Slashdot Mirror


Police Department Accused of Updating Their Radios With Pirated Software (www.cbc.ca)

Winnipeg's police department used encrypted radios to stop the public from listening in to their conversations with police scanners. But did they pirate their software keys?

Long-time Slashdot reader Curtman shares this report from CBC News: Winnipeg police have arrested a manager with the city for allegedly updating police radios with fraudulent software he got from a person considered to be a security threat by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, CBC News has learned. Back in 2011, Ed Richardson allegedly obtained millions of dollars worth of illegal software and instructed city employees to use it, police said in a January 2018 sworn affidavit, submitted to the Provincial Court of Manitoba when officers were seeking permission to search the man's emails...

In the affidavit, police said the Motorola radios needed frequent updating, which could only be done if the city purchased a "refresh key" or licence from the company to unlock the proprietary software. Motorola charged about $94 per update per radio, the document said, and a radio shop employee told police Richardson didn't like that. "[The employee] does not believe his actions were for personal gain; he believes that Richardson likes the idea of not giving more money to Motorola," the affidavit said.

The affidavit alleges that Richardson gave one employee 65,000 refresh keys, and told him that "you don't want to know where these came from."

In the affidavit, the employee adds that they "clearly" didn't come from Motorola.

143 comments

  1. Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Call the police on them....

  2. Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A certain company is bilking governments and the taxpayers. Hmmm.

    1. Re:Sounds like by Calydor · · Score: 2

      Yeah, it sounds like these paid and required updates are a way of going around a ban on subscription services.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not to mention it sounds like a total ripoff... 94 dollars per update per radio? Thats highway robbery...

    3. Re:Sounds like by Calydor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm thinking it's been something like $7.95 per month per radio, but rounded off to a yearly 'update' payment. Still ridiculous, of course. They should be opening an investigation into Motorola to see just how much money they're getting across your country.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    4. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how you profit by awarding a contract to your offshore bullshit business.

    5. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it is a ripoff, and Motorola has been doing this kind of thing for decades! For many years they would not sell programming software or the interface to program their radios. And although Motorola's radios are made to take abuse, the performance sucks. Motorola radios are also vastly overpriced, and so are accessories such as chargers, spare batteries, etc... That does not make what Richardson did right however.

    6. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      They should've thrown the law at motorola, or at least not signed that stupid contract in the first place and instead should have demanded functional radios rather than artificially crippled them.

      As such I fully understand why and hey savings for the taxpayer is all dandy. But it's the police and they gotta abide by the rules better than anyone else. So no pirating, eh. So this is more of a tax on idiot buyers getting suckered by sleezy sales. Too bad the taxpayer gets to pay for it, and not the bureaucrat fucking up.

    7. Re:Sounds like by TaleWeaver · · Score: 1

      Not to mention it sounds like a total ripoff... 94 dollars per update per radio? Thats highway robbery...

      Highway robbery is the bane of traffic cops.

    8. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are they though? These are police radios, they have to be available all the time, this isn't something where they can release a bug fix and hope nobody died in the meantime. Presumably, they're including support for the software along with the actual patches.

      Also, this is a relatively small market compared with some other services, so you'd expect it to cost more.

    9. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a great business opportunity for to undercut Motorola. You should start a business to provide a comparable or better product at a better price. Don't forget to provide free updates for the life of the radios. Free repairs and battery replacements will be great.

    10. Re: Sounds like by dnaumov · · Score: 0

      What makes you believe being hightly profitable, including off government contracts is grounds for an investigation? What kind of mental gymnastics is required to even beging conteptating this when the starting point is âpolice gets caught utilizing illegal software licensesâ?

    11. Re: Sounds like by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Now, I am not entirely well versed in US law and am certainly not a lawyer, but I seem to recall some law stating that any commercial offer extended to the state or government (and I'm assuming police falls under the state for this) must be the best possible available price-wise.

      This ... doesn't seem to match that. That's all.

      And as I said further up the thread, it sounds a lot like these paid updates only exist to get around calling it a subscription service, which in itself is borderline fraud.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    12. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Already exists. Called Yaesu.

    13. Re: Sounds like by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Manitoba isn't covered by American law. What the Manitobian law actually is, I have no idea.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    14. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. The law does not obligated companies to give the government the lowest price. But government purchasing officers have a mandate to evaluate multiple suppliers and get the best deal for the government. That doesn't apply when the suppliers are lobbyists or crooks, they seem to be able to run around the rules and extract a lot of money from the people.

    15. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, I am not entirely well versed in US law and am certainly not a lawyer,

      Don't worry, that shouldn't impact your ability to opine, assert things as fact, etc. Just look at "Shanghai" Bill and his "sterile blood plasma" and "Chinese government that doesn't censor people" - etc. Just make it up.

      *(FWIW, this is probably related to what you were talking about : https://www.pillsburylaw.com/en/news-and-insights/ndaa-limitations-lpta-procurements.html)

    16. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Willfully trying to skirt certain laws is also against the law.

      For instance, explosives are not legal to ship through the postal system. It's also illegal to ship anything through a private parcel service to avoid that transport ban.

    17. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you will it complain when Microsoft, Apple, and Google start charging you for the mandatory updates that you can't opt-out of getting because they'll disable your Xbox or computer or smartphone if you don't.

    18. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're thinking how many government contracts go to the lowest bidder. Not all contracts are this way. Some go to the most technically capable design. Obama tried to push for firm, fixed price contracts. Some time & labor contracts might specify that profit is only X%. But even if it's a lowest price, technically acceptable type contract, that doesn't mean the company that wins is going to be "cheap". It just has to be cheaper than the other guy. So if both Motorola and Harris want to bid on this contract and they both offer rip-offs but Motorola is cheaper, that's how Motorola could've won this contract but still been ripping off the government.

      (This is for U.S. gov't contracting).

    19. Re: Sounds like by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      And this is why Motorola is really afraid of Chinese brands like Hytera and Excera. Especially the patent fight with Hytera that effectively ended up being for some corner functionality that really doesn't matter for most users. The goal was to try to get rid of a serious competitor on the markets where Motorola dominates.

      Also be aware that the radios that people used to joke about like Baofeng, AnyTone and Tytera all are improving fast and are really challenging Motorola. You can buy 10 of them for what a Motorola costs and if it breaks just buy a new. Support is restricted to the downloads you can get from their sites.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    20. Re:Sounds like by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for being the arbiter of what's reasonable.. I guess if you feel that way, that's the way it is..

      I think paying for a iPhone is moronic... But I've never suggested Apple was ripping anybody off.. Don't want to pay for an iPhone? Buy an Android..

      Don't want to pay for Updates to your Motorola radio? Pick one of the other companies making encrypted radios.. Motorola doesn't have a goddamn monopoly.

      Maybe if you bought products from the company that was acting in a reasonable manner, the unreasonable ones (Motorola) would wither and die..

      Instead you steal from the shady company and the honest company never gains any traction in the market.

    21. Re: Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a free market, which capitalists claim to aspire to, excess profit (higher profit from activity A vs activity B) drops to zero. Therefore any industry where profit is "high" is in violation of free competition, frictionless marketplaces or other free market principals.

      Unless you are a Commie Statist, you would object to any industry with a government contract having higher than typical profits.

    22. Re: Sounds like by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Now, I am not entirely well versed in US law and am certainly not a lawyer,

      You aren't too hot on geography either.

      This is aboot Canada, y'hoser.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    23. Re:Sounds like by TXJD · · Score: 1

      Why would they do this? Motorola is free to set whatever price they wish to set. Winnipeg could just move to another vendor if the pricing is objectionable.

    24. Re:Sounds like by kbrannen · · Score: 1

      Why would they do this? Motorola is free to set whatever price they wish to set. Winnipeg could just move to another vendor if the pricing is objectionable.

      No they can't. There is incredible vendor lock-in with systems like this. At best, they find a local dealer who will cut them a deal to make it cheaper, but moving to another vendor is a multi-million dollar deal, and city governments don't do this lightly.

      Disclaimer: I work in this industry but not for Motorola. Also, Motorola is known for shennigans like this, but they can generally get away with it because they are in the #1 position, sort like in the 80's where "you can't get fired for recommending IBM".

    25. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misspelled "business."

    26. Re:Sounds like by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Have you not met people? You just described humans. We are great creatures. But at the same time were too smart for our own good. And were doomed to doom ourselves.

    27. Re:Sounds like by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      I concur with your statement.

    28. Re: Sounds like by Calydor · · Score: 1

      To be fair to myself I was running low on coffee and was just commenting off the replies, having forgotten exactly where this was going on. It just sounded like something you'd hear out of America.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    29. Re:Sounds like by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I see you've never had to deal with critical infrastructure before.

    30. Re:Sounds like by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Still ridiculous, of course.

      Hardly. For public safety infrastructure it's a small cost compared to the total ownership cost of the system itself. Last I checked with a Motorola TETRA system (the USA favours even more expensive P25) we were looking for 2 base stations in one system covering 400 radios a cost of $100k per year for license and maintenance. Radios are in the order of $2k each. And don't get me started on their cloud offerings. We balked at the cost as well and went to a competitor only to be greeted with figures that were very similar.

    31. Re: Sounds like by Curtman · · Score: 1

      But government purchasing officers have a mandate to evaluate multiple suppliers and get the best deal for the government.

      I can't tell if you're unfamiliar with our government or extremely naive, but our Federal government has spent literally billions of dollars trying to sort out its payroll software, and various governments of various political parties have not managed to figure something out yet in three decades of trying.

      This latest attempt by the previous Conservative government, they spent $2 billion on IBM software that IBM said wouldn't work when they began. Now the whole thing is being thrown in the trash and they are starting over.
      Phoenix, a timeline: How the federal government has spent nearly three decades struggling to deliver a new pay system for its 300,000 employees.

  3. Re:Zipping doo da by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The police, whom are paid to uphold the law, are allegedly breaking the law.

  4. jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an government by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an government did this and the government may have to face fines.
    As for this manager what pressure was put on him from higher up's?
    Did they have the funds to even buy the keys?
    Why is the key giver not in jail?
    Will they be able to read the EULA line by line in court?
    What about the government contract with Motorola what is in that and will they be able to read that line by line?
    What is the real cost of the software???

    1. if they can't go over both any EULA and the contract then the case should be removed from criminal court. But moved to an civil court.

  5. intercepted transmission ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    >> Real transcription from an encrypted broadcast -->

    Ex sea tollit torquatos 302.32 definitionem. Graeco imperdiet vim in, facete delicata 411 principes nam ad, no elit tota qualisque vis.

    Invenire abhorreant cum ea. Per te dicant facete detracto. Ludus perpetua nec et, affert suavitate ad duo, saepe 112th semper habemus est et. Has sint possim detraxit ex.

    After decryption -->

    dispatch -- on route to investigate the 302.32 call. Send backup.
    okay car 411, proceed past the dunkin donuts on 112th street. and by the way, please pick up
    2 dozen donut-holes for the second shift. we'll pay you when they're delivered.

    Seriously, why are they using encrypted transmissions?

    CAP === 'scorch'

    1. Re:intercepted transmission ... by dryeo · · Score: 1

      >> Real transcription from an encrypted broadcast -->

      Ex sea tollit torquatos 302.32 definitionem. Graeco imperdiet vim in, facete delicata 411 principes nam ad, no elit tota qualisque vis.

