5 ms·
"P25 has some nice features ... but security is not one of them." And that is just fine. Police and firefighters/medics[1] are civilians and are in their role
by rsync 9y ago
"P25 has some nice features ... but security is not one of them."
And that is just fine.
Police and firefighters/medics[1] are civilians and are in their role to serve civilians at the pleasure of civilians. There is no need for secret comms and, in fact, it is often quite valuable for the public at large to have visibility into their operations in real time.
There is no need to encrypt public safety radio comms and you should be quite suspicious of anyone who claims that there is.
Those radios belong to you. The frequencies belong to you. The people who use them are your own servants.
[1] I am a firefighter/medic in the SFBA.
- tbabb 9y agoAgree, it is probably good for police / fire / EMT etc. to be open. However, the linked talk above notes that the researchers accidentally discovered that some "sensitive tactical law enforcement operations" were unwittingly operating in cleartext, and divulged to the open air "names and/or identifying features of targets and confidential informants, their locations, descriptions of undercover agents, [...] plans for forthcoming takedowns and operations," and a few other things you probably don't want to widely announce. It also notes that radio locations could be easily discovered, even if they're not communicating. Bad guys could therefore build a map of possibly-federal-agents in the city, and learn things they're not supposed to know even if they can't hear what's being discussed. Again, PD/Fire/EMT are great to have open and mutually communicating. But there are (life and death) reasons why you might really need a secure channel in other cases.
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago>However, the linked talk above notes that the researchers accidentally discovered that some "sensitive tactical law enforcement operations" were unwittingly operating in cleartext, and divulged to the open air "names and/or identifying features of targets and confidential informants, their locations, descriptions of undercover agents, [...] plans for forthcoming takedowns and operations," and a few other things you probably don't want to widely announce. We expect block headed 18yo infantrymen not to send sensitive information over insecure channels. I don't think asking the same from our public servants is unreasonable.
- tbabb 9y agoThen we agree that secure channels should exist?
- netsharc 9y agoAFAIK in Europe they have full-encryption. But the presence of encrypted traffic in the reserved airwaves near you means there are cops/fire/ambulance nearby. I remember reading about someone building a cop radar by exploiting this property! There are false positives (e.g. you're speeding down the autobahn, and there's an ambulance in a town you're passing through), but it's probably good enough...
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- noir_lord 9y agoIn the UK the police moved to encrypted radios quite a while ago and it's an offense under a 2006 act to listen to them even if you could.
- guelo 9y agoI've been surprised with how authoritarian the UK has turned lately.
- CamperBob2 9y agoThere is no need for secret comms Most common thing heard on a police scanner around here: "Call me on my cell."