The Official Thread: Live audio feeds, scanners, and... wait for it.. ENCRYPTION!

[knightcon]

Come work a shift with me, you'll see that your idealistic view just doesn't exist where I work. Separate dispatch centers, separate dispatch SOPs for police, fire and EMS. They are not going to patch my department's frequency (100,000+ calls a year) with the police district frequency (150,000+ calls per year) for every response that involves both agencies, it's not feasible. I'm lucky if the cops respond on calls for violent psychiatric patients with me, but when they want the ambulance, they want it NOW. If they were to go encrypted, you would never see a patched channel or any information shared, which could jeopardize MY safety.

Do you work in public safety? If not, regardless of how much radio knowledge you have, you'll never understand.

EDIT...brought over from the original thread....I'd really like to see him answer this one.

I'm going to agree with you here Citywide.

I am in two public safety organisations, one being the volunteer bush fire authority and the other being a volunteer rescue authority undertaking priority 1 road crash rescues, flood rescues, and searches for missing people. I know exactly where you are coming from with the lack of links between agencies.

In my state we have a central call taking agency which handles all emergency phone calls from the public. The job is then broken down into the separate parts that need the separate agencies. Those separate parts are then sent to the individual agency dispatchers to get crews organised and on the road. There is no communication between the agencies at a dispatch level and the only way to get a message between teams which are working for different agencies is to request the dispatcher for your agency call the dispatcher for the other agency and even then the information is not forthcoming.

In an ideal world I agree all agencies could share dispatch channels for major incidents so that everyone knows what everyone else is doing and the situational awareness gets improved, but without a major restructure and change in dispatch methodologies that won't happen.

And to take things back to the original topic of encrypted communications I currently sit on the fence. In one respect I have to agree that there is a danger of criminals monitoringg unencrypted police frequencies to find out if they are going to raid the criminals base or to find out where the police are. The example was used that police chases get called off all the time and the poster did not see that changing based on encrypted or unencrypted, respectfully I would point out that the given example maybe is not the best example to use.

Let's try an actual example that occurred in my home state only a year ago...
(I am aware of this based on conversations I have had with friends who are on the force)

A call was received by the emergency operator notifying them of a person who was using home made explosives on their farm. The police dispatcher notified the appropriate police units who were sent out, this was all done over the air with no encryption. Now was the police did not know was that the farmer had a police scanner in his ute and had been listening and when he heard what and were the job was he knew they were coming for him.

What followed was a 3 day stand off with police after the farmer lined his entire driveway and random spots all around his farm with large explosive devices he could trigger by remote control.

Now had the police been using encrypted channels for the original dispatch call he would not have known they were on their way and they could have gotten in without as much of danger and almost certainly without the stand off.

Now I am not saying that encryption is necessary and by no means is it needed by every single emergency service and government agency but I do feel that it does have its place, and just for the record I am avid scanning hobbyist with multiple units in my 4WD and at home as well as a portable which I keep on my belt at all times for scanning with.

 

[kk6696]

I'm a privacy rights fanatic and I believe strongly in open government (when we last had it), but I also have 30 years of actual, direct experience in this area of work being discussed. Encryption protects people's personal information (name, DOB, SSN) from being listened to (now over the internet, worldwide) and harvested by an identity thief in say, Russia, Nigeria, or somewhere in the U.S., so that a person stopped for a minor traffic violation, who doesn't have their driver's license with them, won't also have their identity stolen and their credit ruined when the officer reads their info over the air.

It keeps a burglary-in-progress call a secret to the burglars (or robbers, or whatever), so the police have a chance at catching them, as they're crawling out of your back bedroom window with your valuables in their hands, instead fleeing the scene once they hear the call dispatched on their scanner.

Having to call a dispatcher on a cell phone every time you have something confidential to pass on is impractical and makes no sense. Why have a radio in the car and on your belt?

Encryption also keeps the police (and sometimes fire and EMS folks) at least somewhat protected from the NUTS, gang-bangers, and professional race-baiters out there, looking to either physically harm or provoke already over-stressed officers, for their own warped purposes. The level of unjustifiable hate, racism and anger directed toward the police, for the actions of a relative few screw-ups, makes the job in today's time much more dangerous. I'm for protecting the officer who is protecting me from anarchy, more than I am for protecting my right to sit in my underwear and listen to what's going on around town on my scanner. I'm also for protecting MY information, when I'm stopped for something. I'll take the tradeoff.

 

[durango5550]

I have been around RR since the beginning. Not so much in the view of others but lurking in the background sucking up the info provided.

Its a shame to see this site get sucked into the greed that it has. As long as the money flows ( and im sure RR is getting paid one way or another ) these feeds will remain and continue to blacken the eye of the scanning hobby.

I really wish the feeds would stop.

for one I'm sure the scanner manufactures would love it. Im sure other hobbyist would love for it to stop ( the continued interest in encryption is killing the hobby )

Thats just my opinion.


I used to enjoy the feeds but if you step back and take a look at the big picture you will see what I see.

