How SDS100/200 handles an encrypted signal?

[n1chu]

How do the SDS scanners handle an encrypted signal? I believe Uniden has been required by law to build scanners that ignore encryption when heard and continue scanning. It’s my understanding the ECPA has made this monitoring of encrypted illegal to even listen to the unintelligible encrypted audio. Can anyone verify this?

This is not a rant on encryption, merely a question regarding how the scanner handles encryption...

 

[ff2sherman]

NO Scanner can Decode Encryption.

 

[ab5r]

Simply stated, you will not hear encrypted transmission, scanner will skip and continue scanning.

 

[KevinC]

I believe Uniden has been required by law to build scanners that ignore encryption when heard and continue scanning. It’s my understanding the ECPA has made this monitoring of encrypted illegal to even listen to the unintelligible encrypted audio. Can anyone verify this?

I'm pretty sure that is an incorrect statement.

 

[n1chu]

NO Scanner can Decode Encryption.

I said nothing about decoding. What happens when an encrypted transmission is received by the SDS’s? How does the scanner handle it?

 

[doctordialtone]

The scanner may briefly flash "ENC" on the screen but continues scanning.

 

[n1chu]

The scanner may briefly flash "ENC" on the screen but continues scanning.

So, in other words, the scanner ignores encrypted transmissions? Now, it’s my understanding the FCC has required any new scanners such as the SDS100/200 to do just that. Can you comment on that? Further I believe the FCC has declared listening to a transmission is illegal... even though the audio we hear is garbled and unintelligible? At least that’s how the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) or as it is amended states. Or, it may be the Communications Act of 1986 as amended... but I know it’s in either one of those statutes.

 

[u2brent]

Listening to the garble is not the same as decoding encryption and AFAIK is not illegal, Uniden just determined that consumers don't want to be bothered by it so they skip it by default (and no option to change this behavior was provided). You can log E TG's and RIDS using Discovery Modes. The Whistler scanners provide user options concerning this.

 

[Firekite]

You are WAY overthinking this. No radio of any sort, “scanner” or otherwise, can decrypt encrypted traffic for which it does not have the proper keys. ANY radio with receive function can be made to listen on any frequency it’s already capable of listening on, which may or may not include various analog and digital modes and scrambling techniques and encryption, providing you with the the meaningless gibberish noise that results from encrypted broadcast. There’s zero point in telling anyone they’re not allowed to listen to that meaningless encrypted gibberish noise and no reliable way to prevent someone from doing so if they wish.

My 436HP will silence encrypted gibberish for me, even with Close Call alerts, to protect my ears from being subjected to the harsh and unpleasant sounds that result. As a favor to me, it may realize it’s encrypted in normal scan mode and move on to continue scanning for something it can actually decide. Neither Uniden nor I need any law to say don’t subject yourself to the harsh and useless noise resulting from encrypted radio traffic.

 

[doctordialtone]

so they skip it by default

Skip it AND mute it.

From the manual:
Encryption Muting - APCO P25 encrypted voice is muted automatically.

 

[u2brent]

Skip it AND mute it.

From the manual:
Encryption Muting - APCO P25 encrypted voice is muted automatically.

Earlier x36 firmware versions did not.. Or at least it left stuff slip through.. They've got it perfected now.

 

[n1chu]

I'm pretty sure that is an incorrect statement.

I asked for verification. Not opposing opinions... Have you read the Acts relating to with I refer to?

You are WAY overthinking this. No radio of any sort, “scanner” or otherwise, can decrypt encrypted traffic for which it does not have the proper keys. ANY radio with receive function can be made to listen on any frequency it’s already capable of listening on, which may or may not include various analog and digital modes and scrambling techniques and encryption, providing you with the the meaningless gibberish noise that results from encrypted broadcast. There’s zero point in telling anyone they’re not allowed to listen to that meaningless encrypted gibberish noise and no reliable way to prevent someone from doing so if they wish.

My 436HP will silence encrypted gibberish for me, even with Close Call alerts, to protect my ears from being subjected to the harsh and unpleasant sounds that result. As a favor to me, it may realize it’s encrypted in normal scan mode and move on to continue scanning for something it can actually decide. Neither Uniden nor I need any law to say don’t subject yourself to the harsh and useless noise resulting from encrypted radio traffic.

No. it’s you who are overthinking it. The question is simple. At no time did I mention decoding. It olays no part in this thread. And I am aware without the proprietary info and equipment that is not possible. I refer to the garbled audio that is supposed to be ignored by the scanner by design. This is dictated by the FCC. Sure, it’s only common sense that we should choose to not listen to an encrypted signal, but why the FCC felt it necessary to mandate manufacturers design their scanners to ignore encrypted signals, declaring it against the law to allow building a scanner that stops on an encrypted signal and remains there until the transmission drops, and further telling users they are not to listen to the encryption under penalty of the law, even if they have a scanner that predates the mandate is anybody’s guess. It’s knowingly an unenforceable law. But there are penalties. It’s spelled out in the Act. I’m beginning to be of the opinion nobody reads these laws pertaining to scanning.

 

[n1chu]

Earlier x36 firmware versions did not.. Or at least it left stuff slip through.. They've got it perfected now.

Not quite. I monitored an encrypted signal on my SDS100 this morning. I agree it just a glitch but occasionally, they skip through. As for Uniden doing it out of a concern for their customers, not true. It was mandated by the FCC.

 

[ofd8001]

I suspect there is something in the scanner's firmware that detects if a signal is encrypted. When the scanner does detects an encrypted signal, it may do that "ENC" flash, then move on. If you are holding on a frequency that is encrypted, you get to look at the "ENC" during the duration of the transmission.

Exactly how the scanner does this is most likely a trade secret. I'm pretty sure when Uniden or any scanner manufacturer, submits a scanner for FCC's blessing, the manufacturer probably has to explain a little more how this is done. Whether the FCC does any verification testing, I don't know.

 

[u2brent]

I guess Whistlers are not in compliance with the law
Sometimes the scanner misses the Enc bit when decoding and let's a bit pass, usually due to poor decode conditions.

 

[hiegtx]

I guess Whistlers are not in compliance with the law
Sometimes the scanner misses the Enc bit when decoding and let's a bit pass, usually due to poor decode conditions.

Also, with the Whistlers and the previous GRE manufactured scanners such as the PSR-800), you can select whether the scanner should ignore encrypted transmissions, or stop on them & play a selectable sound, such as a "phone busy" signal.

 

[u2brent]

I asked for verification. Not opposing opinions... Have you read the Acts relating to with I refer to?

I think you need a law expert to determine the proper response.

 

[Firekite]

No. it’s you who are overthinking it. The question is simple.

No, it isn’t a simple question, at least not the way you asked it. But you seem to think you already know the answer, so why ask it?

It’s spelled out in the Act. I’m beginning to be of the opinion nobody reads these laws pertaining to scanning.

Awesome. Since you’ve confirmed it, please cite it and provide a link to the relevant section of the law or the FCC rules so that we can all benefit from what you’ve found. I’m not aware of any law or rule stating it’s illegal for a radio to receive encrypted transmissions nor any rule mandating that a scanner manufacturer create and implement technology to skip over such transmissions. I look forward to learning from your link.

 

[KevinC]

I asked for verification. Not opposing opinions... Have you read the Acts relating to with I refer to?

No. it’s you who are overthinking it. The question is simple. At no time did I mention decoding. It olays no part in this thread. And I am aware without the proprietary info and equipment that is not possible. I refer to the garbled audio that is supposed to be ignored by the scanner by design. This is dictated by the FCC. Sure, it’s only common sense that we should choose to not listen to an encrypted signal, but why the FCC felt it necessary to mandate manufacturers design their scanners to ignore encrypted signals, declaring it against the law to allow building a scanner that stops on an encrypted signal and remains there until the transmission drops, and further telling users they are not to listen to the encryption under penalty of the law, even if they have a scanner that predates the mandate is anybody’s guess. It’s knowingly an unenforceable law. But there are penalties. It’s spelled out in the Act. I’m beginning to be of the opinion nobody reads these laws pertaining to scanning.

No, I haven't read the "Acts" to which you are referring...have you? If so can you cite the specific part that states that encryption must be completely ignored? The reason I ask this is how does one know what they are listening to is an encrypted transmission? It would seem odd that the mere act of listening to noise would be illegal...but I could be wrong.

 

[slicerwizard]

Where's that "What's your favorite troll thread" thread when I need it?