RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Commercial, Professional Radio and Personal Radio > Industry Discussion


Industry Discussion - General discussion forum for commercial and professional radio technologies. This includes manufacturers not listed below.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2018, 9:59 AM
DaveNF2G's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rensselaer, NY
Posts: 8,849
Default

My guess would be that someone has suggested that AES should be the only funded option by a certain date and that other modes of encryption not be supported after that. Such a thing can easily be transformed by the rumor mill into an "everyone must use" mandate.
__________________
David T. Stark
NF2G WQMY980 KYR7128
ARRL VE & Registered Licensing Instructor
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2018, 3:50 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Where idiots grow on trees
Posts: 177
Default

DHS CAP has been going through a lengthy process where they essentially said:
1) AES encryption is the ONLY standard we will approve going forward,
2) Radios that are sold with encryption and bought using federal funds WILL have AES and not some proprietary standard,
and 3) Radios sold with "proprietary" encryption like Motorola ADP will also include AES.

This has essentially boiled down into agencies using federal funds either buying radios with ZERO encryption, or with single-key AES at minimum. Usually going towards the latter since Motorola and the sort would rather do single-key AES (a la APX900) than to reinvent the wheel to pull ADP.

The reason for all this came about that less-informed police chiefs/commissioners were buying radios with ADP only encryption and then saying "well we bought radios that followed CAP recommendations". DHS essentially closed the communication gap between manufacturer and buyer.

I can be somewhat off in my description - but that is how it was broken down to me when this all went down. It didn't personally phase me one bit since we were building out the statewide P25 upgrade to be AES capable anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2018, 4:34 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbrtklamp2 View Post
Not that I have heard of but at this point not much would surprise me. I think if they may want everyone who is encrypted to be using AES by 2021 as part of the inter op initiative. But I haven't seen any mandated order anywhere that agencies have to encrypt. With Motorola having proprietary algos like ADP for p25 and Basic and Advanced Privacy on trbo I don't think everyone will be going AES any time soon. There was a mandate that any radio sold with encryption must now also have AES included as well. So if you buy a radio with ADP it must also have the a software AES option as well.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
You can't really call ADP proprietary to Motorola anymore. For the last 5 years (prior to the partnership) both Harris and Tait have offered ADP encryption on their radios (named RC4 after the actual algo). Also, since the 5100, EF Johnson has also supported some form of ADP encryption (granted the 5100 did use XTS3000 UCMs)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR8000 View Post
Fake news
Nicely summed up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NavyBOFH View Post
DHS CAP has been going through a lengthy process where they essentially said:
1) AES encryption is the ONLY standard we will approve going forward,
2) Radios that are sold with encryption and bought using federal funds WILL have AES and not some proprietary standard,
and 3) Radios sold with "proprietary" encryption like Motorola ADP will also include AES.

This has essentially boiled down into agencies using federal funds either buying radios with ZERO encryption, or with single-key AES at minimum. Usually going towards the latter since Motorola and the sort would rather do single-key AES (a la APX900) than to reinvent the wheel to pull ADP.

The reason for all this came about that less-informed police chiefs/commissioners were buying radios with ADP only encryption and then saying "well we bought radios that followed CAP recommendations". DHS essentially closed the communication gap between manufacturer and buyer.

I can be somewhat off in my description - but that is how it was broken down to me when this all went down. It didn't personally phase me one bit since we were building out the statewide P25 upgrade to be AES capable anyway.
To add to this, a handful of times a year I deal with federal customers (the three lettered agency kind) and after CAP encryption standards were changed, many have had deadlines set of when they have to be AES256 capable (or running it in place of their existing DES-OFB standards). For some, that means buying new radios as they are running radios that they cannot physically acquire AES256 hardware for and due to long purchasing processes (measured in years) have to plan it out over a several year process.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2018, 4:55 PM
PVPD730's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 685
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderknight View Post
No mandate. It's an agency decision.
I figured as much. Based on my conversations with the commander it sounds like they're in the process of making that decision very soon. He just had to regurgitate the mandate thing to justify that decision. Whatever. At the end of the day, it's beyond my control.

