Jefferson County P25 Migration

[Wauk620]

Looks like Jefferson County has begun to implement their new P25 system. They only have 3 digital channels up so far, and they’re simulcasting with their analog system at this time:

154.860	KSB455	RM	107.2 PL	JELAW1	Law Dispatch	FMN	Law Dispatch
154.860	KSB455	RM	280 NAC	JELAW1	Law Dispatch	P25e	Law Dispatch
155.775	KSB455	RM	103.5 PL	JEEMCOM1	Command	FMN	Multi-Dispatch
155.775	KSB455	RM	280 NAC	JEEMCOM1	Command Digital	P25e	Multi-Tac
154.370	WQB793	RM	107.2 PL	JEFIRE1	Fire Dispatch	FMN	Fire Dispatch
154.370	WQB793	RM	280 NAC	JEFIRE1	Fire Dispatch	P25	Fire Dispatch

With the majority of the county being rural farmland, I fail to understand why the SO decided to go with encryption.

 

[70cutlass442]

With the majority of the county being rural farmland, I fail to understand why the SO decided to go with encryption.

I guess I do not know what farmland has to do with the need or desire to be encrypted or not?

I also do not know how they are simulcasting on the same frequency as their current analog system.

 

[OpSec]

The brutal truth of the matter is that as more police channels become available on scanner apps and web sites, the more police administrators are looking to at least partial encryption.

 

[Tim]

The brutal truth of the matter is that as more police channels become available on scanner apps and web sites, the more police administrators are looking to at least partial encryption.

Greetings...

Since I both work in the public safety field and also a radio hobbyist, I can definitely support using at least partial encryption. Sometimes there is very sensitive information that should not be broadcasted for the general public (Fatal accident victims info, etc). Not every agency has a computer to send this information to the dispatcher. Sometimes scenes are so chaotic that officers can't easily call on the phone with this information.

Tim

 

[OpSec]

Absolutely. It's always striking to see the disconnect between enthusiasts and practitioners...

 

[DVINTHEHOUSEMAN]

I can understand using encryption for highly sensitive information (think undercover ops, SWAT, lifeflights, etc.), but the vast majority of information given, or that I hear anyways, is pretty bare bones and usually relates to "so and so wants to speak with you" and traffic stop information.

Full encryption is kind of ridiculous but I understand why people do it, and it's unfortunate that agencies switch to full encryption due to incidents where people that don't need to be there show up and cause a scene or mess up critical evidence or whatever else. If Joe Schmoe would just let people do their job and not interfere, there wouldn't be any need for encryption, and people could scan freely. That is far from the reality we live in though.

 

[Mattnik]

I can understand using encryption for highly sensitive information (think undercover ops, SWAT, lifeflights, etc.), but the vast majority of information given, or that I hear anyways, is pretty bare bones and usually relates to "so and so wants to speak with you" and traffic stop information.

Full encryption is kind of ridiculous but I understand why people do it, and it's unfortunate that agencies switch to full encryption due to incidents where people that don't need to be there show up and cause a scene or mess up critical evidence or whatever else. If Joe Schmoe would just let people do their job and not interfere, there wouldn't be any need for encryption, and people could scan freely. That is far from the reality we live in though.

This would have been a great argument on 9/12/2001, when the seeds for this were planted. I had just started in pub safety dispatch the year before, and we were not even on a repeater, much less trunked or encrypted. Police have been steadily increasing their use of encryption this whole time, and met with little or no resistance. The scanner hobby as a whole had the attitude of "it's not happening to my agency, so who cares".

Divided, they were conquered.

@OpSec is on point. I get calls to 911 asking what so and so wants with John Q Public because they "heard the name on the scanner". Putting the scanners online have taken the hobby out of the hobbyists hands and placed it in the "Keeping up with the Kardashians" class, with predictable results. The tipping point IMHO is the new APX radios, which come with encryption (ADP software based or AES 256 boards) built in at the time of delivery. When Indiana SAFE-T forces the last XTS radio off the air (they are no longer assigning ID's to them) then the decision to encrypt will be political, not technical.

To keep it on point to the forum topic, LaCrosse (city) is fully encrypted for LE use, and on the other end of the state Manitowoc is as well. Won't be long before they all are.

Matt

 

[DVINTHEHOUSEMAN]

Iron and Price county SO already went encrypted, the DB says partial encrypt which is somewhat true but there's only been a couple instances of open traffic and one of them was just a 10-4. Superior also went encrypted and I think Vilas and Oneida are also encrypted. Marathon county SO is encrypted and so is Wausau PD. At least Ashland and Bayfield counties haven't gone encrypted yet, although Bayfield is on WISCOM.

Online scanner sites for me are kind of a mixed bag, usually you get a lot of people from all over the country listening to an agency because of something that happened, but also, as mentioned before, Mr. Nobody with nothing better to do with his life than stick his nose into everybody's business and stir the pot.

I also heard there's bills circulating around in New Hampshire and California to restrict the use of encryption and not allow it for full time use, but I'm not sure what the status of those are at the moment. Radio encryption has already became political, there's just not too big of a push for/against it outside of public safety agencies and scanner hobbyists.

I hope that there's some kind of reasonable resolution to the whole thing and that it's a peaceful solution.

 

[70cutlass442]

I am a user of the Jefferson County system. It is my understanding that encryption will not be used regularly.