SIRN

[atlong]

So, basically they're skirting the policy to encrypt their main operations. Still, end result, public is locked out from monitoring.

From the IT Directory for Berkeley County. I pointed him to the section of the SIRN policies and asked if they were following that policy. I got this back.
----------------------
Good morning Gary,

No sir, we aren’t breaking any policies. We do not encrypt the primary dispatch channel but after the primary dispatch we move that traffic to an encrypted channel.

I hope that makes sense, if you any questions or concerns just let me know.
-------------------------

 

[BM82557]

FYI -- they've posted the meeting minutes from Sept, Oct & Nov 2021 ----

2021 SIEC Meeting Minutes

SIRN

sirn.wv.gov

 

[mike_s104]

So, basically they're skirting the policy to encrypt their main operations. Still, end result, public is locked out from monitoring.

Exactly. Makes you wonder what they are trying to hide now. I'd be willing to bet that there are dispatches that never make it to their dispatch channel.

 

[mike_s104]

FYI -- they've posted the meeting minutes from Sept, Oct & Nov 2021 ----

2021 SIEC Meeting Minutes

SIRN

sirn.wv.gov

I've looked at older ones, I guess I could email the local rep. Looks like all of wv.gov is down right now.

 

[mike_s104]

So, basically they're skirting the policy to encrypt their main operations. Still, end result, public is locked out from monitoring.

If they have nothing to hide, keep everything in the clear like they did before. If they aren't afraid of screwing up, then keep comms in the clear. I get that in some circumstances encryption is understandable, justifiable, and necessary but not for everything like they are doing.

 

[OpSec]

Why so much activism from you guys? What do you hope to gain from this?

The more the pot gets stirred, the more these agencies will just keep using encryption.

 

[mike_s104]

Why so much activism from you guys? What do you hope to gain from this?

The more the pot gets stirred, the more these agencies will just keep using encryption.

We're not picketing outside the sheriff's office. Encryption isn't a secret. Plus it's only like 3 of us.

 

[IStebleton]

Could this possibly be a site in SIRN? I've noticed that there is a big gap when it comes to Wetzel county in terms of coverage. It appears to be a UHF P25 trunked site.

WRFH922

 

[lebrunmn]

Could this possibly be a site in SIRN? I've noticed that there is a big gap when it comes to Wetzel county in terms of coverage. It appears to be a UHF P25 trunked site.

The freqs match up--all except one--so, it might be part of SIRN. If you can hear it maybe you could run a data decoder against it, like Pro96com, to get some info from a control channel. Then you'd know for certain. Good find.

 

[IStebleton]

The freqs match up--all except one--so, it might be part of SIRN. If you can hear it maybe you could run a data decoder against it, like Pro96com, to get some info from a control channel. Then you'd know for certain. Good find.

I would try to listen to the freqs, but it's a good 75 miles away from me . Hopefully someone closer may be able to scope things out.

 

[firemantom26]

The license is a YW - Public Safety Pool, Trunked. The site location is 6120 HOYT RIDGE RD
WILEYVILLE, WV WETZEL County.

ULS License - Public Safety Pool, Trunked License - WRFH922 - WETZEL COUNTY 911 & OEM

I would think it should be part of Sirn. I have checked the frequencies from two locations it appears not to be online.

 

[Bethanylt241]

I thought at one time, the only two towers Wetzel County had capabilities of utilizing was St. Joes and maybe Sistersville. Atleast that’s what I heard so don’t quote me. I also believe there was discussion in the Sirn minutes about them trying to do a tower site in Wetzel County.

 

[firemantom26]

Correct, in the the Sept. Minutes they said that "Wileyville/Wetzel Co - Working with Premier Construction. Preparing to order tower. Using Mercer County menu bid."

 

[atlong]

Agreed. I have been listening a lot lately and only hear dispatches on the 1107 talkgroup that are high priority. Also, it appears the only units still using that TG are state police and are their traffic is not encrypted (Yet). Using Pro-96 software it appears the only phase II traffic on the system is from Berkeley PTAC 1 TG on both the Martinsburg and Kearneysville sites and only uses two frequencies from each group. I'll have to go back and double check to see if any state police units have affiliated and use PTAC 1. So far, I don't think they do.

Exactly. Makes you wonder what they are trying to hide now. I'd be willing to bet that there are dispatches that never make it to their dispatch channel.

 

[mike_s104]

Agreed. I have been listening a lot lately and only hear dispatches on the 1107 talkgroup that are high priority. Also, it appears the only units still using that TG are state police and are their traffic is not encrypted (Yet). Using Pro-96 software it appears the only phase II traffic on the system is from Berkeley PTAC 1 TG on both the Martinsburg and Kearneysville sites and only uses two frequencies from each group. I'll have to go back and double check to see if any state police units have affiliated and use PTAC 1. So far, I don't think they do.

I do think they are dispatching as they are supposed to but they're isn't any way to know for sure.

I've been looking with SDR Trunk and it shows all TG1141 as regular P25 on the Martinsburg site.

 

[BM82557]

I do think they are dispatching as they are supposed to but they're isn't any way to know for sure.

I've been looking with SDR Trunk and it shows all TG1141 as regular P25 on the Martinsburg site.

There are still times 1141 is not ENC but mostly it is.

 

[mike_s104]

There are still times 1141 is not ENC but mostly it is.

View attachment 113673

Maybe I need to use that

 

[Bethanylt241]

If there using a TAC channel and it’s encrypted, that is not against there rules. It’s stated in the guidelines that Encryption is permitted on tactical talkgroups.

 

[fredva]

If there using a TAC channel and it’s encrypted, that is not against there rules. It’s stated in the guidelines that Encryption is permitted on tactical talkgroups.

But IF a TAC channel is being used for initial dispatch, it's no longer a TAC channel, no matter how it is labeled in a list.

 

[atlong]

Right, that's how what they're doing it and how/where they're doing it on the system is shady. They've moved their main dispatch to a TAC channel, kept the channel labeled as PTAC1 and encrypted it as they migrate to a P25-Phase II system. I'd bet a dollar that after all the dust settles, dispatch will return to it's original TG, then it will be encrypted and TAC will go back to be used for it's original purpose as PTAC1, albeit fully encrypted and they'll move on from there like nothing's changed.