Given that they can go to federal prison for doing so, probably not.
The Official Thread: Live audio feeds, scanners, and... wait for it.. ENCRYPTION!
- Thread starter blantonl
- Start date
belvdr
No longer interested in living
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,567
Not possible currently.
The Chinese claim they can break 2048 bit RAS encryption, using quantum balloon technology. (yes they really claim this)
Paul
chrismol1
P25 TruCking!
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 1,276
The radio companies and scanner companies all they do is implement the code, the algorithm, by the creator of the algorithm, into, for their product. Its deeper than them
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
AES-256, which is the standard for law enforcement and most other serious users, is not currently "breakable" even with modern high speed computers. Theoretically a computer would stumble across the right code, but by that time, whoever owned the computer would be long gone, and the radios they were trying to monitor long since replaced.
NO and It is Illegal to even do so.. Even a supercomputer would take years to crack one code and they can change on a regular basis.
Far more likely for the keys to get leaked from an insider. But them once discovered would be easy to change.
Seems with all the spy crap between counties this is possible. I'm sure the US government doesn't mess with decoding. (sarcasim).
Listen to episode 181 of Security Now, from 2009, which has a brief recap of encryption technology. There are very detailed descriptions in other episodes.
GRC | Security Now! Episode Archive
Security Now! Weekly Internet Security Podcast. This week describing the newly revealed SockStress TCP stack vulnerabilities.
www.grc.com
As others have already pointed out, there is no currently realistic way to break the encryption used by most agencies. (Unless you have an amazing stroke of luck, and find the key in early attempts.)
Listen to episode 181 of Security Now, from 2009, which has a brief recap of encryption technology. There are very detailed descriptions in other episodes.
GRC | Security Now! Episode Archive
Security Now! Weekly Internet Security Podcast. This week describing the newly revealed SockStress TCP stack vulnerabilities.
As others have already pointed out, there is no currently realistic way to break the encryption used by most agencies. (Unless you have an amazing stroke of luck, and find the key in early attempts.)
Odds are you’d find it in the first half. So trying a billion keys a second using a ton of computers you “might” find it in only millions of years.
Thanks, I honestly never knew it was that complex.
International Spy ops such as intercepting and shooting down enemy balloons using stealth fighters is handling using analog AM, and is still available to listen to on Broadcastify live...because this makes sense.
Paul
If they were worried about those comms being monitored, they would have used secure means.International Spy ops such as intercepting and shooting down enemy balloons using stealth fighters is handling using analog AM, and is still available to listen to on Broadcastify live...because this makes sense.
Paul
At 6:21 in the available transcript of the takedown, FRANK 1 and EAGLE 1 switched to secure comms on 233.525. Not all of it was available.International Spy ops such as intercepting and shooting down enemy balloons using stealth fighters is handling using analog AM, and is still available to listen to on Broadcastify live...because this makes sense.
Paul
Active shooter at MSU, at 8:33PM PST on the live feed, officer said they are receiving information the suspect is using a scanner app to monitor officers. Still shots being fired, but eeeekkk...should RR take down the feed for now?
www.broadcastify.com
Greater Lansing Area Public Safety Live Audio Feed
Greater Lansing Area Public Safety Live Audio Feed on Broadcastify.com
www.broadcastify.com
During the tragic active shooting at Michigan State University, police units requested tactical/encrypted channels but were then notified by the dispatcher that interoperability may be compromised since not all units on scene have access to the same encrypted channels. This was becoming a greater concern as they believe the suspect may have access to a scanner and might be actively listening to police operations on scene, giving the suspect an undesired advantage to commit more harm.
This post is to discuss everybody's opinions regarding Public Safety Radio Transparency vs Security and the growing world of Broadcastify. I am a broadcastify feed provider myself and I believe that a lot of radio communications should be non encrypted and available to the general public for transparency and news reporting. However, being a strong supporter of all departments of Public Safety, I firmly believe that any advantage we can give our First Responders during an active shooter, or any other mass casualty event, such as complete encryption of communications should be granted, and every source that can assist in restricting the leakage of sensitive information, like broadcastify, should do so.
Now there are multiple factors at play, such as Encryption Interoperability (not all departments have access to same tactical/encrypted channels), and sensitive information being said on clear channels.
Michigan Public Safety Communication System (MPSCS) has numerous encrypted talkgroups with varying strengths of encryption, so encrypted / tactical channels were in use during this event, but sensitive information was still said on clear channels, like TGID 1008 - STATW1, which acted similarly to a operations / scene dispatch channel.
This brings me to the big debate.
If this suspect was using broadcastify calls, which would give the most information regarding the movements and operations on scene, what should Broadcastify do in an event like this? Like I said before, I highly value the transparency of public safety communications, but at what point should that be limited to protect our first responders on scene?
Like if it were Broadcastify Calls, I think a simple mandatory 5 minute delay should be implemented upon request of the Local Jurisdictions Dispatch Center, or Government official.
What do you guys think? There has to be a balance between Transparency and Security, but if a line had to be drawn, where would it be?
This post is to discuss everybody's opinions regarding Public Safety Radio Transparency vs Security and the growing world of Broadcastify. I am a broadcastify feed provider myself and I believe that a lot of radio communications should be non encrypted and available to the general public for transparency and news reporting. However, being a strong supporter of all departments of Public Safety, I firmly believe that any advantage we can give our First Responders during an active shooter, or any other mass casualty event, such as complete encryption of communications should be granted, and every source that can assist in restricting the leakage of sensitive information, like broadcastify, should do so.
Now there are multiple factors at play, such as Encryption Interoperability (not all departments have access to same tactical/encrypted channels), and sensitive information being said on clear channels.
Michigan Public Safety Communication System (MPSCS) has numerous encrypted talkgroups with varying strengths of encryption, so encrypted / tactical channels were in use during this event, but sensitive information was still said on clear channels, like TGID 1008 - STATW1, which acted similarly to a operations / scene dispatch channel.
This brings me to the big debate.
If this suspect was using broadcastify calls, which would give the most information regarding the movements and operations on scene, what should Broadcastify do in an event like this? Like I said before, I highly value the transparency of public safety communications, but at what point should that be limited to protect our first responders on scene?
Like if it were Broadcastify Calls, I think a simple mandatory 5 minute delay should be implemented upon request of the Local Jurisdictions Dispatch Center, or Government official.
What do you guys think? There has to be a balance between Transparency and Security, but if a line had to be drawn, where would it be?
Yeah I had no better way to ask the question. But it is a valid one. I had friends on Campus that I was texting to check on as I listened to it develop on the scanner.
Remove swat as part of the scanned channels that go on to broadcastify, like car to car channels aren't allowed, swat shouldn't be in there due to high sensitive stuff on swat channels
I think all this has been hashed out multiple times. I am sure you could do a search. My understanding is he didn't have a a scanner and his actions proved it. I also understand that dispatched was asked to put a delay on broadcastify but that didn't happen. I don't know how that works and if it has been done before. Also my understanding Tac talk groups whether encrypted or not are not broadcast on calls platform. And some other talk groups.
Similar threads
