Do you think law enforcement should use encryption on their radios (for security purposes)? Or should they not be allowed to encrypt their communications (for transparency purposes)? Why?
You can do both: encrypt the transmission for security and record it in a tamper proof way for transparency.
Except there are ways around that if you’re not careful.
Back in the 90’s I was active with the USCG in the Boston area. Most comms were done over marine VHF radio, but they had a secondary encrypted radio they could use when desired. The problem with that encrypted radio system was the audio quality wasn’t great and the range was limited, so in the later half of the 90’s as cell phones became more popular they switched to that for private comms. The quality was much better and the range extended to virtually anywhere you had line of sight to shore.
So you would need any recording system to securely record all communications along with a way to correlate them.
A couple years ago I was playing around with an RTL-SDR and I had it scanning a wide range for any voices. I found a police frequency and they were having a standoff in the park. A mother had a knife and her child with her, I assume it was some sort of hostage situation. They apprehended her, and when they transmitted her ID info, they scrambled the transmission. So I was able to learn about the situation but not who specifically was involved, and I agree with this approach honestly. It never made the news btw.
I'm not sure how it works exactly but I assume they have two transmit buttons on their handsets, regular voice and encrypted voice.
I work in 911 dispatch. I think that there are some valid arguments for encryption. Hypothetically in something like a barricaded subject or hostage situation, you don't want the subject inside to be able to listen in on a police scanner to know what the swat team is about to do.
A lot of personal information also goes out over our radios, names, addresses, dates of birth, vehicle descriptions, medical information, a lot of stuff that people would probably rather keep private if possible.
But I'm personally of the opinion that as much as possible should be out in the open
I'm not sure exactly where the line should be for what should be encrypted and under what circumstances. It's a pretty tricky balancing act, and honestly to toe the line the right way we probably need massive overhauls to the kinds of radio and computer systems were using.
One possible compromise that leaps to mind is to have the radios be encrypted, but they all feed into a several-hours-long buffer and get automatically decrypted and published after that delay. You wouldn't be able to stalk police or whatever, but they wouldn't be able to hide malfeasance or incompetence from the public.
It's not perfect, there are still good transparency reasons for knowing what the police are doing right now, but it might be a good enough balance.
Same goal of body cameras, but we all see how that turned out.
The blue wall of silence is real, If there is a way to hide misconduct from anyone along the chain, they absolutely will do so.
Also who is out stalking cops? They notoriously have guns and very little self control over pulling the trigger
who is out stalking cops?
Criminals. Back in the long long time ago I was a minor drug dealer (just weed) but when I would deliver to some of the bigger dealers, like the kind who had whole operations, they would have police scanners going pretty much all the time. It would give them time to dip out before getting pinched.
That issue came about because of poor procedure and poor enforcement. Instead of being "you are fired immediately if camera is screwed with" it was "yeah you're chillin"
There was another comment in this thread about exactly that situation, a female police officer that noticed a creepy guy following her around during her patrol. But there's lots of other potential negatives to having open immediate police comms, like criminals monitoring to see whether there are police around before doing whatever criminality they were planning on doing.
Same goal of body cameras, but we all see how that turned out.
Sounds like "we tried it once and it didn't work, therefore we should never try again." Instead, we should take into account how the body camera situation has failed and modify the approach to account for it.
Mandate that the buffer be operated by an independent body the police have no control over, for example.
Everybody can push "send" on some random device and say "I am your President. Now listen...."
...unless they use encryption.
In this specific scenario, I feel it is really about signing the message than encrypting the message.
"The presidential broadcast today is signed with the words, Tourniquet Faster Inedible Swan Shelf Overturn Cactus. Alternatively, please scan the following Morse Code with your device...."
You are confusing encryption with Authentication, while it is true that they usually come together to a degree, they are not the same
Everything should be encrypted, always. We live in a time where hardware for en/decrypting is so fast and cheap that they can be included in any device. If you send somethig through a it should be encrypted. If you send something over the air, it has even more reason to be encrypted. I see no scenario where it should not be.
