Encryption is NOT for Everyone

This is the place to discuss Riverside County scanning related topics. Whether it be something about a particular agency, radios, antennas, or other general scanner related questions, you can talk about it here.
zz0468
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:35 pm

Re: Encryption is NOT for Everyone

Post by zz0468 »

Jlanfn wrote:I think you raise an important point that the decision to encrypt is based on the perceptions of the agency's decision-making entities...

...Relying primarily upon perceptions of the threats or simply copying the actions of others are certainly not objective thought processes.
I use the word "perception" in these discussions for a very specific purpose. But that purpose is not to imply that no real or rational thought is going into the process. Just based on the expense involved, there IS some rational thought processes taking place that drive the decisions.

By saying "perception", what I'm trying to say is, based on available statistics, previous events, predicted trends, and whatever other sources are out there, law enforcement can make a rational argument that, sooner or later, they will be facing a threat that could be partially mitigated by encrypting their communications. The decision could be based on the possibility, or the probability of such an event, not necessarily that it's actually happened to them, and they know it will happen again.

The perceived event doesn't need to be a catastrophic terrorist act. It could be street gangs using smart phone apps or scanners. It could be drug cartels enforcing their own strange codes of ethics against snitches, or who knows what. Having people listening in HAS caused problems, and the potential for it causing HUGE problems can be very real. Encryption becomes another tool to solve a particular problem that may or may not happen. Drug cartels and even some organized crime (gangs, etc.) has technical capability rivaling some governments. Robust encrypted communications will become essential when dealing with those people.

From the point of view of scanner listeners, the prospect is disturbing. From the point of view of law enforcement, and system administrators, most don't care one bit about scanner listeners one way or the other. The radio is THEIR tool to use, and they will use it as they see fit.

And I agree with that point of view.
Jlanfn
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Encryption is NOT for Everyone

Post by Jlanfn »

N6AJB and zz0468 have done a very good job explaining some of the compelling reasons why a law enforcement agency would choose encryption. Are these reasons so compelling that a sensible agency would ALWAYS choose to fully encrypt? No, apparently not considering all the agencies who have chosen to implement only partial encryption or none at all.

The bottom line is that agencies will decide for themselves using their own decision process. Some will choose to consider all the issues carefully and others will just go with whatever their gut feeling has always been. They will all do what they want because it is their system after all.

I have always understood that my perspective or input is really meaningless because I am not a part of the decision-making process. cvrules90 is probably right; I've spent too much time on this thread. :mrgreen:
cvrules90
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 8:08 am

Re: Encryption is NOT for Everyone

Post by cvrules90 »

It's important to understand that encrypting everything, no matter how dangerous the city or area, is very tough. Scanner listeners can find out about an incident LONG before the evening news broadcast it. This means you can hear everything from bomb threats to a terrorist attack and can protect yourself and your family.

Fortunately, departments that decide on full-time 100% encryption have developed alternate means of relying critical events to citizens. DC Police, for example, let people sign up for emails and there are blogs and notification options out there (RSO and several contract PD websites maintain such blogs). Some areas, like our next door neighbors OC, have emrgency RED TGIDs in the clear keeping everything else encrypted. I hope that will be the case (or at least be considered) on the PSEC.
zz0468
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:35 pm

Re: Encryption is NOT for Everyone

Post by zz0468 »

cvrules90 wrote:It's important to understand that encrypting everything, no matter how dangerous the city or area, is very tough.
No it isn't. You just click the box in the programming software, and load the key with the keyloader. Once encryption capable radios are purchased and deployed, encryption can be made seamless and nearly invisible to the end users. There are a few "gotchyas" to watch out for, but overall it's anything but "very tough" to do.
cvrules90 wrote:Scanner listeners can find out about an incident LONG before the evening news broadcast it. This means you can hear everything from bomb threats to a terrorist attack and can protect yourself and your family.
But that's not the purpose of a law enforcement agency's radio system. It's not intended for broadcast to the general public. In fact, I have heard of cases where a member of the general public tries to act on things heard on a scanner, and it turned out to be an exercise, not a real event. So, even that argument against encryption can be shot full of holes.
cvrules90 wrote:Fortunately, departments that decide on full-time 100% encryption have developed alternate means of relying critical events to citizens. DC Police, for example, let people sign up for emails and there are blogs and notification options out there (RSO and several contract PD websites maintain such blogs). Some areas, like our next door neighbors OC, have emrgency RED TGIDs in the clear keeping everything else encrypted. I hope that will be the case (or at least be considered) on the PSEC.
Police agencies do that regardless of whether or not they're encrypted. If there is a need to disseminate information to the public, I assure you, the police have the phone numbers and contact information of all the appropriate news agencies, along with contact names. They're probably on a first name basis with the usual local reporters, and if it's serious, there is the Amber Alert system for getting things out FAST.

Encryption plays no role whatsoever in any of this.
cvrules90
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 8:08 am

Re: Encryption is NOT for Everyone

Post by cvrules90 »

You can also sign up for a program where they can call you in case of an emergency (known as Code Red or Reverse 911 in some areas).
Post Reply