Remaining scanning benefits if Public Safety is encrypted...

[kayn1n32008]

As I said - specialists yes, but the public? Nope. I have nothing here I could use to decrypt stuff coming out of my radios. I can't buy it, I don;t have the software or programming skills to do it - like I suspect most people. It being possible to do these things doesn't mean we all can. People learn to code in school or college as part of computer courses - can I do it? Nope.

We all agree it is possible with skill, knowledge and time (and of course money). The list of organisations let alone individuals who can do this in real time is a very small one.

Specialists have attempted to find weaknesses to exploit, the ones found are not practical to exploit properly implemented AES algorithms

With current and forecasted technology, there is not enough time left in the life of the universe to brute force AES. What don't people get about it? Even with skill and money, there is not enough time.

Further AES was developed by two Dutch citizens, the likely hood of a back door is small. As well the likely hood of US spy agencies being able to recover data that is encrypted with AES is low.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ShyFlyer]

All in all, an excellent post on the topic! =)

I'd like to add to the discussion, particularly the argument used against encryption, where scanner buffs can help "keep keep tabs on what our public servants are doing"...

There exists a mechanism and a sworn body intended to do just that. It's called the Grand Jury. One of their primary tasks in local government is provide civilian oversight over law enforcement and other government agencies. They can subpoena tape logs of encrypted radio traffic, and make it public if necessary.

It is they who keep the police honest, not scanner buffs.

Sure, obtaining scanner logs and recordings (most departments record all transmissions) is possible via records requests and court proceedings. However, obtaining that information can be quite the ordeal. An agency that doesn't want to release information can drag it's feet.

That said, lets make a few things clear. Just because an agency goes to 100% encryption doesn't mean that they are plotting to subvert the rights of citizens. Let's also make it clear that scanner buffs aren't some valiant group of heroes working tirelessly to protect the Constitution.

 

[goodmore]

My trash man doesn't care if I listen or not.

 

[bill4long]

All in all, an excellent post on the topic! =)There exists a mechanism and a sworn body intended to do just that. It's called the Grand Jury. .

Grand juries can do this, so can judges if there probative value or probable cause.

 

[slicerwizard]

As I said - specialists yes, but the public? Nope. I have nothing here I could use to decrypt stuff coming out of my radios. I can't buy it, I don;t have the software or programming skills to do it - like I suspect most people. It being possible to do these things doesn't mean we all can. People learn to code in school or college as part of computer courses - can I do it? Nope.

Can I cook? Nope. It being possible to cook doesn't mean we all can. Therefore... wait, what was your point again?

We all agree it is possible with skill, knowledge and time (and of course money). The list of organisations let alone individuals who can do this in real time is a very small one.

Money? Money for what? The AES standard is a free download: http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/NIST.FIPS.197.pdf

Source code is also free: https://github.com/kokke/tiny-AES-c

So what is the money for? I suppose you could hire someone to skip the PDF and just throw a wrapper around that source code. Presto, one AES encryptor/decryptor. Certainly wouldn't cost much. So what's the problem?

Wait a sec - you said decryption wasn't available to the general public. What's stopping you from just buying a Motorola radio? The encryption/decryption is built in! Let me guess - the cost? Yeah, well I can't cook! So neither decryption or cooking are available to the public then...

I suppose you or someone else might say it's encryption cracking that we're talking about. Well, that's even easier - all you have to do is pick the correct number out of the range 1 to 115,792,089,237,316,195,423,570,985,008,687,907,853,269,984,665,640,564,039,457,584,007,913,129,639,935.

No fancy education needed to do that.

 

[skinnyb82]

I suppose you or someone else might say it's encryption cracking that we're talking about. Well, that's even easier - all you have to do is pick the correct number out of the range 1 to 115,792,089,237,316,195,423,570,985,008,687,907,853,269,984,665,640,564,039,457,584,007,913,129,639,935.

No fancy education needed to do that.

Could have a Ph.D in math and 40 years experience with encryption algorithms and it wouldn't matter heh. Not unless someone finds a way to predict and, well, that isn't gonna happen.


Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk