Alternatives to Police Radio Encryption
Blanket encryption presents a false choice: total secrecy or total openness. The truth is, better solutions exist that protect legitimate privacy and operational needs while preserving public safety, accountability, and transparency.
The False Choice
When police departments propose encryption, they frame it as binary: "Either we encrypt everything for safety, or we risk officer lives and victim privacy."
This is misleading. Modern radio systems, smart policies, and proven practices offer proportional solutions that address every legitimate concern without eliminating public access.
Below are the alternatives that policymakers, departments, and communities should consider before resorting to blanket encryption.
Solution #1: Hybrid Radio Systems
The gold standard—encrypt what needs encrypting, keep routine policing open
Hybrid radio systems are the most effective alternative to blanket encryption. They use modern digital radio technology with selective encryption: routine dispatch stays open, sensitive operations use encrypted channels.
This approach addresses every legitimate concern about privacy and operations while preserving the public safety, accountability, and journalism benefits of scanner access.
How Hybrid Systems Work
✅ Keep These Open (Unencrypted)
Primary Dispatch
Routine calls—traffic stops, welfare checks, alarms, noise complaints
Traffic Accidents
Vehicle crashes, road closures, traffic control
Property Crimes
Burglaries, theft reports, vandalism (non-sensitive)
Medical Assists
Officer response to medical emergencies (coordinate with EMS)
Public Disturbances
Noise complaints, crowds, public intoxication
Fire/EMS Coordination
Joint responses, scene security, multi-agency incidents
Coverage: 85-90% of all police radio traffic
🔒 Encrypt These (Secure Channels)
SWAT / Tactical Operations
High-risk warrants, hostage situations, tactical raids
Undercover Operations
Drug task force, vice operations, gang investigations
Sensitive Investigations
Active investigations where disclosure could compromise outcome
Witness Protection
Communications involving protected witnesses or informants
Domestic Violence (Switchable)
Officers can switch to encrypted channel for victim privacy on specific calls
Sexual Assault (Switchable)
Sensitive calls where victim information requires protection
Coverage: 10-15% of police radio traffic
The key insight: The vast majority of police work is routine and benefits from transparency. Only a small fraction involves genuinely sensitive operations. Hybrid systems match the tool (encryption) to the actual need, rather than applying a sledgehammer to every situation.
Benefits of Hybrid Approach
Public Safety Preserved
Real-time emergency alerts continue during active shooters, wildfires, and hazmat incidents on open channels
Accountability Maintained
Independent oversight of routine policing continues; community can verify how police operate
Journalism Supported
Breaking news coverage continues; media can independently verify police accounts
Operations Protected
Genuinely sensitive operations use encrypted channels, protecting tactics and investigations
Privacy Respected
Officers can switch to encrypted channels for sensitive victim situations as needed
Cost Effective
Less expensive than full encryption; focused resources where actually needed
Balanced Interests
Serves police operational needs AND public interest in transparency—not zero-sum
Democratic Principles
Presumption of openness with narrow, justified exceptions—as democracy requires
Real-World Hybrid System Examples
Departments Using Hybrid Systems Successfully
Many police departments operate hybrid systems that balance all interests:
- Federal agencies: FBI, DEA, and ATF have long used tactical channels for sensitive ops while keeping some traffic accessible
- Large cities: Several major departments maintain open dispatch while encrypting specialized units
- Regional systems: Statewide radio networks often include both open and encrypted talkgroups by design
These systems demonstrate that hybrid approaches work in practice across different sizes and types of departments.
Communities That Reversed Blanket Encryption
Some departments tried full encryption but reversed course after community backlash:
- Public pressure led to restoration of open dispatch channels
- City councils mandated hybrid approach after encryption criticism
- Departments realized blanket encryption damaged community relations
Proof that encryption is reversible and communities can win transparency back.
Implementing a Hybrid System
For policymakers and departments considering a hybrid approach:
Audit Current Communications
Review what's actually transmitted on radio. You'll likely find 85-90% is routine and non-sensitive.
Identify Genuine Needs
Determine which units/operations truly require encryption: SWAT, narcotics, undercover, etc.
Configure Talkgroups
Set up digital radio system with separate talkgroups: open dispatch + encrypted tactical channels
Train Officers
Teach when to use which channel, proper radio protocol for victim privacy on open channels
Create Clear Policies
Written guidelines on channel usage, victim privacy protection, when encryption is appropriate
Community Transparency
Publish policy explaining what's open vs. encrypted and why, with civilian oversight
Solution #2: Technology Alternatives
Technical solutions that protect privacy without eliminating scanner access
Mobile Data Terminals (MDTs)
What They Are:
In-car computer systems that allow text-based communication between dispatch and officers
How They Solve Privacy Concerns:
- Sensitive information via text: Names, addresses, DOBs, Social Security numbers sent via MDT, not broadcast on voice radio
- Victim details protected: Domestic violence victim info, sexual assault details transmitted securely
- Database queries: Criminal history, warrant checks, vehicle registration—all via MDT
- Silent communication: Officers can request backup or updates without voice radio
Why This Works:
Most "privacy concerns" involve information that shouldn't be on voice radio anyway. MDTs solve this without encrypting routine dispatch communications.
Temporary Channel Switching
What It Is:
Officers can switch from open dispatch to encrypted tactical channel for specific calls, then return to open channel afterward
How It Works:
- Call comes in: Dispatcher sends officer to domestic violence call on open channel
- Officer switches: Once on scene, officer switches to encrypted channel if discussing sensitive victim info
- Conclusion on open: "Resolved, clear" transmitted on open channel once situation handled
What It Protects:
Victim privacy during sensitive calls without encrypting all police communications all the time.
Digital Radio Without Encryption
What It Is:
Modern P25 digital radio systems that provide better quality and features WITHOUT encryption turned on
Benefits Over Analog:
- Better audio quality: Clearer communications than old analog systems
- Improved coverage: Digital signals often reach farther
- Authentication: Can verify radio ID without encrypting content
- Modern features: GPS tracking, emergency buttons, texting—all without encryption
Key Point:
Departments can modernize radio systems and get all the benefits of digital technology without encrypting. Encryption is a switch, not a requirement.
Geofencing & Smart Triggers
What It Is:
Advanced radio systems that can automatically enable encryption based on location or situation
Examples:
- School zones: Automatic encryption when officers are at schools (protecting children)
- Hospitals: HIPAA-related communications auto-encrypt in medical facilities
- Specific addresses: Known sensitive locations trigger secure channels
- Emergency button: Officer activates emergency mode, radio auto-encrypts
Advantages:
Targeted encryption only where/when needed, without requiring officers to manually switch channels or remember complex rules.
Solution #3: Policy & Training Approaches
Non-technical solutions that protect privacy through practice, not encryption
Officer Training on Radio Protocol
The Approach:
Train officers in proper radio etiquette that protects privacy without encryption
What Officers Learn:
- Use generic terms: "Victim," "complainant," "individual"—not names
- Avoid addresses: Use intersection or block number, not exact address
- No medical details: "Medical assist" not specific conditions
- Codes for sensitive calls: "Signal 43" instead of "domestic violence with injuries"
- When to switch channels: Clear guidelines on using encrypted tactical channel
Reality Check:
Many departments protected privacy for decades using these practices. If privacy breaches occurred, it was a training failure, not a reason for blanket encryption.
Code Systems for Sensitive Information
The Approach:
Use numeric or alphanumeric codes for call types, reducing detail broadcast on open radio
Examples:
- Signal 40: Domestic disturbance (vs. describing specific situation)
- Code 5150: Mental health crisis (California code)
- 10-codes: Traditional police codes that obscure detail from casual listeners
Balance:
Codes provide some privacy while still allowing informed listeners (media, emergency managers) to understand general situation.
Caveat:
Some departments abandoned codes for plain language (to improve officer clarity). The point is: if privacy is the concern, codes are an alternative worth considering before encryption.
Presumption of Openness Policy
The Approach:
Formal department policy establishing that radio communications are presumptively open to the public, with narrow, defined exceptions
Policy Components:
- Default: Open - All routine police communications accessible to public
- Defined exceptions: Specific list of situations justifying encryption (tactical ops, undercover, etc.)
- No mission creep: Exceptions cannot be expanded without public notice and civilian oversight approval
- Regular review: Annual assessment of whether exceptions are still necessary
- Transparency report: Public reporting on encrypted channel usage
Why This Matters:
Codifies transparency as the default, preventing gradual expansion of secrecy over time.
