Encryption Reasoning

[fireant]

If they really want to listen there is nothing you can do to stop them. If there was ways to stop terrorism then we would have done it by now.

 

[JnglMassiv]

Mark my word:
EMS will be encrypted when it's viable.
Didn't sink in?
EMS will be encrypted when it's viable.
It falls into the relm of patient privacy and I support it, probably more than police encryption (which, in many ways, I think should be done more often). The ONLY reason EMS is excluded from HIPPA now is the complications that arise from interoperability. Once these are worked out, and interoperability is the end goal, after all, it'll be crypto all the way.

And, obviously, I write this from the perspective of a reasonable citizen, not from a scanner hobbyist's point of view. I don;t have to like it to know it's true.

 

[MetalCarnage]

DOWN WITH ENCRYPTION, i dont like it and i dont have to justify why i dont, lol

All of this fear of terrorists....

 

[Voyager]

Would you rather try to switch to the seldom used encrypted mode mid-emergency (with all the issues that typically surround "occasional" or "special" procedures) or already be in that mode as part of your normal (and well practiced) procedures?

People should be PROPERLY TRAINED in the communciations they are using. Sure, it's easier to be encrypted all the time, but then you can't have those WITH WHOM YOU WORK monitor YOUR activities on 'cheap scanners' so they can know what is going if you need them.

The only communciations that need be encrypted are:

* SWAT/raids
* Internal investigations (for obvious reasons)
* HIPAA issues (which means everyone should have a specific channel just for that purpose)
* Calls such as the Fire Chief mentioned and (keeping names from the public until appropriate)
(although really that is a HIPAA issue as well)
* Calls requesting a coroner

Although, of this list ONLY the first item cannot be effectively done via Cellular.

There are no doubt others that fall into the above category, but I can't any more offhand.

Many officers appreciate the assistance (eyes and ears) the public provides. This benefit is lost in any area that encrypts everything, and the public WILL suffer for it. It also leads to the 'secret police' society that makes people think the PD isn't doing their job (which in some cases is the truth).

There are also cases when someone has a radio without encryption and cannot hear a co-worker because they have their encryption activated. This is dangerous and sooner or later will result in hard that could have been avoided.

There is also something called interoperability that is a major issue these days. It is in direct conflict with encryption.

Joe M.

 

[Voyager]

The real terriorists in the world will still be able to listen even if your encrypted

The REAL terrorists couldn't give a rats rear about your communications. Look how much they relied upon radio intel on 9/11. (answer: big goose egg... 0 )

Even if they did, they would just abduct a cop and use HIS radio to monitor what they need to hear.

Joe M.

 

[jimyleg]

COUGH* uhem nextel sneeze*

 

[car2back]

my rant on encryption

Mark my word:
EMS will be encrypted when it's viable.
Didn't sink in?
EMS will be encrypted when it's viable.
It falls into the relm of patient privacy and I support it, probably more than police encryption (which, in many ways, I think should be done more often). The ONLY reason EMS is excluded from HIPPA now is the complications that arise from interoperability. Once these are worked out, and interoperability is the end goal, after all, it'll be crypto all the way.
And, obviously, I write this from the perspective of a reasonable citizen, not from a scanner hobbyist's point of view. I don;t have to like it to know it's true.

We have had a couple of good threads on this in the OK forum on this concerning the Tulsa EMS provider, EMSA going from the old UHF "meds" to encrypted TGs on the Tulsa TRS in the last year. there are a lot of mixed feeling on this:

http://www.radioreference.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19815&
http://www.radioreference.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19062

Currently EMSA's main dispatch Talk Groups are encrypted, as well as TGs assigned for "encoding" patient reports while en rt to the ED. the only analog TG they maintain is for 'mutual aid' by Fire or PD.