      Invenire abhorreant cum ea. Per te dicant facete detracto. Ludus perpetua nec et, affert suavitate ad duo, saepe 112th semper habemus est et. Has sint possim detraxit ex.

      After decryption -->

      dispatch -- on route to investigate the 302.32 call. Send backup.
      okay car 411, proceed past the dunkin donuts on 112th street. and by the way, please pick up
      2 dozen donut-holes for the second shift. we'll pay you when they're delivered.

      Seriously, why are they using encrypted transmissions?

      CAP === 'scorch'

      To prevent outrage that the cops are buying dunkin donuts instead of timmies.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    2. Re:intercepted transmission ... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I don't believe you, but my latin isn't good enough to check your translation.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  6. some non cop city work allegedly breaking the law by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    some non cop city worker is allegedly breaking the law. Not the cops.

  7. Re:Zipping doo da by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Copyright infringement is neither theft nor a crime according to everything I read here.

    In the US, copyright infringement is a civil offense, and I believe it is the same in Canada. So it doesn't make much sense that he was arrested for that.

    According to TFA, the actual criminal charges are for other things, including fraud and unauthorized use of a computer. Most likely they are just piling on charges to coerce him into a plea bargain.

  8. Re:jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an governmen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is there any proof that an EULA was agreed on or even shown to any party?

    If there is a contract then that is what matters.
    Digital EULAs are nothing but hearsay.

  9. The real criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real criminals here are Motorola for charging $94 per radio per update to let them change settings on hardware the police dept already owns.

    1. Re:The real criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Users are free to buy radios from other vendors which have more reasonable terms. Now perhaps some vendors have engaged in improper practices to sell radios, if so those should be handled ...

    2. Re:The real criminals by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      The real criminals here are Motorola for charging $94 per radio per update to let them change settings on hardware the police dept already owns.

      Owning the radio and having a license to use them on a system are two different things. $94 is nothing, it's pennies when it comes to public safety radio systems. The radios cost thousands. The infrastructure 100s of thousands. The management and licenses hundreds of thousands again.

    3. Re:The real criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $94 per license is not nothing. The guy illegally obtained 65k update licenses in 1 instance. That's over $600k CAD or $450k USD when you do some simple math.

    4. Re:The real criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this would be over $1 MILLION PER YEAR to rekey 1000 radios monthly.

    5. Re:The real criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe the fault lies with the one who made decision to go that way in the first place. It's not like anyone was coerced.

  10. Re:jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an governmen by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    what about vendor / distributorship contract? vs the Motorola contract / EULA?

  11. Little people ... by kbahey · · Score: 1

    Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi. In other words, laws are for little people ...

  12. Police on a leash. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you find you are suddenly in danger of being unable to use some functionality of your device then you have leashed yourself with closed-source software. If they had invested in contributing to an open source software then they would not be leashed. The real problem is that when people think of open source software, they think that because it's free that they should not allocate money toward supporting the software. This short-term MBA style thinking has kept open source projects very weak ("Why financially support a project if there is no immediate benefit?") and thus caused so many fools to put themselves on a software leash. In the case of expiring licenses, that leash is really a noose that slowly tightens around their neck until they pay.

    If businesses were smart then there would be billions of dollars invested to build/improve open source software. Instead there are peanuts because corporations are only looking out for "number one" as they cut their own face.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Police on a leash. by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      If you find you are suddenly in danger of being unable to use some functionality of your device then you have leashed yourself with closed-source software. If they had invested in contributing to an open source software then they would not be leashed. The real problem is that when people think of open source software, they think that because it's free that they should not allocate money toward supporting the software.

      This is delusional. People buy "closed source" software from known companies because they at least have a hope (and usually a contract) to *support it*. Open source generally had *no support whatsoever*, or at best it's at the whim of some open-source zealot. Something goes wrong with your Motorola radio, you call Motorola. They give you a support number or website, they are contractually/legally obligated to support you under terms you agreed to.

          You buy/acquire an open-source "free software" product, you have *nothing*. Maybe theres a website where you can go, ask a question, and maybe someone answers your question, or maybe not, depends on how some individual feels about it that day. There's no one even pretending to be accountable for it, there's no one who gives a damn about your problem. Heck, if it's the police, you might ask a question and then get descended by a bunch of neckbeard shouting "fuck the police" or refusing to support you on their precious principles that law enforcement are the oppressors, or something equally stupid. It might have foriegn content when that is not allowed, and you can't tell, because it's not traceable and no one is responsible.

            Maybe you can hire some flaky hippy-types who job-hop every 6 months, maybe the know what they are doing or not, and guess what, you are now, quite unexpectedly, in the software development business.

            That's why people buy software from actual established companies, and that's why any responsible purchasing agent requires that the terms of support be explicitly stated in a contract. That's effectively impossible to ensure any of these things in a open-source contract, and unless there is something done about it, *you will never, ever make any headway*.

    2. Re:Police on a leash. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " they are contractually/legally obligated to support you under terms you agreed to " - How many times have you enforced this, dipshit Brett Buttfuck?

    3. Re: Police on a leash. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RedHat would like to have a word with your stupid brain.

    4. Re:Police on a leash. by dryeo · · Score: 2

      People can sell support for open source just like closed source. Redhat for example has made a business of selling support for mostly GPL software.
      Likewise, Motorola could be selling GPL software with a support contract, only drawback is that if they charge too much, someone else can offer support as the actual source code would be available.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    5. Re: Police on a leash. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... What prevents a company from selling a contract to support open source software with a suitable license? It doesn't even have to be the author.

    6. Re:Police on a leash. by sjames · · Score: 1

      So you are saying they spend massive bux and leash themselves so someone calling himself Bob will tell them it will be goodly if they will reboot the device?

