Slashdot Mirror


Solving Obama's BlackBerry Dilemma

CurtMonash writes "Much is being made of the deliberations as to whether President Obama will be able to keep using his beloved "BarackBerry." As the NYTimes details, there are two major sets of objections: infosecurity and legal/records retention. Deven Coldeway of CrunchGear does a good job of showing that the technological infosecurity problems can be solved. And as I've noted elsewhere, the 'Omigod, he left his Blackberry behind at dinner' issue is absurd. Presidents are surrounded by attendants, Secret Service and otherwise. Somebody just has to be given the job of keeping track of the president's personal communication device. As for the legal question of whether the president can afford to put things in writing that will likely be exposed by courts and archivists later — the answer to that surely depends on the subject matter or recipient. Email to his Chicago friends — why not? Anything he'd write to them would be necessarily non-secret anyway. Email to the Secretary of Defense? That might be a different matter."

374 comments

  1. Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Talk about a waste of bandwidth.

    1. Re:Who Cares? by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Insightful

          Aw come on, he's the first US President that could use one. :)

         

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    2. Re:Who Cares? by flaming+error · · Score: 1

      I think you nailed it. PDAs are great for those of us who don't have a staff. I think in the case of POTUS, Mr. Obama will soon discover he doesn't need to thumb around on a tiny keyboard when he is sitting in the most sophisticated communications centers on earth. And if he wants to know Toot's recipe for Chicken Noodle Soup, I'm sure he has only but to ask.

    3. Re:Who Cares? by JFDMit · · Score: 4, Funny

      To be fair, he's the first President in eight years that has opposable thumbs.

    4. Re:Who Cares? by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, Bill Clinton used one. Here's a clue: Monica Lewinsky with the blackberry in vibrate mode in the oval office.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    5. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing the POTUS just might have the resources to get an actual Personal Assistant to handle all of the functions of a PDA.

      Plus, Personal Assistants are issued with Presidential kneepads. PDA has another meaning [giggle]
       

    6. Re:Who Cares? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      And if he wants to know Toot's recipe for Chicken Noodle Soup, I'm sure he has only but to ask.

      She has passed on, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    7. Re:Who Cares? by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 1, Troll

      this is right up there with the Zune or iPod question - who the hell cares..... in fact I can't believe I wasted the internet bandwidth to respond to this topic, my bad....

    8. Re:Who Cares? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      And if he wants to know Toot's recipe for Chicken Noodle Soup, I'm sure he has only but to ask.

      She has passed on, you insensitive clod!

      Yeah but the NSA has an extensive archive...

    9. Re:Who Cares? by MrNaz · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Flamebait? Come now, that's funny in quite a clever way.

      --
      I hate printers.
    10. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You take "Offtopic" to a whole new level.

    11. Re:Who Cares? by Sloppy · · Score: 0

      Plus I hear the voice-based interface on PAs is a snap to learn.

      You might have misunderestimated some peoples' command of language.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    12. Re:Who Cares? by schwanerhill · · Score: 1

      PDAs are great for those of us who don't have a staff. I think in the case of POTUS, Mr. Obama will soon discover he doesn't need to thumb around on a tiny keyboard when he is sitting in the most sophisticated communications centers on earth.

      You're partially right, but the point is that Mr. Obama specifically does not want to rely entirely on his staff for information; unlike his predecessor, he wants to read the newspaper and write short emails himself, limiting the filter of his inner circle. During the campaign, he found the Blackberry to be a marvelous tool for that job.

    13. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      So you're saying NObama is the first president in the last eight years that can grip a banana?

    14. Re:Who Cares? by mgblst · · Score: 1

      in fact I can't believe I wasted the internet bandwidth to respond to this topic, my bad....

      And aren't we all glad you took time out of your busy day to do so.

    15. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I gather a previous president found the oral interface on an intern was easy to access...

    16. Re:Who Cares? by DontPanic6x9 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just a little thought here: Whatever phone Barack Obama does use is going to rake in a lot of money. I live in Manhattan, and every day on the path between the S train and the 4,5,6 line, there are old black women selling signs and calendars that say "BARACK OBAMA-THE PROPHECY FULFILLED." Black people look up to this guy as much as they looked up to Shaft. So as much as I hate to say it, it does matter what kind of phone Barack Obama uses. As a side note: I really hope that if he does use a Blackberry, they disable Brickbreaker. I don't want him playing games during his briefings and meetings on foreign policy issues.

    17. Re:Who Cares? by mazarin5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Monica Lewinsky with the blackberry in vibrate mode in the oval office.

      Dammit, I was so sure it was Colonel Mustard.

      --
      Fnord.
    18. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Circle Popper is a lot more fun; though harder with the trackball than with the wheel.

    19. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LMAO

    20. Re:Who Cares? by DelgadoRandom · · Score: 1

      Kerry would've probably offered him an internship as well, as long as it made everyone really uncomfortable: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRB5DIYRfa0&eurl=http://wonkette.com/page/2

  2. research in motion by jfrdtrtyvyui · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its interesting to think of how much money Research in Motion would spend developing a unit specifically for him, that met all of the security criteria, just so he would be seen with it. I imagine some type of self destruct feature would be necessary, in addition to insane encryption.

    1. Re:research in motion by retech · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As if they'd never recoup that in the copious amount of free adverts they've already received?

    2. Re:research in motion by topham · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The one major issue with thi... RIM is a foreign company.

    3. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The one major issue with thi... RIM is a foreign company.

      That can be solved. Once Obama pulls all the troops back from Iraq, they can invade Canada. :-)

    4. Re:research in motion by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Funny

      Once Obama pulls all the troops back from Iraq, they can invade Canada. :-)

      Pffft, easier said than done. If you think an Iraqi insurgent with an IED is a tough adversary just wait until you see a Canadian with a hockey stick..... besides, I don't think the Baldwin family can afford a war with Canada ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:research in motion by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      Options:

      Lo-tech:
      RFID tag tracking system, so it never moves beyond a certain range:
      http://www.remoteplay.com/TagAlertHome.asp

      Hi-tech:
      Some type of optical scanner, like iris recognition:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iris_recognition

    6. Re:research in motion by JWSmythe · · Score: 3, Funny

      I suspect there's some reason that I noticed "DOD Root Certificates" installed on mine. :) There must be some arrangement with the gov't for security, at least of some sort. I doubt that the President should be (or would be) sending much over it though. It's not necessarily the idea that it's a smart phone, and he could lose it (as I noticed someone else said), but that the data is transiting insecure networks.

          And hey, one mistyped address, and some state secret may end up going across insecure networks, to an insecure individual. He is President after all, even an innocent note like "Honey, I'll be home at 8:30, then we can watch that movie" is a huge security concern. The White House is a big place, at least big enough where a targeted attack wouldn't necessarily do much of anything. Knowing he'll be sitting on the couch in whatever room the President would watch movies, at a specific time, is a dangerous thing.

          The again, so far just about everyone loves Obama. :) I'm thinking sometime within the first year, he'd be safe to sit in the front yard of the White House on a lawn chair, smoking a cigar and talking sh1t with foreign diplomats.

          Hmmm, what's this text I just received?

      From: 2024561414@blackberry.net
      To: jwsmythe
      Subject: evac

      Evac ASAP. Bird inbound. ETA 10min

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    7. Re:research in motion by davester666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure they could recoup the money in no time, showing targeted ads to the president on his phone.

      I bet RIM could get a lineup of people out their door and down the street, each with a wheelbarrow of money, to get their ad displayed on the phone of the president. Even in this economy.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    8. Re:research in motion by saforrest · · Score: 5, Funny

      Pffft, easier said than done. If you think an Iraqi insurgent with an IED is a tough adversary just wait until you see a Canadian with a hockey stick...

      That, and we maintain a threatening lead in Zamboni technology!

    9. Re:research in motion by Kippesoep · · Score: 3, Informative

      Didn't they try something like that in 1812 already? Didn't they set fire to the White House? Didn't the Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie make a wonderful song about that?

    10. Re:research in motion by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      That, and we maintain a threatening lead in Zamboni technology [imdb.com]!

      True. Of course we have a 29 to 1 advantage in baseball teams and all of those guys use steroids so they could be pretty tough to beat in a fight ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    11. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The British set fire to the White House, yes. They did in retaliation for the torching of Parliament in Montreal by Americans, a fact that doesn't make it into U.S. history textbooks 200 years later.

      (Incidentally, the White House was deserted quickly immediately prior to the visit by the British Soldiers, and they discovered a state dinner waiting for them. So they ate first and then torched the White House.

    12. Re:research in motion by Kleen13 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll be waiting.... gimme a couple days notice and I'll start icing the Keg. I'm sure the troops are thirsty.

      --
      That sinking feeling deep in your gut when you KNOW you screwed up bad summed up with: {head desk} {head desk}
    13. Re:research in motion by DittoBox · · Score: 1

      Take off, eh! Ya hoser!

      --
      Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
    14. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      besides, I don't think the Baldwin family can afford a war with Canada ;)

      I don't get it??

    15. Re:research in motion by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      They're already secure enough to be standard issue to all Congress critters, including AES encryption and (software) self and remote destruct. Wouldn't be too much of a leap for the Presidential model.

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    16. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the good players in the Canadian hockey teams are Swedish, so what, exactly, were you planning with the hockey sticks?

    17. Re:research in motion by geobeck · · Score: 4, Funny

      True. Of course we have a 29 to 1 advantage in baseball teams and all of those guys use steroids so they could be pretty tough to beat in a fight ;)

      Yeah, those baseball players make terrifying adversaries--except that they have to stop to catch their breath after chasing you 90 feet. :p

      I guess us Canucks have to watch ourselves though; I'm sure Sarah Palin is keeping an eye on us from her house.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    18. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He can switch to an Android device, there is a security app that uses the built in camera as an iris scanner.

    19. Re:research in motion by Xaoswolf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Federal Government uses a ton of Blackberrys. The president just seems to be a special case. I don't see why they can't just activate him on an Enterprise Server and have every single thing locked down on it. Hell, they can require a 20 digit password to unlock it so if he does lose it, they have time to do a remote wipe from the server. Of course, after 10 incorrect password tries, the device will automatically wipe itself anyways.

    20. Re:research in motion by Gorshkov · · Score: 1, Informative

      Canadian Bacon: great movie.
      Zamboni: invented & built in California. Who'da thunk?

    21. Re:research in motion by multisync · · Score: 1

      I imagine some type of self destruct feature would be necessary

      You can wipe and disable them from the BES.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    22. Re:research in motion by originalTMAN · · Score: 1

      citation?

    23. Re:research in motion by Gorshkov · · Score: 4, Informative

      They did in retaliation for the torching of Parliament in Montreal

      a) Parliament has never been in Montreal.
      b) The torching you're referring to is Fort York, now Toronto.
      c) There was no Canada, and no parliament, till 1867.
      d) The first parliament was (very briefly) in Charlottetown, PEI, and then moved to Kingston, Ontario, as a provisional capital. It stayed there until Queen Vickie got pissed with the lobbyists from Kingston & Toronto both wanting to be named the capital, and screwed them both over by naming Bytown (now Ottawa) as the capital instead.

    24. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A BES (BlackBerry Enterprise Server) has a NUKE feature build in.

      BlackBerry Devices can be configured via policy to comply with DoD spec - whats the issue?

    25. Re:research in motion by techno-vampire · · Score: 1
      The again, so far just about everyone loves Obama.

      Tell that to the leadership of the GOP and watch them laugh at you.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    26. Re:research in motion by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Funny

      I guess us Canucks have to watch ourselves though; I'm sure Sarah Palin is keeping an eye on us from her house.

      Nah, she's too busy protecting both of our countries from Putin. There's 12 other US States that share a border with Canada. I suspect that their Governors are the ones busy keeping an eye on you Canucks so don't get any ideas ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    27. Re:research in motion by jcenters · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The money would be well worth it. We're in the Information Age, and presidents can't be cut off from the world forever. Someone has to keep them connected, and it might as well be RIM. That equals a fat government contract for many years to come.

      --

      vi ~/.emacs

    28. Re:research in motion by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 2, Informative

      first off, they are already quite well encrypted, second it would never be used for any type of classified e-mail or messaging, if by some massive waste of taxpayers dollars the NSA were to be engaged to approve a crackberry for processing Secret and above data it would not be allowed on the regular internet and would thus be useless for anything else - despite what some may say, workable multilevel security systems are many years away - as far as secure erasure THAT is in the realm of possible today and you can obtain devices capable of erasing themselves to NSA, DoD and other government standards

    29. Re:research in motion by Curmudgeonlyoldbloke · · Score: 1

      ...some type of self destruct feature...

      That's actually standard (as far as the data on the device goes). The problem is that you're trusting code written by employees of a foreign company to do it.

      Surely the answer is the one that's already in use for all potentially sensitive government communications - classify certain types of communication as only able to take place via certain paths.

      If it's enquiring about the health of the presidential dog, then maybe a Blackberry is OK. If it's "Let's invade Canada", then maybe not.

    30. Re:research in motion by glitch23 · · Score: 1

      The gov't can procure products from foreign companies as long as the company's home country is a U.S. ally and has a U.S. satellite office. Because RIM is based in Canada this isn't an issue. Since someone mentioned how much R&D it could cost to develop a BlackBerry just for him I'll add that I wish they would design a BlackBerry that didn't have a camera for both gov't contractors and employees to use while at work. These idiot carriers/manufacturers think that everyone must have a camera and not everyone needs one nor wants one. I can't take my phone into work because it has a camera. With RIM making phones for business- people and now Obama is known to have one (as I know other gov't employees I work with have one issued by the gov't; they have older ones w/o a camera) it would be in RIM's best interest (and other manufacturers) to think of this segment of the market. Isn't the U.S. gov't the largest employer in the U.S.? Not every employee needs to have a non-camera phone but anyone in the DOD, NSA, and DOJ could probably take advantage of it. I know I could.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    31. Re:research in motion by fishbowl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If he were not (wisely) choosing his fights, he could simply order it. He is not subordinate to the advisers who don't want him using a Blackberry. In fact, he could replace them if he wanted -- he could even eliminate their positions. The President has a great deal of authority, very little of it subject to the opinion of anyone else.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    32. Re:research in motion by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Seriously? Do you think that if a foreign/hostile agent or power ever got the "First BlackBerry", they'd be so crude as to attempt a couple of passwords, have it lock, and say "aww, shit, there goes our chance"?

    33. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if wars were decided by brawling on ice, then Canada would hold a decided advantage. However, here in the US of A we prefer to decide our wars by blowing shit up, and believe me, we are still the world leaders in terms of the capability to blow shit up! Yep, if there is one thing we're good at, it is blowing shit up! We've even got a TV show called "Mythbusters" whose main purpose for existence is to find excuses to blow shit up! We also lead the world in breast implants, which is the major reason we are able to attract world class hockey players like Wayne Gretzky to play in the states, so you hosers had better watch yourselves!

    34. Re:research in motion by baldass_newbie · · Score: 0, Troll

      As if they'd never recoup that in the copious amount of free adverts they've already received?

      Well it is the Blackberry and not the Whiteberry.

      --
      The opposite of progress is congress
    35. Re:research in motion by dangitman · · Score: 1

      smoking a cigar and talking sh1t with foreign diplomats.

      Why on earth did you replace the letter "i" in "shit" with the numeral "1"?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    36. Re:research in motion by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      Not if they do not connect to the BES.

    37. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's a good thing that "fact" didn't make it into U.S. textbooks.

    38. Re:research in motion by afidel · · Score: 1

      I wish they would design a BlackBerry that didn't have a camera for both gov't contractors and employees to use while at work.

      Um, they do it's called the 88x0, also the Bold models ending in 5 are sans camera.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    39. Re:research in motion by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Informative

      I wish they would design a BlackBerry that didn't have a camera

      That would be the 8820. I have one. Very nice. I think Obama has an 8830.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    40. Re:research in motion by ArieKremen · · Score: 1

      The article states that an ad campaign around the president as spokeman for RIM would be worth between $25M and $50M.

      --
      -- Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui
    41. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      c) There was no Canada, and no parliament, till 1867.

      Dead wrong. You must be Canadian. ;)

      The term Canada was in use for about 300 years before the 1867 Confederation as the Dominion of Canada, which is just one in a long series of 'Canada' names for the area immediately above the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence.

      While we're at it, Fort York did not become Toronto, York did. Also York is where the American troops committed arson. Fort York was exploded by the retreating British. Incidentally, the Americans also burned the Parliment buildings at York. T'was the Parliment of Upper Canada.

      But you can go back to telling the Americans they don't know nuthin now.

