this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
489 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

59373 readers
8012 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] airbreather@lemmy.world 236 points 10 months ago (7 children)

Why are they encrypting their communications? Do they have something to hide?

If they've got nothing to hide, then they've got nothing to fear.

Or so I've heard, anyway, right?

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 97 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

They're public employees. Their privacy is non-existent while on duty. There is actually no reason for police radios to be encrypted. The only reason police feel even a modium of responsibility to the public is because they are able to be constantly watched by citizens, and their unencrypted comms is an important part of that.

ETA: I get what you were saying and adding onto it, not trying to contradict

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Their privacy is non-existent while on duty.

True, but your privacy exists even in this case.

There is actually no reason for police radios to be encrypted.

Actually I can think of a couple of reasons.

One is that this way the parents of a violent crime or lethal incident victim can be informed about the condition before the press publish the news. Last year we had some cases here in Italy where the parents of people who passed away for some incident/crime discover it from the press even before the authority had time to inform them.
True, in this case is the press that is in the wrong, but they could do it because they had access to the communications.

Another is that maybe it is not a good idea to let criminals know what the police are doing to catch them.

BUT I understand your point given the news about US police I read around.

What I think about it is that if you think that all the US police officers are bad then I agree that the not having access to the radio communications can be a problem. The solution however is not to keep the communications open but to fix the US police.

[–] yuki2501@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

In that case the records need to be auditable, e.g. available for subpoenas and all that. But given the frequency of their body feels suddenly "malfunctioning" during arrests, I don't see that happening in the shower term.

What we need BEFORE encrypted comms is stronger accountability laws and harsher punishments for police brutality.

Otherwise I won't buy the "protect and serve" excuse. They just want to save their own asses.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] otter@lemmy.ca 27 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

I don't quite get these comments, I think our emergency services went encrypted a while back in Vancouver Canada and I'm surprised NY wasn't already encrypted?

What about keeping the communications encrypted for the privacy and safety of people involved, and storing the records for a set amount of time. Anyone with access to the live feed can access the backups during that time, and report issues as needed.

I'm not familiar with the issues with the police department, so maybe a better compromise would be to open up the feeds publicly after a set amount of time?

[–] doppelgangmember@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago (6 children)

I'll put it simple.

American cops are not equivalent to Canadian cops. US cops use tax payer money to pay lawsuits but are allowed a special police union as well. No other public servants get a union to do their bidding while tax payers foot the bill.

Open the channels. What's there to hide. In emergency events, yes it could be an issue. But people also need to know where serious events might be occurring in their areas.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Historically in the USA many police agencies have tried to cover-up and hide evidence of wrongdoing by on duty officers. Some people viewed the open radio policy as a way to monitor the police to make sure they're not breaking the law themselves. I personally have never tried to listen in to a police radio so it doesn't bother me much but some people are upset about it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Police interactions are public information. If you go to a police station and do a FOIA request, you get all that info anyway. Why would it need to be kept secret before the point it is requested?

Apart from the fact that many departments deny legal FOIA requests and force people to take legal action to get the information they are legally entitled to.

Oh wait. Maybe that’s why they want encryption.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

When I was in the USCG Auxiliary in Boston in the 90’s they used the same VHF radio as all boaters for most comms, but they also had an encrypted radio they could switch to if they needed to discuss anything sensitive. The encrypted radio was crap though and only worked over short distances. But they’d use it when relaying personal details of boats/people they stopped, dealing with drunk boaters, etc.

As time progressed they switched to using mobile phones when they wanted privacy. Cell coverage along the coast proved far better than the proprietary encrypted radio…

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Where I live it's partly to protect the privacy of the people involved.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] harry_balzac@lemmy.world 150 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Aside from the transparency issue, did you see how much it's going to cost?

Four hundred million dollars! The city is cutting back on pretty much everything else but wants to spend that on police radios.

Everyone has to tighten their belts while the thin blue line gets fatter and more dangerous.

[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 37 points 10 months ago

No matter what it costs, we will shield police from accountability.

Name a price and go fuck yourself.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 91 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

They actually need to focus on hospital communications. It's scary what all you can pick up from paging systems in cleartext with a $20 USB SDR and a laptop. Patient names, rooms numbers, alert codes, everything.

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

I worked in a hospital, and patient names should never be paged. Room numbers and alert codes are not PHI, and generally they would say "Adult Male blah blah blah...". Unfortunately, in concrete mazes, paging is still the most reliable (as seen by how easy it is for others to see). And when you're as important as a doctor, you need reliability.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pan0wski@infosec.pub 73 points 10 months ago (7 children)

I find it fascinating how in the United States police radio communications aren't encrypted and therefore anyone can listen to them. In my European country all emergency service communications are TETRA encrypted.

[–] Dalraz@lemmy.ca 22 points 10 months ago (7 children)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Not all llaw enforcement or emergency services are in the clear. The Feds are all encrypted (except for some intentional in-the-clear channels for open comms).

One of the biggest criticisms after 9/11 was the lack of easy comms across agencies because of radio set ups, different 10-codes, etc.

Hopefully this is something they are accounting for with this change.

Also $400m doesn't seem that crazy for an endeavor like this given the size of NYPD.

40k officers and staff + backhaul + tower upgrades + vehicle radio upgrades and installation /$400m

And is that $400m entire lifecycle cost? Over 5-10 years or whatever that's really not insane.

[–] harry_balzac@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Well, for starters, European police are actually trained professionals (in general, much more so than American police) and have different oversight. American police also handle a wider variety of things that really aren't law enforcement - things that should be handled by other kinds of professionals.

EDIT: American law enforcement agencies are also home to some of the highest rates of domestic violence perpetrators and right-wing extremism.

American police shoot and kill 3-4 people each day. That doesn't take into account deaths that occur in jails and prisons due to negligence.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It seems insane that they were communicating out in the open.

On the one hand, you probably hear all kinds of cool shit. On the other hand, how in the fuck are they just discussing all their sensitive shit out in the open??

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (17 children)

They don't? I mean, you can listen to them, they are not discussing sensitive shit because it's public.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] scottmeme@sh.itjust.works 63 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah police radio should never be encrypted.

[–] Toes@ani.social 33 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I suspect it would be helpful for protecting sensitive situations. Currently (at least with EMS) they call each other's cellphones for that, not ideal.

[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (11 children)
[–] godzillabacter@lemmy.world 33 points 10 months ago (7 children)

EMS communication over unencrypted channels is limited by HIPAA, patient information must be kept vague to protect patient privacy. In the event that, say, an individuals name needs to be given to the receiving facility to facilitate review of records prior to arrival by the ER physician, some other method of communication has to be used.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

It's not a HIPAA violation for a report like this to go over unsecured radio waves:

16 year old male, unresponsive. Suspected alcohol poisoning. EMS required. Address to be provided by emergency services

[–] godzillabacter@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I know, which is why my example was about providing the patient's name over the radio.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 42 points 10 months ago

This isn't just bad news for citizen monitoring of the police, it's bad news for the media as well. I worked at a news station. We had multiple police scanners going in case something big happened. The cops want no cameras around.

[–] Critical_Insight@feddit.uk 30 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Surprised it's not encrypted in the first place. You haven't been able to listen to police communications in Finland since the 90's. I would assume most of Europe is the same way.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] a_wild_mimic_appears@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 10 months ago (2 children)

i'm all for full transparency regarding all police activity - i'm not for full realtime transparency regarding all police activity.

active shooter scenarios, violent crimes and everything that invites rubbernecking (read: situations where MORE people are a bad idea, which is most police/ambulance business) should probably not attract people; a 24h delay for release would be enough tho.

my inner cynic already tells me - without searching - that noone thought about automatically releasing the info after a delay. :-(

[–] foyrkopp@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I genuinely like this idea, because it would allow to reach both goals.

The problem I see is that this would probably go down the same as the bodycam idea, with inconvenient recordings vanishing due to "technical issues".

You'd need an independent third party doing life recording and delayed release. Subjectively, the US don't have a great track record with these.

Easier idea: Just publish last week's encryption key. Probably won't happen because some tech supplier will lobby for a more expensive solution.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CCMan1701A@startrek.website 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Are they switching to use Whatsapp?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nodsocket@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago (3 children)

What is the purpose of encrypting comms?

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 25 points 10 months ago (1 children)

To keep criminals from monitoring the police and getting a head start

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Lol the police are a response team. The criminals always have a head start.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Wahots@pawb.social 24 points 10 months ago (2 children)

In prior articles on this, religious nutjobs would listen to police radio and visit the active crime scene and start praying in the middle of the chaos. People and police started getting really sick of their shit during an emergency. Other flavors of morons would also show up to watch shit go down. Sometimes, private information would also get said on the radio such as names or addresses, which could lead to harassment or true crime nuts showing up to private homes.

I kinda get why making channels private for everyone but reporters (for transparency) is happening.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I kinda get it, but at the same time I think it should be our right to monitor police. I'm not sure how to reconcile the personal info part though.

[–] SeriousBug@infosec.pub 9 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Agreed. But I think the right to monitor the police doesn't have to mean real-time access to police radio. The radio could be recorded, like body cam footage, and released on demand with FOIA. FOIA allows redactions when needed, so sensitive information like victims names and addresses could be redacted.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Michal@programming.dev 16 points 10 months ago

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear (or something like that)

[–] vsis@feddit.cl 15 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I'm surprised it was nos encrypted already.

Any one can silently hear their frequency. I looks like an easy way to know if police is coming your way, and how avoid them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 13 points 10 months ago

It's insane it hasn't been encrypted ages ago. Bizarre

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 11 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The New York police department (NYPD) is facing serious backlash after announcing additional details about its plan to encrypt its radio communications system, which experts warn will limit transparency and accountability.

The entire “upgrade” to a new, encrypted radio system will be completed by December 2024 and cost an estimated $400m, a hefty price tag as several city agencies have been forced to swallow major budget cuts.

Maisel said that during Hurricane Sandy in 2012, when more than 200 people died, he was able to provide public safety updates on social media by listening to the police radio.

The encryption plans also have support from Mayor Eric Adams, who said during a July press conference that “bad guys” are listening to the police radios, the New York Times reported.

Cahn added that police have been unable to provide “concrete examples” of criminals abusing the radio system, especially to justify citywide encryption.

“I really do think that we have a fundamental rule-of-law issue under Eric Adams, where the NYPD continues to be enabled to lawlessly pursue this surveillance agenda without abiding by the protections that already exist under law,” Cahn said.


The original article contains 918 words, the summary contains 190 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 11 points 10 months ago

just the police doing everything they can to make sure that no one ever knows what they're doing because they're such great big heroes that we normal people just can't handle their awesomeness

[–] sir_reginald@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Capitalism is evolving into an almost worldwide police state.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›