    7. Re:Police on a leash. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly the attitude the GP is arguing against. "Open source" does not mean the same thing as "community non-commercial project". If you don't have the in-house IT to support a software product, then, yes, you should pay someone else to provide support. That in no way necessitates them keeping the source secret from you.

      To go to the Slashdot standard of car analogies, it would be like the police department buying cars with a contract promising they would only ever have their vehicles serviced by that one manufacturer. Which I suspect is a deal that they would find utterly unacceptable. Yet suddenly such absurdly restrictive terms are considered normal and fine when the thing being supported is software.

    8. Re:Police on a leash. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      That should be "How many times have you tried to enforce this"

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:Police on a leash. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      A point. I, personally, am much more a proponent of free software, but in the 1980's open source frequently worked as you describe.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    10. Re: Police on a leash. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll take a pay cut to $120k/yr and support any open source project that is of even passing interest to me. That covers video/audio production, network/comms, db, graphics, etc, just on systems I have already worked with.

      I might not be good enough to do kernel optimization, but that's more million dollar a year to start people anyway.

      If your business is a real business and you depend on an open source project, you are a fool if you do not have at least a partial FTE digging into it. What if a competitor bought the rights to it, and slowly forked you over?

    11. Re:Police on a leash. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is pretty typical "magical" FOSS thinking. Invest, say the advocates! Build your temple to freedom!

      No. 99.999% of business managers want a plug-and-play solution. Does the term COTS mean nothing to you? And FOTS would be fine too. But building a Greenfield solution is a pretty good way to get fired, most places.

      Why? Your facile thinking is mostly just a minor variation on the old ways. Build your own custom solution, in house.

      It could be different of course. That involves deep links, consultation, and a broad meeting of the minds of many additional customers/partners. Now your expensive and slow delivery timeline gets many additional delays, a layer of politics, and a gaggle of unreslved (and potentially unresolvable) conflicts over priorities, timelines, features, direction, and all the rest.

      In effect you become a software development shop staffed with volunteers, you ha e influence but no control, outcomes are uncertain, timeline is unknown, budget also unknown. Great!

    12. Re:Police on a leash. by kbrannen · · Score: 2

      Disclaimer: I work in this industry but not for Motorola.

      Nice sentiment, but completely unrealistic. There is a lot of work to be done to create systems like this and the market is pretty small, compared to many things in tech. These are multi-million dollar systems and don't get changed just because someone feels like it. That creates incredible vendor lock-in. Also the expertise to create these systems can be hard to find. "Public safety" systems are not easy to do and really take a company to stand behind them.

      The best you could do would be for the federal government to fund creating open systems like this. However, I don't expect that to ever happen either.

      HTH,
      K.

    13. Re:Police on a leash. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If they had invested in contributing to an open source software then they would not be leashed.

      If it existed then it may be viable. But quite frankly there is no competitor to a P25 or TETRA based public safety system in the open source world. Unlike Oracle you can't just download an alternative off the internet. Just like you wouldn't download a car.

    14. Re:Police on a leash. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm as into open source software as the next guy, and in fact I run lots of it, but give it a rest already. People on this site will try to crowbar an OSS reference in when discussing fucking ANYTHING.

  13. Motorola tried this with us over Y2K by wwphx · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was working for a fairly large police department, and our mobile data terminals (MDTs) were not Y2K compliant. They were 386's running Windows 3, I can't remember if it was Windows for Workgroups, and Moto told us they wouldn't roll over properly and would cost on the order of $300+ per terminal to update, and we had over 1000 cars.

    After researching further, we learned that when the officers logged on to our dispatch system that it downloaded the correct date/time from the Unisys mainframe, overriding the Windows clock. Y2K endrun, Motorola doesn't get a trunkfull of money from us. Everybody working 3rd shift on 31 December 1999 were instructed to log off just before midnight and sign back in just after. Everything worked just fine. The MDTs continued working properly for years until they were eventually replaced.

    The only Y2K casualty that we had was the Dispatch system on the HP minis! A patch was supposed to self-deploy at midnight: it was compiled and ready to go, but someone didn't run the link/edit step, and when it deployed, crashed it crashed the whole shebang. At least our Windows network was flawless.

    While I can understand the guy not wanting to pay Motorola a ridiculous amount of money to update the radios, if you sign the contract, you're obligating yourself to the licensing fees. Motorola was infamous for this, so either read the fine print and negotiate a better contract, or find a vendor that will give you a better deal - you don't have to deal with Motorola directly to buy Motorola equipment!

    --
    When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
    1. Re:Motorola tried this with us over Y2K by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      and our mobile data terminals (MDTs) were not Y2K compliant
      This does not make sense ...
      Everybody working 3rd shift on 31 December 1999 were instructed to log off just before midnight and sign back in just after. Everything worked just fine. The MDTs continued working properly for years until they were eventually replaced.
      Then obviously it had no Y2K problem.


            if (XX99 < YY00) ...

      Works completely different if XX and YY exist or not and one is 19 and one is 20 ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:Motorola tried this with us over Y2K by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, but if they didn't have any log files, then restarting after the century rollover would fix things. Only when you need to keep dates from both centuries is this a problem.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:Motorola tried this with us over Y2K by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The entire system was not having a complex problem...
      Parts of a much wider network had to be considered and worked on.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Motorola tried this with us over Y2K by o_ferguson · · Score: 1

      I was working for Computer Dealer News in Toronto for the y2k roll-over, and the only system that died was a little monochrome 286 box that was custom programmed to be our punch-in, punch-out station died, so HR finally gave up trying to have us punch a clock.

