonna start telling all his doper friends when the cops are coming? I'll give you a while to answer that.

-AZ

AZ-

Most departments that I am aware of have some sort of inventory control over the equipment they have, usually being that officers have to check radios out at the beginning of their shift, then back in at shifts end. It doesnt take long to locate a missing radio when proper inventory controls are used. Yes, the radio would obediently accept the new key if done by OTAR, provided that the radio hasn't been inhibited.

again, more of my .02.

The bottom line is a real terrorist would have no problem getting into this country (as if they aren't already here thanks to our useless immigration system), get a job at a 911/e-comm center with their government issued ID (again, thanks to our wonderful immigration system) just as members of Al Queda came here for years and learned how to: fly planes, get houses and credit cards from US banks, etc etc.

You think going to "encryption" is going to a DAMN thing to stop "Terrorism" as it is being touted by it's proponents? Not anymore than making every gun owner a "gun nut" or putting law abiding citizens on a "watch list" will keep guns out of the hands of gang bangers, felons, the mafia, etc. Get real.

This homeland security crap is getting old. All of a sudden these retarded ideas that normally would have folks in an uprising are "ok" because we need to "feel safe". Just like anytime someone fires a gun in a school the gun grabber come a running, now it's the "terrorist" chasers with their "let's secure our government by hiding it in secrecy". Better take a good world history course and see where this kind of theology gets a society...

Where I live (a large metro area known as atlanta) very few if any crooks use scanners. Most of them are to STUPID to program one let alone take the time to learn the codes and signals nor would spend the time to listen to one to help them with their career of crime. But there are plenty of law abiding citizens who have helped our PD's and SO's catch dirtbags in their hoods when they "heard about it" on their scanner.

As much as everyone on here dogs the media, funny how they're your best friend when your ass is in a sling. When some Atlanta PD officers complained to the former chief that some sgt's were double dipping, WAGA TV (Fox 5) used their scanners to monitor APD's TRS, and caught officers working part time jobs at night clubs, getting it on with the dancers while they were IGNORING CITIZENS CALLS FOR HELP (was documented on video and audio from the TRS), LYING ABOUT THEIR LOCATION, etc. All the while they were on city time, collecting an extra 25 bucks an hour from their buddies strip club. Other officers were outraged and nothing happened until Fox 5 ran their story.

Thanks to scanners the evidence was preserved. (APD mysteriously deleted the Instant Replay files of those dates...hmm...the cops are all good right? they would never lie to us, arrest the wrong people...yeah..that never happens and if it did the poor bastard probabbly did something anyway? right? so long as it isn't YOU who cares?)

it's funny how people will simply do an about face. the same folks who would never "give up their guns" seem so willing to give up their privacy and liberties once held so dear (see, the Patriot Act) for the promise of "security"...these promises from the same people who sat on their asses, let terrorists in to begin with, ignored international intel...yeah...okay...somebody wake me when this is over.

With the "illusion" of huge terrorist plots, "evil" people like us should not be "allowed" to listen to radio traffic on systems we paid for with our tax money.
That is just plain ridiculous, since when is it not the right of the people to oversee what law enforcement does?
Their actions affect EVERYBODY, and since this includes ME, I feel I have a bonafide reason to monitor who they are, where they are, and who they are going after. If I remember the declaration of independence, the preamble begins with "WE THE PEOPLE" and not I the government....
Just like driving my car, I have a right to drive it, I paid for the roads I use, and YES, I DO own the road, is a true statement of fact.
Nothing this government has is owned by the government, it IS owned by the people, so no matter what it is, I have a right to know how my equipment is being used, and this means listening to what they are talking about, every day.
As far as I know, Motorola is NOT a law enforcement agency and has no arrest powers, so they too, are toothless.
So we have circle M radios, big deal, what I do with it is my business and not Motorola's.
Where I live, in the "northwoods" of WI., several LEAs use AES now, upgraded from DES-XL, and it's used daily from trafic stops to lost dogs.
I resent my tax dollars being used for coordinating doughnut stops and young driver harassment stops, not to mention the 110 MPH car chases that happen here all too often(and we're called reckless if we drive 65 in a 55 zone!)
I hate to say this, but I can't wait for somebody to be killed during a high speed chase, MAYBE that will cure the desire to "get the crook" if the PD is sued poor. I hope this never happens, but since cops feel they have the right to speed, then they will have the right to be sued poor.
Encryption changes nothing in the world of crime, phones are prevailing all over, and one call lets everybody know where they are, and what they are doing, so if 10 "crooks" are watching, that's 10 cell calls informing the rest as to the exact whereabouts of "the man".
Hiding radio traffic under the veil of "secure" just locks out my right to know what they are talking about, not where they are, or who they are screwing around with.

