FCC Opens Rulemaking to Allow Encryption in Amateur Radio Service

[KF4ZMB]

Petitioning the FCC regarding encryption on public safety frequencies is not possible. I've not seen or heard of the opportunity to do so.



This is a broad sweeping statement and you haven't provided any data to support it. I would enjoy seeing your reasons for saying it. Unfortunately, by making this statement you are setting yourself up to be the only person on this thread who understands the situation while everyone else is making comments out of ignorance and alarm that you term as "crying." You are venturing into "ad hominem" argument and that is never productive.

I would enjoy a point by point discussion of this proposal before the FCC using factual information and with not one statement belittling those with concerns.

**EDIT** Remember that our moderators are volunteers and most have been members here for an extended period of years. Wayne has contributed more hours to this site than I can count. Joining into this discussion with less than 12 posts and criticizing him is not appropriate.

I agree! I think, and I am NOT trying to start a political discussion here at all, that our society has become one full of generalizations all without the need to support any of them (watch your choice of news channel tonight for examples of this) that some people feel that this is the way things are supposed to work. As I have said in a previous post on this thread, statements of "always" and "never" are illogical, and yet they almost always seem to be the statements made by people who, rather than supporting their own positions, seek only to tear down those with who they disagree.

As you pointed out, not one part of his rant gives any reason to show why his claim is superior to the others. It is, it seems, simply because he asserts that it is. As I said before, this is just sad.

Christian KF4ZMB

 

[alexmahoney]

No one has even proposed that "family emergencies" would be allowed under a rule change IF it occurred. The proposal to the FCC deals with emergency communications and training for emergency situations of a governmental assistance nature. Not ham specific, or family specific, "emergencies". Not to mention that if an emergency is bad enough with my family that I need to use ham radio for it then I don't really care who all hears about it. In fact, if I am using it to "hail" help then I want as many people, amateur radio operators or otherwise, to be able to hear my transmission.

Also, this issue, on this board, has nothing to do with any other encryption issues, so of course we would not mention opposition to encryption on other bands (and the few that have have been labeled "conspiracy theorists" by at least one other poster). Not that it your's or anyone else's business, but back when I lived in Orlando I did petition the Mayor and Police Chief NOT to switch Orlando Police Communications to an encrypted system because I personally believe that this type of thing can be, and is sometimes, abused by governments. I was not the only one who did this either. I am at a loss as to how you or anyone, after reading responses on this board, are supposed to know what every poster has or has not done in the past.

I am at a loss as to how you can come in telling everyone else what they have done wrong with an air of inflated superiority, and then, with a straight face, accuse those who are contributing to the debate as being "bickering children". There has been some bickering on this topic, but very little compared to most topics that are controversial on most other boards on the internet.

The when "all else fails" approach just does not hold water in 2013. Sorry, not trying to be rude, but it doesn't. IF every other system in place to pass sensitive governmental information failed (and that is what the proposal is all about) then it is HIGHLY likely that amateur radio would also fail.

Christian KF4ZMB

Christian, First off "when all else fails" means that when police, fire and other radio and comm systems fail, Amateur radio is there to be used.

Second, you need to google radio reference and see just how hated this board's mods really are. I wouldn't lie here about that.

Third, what I stated about RR is the 100% Truth. This thread is one prime example. I have been around since IRC first started publicly in 95. There is no reason to have a power trip, especially in this board.

If Wayne was so helpful, then maybe you need to think about why he chewed someone out via email for just spelling and grammar issues. That is just wrong.

The issue of Encryption is NOT going to go away and trying to stop discussions of it here are fruitless because it is a hot topic. I just saw a "sticky" by Wayne that said if anybody discussed encryption, they would get an infraction, now that is uncalled for considering the state of police comms in the US right now.

That's why I stated that some of you don't want it in police radios but you refuse to make your voice heard and that is why more and more agencies are encrypting.

As a former Ham, encryption is ruining amateur radio because we have no way to keep up in times of crisis with the agencies around us. How can we help the police if we don't know what they are doing?????