      --
      - In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
  14. What does the $94 per update per radio cover? by Danielsen · · Score: 2

    I highly doubt that there are 'software' on the iButtons, they are basically just another 'small' storage media like a diskette, or a USB flashdrive.
    Are the $94 covering:
    1) Are they paying a one time fee to unlock the encrypted communication feature.
    2) A fee to get special trusted X509 time limited certificates to create trust between the radios.
    3) A combination of 1 and 2.
    For certificates to be used within an organization having its own chain of trust, getting a certificate from a third-party is less secure than a selfsigned certificate.

    1. Re:What does the $94 per update per radio cover? by Luthair · · Score: 1

      I don't think there is anything that could legitimately cost $94 dollars a year. Its a straight up rip-off from Motorola.

    2. Re:What does the $94 per update per radio cover? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The firmware updates for the radios mentioned are downloadable for free from Motorola's website as long as you create a free account, but to legally install them you are required to purchase a hardware "key" from Motorola. The key is nothing but a counter containing how many "updates" you purchased, and authentication from the firmware upgrading program telling you that you have upgrades available. The counter goes down by one every time you attempt a firmware update, whether it's successful or not. Flaky proprietary software crashes during the update? Too bad: you're out at least the purchase price of another firmware update key and if you're unlucky, the radio hardware as well.

      Illegally, you can do the same thing one of 2 ways: You can buy a hacked key with ~65,555 flashes available, which has been seen on ebay at times, or download leaked programming software (called "Depot") that will allow you to do the firmware upgrade with the freely available file without the key present, along with enabling pre-installed software-defined upgrades to hardware already present in the radio (such as different types of encryption, digital transmission instead of analog, etc.

      All you're really paying for is a counter to count down 1 bit every time you click upgrade, or running an extra program in the firmware of the radio.

    3. Re:What does the $94 per update per radio cover? by Danielsen · · Score: 1

      This remind me of the Shell car wash back in the early 2000's, where an iButton fob was used as a prepaid token for a number of car washes.
      It was possible to do a 'backup' of a new fob, and 'restore' it again when it was empty.

    4. Re:What does the $94 per update per radio cover? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I highly doubt that there are 'software' on the iButtons, they are basically just another 'small' storage media like a diskette, or a USB flashdrive.

      While you are almost certainly correct about what's on these iButtons, they actually have "Java iButtons" which have a processor onboard capable of running simple Java code. They are intended for upgradeable crypto tokens. Think SIM card.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. And they only use them to block us out by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Once upon a time, you could just buy a scanner and listen in on what the police are up to. They didn't like that, so they went to encrypted radios, and they give access to the system to cherry-picked journalists that won't hold their feet to the fire. The whole reason they even have radios that need updating is to keep us from keeping tabs on their misdeeds.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:And they only use them to block us out by jwymanm · · Score: 1

      Yeah it's great. Tax payers pay their salaries and they go to block us from listening in by using more tax payer dollars to do so. Absolutely insane.

    2. Re:And they only use them to block us out by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Which is probably very true for the Winnipeg police. Don't want to publish dropping people off 10 miles out of town when its 40 below.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    3. Re:And they only use them to block us out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      The radios are often encrypted to comply with things like HIPAA and other privacy laws. If there is a call that involves need for medical care then the call for help can require passing on information that may be protected. If the person involved is a minor, medical condition or not, then there are also privacy laws on this. If it's a matter of tracking down a fugitive then the police don't want the person to know where they are, they are giving the suspect a tactical advantage by hearing how they plan to track him/her down.

      Certainly covering up "misdeeds" is a concern but where and how is this line drawn? I'm not aware of any law that the police are required to broadcast their communications. Should we be able to listen in on all of their phone calls as well?

      I know I might be getting off topic but here goes...
      I keep hearing on how only the police can be trusted with "X". Well, now we have a case where the police seem to not be trusted. Pick a lane people, can we trust them or not? Is there a middle ground perhaps? I think the middle ground was spelled out the in the US Bill of Rights. The police cannot search without a warrant or reasonable cause. If they violate that then the evidence found cannot be used against the accused. The police cannot disarm the public, people have the right to defend themselves. This includes defending themselves from the police. Every police officer is an individual. An untrustworthy cop should not be allowed to abuse another individual. Their right to privacy does not go away because they are now employed by the government. We need to keep records of what was said when in case there is a dispute, this does not mean live transmission of their communications.

      There are ways to hold them to account for their actions besides unencrypted radios. Let them have the radios because I want the same technology for myself. I should have available to me the same tools as the police.

    4. Re:And they only use them to block us out by Vertigo+Acid · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bullshit. HIPAA applies to covered entities and that's not the police

      https://www.hhs.gov/sites/defa...

      --
      Beta is bad enough to make me go edit settings like this sig that haven't been touched since I joined
    5. Re:And they only use them to block us out by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      If you get the spirit of the US Bill of Rights, it's that a low level of crime will be tolerated to ensure freedom and transparency of government.

      Certain states go further - in New Hampshire, 'officers and magistrates' are accountable to the people 'at all times'. In its framing, the People are explicitly supreme to the employees of the State. They're not legally allowed to hide and ambush the People (they do anyway of course because the Rule of Law is out the window).

      If your only choices were protecting HIPAA information and ensuring government accountability, then you would sacrifice the HIPAA privacy. It's not sacrosanct - it's just a statute that may not violate the Constitution.

      I once spoke with a Representative who was against police body cameras because in the event of a no-knock SWAT raid somebody might be undressed. I asked him where in the Constitution such raids were authorized and how he thought that unpresented warrants might be legal and he rapidly changed the subject. I didn't let him get away with that and told him to tackle the real problems.

      You have to watch out for these sociopath types - they'll make every inch you give them into a treacherous mile.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    6. Re:And they only use them to block us out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      now we have a case where the police seem to not be trusted

      The manager (not the policemen) did the right thing. When someone is effectively blackmailing you, you should never stand for it. It might have been illegal, but it was the moral thing to do.

