encrypted radios (how can we)

[egilstrap62]

im asking everyones thoughts on how we can got our conutry to sell encrypted radio scanners. 1.back ground check 2. F.C.C. or ham radio permints 3. all radios sold must be registred with law inforcement. 4. Have monthly fee (like cell phone) to monitor. Ect well what do you think. big ed

[zz0468]

im asking everyones thoughts on how we can got our conutry to sell encrypted radio scanners.

You can`t. Period.

Even if you have a receiver equipped with decryption hardware (available today on eBay), it also requires a `key`, which could change daily, or more often than that. Agencies running encryption guard the keys closely. Should it ever become possible to routinely crack encrypted transmissions, encryption algorithms will advance sufficiently to keep at least one step ahead of any casual listeners.

[sp1989]

RSO leases radios (at least they used to) to news agencies so they can listen to what is happening. Last I knew, it was pretty expensive, and I doubt that they would do it for hobbyists. Not sure what they plan with PSEC once it goes on-line, though, I'm outta the loop these days.

Even if it was possible to make a scanner that could listen to encrypted systems, it is illegal to make one, thanks to the ECPA of 1986. Prior to then, descramblers for some early types of encryption were common accessories for scanners. I saw one on Ebay not that long ago, although I doubt anyone uses speech inversion (?) scramblers on their radio system anymore.

[sp1989]

I guess someone still makes them, so some on must use them still...
http://www.ramseyelectronics.com/cgi-bi ... &key=SS70C

[Mike_G_D]

I think what egilstrap62 was really getting at was more along the lines of how it might be possible to modify the laws in the future to allow non-affiliated folks to have the capability to use a receiver legally to monitor encrypted traffic with appropriate permission/background checks/NDA's (or whatever similar legally binding documents apply)/etc.

I guess that, in a sense, this is already "possible" in the limited sense that some agencies loan or lease so-equipped radios to local news agencies with limited encryption access, etc. However, if I am interpreting the OP correctly, I think he is referring to a more general approach. If so, this falls in line with some of my own ideas about such an approach - I should note that I am pretty much a realist and do not feel these ideas are likely to come to fruition in the near or even foreseeable future especially given the current political and corporate climates; this is more of a "thought experiment" on my part and applies to a more "ideal" world than really exists but I still like to play with the ideas.

The way I see it, in such a "world" it might work like this:

Publicly available radio receivers (at least the higher end models) capable of monitoring public service traffic would have the capability to utilize optional decryption modules capable of dealing with all/most/some (up to the manufacturer, etc.) of the encryption modes available.

Normally, anyone buying said radios would not have the legal ability to purchase said optional decryption modules unless they first passed some form of special background check, signed required documents (which may even state that said user waives certain common personal rights) and jumped through whatever hoops were deemed necessary by federal law.

Assuming that someone had sufficient desire to go through said procedures and the willingness to abide by the appropriate terms and successfully completed all tests/procedures, etc. then they would then be legally allowed to apply for the use of whatever agency's encryption key they were interested in. If said agency was satisfied by the passed requirements, background checks, etc., then they could either program the decryption module on-site or remotely (via internet or proprietary means) for that person's use.

Hardware-wise, this requires that the manufacturers see some potential profit from incorporating this feature in their products. If the "hoops" one needs to jump through to gain legal use of the decryption module are too stiff and/or the interest or desire to do so on the part of dedicated users is too low then it just won't be viable. Some profit might be made selling the feature to authorized agency users or outside mutual aid partners, etc., but that probably wouldn't be sufficient alone to adequately compensate the hardware expense (depends on how popular the products are to actual public safety agencies, etc.).

It may also run into issues wherein the agencies have final say and deem not to allow access despite all passed requirements. So the net effect is back to square one. I see this as the most likely scenario and problem should something like this be tried in "our world". Again, the only users would then be actual agency members and their local mutual aid partners. So no benefit to hobbyists and thus not likely to be profitable to the manufacturers.

-Mike

[zz0468]

A few comments are in order...

The way I see it, in such a "world" it might work like this:

Publicly available radio receivers (at least the higher end models) capable of monitoring public service traffic would have the capability to utilize optional decryption modules capable of dealing with all/most/some (up to the manufacturer, etc.) of the encryption modes available.

Normally, anyone buying said radios would not have the legal ability to purchase said optional decryption modules unless they first passed some form of special background check, signed required documents (which may even state that said user waives certain common personal rights) and jumped through whatever hoops were deemed necessary by federal law.

Consider the fact that RSO is requiring support personnel like radio techs, computer techs, etc. to undergo the same background check used for prospective deputies, it's highly unlikely they're going to make provision for members of the general public to have access to encrypted talk groups. That illustrates the level of paranoia in law enforcement today. That's not to say that paranoia isn't somewhat justified, in my opinion it is. But that's a pretty tall hurdle to clear for people with a need for access. Imagine what it would be for people without a need for access.

Assuming that someone had sufficient desire to go through said procedures and the willingness to abide by the appropriate terms and successfully completed all tests/procedures, etc. then they would then be legally allowed to apply for the use of whatever agency's encryption key they were interested in. If said agency was satisfied by the passed requirements, background checks, etc., then they could either program the decryption module on-site or remotely (via internet or proprietary means) for that person's use.

There may be some misconceptions about encryption keys here. They're quite capable of being changed very frequently, and if an agency using encryption is on the ball, it will be. This is not an issue in modern systems with over-the-air-rekeying capability, but this is not a capability you'll ever see in scanners, since it currently requires two-way communication with the radio to perform rekeying.

Hardware-wise, this requires that the manufacturers see some potential profit from incorporating this feature in their products. If the "hoops" one needs to jump through to gain legal use of the decryption module are too stiff and/or the interest or desire to do so on the part of dedicated users is too low then it just won't be viable.

Licensing fees for decryption firmware would probably be cost prohibitive for most hobby level listeners, and you could expect to see very vigorous opposition on the part of government agencies at every level.

Some profit might be made selling the feature to authorized agency users or outside mutual aid partners, etc., but that probably wouldn't be sufficient alone to adequately compensate the hardware expense (depends on how popular the products are to actual public safety agencies, etc.).

It's already available, and has been for years, in the form of encryption capable two-way radios. What's interesting is the reluctance of many agencies to share encryption keys with neighboring agencies. That happens more than you would think. The preferred method is that mutual aid occurs on designated mutual aid talk groups or frequencies, and that could be encrypted or in the clear, depending on local agreement. Encryption keys can be (and should be) different for each talk group or frequency. Common keys could be designated for mutual aid channels.

...So no benefit to hobbyists and thus not likely to be profitable to the manufacturers.

You have to look at this from a law enforcement angle, where in a post 9/11 world the "threat" isn't what it used to be. Street gangs have become quite sophisticated, and drug cartels have capabilities that rival governments in terms of communications technology. If there's a mechanism for the public to gain legal access to encrypted talk groups, it would be an easy matter for the bad guys to participate, background checks not withstanding. The easiest way to prevent that is to not allow it in the first place, which is exactly what's going to happen.

[zz0468]

RSO leases radios (at least they used to) to news agencies so they can listen to what is happening. Last I knew, it was pretty expensive, and I doubt that they would do it for hobbyists. Not sure what they plan with PSEC once it goes on-line, though, I'm outta the loop these days.

I believe they charged the same price as they did any other user, which was in the $200/mo class per radio. I don't know what the intention is under PSEC, but continuing that policy of providing radios to news agencies would go a long way toward boosting their credibility and people's perceptions of transparency.

Even if it was possible to make a scanner that could listen to encrypted systems, it is illegal to make one, thanks to the ECPA of 1986.

Under the proposals made in this thread for background checks, etc, by definition, the ECPA would not apply, as registered and licensed listeners would therefor become authorized. But that whole idea is so fundamentally flawed at every level, it won't ever be implemented.

Prior to then, descramblers for some early types of encryption were common accessories for scanners. I saw one on Ebay not that long ago, although I doubt anyone uses speech inversion (?) scramblers on their radio system anymore.

It's probably mostly being used in commercial services where a company thinks they need privacy, but can't afford real privacy. Midian still offers voice inversion scramblers and advertises it for users needing "protection against casual listeners".

[Mike_G_D]

zz0468, yes, I already pretty much came to all of those conclusions myself regarding the posted methodology for including outside listeners (for encrypted traffic) in our current world view. What I came up with was more relevant (maybe) prior to 9/11 hence why I stated that in the current climate, political, sociological, and corporate, I didn't think it practically viable.

And, yes, I do understand the encryption key methodology as you explained it - I (over) simplified it in my post for brevity. Technically, I do see ways around this, however, as frequent updates could be sent via other means for receive only radios (perhaps, however, not on a transmission-by-transmission case if that is employed due to latency and consistency of connectivity standpoint). My background is RF engineering with a good understanding of general digital and analog circuitry and have taught myself basic computer networking, etc. From a purely technical standpoint I am sure it could be done with, perhaps, some limitations as outlined above; however, given the practical aspects of dealing with the governing bodies as you have well outlined I do not believe it even remotely likely in our current world.

-Mike

[cvrules90]

im asking everyones thoughts on how we can got our conutry to sell encrypted radio scanners. 1.back ground check 2. F.C.C. or ham radio permints 3. all radios sold must be registred with law inforcement. 4. Have monthly fee (like cell phone) to monitor. Ect well what do you think. big ed

I think what should happen is that all scanner hobbyists should be given free radios if they pass a background check. Encryption goes in place so that crooks can't follow police force comms while holding up a bank for example. If someone has a clear background check, there's no excuse why he or she shouldn't be able to have accesss to encryption.

And not just in RVC but wherever encryption is the norm. Especially OC where all police forces are encrypted.

[egilstrap62]

RIGHT ON GUYS BACKGROUND CHECKS ALSO REGSITER THE RADIO LIKE THEY DO GUNS YOU KNOW. BIG ED