• To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:

    Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.

    If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.

    To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.

    The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.

    For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).

    This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.

XPR 7550 firmware

Status
Not open for further replies.

kayn1n32008

ØÆS, I put that shØt on everything.
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
6,118
Location
Sector 001
Enhanced Privacy also sounds terrible in comparison to AES.
They sound no different. EP/AES sound worse than BP/clear because encryption was an after thought. The protocol steals voice payload bits for the KID, algorithm and initialization vector.
 

kayn1n32008

ØÆS, I put that shØt on everything.
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
6,118
Location
Sector 001
They absolutely do. Motorola themselves admitted at one point that there is a loss in audio quality (though slight) with Enhanced Encryption. In my experience, it's enough loss in quality to be noticeable.
On DMR EP and AES both suffer from audio quality loss. There is a noticeable loss in audio quality between clear and AES encrypted DMR. That loss of quality is the same when using RC4 or AES256 on DMR. Have you even used AES on DMR?
 

alcahuete

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
972
Location
Antelope Acres, California
On DMR EP and AES both suffer from audio quality loss. There is a noticeable loss in audio quality between clear and AES encrypted DMR. That loss of quality is the same when using RC4 or AES256 on DMR. Have you even used AES on DMR?
Vs. no encryption, yes, of course there is a difference. However, there is also a difference between 40-bit and AES256. Here is straight from the Trbo system design manual:

Mototrbo System Design Manual said:
Enhanced Privacy uses multiple keys and a random number to ensure that the encryption data is different for each data message and each superframe of a voice message. This requires transporting crypto parameters (e.g. key Identifier, Initialization Vector) with the voice or data payload. A voice message, in the case of Enhanced Privacy, requires an additional header and replaces some of the least important bits of the voice payload with the Initialization Vector. The additional header increases the System Access Time except when Talk Permit Tone is enabled (in repeater mode) where the additional header replaces one of the normal voice headers. The replacement of payload bits reduces the voice quality. Note that the reduction in voice quality is barely noticeable.
If you understand how that encryption works, the initialization vector actually uses less voice data the larger the key. 128-bit sounds better than their 40-bit, 256-bit sounds better than both. Is it noticeable? To my ears it certainly is, and certainly on the fringes of coverage, where important voice and data bit are being used for other things.

Have you even used AES on DMR?
How do you think I'm making my comparison? I have several Motos and several more Anytone's (though those don't have 40-bit, for comparison).
 

K2NEC

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
967
As long as we are disputing this, enhanced privacy is better than no privacy. AES is better than enhanced privacy. No discussion there. However for 99.999% of people, enhanced privacy is more than enough to stop most people from listening to their transmissions. Does that mean it's foolproof? Absolutely not. Does that mean that someone can't listen if they REALLY wanted to? Absolutely not. But if someone want's to stop the average listener from being able to hear transmissions, EP is MORE than enough. If you are using AES, you either really have something to hide or are very determined not to have anyone listen to your transmissions, at that point it also becomes suspicious about what you are doing. (Of course this depends on the application and scenario. As with everything, YMMV)
 

Floridarailfanning

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
158
Location
East Tennessee
On DMR EP and AES both suffer from audio quality loss. There is a noticeable loss in audio quality between clear and AES encrypted DMR. That loss of quality is the same when using RC4 or AES256 on DMR. Have you even used AES on DMR?
I run EP on all of my radios and have NEVER noticed any audio difference compared to clear DMR. I'm not saying that voice bits aren't diverted for RC4 but it's not noticeable on simplex or repeated.
As long as we are disputing this, enhanced privacy is better than no privacy. AES is better than enhanced privacy. No discussion there. However for 99.999% of people, enhanced privacy is more than enough to stop most people from listening to their transmissions. Does that mean it's foolproof? Absolutely not. Does that mean that someone can't listen if they REALLY wanted to? Absolutely not. But if someone want's to stop the average listener from being able to hear transmissions, EP is MORE than enough. If you are using AES, you either really have something to hide or are very determined not to have anyone listen to your transmissions, at that point it also becomes suspicious about what you are doing. (Of course this depends on the application and scenario. As with everything, YMMV)
Agreed. If you MUST have AES you probably shouldn't be using TRBO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top