Wilmington, NC - Law enforcement agencies encrypting radio trasmissions

Status
Not open for further replies.

slicerwizard

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2002
Messages
6,447
Location
Toronto, Ontario
And as quick as that happens the agencies using ADP will go to AES-256...
Maybe, maybe not. Encryption, even ADP, shuts down the scanner feeds and I suspect that that's enough for most departments. They didn't have significant problems before feeds, so why would they after the feeds are gone?


Here is my little analogy:
It's a bad analogy. A private garden in no way equates to a publicly funded police force. It's not cleaver at all. You're really reaching.
 

quarterwave

Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
559
Location
TBD
What is next?

Fire & EMS Traffic will be next.

Another way to screw the honest man out of a hobby.

David
Where I am, the Forestry people are encrypted full time, but the remainder of the state agencies, including the state cops, on the State system....are not.

Because, you know the privacy of the squirrels and deers' personal information is of the utmost importance!

We barely have enough rangers in any one area where they can even talk to each other anyway...so it's more likely just an ego thing for some director or head cheese.
 

pepsima1

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
1,078
Location
Pimp County, Neveda
Here we go again about Encryption the BIG "E" word.

Get use to it people. Encryption has been around for years now and smaller counties and cities are finally getting caught up to speed as a faster rate than people would like it to be.

Enryption is really not because of apps on the phone or live feeds. Its a contributing factor but its really not because of this.

My County has been fully Encrypted for the past 13 years and it was way before smartphones and apps and when the internet was still not of much yet.

Trust me Encryption is not to keep out law bidding citizens by no mean. Police officers and agencies don't give a rats about us or the scanners that we listen to at all. Its to keep the .00000001 percent of criminals that want the ability to listen and do harm or listen to when they do a crime.

Its not much at all. But you can't send out transmissions and say heah everybody that are good people you can listen and the bad people you can't listen OKAY. They just lock everybody out and that's it.

No going back. Its the way forward and this is what it will be forever.

Plus lets face it, 1 percent of the time is exciting to listen when something good is going on, the rest of the 99 percent of the time is day to day talk and it will put you to sleep like a baby.

This is the honest truth.........................
 

RayAir

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
1,796
We use Harris OpenSky and one of my favorite things about it is that it assures private communication (ie- no scanner can receive it. I've been using it since 2010.

And I know Tyco and MA/Com had lots of problems developing OpenSky but Harris engineers turned it in to a high quality 4:1 digital system. It sounds good and every time I key my mic it goes right through, even in a concrete parking structure using my Harris P7200 portable.

Harris OpenSky works.

As far as encryption, if I was in charge of a department, I would enable it by default. Minimum AES128 for all public safety operations. Key changes monthly and radios that require an authentication to system or password ( like OpenSky).

I think Harris offers AES192 for OpenSky.

Harris. Assured Communications.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,133
Location
Peoria, IL
I think detectives should have encryption. I dont think police dispatch should be that way. The only thing should happen with the police is what I said before and when they issue a 10-49 or 10-99 for someone.
 

snig64

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
25
Location
Texas
We use Harris OpenSky and one of my favorite things about it is that it assures private communication (ie- no scanner can receive it. I've been using it since 2010.

And I know Tyco and MA/Com had lots of problems developing OpenSky but Harris engineers turned it in to a high quality 4:1 digital system. It sounds good and every time I key my mic it goes right through, even in a concrete parking structure using my Harris P7200 portable.

Harris OpenSky works.

As far as encryption, if I was in charge of a department, I would enable it by default. Minimum AES128 for all public safety operations. Key changes monthly and radios that require an authentication to system or password ( like OpenSky).

I think Harris offers AES192 for OpenSky.

Harris. Assured Communications.

You must be a Harris rep. Those of us that have listened to OpenSky on the street are appalled at how much it sucks.


I tested a Harris P25 radio in live conditions on our system and they should NOT be allowed on ANY system. The audio was horrible and I wasn't in a "dead spot". It did not have any missing bits, it just sucked. I'd even take a Kenwood over a Harris.


I put the Tait and Harris side-by-side in "dead spots" and the Harris wouldn't even grab a channel sometimes. BONKKKKKKKK.


I've sat through demos of respected manufacturers (Harris, Relm, Tait, Motorola, etc) and Tait is my second choice. My first is Motorola. Say what you want, I've attended meetings put on by the manufactures. The spatial and noise cancelling mic's on the APX are AWESOME. Dual display? Yes, please.
 

RayAir

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
1,796
lol. I don't work for Harris. I'm just telling you its a quality system now. Our system has been updated to OpenSky2 specs which solved pretty much all of the problems with volume and echo.

Interop is very good as O/S has patch channels to all surrounding Moto systems and conventional systems.

The reason you probably say O/S sounds bad is because you're listening to a digital to analog patch- which DO sound bad. Listen to it on a Harris OTP capable radio and it sounds good.

Fire uses O/S for fireground now because the system updates permit high quality comms in very noisy environments.

I think OpenSky technology is much better than P25.

As I said before, all PDs should encrypt.

Its just to risky not to.
 

fredva

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
1,580
Location
Virginia/West Virginia
Ray_Air,
OpenSky appears to be dying, at least in the public safety realm. Too many spectacular failures that potential customers have been made aware of.
 

AZScanner

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,360
Location
Somewhere in this room. Right now, you're very col
As I said before, all PDs should encrypt.

Its just to risky not to.
Baloney. Why should ALL PD communications be encrypted? Are you telling me there's a risk from someone hearing on a scanner or web feed that someone called to report a barking dog or that the neighbor kids are throwing rocks into the street? Give me a break.

Encryption on routine channels serves one purpose and one purpose only: to hide from amd/or retaliate against the media. That's the only reason I've ever seen this done on PD patrol channels. The agencies out here where I live have made it abundantly clear that they view the media as the "enemy" and only want them showing up when beckoned via Twitter. Details are purposely omitted and most tweets from the PD just warn folks of a "police situation" and to "stay away from the area". Our last officer involved shooting out here was the direct result of a couple of cowboys trying to take on an armed felon alone, but thanks to the heavy encryption in use in our area, the media is oblivious to it, having been reduced to the role of Police Department Mouthpiece because they are 90% in the dark as to what the hell is going on out there and only know what they are told by the PD PIO.

The proliferation of live web feeds only makes for a convenient scapegoat. The real reason departments are going dark has NOTHING to do with criminals and hobbyists and EVERYTHING to do with the news media. Don't be fooled into thinking otherwise. Ask anyone in the know in Wilmington or any other agency that goes full encryption who can speak "off the record". They'll tell you that the scanners and web feeds have nothing whatsoever to do with this move. It just makes it all the easier to justify.

-AZ
 

ElroyJetson

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
2,494
Location
Florida, where you wish you were!
No doubt you've heard this angle before.

Police are on the public payroll. We as citizens have every right to know what our public servants are doing in the performance of their duties except in the rare cases where there is a compelling need to keep communications secret for a long enough period of time that a developing tactical situation will not be compromised by disclosure of that information.

Routine traffic should not be encrypted and I firmly oppose the usage of encryption by public safety as a matter of routine. It should only be for very sensitive data and tactical situations.

I've made my sentiments clear to a few public officials, most of whom agreed with me. If more people would do this, it's very possible that some departments might bow to pressure and go back to clear communications for routine operations.

But it'll never happen if you don't make your voice heard.

As for OpenSky (openscam), its historical background is that it was created by AMP Wireless Systems as a data network for FedEx. It was intended to carry package tracking data, not voice, and it did admirably well in its original application. It was never originally designed for voice comms and I have yet to hear comments from a daily OpenSky system user who had much positive to say about it.

P25 may not be perfect but all OpenSky systems should be changed over to P25.

What we should REALLY be looking at is TeTRA. It's mature, modern, highly developed, and highly reliable. Why we don't have it in the US is a mystery to me.
 

RayAir

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
1,796
An ideal system would be either Moto X2-tdma with law enforcement encrypted with AES128 and fire/ems encrypted with ADP or an OpenSky2 system running AES192.

Public safety comms can be of a sensitive nature and I advocate full time encryption because a lot of users screw up and forget to put their radios in secure mode when enc must be manually selected.

And they are not trying to hide anything by encrypting. If that were the case comms could be hidden from you with an analog system (ex- just use a cell phone or an MDT). Ever hear on an analog system something like, "150 check your screen." Yeah.

And besides the public has no inherent right to be able to eavesdrop on any communications. Arguing that public safety is in the public domain therefore the public has a right to eavesdrop is not a valid argument. Your senator is a public official but should you have the right to listen to his cellphone?

I'm a big advocate for privacy. I don't like the fact that non-department personell or a third party could listen in and I'm glad they can't for the most part.

Just like I was glad when cellphones went digital.

In this day and age, encryption is very important. For you personally and for public safety. Businesses need to get on board too.
 

bfperez

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
203
The beauty of OpenSky appears to be that it's nearly impossible for even its own users to monitor.

So far it seems that Milwaukee's system is working OK, so Harris has that going for them.

As for PA and Las Vegas, not so much. LV Metro is now spending another $20+ million for a Motorola P25 phase 2 system. LV dumped upwards of $40 million into OpenSky only to walk away, PA is in for some $400+ million and they still have big problems.
 

AZScanner

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,360
Location
Somewhere in this room. Right now, you're very col
An ideal system would be either Moto X2-tdma with law enforcement encrypted with AES128 and fire/ems encrypted with ADP or an OpenSky2 system running AES192.

Public safety comms can be of a sensitive nature and I advocate full time encryption because a lot of users screw up and forget to put their radios in secure mode when enc must be manually selected.

And they are not trying to hide anything by encrypting. If that were the case comms could be hidden from you with an analog system (ex- just use a cell phone or an MDT). Ever hear on an analog system something like, "150 check your screen." Yeah.

And besides the public has no inherent right to be able to eavesdrop on any communications. Arguing that public safety is in the public domain therefore the public has a right to eavesdrop is not a valid argument. Your senator is a public official but should you have the right to listen to his cellphone?

I'm a big advocate for privacy. I don't like the fact that non-department personell or a third party could listen in and I'm glad they can't for the most part.

Just like I was glad when cellphones went digital.

In this day and age, encryption is very important. For you personally and for public safety. Businesses need to get on board too.
That's great. Thanks for sharing.

By the way... this is a forum for scanner hobbyists. I think you ended up in the wrong place. Perhaps you should go join your scanner hating pals over on forums.officer.com - just a suggestion.

-AZ
 

RayAir

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
1,796
That's great. Thanks for sharing.

By the way... this is a forum for scanner hobbyists. I think you ended up in the wrong place. Perhaps you should go join your scanner hating pals over on forums.officer.com - just a suggestion.

-AZ
I have a two scanners. But they are mostly paperweights due to any system worth listening to went proprietary digital or MotoTRBO. I don't even bother with attempting DSD because the TRBO users are just security and tow companies.

But I was issued a Harris P7200 OpenSky radio so I can listen to county police, fire, and EMS as well as county EOC.

So I guess you can say my scanner is a Harris radio.
Harris. Trusted Communications for First Responders.
 
Last edited:

RayAir

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
1,796
The beauty of OpenSky appears to be that it's nearly impossible for even its own users to monitor.

So far it seems that Milwaukee's system is working OK, so Harris has that going for them.

As for PA and Las Vegas, not so much. LV Metro is now spending another $20+ million for a Motorola P25 phase 2 system. LV dumped upwards of $40 million into OpenSky only to walk away, PA is in for some $400+ million and they still have big problems.
PA has an issue with radio propagation due to the terrain in the state. The should have went VHF P25, not 800MHz.

NY bought an undeveloped system that looked good on paper but at the time the technology wasn't there. Tyco and MA/Com just didn't have the engineering expertise to evolve a data system in to a voice and data system. Harris, a world leader in military communications did have the expertise. They overhauled OpenSky in to a high quality efficient digital TRS.

Let's not delve off topic though, let me ask you guys. Would YOU want someone to be able to listen in on your communications? I personally dont . Encryption, guys, is your friend.

If you owned a business, would you not encrypt your comms with at least cheap ADP?
 

bfperez

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
203
If I were at work, I would expect that my employer(s) might want/demand to listen to what I'm saying/doing while using their equipment on their time while incurring liabilities for them.

Off-the-clock, so to speak, and/or while using my own equipment (phone, radio, laptop), the answer would be no.

My business communications would probably be encrypted if I felt there was something that needed to be private and the cost justified that. But, I would retain the option to monitor my employees' communications if I felt it were necessary.
 

brandon

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,482
Location
SoCal
What is next?

Fire & EMS Traffic will be next.

Another way to screw the honest man out of a hobby.

David
Very likely, at least with EMS. Hell our county encrypts everything down to animal control and public works depts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top