I know several agencies in the US who refuse to encrypt because the public helps them daily. and furthermore, I refuse to not know where the police are or what they are doing, that is endangering the public right there.

Scanner apps are not public enemy number one. encryption is.

I'm not angry, but this whole RR service needs a revamp just like the agencies need to stop encrypting.

Alex Mahoney

 

[alexmahoney]

I agree! I think, and I am NOT trying to start a political discussion here at all, that our society has become one full of generalizations all without the need to support any of them (watch your choice of news channel tonight for examples of this) that some people feel that this is the way things are supposed to work. As I have said in a previous post on this thread, statements of "always" and "never" are illogical, and yet they almost always seem to be the statements made by people who, rather than supporting their own positions, seek only to tear down those with who they disagree.

As you pointed out, not one part of his rant gives any reason to show why his claim is superior to the others. It is, it seems, simply because he asserts that it is. As I said before, this is just sad.

Christian KF4ZMB

I disagree, Some of you are making it known about your views on amateur encryption. why not start a proposal to stop agency encryption??? You also say there is no way to do so but yet there is. The same way that ham made a proposal to have encryption is the same way you can stop encryption and also by speaking to your local politicians(insert gripe here).

And, to quote you on my rant, none of you make sense when you ban people for disagreeing with you or for being negative. there is no reason to ban someone just because he disagrees with you.

Giving people infractions for discussing encryption is "ILLOGICAL" when encryption is a hot topic that you, yes you, can stop or make your voice heard about it.

while you make arguments about my posts, I can do the same about yours.

 

[KF4ZMB]

Christian, First off "when all else fails" means that when police, fire and other radio and comm systems fail, Amateur radio is there to be used.

Second, you need to google radio reference and see just how hated this board's mods really are. I wouldn't lie here about that.

Third, what I stated about RR is the 100% Truth. This thread is one prime example. I have been around since IRC first started publicly in 95. There is no reason to have a power trip, especially in this board.

If Wayne was so helpful, then maybe you need to think about why he chewed someone out via email for just spelling and grammar issues. That is just wrong.

The issue of Encryption is NOT going to go away and trying to stop discussions of it here are fruitless because it is a hot topic. I just saw a "sticky" by Wayne that said if anybody discussed encryption, they would get an infraction, now that is uncalled for considering the state of police comms in the US right now.

That's why I stated that some of you don't want it in police radios but you refuse to make your voice heard and that is why more and more agencies are encrypting.

As a former Ham, encryption is ruining amateur radio because we have no way to keep up in times of crisis with the agencies around us. How can we help the police if we don't know what they are doing?????

I know several agencies in the US who refuse to encrypt because the public helps them daily. and furthermore, I refuse to not know where the police are or what they are doing, that is endangering the public right there.

Scanner apps are not public enemy number one. encryption is.

I'm not angry, but this whole RR service needs a revamp just like the agencies need to stop encrypting.

Alex Mahoney

I do, believe it or not, understand what "when all else fails" means. I also have a valid response that, in 2013, it is highly unlikely that all public safety communications systems would fail and amateur radio alone among all other redudant systems the public safety groups have in place would remain functional, and that furthermore if this did happen there would be a lot bigger things to worry about than if this or that tramission was encrypted. That is the issue at hand with regards to whether or not ham radio should be encrypted for emergencies. I have been an amateur radio operator since 1998 and have worked for more than one EOC and/or 911 Center. ALL of which had plans in place to use ARES/Hams if needed. NONE of which would have ever considered using ham radio to pass sensitive information. I can only speak for the agencies I have worked with or am familiar with, but that is really all any of us can do.

Honestly, and this is not meant rude to you or anyone else, I don't need to base my opinions, or views, off of any google search, for anything, period. I never said you were lying. You probably believe this to be true. The point I made was that it was a little hypocritical to come in with an accusatory tone with which to call others out for being, what you view as, accusatory. That assessment still stands in my view.

I never said Wayne was helpful, not helpful, or just there. That was another poster, so I am not sure why this was addressed to me.

