RCMP, other users and encryption

[BC_Scan]

Moderator Note: This topic was split from the TransLink thread as the discussion is primarily RCMP and other agencies utilizing encryption.

E-COMM in general should maybe look at other provinces and even states just south and consider the impacts that really had against the general public by not using encryption.

My friend this is a done deal. When the decision was made to switch from 800 to 700 MHz, RCMP told E-COMM that all users on it would be ENC. period . Finito. Done deal. No more question.
The only thing you can do is convince BC politicians to defund the RCMP. Make a provincial only police force like Ontario/Quebec, and maybe there is a snowballs hope in hell. A good start is Surrey only police,

 

[kayn1n32008]

My friend this is a done deal... and maybe there is a snowballs hope in hell. A good start is Surrey only police,

Won't happen. Look at other provinces. Alberta Sheriff's... AES encrypted. AHS... AES encrypted(except for MA to communicate with outsode agencies). EPS/CPS/LethbridgePS/LacombePS/MHPS... all AES256 encrypted. Even some municipal enforcement is using AES256.

Look at Ontario/Saskatchewan/Manitoba most police services are encrypted.

A snowball in hell has a less likely chance of melting, than being able to listen to law enforcement in Canada.

IF BC ends up dropping the RCMP, a provincial police force, would almost 100% be encrypted.

I'd wager that if BCEHS ever converts thier VHF conventional network, it will probably be encrypted.

 

[harryshute]

My friend this is a done deal. When the decision was made to switch from 800 to 700 MHz, RCMP told E-COMM that all users on it would be ENC. period . Finito. Done deal. No more question.
The only thing you can do is convince BC politicians to defund the RCMP. Make a provincial only police force like Ontario/Quebec, and maybe there is a snowballs hope in hell. A good start is Surrey only police,

We were fortunate in Alberta that the RCMP pressure tactics didn't work here regarding the provincial network. Lots to listen to especially Fire agencies CPO's and Taber Police. Why should the RCMP dictate that Fire and other agencies need to be encrypted.
Surrey is going to make the conversion from RCMP and now the City of Grande Prairie is too.
I've been following the California state directive to force law enforcement to broadcast dispatch in the clear. Palm Springs was totally encrypted. Now January 1st that will change.

 

[EWC_BDN]

The RCMP got bitten by being unencrypted in a shootout in Nova Scotia years ago. The un-encrypted communications was brought up as one of the issues in the report after the shooting. It was also the move from shotguns to carbines.

My understanding was that police communication being encrypted wasn't a new thing. I thought it was mandatory for them years ago. Just bringing it up as to why the RCMP is so touchy about this. They take this seriously and never want their officers to have to worry about what information they discuss on the radio.

You can disagree with it all you like, but to them it's their life. that's how they see it.

 

[lamarrsy]

Even though RCMP is a federal coast to coast service, they seem to have province-by-province rules for their comms, as here in province of Quebec, the RCMP is UHF P25 encrypted since at least 25 years.
If they had that P25+encryption in NS (or NB?) when there was this shooting, the lid that was streaming their comms just wouldn’t have been able to do such a disservice back then and created such a mess. But there don’t seem to be a general coast-to-coast rule on encrypted comms, as I can see.

 

[mmckenna]

I've been following the California state directive to force law enforcement to broadcast dispatch in the clear. Palm Springs was totally encrypted. Now January 1st that will change.

No such directive in the State of California.
There have been two bills submitted. The first one died. The second one hasn't moved and has been put off until sometime in 2024.

There is no mandate in the state of California to encrypt radio communications. Those that claim there is have not read the documents. The requirement was that no personal identifying information or criminal justice information be shared in the clear. That's nothing new and has been on the books for a very long time. Its also not limited to California, it's actually in the federal rules.

Individual agencies can decide how that want to handle PII/CJI. There's a lot of good justification for all the different options. Some choose to encrypt some channels, some choose to encrypt all, some choose to use other means of transferring this data.

I wouldn't rely on what the State of California does to dictate what RCMP does.


As for the proposed bill, there were more holes in it than Swiss cheese. Poorly written and not very well thought out. I doubt the second version of the bill is going to get much farther. It was clearly written by individuals that likely didn't know which end of the radio to talk into.

 

[EWC_BDN]

Even though RCMP is a federal coast to coast service, they seem to have province-by-province rules for their comms, as here in province of Quebec, the RCMP is UHF P25 encrypted since at least 25 years.
If they had that P25+encryption in NS (or NB?) when there was this shooting, the lid that was streaming their comms just wouldn’t have been able to do such a disservice back then and created such a mess. But there don’t seem to be a general coast-to-coast rule on encrypted comms, as I can see.

The specific thing I remember was some officers had been shot, but they wouldn't say anything on the radio about it. It was analog Type II trunking. They could have encrypted that, but hadn't . hard to say why because even small police departments in Manitoba on Motorola type II were encrypted since 2008 or so.

I tried to google some information about it. but that mass shooting in nova scotia was a much much bigger deal and has replaced all the results.

My issue is more the forcing the cost of it onto provincial park radios and Highway trucks. Wasteful in those cases.

 

[kayn1n32008]

My issue is more the forcing the cost of it onto provincial park radios and Highway trucks. Wasteful in those cases.

With single key AES, there is very little cost. Keys are loaded via software. Done and done.

While there is costs associated with using hardware encryption, it isn't hard to do, By using Over The Air Re-keying(OTAR), there is little difficulty in using and maintaining an encrypted radio network.

Once a radio is programmed, a single UKEK is loaded via a key-fill device, then the radio is OTAR'd securely, to key fill the radio with TEK's.

The only time a radio has to be re-keyed from a physical Key Variable Loader(KVL) is of the radio is zeroized. If it has a valid UKEK, it can be securely re-keyed over the radio network.

There is little additional time needed to set a radio up for encrypted comms vs clear comms these days.

Even though RCMP is a federal coast to coast service, they seem to have province-by-province rules for their comms, as here in province of Quebec, the RCMP is UHF P25 encrypted since at least 25 years.
If they had that P25+encryption in NS (or NB?) when there was this shooting, the lid that was streaming their comms just wouldn’t have been able to do such a disservice back then and created such a mess. But there don’t seem to be a general coast-to-coast rule on encrypted comms, as I can see.

Each division is responsible for their division communications. BUT, from HQ the decision was made that comm's need to be secured. Over the last decade or so, the RCMP have moved to encrypted comm's as radio networks were modernized. BC for example converted their conventional, analogue VHF network to conventional, P25 VHF, and use AES256. When E-COMM went from EDACS to P25 Phase 2, they started using AES256. In Alberta, when the RCMP went from conventional, analogue VHF to 700MHz P25 phase 1, they adopted AES256.

 

[beeperboy]

Each division is responsible for their division communications. BUT, from HQ the decision was made that comm's need to be secured. Over the last decade or so, the RCMP have moved to encrypted comm's as radio networks were modernized. BC for example converted their conventional, analogue VHF network to conventional, P25 VHF, and use AES256. When E-COMM went from EDACS to P25 Phase 2, they started using AES256. In Alberta, when the RCMP went from conventional, analogue VHF to 700MHz P25 phase 1, they adopted AES256.

The big push to encrypt came from CPIC. The RCMP were in jeopardy of losing access if they didn't stop transmitting personal info over the air.