Senator Becker re-introduces law enforcement radio encryption bill (SB 719)

[mike619]

I hope that bill get's blocked again as it has no benefit to the people it only benefits the press and organizations, if the people can't monitor the dispatch then the press should be blocked from it as well that's just my opinion we all have one.

 

[scannerboy02]

The bill got a due pass from the Public Safety Committee yesterday (4 to1) but is being referred back to the Appropriations Committee, I will need to watch the hearing video later tonight to find out why.

 

[AM909]

Are there not federal level laws that prevent unauthorized decryption of radio signals? Think DirecTV and Dish Network. What's the difference?

Prevent? Probably not.

18 U.S.C. 2511 et seq. describes the relevant crimes and punishment. 17 U.S.C. 1201 has some stuff, too.

 

[ElevatorsAndRadios]

Prevent? Probably not.

18 U.S.C. 2511 et seq. describes the relevant crimes and punishment. 17 U.S.C. 1201 has some stuff, too.

1201 seems to not apply to LMR as radio communications aren't copyrighted lol... but it would apply for the cable TV hypothetical

 

[Peter_SD911]

1201 seems to not apply to LMR as radio communications aren't copyrighted lol... but it would apply for the cable TV hypothetical

The ECPA of 1986 covers the issue.

Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

(Thank God for the statute of limitations...and the "D308" in those 2006's)

 

[jland138]

Senator Becker's SB 719 has not advanced and has been turned into a 2 year bill. It will be eligible for reconsideration during the next legislative session. See: https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/sites/sapro.senate.ca.gov/files/Hearing Results 5-18-23 Unofficial.pdf

 

[mmckenna]

• In the first half of a two-year legislative session, appropriations committees can designate “two-year bills.” These proposals will be paused until the following year. If passed by Jan. 31, they have another shot at survival.

So, nothing happening this year. Try again next year.

 

[scannerboy02]

Looks like the bill is back on the docket for this session. It's currently schedule for a hearing on January 18th.

This is YOUR opportunity to get involved. It doesn't matter what side of this you are on, if you have an opinion reach out to your elected representative and let them know. Also call in and speak during public comment. If you sit idle now, forever hold your peace.

 

[mmckenna]

It's going to appropriations, that just means they are looking at the costs. With the budget impacted in the coming year, adding a bunch of fluff probably isn't going to go over well.

 

[scannerboy02]

It's going to appropriations, that just means they are looking at the costs. With the budget impacted in the coming year, adding a bunch of fluff probably isn't going to go over well.

Correct, my above comment still stands.

I also don't really see how this bill would have a large fiscal impact on agencies. If the radios are already encrypted the majority of the expense has already been paid, all that needs to be done now is some reprogramming and that's not overly costly, hell, I'll do the work for free (**Some terms will apply, contact directly for details** ). If radios aren't currently encrypted continue business as usual.

 

[mmckenna]

Correct, my above comment still stands.

I also don't really see how this bill would have a large fiscal impact on agencies. If the radios are already encrypted the majority of the expense has already been paid, all that needs to be done now is some reprogramming and that's not overly costly, hell, I'll do the work for free (**Some terms will apply, contact directly for details** ). If radios aren't currently encrypted continue business as usual.

I think you are missing a few steps.

The requirements to protect PII/CJI that comes through CLETS still is in place and is not going away. This bill would not change that, and agencies can still run encryption. Agencies that have not encrypted yet still need to protect that CLETS info, so encryption is still one of the options.

So, just going through and reprogramming the radios doesn't solve the issue, and that's the problem with these bills written by people that don't understand the issue.

The costs will come from (depending on what they choose based on the options in the proposed bill):

-If they choose to unencrypt a talkgroup or channel, the radio needs to be touched by an experienced tech with the right software/cables/knowledge, and in some cases, back ground checks. Techs with those qualifications do not work for free, and no agency is going to eat the cost if they can bill back the state.