The only 800 Mhz. comms used here are P-P jail use, with primary comms on 153 - 159 Mhz. with a small portion of low band stuff for public works.
There isn't even a single Smartnet/SmartSite system up here.
LTR on UHF and 800 is all there is......for now.
158.910 in, 155.640 out 118.8/114.8 P.L.
Tribal police are a joke here, many have been fired over "improper" acts, all hidden via "secure" mode. Too bad the real fact/s as to what happened are forever hidden away from public scrutiny so they can have "plausible deniability" the act ever occurred. Too bad there is no oversight for illegal acts committed by law enforcement, because if there was, there would be no more secured comms.
Encryption enables lawlessness by law enforcement, and disables the citizen's right to know.
I for one am happy there are no trunked systems in use by law enforcement in this area, but if there was, I'd do all I could to monitor it.

How many crimes are comitted over secure car to car comms by police?
More than we will ever know.......
Programmed low power, known bad main site receive location, talk car to car secure to set up a fake bust/stop, well, you get the picture.

Do I trust law enforcement?
Simple reply.....NO!
Question authority.....Always!

Thank you for your time!

Ernest......NRA member

While I wil not delve into the technical aspects of the excryption etc....but I think we are going overboard....I think I can speak from a persepctive, that I am sure others can as well, of someone who is related to those lost on the 11th in NY and other parts of the world that shall remain unnamed.

The absolute moment you release to the Federal Goverment or State agencies any sort of absolute "control'". We, as a free people, are in for a world of hurt...

I DO NOT trust the Police ( I have friends that are cops and most are good, but, some are as crooked as the day is long ) In this post 9/11 world we are going over the top with , perceived security.......I do not trust firemen....do you know some were caught stealing jewlery and valuables from the Trade center..that never makes it to the paper...trust the newspapaers...cmonthey have an agenda..

The moment you lose the ability to defend from, or, control/monitor those that would enforce 'laws', you have tyranny...forget civilian oversight...it is a joke..

the below sums up my thoughts....

"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."

Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who
approaches that jewel." - Patrick Henry

Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the
people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped."

- Alexander Hamilton
The Federalist Papers - Number 29

"Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't."
Ben Franklin

No free man shall be debarred the use of arms.
-Thomas Jefferson

Americans have the right and advantage of being armed.
-James Madison

The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.
-Patrick Henry

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
..................................Benjamin Franklin

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude
greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace.
We seek not your consul, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand
that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity
forget ye were our countrymen."......Samuel Adams


later

I, too am a NRA member and I treasure the rights that those before me bled for.

I think this discussion has swayed a bit from the use of encryption to the rights of the people to oversee government entities.

Do I trust the police? To a degree. (I have seen ALOT of harry stuff, and yeah, there are lots of dirty guys with shields.)

Do I trust the organizations to oversee the activities of the police? again to a degree.

However, I think that these agencies purchased the encryption technology with the permission of the ELECTED representatives that oversee them. If they choose to use it, so be it. you want to listen? Purchse the equipment to do so, the agencies spent big bucks to use it, Joe Public you can spend some green to listen. P-25 technology is here, there are scanners that can listen to it. P-25 trunking is available, there are (or will be available) scanners that can follow it., Encryption is here AES, DES, DVP, whatever. If you really need to listen to what the fire dept., police, etc are doing invest in the equipment to eavesdrop. Why doesn't anyone get upset about not being able to listen to our militarys radio traffic (I believe its encryption is called fascinator or something along those lines)?

My $.02. Thanks for reading.

As interesting as it might be to debate this subject, two things are for sure: 1) Digital P25 is taking off like an avalanche, espeically with the plethora of Gov't grants, and it can't be stopped; 2) Once an agency goes P25, it's only one more step to go DES-OFB or AES, and it will happen, and soon. There's no stopping it.

As a law abiding citizen, I have no business eavesdropping on Police conversations. A few reporters can be authorized to buy XTS 5000's, and they can listen for all of us.

larry

And "SPIN" the details to their fancy, or "pump" us with a taste till the regular news hits the air to keep us glued to the idiot box.

ASTROMODAT wrote:A few reporters can be authorized to buy XTS 5000's, and they can listen for all of us.
larry

ASTROMODAT wrote:AZ, based on your logic, police may just as well not carry guns, as someone might steal one. What you may not realize is that stealing an encrypted police radio is not an easy matter. Depts running heavy duty encryption, such as the 3 and 4 digit Fed Agencies, protect their encrypted radios with their life. And, if one goes missing, they re-key the system immediately via OTAR.

Your comments might play well with the media, but you are dreaming if you think you are going to "swap" a radio and fool an agency running heavy duty encryption. One of the costs of such user agencies running encryption is that they establish a very stringent process for protecting these rasdios, since they do assume they are talking on encrypted channels.

larry

Ever worked for the Govt? First example, while not a radio the principle is the same, I have to have my notebook computer inventoried and checked by the Information Security officer every month. He checks to make sure I still have it, that I have the memo from the "CEO" allowing me to remove it from the facility, and that there is not "sensitive" information on the hard drive. That kind of info must be an a removable media not kept in the computer case. Why? Because govt employees from other agencies keep loosing their computers that have "national security" information on them.