 

[RobKB1FJR]

If RR stopped the feeds tomorrow. Someone else would pick them up. I think it depends on the command structure of the police department. With laptops in the car and cellphones the radios are being used less for those boring administrative functions like ordering coffee. Also detective and surveillance channels should always be encrypted. Shame on the departments that don't do that. Then again most of the time you would have no idea who or what is being followed

 

[Citywide173]

Sadly, this is a well thought out post, but riddled with inaccuracies. I have, as of October 8th, 30 years experience in public safety in one form or another (PD/FD/EMS.) I have been going to and photographing emergency scenes for 33 years as of November 28th. I have owned a scanner since October of 1980. I also owned my own two-way radio shop from 1989-1995.

I'm a privacy rights fanatic and I believe strongly in open government (when we last had it), but I also have 30 years of actual, direct experience in this area of work being discussed. Encryption protects people's personal information (name, DOB, SSN) from being listened to (now over the internet, worldwide) and harvested by an identity thief in say, Russia, Nigeria, or somewhere in the U.S., so that a person stopped for a minor traffic violation, who doesn't have their driver's license with them, won't also have their identity stolen and their credit ruined when the officer reads their info over the air.

Most of this information is currently relayed over mobile data networks, and only a small portion is broadcast. Plus, most identity thieves are not going to spend the time and effort to monitor the multitude of frequencies for the small return on investment that these rare events would provide. They would have to be listening to the right frequency at the EXACT right time-too infinitesimal of a percentage.

It keeps a burglary-in-progress call a secret to the burglars (or robbers, or whatever), so the police have a chance at catching them, as they're crawling out of your back bedroom window with your valuables in their hands, instead fleeing the scene once they hear the call dispatched on their scanner.

This argument has been used for decades, yet there is no department anywhere that has produced a verifiable statistic that crime has been reduced by the implementation of encryption, nor has there been a statistic to show increased officer safety, which is usually the other statistic that is touted as a reason for encryption.

Having to call a dispatcher on a cell phone every time you have something confidential to pass on is impractical and makes no sense. Why have a radio in the car and on your belt?

Once again, most mobile applications of CAD systems have a messaging function that make this unnecessary

Encryption also keeps the police (and sometimes fire and EMS folks) at least somewhat protected from the NUTS, gang-bangers, and professional race-baiters out there, looking to either physically harm or provoke already over-stressed officers, for their own warped purposes. The level of unjustifiable hate, racism and anger directed toward the police, for the actions of a relative few screw-ups, makes the job in today's time much more dangerous. I'm for protecting the officer who is protecting me from anarchy, more than I am for protecting my right to sit in my underwear and listen to what's going on around town on my scanner. I'm also for protecting MY information, when I'm stopped for something. I'll take the tradeoff.

The police have no duty to protect the individual citizen there is established case law on this that has been upheld many times in many jurisdictions Warren v. District of Columbia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Radio salesmen tout encryption in the radios they sell, and attempt to use every point above to scare departments into encrypting. Police tactical channels and fire department arson investigation channels are the only thing that departments can justify encrypting in my opinion.

 

[cipher33]

Encryption security?

So.. can these encrypted channels really 100% secure? Not according to this article.. and it was published in 2011...

Flaws in P25 radio standards leave users vulnerable to eavesdropping, jamming -- GCN

What are some thoughts on this? Is it legal to eavesdrop on an encrypted channel if you figure out how to do so? Anyone figure out how to do so?

Thoughts? Discussions? Theories?

 

[rescue161]

So.. can these encrypted channels really 100% secure? Not according to this article.. and it was published in 2011...

Flaws in P25 radio standards leave users vulnerable to eavesdropping, jamming -- GCN

What are some thoughts on this? Is it legal to eavesdrop on an encrypted channel if you figure out how to do so? Anyone figure out how to do so?

Thoughts? Discussions? Theories?

The article seems to point to the fact that the system was not encrypted in the first place; just P25 in the clear. As far as P25 AES, it is very secure. It is illegal (In the United States) to decrypt a signal unless you are the intended recipient.

I opened up a contest, several years ago, in which I asked anyone to decrypt audio from a transmission that I created. I did this to prove a point as there were people claiming that DES over analog was not secure. So I used 1970s technology to encrypt a voice message. That message became partially decoded, but only after I gave out the entire encryption key. Being that the message has not been fully decoded all these years later, even with the key being published, I'd say that even DES over analog is still a secure means to most scanner listeners.

There are apparently programs that can pull the key out of data stream, but I am not privy to that information. If anyone does decrypt audio from an encrypted source, then I'd suggest they keep their lips sealed and keep it to themselves.

 

[KampingAnthony1AolCo]

The article seems to point to the fact that the system was not encrypted in the first place; just P25 in the clear. As far as P25 AES, it is very secure. It is illegal (In the United States) to decrypt a signal unless you are the intended recipient.

I opened up a contest, several years ago, in which I asked anyone to decrypt audio from a transmission that I created. I did this to prove a point as there were people claiming that DES over analog was not secure. So I used 1970s technology to encrypt a voice message. That message became partially decoded, but only after I gave out the entire encryption key. Being that the message has not been fully decoded all these years later, even with the key being published, I'd say that even DES over analog is still a secure means to most scanner listeners.

