The Garden City Telegram
NEW E-Edition!
Subscription
Required
Email this story | Add Your Comment
| Read (10) Comments
Police scanner encryption under fire
Published 7/10/2010 in Local News
By RACHAEL GRAY
Citizens with older model scanners in their homes may have noticed a dead silence late in 2009 when the Federal Communications Commission mandated an upgrade in standards.
1
Laurie Sisk/Telegram Ted Ortiz uses a hand-held radio on Friday morning at the Finney County Law Enforcement Center.
Thanks to Support Services Director Kathy McGaughey of the Garden City Police Department, local emergency response teams hardly missed a beat when McGaughey researched options and helped ease the transition into a new radio system.
In order to listen to the new frequencies, people would have had to buy scanners that range in the $500 range, or try their luck with Internet broadcast frequencies. But now, even with those two tools police department traffic no longer can be heard because of software installed on the radios that encrypt, or scramble, the messages to the outside world.
Garden City police Sgt. Michael Reagle said when the radio systems were first changed over, department officials didn't know they had the option to encrypt. He said when the software was presented to make it possible, the department made the decision to scramble the signals.
He said the cost of the encryption program was part of the overall cost of installing the new radio system, but the department did have to purchase encryption for some radios that did not come with it.
He said for the 43 radios that did not come with encryption, the department spent $2,795, about $65 for each radio.
He said the main factors weighing into the decision to encrypt were the safety of the officers and the ability to catch criminals.
"The primary factor is the safety of the officers. Basically, it boils down to officers can now respond and coordinate efforts for certain incidents, and everyone doesn't hear it," he said.
He said encrypting police scanner traffic also can aid in catching criminals, who may have access to scanners during crimes in progress, such as burglaries.
"Scanner traffic is available online now, and there are even applications for smart phones," he said.
Reagle said the police also had incidents during which people with scanners follow them around on calls.
"It takes the officer's attention away and adds another element to deal with during stops. And we don't always know what that person's intention is," he said.
In a June 17 letter to the editor, published in The Telegram, Linda Parker, Garden City, expressed her concerns about the encrypted traffic. She said she spent the money to purchase a new digital scanner when the new radio system was put in place, but still couldn't hear the police department because of the encryption.
The article sparked much debate from those who commented on the story online, with some arguing for police safety and who were in favor of the encryptions, and others who thought law enforcement agencies should be more transparent, and thought law enforcement officials were being secretive by hiding behind the encrypted signals.
Reagle said the department is hiding nothing.
"For people concerned we're hiding things, we're still governed by the FCC. We still use the radios exactly how we always have, and haven't changed procedures. Staff members still monitor the radio use, and we still maintain the professional way of talking on the radio. All dispatch channels are still recorded and are still open to be discoverable in the court of law," Reagle said.
For any major accidents or fires, or during incidents in which citizens are hurt, Reagle said people still can listen to the Garden City Fire Department.
Garden City Fire Marshal Dan Wimmer said the department discussed going encrypted with radio traffic and opted not to because of the software expense.
Finney County EMS decided to encrypt scanner traffic, said EMS Director Bob Prewitt.
"What we transmit is basically data that is HIPAA protected. That's pretty private information, and so it's in our best interest to protect the patient. That's the best way to do it," he said.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 protects patient's confidential information.
He said agencies met and held meetings to discuss whether or not to encrypt their radio signals.
"It was in the best interest for most of us to do it," he said.
The Finney County Sheriff's Office encrypted their radios for a while, before Sheriff Kevin Bascue learned the office's radios did not have to be encrypted in order to communicate with police and other agencies who were encrypted. He said the sheriff's office made the change back from encryption a few weeks ago.
He said that initially, the office wasn't interested in encrypting because of the software that had to be purchased.
"We felt we needed to do it to communicate, then found out the radios are smart enough to still communicate without the signal being encrypted." he said.
Bascue said he feels he has no reason to hide scanner traffic from the public.
"We never felt there was a reason for it," he said.
But now, with the option to encrypt the traffic, he said deputies serving search warrants, doing gang unit work, or doing task force work have the option to switch over to encryption during incidents where officers must share classified information.
"If we feel like we have a situation, we have the ability to go encrypted. We just switch a button," he said.
As for officer safety and criminals with scanners, Bascue said in his 26 years with the sheriff's office that he can't recall a situation during which a citizen with a scanner created a safety issue.
"But that's just on the sheriff's side," he said.
And, when dealing with classified information, Bascue said investigators have department-issued cell phones.
"They can always communicate with each other or with dispatch with cell phones," he said.
Therese Cruz, Holiday Inn Express manager, said she used to listen to scanner traffic to find out what was going on in the city.
"I'm not in favor of (the encryption). You can't listen to what's going on," she said.
Cruz doesn't see how the issue is officer-safety related.
"I don't think avid listeners would be doing anything that would harm police. How many years have we been able to listen to it? And how many issues have they had with scanner listeners?" she said.
Found 10 comment(s)!
What's to hide again?
"*Okay Mr. EMT/FF, let's have an officer on a cell phone or looking at their laptop while they are running lights and sirens to a call....what happened at Mary and Taylor yesterday would only be the beginning. Wouldn't you rather have an officer listening to radio traffic than having to read the laptop or hold the cell phone?"
First, pay attention, because they already do it far more than you realize. I tend to see police officers on cell phones more often than I do not.
Second, the police department is a part of our local government. Government should be free, open, and transparent in operations, to the public at all times, with the exception of personnel matters. Radio traffic does not concern personnel matters as personnel matters are dealt with at the station, not over the radio. How are we to keep out department in check now that we can't hear them? How are we to know that they are doing their job effectively, efficiently, and EVENLY, regardless of the call or incident, now that we can't hear a word they're saying?
It speaks volumes about the level of trust we can invest in our law enforcement when we can't even hear them. Not to mention the fact that it makes it harder (as stated by several individuals) to assist them when it may be necessary for public assistance.
So much for interoperability. My only hope is that the state intervenes and declares it unlawful as it renders other agencies depending on hearing these transmissions utterly helpless.
Posted by: B.W. on 8/10/2010
nuff said.....
on this subject already
Posted by: tater salad on 7/21/2010
I scan for safety NOT entertainment.
I have listened to PD/FD/EMS for 35+ years. "Scanning" educated me about real PD/FD/EMS ops vs TV or movie stereotypes which continue ad-nauseum. Scanning has helped me correct misinformation such as the assertion that our FD does mock code-3 runs on public streets. NO, I explained, this was obviously an Engine dispatched to an alarm then cancelled en-route. I would never go "ambulance chasing" based on comms I have heard. I have managed to avoid danger from armed/violent subjects, avoided becoming part of multi-car pilup, and avoid getting in the path of multiple pursuits and violent weather! A friend was T-boned by a vehicle being chased by DallasPD. Ironically he had a scanner but did not hear the chase going on. My radios have saved my life! I also found them invaluable as a Security Ofc. in giving and receiving assistance w/ PD in various juristicitions I worked. Even w/ "two-way" radios in our Patrol cars we also needed the scanner we had installed! It helped us coordinate w/ PD to catch bad guys several times!! However there were times when I was upset w/ other guards giving sensitive info out over the air, ie. "Can't get this door to lock so we'll have to keep an eye on this building..." Switching to encryption would have been appropriate , and I support on-demand encryption for SOME PD/FD/EMS comms. Theoretically we have a right to protect ourselves from crime, and natural disasters which is my main justification for having the scanner. Law's limting scanner use basically declare one Guilty until proven Innocent. use of a scanner in commision of a crime is already a federal offense so these laws are IMHO unconstitutional and shound be struck down. Most of what I know about the dangers that exist(ed) in my hometown(s) came from monitoring the Scanner NOT from News Media reports. Nearly all the time, incidents I hear on the scanner are presented very inaccurately in later media Reports. Most incidents (wrecks/fires/crimes) never make it to print or video News, especially not in anything like real-time. During a recent Tornado in my city I became the go-to-guy at my Plant for 100+ confused co-workers, worried about their homes, ect. The local TV stations had NO info so my scanner was the main info source for us!! The Tornado cut a swath several miles east of our Plant and even IF the city sirens sounded an all=clear we can't hear them in the Plant.
The argument against scanner radios ("officer safety") seems to me to mirror the arguments against gun ownership. I am in favor of responsible ownership and use of BOTH! Both are simply tools which can be used for good or bad. We have the moral right to protect our lives, family and property! I feel that the demonization and attempts to limit both are evidence of a terrible drift toward loosing the freedoms we have fought for. And it irks me that the so called defenders of our freedom push to take our freedom away! For 35 years I have monitored comms providing proof of poor coordination between agencies eveywhere. Any agency that isolates itself from neigboring juristictions by going to PROPRIETARY radio systems (ie: OpenSky or ProVoice) or encryption is taking a giant step away from coordination and are not helping Public Safety one iota!! With so many scanners sold over the years, if they were so dangerous we would have seen anarchy already. Just as the majority of gun owners are not criminals, the majority of scanner listeners are not the bad guys!!!
