NY, Arrest of twitter user listening to G20 Scanner

[chrismol1]

Originally Posted by blantonl

Believe it or not, there are many public safety agencies that actually respect the public's ability to monitor them

That would make good PR for some agencies

[AZScanner]

It's guys like this who give the "encrypt everything" types their ammunition. Thank God this time it was only protesters found with scanners. If they ever find a scanner on a terrorist you can kiss the hobby goodbye - they will encrypt everything.

What was this guy thinking?!

-AZ

[blantonl]

Technology is evolving Lindsay. The newer systems make encryption not only easier but a part of the complete package. The Feds are pushing it the way they are pushing P25. It's only a matter of time. No it isn't going to happen overnight, but I am talking 10-15 years from now when newer more advanced wireless technologies such as P25 phase II, III, IV, LTE and IP make it's way down to public safety radio will scanners become pretty much a thing of yesterday.

We heard this same argument 20 years ago when trunking came on the scene. I won't refute your assertion new wireless technologies are on the horizon and destined for the public safety market, but I'll still argue that encryption won't become a focal point of those networks.

There are a number of reasons why

1) It is expensive. Yes, I realize that with some volume licensing deals for subscriber units that ADP and other offerings are inexpensive by themselves. But supporting the entire infrastructure, end to end, is very expensive for 99% of public safety agencies out there

2) Interoperability. Encryption is a major hindrance to public safety interoperability.

3) Manageability. Encryption technology has come a long way in terms of strength, but the process of manageability (key management, training, limitations, interop etc) have not even come close to the incremental progress the "encryption industry" has made. This alone is the absolute #1 reason why encryption is a hindrance.

As a former practice manager for a worldwide IT security practice, I can speak to this issue first hand (from the manageability standpoint). Now I spend a lot of my working time here at RR also working with Public Safety agencies and the federal government (believe it or not our work here on RR is used quite heavily). I see first hand every day how encryption is a major obstacle.

Twenty years from now, yes, we might see a national public safety communications network that has encryption built into the core of the technology (like TETRA). But ONLY if agencies are ever willing to give up control of their infrastructures. And frankly, here in the United States that will never, ever happen.

[ac7xc]

Originally Posted by blantonl

The man, Elliot Madison, 41, a social worker who has described himself as an anarchist, had been arrested in Pittsburgh on Sept. 24 and charged with hindering apprehension or prosecution, criminal use of a communication facility and possession of instruments of crime. The Pennsylvania State Police said he was found in a hotel room with computers and police scanners while using the social-networking site Twitter to spread information about police movements. He has denied wrongdoing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/ny.../05txt.html?bl

Well the law is on the Twitter users side:
US CODE: Title 18,2511. Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited


to intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public;
(ii) to intercept any radio communication which is transmitted—
(I) by any station for the use of the general public, or that relates to ships, aircraft, vehicles, or persons in distress;
(II) by any governmental, law enforcement, civil defense, private land mobile, or public safety communications system, including police and fire, readily accessible to the general public;

[MPSCS]

Originally Posted by cfr301

Heres the catch that everyone needs to understand, Its not listening to the scanner that got him into trouble its not even the actual dissemination of what he heard, it was HOW and to WHOM and for MAINLY what purpose that caused his arrest.

Your free to listen, you can tell a friend, the media can print what they hear, you can not however use whats heard for criminal purposes. Put the blame where it lays right in the criminals hands.

Lets don't get carried away and go Bang, halt, police just yet!

I agree. Considering Elliot Madison, publicized the fact that he is an anarchist, and the fact that he was there during a high security risk event, he was no doubt being watched closely.

Monitoring the police activity by itself would not have been something they could act on. But when he passed it on to other activist, he became a security risk. They brought him down with what ever excuse they could come up with at the time, to prevent more violence.

It reminds me of a similar situation in the news recently. As many of you know, citizens in several states have recently become aware that there are no laws preventing them from carrying a loaded handgun, without a permit, providing it is not concealed.

(Check the laws in your state before doing so!)

So it seems to be a new fad to open-carry your weapon, and walk into various scenarios, tempting confrontation with LEO's, so you can prove them wrong. Bad idea! What's worse, some fools take it to the next level and show up at presidential outings, while open-carrying! While technically not against the law, under some circumstances, it's not a very wise thing to do. Some idiot even showed up wearing his AR15 rifle over his shoulder! If this kind of crap keeps up, how long do you think it will be before laws are passed to prevent open-carry of firearms?

If we abuse our rights, and are immature and confrontational, we will no doubt loose many of them. Let common sense prevail.

[rdale]

Originally Posted by ac7xc

Well the law is on the Twitter users side:
US CODE: Title 18,2511. Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited

No, the law says he is able to intercept (listen to) the conversations. Where he broke the law was by publicizing it to others (the disclosure part.)

[kf4uel]

Originally Posted by rdale

No, the law says he is able to intercept (listen to) the conversations. Where he broke the law was by publicizing it to others (the disclosure part.)

so what about the breaking news/ incidents sub forums for each state?

And incident paging services?

[N5AMS]

its because of this why most of the p25 systems are using encryption for the public safety mostly law enforcement

[rdale]

Originally Posted by kf4uel

so what about the breaking news/ incidents sub forums for each state?

And incident paging services?

None of those services send out detailed location reports for police undercover ops... Otherwise they probably would get in trouble.

Originally Posted by N5AMS

its because of this why most of the p25 systems are using encryption for the public safety mostly law enforcement

Actually most P25 systems in the US do not use encryption. Digital <> Encryption, they are two different things.

[N5AMS]

Originally Posted by rdale

None of those services send out detailed location reports for police undercover ops... Otherwise they probably would get in trouble.

that is true i know as far as IPN goes the don't send out addresses on swat calls but addresses are sent out on everything else

[ac7xc]

Originally Posted by rdale

No, the law says he is able to intercept (listen to) the conversations. Where he broke the law was by publicizing it to others (the disclosure part.)