      What we do know is that most people who read an article will misunderstand it. The police arrested one of their managers, they weren't the ones intentionally breaking the law. However, anyone with power should by default not be trusted.

    7. Re: And they only use them to block us out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We are stopping in the abandoned mill for a while before heading back to the station. We don't want people to hear the subjects' screams while we 'question' them further"

      "10-4"

    8. Re:And they only use them to block us out by kbrannen · · Score: 1

      Once upon a time, the vast majority of the people did the right because it was the right thing. Someone had something, it stayed put, and no one was bothered. That meant you could leave your house, with your front door unlocked, and return later to find that nothing had been stolen -- ever.

      Now, we have locks on our front doors because we have to to keep people from stealing things. Now, the police have to encrypt their radio systems otherwise some [negative word of your choice] people will not only use scanners, but will also use their radios on the police networks and create nuisances of themselves at best, or prevent the police from using the systems (in sort of a DoS way). The systems have a way to "inhibit" those radios to get them off, but the more determined people have bought/stole/whatever a factory kit to unbrick the radios and then come back and do it some more. Therefore, encrypting the radios and system is the way to combat that.

      Disclaimer: I work in this industry but not for Motorola.

    9. Re:And they only use them to block us out by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Now, we have locks on our front doors because we have to to keep people from stealing things. Now, the police have to encrypt their radio systems otherwise some [negative word of your choice] people will not only use scanners, but will also use their radios on the police networks and create nuisances of themselves at best,

      We have to have unencrypted police radio because if we don't, [a subset of] the police will use the radio system to facilitate crimes against The People.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:And they only use them to block us out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. HIPAA applies to covered entities and that's not the police

      https://www.hhs.gov/sites/defa...

      But it could be EMS, so it may be necessary to encrypted data links for EHRs, if not voice/dispatch.

    11. Re:And they only use them to block us out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's HIPAA have to do with Canada?

    12. Re: And they only use them to block us out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you are really dumb...

    13. Re:And they only use them to block us out by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Wow, what an amazing conspiracy theory you have there. How'd you get modded up? I used to listen to police scanners all the time and they're boring as hell. A lot of mundane business. When they switched to trunked systems it wasn't a conspiracy to keep TEH CRIMEZ from the honest (giggle) journalists, it was to make better use of scarce frequencies. Just a quick question, do you listen to Alex Jones? And have you been checked for schizophrenia lately? The disease often manifests itself with paranoia and conspiracy theories.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    14. Re:And they only use them to block us out by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Wow, what an amazing conspiracy theory you have there

      Not a theory

      How'd you get modded up?

      People with a clue must have got modpoints somehow.

      I used to listen to police scanners all the time and they're boring as hell. A lot of mundane business.

      These days, murdering the innocent is mundane police business, and so is hiding the fact.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:And they only use them to block us out by beheaderaswp · · Score: 1

      These days, murdering the innocent is mundane police business, and so is hiding the fact.

      These days?

      You are obviously a person with bad memory or in the flower of your youth.

      Today's police violence/misconduct pales in comparison to the sheer majesty of brazen nefarious activities found in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.

      --
      Another consultant who stuck it out.

      "We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
    16. Re:And they only use them to block us out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once upon a time, you could just buy a scanner and listen in on what the police are up to. They didn't like that, so they went to encrypted radios, and they give access to the system to cherry-picked journalists that won't hold their feet to the fire. The whole reason they even have radios that need updating is to keep us from keeping tabs on their misdeeds.

      I had an analog scanner, then in partly in response to 9/11, most first responders switched to digital trunked systems, so I could only hear small towns. Now, I can buy a $9 software defined radio receiver and listen to the 800 MHz trunked system. I can follow any channel I want. Almost none of it is encrypted. And the system tells you which channels are or arn't. EMS, police, maintenance, etc are all in the clear. Vice is encrypted and the fire chief had an encrypted channel. There were a few others, but not much. Everything on these channels is recorded and the public can request access, so there is little reason to encrypt them.

    17. Re:And they only use them to block us out by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Today's police violence/misconduct pales in comparison to the sheer majesty of brazen nefarious activities found in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.

      They are killing us in record numbers, so I don't believe that for a second. They are still up to all the same old tricks.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:And they only use them to block us out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, and so are kids.
      School shootings are up.

  16. Re:jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an governmen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As I said, the contract is what matters.

    If there is any claims of a digital EULA the response can be "I never saw it" or "this isn't what I agreed to" and then you have word against word.

  17. Re: Zipping doo da by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    100% no crime here.
    Fuck Motorola

  18. Re:Hi Everyone by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0

    my pal's sister makes $69/hour on the internet.

    How exactly does she 69 over the Internet? Asking for a friend...

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  19. Better move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would be to dump Motorola, buy those Baofeng radios and be done with it.

  20. It isn't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If monopolyprivilege is not a crime like theft, then surely I can "buy" your worthless mere copies of that software with my worthless mere copies of money.

    But, but you worked hard to make that software?
    Yeah, and I worked hard to make that money!
    But my money is merely a copy! It is worth nothing! You can make such a copy yourself!
    Yeah, and so is your software.
    But, but... a copy is not the same thing!
    EXACTLY!

    Then how do you make money from your software you ask?
    *The same way every other legitimate business in the history of mankind did!* By selling your *service* as a *service*. Not as a product. ... Because *it isn't!*

    1. Re:It isn't. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It's because of assholes like you that this is the exact direction the software industry is headed. Software as a rental.. I can't just buy Photoshop anymore..

      Don't be daft. Adobe would have gone that reason regardless just to get the people who don't need the new features to give them more money anyway.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:It isn't. by jpaine619 · · Score: 0

      Maybe, maybe not. You have no proof they would have. What we do know is Photoshop was one of the most widely pirated software titles out there. Probably (guessing) beaten by pirate installs of Windows.