One thing I have noticed is that encryption has become a "security blanket", if you will for agenices using it. Their radio usage has changed to reflect the assumption that 'no one can hear me'. For example , since EMSA has made the switch to encryption, all form of patient confidentiallity has gone out the window! I have been in the ER on numerous occasions and heard trucks brodcasting patients names and other personal info over the air on the EMSA radios provided to the hosptial. Why this may not be a major deal in its self, it is kind of disconcerting b/c there has been several times EMSA has had problems with the TRS and switched to the old UHF meds or simulcast on them and I have been able to hear all sorts of things (names, DOBs for example) patients probably wouldn't want me to hear, and I would have never heard in the old days before encryption!
Alot of the reasons used to justify encryption such as patient confidentialty and secretive LE activity can be easily addressed by more cost effective solutions such as cell phones and using common sense while transmitting. The LE agency I dispatch for doesn't have encryption capablities, and yet suprisingly we are able to operate securely in a county full of meth-heads, robbers and other criminal idiots who posess scanners in alarming numbers. The EMS service I work for part-time uses the old simplex HEAR frequency to make patient reports. It's not a fancy digital/encrypted trunked radio talk group; We just use our heads on what we can and can't say over the radio.

 

[ofd8001]

I agree with N Jay in part, and other part I don't. Good thing it's a free country and we can have and express own opinions.

When I said patient reports should be encrypted, HPPA wasn't a concern. It just seems that protecting a person's medical issues is the right thing to do.

Most of the time when we have an injured firefighter, any radio transmissions are not done during mid stream of the emergency action. In fact most of the injuries occur during everything but emergency response. Switching to other channels is a concern in those cases.

 

[Voyager]

When I said patient reports should be encrypted, HPPA wasn't a concern. It just seems that protecting a person's medical issues is the right thing to do.

If you don't know who the patient is, how is HIPAA violated? The fact that you know someone is having trouble breathing is not a HIPAA concern.

I like the post a couple above where privacy has gone out the window and anyone within earshot of a medic unit can hear all the details about who the person is and any other confidential info that need not be transmitted over the air.

Joe M.

 

[GTO_04]

People should be PROPERLY TRAINED in the communciations they are using. Sure, it's easier to be encrypted all the time, but then you can't have those WITH WHOM YOU WORK monitor YOUR activities on 'cheap scanners' so they can know what is going if you need them.

The only communciations that need be encrypted are:

* SWAT/raids
* Internal investigations (for obvious reasons)
* HIPAA issues (which means everyone should have a specific channel just for that purpose)
* Calls such as the Fire Chief mentioned and (keeping names from the public until appropriate)
(although really that is a HIPAA issue as well)
* Calls requesting a coroner

Although, of this list ONLY the first item cannot be effectively done via Cellular.

There are no doubt others that fall into the above category, but I can't any more offhand.

Many officers appreciate the assistance (eyes and ears) the public provides. This benefit is lost in any area that encrypts everything, and the public WILL suffer for it. It also leads to the 'secret police' society that makes people think the PD isn't doing their job (which in some cases is the truth).

There are also cases when someone has a radio without encryption and cannot hear a co-worker because they have their encryption activated. This is dangerous and sooner or later will result in hard that could have been avoided.

There is also something called interoperability that is a major issue these days. It is in direct conflict with encryption.

Joe M.

Well said! Hopefully most government agencies would take this viewpoint. If not, like you say, we will all suffer.

GTO_04

 

[Mozilla]

There are also cases when someone has a radio without encryption and cannot hear a co-worker because they have their encryption activated. This is dangerous and sooner or later will result in hard that could have been avoided.

There is also something called interoperability that is a major issue these days. It is in direct conflict with encryption.

Joe M.

Well most encryption when set up properly, allows for a unit in the clear to transmit and be heard by a unit that is encrypted. And it can also be set in the programming so that a unit that is transmitting in encrypted mode can be recieved by a unit that does not have encryption selected . The most common example will be ICE / Customs marine and mobile units, you will pick up one half in the clear, also Coast Guard is commonly heard doing this.

As to the interoperability, at least in our scenario, there is a "common key " that is assigned to the Interoperability channels and talkgroups. The State of Florida also has this done in their radios for some of the mutual talkgroups.

Training definitely plays a part....

