[TrunkCom] while we are on the subject of encryption

[Arthur-Bryan E. Phelps]

In spite of ALL the problems Tyco M/A Com has had in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, I understand that New York's system is well planned and moving
forward in a timely manner. Also,I have read articles about local and even
federal entities signing contracts with M/A Com.  In fact, some folks
speculate that by 2008 all federal entities will be using ProVoice. The next
year or so could be somewhat frustrating for those who scan public service
(e.g. law enforcement).  Between rebanding and ProVoice systems many
scanners may become prematurely obsolete. 

-----Original Message-----
From: trunkcom-bounces+aphelps=enter.net at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:trunkcom-bounces+aphelps=enter.net at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of
Jeff Kenyon
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 6:33 PM
To: Discussion of Monitoring Trunk Radio Systems
Subject: Re: [TrunkCom] while we are on the subject of encryption

That was the last thing I heard.  I don't know if they'll ever work with
Uniden or anyone for ProVoice though.  It seems as though there are more
ProVoice systems coming all the time.  Do you all think that this eventually
will evolve into OpenSky?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur-Bryan E. Phelps" <aphelps at enter.net>
To: "'Discussion of Monitoring Trunk Radio Systems'" 
<trunkcom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 5:43 PM
Subject: RE: [TrunkCom] while we are on the subject of encryption


> The original contract with the Commonwealth did include a provision 
> for registered "scanners" - probably radios with the transmitting 
> circuitry disabled - for use by LE, news media, etc.  I do not know if 
> it would be released to an individual. The unit ID would be displayed 
> on a console in the dispatch center when the scanner was powered up 
> and could be disabled at will if the PSP did not want sensitive 
> information disclosed. The last I heard, was that M/A Com OpenSky was 
> "looking" to form a partnership with a company, e.g. Uniden to make 
> and license a scanner.  So, if that is true, it negates the initial 
> option.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: trunkcom-bounces+aphelps=enter.net at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:trunkcom-bounces+aphelps=enter.net at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf 
> Of Scott Berringer
> Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 4:59 PM
> To: Discussion of Monitoring Trunk Radio Systems
> Subject: Re: [TrunkCom] while we are on the subject of encryption
>
> There has been talk forever about an OpenSky 'receiver' being 
> manufactured by MA/COM for being able to monitor the Pennsylvania 
> system. However, that has never come to fruit. I don't think it ever 
> will. Honestly, I don't even think the OpenSky systems will survive.
> Especially not with everyone trying to get everything P-25 compliant.
>
> IMHO, Encryption should ONLY be used for sensitive ops (VICE, NARCS, 
> SWAT,
> etc...) not for day to day ops. If you need to encrypt your car-to-car 
> channels, you got issues. Also, encryption should only be available 
> for law enforcement and possibly arson investigators. But, only on an 
> as-needed basis for sensitive ops.
>
> There is one city in Ohio that comes to mind that everyone is always 
> whining about. Canton, Ohio PD. They have all of their main PD 
> talkgroups encrypted in addition to them being P-25 digital 
> modulation.
> With encryption for routine operations, if you give out a BOLO, the 
> citizens can't lend an additional set of eyes/ears because they don't 
> know that the BOLO has been issued. Some people (system 
> administrators) have been suckered by smooth talking sales reps (from 
> Motorola and
> MA/COM) in to thinking that they NEED full-time encryption. Those 
> sales reps are the ones that show up for a sales meeting in a 
> Mercedes, or a Hummer because they get paid WAY TOO MUCH $$$$$$$$.
>
>
>
> Jeff Kenyon wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone, while we are on the subject of encryption in the few
>> rumors I have seen on the net about a possible OpenSky scanner coming
>> out one thing that was mentioned was encryption there, and the fact
>> that the radio would be able to be disabled if need be.  These threads
>> have been here and there, but I would imagine anything OpenSky would
>> be a long ways out, and I know that in PA and Oakland County, Michigan
>> we have to get our systems working first!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> TrunkCom mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/trunkcom
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
>> Post: mailto:TrunkCom at mailman.qth.net
>>
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> TrunkCom mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/trunkcom
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:TrunkCom at mailman.qth.net
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> TrunkCom mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/trunkcom
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:TrunkCom at mailman.qth.net 

______________________________________________________________
TrunkCom mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/trunkcom
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
Post: mailto:TrunkCom at mailman.qth.net