HOWEVER! For law enforcement and other official governmental agencies I think all communication should have to be recorded. And failure to do so should have very high penalties. Transparency should happen after, not during the communication.
Most law enforcement in my area already does use a form of encrypted coms. Have been for the last 25 years. As for my opinion on it, I can see both sides.
On the one hand, police com traffic often contains details about people's most painful or vulnerable moments. On the other hand, there has been a real problem with law enforcement conduct for some time and the darkness that encrypted com traffic allows for some real shady shit to go down unnoticed. It's the exact same arguments, for and against, for civilian use of encryption.
In the case of police in my local area, the com traffic is supposed to be recorded and made available on request. Never tried going after it, though.
Overall I am always for more transparency with those in positions of authority. I will offer a piece of anecdotal evidence why encrypted radios might be used, besides the personal details that everyone mentions.
I work in a small high school (14 - 18 YO) in the USA. In lieu actually tackling the problem of school violence, out state has mandated a police officer in every school. (Without funding it, of course, but that's another post.)
Our SRO (School Resource Officer) is completely awesome and happens to be female. Before she worked for the school, she worked a regular patrol. On patrol she says she would regularly be at a scene and look up to find a random guy (always a guy) sitting in his car watching. She questioned several, "Why are you here?" And the answer was always super creepy. Basically "You are a small girl out here all alone. I'm just trying to keep you safe."
So for that encrypted radios would help disperse the stalkers with scanners.
The correct solution is encrypted, but not E2EE. This is kinda obvious imo. All official communications must be secure but backdoored. Basically there needs to be a kind of blackbox (think flight recorder) in every police department that also has the encryption keys and just records every single channel 24/7. If you dont trust the police department you can just put this blackbox in the hands of another trusted government body.
I've always found it crazy that in the US anyone can listen to police radio - atleast according to movies. I'd love to do that too but I don't think I should be able to.
The police should a secret line and an open line. The secret line should only be used in sensitive situations and for PII, it should all be recordes and available for future investigations. But most of their communication should be open as the scrutiny of the public is critical for maintaining a power balance. If police communications are completely unknowable to the average citizen, it can lead to the creation of a "secret" police or a police state very quickly.
Is there place were law enforcement still use regular radio ?
Nowadays, it's a protocol similar as mobile phone with digital data transmission and encryption rather than good old analog radio.
And it's typically a case were encryption is important, even for the privacy of the involved persons
I can't speak to how common it is, but a few years ago I was camping in a rural part of PA, I brought my baofeng with me and loaded it up with the local repeaters before I went.
And when I was looking them up I was a little shocked to find that pretty much all of their emergency services were using pretty basic 2m or 70cm radios. Outside of the frequencies allocated for amateur use but still within the capabilities of most amateur radios.
Surely I thought I must be missing something, there must be some kind of encryption or something, but no, when I tuned to those frequencies I could hear all of their communications with my little $30 glorified walkie talkie.
I didn't try to key up on them, because that would be illegal, but I don't see any reason I couldn't have if I really wanted to.
Interesting,
I know that in the french alps we can reach the mountain police through VHF if needed, and that during heli-rescue they give a call on the free-flight frequency to let paraglider know that they are coming. but I am pretty sure that they have their own network too, and that VHF is a way to call them when you have no mobile phone coverage
There's definitely a difference between rural and urban requirements.
Basically, it's not worth the cost/effort to upgrade. It also provides some extra benefits.
this is a tough one. but i think they should not be allowed to do so.
Allowed or not is not the issue. When they need to talk confidentially, they already switch to "landline", aka cell phone, when sensitive information is being exchanged. Restricting them from using encryption will only result in them relying on off-the-shelf private modes of communication rather than publicly monitorable frequencies. Sadly,.regulation will not make information more available to the general public.
I think law enforcement should be abolished.
and be replaced by neighnourhood watches?
Free guillotines for everyone? /s