 

[hoser147]

Thlink about it , terriorists can get scanners that are not approved By the FCC and can monitor anything they want from outside the U.S.. Most Bad Guys dont have the inteligence to use a scanner except to steal it and resale it. Most people who scan are decent law abidding citizens who when they hear a child missing will check their property and show up in groves to help out, also scannist have been witnesses being in the area when something happened and gave info to help out when the average person would know nothing was going on. There are however times and places for encryption. I personally want to know what is going on at places my loved ones are at IE school work or anywhere for that matter so i can help to keep them out of harms way. If you are infavor of fulltime encryption i suggest you find another hobby and quit this one Hoser147

 

[N_Jay]

Thlink about it , terriorists can get scanners that are not approved By the FCC and can monitor anything they want from outside the U.S.. . . . Hoser147

THAT is what ENCRYPTION is for. :roll:

It is not a matter of the people here being "for" or "against" encryption
(or digital, or Trunking, or 800 MHz, or Two Way)
(Each an example of a technology change that 'inconvenienced' those who's hobby it is to 'eavesdrop' on public safety communications).

The issue is understanding the FACTS about encryption and its use.

Even when almost everything is encrypted, there will still be more to listen to than when dispatch was on 1780 AM. (Remember back then the "return channel" was from a call box and you never heard that traffic.)

 

[SIMON11]

My thoughts (I'm a fire chief). I think that radio traffic on Police, Fire and EMS channels ought to be "in the clear", with exceptions. The exceptions are: for police - if radio traffic is such that the bad guys hearing them, and thus thwarting an operation or put an officer's life in danger. For fire, we occasionally have a guy get hurt. I'd rather tell the firefighter's significant other in person, rather than hearing the firefighter's name on the radio. For EMS, patient confidentiality needs to be maintained.

In all aspects of life people get hurt and should have confidentiality. Does this mean that all services should be encrypted? The police in the UK sometimes use the old analogue when the digital is playing up. I find that officers are asked to use a telephone if the info is that confidential. I would have thought that everyone carries a mobile telephone in these times. Especially the police and fire service if only to contact relatives in an emergency.
I feel naked going out without mine.

 

[bassmkenk2508]

Well most encryption when set up properly, allows for a unit in the clear to transmit and be heard by a unit that is encrypted. And it can also be set in the programming so that a unit that is transmitting in encrypted mode can be recieved by a unit that does not have encryption selected . The most common example will be ICE / Customs marine and mobile units, you will pick up one half in the clear, also Coast Guard is commonly heard doing this.

As to the interoperability, at least in our scenario, there is a "common key " that is assigned to the Interoperability channels and talkgroups. The State of Florida also has this done in their radios for some of the mutual talkgroups.

Training definitely plays a part....

I have personally scanned and heard that method before. Keesler AFB, MS - military police, command nets, etc. - has that capability.
One user transmits encrypted then the other user would respond "10-4" or whatever.

 

[grem467]

one of the biggest reasons you are seeing more and more encryption is audio quality.

with analog, the encryption makes the audio sound HORRID (DES, DES-XL as an example)
with digital, there is ZERO loss of quality between enc and non enc...

 

[bassmkenk2508]

one of the biggest reasons you are seeing more and more encryption is audio quality.

with analog, the encryption makes the audio sound HORRID (DES, DES-XL as an example)
with digital, there is ZERO loss of quality between enc and non enc...

Well, actually a digital transmission mode would be the reason for the audio quality. But digital is not encryption. Encryption is an add-on feature.

 

[grem467]

what i was getting at is that under the old DES-XL type systems, audio quality suffered as compared to un-enc analog audio (not to mention TX/RX range), on the digital systems enc or un-enc audio sounds exactly the same and gets the same range.

 

[Drifter]

I've been really pleased with this thread! There are any number of reason here that honestly never occured to me.

I'm still hoping that Alexandria was joking about converting refuse collection to encrypted though. It's actually fun to listen to them sometimes, especiall the calls that go like...
"can you go back to this-street and pick up the trash they just brought out, the lady calling says her husband was running late for work and missed you guys". The truck guys will go off for about 4-5 minutes after that, it's hillarious!!!! I swear the dispatcher does it just to jerk their chain.

 

[DaveIN]

I can see a use for encryption in some cases, but how many times have scannests and hams' come to the aid of agencies because they were listening to the publice service or trunked radio system?!?

Many a time I have monitored one side of a so called encrypted comm when only one side was using encryption, with the conversation in the clear, and being no where near a level of sensitive information. Really makes you think that our tax dollars could have been spent more wisely on something else.