It is well known to many members of RadioReference.com the data removal policy that was put in effect around the 2002 time frame. At that time, the political climate in the United States was at times very worrisome - especially after September 11th. After some drawn out discussions with multiple people within the Federal Government and US military, I decided that it was in the best interest of RadioReference.com, and myself, to allow US Federal and Military officials an opportunity to formally request that I remove data from the site, only under certain conditions. Basically, an "out", and the ability to stay off the radar of some folks that were looking to cause trouble. It is important to note that policy did not under any circumstances provide for the removal of data from the site for state and local government, or businesses, even though we had had received many requests to do so.
At the time, many wondered why I "caved" in to the US Military and Federal government, and I was strongly criticized for implementing this policy. I even wrote a lengthy position statement that helped explain the approach we were taking. However, in looking out for the best interest of RadioReference.com community and my family, with the political climate as it was at the time, I had decided to implement a removal policy to keep such a large target from becoming "shot at."
Moving forward though, now that the political climate has calmed and it has been very apparent that the 10 or so requests that I had to remove data did nothing to actually remove the information from the public domain - and frankly it is a well known fact in the security industry that security-by-obscurity does not work. Therefore, effective May 19th 2008 I made the conscious decision to rescind the policy and not remove any data from the site unless ordered to by a court that has jurisdiction over the site.
I'm sure that even this "policy change" will result in criticism, and I welcome the discussion. But remember, at the end of the day if something is important enough to be requested for removal, then it is important enough to either be encrypted or not broadcast over the air.
14 comments:
I applaud this decision, Lindsay. I can see both sides of the issue but I agree that it should be encrypted if it's that important. And it is in the case of security at LLNL.
In the end you simply made it easier to use and update data I already had. Thanks.
Now if you could just wave a wand and make using my PCR1500 on a Mac running TrunkPCR and Fusion easier.... :)
I think you made the right decision. It's either classified, or it isn't. If it isn't then there shouldn't be any problem. That's what freedom is all about.
"Sensitive Communications" should be removed as policy. We have no right to post Talkgroups and frequencies if this could put public officials or military people in danger. Some here need to get off this high and mighty pedestal and think out of the box. Half the information is wrong anyway..
I supported your move then to protect you, your family, and your other vested interests.
I support your move now for the same reasons as you are the site owner and know what is best to save you and your family's skins at the end of the day.
Like you said, if it is that important, encrypt it. You nor anyone interested in staying in line would advocated breaking the law to intercept encrypted transmissions.
Thank you for all you do to advance OUR hobby!
Ron (FireCop)
Even though frequency info is easily available elsewhere, posting input freqs and Pl tones or net ID info on RR is often a sore point with system admins. I'm sure some of them will point to this very blog entry in their next pitch for encryption (myself included)- and it is getting less expensive every day.
Are you helping casual listeners? I don't know. Are you hurting radio system admins? If they are smart enough to display the web site to a budget meeting, you will probably help indirectly to fund a whole new round of AES installations.
I have to agree with the previous post. I think in the long run this policy will lead to more encryption, and as some system admins (see Orlando, Orange County CA) all transmissions are sensitive enough to be encrypted. So when you say if it is sensitive enough they will encrypt, it can and will be used to everyone's individual benefit. End result = help the listener who doesn't want to search for themselves for a little while, but in the long run hurt everybody who likes to listen.
the more encryption and more systems that the public cannot listen to will lead to more and more police corruption. I know a IA guy who says that there has been a increase in corruption since that now have a system that the public cannot listen to. If they want this type of systems the damn tax payers to take a stand and say forget you and not vote for pay raises. When take things of your general broadcast station and hide them from the public what exactly do you have to hide? They say its because of terrorist and criminals if they are any kind of terrorist or criminal you will find a way to listen. Hell the biggest terrorist in the United States is the government. The definition of terrorism is control by fear and the government has the American people so scared about everything and we let them control us by doing that. I know a lot of you will disagree but so of you will know that its the truth.
If I offend anyone I am sorry just speaking the truth coming from a ex law enforcement officer who gave it up for his family and honesty when asked to cover up for a another officers wrong doings.
i just bought a pro 26 scanner, can i use this scanner with today frequencies
Talk about a double edged sword. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't. As far as federal and military freq's are concerned. They do a great job at making sure your not going to hear what they don't want you to hear. Even if you can "plug in" to them. Having the frequency information is a matter of public record. If they did not want you to know, it would not be out there. It's somewhat of a moot issue. If DHS wants to squelch this info, they will.
As far as state and local systems. This arguement has been going on ever since you could tune in the police on your dashboard radio in the 1950's.
Law Enforcement Agencies do a pretty good job of keeping off the air-waves. Most departments just use cell phones. Between the MDC's and cell phone use plus trunked and encrypted systems they have plenty of tools at their disposal to ensure security. (stop being so paranoid).
In my community we have a citizen watch on a blog with residents and police (on duty). We use our scanners to keep locals informed of *current events with a hand-shake agreement with the local police not to endanger any officers and we police ourselves to maintain that integrity.
Surprisingly it works extremely well, and our local citizens and police have a great rapore that is something I have never seen anywhere.
We even have local news media plugged into us because we are "on it" before anyone else.
Even local city government officials. It's quite a community.
www.Claycord.com
But if it was not for the resources like radio reference, this would not be possible.
Thanks for all you folks do.
Speak softly and carry a big stick!
Why force their hand on encryption I ask? It's almost as if though alot of you are saying "go ahead and encrypt if you think you can"...and yes they can! It almost feels like children stomping their feet in the corner. I enjoy the database and it's purpose. Why do we as scanner listeners need input frequencies on repeatered systems, why are covert operations identified by talkgroups and frequencies? I can see us identifying a local agency that patrols the streets. I can understand giving info on UHF Trunking Systems and how to program them...but some of the database info I question our actual need for. Why force a court order upon yourself when your common sense should prevail?
excellent decision, IMO!
I, too, applaud your decision, Lindsay. But then, you don't need my permission, he he.
This is somewhat of a two-edged sword. On one hand, we hobbiest would like to just know, while at the same time, keep criminals, whackers, and terrorist from using this information for no good. It may come down to a point of scanner owners banning together and passing information via e-mail on the I-Net with no "group" or "site" designations, passing information to ONLY those whom you really can "trust". :-(
It truly is a shame that this World has become this way, but it's only going to get worse as already has been foretold.
BTW, I just discovered the BLOG thing here and the radio information is terrific. Please keep it up.
Respectfully submitted,
73,
Shreveport
LINDSAY FUCK OFF PUSSY BOY.
Thats why there is so many pro-encryption babies on radio reference. I for one am not happy with encryption, sounds like police and other agencies will just be more corrupt. And why do taxpayers have to pay for this crap? We don't get to listen. Why do we pay?
Post a Comment