Someone else mentioned inventory control, HA! The officer goes to the control room and hands over his "chit" and is given a radio with a number engraved on the front. At the end of his shift he gets back in line and hands in the radio. The officer in the control room looks at the radio to get the number on the front, takes the officers chit off the hook, hands it back to the officer and throws the radio in a pile in the corner. Then when the line goes down he stuffs the radios in the cooresponding numbered slot in the charger. If it is one of the "spare" radios that only get used for emergencies or when a regular radio is out of service it may not get checked out again for months. No use logs are maintained. So how would it be proved who the last user was? A serial number inventory is conducted once a year.

I guess you don't need guns either Larry, as a law abiding citizen?

The bottom line in this discussion is encrypt what needs to be encrypted, not ever day comms. Its expensive and adds another very complex layer to a system.

Other than a few discrete channels we don't have major encrypted systems out here other than fed. Not sure why the 100% all the time encrypted paranoia hasn't hit here yet unlike other areas of the country (florida and LASO come to mind).

apco25 wrote:I guess you don't need guns either Larry, as a law abiding citizen?

You beat me to it. People like that make me sick, the whole "Sure you can take my rights, I wasn't using then anyway".

Really make you worry about the future of this country.

Cam

It's the nut job, conspiracy theorists, waccos that scare me! You know the type: Black helicopters are everywhere, Ron Brown was murdered, We're all being “watched,” etc. Same folks that are lifetime members of the NRA, and believe we should all be able to own machine guns, bazookas, flame throwers, hand grenades, Barrett .50 cal M82A1's, etc. These are the types that are against encryption: they either A) have something to hide from the police, and/or B) are paranoid schizophrenic basket cases.

OK, that's probably enuf said on this encryption subject!

Anymore, and this thing is gunna get locked down, kids!

larry

What's wrong with people owning machine guns, flame throwers, .50 cal rifles, etc.?

A lot of people like to listen to the police because many of them *can't be trusted*. Unfortunately, in a lot of cases, the old saying of the only difference between a cop and a suspect is the badge, is true. Wanna encrypt SWAT/Tactical traffic? Cool. Routine patrol channels? ********.

If you're in any way related to the federal government, Larry, you should know that we're being watched all the time. Maybe not individually, but that's the reality of today's world.

By the way, who do you work for? You tell plenty of good stories, but I've never seen anything to prove that you actually do anything in the real world. In a lot of ways, you appear to be a slightly-more-intelligible Cowthief.

I own and operate my own helicopter Part 135 company.

If flamethrowers and the like are OK, how about nuclear bombs? Should those also be OK?

I assume you get the point---it's all a matter of where the line is drawn. And, I think machine guns, etc. are way over the line.

you're right larry, it is where you draw the line. but tell me this: how is my local PD's safety or security at risk by me monitoring their dispatch traffic from my home or car?

it is amazing to me how people are willing to give up their rights for a total illusion of safety (aka the Patriot Act). Under the Patriot Act, the government can intercept MY comminications but I CAN'T monitor thiers?

please wake me when this is over...

I'm all for it, if it helps keep us a little safer, which I believe it does.

ASTROMODAT wrote:I'm all for it, if it helps keep us a little safer, which I believe it does.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin, 1759.

Those guys had it figured out back then. Apparently, some people have lost sight of their goals.

ASTROMODAT wrote:I'm all for it, if it helps keep us a little safer, which I believe it does.

okay so explain to me on what basis or premise does a local police or FD encrypting their daily radio traffic make you feel "safe"? I bet you my paycheck to yours anyday that the terrorists such as Al Queda will have NO PROBLEM getting their hands on an XTS5000 with AES setup on whoever's system they want to stalk to aid them in a future attack. Just like your local druglord has NO PROBLEM getting his hands on all the firepower he needs regardless of how "illegal" they are for the average citiizen to have.

If we really want a "secure homeland" why have we not started by SEALING OFF OUR BORDERS rather than this charade game of hiding government, giving government more power to nose into our lives...all for what?

I find it ironic. The goal of terrorism is to strike fear and disrupt the way of life for a political gain. Looks they they have won hands down. We are already changing our core values to match theirs. For example: living in fear, constant surveilance of our own people, giving up our basic freedoms and values so we can have a false vision of "security". What next?

ASTROMODAT wrote:If flamethrowers and the like are OK, how about nuclear bombs? Should those also be OK?

Well, the problems with the average nuclear weapon are:

1) Hard to find a range that will allow you to plink with them.
2) :o to reload - hard to find the casings after you've shot them.
3) Your shoulder really hurts after firing more than a couple of rounds.

Seriously - I would have no problem with my local municipalities encrypting their transmissions, so long as they have no problem with me doing the same.

Too many people forget that, in our founding fathers' vision, the idea was that most of the work of law enforcement and homeland defense would be done by the average citizen - that you would call the shire's reeve (from whence we get the word "sherrif") only to take a person we had aprehended into custody, to hold them until trial.

Ok, I was letting this go as long as the word 'encryption' was used every once in a while, but it is truely off topic now, with the talk of rights, nuclear weapons, & founding fathers. Feel free to continue the discussion over at the Batlounge.

Todd