The law can not prevent the publication of publicly available information. They can't arrest you for discussing what you heard at a public meeting and they can't arrest you for what you heard on a public frequency. He published the twitters to a public internet address on a public page. He did not provide the information directly to someone that was involved with criminal activity. If this holds up Lindsay better say goodbye to scanamerica.us because demonstrators can use their Web or iphone to listen to Public Frequency broadcasts and use that to avoid arrests.

[rdale]

Anyone panicing about the streaming has no idea what legal issues are behind streaming. Do NOT compare this event to live audio online.

Originally Posted by ac7xc

The law can not prevent the publication of publicly available information.

I suggest you read the law again.

[jeremy92]

It's bad enough that most places have switched to digital (not in my county yet, but soon) and the scanners are $400.00+. Now they'll probably start encrypting everything because of people like this.

[Astrak]

Originally Posted by blantonl

What is fascinating in this instance is not just a few months ago our federal government openly worked with and championed the use of twitter during the Iran demonstrations. Yet, when someone here in the United States uses Twitter the government arrests him and searches his house.

Interesting...

It's a little bit different though, don't you think? Someone who has power over a military that might use nuclear weapons to attack the US versus someone who protests a summit. I guess I don't find that fascinating at all.

What I do find fascinating is that on this forum is probably the most attention this will receive, while we should let this die so that it doesn't pop up on anyone's RADAR.(Not saying that it won't/hasn't but why perpetuate an issue we don't want perpetuated.)

[ac7xc]

Originally Posted by rdale

Anyone panicing about the streaming has no idea what legal issues are behind streaming. Do NOT compare this event to live audio online.



I suggest you read the law again.

Name the case law that says you can not publish publicly available information.
Pentagon Papers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[PJH]

Well...I wasn't going to post, but since the topic has strayed far enough off topic...

AGENCIES ARE NOT GOING ENCYPTED FULL TIME BECAUSE OF FEAR OF BEING HEARD BY THE CRIMINALS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC (usally).

You are seeing wider use of encyption due to some or all of the following:

1-The IMBE (and now the AMBE) codec for digital voice.

Before "digital" was standardized, the encyption chips used by Motorola, GE, et al used primitive hardware that had to digitize, encode, receive, decode and convert back into analog voice. If you actually heard what it sounded like, it sucked. Best that I can say is that is sounded like a faint voice in a sea of squelch depending on how well the radio was transmitting and receiving (and the system it was on).

It worked, wasn't great but it worked.

Now with the digital voice that are optimized for voice, all the encyption chip (or software) needs to do is apply the encryption algo to the existings 1's and 0's. It doesn't touch the voice. When the other radio receives it, the audio is indistingishable from in the clear voice.

2-Cost has dropped on the subscriber side with ADP. ADP (which can only be used in the digital voice mode) is dirt cheap for new radios and systems. If you add on ADP for a new radio, prices have been as cheap as $10-$40 per radio. Compare this with $300-$500 hardware chips for DES-OFB, AES-256 etc, its a steal. In this day in age for 99% of law enforcement secure comms, this works just fine. Now that you have added it, why not use it? BTW: ADP addon to a radio already in service is in the $200+ range (which leads to below).

3-Salespeople are great. Now that you just bought your multimillion dollar radio system, why not use full time that nice ADP option that you got so cheaply? This is where the LE administrators tout to the police commissions, city's, whatever that they are getting a good bang for the buck. Its a selling tool that works very well.

4-For most conventional systems, and smaller trunked radio systems...these days (at least) managing encryption isn't as difficult as some would lead you to believe. With the current production radios by the major manufactures, keeping tabs on everything is a point and click kinda deal with the KMF's. Now, if you don't properly map out and track your assets in the beginning, then yes it could be a nightmare. Again, most conventional and smaller TRS's won't really have a problem. Mega systems, its a possibility..but it depends on how keen your admins are.

5-For new systems, its a novelty. As quick as its implemented, it mostly goes away except for the people who really need it. Delaware use to encypted everything, now the normal troop channels are in the clear.

So, in short... digital voice made encyption much more tolerable. Cost (depending on manufacture and type) is negliable. Infrastructure for basic systems isn't THAT much more than one in the clear.

[Squad10]

[QUOTEActually most P25 systems in the US do not use encryptionQUOTE]

By "use" do you mean most P25 radio systems in the US were purchased with encryption and the user does not choose to "use" encryption, or, most P25 systems in the US are not purchased with the encryption capability, so the user cannot "use" encryption?

[rdale]

Originally Posted by Squad10

By "use" do you mean most P25 radio systems in the US were purchased with encryption and the user does not choose to "use" encryption, or, most P25 systems in the US are not purchased with the encryption capability, so the user cannot "use" encryption?

Does it matter? The point is - a majority of P25 systems are transmitting in the clear.

[rdale]

Originally Posted by ac7xc

Name the case law that says you can not publish publicly available information

Already linked above - you cannot divulge information intercepted from radio traffic.

[SlipNutz15]

Just remember, each state has it's own laws on how scanner owners can function. Some states allow scanners unrestricted; others none at all; while others allow you to have a scanner but if you are found to have it for reasons other than hobby - like monitoring police to know when you can rob a bank - it's illegal. PA has no scanner restrictions currently. There are laws in the PA Crime Code about using wireless communications and monitoring devices if used for felonious use, but nothing that states specifically SCANNERS in general are illegal.

As has been said before, technology is evolving and encryption is coming here and there, maybe someday no one will be able to listen because of encryption, but I don't see that happening for a really long time - especially in some places in PA like where I live.