You are mistaken. It is the Eleventh Commandment.
All joking aside, the poster has the right to attribute his feelings to God if he wishes.
Encryption editorial
- Thread starter Chicago2210
- Start date
- Status
You are mistaken. It is the Eleventh Commandment.
All joking aside, the poster has the right to attribute his feelings to God if he wishes.
Did tax payers not pay for military encryption? Those savvy biker gangs and "organized" crime dudes aren't monitoring day to day precinct radio traffic. The fact that you see proceeds of busts that include scanners only shows how ineffective they are to criminals. LE has been solving crime waves long before encryption and even radio communications came along. Sure things have changed, but so has police work. Even if encryption is a "free" feature, the radio industry is doing quite well. To compare internet security with public service communications is a false equivalency. Equally false is to claim that private business deserves encryption to guard their secret proprietary communications. As if such info is broadcast.
Encryption has a place in LE, of course. All specialized enforcement teams and investigators need the security that encryption provides. To encrypt everything is to say "public be damned"we don't need or want you and anything you can provide!
Encryption has a place in LE, of course. All specialized enforcement teams and investigators need the security that encryption provides. To encrypt everything is to say "public be damned"we don't need or want you and anything you can provide!
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
But they are entitled to use it if they want. Regardless of what the contents of the comms are.
As for law enforcement and other public safety using encryption, when their comms are streamed, and they don't want them streamed, and those that do stream regardless, encryption puts an end to it.
In BC, the WARS replacement system is P25/phase 2, 100% strapped AES-256. Even the interop talk groups. Inter agency Cooperation, and OTAR, make using encryption full time easy. It also ensures idiots will not be able to stream their comms. To say encryption will prevent interoperability is just wrong.
Sent from my SM-G870W using Tapatalk
In New Mexico a county has been playing with securing interops.
They supplied keys to its direct neighbors, who have option to punch the button to secure when needing to communicate with them or stay clear for their neighbors other side of their own county while being able to mingle with strapped county.
So far it hasn't failed, many have been watching this in the system admin world lately in NM.
State police doesn't have a issue since they are supplied the keys anyway for the mains. Fire end also has access so while to a listener in public it may seem this or that user doesn't have access but they indeed do, including public works or other government users for main talkgroups or channels. It has not failed one bit during weather, or outside agency hearing or communicating.
Many NM smaller cities pd dispatches or sheriffs offices dispatch public works, or interop with them during the flood and rain seasons. They kept ability for those users to hear, communicate while leaving sensitive talkgroups or channels out such as narcotics, tacs while a few do give the same programming to all. So far no issues, no hiccups.
They supplied keys to its direct neighbors, who have option to punch the button to secure when needing to communicate with them or stay clear for their neighbors other side of their own county while being able to mingle with strapped county.
So far it hasn't failed, many have been watching this in the system admin world lately in NM.
State police doesn't have a issue since they are supplied the keys anyway for the mains. Fire end also has access so while to a listener in public it may seem this or that user doesn't have access but they indeed do, including public works or other government users for main talkgroups or channels. It has not failed one bit during weather, or outside agency hearing or communicating.
Many NM smaller cities pd dispatches or sheriffs offices dispatch public works, or interop with them during the flood and rain seasons. They kept ability for those users to hear, communicate while leaving sensitive talkgroups or channels out such as narcotics, tacs while a few do give the same programming to all. So far no issues, no hiccups.
I can say with fact, at least this way, persons of criminal element have and do monitor LE traffic on mains with own purchased equipment, scanners. More of the organized gangs and such. Organized branches of the cartels do in fact reside in west Texas and NM and some crimes have been occuring past year which many dont hear about.
The petty criminal or one time small criminal has been caught before monitoring either with a perosnal consumer device or app.
I have yet to see it made to news since the local news outlets didn't feel it being news worthy considering the other issues the arrests or stories were about.
El Paso county TX strapped it all and made a talkgroup for El Paso PD to interop. They get patched and in fact the city does have ability to strap they haven't yet but this patched talkgroup on city end is secured from 800 end to VHF end.
The county at its own dime reprogrammed the city equipment enabling secure for these talkgroups and the city units can and do monitor the VHF trunk system main 3 channels the county went to. Most the time it is off (patch) but if a unit requests it communications enables the patch and it is secured.
Works flawless.
The petty criminal or one time small criminal has been caught before monitoring either with a perosnal consumer device or app.
I have yet to see it made to news since the local news outlets didn't feel it being news worthy considering the other issues the arrests or stories were about.
El Paso county TX strapped it all and made a talkgroup for El Paso PD to interop. They get patched and in fact the city does have ability to strap they haven't yet but this patched talkgroup on city end is secured from 800 end to VHF end.
The county at its own dime reprogrammed the city equipment enabling secure for these talkgroups and the city units can and do monitor the VHF trunk system main 3 channels the county went to. Most the time it is off (patch) but if a unit requests it communications enables the patch and it is secured.
Works flawless.
Encryption was coming to the radio world no matter of crime or whackers doing weird stuff. Even before streaming or the internet was even on the radar there was counties and cities already starting the encrypting process.
All of us that have been scanning for several decades just got use to the free world of listening to whatever and we feel it should continue but its slowly going away. It sucks because our hobby is slowly being taken away from us and it blows A$$. I completely dis-agree about why these counties and cities are locking stuff down since we pay for these systems and have no decision making abilities. You can fight all you want but "we the people" don't have a say so anymore. We are just in a period of history in time where an empire eventually has to fall before it can be re-built again. Only GOD knows when that will be.
I just wonder how Uniden and Whistler are dealing with all of this encryption crap since its most likely hurting their sales and will continue to nose dive within the next 5 to 10 years. I see them pushing all of this new modulation with DMR and NXDN and I see RR.com pushing on getting their databases filled with all for all of these DMR Hotels and all of this non sense crap that nobody will listen too.
The newer generation does not even know what a scanner is and never will buy them. They are glued to their smartphones and the gaming world. They could give a rats A$$ about public safety and encryption. So there will be no fight and it will continue to lock more and more comms out. Just chip away at the block until government gets their way. That's the way it works in life. Keep taking more and more away as time passes us by.
All of us that have been scanning for several decades just got use to the free world of listening to whatever and we feel it should continue but its slowly going away. It sucks because our hobby is slowly being taken away from us and it blows A$$. I completely dis-agree about why these counties and cities are locking stuff down since we pay for these systems and have no decision making abilities. You can fight all you want but "we the people" don't have a say so anymore. We are just in a period of history in time where an empire eventually has to fall before it can be re-built again. Only GOD knows when that will be.
I just wonder how Uniden and Whistler are dealing with all of this encryption crap since its most likely hurting their sales and will continue to nose dive within the next 5 to 10 years. I see them pushing all of this new modulation with DMR and NXDN and I see RR.com pushing on getting their databases filled with all for all of these DMR Hotels and all of this non sense crap that nobody will listen too.
The newer generation does not even know what a scanner is and never will buy them. They are glued to their smartphones and the gaming world. They could give a rats A$$ about public safety and encryption. So there will be no fight and it will continue to lock more and more comms out. Just chip away at the block until government gets their way. That's the way it works in life. Keep taking more and more away as time passes us by.
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
I understand your frustration and I hear what you are saying, but I'd question the idea that we have a right to listen in on everything the police does.
2 way radio traffic is only part of their communications. Hobbyists have enjoyed having unrestricted access to that for nearly a century. Now that it's going away, hobbyists are frustrated. I get it.
But let's remove the word radio and put "communications" in it's place. The assumption that the general public (that includes scanner listeners) should have unrestricted access to all communications is flawed. We have never been allowed to listen in on police department telephone calls, ever. No one has complained about that. Cell phones are in wide use by police officers, and that's all encrypted, we've never had access to that. MDT communications are not something we can easily intercept, and lots of dispatch is going to "the screen".
I don't get the attitude that we are owed free and unrestricted access to all radio communications just because it's paid for by the taxpayers. Taxpayers fund the phone system, the cell phones, and the MDT's, but I've never heard anyone demanding access to that.
But, wait, we DO have access, FOIA is always an option if you want to take the time. No, it's not instantaneous, but it's an option.
Again, I hear your frustration. I grew up listening to a scanner and I enjoyed it. I would have missed it if it had disappeared, but at no point did I ever think it was my right to hear everything that was said.
It's kind of a "first world problem" so to speak. The fact that we have disposable income to spend on electronics that allow us to listen in on radio traffic for fun and entertainment is a privilege, not a right. If we make it a "right", how do we address those that can't afford a new P25 scanner?
They deal with it the only way the can. Try to find new and interesting things to listen to.
Is it going to keep sales up? Probably not. I'd be surprised if it did.
Look at Short Wave radios. Used to be there was a lot of stuff to listen to. Now, not so much. I'm sure short wave radio sales have dropped a bit, especially with the internet.
That argument will work for just about anything.
My parents said that about me back in the 70's with TV sets. They grew up without TV, but yet we all survived.
And the "government" is a big term, and can mean a lot of things.
Local government is what's driving a lot of this. You as a voter do have some amount of control over what your local agencies do. It's about making this an issue. However, I think you'll find that the scanning hobby isn't as popular as some think. Probably not enough people to get enough votes to make something happen.
Doesn't mean you shouldn't try though.
Digital is the future. Police do need secure communications. There is just no justification to encrypt everything! Calls for barking dogs, auto collisions blocking streets and domestic distress can't predict the success of a crime of property to a thief. The only reason encryption gets used on routine traffic is to cover the bosses butts. Don't wrap the flag around encryption, call it what it is: the erosion of liberty. Yes the air waves are owned by the people!
Last edited:
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
It has nothing to do with the flag, not sure where that came from.
Encryption has it's place, that's well established.
I'd agree that most dispatch traffic does not need to be encrypted, however there is some stuff that does. That creates an issue.
I also can tell you that most police departments really don't care about making life easier for hobbyists. If they feel they need encryption to do their job safely and effectively, that's probably what is going to happen. They have no interest in catering to the scanner crowd. The solution is to give news agencies a portable set up for receive only and with encryption enabled. The media can disseminate the information to the public a lot easier than a hobbyist can.
I think you may be confusing the difficulty of being a scanner listener in a digital/encrypted world with the law enforcement agencies trying to keep the public from listening. I don't see that as the issue.
Encryption has it's place, that's well established.
I'd agree that most dispatch traffic does not need to be encrypted, however there is some stuff that does. That creates an issue.
I also can tell you that most police departments really don't care about making life easier for hobbyists. If they feel they need encryption to do their job safely and effectively, that's probably what is going to happen. They have no interest in catering to the scanner crowd. The solution is to give news agencies a portable set up for receive only and with encryption enabled. The media can disseminate the information to the public a lot easier than a hobbyist can.
I think you may be confusing the difficulty of being a scanner listener in a digital/encrypted world with the law enforcement agencies trying to keep the public from listening. I don't see that as the issue.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2014
- Messages
- 96
What makes the media so special? If they can get a radio, so should anyone else.
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
If you are expecting dispatchers to select encryption for some dispatch calls and not others on the fly, and to do this on top of all the other things they are doing, you don't understand how a dispatch center works.
I disagree it's an "erosion of liberty". I believe you have a different definition of what's a liberty and what's a convenience than I do.
Unencrypted easily accessible communications is a convenience for scanner listeners. Not a liberty. If you think you are owed free and unhindered access to any and all communications, you might be mistaken.
I disagree it's an "erosion of liberty". I believe you have a different definition of what's a liberty and what's a convenience than I do.
Unencrypted easily accessible communications is a convenience for scanner listeners. Not a liberty. If you think you are owed free and unhindered access to any and all communications, you might be mistaken.
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2010
- Messages
- 588
So I'm just curious... For all of you that are Pro-Encryption (including Fire & EMS channels), why are you even on this website then? Cuz I'm willing to bet it's the first place you go to if you want to look up a particular city or county's radio information... The site is RadioReference, so with Encryption there is no more Radio... So I'll ask again, why bother coming to this site if you want Encryption on all radio talkgroups?? Why bother being a scanner hobbyist??
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
Never said I was "pro-encryption". I'm pro-reality.
Like I've said above, I understand the frustration. The difference is that since I work in the industry I can see both sides of the argument.
No, not every channel needs to be encrypted, however expecting overworked dispatchers to change the way they do their jobs to benefit hobbyists is just so silly, it's not even worth discussing. Those that bring this up show a complete lack of understand about how things work in the real world.
Most hobby scanner listeners have a single point of view and are not in a position to understand all the different parts of the decision. I've attempted to explain them above, but there seems to be a "Kill the messenger" attitude.
That's OK with me. Feel free to moan and complain about how your freedoms are being taken away.
I've suggested ways to address this, but that gets overlooked.
And, no, when I want to look up information I either contact the agency directly or I use the FCC database.
Like I've said above, I understand the frustration. The difference is that since I work in the industry I can see both sides of the argument.
No, not every channel needs to be encrypted, however expecting overworked dispatchers to change the way they do their jobs to benefit hobbyists is just so silly, it's not even worth discussing. Those that bring this up show a complete lack of understand about how things work in the real world.
Most hobby scanner listeners have a single point of view and are not in a position to understand all the different parts of the decision. I've attempted to explain them above, but there seems to be a "Kill the messenger" attitude.
That's OK with me. Feel free to moan and complain about how your freedoms are being taken away.
I've suggested ways to address this, but that gets overlooked.
And, no, when I want to look up information I either contact the agency directly or I use the FCC database.
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
Again, you are missing the point.
The sole purpose behind encryption is to keep those "anyones" from listening. A properly controlled radio in the hands of the media can be used for accountability. There are many ways of getting information to the public.
Expecting an agency to give any hobbyist that asks authorization to have access to encrypted channels negates the entire purpose of encryption.
royldean
Member
Except in these modern times, even the "unbiased media" is biased one way or another. Sorry, I can't trust the government, and I can't trust the media.
As for the whole https/hypocrite argument..... Nobody is arguing for private business transparency... this is all about GOVERNMENT transparency. I don't want to know what a cop is telling his wife or kids when he's off duty. I don't want to know what a dispatcher is telling her best friend while she's on her lunch break. I want to hear what two GOVERNMENT officials are telling eachother. It's apples and oranges.
The idea that you are entitled to listen to the communications because taxpayers funded it is so beyond extremely flawed.
I would agree not everything needs to be secured, but expecting them to turn on and off encryption per call is unrealistic. Also, just because it is not something that seems sensitive to you does not mean someone is not going to post some inappropriate commentary about it on social media. The idea that encryption is used to cover the bosses butt or hide something kind of goes out the window when the recordings are all discoverable or accessed via freedom of information requests.
I would agree not everything needs to be secured, but expecting them to turn on and off encryption per call is unrealistic. Also, just because it is not something that seems sensitive to you does not mean someone is not going to post some inappropriate commentary about it on social media. The idea that encryption is used to cover the bosses butt or hide something kind of goes out the window when the recordings are all discoverable or accessed via freedom of information requests.
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ
I guess I am pro-encryption. Having said that, it is not because I don't want people to listen. It is more because of those that stream communications, with no care. Those that feel they can do what they want, regardless if the agency does not want their comms online.
I am here for a variety of reasons, mostly I like the technology. I like to learn about the gear I use. I want to learn about the technology and how it works when it comes to modern trunking methods. I really don't care much for the contents of the communications. Yes I do like to scan and listen to first resonders, no but it is not the reason I am here.
When I am going somewhere new, I do use the database, but I am more interested in amateur radio than listening to the local fuzz.
Sent from my SM-G870W using Tapatalk
This has nothing to do with encryption. MedicDavid78, you are so misinformed. Scanning is but a small part of this web site. Do yourself a favor and visit The RadioReference.com Forums - Powered by vBulletin
- Status