There are apparently programs that can pull the key out of data stream, but I am not privy to that information. If anyone does decrypt audio from an encrypted source, then I'd suggest they keep their lips sealed and keep it to themselves.

In our area there is a taxi company that uses either AES or DES to encrypt their operations and if you listen close enough too it you can still understand what they are saying. I was not decoding it at all. It is analog AES or DES.

 

[balibago]

analog scrambler

Hey that's probably an analog scrambler. I listen to the taxi when my mental health medication is not working!

 

[rescue161]

In our area there is a taxi company that uses either AES or DES to encrypt their operations and if you listen close enough too it you can still understand what they are saying. I was not decoding it at all. It is analog AES or DES.

I guarantee you that you did not just "listen" and decode DES or AES by ear.

Here is the thread that I was talking about: http://forums.radioreference.com/ge...ion/63775-decoding-encryption-permission.html

Here is what DES over analog sounds like: http://home.comcast.net/~scanner_freak/DES_Contest-Discriminator.mp3 <-- Please Right-Click and Save-As as I'm not hosting this.

This my encrypted voice traffic that I asked everyone to decode. Seven years later...

 

[KampingAnthony1AolCo]

Hey that's probably an analog scrambler. I listen to the taxi when my mental health medication is not working!

Your are right. Now I remember it is voice scramble.

464.12500 KNJJ731 RM 203.5 PL TriCountyCab Tri County Cab (Voice Scramble) FMN Transportation


464.12500 KNJJ731 RM 131.8 PL TriCountyCab Tri County Cab (Voice Scramble) FMN Transportation

 

[balibago]

No ne of us noobs will ever crack DES. But I've been hoping we could take down that ADP from Motorola.

 

[Forts]

No ne of us noobs will ever crack DES. But I've been hoping we could take down that ADP from Motorola.

And you realize that if someone 'takes down' ADP... then whoever is using it will immediately look into upgrading to AES, right?

 

[StevenS]

I would be interested in seeing some statistics as to how many times the criminal element was caught with a scanner app running while in the commission of a crime. If they were caught using one during a crime, they obviously were not sophisticated, or fortunate enough to hear the dispatch that the police were on their way. I can't imagine the statistics to be extremely significant. Besides, the only time I ever monitor a stream or an app myself is when I am nowhere near my scanners. Even then I get frustrated. You cannot listen to a single channel if you want, and you are stuck listening to everything else that is being scanned.

This is mainly why I mostly use a dedicated scanner in the comfort of my own home. I would think it would be awfully difficult to commit a crime with one of these in a medium to large city, given all the radio traffic. You would have to be lucky enough to catch the dispatch to know that law enforcement was coming after you. I think the argument that criminals are effectively using these streams and apps has more than a few holes in the theory.

My feeling is encryption should be saved for special enforcement detail, but public safety should be transparent and keep routine radio calls in the clear. Most criminals are repeat whatever has worked for them over and over again, and is why they eventually get caught. I don't know enough of the law on charges for criminal activity when a scanner is used, but I imagine if significant penalties could be added when a scanner is used in a crime, the statistic would drop even further. Although many may disagree, that is my two cents worth. In the end, LE will encrypt if they can convince the powers that be effectively, and can raise the funds to do so. It is as simple as that.

 

[alpha-alligator]

GNU radio with a brute force key finder written in? Could it be this simple. haha (crazy laughing)
but i saw this guy on youtube create (write) a GNU radio where the known key could be typed in and all was in the clear. He should have uploaded that file so we could open it in GNU radio and have a look at the blocks.

 

[PeterGV]

GNU radio with a brute force key finder written in

Motorola AES encryption uses a 256 bit key. Good luck using brute force to attack that.

Quoting from a Seagate paper that was quoted in EE times here:

If you assume:
- Every person on the planet owns 10 computers.
- There are 7 billion people on the planet.
- Each of these computers can test 1 billion key combinations per second.
- On average, you can crack the key after testing 50% of the possibilities.

Then the earth's population can crack one [128 bit AES]encryption key in 77,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years!

Like I said, good luck with that.

 

[alpha-alligator]

p vs p
size reducing,srink, tiny proplem
I' am aware of this astronomical calculation.
But I believe one day I will have a program with power, capable of such things.
and your comeback will be something like 1} then they will have something better 2} you are breaking the law
3} lay off the pot :}-~~

 

[com501]

Even an antiquated Cray takes a long time and there are far faster computers to do the flops now. As there are far better algorithms. Better to waterboard the guy who knows what the keys are, you will get faster results.

Keys are only good for tactical real time decoding, and that is a LONG way off.

OLD information is useless.

 

[Romak3]

Waterboarding, had the time of my life this past summer on the beach and waves!

 

[pepsima1]

Who cares about Encryption anymore. It's a JOKE. Agencies should be worried more about fixing other issues like what just happened in New York. You can encrypt every radio in the world if you want but it won't fix wacker's going crazy with loaded guns.

We have way deeper issues at this point in history of time then scrambling radio communications.