Posted by: TX-Riflemin on 7/16/2010
Just my thoughts.....
*Yes Johny Cage! You are spot-on in regard to people getting a life. I've had a scanner, and I'm sorry, just never found it that entertaining. A good book tops that any time.
*Okay Mr. EMT/FF, let's have an officer on a cell phone or looking at their laptop while they are running lights and sirens to a call....what happened at Mary and Taylor yesterday would only be the beginning. Wouldn't you rather have an officer listening to radio traffic than having to read the laptop or hold the cell phone?
*Taxpayer 1124: Bascue is an elected official. Of course he's going to listen to "THE PEOPLE"...they are the ones who keep him in office. Just because he listens doesn't mean he's right. Don't you think if there were more voters calling in saying how great it is that they are encrypted that he wouldn't change his mind in a heartbeat?
*J. Irsik, there are 4 roads leading out of Garden City if you don't feel safe or don't feel like you are getting the protection you should.
**I love living in this Great Country were we are all given the freedom of speech!!
Posted by: Still a Tax-paying Citizen on 7/14/2010
What's to hide?
A few things to clarify:
1. The only details guarded by EMS actions under HIPAA are patient reports on EMS-to-ER transmissions, and specifically in regards to their name, DOB, and medical history.
2. If the police department is so concerned with being listened to, why not use cell phones? They also have secured Mobile Data Terminals (Laptops) in their cars with a secured wireless communication network that allows them to do silent dispatching, GPS coordinating, and several other things all without the use of voice transmission radio.
I am a firefighter/EMT myself, and personally, I find it unprofessional and childish that Finney County EMS and GCPD are hiding behind encryption for reasons that aren't justifiable.
Posted by: B. W. on 7/13/2010
Get a life
I think that people need to find better things to do than complain about the scanner issues. The scanners are for the police to conduct police business. Not for people to get some entertainment. If rely on a scanner for you safety then maybe you should take a conceal and carry class or go take some karate. Its called self help.
Posted by: Johny Cage on 7/13/2010
The exception, not the rule
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" or "Who guards the Guardians?" Sheriff Basque understands and listened. WE THE PEOPLE are the government, not those hired to administer it. If they feel it is not safe to work for us if we know what they are doing, they maybe it is time for a career change. I personally have 15 years in Law Enforcement on both the State and local levels. Only once in that time did I encounter a situation where the offenders were using scanners to listen in and the officers involved knew that. They throw out terms like ”Officer Safety”? Yes, safety from misconduct lawsuits, from nosey defense attorneys, from an involved citizenry. If the past is any proof of how well “Staff members still monitor the radio use” then let the racial and ethnic profiling begin or in actuality continue…. If there is a need to provide confidential info, then by all means use the available encryption. But, it should be the rare exception, not the rule.
Posted by: Taxpayer 1124 on 7/13/2010
Encryption
A really good read on scanners and EMS agencies, written by an attorney is found at http://www.emsresponder.com/web/online/Top-EMS-News/FAQs-for-HIPAA-Compliance-/1$151
Any EMS director who hides behind HIPAA for a reason to encrypt should either not be in a management position, or is hiding something. As the article states, there is NO reason to encrypt to comply with HIPAA
Posted by: Jim Sharp on 7/13/2010
scanner encryption
The encryption on police scanners is great. Not everything the police transmit should be heard by the public. Some things are none of their business.
Posted by: Jim Baker on 7/13/2010
Police Scanner Encryption Under Fire
Visit RadioReference.com, they have a database of all radio licenses issued by the FCC as well as links to numerous frequencies of cities across the nation. You might be surprised at how much personal information is broadcast on Law Enforcement radios that is not encrypted(SSN, Birthdates and addresses of an individual. If our criminal element is so dangerous here in Finney County, perhaps Law Enforcment should educate the general public of whats going on so we can protect ourselves. It doesn't really matter what you or I would like to see happen, Law Enforcment is going to do whatever they want and how they want to do it. God thats scary!
Posted by: J. Irsik on 7/12/2010
Twitter Updates