Civilian Oversight of Encryption Decisions
The Approach:
Community oversight board with authority to review and approve encryption policies
Oversight Functions:
- Policy approval: Board must approve any expansion of encrypted channels
- Usage monitoring: Regular reports on how much traffic is encrypted vs. open
- Complaint review: Investigate claims of inappropriate encryption usage
- Public transparency: Annual public reports on encryption policies and compliance
Accountability:
Prevents police from unilaterally deciding to encrypt more communications. Community has a voice in the balance.
Solution #4: Media Access Programs
Giving credentialed journalists access even if some encryption exists
If departments insist on some level of encryption beyond tactical ops, media access programs can preserve journalism functions without full public scanner access.
Credentialed Journalist Access
Similar to press credentials for crime scenes or government buildings:
- Application process: Legitimate news organizations apply for credentials
- Background check: Basic vetting (not editorial control)
- Decryption access: Credentialed journalists receive encryption keys for newsworthy channels
- Revocation for cause: Access can be revoked only for specific violations, with appeal rights
Preserves: Breaking news coverage, independent verification, press freedom
Press Pool Arrangements
Designated reporters have access, share information with broader media:
- Rotating assignments among credentialed outlets
- Pool reporters monitor encrypted channels during major incidents
- Information shared with all media via pool reports
- Used at federal level for presidential coverage
Compromise: Limited direct access, but information still flows to public via press
Shorter Delayed Feeds
If delays are necessary, make them reasonable:
- 5-10 minute delay: Enough to protect active scenes, short enough for breaking news value
- No content removal: Delay yes, censorship no
- Automatic release: No human review/approval needed (just time delay)
- Complete audio: Nothing redacted or removed
Better than: Chicago's 30-min delay with active censorship ("almost useless for breaking news")
Transparent Redaction Policies
If some content must be withheld, make the process accountable:
- Public redaction log: Record of what was redacted and why
- Narrow categories: Specific, defined reasons for redaction (not catch-all "sensitive")
- Time limits: Redactions expire after X days (investigation concluded, privacy concern moot)
- Civilian oversight: Independent board reviews redaction decisions
- Appeal process: Media can challenge redactions
Accountability: If police must control information release, at least make the control transparent and reviewable
Important Caveat
Media access programs are compromises, not ideal solutions. They're better than total blackout but worse than open scanner access because:
- Small outlets and freelancers may not qualify for credentials
- Government controls who counts as "legitimate press" (potential for abuse)
- Doesn't serve public safety alert function (only journalists benefit)
- Doesn't provide independent citizen oversight
Consider these only if: Hybrid systems (Solution #1) are rejected and some encryption is inevitable. They're damage mitigation, not the right answer.
Solution #5: Legislative & Regulatory Approaches
Laws and regulations that mandate transparency
State Laws Requiring Openness by Default
Approach: State legislation establishing presumption that police radio communications are public records accessible in real-time
Model Legislation Elements:
- Presumption of access: Police radio transmissions presumed public unless specific exception applies
- Narrow exceptions: Defined list (tactical ops, undercover, ongoing investigations) with sunset provisions
- Public notice required: Any department seeking to encrypt must hold public hearings
- Civilian approval: City council or oversight board must approve encryption policies
- Annual reporting: Departments report percentage of encrypted vs. open communications
Where This Could Work:
State legislatures, especially those with strong open government traditions or responsive to journalism/civil liberties coalitions
Public Notice & Comment Requirements
Approach: Before implementing encryption, departments must follow public engagement process
Required Steps:
- Notice: 60+ days public notice of intent to encrypt
- Evidence submission: Department must submit documented evidence justifying encryption
- Public comment: Community hearings, written comment period
- Impact assessment: Analysis of effects on journalism, accountability, public safety
- Alternatives analysis: Why hybrid systems or other solutions insufficient
- Elected approval: City council or commission vote required (not just police chief decision)
Effect:
Prevents unilateral encryption; forces departments to justify decision and consider community input
Transparency Reporting Requirements
Approach: Departments using encryption must regularly report on usage and impact
Required Disclosures:
- Percentage encrypted: How much radio traffic is encrypted vs. open
- Justification categories: Breakdown of why different channels are encrypted
- Incident documentation: Any documented cases of scanner-related harm (spoiler: there are none)
- Cost reporting: Total cost of encryption systems and maintenance
- Alternative methods: Use of MDTs, codes, training to protect privacy
Accountability:
Public reporting creates transparency about the transparency loss, enabling informed community oversight
Sunset Provisions & Mandatory Review
Approach: Encryption policies automatically expire unless renewed after review
How It Works:
- 5-year sunset: Encryption authorization expires after 5 years
- Renewal process: Department must re-justify encryption with current evidence
- Changed circumstances: If original justification no longer valid (technology improved, no incidents documented), must return to openness
- Public review: Same public notice and comment process for renewal as initial approval
Why This Matters:
Prevents encryption from becoming permanent by default. Forces ongoing justification and periodic reconsideration.
Legislative Action Opportunities
Currently, most encryption decisions are made by police chiefs or city managers without state-level oversight. There's an opening for legislation in states that value open government.
Organizations like ACLU state chapters, journalism coalitions, and government transparency advocates are potential allies for model legislation efforts.
Comparing Solutions: Which Approach is Best?
Evaluating alternatives against key criteria
Different alternatives serve different goals. Here's how they stack up:
| Solution | Public Safety Alerts | Accountability | Journalism | Op Security | Privacy | Cost | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid System | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓ | Best |
| MDT + Training | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | Excellent |
| Media Access Program | ✗ | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓ | Compromise |
| Delayed Feed (5-10 min) | ✓ | ✓✓ | ✓ | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | Compromise |
| Legislative Mandate | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | ✓✓✓ | Excellent |
| Blanket Encryption | ✗✗✗ | ✗✗✗ | ✗✗✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | Worst |
Key:
- ✓✓✓ Excellent - Fully serves this goal
- ✓✓ Good - Adequately serves this goal
- ✓ Fair - Partially serves this goal
- ✗ Poor - Fails to serve this goal
The Winner: Hybrid Systems
Hybrid radio systems score highest across all criteria. They serve every legitimate interest:
- ✅ Public safety: Real-time alerts continue on open channels
- ✅ Accountability: Routine policing remains transparent
- ✅ Journalism: Breaking news coverage preserved
- ✅ Operational security: Tactical ops use encrypted channels
- ✅ Privacy: Sensitive calls can switch to secure channels
- ✅ Democratic principles: Presumption of openness with narrow exceptions
This is the solution departments should implement. It's not a radical idea—it's common sense proportionality that balances all stakeholder interests.
Advocating for Alternatives in Your Community
How to push for better solutions instead of blanket encryption
1. Educate Decision-Makers
Most officials don't know alternatives exist. Present them with options:
- Share this page and model policies with city council members
- Bring in experts from departments using hybrid systems successfully
- Provide written materials explaining how alternatives work
- Emphasize that hybrid systems serve police needs AND community interests
2. Demand Evidence-Based Decision
Ask officials to justify why alternatives won't work:
- "Why can't we use MDTs for sensitive information?"
- "Why won't a hybrid system work in our community?"
- "What specific operations require ALL communications to be encrypted?"
- "How many incidents justify this level of secrecy?"
3. Build Coalition Support
Allies make alternatives more viable:
- Partner with local journalism organizations
- Engage ACLU or First Amendment Coalition
- Recruit community groups concerned about accountability
- Find sympathetic law enforcement voices who support transparency
4. Propose Specific Solutions
Don't just oppose encryption—offer concrete alternatives:
- Draft model hybrid system policy for your city
- Present cost analysis showing MDT solution is cheaper
- Offer training program for officers on radio protocol
- Propose civilian oversight of encryption decisions
5. Use Model Language
Sample policy language for city councils:
"The [City] Police Department shall maintain a hybrid radio communication system wherein routine dispatch and non-sensitive operations are conducted on unencrypted channels accessible to the public, while tactical operations, undercover investigations, and communications requiring protection of victim privacy are conducted on encrypted channels. The presumption shall be openness, with encryption used only for defined, narrow exceptions subject to annual review by the Civilian Oversight Board."
Take Action for Transparency
Your voice matters. Here are concrete ways to advocate for open police communications in your community.
Contact Your Representatives
Use our templates to email your local officials about police radio encryption policies.
Get StartedRead Case Studies
See how encryption has affected real communities - from Highland Park to Chicago.
View CasesSpread Awareness
Share evidence about police radio encryption with your network and community.
Public Testimony
Learn how to speak effectively at city council and public safety meetings.
Prepare to Speak