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

[chrismol1]

What I posted a few pages back on the fella that ran a feed and social media. They seemed concerned over the social media broadcasting then onto the feed then PII.

It's interesting. I remember back in the early 2010s when broadcastify was up and running and it was much like a scanner, you had to be present. There were concerns but gradually over the years it went from criminals listening to posting on social media to 1st amendment auditors and showing up at scenes to now PII. All in the span of 15 years or shorter for some areas.

 

[kc2asb]

It does precisely zero to meet the requirements set forth by the USDOJ and the FBI regarding protection of PII and CJI.

If any agency wants to route such traffic through a separate encrypted records channel, then delaying dispatch reduces some (not all) of the risk with officer safety. But that's not real high on the list of concerns for many agencies. There are much better ways to get information to the general public, and not relying on a small group of scanner listeners.

Agreed, delayed feeds are not a top priority for these agencies, which is why Chicago and Baltimore will likely end up being the exceptions rather than the norm.

I appreciate online feeds (and SDR's) and have used them on Broadcastify countless times, but mainly to hear agencies that are not local and for major events. Listening to a feed on a PC or a phone app is not the radio hobby anymore IMHO. I will always prefer listening direct on my own equipment.

 

[kc2asb]

And I highly doubt said user knew the full name. They probably posted that such and such fire fighter was injured or killed. This is why I'm in favor of dispatch being open but not TAC channels. But that too would be a real shame, as it helps TREMENDOUSLY during a natural disaster like a hurricane, flood, tornado, earthquake, dam break, mass health issue, etc. I know it's helped me and I'm sure hundreds if not thousands of other scanner hobbyists can share their stories as well.

Somehow the social media hack found out the family's address if you read the post by @mmckenna . It had to be more than a first name. From my monitoring experience, I have heard FF last names over the air during a working fire. I have also heard the FDNY announce "mixer off" and then a message was passed over the air, which I could not hear. They turned off the repeater to relay some sensitive information.

Sure, a scanner has helped me in the past. After Hurricane Sandy, the scanner provided a picture of what was happening around town and the surrounding areas. An odor of smoke in the air? Flipped on the FD and found out what it was in short order. About a year or so ago, I woke up to a strong smell of smoke in the house. Once I checked and ruled out a fire here, my instinct was to flip on the scanner. Well, my local dept is now encrypted. Definitely felt cut off and had to wait until the next day to find out what happened. A delayed dispatch feed would have been great, but it's not happening and I suspect it will not happen with the majority of agencies that go encrypted.

 

[kc2asb]

It's interesting. I remember back in the early 2010s when broadcastify was up and running and it was much like a scanner, you had to be present. There were concerns but gradually over the years it went from criminals listening to posting on social media to 1st amendment auditors and showing up at scenes to now PII. All in the span of 15 years or shorter for some areas.

The phone apps were the game changer, turning a smartphone into a portable scanner. Anyone could now listen anywhere.

 

[mmckenna]

Again, the approach can be a sensible commonsense one. And TAC channels can remain encrypted. So if MDT is down the officer can run the information over the encrypted TAC channel.

Pretty obvious you don't live in small town.

Agencies are not going to rely social media rules to protect sensitive data. That doesn't meet any of the requirements what so ever and any agency that used that as a defense is going to get laughed out of the courtroom.

In this sense a delayed dispatch only feed or delayed talkgroup would work as it applies to DOJ crap. Yes, crap... it's never been an issue when I stared as a scanner hobbyist circa '96.

No. You do not understand the requirements at all.

Public safety communications does not revolve around the needs of the scanner listener. In fact, I can confidently say that in 30 years of doing this job, never once has anyone ever uttered the phrase "But what about the scanner listeners?"

Enjoy the hobby. There's other things to listen to. The existing requirements are not going away.

 

[N4DES]

This goes back more than a decade for my County and here is the public item on the County website from 2014:

http://discover.pbcgov.org/countycommissioners/Agenda_Master/20140415.pdf

Since the distribution of the Report, Sheriff Ric Bradshaw has asked that County begin the migration as soon as possible in order to gain encryption functionality which currently only exists for a limited number of users.

There was also an article published by the Palm Beach Post shortly after that also quoted our sheriff, so the encryption notification was very public. The new system was rolled out about a year later and PBSO, along with a number of municipal PD's, never looked back.

 

[kc2asb]

This goes back more than a decade for my County and here is the public item on the County website from 2014:

http://discover.pbcgov.org/countycommissioners/Agenda_Master/20140415.pdf

Since the distribution of the Report, Sheriff Ric Bradshaw has asked that County begin the migration as soon as possible in order to gain encryption functionality which currently only exists for a limited number of users.

There was also an article published by the Palm Beach Post shortly after that also quoted our sheriff, so the encryption notification was very public. The new system was rolled out about a year later and PBSO, along with a number of municipal PD's, never looked back.

Does the local press have access on department-issued radios or online feed(s)?

 

[N4DES]

Does the local press have access on department-issued radios or online feed(s)?

Nothing was provided up to when I retired mid-2023 and I highly doubt that anything has been provided to this day.

 

[BinaryMode]

Pretty obvious you don't live in small town.

So encrypted TAC channels are not an option for data? But the whole thing needs to be shut out from the public and the press? Like a communist bloc country? Is that where we are in this day and age?

The apparent DOJ requirements can be met and so can the ability to keep the public and the press informed. And no, it's not just a "hobbyist/scanner thing," it's much more than that. It's like having a multiband weather radio to alert you to so much more should SHTF. Next month and going forward is tornado season. Thank the radio gods I can still hear the fire department and in other 'small towns' near me. Last year we had a wicked thunderstorm go through and the fire department was very busy as was utilities. Both of which I monitored on battery power.

Agencies are not going to rely social media rules to protect sensitive data. That doesn't meet any of the requirements what so ever and any agency that used that as a defense is going to get laughed out of the courtroom.

Of course this doesn't pass legal muster. Don't misconstrue what I said to try and make a point. What I said was that to an effect social media companies have a responsibility, but they care more about their Ad revenue than anything!

The bottom line is that this isn't Europe or the UK. This is the United States of America held together by a framework known as the Constitution and put forth by a declaration, a declaration of independence. The 1st amendment is practically non existent in the UK and Europe but there's also a communist-like mentality that public safety needs to be completely hidden from public view. How their press can possibly procure their duties in an unimpeded way defies all logic and trust. Heck, does the UK even have a FOIA type law at all?! How about a real Constitution and not a Magna Carta? Again, this is the U.S. We're better than that, or so I thought...

I have conceded to the fact that not all radio channels need to be open. Of course not. SWAT, internal affairs, drug task force, data, that kind of stuff needs to be encrypted for commonsense reasons. But to NOT provide a simple one channel delayed dispatch feed or talkgroup tells me everything about how the government is very Machiavellian. Heck, they probably ALL read The Prince!

I bet, just bet the Founding Fathers of this country would agree with my sentiments... Probably Benjamin Franklin most of all since he created the fire department. Which has been copied the world over. As well as our Constitution.

When the government hides in the shadows, and the people are not allowed to know the truth, the equilibrium of destruction must ensue. As it is we pretty much live in a fake society. And that pretty much started on November 22, 1963. The nightmare on Elm street... Today it is no better than the Pharisees. History repeats its self in many ways...

 

[buddrousa]

And when criminals break laws they should be locked up not freed to commit more crimes.

 

[mmckenna]

So encrypted TAC channels are not an option for data? But the whole thing needs to be shut out from the public and the press? Like a communist bloc country? Is that where we are in this day and age?

Encrypted channels/talk groups are always an option.
However, small agencies or very large rural areas may not have the funding to build out second channels simply for handling CJI/PII when it's more cost effective to just encrypt everything, as they are permitted to do.

Also, some don't want to rely on an officer or dispatcher changing channels when protected information needs to be shared. They don't want the additional burden.

The apparent DOJ requirements can be met and so can the ability to keep the public and the press informed.

There are many ways to meet the requirements, encryption isn't the only option. However, for some agencies, it is the easiest and give them the most flexibility. Agencies will choose what works best for them, and that decision will not necessarily take into account the needs of the scanner community.

The bottom line is that this isn't Europe or the UK. This is the United States of America held together by a framework known as the Constitution and put forth by a declaration, a declaration of independence. The 1st amendment is practically non existent in the UK and Europe but there's also a communist-like mentality that public safety needs to be completely hidden from public view. How their press can possibly procure their duties in an unimpeded way defies all logic and trust. Heck, does the UK even have a FOIA type law at all?! How about a real Constitution and not a Magna Carta? Again, this is the U.S. We're better than that, or so I thought...

I think you need to travel more.
As for the Constitution, the First Amendment doesn't have anything to do with scanner listening. There is nothing that says anyone needs to be given free and unrestricted access to public safety communications.

I have conceded to the fact that not all radio channels need to be open. Of course not. SWAT, internal affairs, drug task force, data, that kind of stuff needs to be encrypted for commonsense reasons. But to NOT provide a simple one channel delayed dispatch feed or talkgroup tells me everything about how the government is very Machiavellian. Heck, they probably ALL read The Prince!

Delayed feeds don't really solve many issues. They are an option for some agencies that have multiple channels, but there's a lot of moving parts and it's not a solution that works for everyone. Delayed feeds do not satisfy the CJI/PII protection requirements in any way.

When the government hides in the shadows, and the people are not allowed to know the truth, the equilibrium of destruction must ensue. As it is we pretty much live in a fake society. And that pretty much started on November 22, 1963. The nightmare on Elm street... Today it is no better than the Pharisees. History repeats its self in many ways...

I think that's an exaggeration. There's a lot of things that happen in public safety that you don't have free and unrestricted access to. The idea that people always had access to unencrypted radio traffic somehow guarantees that it must continue isn't realistic.

 

[kc2asb]

And when criminals break laws they should be locked up not freed to commit more crimes.

Agreed, and they are. We have the largest prison population in the world. Show much for prison being a deterrent to crime.

 

[kc2asb]

Delayed feeds don't really solve many issues. They are an option for some agencies that have multiple channels, but there's a lot of moving parts and it's not a solution that works for everyone. Delayed feeds do not satisfy the CJI/PII protection requirements in any way.

I like the idea of delayed feeds along with @BinaryMode , but with the CJI/PII requirements it sounds like someone would have to review the communications for sensitive data before it goes out over the delayed feed? If so, that could lead to redactions which in turn could lead to the press/public perceiving a lack of transparency.

 

[kayn1n32008]

The 1st amendment is practically non existent in the UK and Europe

You understand that YOUR first amendment only applies within the borders of the USA and its territories right?

It protects, with some limitations, your 'speech' from silencing/suppressed by your government. As well as the freedom of the press. Nowhere does it say you can have unhindered access to Public Safety comms, nor does it say the press can have unhindered access to PS comms.

No different than the FCC rules only apply in the USA.

 

[W8KIC]

You understand that YOUR first amendment only applies within the borders of the USA and its territories right?

It protects, with some limitations, your 'speech' from silencing/suppressed by your government. As well as the freedom of the press. Nowhere does it say you can have unhindered access to Public Safety comms, nor does it say the press can have unhindered access to PS comms.

No different than the FCC rules only apply in the USA.

If the FCC and or law enforcement agencies across the country decide to provide a carve out (as it relates to encryption) for both the press, as well as various favored VIP's, while giving the public at large the shaft, I can guarantee you that the optics of such a scheme WILL blow up in their faces, (not to mention the argument you've made on the first amendment as it applies to this subject) regardless of how well intentioned those who advocate for full or across the board encryption try to sell it. As mentioned in my previous posts on this subject, I'm keeping it narrow in scope, by limiting the exception to just the dispatch channels or frequencies, understanding full well the necessity to encrypt TAC and SWAT communications.

 

[BinaryMode]

Delayed feeds don't really solve many issues. They are an option for some agencies that have multiple channels, but there's a lot of moving parts and it's not a solution that works for everyone. Delayed feeds do not satisfy the CJI/PII protection requirements in any way.

I did not say in a blanket way that all delayed feeds would satisfy the DOJ requirements. I'm referring to dispatch ONLY. Again, and for the 10,000^10 time, TAC channels should remain encrypted. This is where there IS a precedent to CJI/PII.

And most if not ALL departments have more than one channel and usually an MDT in the car...

There's absolutely no clear and valid reason that falls under the banner of commonsense that dispatch can't be open and with a delay. Especially the fire department, which doesn't really need a delay. That's just stupid. Many departments do so already. Let that be a exhibit A and solidify what I'm conveying. Here in my town they CAN do this. Data was usually on TAC 2. They also have MDTs in the car. Yet they chose to encrypt the entire thing shutting out the public and the press at large. When I could monitor I heard things that NEVER got reported on that should have. This is what I'm referring to about transparency. But again, when you have a department buying up military gear and story after story is written in the paper about their unfavorable actions in the court of public opinion, it's no wonder they want to go all bullheaded and encrypt everything.

You understand that YOUR first amendment only applies within the borders of the USA and its territories right?

It protects, with some limitations, your 'speech' from silencing/suppressed by your government. As well as the freedom of the press. Nowhere does it say you can have unhindered access to Public Safety comms, nor does it say the press can have unhindered access to PS comms.

No different than the FCC rules only apply in the USA.

A challenge could be brought before the lower and possible higher courts about the abridging the press' duties when it comes to the absolute rejection of openness of public safety in a community it serves. FOIA requests for example are very cost prohibitive and time consuming. And if there's an active investigation that request WILL be denied.

Unless all departments in the state offer a radio, the blanket shut out of the press in the entire state is deafening and a clear case of dystopia. I feel a legal challenge should be brought up before the courts. But it takes money and expertise. A specific group of lawyers would have to do so. It would be a very interesting case on both sides.

 

[mmckenna]

I did not say in a blanket way that all delayed feeds would satisfy the DOJ requirements. I'm referring to dispatch ONLY. Again, and for the 10,000^10 time, TAC channels should remain encrypted. This is where there IS a precedent to CJI/PII.

And most if not ALL departments have more than one channel and usually an MDT in the car...

Absolutely not all.
MDT's are great in the car. Not so great when on foot. Or when driving, especially fast. Or when the officer has his/her hands full.

I understand what you are saying, but your point of view as a scanner hobbyist isn't letting you see the entire picture. That's why we share our point of view.

There's absolutely no clear and valid reason that falls under the banner of commonsense that dispatch can't be open and with a delay. Especially the fire department, which doesn't really need a delay. That's just stupid. Many departments do so already. Let that be a exhibit A and solidify what I'm conveying. Here in my town they CAN do this. Data was usually on TAC 2. They also have MDTs in the car. Yet they chose to encrypt the entire thing shutting out the public and the press at large. When I could monitor I heard things that NEVER got reported on that should have. This is what I'm referring to about transparency.

The requirement to protect CJI/PII is not optional. Doesn't matter what happened in the past. The requirement is there and there's no waivers available. There is no grace given for accidentally forgetting which channel one is on.
When an agency is faced with a requirement handed down from above, they are required to follow it to keep their agency accreditation. All agencies go through this.
There is no waiver for "whoops, we forgot…." Some manage to pull it off. Some decide not to take the risk. Each agency seems to be choosing what is best for their situation.

The press has other ways of gathering news and public safety agencies have other ways of getting them the info they need. The world does not revolve around scanners.

 

[INDY72]

But we NEED to know how the sausage is made, dang you info mafia creeps!

 

[buddrousa]

Receiving Radio Communications is a Privilege not a Right.
Just as is earning $100,000.00 a year. If you want to make that kind of money, make yourself that kind of Employee.
Just as is a College Education it is a Privilege it is also your bill you pay it.

 

[kc2asb]

The press has other ways of gathering news and public safety agencies have other ways of getting them the info they need. The world does not revolve around scanners.

Granted there are other ways to gather information, but I disagree about scanners. Scanners have become standard tools that many newsrooms rely on. Before my local and surrounding depts started going encrypted, the local press often reported incidents citing "radio communications" as the source. More often or not, there was no information or comment from department officials. Now we do not hear about incidents unless the departments release information or a resident posts on social media.

The running joke in my town was that the police only commented on crimes they had solved. Seems there is a lot of truth in humor.