    42. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Get thee to a video store

    43. Re:research in motion by Maserati · · Score: 1

      http://www.deadtroll.com/index2.html?/dvd/1812.html~content

      Yeah, it's hilarious. If you ever need to cheer up a Canadian, play this song for them.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    44. Re:research in motion by MasterOfDisaster · · Score: 1

      Besides the usual penis pills and pre-approved credit cards, what type of ads would you target at the president? He doesn't have much leisure time - so pretty much any ad you or I might see is out.

      Lobbyists? Military contractors?

      I wonder what the Blackwater PR department is like....

      --
      The opinions in this post are ficticious. Any similarity to actual opinions, real or imagined, is purely coincidental.
    45. Re:research in motion by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      We're in the Information Age, and presidents can't be cut off from the world forever. Someone has to keep them connected,

      The President has been connected for a long time. He has more ways to communicate with pretty much anyone anywhere than RIM can begin to imagine, I expect.

      Cue Han Solo "I can imagine an awful lot".

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    46. Re:research in motion by camperdave · · Score: 3, Funny

      The one major issue with thi... RIM is a foreign company.

      Depends on your point of view. From where I sit, it is a domestic company and a foreign president.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    47. Re:research in motion by HiVizDiver · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, the self-destruct feature is easy, I already have one on my Crackberry. I just open an HTML e-mail. BOOM.

    48. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is so wrong. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_Canada

      In 1841, the British Parliament united Upper and Lower Canada into a new colony, called the Province of Canada. A single legislature, consisting of an elected Legislative Assembly and an appointed Legislative Council, was created. [...]
      From 1841 to 1844, Parliament met on what is now the site of Kingston General Hospital in Kingston, Ontario. In 1849, the Parliament Building in Montreal, which had been the home of the legislature since being transferred from Kingston in 1843, burnt down. The fire was part of a Tory-led riot caused by the Rebellion Losses Bill and a series of tensions between Francophones and Anglophones, as well as an economic depression. In 1857, the legislature was finally moved to Ottawa, after a few years of alternating between Toronto and Quebec City.

      So, yes the parliament was in Montreal, but there was no parliament in 1814 when the whitehouse burned.

    49. Re:research in motion by Gorshkov · · Score: 5, Informative

      Dead wrong. You must be Canadian. ;)

      No I'm not, and yes, I am.

      The term Canada was in use for about 300 years before the 1867 Confederation as the Dominion of Canada, which is just one in a long series of 'Canada' names for the area immediately above the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence.

      Canada comes from the Iroquois word 'Kanata', which means villiage, or settlement. It was in common use anywhere the Iroquois were - which includes the area above the Great Lakes - but also below, and around.

      While we're at it, Fort York did not become Toronto, York did.

      Fort York was a British military garrison, and York, the town, grew up around it. As a matter of fact, Fort York is almost smack dab in the middle of Toronto - you can go and visit it if you'd like. There just wasn't much of a town there at the time - and I hardly think that the American troups went to "York" to trash the town, and ignore the Fort. The Fort WAS the target.

      Also York is where the American troops committed arson.

      See above.

      Fort York was exploded by the retreating British.

      True ... but a detail, given the situation. When the Americans do 99% of the damage during the battle, it's a bit specious to tell me I'm wrong becuase the British did the remaining 1%. But I might also add that your statement reinforces my point - Fort York was the target. It was destroyed by the British to deny the Americans use of it.

      Incidentally, the Americans also burned the Parliment buildings at York. T'was the Parliment of Upper Canada.

      Ummmm ... wrong. Upper Canada didn't *have* a parliament - it had a legislative assembly. Parliament is very similar to congress in that way ... original usage was a meeting or session - nowadays, it also refers to a place or a body. The "1st Parliament of Upper Canada", which ran from 1792-1796, refers to a meeting of the Legislative Assembly, not a specific place.
      The Parliament buildings you refer to didn't really exist, either - when in Session, the legislative assembly used nondescript government buildings - I could be wrong, but I don't think they were even dedicated for the purpose (I'd have to look that up).

      But you can go back to telling the Americans they don't know nuthin now.

      Your assumption, not mine. The only thing I've assumed is that not everybody is very familiar with the history of countries other than their own.

    50. Re:research in motion by Cowmonaut · · Score: 1

      Yar, inside of the president's limo or air force one is pretty crazy. You can talk with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Wouldn't be surprised if it FORCED them to answer too.

    51. Re:research in motion by Gorshkov · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So, yes the parliament was in Montreal, but there was no parliament in 1814 when the whitehouse burned.

      As per my other comments - Legislative Assembly != Parliament, regardless of what wikipedia says.

    52. Re:research in motion by bdenton42 · · Score: 1

      Its interesting to think of how much money Research in Motion would spend developing a unit specifically for him, that met all of the security criteria, just so he would be seen with it. I imagine some type of self destruct feature would be necessary, in addition to insane encryption.

      Considering what they do to the presidential limo http://www.parade.com/news/2009/01/they-would-give-their-lives-for-the-president.html I just can't see the Blackberry ever being approved.

    53. Re:research in motion by Golddess · · Score: 1

      It's a reference from the South Park movie.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    54. Re:research in motion by Redlazer · · Score: 1

      The one major issue with thi... RIM is a foreign company.

      So? Its not like Americans don't buy products from foreign companies.

      Positive press and attention is good, and can you imagine the positive press that "We made Obama a custom cell phone" would generate?

      I cant believe that got 5, Insightful.

      --
      Guns don't kill people, "with glowing hearts" kills people.
    55. Re:research in motion by Rick+Bentley · · Score: 1

      What's Canada?

      --
      My favorite quote doesn't fit into 120 characters. Now no one will like me.
    56. Re:research in motion by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1

      and why the hell would the president not be connected to one of the governments BESs?

    57. Re:research in motion by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      In the hypothetical scenario in which BES-triggered data erasure is relevant, the president is not the one in possession of the blackberry.

    58. Re:research in motion by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1

      ok, so the people who have it cannot unlock it unless they can guess the password within the default 10 tries and it auto erases. And once Barrak finds that he no longer has his Blackberry (should be before they leave the parking lot if he is like any other blackberry user) he will either turn around and retrieve it, or it will be wiped, then he will turn around and retrieve it. In either scenario, we will have a waitress at a diner who now has a dead blackberry with secret service agents returning to find.

    59. Re:research in motion by ZeroZen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The one major issue with thi... RIM is a foreign company.

      Well golly! I wonder what other things this man depends on in his daily life are made by foreign companies....

      EVERYTHING? How about you? Have you been compromised?

    60. Re:research in motion by Lost+Engineer · · Score: 1

      Anything he could possibly buy and be seen using in public.

    61. Re:research in motion by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      The worst case scenario is not him forgetting it, it is someone stealing it, or him losing it in some irretrievable way (he drops it off a bridge). Once someone has possession of the device, the 10 tries limit is moot. Rip the flash device out of it, read it directly from a computer, same way you read a hard drive from a "password protected" computer.

    62. Re:research in motion by persicom · · Score: 1

      Kevin Bacon: so-so actor
      Zucchini: Nice, chopped, cooked in tomato sauce

    63. Re:research in motion by willith · · Score: 4, Funny

      Canada comes from the Iroquois word 'Kanata', which means villiage, or settlement. It was in common use anywhere the Iroquois were - which includes the area above the Great Lakes - but also below, and around

      Really? I thought the name "Canada" came from the two folks who first discovered it.

      "Great country, eh?," said the first one. "What should we name it, eh?"

      "I know," said the second one. "We'll put some letters in a hat, eh, and then we'll take turns drawing the letters out, eh, and that's how we'll name the place!"

      "Good idea, eh!" said the first one. He pulled off his toupe, scribbled some letters on some paper scraps, dumped them into the toupe, shook it up, and they began to draw.

      "Oh, I got a 'c', eh!"

      "I got an 'n', eh!"

      ...and so on.

    64. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it really matter who he talks to or what he says...none of that seemed to matter and was totally ignored pre-election...so why should his administration even care?

    65. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Federal Government uses a ton of Blackberrys. The president just seems to be a special case. I don't see why they can't just activate him on an Enterprise Server and have every single thing locked down on it.

      Because even when using Blackberry Enterprise Server, all mail and other information goes through the insecure Internet _and_ Blackberry's servers when in transit between the BES and the device.

    66. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada is a foreign country? WFT when did that happen?

    67. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell me about it. Look what I found:

      Obama Slippers

    68. Re:research in motion by geekmux · · Score: 1

      The one major issue with thi... RIM is a foreign company.

      Ah, that little fact didn't seem to stop half of the current Government agencies from using one, so tell me again what makes his so different?

      I have to still believe to some extent that the main benefit of TS/SCI (obvious emphasis on the compartmentalization) intel exists at even his level. Sometimes, even he doesn't have a need to know, which makes his Crackberry risk that much more tolerable.

    69. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One great IT guy will manage it.

    70. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's a soft drink.

    71. Re:research in motion by Firehed · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Very true, though I don't think it really matters what company does it provided the security is set up properly. As TFS mentions, the public record thing is really the main issue. However,

      Email to his Chicago friends â" why not? Anything he'd write to them would be necessarily non-secret anyway. Email to the Secretary of Defense? That might be a different matter.

      Seems like it would be the other way around to me - I certainly wouldn't want _my_ personal communications becoming part of the public record for the rest of eternity. Of course there's certain issues of practicality of internal secrets going into the public record, but past /. discussions have suggested using some sort of proxy-type person where it would go through someone who would email the president with a "new message from X about Y - would you like to receive it knowing that the communication will become part of the public record" type of message.

      Or maybe the laws regarding this kind of stuff are stupid. Seems that personal stuff should remain personal, and that anything @whitehouse.gov would go into the archives, but the president (and related staff) would be legally required to use the appropriate address and that the personal account(s) could be audited during the presidency to ensure that no funny business is taking place.

      Dunno. But considering that Obama probably wouldn't have taken the top job were it not for all of the internet-based efforts, it would be Pretty Fucking Stupid to cut him off.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    72. Re:research in motion by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Do you think that it would take more than five minutes for Obama to realize that he wasn't buzzing at the hip and immediately have a remote wipe run? I'm pretty sure the only way anyone unauthorized would be able to get anything off it would be to steal it from inside a Faraday cage.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    73. Re:research in motion by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      It might be a joke for some, but the few guy's I've known who were in the Canadian military scared the living crap out of me. They may not seem like a threat, but then they haven't turned loose their armies of psychopathic berserkers.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    74. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That quotation was Tina Fey, in fact.

      Surprised? That's what media with opinions does to you.

    75. Re:research in motion by digitalunity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      IMO, the whole thing is bullshit.

      I think everything the president does should be recorded in a place where judicial or legislative review can occur. Obviously only certain people should have access, such as federal judges, the SCOTUS and a senate committee or two. And yes, I mean even for national secret type stuff. It is the responsibility of the executive branch to fulfill obligations set forth by laws enacted by the legislative branch and in accordance with decisions by the judicial branch. If there is no transparency, there is tyranny.

      Just think how interesting it would be to read emails between Bush/Cheney & the Justice Dept. regarding interrogation techniques, or the prelude to invading Iraq, or the events surrounding 9/11(still a gazillion unanswered questions). If a bipartisan senate committee had access to that information, I bet Bush would have been impeached quickly.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    76. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, I'll bite - what's the difference?

    77. Re:research in motion by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1
      you do also understand that blackberrys are not rated for top secret materials, and as such, the most that anybody would get is personal email, maybe a few reminders or calendar appointments, some pictures of the last presidental luncheon, and his collection of mp3 files.

      I guess perhaps the script for a speech that he is preparing for also...

      But yeah, in general, not much to worry about.

      Also, if it is stolen, again, the device will be wiped remotely before anything can be done with it if needed.

    78. Re:research in motion by WhoCantTakeAJoke · · Score: 1

      Bah, he should just get the NSA or one of the CIA's tech firms to build him one.

      --
      I have no direct experience or knowledge, but I'd imagine...
    79. Re:research in motion by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Stock Blackberries used with the Enterprise product ship with a remote self-destruct feature. The whole path message path is also encrypted but I am not sure if it's tough enough for the President. An application that encrypted all messages on the device before pushing it over the server could be implemented as well. Hopefully Obama has a non-trivial password in his device. A Blackberry addict will know very quickly if he has left his device somewhere, and either find it or have it remotely destroyed.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    80. Re:research in motion by pleappleappleap · · Score: 1

      I'd ask the question, "What the fuck?", but then I'm afraid of the answer.

    81. Re:research in motion by th0ma5 · · Score: 1

      Blackberries have a self-destruct feature. Entering the PIN incorrectly a certain number of times will wipe the device. This can also be initiated by the Blackberry administrator remotely. Of course you have to enable the PIN feature in the first place...

    82. Re:research in motion by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      If by "capable of erasing themselves to NSA, DoD and other government standards" you mean that they come with a block of thermite pre-attached to the storage medium ready to be activated with the flip of a switch, then yes.

      Otherwise, no.

    83. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that was funny. But please: toque.

    84. Re:research in motion by saforrest · · Score: 2, Informative

      That quotation was Tina Fey, in fact.
      Surprised? That's what media with opinions does to you.

      No, actually, I was aware of the difference. In any case the Fey quote it was a parody of something Palin and the McCain campaign actually said... that Palin had foreign policy experience by virtue of Alaska's being a neighbour to Russia.

      References: here and here.

    85. Re:research in motion by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      The topic of conversation here is, if you follow the thread, using the blackberry for sensitive material, instead of using one of the NSA-approved PDAs. The device cannot be wiped remotely if you do not let it connect to the BES after stealing it.

    86. Re:research in motion by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      So does official email sent between different governmental networks. I fail to see the relevance that a jaunt across the interwebs is going to have. Lots of official communications use the Internet. Nobody is engaging in hand-waving-freakoutery over that.

    87. Re:research in motion by despeaux · · Score: 1

      Get him an iPhone, then we can have Apple marketing create a legit ObamaRoll ad.

    88. Re:research in motion by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Do you think that it would take more than five minutes for a foreign hostile agent to rip out the batteries so it cant be wiped?

      but this is a moo point as the issue is about privacy, not security. Whereas what is discussed over the phone can be forgotten when needed, what is sent by email is stored and so he cant "not recall" those emails he sent to the some big oil exec.

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    89. Re:research in motion by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      AFAIK Blackberries HAVE a self-destruct function that IT departments make copious use of when some high-powered exec loses theirs.

      Obama would probably get something cooler, like a Blackberry that transforms into a helicopter and flys back into his pocket.

    90. Re:research in motion by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      If anyone honestly believes that U.S. troops would shoot at people who can offer them free beer and flapjacks, than you're insane.

    91. Re:research in motion by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

      Canada is affectionately referred to as "The Hat of America." And Alaska is the feather. It's a Pimp hat I guess.

    92. Re:research in motion by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      If anyone honestly believes that U.S. troops would shoot at people who can offer them free beer and flapjacks, than you're insane.

      So what your saying is that if we invade Canada we'll be greeted as liberators? ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    93. Re:research in motion by old+dr+omr · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the big red button. Put it right next to the SEND key. "Email to President of China and SEND ...Doh!!"

    94. Re:research in motion by frehe · · Score: 1

      Yar, inside of the president's limo or air force one is pretty crazy. You can talk with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Wouldn't be surprised if it FORCED them to answer too.

      Hmmm... yes, I can see this happen when Golan-Globus brings back the Cannon Group to life as a phone company. Chuck Norris, Lee Marwin, and the rest of Delta Force are launched in an ICBM, and then do a HALO parachute jump from it, fire explosive charges at the windows while still airborne, then land by crashing through the blown windows on motocross bikes, use martial arts to force the people the President wants to talk to to pick up their phone and answer it, and then finally relax with a couple of cold Budweisers after another mission well done. Sounds like just another normal day at work for Chuck and the boys...

    95. Re:research in motion by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Huh? I regularly work with General Dynamics TACLANE encryption devices, which are approved for top secret traffic. The 'zeroize' procedure is simply to press the 'zeroize' button three times. Then the device is unclassified.

    96. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wonder what that makes Mexico and Florida.

    97. Re:research in motion by multipartmixed · · Score: 1, Funny

      > Parliament is very similar to congress in that way ... original usage
      > was a meeting or session - nowadays, it also refers to a place or a body.

      Not quite. Parliament comes from two French words -- "Parler", to speak, and "Mentir" ... to lie.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    98. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its called Blackberry Server Enterprise.. Install it on a server, and it the phone ever gets lost you can wipe it remotely.

    99. Re:research in motion by N1AK · · Score: 1

      I'm glad somebody finally made this point, as it is exactly what came to mind when I saw the article suggesting otherwise.

      My second thought was that complete constant monitoring isn't right. He may well be the USA's elected leader, but I still think some framework for privacy needs to be in place. From a practical point of view, nothing short of a group of independant observers who NEVER allow him to leave their view, with video and audio recording equipment would be sufficient to actually manage recording everything.

      You may think that is excessive but if you are worried about people at the top level of goverment trying to get information to the President under the radar then it should be obvious that the resources they have available to do this will be extensive.

      The moment you decide that not to go the the extreme you have to accept that you can't record the things you really want to (the things they are trying to hide). If Bush emailed the DoJ something that could get him impeached, he did it because he knew he could remove the evidence. If he couldn't, then he would get the information through other channels that weren't monitored.

      Perhaps the better thing to do is not to ensure that everything is recorded, but instead to ensure that only that which is recorded in the correct manner is official, and overhaul a number of areas of the law.
      1/ The ability to retrospectively make something legal or illegal.
      2/ The ability of the President to pardon people who commit crimes (or at least limit it to stop blatant abuse).
      3/ Make it a crime for an employee of the State or Country to ask someone to commit a crime.
      4/ Clarify and Define in law that noone may use the fact that an employee of the State or Country as a valid defence for committing a crime.
      5/ Do some genuine research into the complexity of law and your citizens and employees knowledge of it. If as I expect, most people have very little idea what rights they have, what rights their goverment has and that the law is too complex to allow citizens to have a good knowledge of it then begin to reform it.

    100. Re:research in motion by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      There's no chance that the publicity would be worth the cost of getting an NSA Type 1 crypto certification. The fact that RIM is Canadian doesn't help in this regard.

      Also, the problem is not necessarily security of of information stored on the phone itself, but the fact that cell phones and in fact any sort of RF transmitter that isn't specifically approved for use in a classified environment will be banned in many government areas. I'm fairly certain the Oval Office (and likely a number of other sensitive locations in the White House) are such locations.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    101. Re:research in motion by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VH-71_Kestrel - Multibillion dollar contract to keep the President connected during just a short part of his travels.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    102. Re:research in motion by Rich0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree with most of what you wrote. However, it isn't entirely in keeping with the constitution.

      The US is not a parliamentary democracy - it is a 3-branch government. The president is actually on equal footing with all of congress within the constitutional bounds of his office. Other than the ability to impeach the president, the congress does not have any particular special investigatory power over the president.

      Most western democracies use a parliamentary system of government. The prime minister is the chief executive, but is merely an appointed representative of the legislature. The prime minister serves at the pleasure of the legislature and is fully answerable to it. The relationship is similar to a CEO and the board of directors - the CEO is just a regular company employee that the board has hired to run day-to-day operations.

      In the US the president is directly elected, and while there are checks and balances in general the office of the president is completely independent of the legislature. There is a duty to uphold the laws of the US, but no real accountability for not doing so (other than impeachment).

      The problem with Bush wasn't that he thumbed his nose at Congress so much as the fact that he was elected (twice!) in the first place. Like it or not more Americans supported him than opposed him (at least up until 2004). You can debate the 2000 election of course, but the fact is that even if he should have lost it would have only been by a slim margain. When a nation supports a president that uses his power in the way it was used, then there is little that can be done to stop it. Like it or not, he had the backing of the populace. Even with the abuses, there really wasn't enough popular support for an impeachment to make it happen. (Just look at how long it took to get rid of Gray Davis in a state known for political activism.)

      Honestly, I think I'd prefer a parlimentary proporational democracy to what we have today. However, that isn't the nation we currently live in, and I don't see 3/4ths of the states voting for such a major overhaul of the constitution. So, we're stuck...

    103. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and so he cant "not recall" those emails he sent to the some big oil exec.

      Why can't he? Bush did...

      ...oh wait, no, he "lost" them.

    104. Re:research in motion by juanfe · · Score: 1

      That is a significant point.
      The architecture of the BlackBerry system requires all traffic going to a BlackBerry device from an Enterprise email server to go through RIM's NOCs -- all Americas email traffic goes go through the Canada NOC at some point, all EMEA traffic goes through their NOC in the UK. [reference]

      While all the transmissions are encrypted end-to-end (to the point that the system has passed US-government security reviews for secure traffic), the transmission of a US President's data traffic through systems that are outside of US jurisdiction and government control can be tricky.

      But then again, this gets eliminated if they go with any other wireless email device that does not use RIM's infrastructure; there are plenty, and they can be made to work.

      --
      ***Foucault is watching you..***
    105. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a HUGE difference between "used by Federal Government" and "used by Federal Government in a classified environment.

    106. Re:research in motion by Restil · · Score: 1

      "quite a bit" not "an awful lot".

      Yes, I know, it's sad that I know that.

      -Restil

      --
      Play with my webcams and lights here
    107. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey Prof. Yoo,

      The Bush administration is over, didncha hear?

    108. Re:research in motion by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      I wonder if you'd feel the same way about Bill Clinton's video tape of Monica giving him a BJ while on the phone with a foreign dignitary, especially after he shook his finger at America and said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky".

      The whole rant of the left about "Bush lied, people died" crap is just a smoke screen. If lying is bad, it doesn't matter what the result is. Pointing to someone else's wrong is not an excuse for the wrongs you do.

      Oh, BTW, There is more evidence that Clinton lied about many many more things than Bush. Bad intellegence is not lying, shaking your finger and parsing legal definitions at America is. "It all depends on what the definition of is ... is".

      Not that I'm a fan of GWB, because I'm not. That is not my point. GWB is an idiot. I have no use for the guy. I just think he is too stupid to lie like Clinton could.

      The looney left is confounded by GWB, because at the one hand, they claim he's an idiot, and on the other hand, quite brilliant. Perhaps maybe they should call GWB the Idiot Savant!

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    109. Re:research in motion by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Which I should have known, since the daughter forced me to sit through all six Star Wars movies over the last couple weekends.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    110. Re:research in motion by dmnic · · Score: 1

      I have an 8830. no camera.

    111. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The looney left is confounded by GWB, because at the one hand, they claim he's an idiot, and on the other hand, quite brilliant. Perhaps maybe they should call GWB the Idiot Savant!"

      This is way off topic, but I agree. I'm pretty far left these days, but for these conspiracy theorists to claim that he is behind so many of the problems in the last 8 years is amazing. And they do exactly as you say...claim he is the mastermind, with Cheney and Rove...yet...a moron. It doesn't make sense.

      Personally, I'd just rather think of him as someone that got in over his head, wasn't equipped to be the President, but was elected anyways. On the far left side, people like Jimmy Carter were the same way...I think that man is a saint, but a HORRIBLE President (I will say he was the last President that actually understood that if you were going to claim to be a Christian, you had to act in a specific manner).

      Anyhoo...off the topic...

    112. Re:research in motion by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      and that the personal account(s) could be audited during the presidency to ensure that no funny business is taking place.

      Are you serious? So you think the president should not be allowed any truly private communication whatsoever? Should the president give up the right to use Truecrypt and Tor on his personal laptop in the residential wing of the Whitehouse? Should this extend to his family? What if the president used Tor running on his daughter's computer to access a private gmail account? Would all people living in the Whitehouse be subject to having their personal computers searched for unapproved software? It's one thing to require that all government correspondence be archived, but quite another to require that all communications be subject to search in order to determine if they should be archived. Should the president and his family really be treated like sex offenders?

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    113. Re:research in motion by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 1

      there are government (NSA, ARmy, Air Force, IRIG) approved algorithms for erasing classified hard disks and flash memory - and there are disk drives that support the said erasure methods. The Following regulations are applicable:
      NISPOM DoD 5220.22-M
      NSA 130-2
      Air Force AFSSI-5020
      Army AR380-19
      Navy NAVSO P-5239-26
      IRIG 106-3

    114. Re:research in motion by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      Yes, thank you Mr. Bush for the massive increase in Presidential power, thank you for handing that power directly to the hand of your opposition party, and thank you for leaving office.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    115. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dunno about Mexico but Florida is America's wang.

    116. Re:research in motion by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1

      What level of information can be used on a blackberry. I know that they do not rate top secret information. The presidential blackberry would be the same way. He would have his calendar in it, so if someone finds it they would be able to see where his next lunch is, and perhaps a couple of personal emails or some general work emails, but he would not be sending troop deployment or launch codes via the blackberry...

    117. Re:research in motion by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      And are using it to stage an invasion of the US, apparently.

      Fortunately, the Canuks appear to have miscalculated.. Hockey in the US doesn't draw 100% of the population as it does in Canada, so most of us are safe.

    118. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but our hockey moms wear lipstick!

    119. Re:research in motion by wallsg · · Score: 1

      IMO, the whole thing is bullshit.

      Just think how interesting it would be to read emails between Bush/Cheney & the Justice Dept. regarding interrogation techniques, or the prelude to invading Iraq, or the events surrounding 9/11(still a gazillion unanswered questions). If a bipartisan senate committee had access to that information, I bet Bush would have been impeached quickly.

      Just think how interesting it would be to read all of the email and listen to telephone recordings of Pelosi, Reed, et. al. Or the Lying Clintons with the Hillary care task force cover up debacle. I'm sure that none of these people have anything to hide.

    120. Re:research in motion by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      i dunno, i was sort of hoping he would be less of a douche, but you do have a point. If the American people took that kind of crap from bush and many still voted for mccain, surely obama could just do the same.

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    121. Re:research in motion by myvirtualid · · Score: 1

      Of course we have a 29 to 1 advantage in baseball teams and all of those guys use steroids so they could be pretty tough to beat in a fight

      You neglect our fifth column: 24 hockey teams, most with Canadian captains and ~50% Canadian players. I'm sure we'll be able to co-opt the Europeans as well....

      The hockey players are in full body armour, with deadly weapons in their hands and on their feet. So I'm pretty sure our fifth column hockey players will take out your drug addled club wielders (hint: Use AL pitchers as fodder, since they have yet to master the club).

      Your only hope is that your guys in half body armour can stay in the fight for more than a single play.

      And don't even think about enlisting basketball players - unless it's for the comic relief of a slap fight among the freakishly tall....

      --
      I'm here EdgeKeep Inc.
    122. Re:research in motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      didn't they name it after the Canada Geese?
      what other bird can take down an airbus?

  3. The Sectera Edge by fm6 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I just did a pretty good submission about the very same issue. Now, alas, redundant. But I did pick up one useful new fact: General Dynamics makes something called a Sectera Edge which would probably be a good, secure, replacement for the Obamaberry.

    1. Re:The Sectera Edge by samkass · · Score: 4, Informative

      ... which c|net has a pretty good article on concerning its ability to fulfill Obama's needs.

      (Disclosure: I work for GD, but don't speak for them.)

      --
      E pluribus unum
    2. Re:The Sectera Edge by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      Biggest downside of course being you would have to use Windows Mobile. Being a fellow BlackBerry addict, it's not the same.

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    3. Re:The Sectera Edge by samkass · · Score: 1

      Being an iPhone owner, I agree. But it's the only thing that can get you on the secret network on the same device as you can check your unclassified email on.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    4. Re:The Sectera Edge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Disclosure: I work for GD, but don't speak for them.)

      So can you enlighten us as to why GD fucked Tadpole so badly and what the plans, if any) are to unfuck Tadpole? It's darn hard to find non-x86 hardware and GD just made it a whole lot harder.

    5. Re:The Sectera Edge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WOuldn't it be better to say;
      BarackBerry.

      Of course before I saw your 'ObamaBerry' I was always leaning more towards 'BlackObama'. But than that's just redunant. Or is it ignorant? I'll wait until Al Sharpton tells me.
      But seriously, BarackBerry rolls off the tounge better in my opinion.

    6. Re:The Sectera Edge by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      But it's the only thing that can get you on the secret network on the same device as you can check your unclassified email on.

      Which, IMHO, borders very close on a Very Bad Idea (TM). One pin-sized hole and "oops, I just posted the positions of the entire armed forces on Facebook"

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    7. Re:The Sectera Edge by samkass · · Score: 1

      No, sorry. It's a huge company and I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, let alone any further insight because of my employer.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    8. Re:The Sectera Edge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to Facebook!

      Status Updates:

      Barack Obama is planning to invade Pakistan. Sooo boring *rolls eyes*

  4. If Bush was intelligent... by GagliardiMan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ...enough to use an electronic device without it being a security problem I don't see why Obama couldn't handle such a difficult task as president.

    1. Re:If Bush was intelligent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bush went out of his way to avoid any device that could leave records.

    2. Re:If Bush was intelligent... by Kleen13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Can't figure why... I mean, it's not like he has anything to hide, right?

      --
      That sinking feeling deep in your gut when you KNOW you screwed up bad summed up with: {head desk} {head desk}
    3. Re:If Bush was intelligent... by nevillethedevil · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Speak 'n Spell doesn't count.

      --
      Be gone from my sight or prepare to feel my flaming wraith!
    4. Re:If Bush was intelligent... by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      Weren't there concerns that Bush staffers where using non-secure equipment for communications because they could be "cleaned" and wouldn't keep records, as required by law? Didn't the White House "lose" emails, including many from Karl Rove related to firings?

      Who's to say Bush didn't do the same? I mean, who KNOWS what they covered up by not following procedure? Not that there is a large belief that Obama is a bad guy, but every President (and administration) must be held to higher standards and accountability from here forward. We see what being too trusting has brought us.

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  5. the answer is obvious. by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The solution is simple -- the government already has PDAs that tie into their networks and are secure. He will use that for classified information, as required by law anyway. His blackberry will be used for non-classified information. Separation between the two is also required by law. Now, why are we fangirling over Obama like this? This wasn't news when Bush was in office and he used a cell phone and a PDA too. Now I wait for my -1, didn't fangirl score.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:the answer is obvious. by CannonballHead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This wasn't news when Bush was in office and he used a cell phone and a PDA too

      Because a blackberry is so much harder to use than a PDA and cell phone ;) Or maybe it's an issue of race.

      Sarcasm aside, it is a bit annoying that suddenly, the choice of dog and the use of a communication device is "big news." It's not big news, Presidents have had communication devices for years and dogs for much longer.

      I can see it now. Headline news back in the day was undoubtedly "President Washington to Choose Arabian or Quarterhorse?" Of course, news was a lot slower, so the horse would have likely already died by the time anyone heard about the decision.

    2. Re:the answer is obvious. by MozeeToby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This isn't a question of Classified vs Unclassified information. This is a question of covering the Commander in Chief's ass if things became public knowledge that were never meant to be.

      Notice how there's no email trail linking President Bush to the torture of terror suspects or the tapping of our phone lines. If the president sends an email, it legally must be saved. If he has a private meeting with his advisors, all that needs to be recorded is who spoke to whom and when.

      A better solution to this problems is: 'Hey, maybe the president shouldn't order or condone illegal or unethical behavior regardless of whether or not there is a record of his statements.'

    3. Re:the answer is obvious. by Microlith · · Score: 1

      Now I wait for my -1, didn't fangirl score.

      You should be modded down just for asking.

      There was discussion that he wouldn't be able to continue using the Blackberry at all, which seemed to many people odd that we'd force our President to be less connected and capable of keeping himself informed than he was previously.

      I also think people are keeping an eye on it because Obama seems far more "with it" than Bush, who admitted that he didn't so much as read newspapers (until 2006, when he backtracked.)

    4. Re:the answer is obvious. by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sarcasm aside, it is a bit annoying that suddenly, the choice of dog and the use of a communication device is "big news."

      It's only big news if you watch CNN, MSNBC or Fox. The network news broadcasts have barely mentioned it and the Newshour hasn't even touched on it at all. I'm sorry to say that I get most of my news from Jim Lehrer and I'm completely out of the loop on what dog the Obama family is considering getting. I should write PBS and tell them they need to do a better job of covering this important story.

      Just remember the cable news people are the same ones that can devote hours of coverage (and helicopters!) to Britney Spears arraignment while our country is bogged down in two wars, one of which they apparently forgot existed until recently. I just can't take them seriously any longer.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:the answer is obvious. by tlhIngan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The solution is simple -- the government already has PDAs that tie into their networks and are secure. He will use that for classified information, as required by law anyway. His blackberry will be used for non-classified information. Separation between the two is also required by law. Now, why are we fangirling over Obama like this? This wasn't news when Bush was in office and he used a cell phone and a PDA too. Now I wait for my -1, didn't fangirl score.

      Or, why not take away his personal blackberry, and give him a government-issued one? They're already so prevalent throughout the government, so why not give him one? Then you can do the BES thing and have remote wipe, and have all emails sent through it archived. And given the encryption already on it, I'm sure it's usable for classified stuff as well.

      If he wants, he can tell his friends his new email address, or forward his current emails onwards.

      At least, it should be possible, no? Everyone raves about how good BES is at doing stuff and keeping records...

    6. Re:the answer is obvious. by timmarhy · · Score: 1

      No you fools, all his communications were in hand written letters inked with the blood of clubbed baby seals.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    7. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because when you have 8 hours of TV to fill you make do with random shit like this

    8. Re:the answer is obvious. by CannonballHead · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, I don't watch any TV, let alone news. And most news is no better, as far as being opinionated, than talk radio (which, ironically, I do listen to).

      That said, I think NPR (not sure if that is necessarily the same as PBS though) is decidedly biased as well. And I might add, NPR did cover the dog story on "All Things Considered." (Online here.)

    9. Re:the answer is obvious. by nine-times · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The articles mention RIM's network in all that, which causes me pause-- Is RIM still forcing people to send information to their servers? If so, can anyone give me a single good reason for that, and why I, as a customer, would want that rather than a normal IMAP+SSL connection to my own mail server?

      Ok, that aside, I'm just wondering... isn't there some point at which we admit that e-mail sent over the internet, as things operate today, is just an inherently insecure method of communication? I mean, I guess you could encrypt all your messages (PGP-style), but nobody does that, and short of doing that, there's nothing to prevent someone from eavesdropping.

      There's a lot to talk about here, but I hope Obama keeps fighting for his Blackberry-- not for his own sake, but it makes sense in concert with his promise to improve Internet infrastructure. If the secret service can't figure out a way for the President to have a secure smartphone, then we should be asking "what needs to happen to make that possible?" From there, the next question should be, "What needs to happen to make it possible for consumers to have access to secure smartphones?"

    10. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or, why not take away his personal blackberry, and give him a government-issued one? They're already so prevalent throughout the government, so why not give him one? Then you can do the BES thing and have remote wipe, and have all emails sent through it archived. And given the encryption already on it, I'm sure it's usable for classified stuff as well.

      Classified? No. While blackberries are very secure and have been audited from end-to-end by many government agencies, they are currently certified for "Sensitive But Unclassified" information by the US government.

      For example, blackerries aren't tempest shielded.

    11. Re:the answer is obvious. by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't watch any TV, let alone news
      Is this you?

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    12. Re:the answer is obvious. by schnell · · Score: 2, Informative

      Is RIM still forcing people to send information to their servers? If so, can anyone give me a single good reason for that, and why I, as a customer, would want that rather than a normal IMAP+SSL connection to my own mail server?

      Yes, I'll give you two. Because of that permanent stateful connection to RIM's NOC, your e-mail is pushed to the device automatically rather when needed. Your IMAP/SSL connection only checks on a regular schedule (whatever you set it to be) and that can be too often or not often enough. On top of that, it allows BlackBerries to communicate with each other via a unique PIN address so even if your mail server/BlackBerry Enterprise Server is slammed or out of commission, you can still communicate with any other BlackBerry user if you know their PIN address.

      On the downside it does represent a single point of failure, but RIM does a pretty good job of making their NOC highly available (of course not perfect). In the real world you're more likely to be out of cell coverage or have your corporate e-mail/BES down than for the RIM NOC to be down.

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    13. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      No you fools, all his communications were in hand written letters inked with the blood of clubbed babies.

      There, fixed that for ya. Noone except hormonal chicks care about baby seals. It's all because of the eye-head size ratio.

    14. Re:the answer is obvious. by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      hehe...

      No. But it so happens that TV has come up a lot, and rather than simply say "I don't watch CNN" it' easier and makes the point come across more strongly to say "I don't even own a TV."

      I also don't have facial hair, for what it's worth. ;)

    15. Re:the answer is obvious. by philspear · · Score: 1

      Sarcasm aside, it is a bit annoying that suddenly, the choice of dog and the use of a communication device is "big news." It's not big news, Presidents have had communication devices for years and dogs for much longer.

      You're annoyed with news like this, yet you clicked on the topic?

    16. Re:the answer is obvious. by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That said, I think NPR (not sure if that is necessarily the same as PBS though) is decidedly biased as well.

      I disagree. I think they've gone out of their way to show both sides of the argument even if one side has a pretty absurd argument that isn't even grounded in reality. I've seen them piss off both Liberals and Conservatives and tend to believe the old adage that you are probably doing something right if everybody is unhappy ;)

      And I might add, NPR did cover the dog story on "All Things Considered." (Online here. [npr.org])

      Hmm, I hadn't heard that. At least they only devoted 2 minutes and 46 seconds to it though. How much time has CNN devoted?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    17. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that customers willing to purchase the Enterprise Server software can send the email through their own server .. rather than through the RIM servers-- http://na.blackberry.com/eng/services/server/

      oh and I believe that an Enterprise server (and all Blackberry devices which connect to it) can be set up so that all messages must be encrypted.

    18. Re:the answer is obvious. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Because of that permanent stateful connection to RIM's NOC, your e-mail is pushed to the device automatically rather when needed.

      I've heard Blackberry fans make a big deal of this, but that's not exactly a unique feature. Exchange does it. IMAP servers can do it (though not all do).

      On top of that, it allows BlackBerries to communicate with each other via a unique PIN address so even if your mail server/BlackBerry Enterprise Server is slammed or out of commission, you can still communicate with any other BlackBerry user if you know their PIN address.

      That doesn't sound like much of a feature to me. I could do the same thing by auto-forwarding all of my work e-mail to a Gmail account and setting my phone up to check that Gmail account. Or I could just set my phone up to have my work account *and* my gmail account, which makes even more sense.

    19. Re:the answer is obvious. by schnell · · Score: 3, Informative

      Exchange does it. IMAP servers can do it (though not all do).

      Yes, the newest versions of Exchange with Direct Push do it as well. Although IMAP IDLE can theoretically do it, I have yet to see it in the wild. The deficiency in IMAP is that (unlike RIM's NOC or Exchange Direct Push + SCMDM) the encrypted permanent connection is used for device management as well (OTA provisioning, remote wipe if the device is stolen, etc.)

      That doesn't sound like much of a feature to me [...] I could just set my phone up to have my work account *and* my gmail account, which makes even more sense.

      The point of PIN-to-PIN is not just proofing against just one e-mail account being unavailable (although in most large enterprise/government environments you would be shot by the IT security group for sending potentially sensitive information via your gmail account). It's about the fact that those communications go from any BlackBerry to the RIM NOC and straight to the other BlackBerry. The whole Internet could disappear and as long as the RIM NOC (which links directly to the packet networks of the major cell carriers) is there you can still send messages between BlackBerries. Not an everyday feature but very useful in emergency situations...

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    20. Re:the answer is obvious. by dangitman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sarcasm aside, it is a bit annoying that suddenly, the choice of dog and the use of a communication device is "big news." It's not big news, Presidents have had communication devices for years and dogs for much longe

      Well, President Bush owning an iPod was as much "big news" as this, and the Bushes aren't shy of giving their dogs media coverage. In fact, First Pets are usually well-covered and adored by the media. So, what's changed? Nothing that I can see. Heck, Laura bush recently gave a press conference on their choice of china sets for catering. Of course everything the Presidential family does will be scrutinized by the media (well, unless it's something like criminal corruption or war crimes, then they look the other way).

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    21. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I wait for my -1, didn't fangirl score.

      Didn't that used to be "groupies"?

    22. Re:the answer is obvious. by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      The legislature is out until the inauguration, bush has kept his head down since the republican primaries and all the CEOs/marketing departments have been off since 12/15/08 or so and there won't be any major news until 1/20/09 when MLK day is over with. This is just "slow news season" filler crap to fill the airwaves while CNN, etc idle about. It's also not a coincidence that Israel decided to start a major military attack just weeks (days, really) before a new incoming president is seated in a seriously asshole international power play, but that's for another thread....

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    23. Re:the answer is obvious. by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      It's not unique and others certainly have done it, but the reason we make such a big deal out of it is because it works. As in, it always works, every time. Waiting on an important email? No worries, your BB will beep you when it's in your inbox. With all your phone calls, SMS and email in chronological order, even though I have my gmail routed through it, I'd rather pick up my BB and check/send email with that than use my computer (for shorter messages). The KISS mentality and bulletproof, 100% integrated system used on a blackberry is what makes it Worth It. I've had my BB for about 6 months now and I've had exactly zero snags, hiccups or outages with instantaneous email.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    24. Re:the answer is obvious. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Although IMAP IDLE can theoretically do it, I have yet to see it in the wild.

      I have. It works great.

      The deficiency in IMAP is that (unlike RIM's NOC or Exchange Direct Push + SCMDM) the encrypted permanent connection is used for device management as well (OTA provisioning, remote wipe if the device is stolen, etc.)

      Ok, so we've identified one potential winner. If you want remote wipe, you need to either use Exchange or Blackberry or something more than IMAP. I'll give you that one. Still, that's really not helpful the whole rest of the time that you haven't lost your phone.

      Also, the question I was really trying to ask was, "Does RIM still force you to send traffic over their network in order to get it to a Blackberry, and if so, how would this benefit me as a customer?" RIM's network shouldn't be necessary for remote wiping.

      It's about the fact that those communications go from any BlackBerry to the RIM NOC and straight to the other BlackBerry. The whole Internet could disappear and as long as the RIM NOC (which links directly to the packet networks of the major cell carriers) is there you can still send messages between BlackBerries

      Ok, so the big benefit here is that if there is a catastrophe (nuclear war?) and the entire Internet gets destroyed, but somehow your cell network and RIM's network survives, then you'll definitely be able to send someone an email. Assuming you both have Blackberries. And if you happen to know their obscure PIN. Great.

    25. Re:the answer is obvious. by fm6 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sarcasm aside, it is a bit annoying that suddenly, the choice of dog and the use of a communication device is "big news."

      We've already beaten the device issue to death, but the dog issue isn't as trivial as all that. I have a niece who volunteers in animal rescue, and she's bloody thrilled at all the publicity the rescue movement is getting out of the First Dog. The fact that the Obamas are canvassing the shelters instead of the breeders will cause a lot of others to do the same, which could save thousands of animals from being euthanized.

      That's not a small thing. It's not the end of the recession or OBL's head on a pike, but if you care about the 9 million or so animals that get euthanized every year, it's not a small matter.

    26. Re:the answer is obvious. by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 1

      "maybe the president shouldn't order or condone illegal or unethical behavior"

      I agree but what's legal and illegal is up to interpretation; that's what our legal system is based on - judges, lawyers, and courts all having a say in interpreting laws. Further, what's considered ethical and unethical is also widely variable. I'm not condoning illegal or unethical behavior but the issue many times is not black and white.

    27. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may be legally required to keep all emails for the public record but that certainly hasn't stopped this administration from losing "backups".

    28. Re:the answer is obvious. by timmarhy · · Score: 1

      missing the point. with the baby seals he is killing something and also harming the environment, which is the typical anti bush tactic. *sigh* it takes all the fun out when you have to explain these things...

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    29. Re:the answer is obvious. by The+Breeze · · Score: 1

      It's actually an interesting problem, when you think about it. Bush had grown daughters; Obama has wee ones...who are going to school outside the White House (I think they're going to a charter school). I don't think the security agencies are worried that he's going to send the nuclear codes over the blackberry - but they may be worried about a daughter texting "can I go to the mall after school" and having that intercepted by those who would kidnap or attack the kids.

    30. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't watch the news, how can you claim to understand its biases?

    31. Re:the answer is obvious. by Xaoswolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll go with the race card... I love my caucasianberry myself.

    32. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sarcasm aside, it is a bit annoying that suddenly, the choice of dog and . . .

      Funny you should mention that. I heard one of Regan's dogs was a retriever, trained by the soviets. Needless to say once they uncovered it, they were feeding him misinformation. Eventually the dog realized his cover was blown, bit the hand that fed him, and so they sent him to the pound. That was a real red hot.

      And now you know the rest of the story.

    33. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, why are we fangirling over Obama like this? This wasn't news when Bush was in office...

      I think you're forgetting, this time around we actually want Obama in office.

    34. Re:the answer is obvious. by StopKoolaidPoliticsT · · Score: 1

      The legislature is out until the inauguration

      Uh, Congress already met to swear in the new members, count the Electoral College votes to declare who the next President will be, work on legislation (including a Sunday session on the 11th with a successful motion to bring an earmark laden omnibus bill to a vote) and is holding hearings on confirming Obama's top staff this week. I'd hardly call that out of session.

      This is just "slow news season" filler crap to fill the airwaves while CNN, etc idle about.

      There's also plenty of important news going on, including possible pay for play accusations against Hillary, Obama's Treasury Secretary nominee, Timothy Geithner, evading paying his own taxes and possibly hiring an illegal alien, the current economic news, the SCOTUS hearing a case about whether or not police have to stop interrogations after someone requests their lawyer, the Russians cutting off gas supplies to Europe, etc. Just because the news prefers to air Golden Globe speeches, discussing Ben Afflick's baby's name or blabbing on about American Idol doesn't mean that there isn't stuff to cover, it simply means people in the newsrooms are out to gossip since it draws readers/viewers/listeners better than the serious news does. I mean... Congress is out until the inauguration, right?

      --
      Stop Koolaid Politics
    35. Re:the answer is obvious. by gemada · · Score: 1

      I wish that the hardest decision Obama will have to make would be his choice of horses.

    36. Re:the answer is obvious. by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Call me when congress passes meaningful legislation between now and Jan 21st. Which they won't. Russia turns off the gas to Ukraine and other eastern bloc countries almost every year like clockwork, see my other posts concerning that; also that's very, very low on the US's (and any non-western European country's) list of priorities. The biggest story right now is Israel's nearly illegal war against the already occupied gaza strip, which does affect our foreign policy, especially in forming new policies between Israel and the incoming Obama administration (again, I disagree with Israel's timing on this). I'm not sure what stick is up your ass but take a chill pill dude. My point was that the US has been on holiday and no meaningful laws will be passed between a week before christmas and the inauguration. Congratulations you caught me on a technicality. I'm sorry your life sucks so much that you have to take joy in small wins like this on the internet.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    37. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry your life sucks so much that you have to take joy in small wins like this on the internet.

      Looking at your slashdot journal, you seem to have some anger issues

      That aside, I'm pathetic because I corrected your obviously wrong information, but your life is so bad that you felt the need to insult me for pointing out that you were wrong and now you can't admit it to yourself (hence your dodges in the reply about the news going on that the media refuses to cover in favor of pop-news), and need to put me down to regain a feeling of superiority to cover your bruised ego.

      cheer up buttercup, it'll be ok. You can insult me again, or maybe foe me, if it makes you feel better.

    38. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Admittedly, it's been a few years since i lived in the US, and then only for a year, but at that time at least, PBS and NPR were the only somewhat objective American major news organizations, and the only ones that actually knew there was a world outside the US. (though the BBC was way better than both)

    39. Re:the answer is obvious. by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Are you an Israeli apologist or something? As far as major news goes, the possible ethnic clensing (because honestly, does it really look like anything else?) of the gaza strip seems like the most likely path to WW3, especially in the throes of a global economic collapse. Why yes, I can be sharp tounged to such an inflammatory post as yours. We were arguing about congress not being productive, right? Not dodging the topic at hand by throwing in pop culture references, right? Why did I not respond to your bit about pop culture? Because I don't keep up with the latest "Brangelina" drama and I dont' disagree with you on that. But yes, it is a slow news season for the US media, which was my original point.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    40. Re:the answer is obvious. by mzs · · Score: 1

      There may also be a sinister rationale to keeping him away from the blackberry. Think how out of touch Bush Jr. became. There may be people pushing advisors to recommend dropping the blackberry for cya reasons, but the reason to them is really so that the president loses touch with what people outside of the political circle around him would like him to see.

    41. Re:the answer is obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NPR is a separate organization from PBS and the CPB

    42. Re:the answer is obvious. by StopKoolaidPoliticsT · · Score: 1

      Are you an Israeli apologist or something?

      Why do you assume I even care about Israel, are you that much of an Israeli hater? Israel has virtually no affect on my life and whether or not we support them, there will be fighting in the Middle East as there has been for thousands of years. If it isn't the Muslims fighting the Jews, it's the Arabs fighting each other.

      s far as major news goes, the possible ethnic clensing (because honestly, does it really look like anything else?) of the gaza strip seems like the most likely path to WW3, especially in the throes of a global economic collapse.

      I've heard "that's going to start WW3" so many times that it's pretty safe to say nothing is going to start WW3 until someone actually wants to start WW3. WW3 was going to start under Ike, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Reagan and GWB according to the people that think they're smarter than everyone else. It's almost as ridiculous as "this is the year of Linux on the desktop"

      We were arguing about congress not being productive, right?

      We were talking about Congress being in session and the news not covering the news in favor of the latest poptart scandal, but apparently, you think I'm busy bashing Gaza or Israel instead even though I deliberately avoided mentioning them precisely because you had already mentioned that it should be news.

      But yes, it is a slow news season for the US media, which was my original point.

      It's not a slow news season, the media simply refuses to cover the news in favor of tabloid crap because the media isn't in the business of disseminating news, they're in the business of drawing as many eyeballs as they can to sell ads to. The real news isn't as profitable as the celebtard crap, but that doesn't mean there isn't any real news.

      Why yes, I can be sharp tounged to such an inflammatory post as yours.

      Maybe rather than kneejerk and lash out, you should stop and think first... and there wasn't anything all that inflammatory in my post unless you consider being told that you're wrong (with examples) being inflammatory.

      --
      Stop Koolaid Politics
  6. It seems we should figure this out. by Facegarden · · Score: 1

    This is only going to become more pertinent of an issue. We might as well figure it out now. If we don't, we'll just have to figure out a system next time, as in four or eight years this will only be more common.

    It's not like a system couldn't be devised that would work, they just need to look at the specific roadblocks and figure something out.

    As McCain said, we should get together the smartest people in the country to solve this problem. He's a smart guy coming up with cutting edge ideas like that. ;)
    -Taylor

    --
    Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
  7. security nuts by jay2003 · · Score: 0

    This is a perfect example of how security nuts make life difficult even for people in positions of tremendous power. He's the head of the government. Logically, Obama should just be able to say, "I'm keeping my Blackberry" and have his staff figure out how comply to with records retention, etc. It's not that hard.

    That Obama doesn't automatically win this one as the most powerful man is world makes me feel better about the continually hassles I'm forced to put up with by the IT department in name of "security.

    1. Re:security nuts by SoapBox17 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the reason he doesn't just say "I want this" and have it be done is not because he can't, but because he realizes that he has advisors to figure out if it is a good idea. It could be that all of the issues could be handled, but that doing so would cost a lot of tax payer dollars.

    2. Re:security nuts by Xiroth · · Score: 1

      Just a good little reminder that no-one is above the law. The President, in fact, has laws that apply only to him (and his senior staff) that he has to follow regarding this sort of thing.

    3. Re:security nuts by fluxrad · · Score: 1

      He's the head of the government.

      You must be British.

      --
      "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
    4. Re:security nuts by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      This is a perfect example of how security nuts make life difficult even for people in positions of tremendous power.

      ESPECIALLY for people in positions of tremendous power.
      Think of all the trouble Hitler went through because of Enigma hackers!

      We'd be cowering in fear of some pretty awesome looking aircraft right now if you could ignore security nuts with impunity.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    5. Re:security nuts by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      But he is the head of the government, while also being the head of state, as US of Americans would more likely call him. In a Presidential Republic, the President is usually invested with both roles.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  8. Idle by Daimanta · · Score: 0

    Meet IT

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  9. Government Phone by binaryseraph · · Score: 0

    I'm a little surprised that the US Govt. does not have a communication service just for its own executive office. One would think they could find a way to utilize thechnology's that RIM has introduced, to a more secure network. Maybe a PGP encrypted phone? I seem to recall there being some sort of encryption software for windows mobile OS, surely such a piece of software could be put in place, in combination with a govt. run communications network to ensure that our president can 1. keep his blackberry and 2. allow for the office of the presidency to opperate in the 21st century. THe only problem that could arise in this is the legal issues of archiving all emails sent to/by the president- as we may recall a few years back the large uproar of RNC email addresses being used to conduct federal matters. But I'm sure congress can work out that detail.

  10. Obamatard portmanteaus by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Informative

    Can we stop all this portmanteau crap? Please? It's like the imaginary label "President-Elect"...

    PS:

    And as I've noted elsewhere, the 'Omigod, he left his Blackberry behind at dinner' issue is absurd

    No, it's not. The people who surround the president have (practically since the inception of nuclear weapons) had problems keeping the codes or the authorization mechanisms physically secure, despite the fact that the fucking thing is in fact attached to the person carrying it:

    On occasion the President has left his aide carrying the football behind. This happened to Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush[2] and, most recently, Bill Clinton on April 24, 1999.[3] In none of these cases was the integrity of the football breached. clicky.

    It's one thing for a "football" which is specifically designed to not rely just on restricted access, but if someone got ahold of Obama's blackberry, getting into it isn't nearly as challenging.

    Also, the article submitter doesn't have the remotest understanding of how things work at a presidential level in regards to information security; its not as simple as "zOMG, do not email the sec of defense on blackberry!" Bush went so far as to keep his press secretary at arm's length so that he was truly ignorant on stuff that Bush didn't want the press to know about.

    Much of information security at that level isn't about actual classified information, but dissemination of unclassified information to the media that is either beneficial or hurtful to other political entities and individuals, domestic or foreign.

    1. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by malkman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Somehow if Bush could manage it, I think he can too :)

      --

      Robort knows all.
    2. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by couchslug · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Can we stop all this portmanteau crap? Please? It's like the imaginary label "President-Elect"... "

      OK, you win. No more Obamanteaus.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    3. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by SuperBanana · · Score: 0

      Somehow if Bush could manage it, I think he can too :)

      Obama is actually extremely close to his pick for press secretary, and is probably interested in strengthening the executive branch via non-authoritarian ways.

      That's where the much more significant debate has been; the press are excited at the possibility of a press secretary who is very close to the to-be President, but also wondering if it'll work out for the administration or not as it tries to pursue its goals.

      I highly recommend listening to NPR/PRI podcasts, like On Point with Tom Ashbrook, and Fresh Air if you want to learn more about this stuff.

    4. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you propose to call the person who has been elected to the office of president but has not yet been sworn in? President-elect is a perfectly acceptable term.

    5. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm sorry, how is "President Elect" imaginary? It's a widely-used term, and everybody knows what it means. And BTW, it's been around for about three centuries, according to the OED.

      But even if it had been invented last year, it wouldn't be "imaginary", not if people are actually using it.

    6. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Barack Obama? Mr. Obama would work too.

    7. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      probably interested in strengthening the executive branch via non-authoritarian ways.

      Care to back this up in a meaningful way? We're well past the "but he's Obama!" fanboism. We know that Clinton has full intentions on going on a power grab at the first chance she gets and that Holder probably isn't going to be much better (this is the guy who claimed that the logical response to 9/11 was more gun restrictions).

      So far what we've seen of Obama in action (you know, the cabinet thingy) shows that he's just as much business as usual as any other president to take the oath in the last few decades. The man plans to effectively increase the national debt by damn near 10% as soon as he can get congress to approve it. He'll do in a couple of pen strokes what it took everyone's favorite punching bag, George II, nearly his first four years to do.

      Am I the only one who's not impressed so far? I wonder how many people would have still voted for him if they would have known what the man would be up to in his first few months after winning the election. So much for change.

    8. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, that works now. But what if John McCain had been elected? And what of all of the other future Presidents-elect? I'm sure they would prefer "President-elect" over "Mr. Obama"...

    9. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by artor3 · · Score: 2

      What are you talking about? No one left the football sitting on a table somewhere... the aid carrying it got separated from the president. What do you think is going to happen? Obama accidentally leaves his blackberry with an aid.... who is then abducted so that the terrorists can read the president's chat logs? And as for "President-Elect" being a recent term....

    10. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by romcabrera · · Score: 1

      Obama is the "President-elect". So, Bush wasn't "elect"? Oh, wait...

    11. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Yes, imaginary..

      Not mentioned in a bunch of places such as the over a dozen times in Presidential Transition Act of 1963: http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?contentType=GSA_BASIC&contentId=24780

      Sure usually you don't hear it used often, but usually you don't have an generational economic crisis in motion and the sitting President twiddling his thumbs.

    12. Re:Obamatard portmanteaus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...It's like the imaginary label "President-Elect"...

      Amendment XX

      3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

  11. Arm Chair by SoapBox17 · · Score: 1

    Do you really think that no one on Obama's team can figure out whether or not there are issues with him having a PDA. This article seems to indicate that they know something the rest of Obama's team and he himself don't know.... But they obviously have no idea what the issues with the presidential records act are, let alone the ridiculousity of chiseling a security argumenet down to a self destruct feature. I hope everyone on /. already knows there is more to security than whether or not the device can be erased after someone realizes it is lost (potentially well after it has fall into nefarious hands).

  12. sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so you have the best communications one would ever want and you want to keep your shitberry? your already a dumb ass for that.. everything you get once your pres is 15x better than your blackberry just STFU and deal with it you dbag..

  13. solution - an iphone by cmbondi · · Score: 0

    problem solved, oh and I think the CTO for the federal government should be Steve Jobs once he feels better and the first project for the Obama administration should be to convert the entire government to Macs and OS X. Then we would be safe and effective as a nation!

  14. Who Cares? by lemur666 · · Score: 1

    We keep forgetting what the original purpose of these little electronic gizmos was.

    Or... they call them Personal Digital Assistants for a reason.

    So call me crazy, but I'm guessing the POTUS just might have the resources to get an actual Personal Assistant to handle all of the functions of a PDA.

    Plus I hear the voice-based interface on PAs is a snap to learn.

    --
    Corollary to Hanlon's razor: Any significantly advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from malice.
  15. Left Behind by rudy1066 · · Score: 1

    I have to take issue with the idea that having someone keep track of the device would prevent it from being left behind. After all, if the Nuclear Football or launch codes have been be left behind or lost at least four times, then the Presidential Blackberry could just as well slip out of a pocket in a crowd.

    1. Re:Left Behind by MadnessASAP · · Score: 1

      3 of those times were a non issue and the 4th would be very difficult if not impossibe to exploit. In the specific case of the article the football was still with an aide and they left him behind, it was left behind on Airforce 1 and when Reagan got shot the aide with the football was seperated from him. In the 4th case of the dry cleaning the codes AFAIK change every day so its doubtful that even the most dedicated of organizations would be able to exploit it.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
  16. This is ridiculous. by nobodylocalhost · · Score: 1

    I am sure the previous presidents of the united states used cellphones and laptops. This is no different by the combination of the two. What exactly are those security experts hired for anyway? They are suppose to enable usage of tools while preserving security, not by telling their boss what he can't do. They are getting paid big bucks for resolving the headaches, not creating them. Any incompetent fool can suggest not to use a particular solution, the competent IT workers get things done without disrupting the service.

    --
    Where is the "Ignorant" mod tag?
    1. Re:This is ridiculous. by Scrameustache · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am sure the previous presidents of the united states used cellphones and laptops. This is no different by the combination of the two. What exactly are those security experts hired for anyway?

      They are hired to know gems like this: All data transferred via BlackBerry devices is encrypted and travels through RIM â(TM)s central server in Canada .

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    2. Re:This is ridiculous. by nobodylocalhost · · Score: 1

      yet they don't have enough sense to contact RIM to have them submit the specs and code review for configuring government only blackberry servers that our government has full control of and enable the blackberries in government to use that server? RIM would jump on that opportunity for the most powerful man to serve as a walking billboard.

      --
      Where is the "Ignorant" mod tag?
    3. Re:This is ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am sure the previous presidents of the united states used cellphones and laptops.I'm sure not ALL the previous presidents used them, only the last few. For Clinton the laptop wasn't a problem 'cause he only used it to surf porn sites, and for "W" it wasn't a problem 'cause he only used it to visit sesamestreet.com. Bush senior... well, he had enough sense to be careful about it. Before that, the civilian technology wasn't really there yet, so they were using military devices anyway.

    4. Re:This is ridiculous. by geobeck · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...travels through RIM(TM)'s central server in Canada

      Canada, eh? That's one of those unstable, oil-rich nations run by a fundamentalist dictator, that supports all kinds of terror, right?

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    5. Re:This is ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yet they don't have enough sense to contact RIM to have them submit the specs and code review for configuring government only blackberry servers that our government has full control of and enable the blackberries in government to use that server?

      Already been done. The blackberry platform has been audited from end-to-end by many government agencies:

      http://na.blackberry.com/eng/ataglance/security/certifications.jsp

  17. Why? by Hatta · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Why does the president need a blackberry? Doesn't he have more important things to do than write emails and call people? Won't he have a secretary to do all that for him?

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Why? by nobodylocalhost · · Score: 1

      What more important things to do than write emails and call people?

      Seriously, what do you think the president's job is? How do you think he keeps in contact with his cabinet and thus stay on top of domestic and world events? How do you think he visits other countries' leaders? By just showing up at their door steps?

      Think of the president as a project manager, except on the grand scale, then, you will understand.

      --
      Where is the "Ignorant" mod tag?
    2. Re:Why? by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 1

      Doesn't he have more important things to do than write emails and call people? Won't he have a secretary to do all that for him?

      Barbara, is that you?

      --
      My first program:

      Hell Segmentation fault

    3. Re:Why? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Sure, but I don't expect him to actually be doing the calling or letter writing himself. It's his job to communicate with people, dialing the phones and typing the letters is clerical work. Think about all the hundreds or thousands of people the president may need to talk to. Surely he would have an assistant whose job it is to deal with all that.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, yes?

  18. WTF? by sexconker · · Score: 1

    It's a cell phone.
    It's his property.
    He can do whatever the fuck he wants with it.

    I fucking hate the media for creating this fucking non-issue.

    Why was this not an issue when he was a senator?

    As long as he keeps his black berry for personal use only, it's fine. If it's for official use as well, then they should implement some basic security both inside and outside the device, just as you would with a the President's computer, his plane, his car, his (land line) phone, and his dog.

    Obama the person is not always Obama the President. Every single thing he says, types, does, etc. does not need to be logged, filed, and splooged over. Maybe the guy wants to take a minute to troll slashdot while sitting on the can. Maybe he wants to post a message to his daughter's village in Animal Crossing.

    Where's that AC with the post about eating Obama's turd?

  19. Barack is not Black. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's actually a Mulatto, much like Tiger Woods is actually more Asian than Black . We still don't have an actual pure Black African president. Step away from the "c-c-c-combo breaker" pics.

  20. It can happen again by cctchristensen · · Score: 1

    "the 'Omigod, he left his Blackberry behind at dinner' issue is absurd." The president has left behind far more important items. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/328442.stm

  21. Yeah, right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...the answer to that surely depends on the subject matter or recipient. Email to his Chicago friends - why not?

    Such latitude all of the sudden. Only months ago Bush was a criminal of the highest order because non-official email accounts were being used. What for? Doesn't matter, there aren't any exceptions... Obama uses a PDA? Well now, subject matter, recipients... well I'll be, look at all this gray area! Obviously no possibility of abuse. Oh no.

    Frankly this is all bullshit. Just because a bunch of tort lawyers have you convinced that there is something wrong with private communications doesn't mean it's true. Corporate emails, private communications among politicians... none of it should be exposed beyond the originators wishes regardless of what you and your nanny state rulers want. They're going to stick your own fucking rules on you one day.

  22. Problem is using celluar signal to bomb him by blazespinnaker · · Score: 1

    Let's be serious. The secret service could care less about the info security. They're a lot more concerned about the fact that they have all these guys who are sitting ducks because 'Renegade' insists on carrying a homing device with him wherever he goes. I think the solution is to tell the world he's carrying a blackberry but then carry some custom device which is built on radio.

    1. Re:Problem is using celluar signal to bomb him by KevinKnSC · · Score: 1

      but then carry some custom device which is built on radio.

      What sort of magic do you think the BlackBerry uses to communicate, if not radio?

    2. Re:Problem is using celluar signal to bomb him by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      by radio I meant private radio. apologies for those who didn't understand that.

    3. Re:Problem is using celluar signal to bomb him by u38cg · · Score: 1

      I;m more amused at the notion that the only possible way to know where he is is by tracking his cellphone. He's only the leader of the free world, I mean, it's not that hard to find out where he is...

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
  23. GPS tracking? by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

    The BlackBerry is a cell phone... isn't there a law that cell phones must be able to be located, within a few hundred feet, for EMS purposes?

    I am sure the secret service would love to have the president tracked by his phone carrier.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  24. More federal funds. by NeonVice · · Score: 1

    If only the 'No Blackberry Left Behind Act' were more adequately funded.

  25. Murphy's Law by caffiend666 · · Score: 1

    I think techies ought to appreciate this, it's entirely Murphy's Law. If he can lose it, he will. A great example is that once Bill Clinton walked out on a check. (Might have been after he was out of office) He just assumed someone else had it. A reporter picked it up. That reporter managed to make a name for himself by covering a $20 tab. Now, imagine if a reporter got ahold of Obama's blackberry. I'm sure the reporter would return it, eventually....

    Unless people believe Obama is incapable of getting distracted....

    Then again, I'm pretty sure he could ask RIM for a blackberry with a thumb scan and get one custom made....

    --
    Here's to losing my Karma Bonus again....
    1. Re:Murphy's Law by Morkano · · Score: 1

      They all have password locks of them, if you want to use it. The device locks itself after a timeout you specify, and wipes itself if a password is entered incorrectly a set number of times. And you can do the same remotely if it gets lost.

      Blackberries are designed for secure business use, and as such this sort of thing has come up before.

      --
      Victory or awesome!
  26. I care. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Mr. Obama is on my payroll (just like every State and Federal employee) and I want to know where my money is being spent.

    I don't know what you pay in taxes but I let every City, State and Federal employee know that I want them to spend *MY* money properly. Sure, you say it is a small portion but when 39% of my cash goes to "the government", it is real fucking number to me.

    I have a buddy who works for the city. We were discussing the recent zoning laws that changed (without my input) and I commented that "well, the city knows what's best". He laughed and said sometimes they don't. I asked then if he did his job well and if he knew how to do his job best and of course he said "I'd like to think so". I then commented "well, we have a conflict here". He was quite confused as to how to answer.

    Personally, I'd like to see every congressperson have their financial dealings in read-only mode on the web for any US Citizen to read. "Public servants" are a thing of the past.

    As a side note: I took my first State contract and made $4500 for a job someone who was paid $2000 could do in 1/8th of the time. I offered to find that person, save the State money and was denied the opportunity. That's the last time I worked for the State.

    1. Re:I care. by Anpheus · · Score: 1

      Why not take the extra money and donate to charity?

      I mean, surely you'd be doing more good than the shmuck they get next time, right?

  27. Regarding security and archiving by slimjim8094 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I must be missing something big, but isn't the point of a Blackberry the fact that everything goes through a $business-controlled server? One that can nuke the device from orbit whenever the admin says so? One that stores all the data securely?

    I thought that's pretty much why RIM was able to get Blackberries into so many businesses - they could just buy a server that would integrate with their stuff and keep it all safe.

    I'd actually be upset if he wasn't using a blackberry, but a less-secure cellphone

    Or am I way off the mark for some reason, and why?

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    1. Re:Regarding security and archiving by todrules · · Score: 1

      That's exactly why they became popular. They all use 3DES encryption. And it's also the reason that Blackberrys do not (at least until the Pearl) have cameras. That way people could use them when working around classified material.

      However, one problem I see is that RIM is a Canadian-based company, and their servers are in Canada. There's nothing stopping the authorities up there to install some kind of sniffing device without anybody knowing. I mean, c'mon, you know what most countries would give if the President of the USA were to use servers based in their country? That just makes spying waaaaaaay to easy.

    2. Re:Regarding security and archiving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct ... but most slashusers don't want to hear that they need to spend $3000.00+ to buy the software to have complete control over their blackberry devices and messages.

      If you are a individual client (ie a person ) then RIM keeps control of the server software

      If you are a business/government/large organization you can either have RIM manage the server just like they do for individual clients or you can buy the server software and maintain control all of your own blackberry devices.

    3. Re:Regarding security and archiving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They all use 3DES encryption.

      That was true about 5 years ago. You've now got a choice of 3DES (for backwards compatibility) or AES/Rijndael.

  28. It's not about losing it or archiving messages by tcampb01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's about the fact that it can be 'tracked' -- just as the US has used cellphone tracking to hunt down bad-guys overseas, they can do the same thing to us if they know what cellphone we have.

    It's not about the 'archival' of data. The Blackberry taps into YOUR traditional mail infrastructure. If you back it up, then your messages are archived.

    No, it's more about the fact that an external company is granted access (usually via VPN) to your internal network (or at least part of it) and, more specifically, they get to keep a copy of your authentication credentials (so they can watch your new mail arrive, copy it, and delivery it to your device). Allowing a 3rd party company VPN access to a US government network with the Whitehouse mail server and, oh by the way, a copy of the president's username and password... well NOW maybe you can understand why they're nervous about security.

    Frankly it would be better if he were addicted to an iPhone. At least with that solution you can host your email on any IMAP compliant mail server you want and nobody but you needs a copy of your security certificates, VPN gateway access, or username & passwords.

    1. Re:It's not about losing it or archiving messages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not about the 'archival' of data. The Blackberry taps into YOUR traditional mail infrastructure. If you back it up, then your messages are archived.

      The point is, Obama wants to have conversations that are NOT archived. So much for "change". The Obamasiah is just another politician.

      No, it's more about the fact that an external company is granted access (usually via VPN) to your internal network (or at least part of it) and, more specifically, they get to keep a copy of your authentication credentials (so they can watch your new mail arrive, copy it, and delivery it to your device). Allowing a 3rd party company VPN access to a US government network with the Whitehouse mail server and, oh by the way, a copy of the president's username and password... well NOW maybe you can understand why they're nervous about security.

      Not at all. You really don't understand the blackberry platform (neither do the people who modded you insightful). Start by looking at blackberry security certifications: http://na.blackberry.com/eng/ataglance/security/certifications.jsp

      With a blackberry enterprise server (BES), no outsider connects to your email system, has access to the encryption keys, access to your email or access to your password.

      The BES software is installed on YOUR windows (2000, 2003, 2008) server. A regular user account on this server connects to YOUR email server (exchange, notes, groupwise), and gets your email. This user account has permission to read/send YOUR email.

      When new email arrives on YOUR server, the BES account grabs the message, the email is compressed and encrypted with the handheld's encryption key using AES-128. Only then is the message sent outside your network to RIM. This connection is outbound on tcp port 3101 to srp.na.blackberry.net. No other external internet access needed. RIM only receives the encrypted message (RIM can't decrypt it, since RIM doesn't have the keys). RIM then forwards the message to the cell phone carrier, who sends it to the handheld. The handheld receives it and uses its decryption key to read the message.

      For additional paranoia you can use PGP or S/MIME in addition to the native AES-128 encryption. The BES is made up of 8 or so services. These can be installed on different computers, and only the blackberry router service connects to the internet.

      Frankly it would be better if he were addicted to an iPhone

      You gotta be kidding. Apple knows nothing about mobile security. Tapping an iphone in a certain way will unlock it. The content is not stored encrypted. There is no remote wipe. Apple retains full control of your iphone and can remove applications whenever Apple feels like it.

    2. Re:It's not about losing it or archiving messages by DaMattster · · Score: 1

      I am sure if it was lost, they could initiate a remote kill which would securely wipe the blackberry clean of any data.

    3. Re:It's not about losing it or archiving messages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And oddly enough if the gubberment is smart enough to buy RIM's Enterprise Server software then the blackberry devices can be linked to the gubberment's OWN server instead of the RIM servers. ie The Enterprise server is the way enterprises can be in control of devices instead of RIM's public device servers being in control.

      Oh wow it's almost like RIM thought about information and physical security and decided that most enterprise level clients would not want their information including tracked location being stored on RIM owned servers.

      So then the only RIM supplied software able to track the location of the President's PDA would be the gubberment owned Enterprise Servers that are linked to his blackberry.

    4. Re:It's not about losing it or archiving messages by Suhas · · Score: 1

      and, oh by the way, a copy of the president's username and password...

      Do you have any idea how the Blackberry platform and the BES work? Why would the BES Account need any user's password? The BES account needs send on behalf and other privileges on the user mailbox obviously but password?

  29. transparency by toby · · Score: 1

    whether the president can afford to put things in writing that will likely be exposed by courts and archivists later

    Do you really WANT a leader who would write anything that should not be 'exposed'??

    I thought you Americans were supposed to be against totalitarian government. Apparently not; you voted it in several times and appear to have learned nothing by it.

    --
    you had me at #!
    1. Re:transparency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're working hard to join the rest of the world on that one, but we don't want THAT much totalitarian government, just partitalitarian.

  30. Left Behind Impossible? Remember the football! by Kagato · · Score: 1

    Sure, just add an employee to look after the blackberry? Really? It's just that simple? Nixon, Ford, Carter, Bush and Clinton have all left behind the Nuclear Football at events.

  31. Fangirls of the World Unite! by fm6 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This wasn't news when Bush was in office and he used a cell phone and a PDA too.

    Actually, it was an issue for Bush, though it had nothing to do with phone calls or PDA functionality.

    Obama is a notorious IM addict. He pretty much ran his campaign through his Blackberry. Now of course, you can use a Blackberry to make phone calls and track your appointments, but that's not why he's under pressure to give it up. The security wonks don't like the potential for text messages getting intercepted, and the lawyers don't like the legal exposure he'd get if the messages were subpoenaed or FOIAed.

    I'm not sure if Bush ever had a Blackberry or a PDA, but he used to be a heavy email user. He went cold turkey when he assumed office. According to his "last email" that went out to all his correspondents, it was mainly about the legal exposure.

    An NSA-approved smart phone is probably the solution to the security issue. (See one of the submissions in my sig.) I suspect Obama will just blow off the legal issue. He's supposed to be Mr. Open Government, after all.

    Now I wait for my -1, didn't fangirl score.

    And you'd deserve it! People who don't like fangirl stories (what happened to fanboys?) have no place on Slashdot!

    But this is not a fanchild issue. Obama keeps talking about the dangers of living in the "Presidential Bubble". One way he wants to avoid this is to have a lot of contacts that aren't mediated by his underlings. A Blackberry or other pocket IM device is an obvious tool for this purpose.

    I suspect he's being a little naive. He's going to be in charge of the biggest bureaucracy on the planet — does he really think that he can be on a first-person basis with the whole kaboodle? But hey, he's surprised us before!

    1. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not sure if Bush ever had a Blackberry or a PDA, but he used to be a heavy email user. He went cold turkey when he assumed office. According to his "last email" that went out to all his correspondents, it was mainly about the legal exposure.

      I think his decision at that moment said a lot about what his priorities would be as President: it was more important for his ass to be completely covered than it was to continue using the tools that would maximize his productivity.

      It will be interesting to see, eight years later, with electronic communication methods more pervasive and essential than ever, if President Obama will make the same choice.

    2. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by fm6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      OK, I thoroughly despise Bush Jr. (was his final press conference pathetic or what?) but on this one issue you're being a little unfair. The CYA attitude is as old as bureaucracy and as the legal profession. Which, come to think of it, are not really different entities.

      A couple years ago I was called into a meeting at work. What was it about? Can't tell you, would violate my NDA. And if I did tell you, it would have to be from memory, because everybody in the meeting was to forbidden to take notes or to write email about what happened in the meeting.

      I'll bend the rules a bit, and tell you that it was a really, really trivial legal issue. No bodies were being buried, no careers were at stake. Many companies would have just told their lawyers, "Your problem, do whatever is necessary." But that costs money, and we didn't have money to burn. So we picked the most cost effective strategy, and that involved created an absolutely minimal paper trail.

      We were following advice that lawyers give their clients every day: minimize your exposure. That's the advice Bush's lawyers gave him 8 years ago, and that's the advice Obama's lawyers are giving him now. I like to think that Obama will ignore them in the name of open government. But he's a pragmatic guy, so he knows that making that kind of idealistic choice comes at a cost.

      Obama's something of an idealist; if he weren't, I wouldn't have voted for him. (I probably wouldn't have voted at all.) But he also knows that if he makes every decision on purely idealistic grounds he's going to have lots of Right Decisions and very little to show for it. Woodrow Wilson can tell you all about that.

      No doubt Bush thinks he's the same way: making the idealistic decision when he can, making the pragmatic decision when he has to. The difference is that what Bush considers to be his ideals are morally bankrupt, and his critical judgment fatally impaired.

    3. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by girlintraining · · Score: 2, Funny

      People who don't like fangirl stories (what happened to fanboys?) have no place on Slashdot!

      Oh sorry. I'll disappear into a black hole of male-dominated language now.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    4. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you're a real girl, and not just a girl in training, you'll have reason to complain!

    5. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Obama is a notorious IM addict. He pretty much ran his campaign through his Blackberry. Now of course, you can use a Blackberry to make phone calls and track your appointments, but that's not why he's under pressure to give it up. The security wonks don't like the potential for text messages getting intercepted, and the lawyers don't like the legal exposure he'd get if the messages were subpoenaed or FOIAed.

      There's also the concern that the President of the United States isn't supposed to be spending his time micromanaging things - he's got a whole staff to do all that, as well as the entire Executive Branch.

    6. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

      Alright, alright, *normally* I sympathize with eliminating gendered language, but seriously, there's not much you can do about this one. What *short* word even exists that encompasses both fanboys and fangirls? Nobody will have heard of it!!!

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    7. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      What *short* word even exists that encompasses both fanboys and fangirls? Nobody will have heard of it!!!

      Fans.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    8. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by girlintraining · · Score: 2, Informative

      When you're a real girl, and not just a girl in training, you'll have reason to complain!

      O_o I suppose now isn't the best time to tell you that my nickname comes from the fact that I have been raised by lesbians and have been told that it would be a good idea to "try acting like a girl." Not that it should matter, prick.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    9. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

      Left off the sarcasm tag, did I? :-P

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    10. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by fm6 · · Score: 1

      I'm honestly sorry for offending you. It's not clear to me how I did. I made an off-the-wall response to what I took to be an off-the-wall post.

    11. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by fm6 · · Score: 1

      I don't think any of his advisers are telling Obama "give up your Blackberry because you can't micromanage". They might be thinking that, but officially it's all about legal and security issues.

      Anyway, keeping in touch with your subordinates is not the same thing as micromanagement. Some of the great micromanagers (Jimmy Carter comes to mind, as do several people I've worked for) manage to do it without technical aids. And Obama's right when he says that past Presidents have been too isolated. One hopes that he's smart enough to "break the bubble" without trying to micromanage every government employee.

    12. Re:Fangirls of the World Unite! by downhole · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that was a joke... that was somehow modded insightful. Methinks a few people need to go to that social skills class that was posted about a few days ago.

      --
      I don't reply to ACs
  32. Not fully understanding the concerns... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The OP doesn't seem to actually understand the concerns. First of all, information sent and received from a device like a blackberry is hardly secure. They can't very well risk having confidential information absent-mindedly entered into a note on a phone or very private numbers/emails stuck in a phone book. Beyond someone physically getting a hold of the phone, it's entirely possible for the device to be accessed via blue tooth and such, which he could turn on just tinkering with the thing.

    On the note of record retention. Records passed to and from officials can meet all kinds of retention laws. They don't have to be about top secret government business to need to be retained forever. In fact, many records that are deemed to be kept forever are actually public record, that have to be presentable upon request. So if he sends a message about making a plan for business (IE asking someone to come to a meeting), depending on the context, it could be a matter of public record forever. If his phone is destroyed and the document wasn't backed up, he would be screwed as soon as a court asked for his copy.

  33. No Exceptions.. Thats the rule. by sjs132 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hey, Come on... We are people at SLASHDOT... That used to mean "technology folks" that were usually involved in security, technology, and BOFH's... The RULE IS: NO Personal Communications Device. NO exceptions. Sorry you don't like the rules, Now enforce it. I think that is in the BOFH Rule book someplace.

    If he can't live with this rule, what about the rest? What are we to think if he constantly considers himself "above the law?" This is just a start of the trend that eventually leads to corruption. (IF it already isn't so.)

    Besides, All you might need is a laser and bounce it off of the screen when he's using it and anyone could read it... (oops, wrong tech? Does that work for LCD's?)

    --
    --- Relax, that mass muderer is just trying to reduce our carbon footprint, one fetus at a time...
    1. Re:No Exceptions.. Thats the rule. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he can't live with this rule, what about the rest? What are we to think if he constantly considers himself "above the law?" This is just a start of the trend that eventually leads to corruption. (IF it already isn't so.)

      Wait, you think that Obama's on the road to corruption (or already THERE) just because he'd like to keep using his Blackberry?

      Paranoia much? Fucking wingnut.

    2. Re:No Exceptions.. Thats the rule. by sjs132 · · Score: 1

      Paranoia much? Fucking wingnut.

      HAH!.... I should take that as a compliement considering poster is so Paraniod as to post A/C...

      Wingnut... Wingnut... I love it... I'm gonna have to get a new username now!

      --
      --- Relax, that mass muderer is just trying to reduce our carbon footprint, one fetus at a time...
  34. Presidents and Personal Communications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is just this: If the president sends a private communication to a friend or relative, he is required to pay for it himself, and also pay for the security required or the security response needed to safeguard those friends or relatives if there is a leak. Security does not take credit, and if the security budget is expended they are required to work for free, which can cause problems not only for dependents of those security workers, but for the administration itself if it cannot allocate or justify more funds. I wouldn't want to see a Patriot Act II just so the prez could pay for his blackberry security leak messes.

  35. Is it that easy? by AdamTrace · · Score: 1

    "Somebody just has to be given the job of keeping track of the president's personal communication device."

    That's it? THAT'S the best solution?

    Is there a fallback plan if the person whose job it is makes a mistake? Or is this a job for someone who never makes mistakes?

    1. Re:Is it that easy? by AdamTrace · · Score: 1

      More...

      There's simply only one method of operations: Cell phones and PDA's WILL get lost or stolen.

      If you don't plan on that eventuality, you're sticking your head in the sand.

  36. State Govt. requires Blackberry... by Xerolooper · · Score: 3, Informative

    Working for a state agency I am required to use a Blackberry vs. a smartphone or other PDA. This is suppossedly because it is more secure and has an encryption password built in that will wipe the phone if lost.

    --
    "The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget." -Thomas Szasz
    1. Re:State Govt. requires Blackberry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite. The hardening guidelines are pretty restrictive (http://www.dsd.gov.au/library/pdfdocs/BlackBerry_Hardening_Guide_Dec07.pdf). The TOE for using a Blackberry strongly encourages you to NOT store any classified information on it (http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/files/epfiles/blackberry410-sec-e.pdf), it is rated to EAL2, in Aust. this means In-confidence material only (lowest level) not protected or above.
      When it came out in Aust. the implementation was sent out as an out-of-band notice about using them on govt systems. The very fact that they got on the approved products list wasnt driven by any security agency it was users who demanded them be available for use in accessing government systems. Implementing them is a HUGE job

    2. Re:State Govt. requires Blackberry... by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      So how does it know if it is lost ... and if it is lost can it 'phone home'.... does it like Reses Pieces ....

    3. Re:State Govt. requires Blackberry... by Xerolooper · · Score: 1

      So how does it know if it is lost ... and if it is lost can it 'phone home'.... does it like Reses Pieces ....

      Someone enters the wrong password ... yes ... never asked ...

      There is also a remote wipe command that can be sent.

      --
      "The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget." -Thomas Szasz
    4. Re:State Govt. requires Blackberry... by dremspider · · Score: 0

      It does "phone home", but to the server that you point it to, not some other server. If you use the enterprise features, you say I am going to point it to this server, and that is all that it ever looks at. Then you can kill the blackberry from that server. Once you move the server it points to, ATT or RIM or whoever can't kill the phone. It is your choice to do so as the admin of the server.

  37. Courts by residieu · · Score: 1

    . As for the legal question of whether the president can afford to put things in writing that will likely be exposed by courts and archivists later

    Shouldn't we encourage the president to be doing anything that will make it easier for courts to know what he's up to? If the courts are interested in what's on his Blackberry, it means he's suspected of something serious, and we as citizens should want to make sure the court gets all the information about it as they can.

  38. This got me thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At my current job, all e-mail entering, leaving, and within the organization are public record. Anyone can file a public records request and get all my outgoing and incoming e-mail, with confidential information redacted.

    I can check my personal e-mail from work over an SSL connection. I can receive text messages on my personal cell phone. I don't do work stuff with my personal phone and e-mail, and I don't do personal stuff with my work phone and e-mail.

    So I get elected President of the United States. I exchange text messages with my wife, friends, and family. I have a personal e-mail account at some vanilla hosting provider. Do I have to save all of this and turn it over when I leave office? Or is it considered personal, just like how now, my personal e-mail isn't public record?

  39. Let's hope he's not using a Mac by Apostata · · Score: 1

    RIM's support for OSX is hideously outdated. It's basically a set of bandage solutions so that you can do the minimum amount of syncing and media management...but not at the same time.

    --

    This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
  40. username by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just wondering, by "girl in training" do you mean transexual? If so, that's awesome. I've recently started my transition (male to female).

  41. As per the legal angle... by likerice · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not nearly that simple. Putting aside the issue of self-control, there are also many instances in which a President would want to deny ever having *received* a certain message, which is much harder to do when you check your email yourself on your Barackberry. Look at how easy it was for Bush and his senior staff to deny having received credible intelligence about a potential attack on 9/11. Had that intelligence been sent to him via email, and had he received that message on a blackberry, his administration would have been dead and buried years ago.

  42. Re:the answer is obvious.(SME PED) by clesters · · Score: 2, Informative
  43. It's an essential tool by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

    for today's President on the go.

  44. If... by jd · · Score: 1

    ...the President elected to represent his/her nation cannot afford (even with secret court hearings and time-restricted public expoosure - often in the 50-100 year region) to communicate something that might be read by another person, one should not start by asking whether they can afford to write it down. Rather, they should start by asking why such communication is taking place at all. If, even in 100 years, a Presidental instruction is too hot for the nation to handle, long after all people involved and/or targeted are dead and buried (or, at least, dead and in cryogenic storage in Area 51), then perhaps that instruction should never be issued at all.

    (If ultra-secure agencies regard 100 years as too short a time, add a 150-year rule, or a 200-year rule. The point is that future administrations may need that information for reasons of national security or national interest, and indeed are far more likely to do so to a far greater degree than any individual could possibly need to avoid personal criticism for recklessness and stupidity. Indeed, archivists are a vital ingredient in the prevention of recklessness and stupidity, whether that information is ever made available to the general public or not.)

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  45. Why a presidential Blackberry is a bad idea by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

    History records President Obama's words upon receiving news of [tragic event that has yet to occur]:

    "omg, wtf?
      no sleep 2night! cu"

  46. If i would be blackberry by drolli · · Score: 1

    I would hire a dev team experienced in developing government certified applications and extend the device in the proper way. Even it that will cost millions, it will be the best marketing invenstion ever (it seldom happens that you can bill development directly to the marketing budget). Beeing mention ten more times on slashdot (Blackberry present obama with beta-blackberry, Blackberry open some source code, gets the ceritfication, invents a new logo, pack it into a platinum-corates titanium frame erc. are worth more than ads you can seriously buy for money...)

    1. Re:If i would be blackberry by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      I know it's an asshole move to be the grammar/spelling nazi, but please tell me your finger slipped back onto the E key when spelling "being". Maybe you're just lazy and not correcting all your typos? Firefox has had spellcheck for at least two years in windows, how lazy can you be? Why, drolli, WHY?

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    2. Re:If i would be blackberry by drolli · · Score: 1

      Deifnitly. Maybe.

  47. BLACKberry by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    Call it what it is.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:BLACKberry by Mipsalawishus · · Score: 1

      Oh, I see how it is. It's because they're black..isn't it. ;-)

  48. This is why we're screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have to pay somebody to keep track of the president's cell phone? Seriously? We trust him to be run the country, but he's incapable of keeping track of his cell phone? *Billions* of people all over the world manage to keep track of their phones, but we elect the one guy too stupid to do it himself? Sounds like a real winner.

    1. Re:This is why we're screwed by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      YOUR cell phone isn't a matter of national security. Besides, we don't have to pay anyone to do just that -- it's such a small responsibility that you can add it to the job description of an already-existing employee(s). Say, perhaps, the bodyguards whose job it is to protect his life with his own?

  49. Time for a Pip-boy by Cytric · · Score: 0

    I think that would solve all the problems listed here. Anyone have any plans drawn up?

  50. Obamatard? Solution: He's the antichrist by nobodymk2 · · Score: 0

    The biblical description of the Antichrist is a prophet of peace that turns sour 3.71 years or so into his leadership or whatnaught. Whatever you want to believe in, I guess. Obamachrist! lol

    Not my fault they won't let him into the presidential guest house. He had to rent a Hotel. That's absolutely retarded for the incumbent president (which McCain publicly supported) which has publicly condoned torture and implicated the implementation of Waterboarding in GITMO on his last press interview. That's not any crime. That's a warcrime. (--Paraphrased Source: MSNBC commentary shows) I'd rather have Nixon than Bush, at least Nixon was consistently angry-toned. Obama's PhotoOps now look like he's lost his zeal or they couldn't afford their Photoshop CS4 License. He seems wiped out already but he's not yet president. He's not enjoying the celebrity life that he made up. The office of the celebrity elect. I can't understand why Obama can't look back on 2000-2008 (btw Bush stole the election! and contributed to 9/11) to move the whole country, the whole moral standings of it's people, and the whole world forward. He's certainly lost his "charisma" that got him elected but at least he doesn't need a teleprompt he just uses notecards and a glass of water. Bush can barely read a teleprompt.
    However, I really don't see where all the Hype is coming from. I think it's the republicans and conservative folk that are keeping the topic active by /replying on the forums.
    His blackberry could be modded to support hardware level encryption or remote-deletion or a ghost layer as well as password protection and autolocking.
    Or he could keep two separate devices. Bush had a cellphone but that was before Hybrid devices really kicked off. Blackberrys are meant for business people, so with a VPN and a passphrase (4-bit pin) only he knows to unlock the phone for personal calls (exempt from Phone company logging I would suppose, I don't think there's a subpeona issue here but under the wiretapping act/electronics surveillance act, all communications companies are required to keep extensive logs and recordings) and a PGP passphrase hash that changes every 10 minutes and is 1024 bits long and protected by a atomic-clock synced coder box that has a biometric lock on it. Wirelessly backed up and equipped with a small scale self-destruct device with the military encryption that changes every 10 seconds. Security plan, implemented! THIS MESSAGE WILL NOW *NO CARRIER*

    Omgsh Obama Scene Investigation (ObamaSI) folks, except the show doesn't have any actual computer scientists on it. I.e., CSI sucks too many unrealistic scenarios and too many autopsies.

    I.e., he needs to hire me!

  51. Not sure what all the fuss is about by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1

    If he is activated on a BES, then he is using the government's email server, so any required backup and logging of his email can be done there. Also, on a blackberry, if you type the password wrong too many times (default is 10, but you can reduce that) it will wipe the device memory, likewise, on a BES, the admins can do a remote wipe, so any fears of it being lost at a diner and being used are pretty small. Likewise, they can lock out lots of other items, like SMS, other apps, and I believe other email sources as well from a BES. I don't see why he can't have one once the admins lock it down.

  52. Barackberry?? by Mipsalawishus · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the engrish term for Blackberry.

  53. A Good Sign by DaMattster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I consider it a good sign that Barak Obama wants to keep his Blackberry. This, if anything, shows that he is willing to step up to a greater level of accessibility and responsibility. It is certainly a feather in his cap. Plus, I am sure RIM can develop a special Blackberry device that will allow Obama to safely have classified material transmitted to him.

  54. No One Cared About Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This wasn't news when Bush was in office and he used a cell phone and a PDA too.

    Bush did not receive anywhere near the level of scrutiny that Obama is now under.

    First, the election debacle took our attention away.

    Second, the culture at the time was not one that approved of criticism of a president-elect. We were supposed to "rally" behind our new leader, remember?

    Third, Republicans historically are not held to as high standards as Democrats. (I'm sorry if that sounds trollish, but it's true!)

    Now, with a Democrat preparing to take office during a time of extreme skepticism every little detail is paraded before us as a potential scandal. It's a good thing overall. I'd rather hear about Obama's Blackberry than about celebrity exploits.

    1. Re:No One Cared About Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Third, Republicans historically are not held to as high standards as Democrats. (I'm sorry if that sounds trollish, but it's true!)

      Because Reagan got tons of adoration while he was in office and was never investigated... Ford, why, he was treated like the shining knight that he was. Mixon, was practically worshiped by the media and Congress (forget that whole being forced out of office thing). Contrast that to the media constantly covering for and promoting JFK out of adoration. How about the treatment of Sarah Palin versus Joe "flub a day" Biden during this past election? There was an order of magnitude more coverage about Palin even when half the stuff she was accused of didn't even come out of her mouth.

      Or if you want to get out of Presidential politics, compare Mark Foley to Gerry Studds or the almost deafening silence on Foley's successor's affairs. Larry Craig? Trent Lott being forced to step down as Majority Senate Leader for telling Strom Thurmond that it would have been nice if he won the election versus Robert Byrd's KKK connections and Joe Biden's comments about the Indians running all the stores in Delaware. Ted Stevens and his "tubes" comment in these parts compared to the defenders that come out every time someone mentions Al Gore inventing the internet?

      It's all a matter of perspective. You likely identify with the Democrats, so you take criticism of them more personally, while simultaneously brushing off the criticism of Republicans as not as bad because they deserve it (and more) in your eyes. Maybe what you said sounds trollish because it is trollish.

  55. Re:Left Behind Impossible? Remember the football! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh, but this is obama. he's right up there with jesus. he's not just another human.

  56. insane encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I imagine some type of self destruct feature would be necessary, in addition to insane encryption.

    By "insane" I presume you mean "CALEA-compliant."

  57. Just think the first war directed by Blackberry. by John+Sokol · · Score: 1

    Or the first peace treaty over E-mail via Blackberry.

    There could be all kinds of interesting firsts. I just love the fact that we have a president that actually has used the Internet first hand!!!

    A president that can Google something for himself before making a decision.

    Best of all he knows it's more then just a series of Tubes!

    When I was a young hacker we actually got Regan on the phone while he was President. If only I actully would have had something to say. Instead we were just a bunch of scared kids getting a thrill.

    I am just waiting till some one get's Obama's E-mail addresses.

    For some young hacker this could either end up with a prison sentence or a cabinet position.

    And just think presidential spam, soon he will have his fill of cheap Viagra adds. Then maybe we will see these spammers get there just dues.

    I wonder if Obama@whitehouse.gov will work?

    --
    I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. - Pablo Picasso
  58. I can't believe this is even an issue. by HerculesMO · · Score: 1

    Make it a 30 second screen lock, and if you find you lost it, do a remote wipe.

    I don't see how that is so damned complicated. Even if he loses it people keep track of everything "Mr. President, you have your socks, shoes, tie, OMG NO BLACKBERRY CALL THE IT DUDES!!!111!!!"

    In a few moments the BB will be wiped, and with tracing software can be located. Solder the SIM in and it's easy to find too.

    Jeez.

    --
    The price is always right if someone else is paying.
  59. Re:racism! by John+Sokol · · Score: 1

    Oh man, I think that's funny, let me ask some of my darker skinned brethren just to be sure.

    I don't think this parent should be modded down though.

    For god sakes everyone, it's not like everyone had to stop telling Irish jokes after JFK took office.

    It's the spirit of the Joke that's important. I don't think this one was mean spirited. It is making fun of "political correctness" more then race.

    --
    I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. - Pablo Picasso
  60. Records retention won't be a problem by Quila · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Simply because the press won't push it as a problem. Rove using RNC accounts for business? Palin using online mail? Major scandal. Obama using private accounts for government business? Don't worry about it, he likes his Blackberry.

    1. Re:Records retention won't be a problem by DelgadoRandom · · Score: 1

      Re (specifically): Palin's use of Hotmail. Wasn't so much a major scandal, more it fed into the snowbilly caricature that was forming about her, and it wouldn't have been an issue beyond being sort of goofy, if she hadn't been using it to exert some pretty official pressure regarding getting that dude fired. So, yeah, Obama using a blackberry is different.

  61. Executive Power by witherstaff · · Score: 1

    After the Bush executive branch 'lost' millions of emails in violation of the Presidential Records Act, and will probably never have a bit of legal trouble of their actions, why does legality matter?

    Obama wants to bring change to the country then demand that laws get upheld and bring those to task who disregarded the Records Act millions of times. Don't want to tarnish a past President then at least disbar the white house counsel which may have known about it under Gonzales. Otherwise don't try to grandstand that you're following the law since it doesn't have any teeth whatsoever to be followed. Kinda like those other Dumb laws that were never taken off the books.

    1. Re:Executive Power by fm6 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're taking it as a given that those missing emails got trashed on purpose. But this is the kind of IT screwup that happens every day. Innocent until proven guilty, yada yada. Like so many things that have happened in the last eight years, that episode deserves to be observed with Hanlon's Razor in mind. Really, GWB is the poster child for that principle.

      I admit that the Bush administration has a pretty bad record when it comes to obeying the law. But their usual strategy is to hide behind weird legal theories that don't stand up in court (an outcome that any sane lawyer would predict). They're simply not competent enough to succeed at the kind of conspiratorial skullduggery you give them credit for.

    2. Re:Executive Power by Boronx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're taking it as a given that those missing emails got trashed on purpose. But this is the kind of IT screwup that happens every day.

      You're putting the federal government at the same level as a newbie IT team with no budget.

      Innocent until proven guilty, yada yada. That's the proof standard for a conviction, not an investigation. In any case, we already know the data was destroyed.

      Like so many things that have happened in the last eight years, that episode deserves to be observed with Hanlon's Razor in mind. Really, GWB is the poster child for that principle.

      Hanlon's razor has no intellectual basis. It is a guide for interpersonal relationships, not a tool for getting at the truth.
      Besides, how much benefit of the doubt does one man get?

      I admit that the Bush administration has a pretty bad record when it comes to obeying the law. But their usual strategy is to hide behind weird legal theories that don't stand up in court (an outcome that any sane lawyer would predict). They're simply not competent enough to succeed at the kind of conspiratorial skullduggery you give them credit for.

      Can you really be unaware about how ruthlessly effective they've been at accruing power, stealing money, and breaking the law?

      Do you really think these guys don't know how to keep a secret? If so, a few billion of us would like answers to the following.

      What did the Whitehouse decided about torture?
      Why were the US Attorney's fired?
      What is the nature and what is the purpose of the illegal wire tapping operation?
      Where did the billions of dollars in cash that disappeared into Army planes go to?
      Who is in CIA secret prisons?
      What nation's agents were in contact with the 9/11 terrorists?
      What happened to the bailout money?
      Why does the administration fight efforts to investigate war profiteers?
      Why the hell did we invade Iraq, anyway?

      And most importantly (and what incidentally blows Hanlon's Razor, surely the dullest razor ever devised, out of the water):
      Why didn't the Bush admin do anything to correct these crimes and punish the criminals?

  62. homing beacon? by firewood · · Score: 1

    I don't think the Secret Service is going to let the prez carry around a homing device with a known frequency and easily traceable/trackable radio fingerprint. They're going to force him to use some military pocket radio device capable of anti-detection countermeasures.

    Maybe his White House legal counsel will allow him to relay his SMS messages though this magic device and some White House firewall before going into the cloud... or Canada.

    .

  63. My Solution: Biometric ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The deal is, anything on the President's personal blackberry is likely to have two characteristics:
    1) It is confidential; i.e., it is very bad if an unauthorized person gets ahold of it
    2) It is NOT integral; i.e., it is not very bad if all the information is lost

    Therefore the solution is to encrypt everything on it, add a biometric fingerprint scanner, and automatically erase all the data if the biometric ID authentication fails.

    I don't actually know whether RIM has the technology to do that, but even if they have to have custom-build one for the President it would be a huge PR coup.

    Of course, it would probably have to be a custom job anyway, since (I don't think) it would be allowed to route mail through RIM's servers. But I don't have a BB, don't know how much about how it works, and could be totally wrong on this (especially if the mails themselves are encrypted).

  64. Re:self destruct feature by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    News Flash: President Obama was killed today when he accidentally miss-keyed the self desctruct feature of his Blackberry as he put it back into his pocket....

  65. Secure Blackberries by Sniper98G · · Score: 1

    I don't know about white house comm. But; in the Air Force we are beginning to have to support specially designed blackberry like devices that not only support all of your conventional on the go services but also classified voice and data, like this this one. I don't know why seemingly every Colonel General in the Air Force can have one of these but the president couldn't

  66. So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We ignore he was born in Kenya, yet give a fuck that he uses a blackberry.

  67. Security is more than encryption by PPH · · Score: 1

    The Secret Service doesn't want the POTUS carrying around a transmitter with a unique ID that can be monitored and used to track his movements. Knowing the contents of his communications isn't the only security concern they have.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  68. Let's see here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're posting a Bush insult on /., and he's still the most powerful man in the world. And you still live in your parents' basement. I'd say Bush has been more successful than you could ever dream to be... even if you do manage to move out of your parents' basement. Get a life and stop worshiping the one who's take our country down the toilet like Chicago.

    1. Re:Let's see here... by biocute · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      he's still the most powerful man in the world. And you still live in your parents' basement.

      Things might change when Bush has moved out of the White House. Who knows where he's moving into.

      "W, come up for dinner!"

      Or maybe the White House?

    2. Re:Let's see here... by JWSmythe · · Score: 2, Funny

          Funny, your IP resolves to something at eop.gov.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    3. Re:Let's see here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny how insulting Bush = (5) Funny, and defending him = (-1) Troll.

      I guess I'd need to say something insulting, like "at least Bush's thumbs aren't dragging on the ground"

  69. Could just have an open presidency by ddt · · Score: 1

    He could always go insecure and just have an open Presidency, per his campaign promises.

    Honestly, it would be a lot better for the country if he did. He would then have a lot more eyeballs on the country's issues, and as a great Finn once said, "With many eyeballs, all problems become shallow."

    I like Obama and voted for him, but it takes balls, bigger ones than I think he has.

  70. VPN, IMAP, and NSA. Next question by MacColossus · · Score: 1

    Use VPN for security. IMAP for email so all email can be saved from the server. Any texting or other items that fall through the crack are being captured by the NSA's domestic wiretapping program. They can just be polite and forward that to the Library of Congress for public record. Solved. Next problem. :-)

  71. Don't forget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A blackberry can locate the president.

  72. Here's what I think by Sam36 · · Score: 0

    A couple weeks ago, while browsing around the library downtown, I had to take a piss. As I entered the john, Barack Obama -- the messiah himself -- came out of one of the booths. I stood at the urinal looking at him out of the corner of my eye as he washed his hands. He didn't once look at me. He was busy and in any case I was sure the secret service wouldn't even let me shake his hand.

    As soon as he left I darted into the booth he'd vacated, hoping there might be a lingering smell of shit and even a seat still warm from his sturdy ass. I found not only the smell but the shit itself. He'd forgotten to flush. And what a treasure he had left behind. Three or four beautiful specimens floated in the bowl. It apparently had been a fairly dry, constipated shit, for all were fat, stiff, and ruggedly textured. The real prize was a great feast of turd -- a nine inch gastrointestinal triumph as thick as his cock -- or at least as I imagined it!

    I knelt before the bowl, inhaling the rich brown fragrance and wondered if I should obey the impulse building up inside me. I'd always been a liberal democrat and had been on the Obama train since last year. Of course I'd had fantasies of meeting him, sucking his cock and balls, not to mention sucking his asshole clean, but I never imagined I would have the chance. Now, here I was, confronted with the most beautiful five-pound turd I'd ever feasted my eyes on, a sausage fit to star in any fantasy and one I knew to have been hatched from the asshole of Barack Obama, the chosen one.

    Why not? I plucked it from the bowl, holding it with both hands to keep it from breaking. I lifted it to my nose. It smelled like rich, ripe limburger (horrid, but thrilling), yet had the consistency of cheddar. What is cheese anyway but milk turning to shit without the benefit of a digestive tract?

    I gave it a lick and found that it tasted better then it smelled.

    I hesitated no longer. I shoved the fucking thing as far into my mouth as I could get it and sucked on it like a big half nigger cock, beating my meat like a madman. I wanted to completely engulf it and bit off a large chunk, flooding my mouth with the intense, bittersweet flavor. To my delight I found that while the water in the bowl had chilled the outside of the turd, it was still warm inside. As I chewed I discovered that it was filled with hard little bits of something I soon identified as peanuts. He hadn't chewed them carefully and they'd passed through his body virtually unchanged. I ate it greedily, sending lump after peanutty lump sliding scratchily down my throat. My only regret was that Barack Obama wasn't there to see my loyalty and wash it down with his piss.

    I soon reached a terrific climax. I caught my cum in the cupped palm of my hand and drank it down. Believe me, there is no more delightful combination of flavors than the hot sweetness of cum with the rich bitterness of shit. It's even better than listening to an Obama speech!

    Afterwards I was sorry that I hadn't made it last longer. But then I realized that I still had a lot of fun in store for me. There was still a clutch of virile turds left in the bowl. I tenderly fished them out, rolled them into my handkerchief, and stashed them in my briefcase. In the week to come I found all kinds of ways to eat the shit without bolting it right down. Once eaten it's gone forever unless you want to filch it third hand out of your own asshole. Not an unreasonable recourse in moments of desperation or simple boredom.

    I stored the turds in the refrigerator when I was not using them but within a week they were all gone. The last one I held in my mouth without chewing, letting it slowly dissolve. I had liquid shit trickling down my throat for nearly four hours. I must have had six orgasms in the process.

    I often think of Barack Obama dropping solid gold out of his sweet, pink asshole every day, never knowing what joy it could, and at least once did, bring to a grateful democrat.

  73. Why should the President have secrets anyway? by Money+for+Nothin' · · Score: 1

    This is the man touting his "transparency" with the American public. Those of us who think the man is little more than a very slick used-car salesman (who has long-since oversold his case and has since his election been trying to back-down his true-believers and the media lapdogs who bend to his every whim) in a nice suit will laugh at the notion that he will actually be usefully-transparent with us. But, like his legions of naive believers, let's idealistically assume those Obammunists have their way.

    So what? If Rod Blagojevich, Mayor Daley, and the rest of the Chicago crew -- that den of thieves of Crook County from which Barack is emerging -- haven't convinced you that more transparency in government is needed, nothing will.

    Despite the more-limited powers enumerated by the Constitution, the Presidency has devolved into too-important a job to be entrusted to a single individual, ever. The POTUS, by design, is not a King. IMO, there is no email, phone call, written document, or word spoken, or any other moment in the President's life which should not be recorded and made available for all to see on the Internet (and though it would be popular for the purpose of outrage, I doubt there is much titillation to be had from Clinton's moments with Monica). *That* is true transparency -- the likes of which we will never see under any administration, ever -- not in the wildest fantasies of David Brin.

    I could make exceptions for specific, i.e. technical details (dates, times, locations, force vectors, etc.) of ongoing or planned military offensives. But general discussions of such offensives? No (not that its lack is generally a concern anymore, given the evolved state of media attention towards governments).

  74. Hiding MS role in the changeover failures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why? Because the changeover is in a world of hurt due very much in part to use of MS products in place of mail servers and file servers. A lot of smoke is needed to hide MS role in the loss and misorganization of federal records during the changeover. Focusing on the Blackberry does a good job of that and grabs attention easily.

  75. couldn't leave it? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    As if a President has never left something crucially important behind before. Like, for instance, when Presidents have left the Nuclear Football carriers behind, forgetting about them for quite a while.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  76. A great deal of authority by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, the last 8 years definitely taught us that.

  77. switched blackberry by doubleshot · · Score: 1

    Could you really tell if Obama switched blackberries midstream and started writing emails that weren't documented. we have this rule to preserve checks and balances and the freedom of information acts. if it's written, it must be recorded. somehow you all miss the point, the president chooses advisors, those advisors come to him with information, he makes decisions based on that information. running the united states is a big task, last thing i want his our president wasting his time googling or making youtube videos. i can just see the presidential blog now... there's plenty of other things obama needs to worry about than having a blackberry, for christ sake he's got a personal assistant that follows him around everywhere, that's his own real live flesh blackberry.

    --
    TechColumnist.com -- http://www.techcolumnist.com
    Looking for avid moderators and posters that want to contribute!
  78. Re:Left Behind Impossible? Remember the football! by Repossessed · · Score: 1

    No, they left behind the aide who carried the football. The football was right where it was supposed to be, with the aid who kept track of it.

    --
    Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
  79. Sample transcript from the National Archives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Barack: OMG, WTF w Iran

    Biden: LOL maybe UR BFF HC can holla

    Barack: Word

    1. Re:Sample transcript from the National Archives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Biden: Back in 1921, I watched FDR stand up and give a speech to the nation on live TV... Oh hey, Barack! You're surprisingly clean and well-spoken for a negroid.

      There, fixed that for you.

  80. Infosec by shilly · · Score: 1

    It's interesting that the author thinks there's no real infosec issues. I don't think they've shown that at all. You can have all the fancy-shmancy encryption you like on the president's device, but it doesn't matter worth a damn unless the same encryption exists on the devices of all the people that the president is going to be sending messages to. And that's a lot of mobile devices to keep secure.

    Additionally, the idea that you can solve many issues by saying pragmatically "well, the president will just have to not use it except for low-security matters" just ignores what we know about how humans use IT. There's no very obvious dividing line between low-security and high-security matters -- lots of things exist in the fuzzy middle -- and inevitably, the president will be tempted to use the device to do real work, which will mean treating more and more of the fuzzy middle as low-security.

  81. Change we can believe in by Lensman · · Score: 1

    I think the matter should be quite clear. If President-elect Obama thinks that using this device would let him do his job job more efficiently then he has a responsibility to do so.

    It would also go a long way to saying (as he himself said on Meet The Press the other day when talking about CIA officials) that he is going to focus on getting the job done, and not about covering thing up from lawyers.

    Lastly it makes for a great step in trying to repair the image of the executive branch of US government in that the presumption is that what he writes doesn't NEED to be censored from public scrutiny.

  82. left behind.....bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Somebody just has to be given the job of keeping track of the president's personal communication device." Well somebody is in charge of carrying the football (nuclear launch codes) And they have been "left" behind by many presidents!

  83. Emailing his friends in Chicago like Blago & R by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now THOSE would be interesting emails, and no doubt ones the public would have the right to know about.

  84. Wrong subject... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should have titled your post, "Obama's dingleberry dilemma."

  85. wait a minute! by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    Funny, I think it should be obvious to him alone why he should not use such a device.
    If everywhere you go, you need a secure line to talk to someone, or a cell, then you use that...
    the blackberry is for people that have constantly people nagging them with emails and text messages, he will have someone do filtering on that for him, to know what he should be spending his precious time on, ....I see people all day on a blackberry, without ever accomplishing real work,
    yet it now becomes obvious it takes up too much time in their day for them to be productive.

    I don't see the president having time to do any blackberrying.
    I can see him sending a text message to his wife or kids to tell them he misses them, that would be ok, but the truth is, aside from that, if someone knows you have a blackberry, they will use that first to contact you, and his day will be spent with every politician using that to contact him , instead of the regular filtered channels.

    Its not even a security issue, more then it is a productive one.
    Ok for family, but everything else nay!

  86. regarding leaving the device behind... by mzs · · Score: 1

    Princess Beatrice recently had her car stolen while she was under full security detail. One of the security people should have noticed that she left the keys in the car, but no one did.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/theroyalfamily/4165229/Thieves-steal-Princess-Beatrices-BMW-after-she-left-keys-in-ignition.html

  87. TMobile is problematic too. by sjbe · · Score: 1

    He can switch to an Android device...

    Since there is pretty much one Android device that means the only option is TMobile which is owned by Deutsche Telekom. Somehow presidential communications going through a foreign controlled mobile phone operator seems like just as bad an idea as using RIM which routes traffic through Canada. I guess they could switch it to AT&T if needed.

  88. What about a SecretServiceBerry? by keithpreston · · Score: 1

    Here a good idea, let's issues a 3G laptop with a certified secure mail program on it to one of the Secret Service agents that follows him around all day. Then when they get an e-mail he can be timely alerted and he could dictate all responses to said SecretServiceBerry. Problem solved. In fact this is better then a blackberry, because you have a larger device to use. The only reason to carry a blackberry is because typically smaller devices are less of a hassle, no so with a SecretServiceBerry.

  89. But...but... by Chicken_Kickers · · Score: 1

    if the President has nothing to hide, then he shouldn't be worried right?

    1. Re:But...but... by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Everybody has something to hide.

  90. eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is everyone just skirting over this or is it me? It doesn't matter if he had a HTC WM device, or a Palm or BlackBerry the issue is what he uses the device for.

    There are multiple ways of securing many mobile devices, BlackBerry just happens to be easy, fast and very granular. RIM's NOC's make this possible.

    In essence if you really wanted to you could hack the wireless side of things, or just wait until he left it somewhere/steal it, bung it in a Faraday cage and remove the data manually (although Iâ(TM)ve never found any info on how RIM employ data destruction methods to the NVRAM, Iâ(TM)ve been told by RIM on a training course if you attempt to remove the NVRAM chip to access the data externally, and your using content protection the chip will destroy its contents immediately â" love it if someone had any proper tech info on this but since its probably propriety I donâ(TM)t think anyone would.)

    Basically if he wasn't so addicted to his mobile device and as such using it for many different things it probably wouldn't be a problem. But the risk mitigation based on how much he uses his BBerry is nion-impossible.

    This isnâ(TM)t an issue with RIM or BB or mobile communications; itâ(TM)s what Obama uses mobile communications for.

  91. Get over it already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All communications by the president are confidential. A written note, until cleared as otherwise, is treated as top-secret. The potus-elect, and the media making this mountain, need to get over it and accept the position for what it is. For god sakes, put the crackberry down.

  92. VaporStream and Confidential Messaging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    VaporStream, A Chicago-based technology company focused on confidential messaging and corporate confidentiality, appears to have already solved this problem.

    They offer a free 90 day trial on their website:

    https://www.vaporstream.com/

  93. Different security question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought the secret service weren't too happy about the president carrying a radio transmitter routinely.

  94. Unsecure Blackberry? Are you serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a Blackberry Technician who has had training from RIM (I live and work in Australia), I understand how these things work.

    As long as Barack connects to a BES (Blackberry Enterprise Server), all communication is secure between the Handset and the Blackberry Server (3DES - I dont think this is supported in the USA though as the FBI cant break it! LOL!).
    Since the data on the Blackberry is A COPY of that on the mail and to some extent the Blackberry server (ie browsing the net on the BB goes through the BES's MDS), then there is no security issue.

    Barack simply has to put up with Connecting to a BES with a strict IT Policy which downloads onto the HH to ensure security is maintained (and the IT Policy can log down programs and hardware to ensure only certain portions of the HH are used).

    If he looses the device then the BES can simply issue a Lock command, wipe command or Kill command so no one can get access to it or use it under any circumstances...

    Security issues? I dont think so... More like they CANT read his personal emails - thats more likely to be the issue!!!

  95. Maybe he'll use his Blackberry for official biz by Quila · · Score: 1

    Like firing prosecutors. Like if he fired Fitzgerald and the Blago prosecution kind of stalled, questions into contacts with Obama not asked. But the decision making behind the firing was not accessible by FOIA or Congress. To me that makes a huge scandal possibly worthy of impeachment. It would go nowhere if that did happen. It would be deemed not newsworthy, not worthy of criminal investigation.

  96. Goebbels mods at /.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gotta love fascists. Truth is now modded Flamebait.