Why go encrypted

[N2DLX]

Let's forget about "corruption" here for a moment. Lately crime has been on the rise in many towns, likely due in some part to the economy (desperation on the part of the criminals, budget cuts and downsizing in departments, etc). In towns that encrypt their main dispatch channel, there's no way for the average resident to be aware of what's going on. Unless you hear about it in the news or by word of mouth, it's almost as if it never happened.

I notice a lot more crime in Edison lately, in areas that were never subject to it. It never makes the news unless it's a BIG story.. but the smaller crimes which are far more likely to impact your life go unnoticed. Car thefts, vandalism, theft, breaking and entering, assaults.. things you would normally be able to hear on a scanner, are hardly ever reported on in the media. Unless the department volunteers the information to media outlets, the smaller crimes never really get talked about. I'm all for encryption on sensitive channels/talkgroups like medical examiners, vice, drug stings, SWAT.. but not on the main dispatch channel. Isn't it the right of the residents to know what's going on (with a few exceptions)?

Getting back to corruption, when a department encrypts their communications, it invites speculation of corruption -- true or not. If the department were in the clear, the residents wouldn't feel so out of the loop and so distant from their departments. You don't know what's going on in your own town, and they certainly don't go out of their way after-the-fact to inform residents of the recent crimes in the town.

What are the chances of getting enough public support for departments to remove encryption from their main dispatch channels? Obviously much of the scanner community would be on board, but that's a minority. What about the average Joe?

 

[zerg901]

Death squad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Several mentions here of police operating as death squads

 

[N_Jay]

Death squad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Several mentions here of police operating as death squads

Well, THAT must be the reason!:roll:

 

[JoeyC]

In towns that encrypt their main dispatch channel, there's no way for the average resident to be aware of what's going on. Unless you hear about it in the news or by word of mouth, it's almost as if it never happened.

The average resident isn't interested in listening to scanners.

It never makes the news unless it's a BIG story.. but the smaller crimes which are far more likely to impact your life go unnoticed. Car thefts, vandalism, theft, breaking and entering, assaults.. things you would normally be able to hear on a scanner, are hardly ever reported on in the media. Unless the department volunteers the information to media outlets, the smaller crimes never really get talked about. I'm all for encryption on sensitive channels/talkgroups like medical examiners, vice, drug stings, SWAT.. but not on the main dispatch channel. Isn't it the right of the residents to know what's going on (with a few exceptions)?

I don't know about you, but I find assaults, vandalisms and the things you mention as not really newsworthy. Most cities would prefer the news media not paint such a grim picture of the area by reporting every crime committed on the 6 pm news. It doesn't look good for PR.

Getting back to corruption, when a department encrypts their communications, it invites speculation of corruption -- true or not.

only amongst some scanner enthusiasts.

You don't know what's going on in your own town, and they certainly don't go out of their way after-the-fact to inform residents of the recent crimes in the town.

Thats funny, in many small town newspapers, there is usually a police blotter sections in the paper with all the little stuff you speak of. Not to mention that you can request this information as part of the FOIA from the department itself. Many times this stuff is posted at the end of a year as well, on the dept website or the new media obtains it and reports it.

What are the chances of getting enough public support for departments to remove encryption from their main dispatch channels? Obviously much of the scanner community would be on board, but that's a minority. What about the average Joe?

If left to decide based on the reasons given by LE or the radio vendors, fewer than more would be in favor of removing the encryption.

Again, who is in the majority here?

 

[Septa3371CSX1]

I would say not true for the average resident. While many don't express interest in scanners, you have to remember that many scanner users are firefighters, EMTs, police officers, etc. Also there are many people who have a scanner to keep them occupied. The lady that used to live behind me had a scanner and she basically had it to keep in touch with what's going on and to keep her company since she lived alone (her husband died many years before). Encryption makes many of these people upset because they get placed out of the loop. The whole arguement for criminals using scanners is a little weak if you ask me. For the most part, the majority of criminals can't afford a good scanner. Also in many states it is illegal for a convicted felon to possess a scanner and just about everywhere it is illegal to use a scanner in the commission of a crime. I will rest my case here.

 

[radioman2001]

Oh, I just have to jump in on this one. I too have been involved in P.S. communications for over 35 years. I have never been a fan of encryption. It gives the sense of not being allowed to oversee the personell you as a taxpayer are paying for. Now for a moment lets put this scenario in a non-public safety setting. You work for company A. You can go about your business without the boss, the guy who pays you without any oversight ie: listening to you conversations, how you dealt with customer B and the like. How long do you think that would last! Not very long, I'm sure. Now as I have stated in other threads, I do support encryption for instances that warrant them. But that is the problem, who decides? The department or government agency? Sure they would all like to be like the employee in the scenario above. BTW with FOIA, has anyone tried to get info using it. It's a PITA. First you need to know about what you are looking for, very hard if you don't know it happened. Next the rules concerning FOIA are very strict that you must be very specific on what you want and from whom and when it happened. So you can't just go and troll looking for things. ( first problem with encryption, you don't know it happened or where it happened, and you have no independent knowledge of it having happened) Now I don't know about any other state other than New York, but unless the agency involved wants it known, you are not going to get any information posted anywhere about anything. Police blotters are for the most part just filtered descriptions of events that have already happened. BTW I don't trust the media anyway, been personally involved in incidents and then read or saw the news portrayal and it wasn't even close to what really happened.
For joey_c. Now as far as the average citizen listening to their local PD dispatch system, has anyone ever REALY done a comprehensive survey to determine that? Most likely not, but based upon scanner sales there a lot more than local governments may want to admit to.
Now for HIPPA, most folks didn't realize how this was going to effect their daily lives when they supported it. The original intent of the law was to make it easier for the consumer/patient to get their own records and seek medical advice without the interferrence of the originating doctor and insurance company. What we have now is, you have to sign away you rights every time you go the the doctor so he/she can bill the insurance company. Now there may be some instances where HIPPA is working, but I am getting a little tired of every time I have anything medical done I have to sign a wavier over and over and over again. For it's effect on radio transmissions, it's all BS. If you are transmitting personal information over the radio you SHOULD be charged with violating HIPPA. There is no instance I can think of, (and I have worked for the busiest EMS system in the world in NYC) where it is necessary to transmit personal information, that would have anything to do with pre-hospital care. Giving descriptions of patient conditions or level of injury don't constitute transmitting personal information. Giving names addresses and the like do, but under HIPPA you cannot even talk about them in the hospital elevator either.\
I've thrown out a lot of my beliefs. I'll address how to prevent local agencies from adopting full wide-scale encryption of their systems in another thread. I have to do some work now.

 

[radioman2001]

Oh, I just have to jump in on this one. I too have been involved in P.S. communications for over 35 years. I have never been a fan of encryption. It gives the sense of not being allowed to oversee the personell you as a taxpayer are paying for. Now for a moment lets put this scenario in a non-public safety setting. You work for company A. You can go about your business without the boss, the guy who pays you without any oversight ie: listening to you conversations, how you dealt with customer B and the like. How long do you think that would last! Not very long, I'm sure. Now as I have stated in other threads, I do support encryption for instances that warrant them. But that is the problem, who decides? The department or government agency? Sure they would all like to be like the employee in the scenario above. BTW with FOIA, has anyone tried to get info using it. It's a PITA. First you need to know about what you are looking for, very hard if you don't know it happened. Next the rules concerning FOIA are very strict that you must be very specific on what you want and from whom and when it happened. So you can't just go and troll looking for things. ( first problem with encryption, you don't know it happened or where it happened, and you have no independent knowledge of it having happened) Now I don't know about any other state other than New York, but unless the agency involved wants it known, you are not going to get any information posted anywhere about anything. Police blotters are for the most part just filtered descriptions of events that have already happened. BTW I trust the media anyway, been personally involved in incidents and then read or saw the news portrayal and it wasn't even close to what really happened.
For joey_c. Now as far as the average citizen listening to their local PD dispatch system, has anyone ever REALY done a comprehensive survey to determine that? Most likely not, but based upon scanner sales there a lot more than local governments may want to admit to.
No for HIPPA, most folks didn't realize how this was going to effect their daily lives when they supported it. The original intent of the law was to make it easier for the consumer/patient to get their own records and seek medical advice without the interferrence of the originating doctor and insurance company. What we have now is, you have to sign away you rights every time you go the the doctor so he/she can bill the insurance company. Now there may be some instances where HIPPA is working, but I am getting a little tired of every time I have anything medical done I have to sign a wavier over and over and over again. For it's effect on radio transmissions, it's all BS. If you are transmitting personal information over the radio you SHOULD be charged with violating HIPPA. There is no instance I can think of, (and I have worked for the busiest EMS system in the world in NYC) where it is necessary to transmit personal information, that would have anything to do with pre-hospital care. Giving descriptions of patient conditions or level of injury don't constitute transmitting personal information. Giving names addresses and the like do, but under HIPPA you cannot even talk about them in the hospital elevator either.\
I've thrown out a lot of my beliefs. I'll address how to prevent local agencies from adopting full wide-scale encryption of their systems in another thread. I have to do some work now.

 

[kenisned]

Nope, just some support for your strong opinion.

30 years of working for and with federal, state and local public safety agencies in the needs analysys, design and implementation of radio systems.

Maybe, but we were not discussing only EMS radio systems. (Although that was the last few posts)

You have jumped to the ASSUMPTION that cellphones provide acceptable coverage.
You have also assumed that a cell phone is available.

You have ignored the cost of the cellphone service and equipment.

Well, my 25 years of public safety experience suggests that for non-law enforcement, there is no need for encryption.

I was responding to the post about EMS, sorry if you assumed otherwise.

Cell phones have pretty good coverage, just like most radio systems, they have dead spots.

The cell phones are already a fixture on most public safety vehicles around here. They just need to use them if they have sensitive comms.

Sorry, I remain unconvinced.

 

[NNJradio]

You folks just don't get it. Corruption is not done because of encryption. Keeping the public informed is the job of the police dept. fire dept. etc. They are under no obligation to let the public in on everything. Despite our hobby we cannot control it. However, it certainly does not help when people post things such as doughnut runs, mistakes etc. that were done. Think about what you post, think about what you say. Some of you are posting way too much. What do you think is one of the driving forces for agencies that go Tyco? The ability to not be heard in Pro Voice or Open Sky.

 

[N_Jay]

Well, my 25 years of public safety experience suggests that for non-law enforcement, there is no need for encryption.

How many needs analysis programs have you been involved in?
How many different agencies have you interviewed?
Yes, we ALWAYS get some who see the need and others that don't.
The fact that you don't does not change the information from those that do.

I was responding to the post about EMS, sorry if you assumed otherwise.

EMS seems to have a couple of different camps of thought these days.

HIPPA scared everyone, now that is fading, but more thought is being put into the overall need.

Cell phones have pretty good coverage, just like most radio systems, they have dead spots.

How broad is your experience across the country?
There are MANY states with vast areas of no cellular coverage,

The cell phones are already a fixture on most public safety vehicles around here. They just need to use them if they have sensitive comms.

If they are there, when they work, and IF (Big IF) they are included in the procedures and planning (including procedures for when they don't work).

Sorry, I remain unconvinced.

Yes, some always do.

 

[kenisned]

How many needs analysis programs have you been involved in?
How many different agencies have you interviewed?
Yes, we ALWAYS get some who see the need and others that don't.
The fact that you don't does not change the information from those that do.

EMS seems to have a couple of different camps of thought these days.

HIPPA scared everyone, now that is fading, but more thought is being put into the overall need.

How broad is your experience across the country?
There are MANY states with vast areas of no cellular coverage,

If they are there, when they work, and IF (Big IF) they are included in the procedures and planning (including procedures for when they don't work).

Yes, some always do.

I've never done a needs assessment. I've just been an end user, EMS worker/supervisor, firefighter/officer/chief officer over my last 25 years.

No interviews, just end-user experience. I've written policies, implemented HIPPAA, etc.

The fact that I don't believe it is needed, doesn't make my opinion any less valid then those that do. That's a bit of faulty logic there.

I've been involved with large scale forest fire incidents across the US. However, I was positing in the NJ forum, so that's really where my comments were directed.

However, the lack of cell coverage is a reason to go encrypted? Hmm....

I stand by my opinion. As an emergency services administrator and end user, Encryption serves very little use in EMS/Fire operations.

 

[N_Jay]

I've never done a needs assessment. I've just been an end user, EMS worker/supervisor, firefighter/officer/chief officer over my last 25 years.

Yep, that is why we survey end users, line supervisory, and upper management/administration personnel.

No interviews, just end-user experience. I've written policies, implemented HIPPAA, etc.

Then, if you agency is doing it right, you would probably be on the list.

The fact that I don't believe it is needed, doesn't make my opinion any less valid then those that do. That's a bit of faulty logic there.

Why? No more valid, no less.

I've been involved with large scale forest fire incidents across the US. However, I was positing in the NJ forum, so that's really where my comments were directed.

Yes,. needs do vary considerably, but even in dense areas, there are good reasons not to build critical communications on public networks.

However, the lack of cell coverage is a reason to go encrypted? Hmm....

However, you did imply that cellular was to be used for "more secure/private" communications.
Why, if there are no security/privacy needs?
If there are needs, what is the fallback if cellular is not available (or fails)?
Do you (or does your agency) want a process that relies on public networks, and requires a different policy and procedure if that network is not available.

The issues are not just "technical"?

I stand by my opinion. As an emergency services administrator and end user, Encryption serves very little use in EMS/Fire operations.

So noted.

 

[zerg901]

Gruesome confessions of police killings by death squad driver « The Nairobi Chronicle

Kenyan Police death squads. Read the pdf. Peter Sz

 

[robbinsj2]

From Kearny PD to Kenyan death squads. What about UFOs, no one has expressed an opinion on whether or not they should be encrypted.

 

[kenisned]

Death Squads?

Wow... talk about left field!

 

[zerg901]

washingtonpost.com

PG County Police rob bank while using PD radios

 

[N_Jay]

washingtonpost.com

PG County Police rob bank while using PD radios

Were they encrypted, or are we still in left field?

 

[kenisned]

Were they encrypted, or are we still in left field?

I don't think we are even in the ballpark with these last few posts.

 

[radiomanNJ1]

Only one answer yes. Did they get caught? Yes.

Were they encrypted, or are we still in left field?

 

[radiomanNJ1]

So you were one of the mommy type volunteers who picked up the rig at the barn?

I've never done a needs assessment. I've just been an end user, EMS worker/supervisor, firefighter/officer/chief officer over my last 25 years.

No interviews, just end-user experience. I've written policies, implemented HIPPAA, etc.

The fact that I don't believe it is needed, doesn't make my opinion any less valid then those that do. That's a bit of faulty logic there.

I've been involved with large scale forest fire incidents across the US. However, I was positing in the NJ forum, so that's really where my comments were directed.

However, the lack of cell coverage is a reason to go encrypted? Hmm....

I stand by my opinion. As an emergency services administrator and end user, Encryption serves very little use in EMS/Fire operations.