I appreciate all of the responses from everyone. Thank You
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2018, 5:19 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 120
Default

Encryption and interoperability are terms that cause more problems when used together. Unless there is a shared key or a console to connect tthe systems, you'll have problems. Each agency or department will have their own key.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2018, 6:57 PM
RFI-EMI-GUY's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,436
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markinsac View Post
Encryption and interoperability are terms that cause more problems when used together. Unless there is a shared key or a console to connect tthe systems, you'll have problems. Each agency or department will have their own key.
The system management infrastructure (CORE), required to construct a key management facility can be prohibitively expensive (and obsessively complex) for small agencies / small systems.

To say that P25 was geared at directly replacing small systems is a joke.
__________________
"Have Spectrum Analyzer, - Will travel" "Standby for Traffic, Now Going Red"
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 07-08-2018, 12:03 AM
RodStrong's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MCore25 View Post
You can't really call ADP proprietary to Motorola anymore. For the last 5 years (prior to the partnership) both Harris and Tait have offered ADP encryption on their radios (named RC4 after the actual algo). Also, since the 5100, EF Johnson has also supported some form of ADP encryption (granted the 5100 did use XTS3000 UCMs)
Just about all the major outfits have ADP (compatible) nowadays. Relm and Kenwood/EFJ have it as well. I suspect Icom is working on it as well for their new 700/800 radios.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 07-08-2018, 8:27 AM
DaveNF2G's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rensselaer, NY
Posts: 8,849
Default

Sounds like a "buy Motorola" mandate, and we can guess where that came from.
__________________
David T. Stark
NF2G WQMY980 KYR7128
ARRL VE & Registered Licensing Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 07-08-2018, 8:42 AM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ten13
Posts: 262
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb4mdz View Post
What equipment salesman is telling you this?
Excellent point.

We are where we are today with radios primarily because of the radio company SALESMEN, interacting with know-nothing police and fire chiefs.

I knew a situation, many years ago, in the infancy of trunked radio, when a MAJOR metropolitan police department was approached by a major radio manufacturer (who will remain naMeless), and had them all but convinced that this major metro PD MUST have the latest radio system...."MUST!"

Unfortunately for the salesman, this PD had an active cop who also happened to be a radio buff, on their Tech staff. He knew, from his own research and experience, the downfall, then, of the new system. Behind closed doors, this cop gave the "cons" of the new system, and it didn't take much convincing of the PD bosses to realize it would be to the detriment of the cops on the street if they switched to a new system (not to mention the massive cost).

Some of these radio salesmen could sell ice to the Eskimos.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 07-08-2018, 12:25 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 524
Default

As a government gets more corrupt, they must hide all communications from the public.
The Patriot act created all the framework and funding
Reply With Quote
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 07-08-2018, 9:37 PM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: pittsboro in / mesa az
Posts: 441
Default

Way back in my naMeless company tech days I was at a client's site installing new remote units for their new repeater (I think they were DC, it's been 30+ years). I had serviced their equipment a few years before when I was a tech for a GE shop so I knew some of the folks there pretty well.

The manager was talking to me about the new remotes and said the salesman said the GE remotes would not work on a naMeless repeater. I told him they would since it was an industry standard.

Our shop manager called me in his office when I got back and said the client called and demanded we take back the new remotes since the old ones would work. I was told it was company policy to not take back equipment and to go back and say I was wrong.

I refused and told him I still had GE manuals in my garage that showed the jumper settings needed to work on the new system. To his credit he let me go back the next day and test my theory.

I took the GE apart and made the jumper change (they were heavy gauge wires on large metal pins back then). The GE unit worked and the manager thanked me for being honest, then said he would keep the new remotes after seeing how old the technology was in the GE remotes.
__________________
jay thompson / CETsr, GROL
COML, COMT trainee
KC9VTT / COML DMAT CA-4
you must be really bored to be reading this far down
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2015 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions