HMM I wonder if a FOI would be usable to get freqs from TAFL restricted? With digital modes/encryption there is very little reason not to have the allocations listed. I dont buy the 'national security' angle. Anyone with a spectrum analyzer, freq counter or even a $20 SDR can locate freqs. Look at how quickly the new Waterloo system was discovered.
OPP and future encryption
- Thread starter fiddlefaddle99
- Start date
- Status
Good luck with that FOI. OPP wont even release response times of actual calls for service (average times based on priority type), something that all municipal police services do via annual reports. They turn down FOI response times for the public to know how long they can expect an officer to show up based on "Criminals could use this information".
Meanwhile, it's available for all other police services. Anyone listening to their current audio knows it could take an hour or two for a unit to drive across a county as they're understaffed. They just don't want you to know it.
Meanwhile, it's available for all other police services. Anyone listening to their current audio knows it could take an hour or two for a unit to drive across a county as they're understaffed. They just don't want you to know it.
DaveH
Member
Personally I wouldn't spend time on this, governments have shown many ways of blocking FOI's for whatever reason
(and using taxpayer money). Just because some of the info can be found by (assume) legal means (i.e. searching) does not
compel any agency to hand over the info. Some site info may be sensitive as it could reveal vulnerabilities which could
be exploited by the wrong type of people with not good intentions. As much (or most, or all) of the system is likely to be
encrypted, that would render any FOI rather moot.
Dave
casehuff613
Newbie
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
- Messages
- 3
LONG READ :
I just want to add to these comments about people saying they are okay with these agencies going encrypted.
I AM NOT OKAY with this. Although I have no control over this, it makes transparency impossible. It puts everyone in the general public out of the loop as to whats going on. It is important for the OPP to stay digital, even Phase 2 because they need reliable communications. It is, however dumb and stupid for they to encrypt two way radio communication.
Things that go on in the community are important to know, but to put everyone in the dark, so they dont know what's going on anymore is the stupidest thing ever.
I realize that the Ford government wants encryption, I hope they never do use it because it keeps everyone in the loop as to whats going on. I really hope they do switch to a more modern system though.
I am an active listener to the OPP and MOH, I use a Motorola XTS2500 radio. There system has a lot of dead spots, and if they went to a 700/800 MHz system, they would at least have reliable two way communication, and they could cut out the use of repeaters and just use there portable to connect directly to the system.
If anyone has something to add to this, please do so. Thanks
I just want to add to these comments about people saying they are okay with these agencies going encrypted.
I AM NOT OKAY with this. Although I have no control over this, it makes transparency impossible. It puts everyone in the general public out of the loop as to whats going on. It is important for the OPP to stay digital, even Phase 2 because they need reliable communications. It is, however dumb and stupid for they to encrypt two way radio communication.
Things that go on in the community are important to know, but to put everyone in the dark, so they dont know what's going on anymore is the stupidest thing ever.
I realize that the Ford government wants encryption, I hope they never do use it because it keeps everyone in the loop as to whats going on. I really hope they do switch to a more modern system though.
I am an active listener to the OPP and MOH, I use a Motorola XTS2500 radio. There system has a lot of dead spots, and if they went to a 700/800 MHz system, they would at least have reliable two way communication, and they could cut out the use of repeaters and just use there portable to connect directly to the system.
If anyone has something to add to this, please do so. Thanks
slicerwizard
Member
Oh, we can see that you're doing your (lame) best to get it locked.
Encryption discussion is permitted on the forums. What is discouraged is negative comments discussing streaming audio and encryption.
I looked over the prior posts and only one person brought it up previous to post 45. If you have anything thoughtful and relevant to add, please do.
I looked over the prior posts and only one person brought it up previous to post 45. If you have anything thoughtful and relevant to add, please do.
There is really not much we can do about systems using encryption. It's a fact of life nowadays and we just have to get used to it.
I just bought a new scanner and to hear that Fleetnet could be replaced with another system that could use encryption is disheartening. There are other systems that can be monitored.
I agree with being transparent, etc and maybe with all the cutbacks that Ford is making he may not opt for encryption. From what I've read it's just a drop in the bucket for the extra cost of encryption.