-If they choose to stream radio traffic, that will require suitable equipment to get audio out of the radio system/logging recorder and onto the internet in a secure way. It also requires the ability to redact/bleep out data that is protected, and suspend the feed if the incident requires it. That equipment is not cheap and no agency is going to eat that cost if the state will pay for it. IT guys don't work for free.

-If they choose to use the option to supply redacted recordings, then the cost would be on the requester, per this part of the proposed bill: "(C) Upon request and for a reasonable fee, providing access to encrypted communications to any interested person." In other words, the person doing the requesting has to pay for time and materials to pull that recording. The people that are permitted to touch those systems are not minimum wage kids, they are usually the people who manage the dispatch centers. They get paid quite well. Plus, there's all the time involved in redacting the PII/CJI that still won't get released, even if this bill passes. Our dispatch center manager gets paid well. She had to supply redacted recordings for a long incident to someone who requested it. It took her -hours- of work to comb through the recording and redact info that was not permitted to be released to the public. It was not cheap, but it was reasonable considering the requirements.

Nothing in this proposed bill removes the requirement that CLETS data be protected in all forms and at all times. It's another poorly thought out plan by a politician that may not even know which end of a radio to talk into.

 

[scannerboy02]

SB-719: Law enforcement agencies: radio communications.


On 22-JAN-24 the following history action was applied:

"From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 4. Noes 2.) (January 18)."

 

[Markinsac]

University and college police departments have been exempted, but the bill has been sent to 3rd reading.

 

[Chuy_01]

doesn't look like the bill is going to pass this year either, unfortunately.

 

[marcotor]

hell, I'll do the work for free

Come on down! My county has about 23,000 subs, all of which will need to be touched TWICE. Take you what, a week maybe 10 days to complete?

 

[scannerboy02]

Come on down! My county has about 23,000 subs, all of which will need to be touched TWICE. Take you what, a week maybe 10 days to complete?

As the post said, terms will apply but I am serious about the offer. The terms are basically lodging and equipment/software related. Again, anyone interested can contact me directly for full terms.

 

[657fe2]

Don't forget to thank Sen. Becker for his efforts. Also calls to the Black and Latinx caucus about your concerns will be noted. If you get some safety concerns back use the Burbank streaming example. Be prepared to mention Broadcastifys Offical feeds page, all those police departments streaming delayed feeds. Think like a lobbyist.

 

[marcotor]

Even if a miracle happens and the bill passes hold your horses there. You're not going to be struttin' down Lake on a Friday night "patrolling" with real CopDispatches™ coming out of your Scanner, or your XTS or APX (with real CopSounds™) strapped to your belt. As our friend from the North with the drill has better stated, most will comply with an "Official RR feed" and be done with it. Decryption of individual subscribers isn't happening, at least not on the locals' dime - and no matter the copius amounts of hopium consumed here.

 

[mmckenna]

Even if a miracle happens and the bill passes hold your horses there.

It's essentially dead, like SB1000. It would take a miracle to pull it out of the hole it's in.
Maybe they'll keep submitting more and more eroded versions, and eventually get something passed, or give up.

There's a lot of holes in these bills that seem to get ignored. I've tried to point that out to others that put a lot of hope in these, but there's some serious blinders action going on.

 

[657fe2]

I know we will never get back to the halcyon days of the 90's I would be willing to compromise and have a Burbank/Chicago situation. I want to know crime trends and emerging problems in my neighborhood, that's good enough for me. What really bothers me is that we use to have police executives and people like Don Root that would interface with us because our hobby was their work. Now, it just seems like the police managers have a go "F" yourself mentality where we the public our considered unimportant and our concerns are meaningless. This has real life implications like recruitment crises. I got attracted to law enforcement by listening to police calls. Now police-community relations are in the gutter and people see that the Police Executives are mediocre at best although they think their brilliant. This is not the Cop on the beats fault, this is the Police managers fault. Most stink at their jobs, cannot bring people together, and that is why no one wants to work for them anymore which is why taxpayers now have to pay thousands in recruitment incentives. We need new Chiefs and Sheriff's. I will continue to fight, not to reform the Police but to Reform the Brass!