You did not say that "some" of us did not want it in police radios but refused to make our voices heard. You said that none of us had made our voices heard about concerns over encryption on police radios. I pointed out that I had. I am sure others have also. Orlando, like it or not, is in the back pocket of the theme park industry. That is the reason they are encrypted, I believe. When crime was on the rise on I-Drive and Orange County Sector 6 (the sector that covers Disney World) this could look bad for tourists, so the radio needed to be encrypted. I am not saying this was the only reason, but those familiar with Central Florida politics will agree this played a role. So, no matter how many of us complained about them going encrypted (including other agencies and dispatch centers who did business with them) Orlando PD still went encrypted and Orange County Sheriff's Office has followed suit. I am sure the same is true in other parts of the US. It is unfair to assert that we as amateurs have not done enough to stop that encryption, BUT at the same time we should not fight encryption on ham frequencies. Whether or not amateur radio goes encrypted for ARES type purposes I doubt that many radio administrators of encrypted public safety agencies are going to allow hams with encrypted radios to monitor what is going on daily. Therefore, they will still won't know what police agencies are doing. Be that as it may, again, this thread was about encryption on amateur radios for use in emergencies. Not encryption on police radios, nor even allowing hams to monitor encrypted police comms.

I also know police departments that appreciate public help. Again I do not see how this applies in this case. On one side you seem to be saying encryption must come to ham radio, and the other side you are talking about how bad encryption is.

I never said scanner apps are a problem nor will I ever. I always, as a dispatcher, appreciated the public providing help. Again I do not know why this was addressed to me.

Again I ask, because of your last line, do you want to stop encryption or allow it? I want to stop it from coming to ham radio, and I said so here because that's what this thread was about. I also do not believe it belongs on public safety radios in most cases, but that is a discussion for another thread.

Christian KF4ZMB

 

[KF4ZMB]

I disagree, Some of you are making it known about your views on amateur encryption. why not start a proposal to stop agency encryption??? You also say there is no way to do so but yet there is. The same way that ham made a proposal to have encryption is the same way you can stop encryption and also by speaking to your local politicians(insert gripe here).

And, to quote you on my rant, none of you make sense when you ban people for disagreeing with you or for being negative. there is no reason to ban someone just because he disagrees with you.

Giving people infractions for discussing encryption is "ILLOGICAL" when encryption is a hot topic that you, yes you, can stop or make your voice heard about it.

while you make arguments about my posts, I can do the same about yours.

I really have no clue why you made this response to a quote of my post. But I will say the reason we are speaking about ham radio encryption on this thread, and not other encryption is because that is the topic of this thread. That is how discussion forums should work. Discussion is made on the topic of the thread, and other topics are posted on their own thread. Sometimes people get off topic, but mostly people try to adhere to the topic at hand. This is the same for discussion boards the internet over not just here.

With regards to me "banning" people. I am not a moderator nor do I have the ability to ban anyone. Obviously you have previously used this or another RR board under a different name and were banned at that time, or you know of someone who was banned. Either way, I have no control over that, so I am not sure why you would make this claim in response to one of my posts.

My "illogical" response dealt with people making always and never statements. Sort of like when you asserted that none of us had any issues with police radio encryption, or when other posters have asserted that "no EM" would do this or that. Furthermore illogical as I used it dealt with logical arguments as studied in the academic field of logic. This was not a character attack at all. In the field of logic always and never arguments are illogical because they imply knowledge of things that cannot be had such as knowing how every person feels about a topic or knowing that something will never happen (which is near impossible to prove anyway). I never made a comment that discussing encryption was illogical since encryption on the amateur bands is what this thread is all about.

I also never made arguments about your posts. I critiqued them yes, but then what do you expect when you make your first post so inflammatory and full of unprovable assertions? You are entitled to your opinion sure, but so is everyone. That was one of my main points. You asserted the infallible superiority of your positions without any supporting evidence as to why your position was superior. Furthermore, you seem to vacillate between encryption being needed (amateur radio) and terrible (police communications). Your stance seems to be which ever one will allow you to argue or post rants.

As it is your posts, thus far, seem like little more than an attempt to start a flame war, so I will not respond to any additional posts from you. I wouldn't even have responded to this one if you had not implied that I somehow banned people from this board, and I wanted to clear that up.