      Large corporations are slow to change. They have inertia.. They tend to react rather than be proactive. It's more likely (absent any facts) that Adobe would have continued with their business model if there had been less pirating.. There would have been no pressure to change... Why move to subscriptions if people were buying the software in the first place?

      Oh.. I know.. All corporations are evil and Adobe is a bunch of assholes for wanting to be paid.. But rather than not pirate it and use a free alternative like GIMP.. Oh, yeah GIMP sucks in comparison so lets justify stealing Photoshop.. There, saved you the bother of replying.

    3. Re:It isn't. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Maybe, maybe not. You have no proof they would have.

      And you have no proof that they wouldn't have. If you get near a point, make it.

      What we do know is Photoshop was one of the most widely pirated software titles out there.

      So what? We also know that you're blaming people who would never have bought it anyway, who aren't reducing sales at all and who may one day purchase the software, for Adobe's corporate decisions. If you want to be upset at someone, be upset at the professionals who aren't paying for it, and are then making money with it, because they represent actual lost sales — and therefore an actual reason to implement this type of scheme. The hordes of kiddies who warez Photoshop and use it only to meme would never have given Adobe a dime to begin with.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  21. Re:jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an governmen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an government did this and the government may have to face fines.

    I agree. The government should have to pay triple now for not paying the previously advertised price. If governments don't see the damages from not following the rules then this will continue.

    As for this manager what pressure was put on him from higher up's?
    Did they have the funds to even buy the keys?

    I'm not sure this is relevant. If they didn't have the funds for new keys then, as I understand it, they should have continued using the radios but without encryption. If this manager got pressure from above then it is still the police department that is responsible for the actions of its members, have the police department pay the fines and then let the internal investigators do their own internal investigation on who gets fired.

    Why is the key giver not in jail?

    The story says it was a US ham radio operator that sold the software to a Canadian police department. Depending on how the law is interpreted then he might just end up in jail.

    Will they be able to read the EULA line by line in court?

    I'm sure it can be read. My question is, will they finish before the heat death of the universe?

    What about the government contract with Motorola what is in that and will they be able to read that line by line?
    What is the real cost of the software???
    1. if they can't go over both any EULA and the contract then the case should be removed from criminal court. But moved to an civil court.

    Seems to me that criminal and civil laws were broken here.

  22. Re:Zipping doo da by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some techie grunt broke the law, do you think the pigs using the radios even know they are using pirated software? Or care?
    Some slashdolt who pirates shit all of a sudden getting smart on the law. Give me a fucking break.

  23. US DHS ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... security threat. The details that they are dancing around is that encrypted public service radios have been hacked. The information is out there, just like DVD and Blu-ray rippers. Patches are available for digital trunking scanners and SDR receivers.

    This is more about Motorola having made a promise to their customers which they can not keep. And as anyone involved with software knows, nobody can keep in the long term.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  24. Re:jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an governmen by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    I'm sure it can be read. My question is, will they finish before the heat death of the universe?
    and will they a jury that can live on $10/day that will wait that long?

  25. So, there are some bad ideas. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    ... Richardson likes the idea of not giving more money to Motorola ...

    Giving money to and paying for a product/service are not the same thing.

    ... police said the Motorola radios needed frequent updating.

    This is the bigger question - why? Do radio signals get stale?

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:So, there are some bad ideas. by xlsior · · Score: 1

      ... police said the Motorola radios needed frequent updating.

      This is the bigger question - why? Do radio signals get stale?

      Digital encryption certificates expire and may need to be updated, allocated radio frequencies may change and need to be re-programmed in, and more.

    2. Re:So, there are some bad ideas. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      ... police said the Motorola radios needed frequent updating.

      This is the bigger question - why? Do radio signals get stale?

      Digital encryption certificates expire and may need to be updated, allocated radio frequencies may change and need to be re-programmed in, and more.

      Okay... but frequently? Certificates should last a while, unless the vendor is trying to rip-off customers and I can't imagine cities re-allocating their EMT frequencies that often. Sounds more like a business model designed to generate income for Motorola. I imagine that they're probably locked-in at this point and finding an alternative secure radio vendor *and* migrating over would be a HUGE hassle. Still not an excuse for a LEO to get the certificates illegally.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    3. Re:So, there are some bad ideas. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Not just that, but the department should be able to load their own certs, or program their own frequencies.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re: So, there are some bad ideas. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a license fee for the encryption feature. You need to update every 3months so the encryption keeps working.

  26. $94 each...WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry guys, sounds like you arrested the wrong thief.

  27. Re:jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an governmen by HiThere · · Score: 0

    How do you know that the EULA that is shown in court is identical to the original EULA?

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  28. Re:Zipping doo da by jpaine619 · · Score: 0, Troll

    In the US, copyright infringement is a civil offense, and I believe it is the same in Canada. So it doesn't make much sense that he was arrested for that.

    It doesn't make sense because you are talking out of your ass. You aren't a lawyer, stop pretending to be one.

    Criminal copyright laws prohibit the unacknowledged use of another's intellectual property for the purpose of financial gain. Violation of these laws can lead to fines and jail time. Criminal copyright laws have been a part of U.S. laws since 1897, which added a misdemeanor penalty for unlawful performances if "willful and for profit".

    Criminal penalties were greatly expanded in the latter half of the twentieth century, and those found guilty of criminal copyright infringement may now be imprisoned for decades, and fined hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    Criminal penalties, in general, require that the offender knew that he or she was committing a crime, while civil copyright infringement is a strict liability offense, and offenders can be "innocent" (of intent to infringe), as well as an "ordinary" infringer or a "willful" infringer.

    The above is for the US.