Unless a majority of people make official complaints to the government I think it's a done deal. It could also mean that if they see how many people complain, they may use it as evidence that people are listening and want to prevent that from happening.
I just bought a new scanner and to hear that Fleetnet could be replaced with another system that could use encryption is disheartening. There are other systems that can be monitored.
I agree with being transparent, etc and maybe with all the cutbacks that Ford is making he may not opt for encryption. From what I've read it's just a drop in the bucket for the extra cost of encryption.
Unless a majority of people make official complaints to the government I think it's a done deal. It could also mean that if they see how many people complain, they may use it as evidence that people are listening and want to prevent that from happening.
Muxlow
Super Secret
I can say 1st hand when I upgraded a local fire dept from analog with some NXDN channels to Hytera DMR, we went full encrypted to keep scanner people from showing up on scene, leaking photos and wrong info to media. Fire Dept wanted to be able to give phone numbers, door access codes, hidden key locations and all that stuff over the air.
Quite a few fire depts going encrypted. City of Windsor is in talks of doing it on all their talkgroups not just on a couple as is. And Essex County Fire is going to be changing radio systems and going encrypted, also.
Just the digital age we are in. Look at the bright side. We can still monitor the school bus, taxi cabs and Coast Guard or the local trucking company.. "yaaaay"
Quite a few fire depts going encrypted. City of Windsor is in talks of doing it on all their talkgroups not just on a couple as is. And Essex County Fire is going to be changing radio systems and going encrypted, also.
Just the digital age we are in. Look at the bright side. We can still monitor the school bus, taxi cabs and Coast Guard or the local trucking company.. "yaaaay"
slicerwizard
Member
You think the decisions weren't made a long time ago and contracts signed?
Hard to say. Could be.
uncleblackie
Member
That means nothing. Look at all the renewable energy contracts Thug Ford cancelled.
I predict that when the true cost of cancellation comes to light, it will equal the Fiberals gas plant scandal......
If you mean MTO Enforcement, they'll likely be encrypted and if not, still dispatched by the various PCCs. If you mean MTO AMC maintenance, they don't currently have that ability so that wouldn't change once they encrypt. Communicating with tows isn't critical either, though they would more than likely keep the "first available" MAC channels they already have.
Transparency and accountability are still there post-encryption. Recordings are still made, and are still subject to court subpoena, FOIA request etc...
Transparency and accountability are still there post-encryption. Recordings are still made, and are still subject to court subpoena, FOIA request etc...
DaveH
Member
No offence folks but hasn't this turned into another endless and mostly pointless dragged-out discussion on
encryption, possibly to end with a locked thread? I'm not a fan of censoring or shutting down but do people know
when to give it a rest?
Nothing the scanner community does will do much to prevent encryption though it arguably could bring it on faster.
Nothing else useful to talk about?
Dave
encryption, possibly to end with a locked thread? I'm not a fan of censoring or shutting down but do people know
when to give it a rest?
Nothing the scanner community does will do much to prevent encryption though it arguably could bring it on faster.
Nothing else useful to talk about?
Dave
"Nothing the scanner community does will do much to prevent encryption though it arguably could bring it on faster. "
Winner winner chicken dinner.
Winner winner chicken dinner.
slicerwizard
Member
Takeout only!
DaveH
Member
As a parting thought, at the risk of triggering the OT alarm (not to mention being spirited over to the Tavern, none of the
real ones are open anyway...), and to lighten things a bit:
A politician mentioned earlier campaigned on "buck-a-beer" which I tried at the time; small blue cans for $1.10 with
deposit. Tasteless and cloudy! No names. Apologies to the (unnamed) county where it was brewed.
Dave
real ones are open anyway...), and to lighten things a bit:
A politician mentioned earlier campaigned on "buck-a-beer" which I tried at the time; small blue cans for $1.10 with
deposit. Tasteless and cloudy! No names. Apologies to the (unnamed) county where it was brewed.
Dave
Please continue with a productive discussion.
Thanks
Thanks
- Status
Similar threads