Christian KF4ZMB

 

[MTS2000des]

Christian, First off "when all else fails" means that when police, fire and other radio and comm systems fail, Amateur radio is there to be used.


As a former Ham, encryption is ruining amateur radio because we have no way to keep up in times of crisis with the agencies around us. How can we help the police if we don't know what they are doing?????

I know several agencies in the US who refuse to encrypt because the public helps them daily. and furthermore, I refuse to not know where the police are or what they are doing, that is endangering the public right there.

Scanner apps are not public enemy number one. encryption is.

I'm not angry, but this whole RR service needs a revamp just like the agencies need to stop encrypting.

Alex Mahoney

So, you're NOT a ham. You're NOT a cop. You're NOT anything other than someone who has a very misguided view of what amateur radio is.

First off, public safety should maintain redundant systems- the "when all else fails" whackerism mantra is propagated by the ARRL and a handful of self-important niwits who insert themselves into situations they have no business being in.

Second, as a close to 30 year ham, I've NEVER felt the need to encrypt any traffic I've passed while: working public service events, participating in bonafide disaster drills, working Red Cross shelters, etc. I've NEVER had ANY served agency ask or request I utilize encryption of any kind.

If they did, I'd tell them I'm unable and maybe they should design a more robust system with encryption in the part 90 LMR service and invest in that versus relying on ham radio.

The "when all else fails" hot air is just that: a bunch of hot air blown out the rear ends of self-important people who have some weird desire to insert themselves into places they really have no business.

 

[SCPD]

Alex, you keep comparing public safety encryption with amateur radio encryption. I think they are two different animals. Public safety radio involves the safety of law enforcement officers engaged in very dangerous circumstances. I don't see how anything on ham radio can compare. We have been given a chance to respond to a petition to allow encryption on ham radio and no such chance has been given in regard to public safety encryption. This is an apple to orange comparison and to hold amateurs to a standard where they are being hypocritical for not taking measures to lobby against both is not relevant. If the FCC opens up public safety encryption to comment I'm sure the response would be overwhelming. We both know that this FCC action is not going to happen as we know that public safety encryption is not going away for reasons not under the control of amateur radio licensees or members of this website.

Wayne has been helpful and I am the one that wrote that. I stand by that statement. He has knowledge of many radio systems in California and access to information very few people have. As moderator his manner can be a bit harsh at times, but that does not diminish the amount of time he has put into this website. If you don't like what he is doing volunteer and maybe you can replace him.

If you want to volunteer to make this website better you need to present a different attitude. Your air of superiority will not serve you well as it has not served you well on this thread. I had some thoughts that you might be a troll and am not entirely convinced that you are not.

If you think that this entire website needs to be overhauled, by all means contact Lindsey with suggestions. If you already have and did not get the answer you wanted remember he owns the whole thing. If you don't like the site then start your own and/or stop visiting here.

 

[SCPD]

So, you're NOT a ham. You're NOT a cop. You're NOT anything other than someone who has a very misguided view of what amateur radio is.

First off, public safety should maintain redundant systems- the "when all else fails" whackerism mantra is propagated by the ARRL and a handful of self-important niwits who insert themselves into situations they have no business being in.

Second, as a close to 30 year ham, I've NEVER felt the need to encrypt any traffic I've passed while: working public service events, participating in bonafide disaster drills, working Red Cross shelters, etc. I've NEVER had ANY served agency ask or request I utilize encryption of any kind.

If they did, I'd tell them I'm unable and maybe they should design a more robust system with encryption in the part 90 LMR service and invest in that versus relying on ham radio.

The "when all else fails" hot air is just that: a bunch of hot air blown out the rear ends of self-important people who have some weird desire to insert themselves into places they really have no business.

I agree with some of what you say regarding "When All Else Fails." When communication systems go down and don't think it doesn't, the help of amateur radio operators can be quite helpful. In the area I live in telephone and internet service goes down about once every other year, even without disasters. I live in a small, somewhat remote county of only 12,000 people with the two country region having a population of about 32,000 in an area about 240 miles long and 70 miles wide.