    The person referenced in the story, a Canadian, knew damn well what he was doing and he evidenced it as much when he said "Don't ask where these keys came from". As Canada also has criminal penalties for copyright infringement.....

    According to section 34(4) of the Copyright Act, specific penalties will be decided by the court. Section 35(1) states that an infringer is liable for the financial gain made through infringement, and "such damages to the owner of the copyright as the owner has suffered due to the infringement"......

    In addition to the civil penalties described above, Section 42(1) of the Copyright Act sets out a number of criminal offences. These primarily deal with infringement that involves sale or rental of copyrighted materials, and can result in fines of up to $1,000,000 or prison sentences of up to 2 years for indictment. For a summary conviction, the maximum fine is $25,000 and prison term is limited to 6 months.

    So both countries have criminal copyright law..... Try again.

  29. Re: Zipping doo da by jpaine619 · · Score: 0

    100% no crime here.

    I dare you to tell that to the guy in question when the government gets done ass fucking him. I think he'll disagree.

  30. Re: some non cop city work allegedly breaking the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The cops are still using illegally obtained software. In possession of stolen property, as it were.

    The guy who ordered it done should go to jail for millions in theft. So should the guy who approved signing contract where a "frequently needed" firmware update is $94 a pop. For longer.

  31. Re: Zipping doo da by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    In the US, copyright infringement is a civil offense

    Not if you're uploading, it isn't.

  32. Re:jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an governmen by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Why is the key giver not in jail?

    The article doesn't go into technical details, but if this guy developed an independent programmer and key generator, he may not be under contract with Motorola at all and it's not [yet] illegal to write software to mod devices.

    The police department more than likely is under contract and apparently used that software to engage in theft of services (and possibly copyrighted software) from Motorola.

    I'm sure they'll want to scapegoat him anyway, as cops very rarely face punishments for their misdeeds.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  33. oooh, I'd like one of those mounties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oooh, I'd like one of those mounties to pirate my butthole

  34. Re: Zipping doo da by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we found the lawyer who trains the police and then protects them when they f up

  35. I am no fan of authoritarian overreach... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but if I read the summary of the CBC report correctly, the Police, as such, did nothing wrong. The illegal actions performed by a "manager with the city".
    It is not clear from the summary that the 'manager' was in fact directly employed in the police department. I am all for holding members of institutional 'authority' to the highest standards of conduct, but in this case it is not clear that there is any problem with the way that police personnel did their job.

         

  36. Re:Zipping doo da by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, the official, licensed software lacked the ability to seamlessly delete "inconvenient" radio comms, and the cops are sick and tired of having to pay out-of-pocket for their private cellphone usage in their drive to do end-runs around transparency and open-records laws to protect themselves from being held accountable when they violate people's civil rights and break the laws they're supposed to enforce while conforming to a "blue line" code of silence like the mafia of old.

  37. Re:Zipping doo da by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > In the US, copyright infringement is a civil offense

    Under the DMCA, pirating more than $500 worth within a 6 month timeframe is a felony. It likely applies to activation codes.

  38. Re:Zipping doo da by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > he got from a person considered to be a security threat by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security,

    That's probably why.

  39. bone spurs by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    Ask yourself, would Donald Trump do this??

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  40. Re:Hi Everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    my pal's sister makes $69/hour on the internet.

    How exactly does she 69 over the Internet? Asking for a friend...

    one person holds a fleshlight the other a dildo

  41. Dr. Locktite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Motorola has the PD locked in nice and tight.

    The jailers become the jailed.

  42. Re: Hi Everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So she sells her body on Craigslist?

  43. Re:jail / prison maybe the wrong way. an governmen by omnichad · · Score: 1

    it's not [yet] illegal to write software to mod devices.

    If the programmer is in the US, then it most certainly is illegal, for better or worse. If the DMCA can be used by John Deere, it can be used by Motorola. They are circumventing a digital restriction.

  44. Playing with PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It always ends in a disaster.

  45. Motorola has the keys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To encrypted government communication? If the are producing the keys and update the radios, does this imply they can listen in?

    Shouldn't such system be done in a way that only the government has the keys?

  46. Re:Zipping doo da by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is copyright infringement relevant here? In fact I'm having trouble identifying what the seller of the keys is infringing on aside from "fraud" - misrepresenting the source of the keys (which is still a very serious crime). Unauthorized use of a computer is also a bit strange given that he probably used his own laptop or something to generate the keys so of course he had access.

    Keys are just numbers and even if you claim these numeric keys are copyrightable, Motorola probably had never created those 65000 particular keys before so they would have no claim to them.

    If it is possible to algorithmically create keys, wouldn't the closest thing for them to lay claim on be some sort of patent claim for the key generation algorithm... but then again that isn't for sale here, only the generated numbers.

  47. Re:Zipping doo da by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Why is copyright infringement relevant here?

    Because there is more to law than a two worded title that you looked up in a dictionary, and the practices being described have always been codified as illegal in criminal copyright legislation.

  48. software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew what company it was without even reading the article. Motorola is real bad. They sell a police $5000 radio then want money to program it and fees to allow you to use it on your own network. I Put a lot of blame on the police agency. They agreed to these terms.. They should have written these "extra" programming fee's out of the radio purchase agreement.

  49. openmhz.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IT seems silly as those Motorola encryption systems are very weak, and all you need is 1 person to stream the results to one of many sites like https://openmhz.com/systems

    1. Re: openmhz.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it is encrypted that will not work (assuming the key was not leaked)

  50. Re: Zipping doo da by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

    Not a lawyer but I know how to use Google. How you came to the conclusion that copyright is not a criminal offense is beyond me, when we all have seen warez pirates sent to prison.....

  51. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How the hell do police RADIOS even HAVE millions of dollars worth of software ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!