P25 is a Protected call really encrypted?

[cferguson4809]

I am not starting this thread to complain or bash agencies that use protected talkgroups, I am genuinely curious if the native protected talkgroup feature built into the P25 architecture is truly encryption or if its a private key.

I used to use a radio at work that used a Transcrypt 460 radio encryption device that was separate hardware added to the radio, the radio provider claimed that it offered military level encryption I found this on the companies website.

Level 460 Scramblers

• The 460 Series scrambler uses a hybrid sweep/hop technology changing the inversion up to 1000 times per second
• Proven success in the field with military and first responder operations
• The 460 is robust with features and offers signaling and OTAR capabilities in clear and coded modes

One of the issues with that type of encryption is we lost the ability to hear the talk permit tones, I could see that being a serious officer safety issue because you have NO IDEA if you're actually transmitting or not.

 

[KevinC]

Just to be clear, that device has nothing to do with P25. It "digitizes" an analog signal I believe.

 

[cferguson4809]

Oh I know that, it scrambles the already created radio signal. I'm talking about the feature-set built into p25 for private talkgroups and how that compares to real encryption.

 

[Giddyuptd]

If they are using encryption then yes it is encrypted. If they are just having the talk group to where only a few can hear it and don't have encryption enabled then anyone with a scanner or radio capable can monitor the talk group.

Is it possible to make a secure talk group and private call yes. But encryption has to be enabled on the talk group or users switch it on.

 

[TampaTyron]

P25 encryption is really encrypted. If they are using AES, then you won't hear it. If they are using the 40 bit software encryption, then it is very unlikely you will hear it. TT

 

[crazyboy]

P25 encryption is really encrypted. If they are using AES, then you won't hear it. If they are using the 40 bit software encryption, then it is very unlikely you will hear it. TT

So there is a chance of hearing it if they are using 40bit? [emoji848]

 

[TampaTyron]

Significantly greater than if they are using 256 AES. Breaking ADP isn't trivial, but I cant say it is impossible. So.... much more likely if they are using 40 bit vs. 256 bit. TT

 

[poltergeisty]

Oh I know that, it scrambles the already created radio signal. I'm talking about the feature-set built into p25 for private talkgroups and how that compares to real encryption.

I believe it's just a typical analog voice inversion. Like the cordless phones of times past that had a basic "scrambler", but this uses much, much higher tech and would be an absolute PITA to descramble.

Significantly greater than if they are using 256 AES. Breaking ADP isn't trivial, but I cant say it is impossible. So.... much more likely if they are using 40 bit vs. 256 bit. TT

I've read many years ago someone in the land down under decrypt ADP. There was a website about it, and I'm sure if you do some research you can find it.

Edit-

Here's some interesting reading. DSD+ now breaks encryption??

 

[Giddyuptd]

I believe it's just a typical analog voice inversion. Like the cordless phones of times past that had a basic "scrambler", but this uses much, much higher tech and would be an absolute PITA to descramble.




I've read many years ago someone in the land down under decrypt ADP. There was a website about it, and I'm sure if you do some research you can find it.

Edit-

Here's some interesting reading. DSD+ now breaks encryption??

Why many steer away from ADP.

 

[poltergeisty]

Why many steer away from ADP.

That I didn't know. Be nice they used it more than AES256....

 

[wardaddy]

Why many steer away from ADP.

Are you trying to tell me ADP with a key of 1111111111 isn't secure!?

 

[kayn1n32008]

Are you trying to tell me ADP with a key of 1111111111 isn't secure!?

ADP is not secure, regardless of the key-variable used.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kayn1n32008]

Significantly greater than if they are using 256 AES. Breaking ADP isn't trivial, but I cant say it is impossible. So.... much more likely if they are using 40 bit vs. 256 bit. TT

ADP is less secure than DES. DES was defeated a long time ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[radioman2001]

Harris was the big player that touted that ADP was easily broken in about 2 hours, and I had seen videos of it. Harris was using that as a pretext to having agencies pay for AES instead of getting free ADP, because they were not getting the bids with M giving away free encryption.
Well it did work to some extent, now AES must be in the radio to receive DHS grants, but mother M now gives a single key AES away like they did the ADP. Harris soon after followed suit.
DES is 56 bit, ADP is 40 bit, so less secure. As the power of desktop PC's gets bigger, never mind using shared internet processing power DES and ADP are pretty much useless to a persistant code breaker. BTW multi key AES modules are about $1800.00 ea my agency is going through that now removing ADP and installing AES.

Quote"
Are you trying to tell me ADP with a key of 1111111111 isn't secure!?

To anybody with a scanner yes. Someone with an ADP equipped radio not so much, and I think you can't put 11111111 in as a key. Will have to try it.

 

[wardaddy]

Well, I wasn't being serious. That being said, you can put any ridiculous combo you want for key data.

 

[KevinC]

Harris was the big player that touted that ADP was easily broken in about 2 hours, and I had seen videos of it. Harris was using that as a pretext to having agencies pay for AES instead of getting free ADP, because they were not getting the bids with M giving away free encryption.
Well it did work to some extent, now AES must be in the radio to receive DHS grants, but mother M now gives a single key AES away like they did the ADP. Harris soon after followed suit.
DES is 56 bit, ADP is 40 bit, so less secure. As the power of desktop PC's gets bigger, never mind using shared internet processing power DES and ADP are pretty much useless to a persistant code breaker. BTW multi key AES modules are about $1800.00 ea my agency is going through that now removing ADP and installing AES.

Quote"
Are you trying to tell me ADP with a key of 1111111111 isn't secure!?

To anybody with a scanner yes. Someone with an ADP equipped radio not so much, and I think you can't put 11111111 in as a key. Will have to try it.

And Harris has RC4 also (Encryption Lite).

 

[wardaddy]

DES was defeated a long time ago.

While that is true, and while I wouldn't advocate DES going forward, a proper OTAR schedule can mitigate the chances of the key being cracked for real-time decryption.

 

[speedway_navigator]

Harris was the big player that touted that ADP was easily broken in about 2 hours, and I had seen videos of it.

Can you send me a link? Our county is talking about using it, probably at the suggestion of a certain dominate radio vendor in order to make sure none of the other state approved vendors sell radios in our county.

 

[kayn1n32008]

While that is true, and while I wouldn't advocate DES going forward, a proper OTAR schedule can mitigate the chances of the key being cracked for real-time decryption.

Nope.

DES is welfare. It should not be used under any circumstances where you require voice security. Period. AES or nothing.

While RC4 and DES will keep comms from being streamed, it will not slow down a detriment adversary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wardaddy]

DES is welfare. ... it will not slow down a detriment adversary.

If you saw some of the budgets people work with, welfare would be an accurate description. As for adversaries, as long as the street level criminals and news agencies can't listen in, I'm fine. Like I said, AES going forward, but it's not like it's some sort of emergency.