During disasters public safety communications systems are quite busy. The role of amateur radio is to provide communications between shelters and to pass health and welfare traffic.

Amateurs are invited to become a member of the disaster community here. The sheriff of one of the counties occasionally attends meetings of our local amateur radio club. The club provides communications for special events, such as ultra marathons and bike races greater than 100 miles in some mountainous terrain. We are asked to provide this service and don't push organizations to use our help. We have been asked to work with the Salvation Army on a regular basis, in fact, they provide us meeting room space. We have no whackers among our membership.

 

[zz0468]

Um... Wow. Where to start...

I saw someone suggest using FRS for emergency communications. Just what do you people NOT get on this issue???

Why not? It's yet another resource that can be used. It would be ridiculous to make it the only resource, but why not throw it into the mix?

Encryption is a winner on the ham bands because as I said in another thread, "when all else fails". This is not an ARRL creed, it is an amateur wide DIRECTIVE.

And just who's directive is that? After 35+ years as a ham, I've never gotten the memo.

Absolutely none of you understand what is going on here and yet you want to comment like this is tragedy.

None of us? Wow. Can we assume that you include yourself in that category? There's some pretty sharp people here, some of whom are well placed professionals in various public safety capacities. Pretty sure they know what's going on. Yeah, there are some "amateur amateurs" getting excited over the prospect of an orange vest and a badge for their windbreaker. But come on... "absolutely none of you"???

Encryption on Ham Radio would be a blessing when those times that OTHER forms of communication won't allow encryption due to power outages and other maladies.

I disagree. Ham radio's greatest benefit to the public is that it brings different resources to the party, not a duplicate of what's already out there. The more complex ham radio allows itself to get, the less utility it will have where it really shines - the ability to create reliable ad hoc networks on short notice with dissimilar types of gear. Encryption will force anyone opting for it away from the biggest single thing hams have to offer.

There will be times when YOU as an amateur, have to deal with a family crisis and i'm sure you don't want to broadcast info in the clear regarding your family.

That's what cellphones are for. If cellphones are down and it's that critical, saying anything in the clear is less of a concern to me.

And the thing that is SOOO darn funny is you people petition the FCC to stop encryption on Amateur bands...

The actual petition is to ALLOW encryption, not stop it.

...but yet you won't petition the FCC to stop encryption on police, fire and other radios. THAT is really sad.

First, the notion that a petition by amateurs could stop public safety agencies from encrypting their radio systems is just silly. There are a number of things driving encryption, but public concern from a segment of the population that constitutes about 0.2% of the total isn't going to have a whole lot of clout, especially when the most compelling arguement against is that their expensive scanners will be rendered useless. Guess who doesn't care! That would be the other 99.8% of the population.

Amateur Radio is a fraternity of ADULTS and KIDS that have gotten their licenses and yet I see nearly 85% of this board bickering with each other, banning people for stupid reasons.

And along comes you to save the day with, what, your first 10 posts pretty much bickering? Atta boy! You show us how the big boys do it downtown. :roll:

Listen, this is a public board, the mods here don't own this, Lindsay does. I think there needs to be a better way to run this board without all this childish crap that is going on here daily.

Pretty sure the mods run things the way Lindsey wants them to, but it's sure not up to any of us to say so.

Dan got chewed out by Wayne for spelling errors??? Come on people, wake up. this board needs everybody to grow up and act responsibly toward each other. and Mods, if there is something you don't agree with, give a verbal or written warning and get rid of this stupid infraction system.

WTF? I though this was a thread about encryption on the ham bands. Reading your post here is like playing mental ping pong. This paragraph is about encryption, that paragraph is about... SQUIRREL! :roll:

Radio as a whole needs to be back in the PUBLIC's hands, not some government big wig who thinks that we suck and don't need to know everything that goes on.

You are demonstrating a profound lack of understanding about what's driving the move toward encryption.

and this goes for the radio manufactuers as well. They need to stop forcing these expensive radio systems down the taxpayer's throats, because we are the ones who ultimately pay the price for them.

This is free market capitalism at work. I guess even our economic model has a down side. *shrug*

 

[AK9R]

I agree with some of what you say regarding "When All Else Fails." When communication systems go down and don't think it doesn't, the help of amateur radio operators can be quite helpful.

A few years ago, I attended an Auxiliary Communications (AUXCOM) workshop conducted by folks from the U.S. DHS Office of Emergency Communications. The workshop leaders were all experienced with emergency communications at the state or federal EOC level and were also licensed amateur radio operators. They pointed out that the "when all else fails" motto promoted by the ARRL is potentially offensive to folks in public safety who have poured considerable planning and millions of (taxpayer) dollars into hardened communications systems. The OEC folks suggested that the motto should be "when all else gets overloaded".

 

[DaveNF2G]

The OEC folks suggested that the motto should be "when all else gets overloaded".

I like it!

"When normal communications paths are overloaded, amateur radio can provide additional capacity."

That is much closer to the typical disaster scenario than almost anything else that has been said by the pro-encryption crowd (or by many ARES proponents).

 

[prcguy]

I'm now convinced HT220 non encrypted lives in a gopher hole thinking that public service comms will never fail in a disaster and am getting a bit pissed off along with other amateur radio operators on RR who volunteer time and equipment for training exercises THAT WE ARE ASKED TO PARTICIPATE IN from local hospitals, etc.

I suspect if there is a disaster in his area and communications fail he will be the firs to point fingers and say "I told you so" when communications systems may not have bee designed well enough to survive or to call responding hams "whackers" when they actually help bridge the communications gap when all else has failed.
prcguy

So, you're NOT a ham. You're NOT a cop. You're NOT anything other than someone who has a very misguided view of what amateur radio is.

First off, public safety should maintain redundant systems- the "when all else fails" whackerism mantra is propagated by the ARRL and a handful of self-important niwits who insert themselves into situations they have no business being in.

Second, as a close to 30 year ham, I've NEVER felt the need to encrypt any traffic I've passed while: working public service events, participating in bonafide disaster drills, working Red Cross shelters, etc. I've NEVER had ANY served agency ask or request I utilize encryption of any kind.

If they did, I'd tell them I'm unable and maybe they should design a more robust system with encryption in the part 90 LMR service and invest in that versus relying on ham radio.

The "when all else fails" hot air is just that: a bunch of hot air blown out the rear ends of self-important people who have some weird desire to insert themselves into places they really have no business.

 

[alexmahoney]

Alex, you keep comparing public safety encryption with amateur radio encryption. I think they are two different animals. Public safety radio involves the safety of law enforcement officers engaged in very dangerous circumstances. I don't see how anything on ham radio can compare. We have been given a chance to respond to a petition to allow encryption on ham radio and no such chance has been given in regard to public safety encryption. This is an apple to orange comparison and to hold amateurs to a standard where they are being hypocritical for not taking measures to lobby against both is not relevant. If the FCC opens up public safety encryption to comment I'm sure the response would be overwhelming. We both know that this FCC action is not going to happen as we know that public safety encryption is not going away for reasons not under the control of amateur radio licensees or members of this website.

Wayne has been helpful and I am the one that wrote that. I stand by that statement. He has knowledge of many radio systems in California and access to information very few people have. As moderator his manner can be a bit harsh at times, but that does not diminish the amount of time he has put into this website. If you don't like what he is doing volunteer and maybe you can replace him.

If you want to volunteer to make this website better you need to present a different attitude. Your air of superiority will not serve you well as it has not served you well on this thread. I had some thoughts that you might be a troll and am not entirely convinced that you are not.

If you think that this entire website needs to be overhauled, by all means contact Lindsey with suggestions. If you already have and did not get the answer you wanted remember he owns the whole thing. If you don't like the site then start your own and/or stop visiting here.

Encryption is encryption, no matter what the service is. Amateur or public safety. That's why there are problems. People think there are 2 separate encryption issues.

The basis behind my post is because this so called "whacker" mentality by some of you is just downright disgusting. There are no crazy people behind encryption being used on amateur bands. Times are changing people, If you can't understand that radio comms are moving forward, then i can't help you understand anything.

 

[N8OHU]

I'm now convinced HT220 non encrypted lives in a gopher hole thinking that public service comms will never fail in a disaster and am getting a bit pissed off along with other amateur radio operators on RR who volunteer time and equipment for training exercises THAT WE ARE ASKED TO PARTICIPATE IN from local hospitals, etc.

I suspect if there is a disaster in his area and communications fail he will be the firs to point fingers and say "I told you so" when communications systems may not have bee designed well enough to survive or to call responding hams "whackers" when they actually help bridge the communications gap when all else has failed.
prcguy

Indeed; if the agencies we work with know what we can and can't do, they won't ask us to do it. They will use the allowances in the current rules as they have, and pass traffic as they always have. If, however, we gain the ability to send encrypted traffic when needed, then they will use it and we will do it. And yes, things do fail, and the smarter agencies know that even the best preparation on their part won't stop it; it doesn't matter how many redundant systems they set up when the antennas for those systems are on the ground because the disaster caused the tower they were on to collapse.

 

[alexmahoney]

I'm now convinced HT220 non encrypted lives in a gopher hole thinking that public service comms will never fail in a disaster and am getting a bit pissed off along with other amateur radio operators on RR who volunteer time and equipment for training exercises THAT WE ARE ASKED TO PARTICIPATE IN from local hospitals, etc.

I suspect if there is a disaster in his area and communications fail he will be the firs to point fingers and say "I told you so" when communications systems may not have bee designed well enough to survive or to call responding hams "whackers" when they actually help bridge the communications gap when all else has failed.
prcguy

There is no such thing as whackers here in this issue. I am getting pissed off because people just can't understand that radio comms are moving forward in technology and they can't deal with it. Encryption is encryption and there is absolutely no difference between amateur encryption and public safety encryption.

nearly every person here is using HIPPA to their own advantage by saying that amateurs can't relay messages that hospitals ask them to do. when you skim off the fat, I would love to see how some of you would answer when a person dies because you wouldn't relay personal info when asked to.

Amateur radio operators HAVE, in the past, done just that even before HIPPA became a standard.

I am sick and tired of other hams saying that hams relaying messages is wrong because in all reality, Hams are the bloodlines of comms when all other comms are down.

 

[zz0468]

Everyone knows RADIO IS NOT A PRIVATE PLATFORM,so why are they trying to make it such??

Because sometimes it NEEDS to be a private platform.

 

[zz0468]

Encryption is encryption, no matter what the service is. Amateur or public safety. That's why there are problems. People think there are 2 separate encryption issues.

You have a profoundly inadequate understanding of the needs for encryption in public safety, and the purposes and needs of amateur radio. Your lack of understanding is neatly encapsulated in the paragraph above.

 

[N8OHU]

You have a profoundly inadequate understanding of the needs for encryption in public safety, and the purposes and needs of amateur radio. Your lack of understanding is neatly encapsulated in the paragraph above.

True; hams don't need to be doing the encryption but we should be able to pass encrypted traffic if needed by the served agencies. It's permitted for that reason by the ITU, which it seems not a lot of hams are aware of, which is why Australia has been able to change its rules to allow it.

 

[zz0468]

...Hams are the bloodlines of comms when all other comms are down.

That's because of it's ability to quickly assemble itself into an ad-hoc network that is frequency agile, multi-mode capable, and mostly independent of specific makes and models of equipment.

Trying to create a duplicate of a public safety service with things like encryption would greatly reduce that ability, and restrict it to only those who have obtained specific equipment, and had it loaded with a specific encryption key. There may be rare instances where that's exactly what's needed, but it's not likely to change the shape of amateur emergency communications anytime soon.

 

[wb3v]

Amateur Radio Encryption

As an experimenter and a ham, I ran into the encryption issue decades ago on amateur radio, as some of us started experimenting with spread spectrum. Whether we tried hoppers or direct sequence spreading, the FCC view was that this was "encryption", so we needed to use silly schemes to provide "unencrypted" id. Point is that the word encryption can take on too many meanings and for amateur radio it needs to be clearly defined.