Slashdot Mirror


Obama Keeps His Blackberry (And Gets a Sectera)

InternetVoting writes "After all the controversy surrounding Obama's Blackberry, word has come that he will get to keep it. Few details are available and neither the National Security Agency nor the White House are talking. The current rumor is that the Blackberry will be used exclusively for personal use and a Sectera Edge will be used for official communications."

36 of 365 comments (clear)

  1. gotta keep 'em separated by characterZer0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Kinda like rnc.org for personal use and whitehouse.gov for official communications?

    --
    Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    1. Re:gotta keep 'em separated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or yahoo.com for personal and yahoo.com for official communications?

    2. Re:gotta keep 'em separated by Squeeonline · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'll be waiting for his Sectera (which runs Window mobile) to get a BSOD

      { guantanamo.exe has performed an illegal operation and will now close. guantanamo.exe must be closed }

      12 months later...

      {It appears that you have not yet closed guantanemo.exe }
      [Ignore][Retry][Cancel]

  2. Should be interesting... by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The main reason for the President himself to not to have something like a personal BlackBerry or other personal communications devices -- ones which is he is publicly known to have, anyway -- is simply the high-profile nature and symbolism of the target. It doesn't matter that other federal agencies and the military use them for one purpose or another.

    This is the case even with all the compelling "finger on the pulse of [insert subject du jour here]" and Information Age tempo arguments. The fact is that the President will have an army of aides who can all have their fingers directly on the multitude of things that the President cares about and needs to know about.

    And in the event that a case is made, internal to the administration, that the President -- now or in the future -- really needs to have his own personal communications device(s), that fact in itself -- not to mention the specific equipment and carriers -- doesn't need to be, and, frankly, shouldn't be, publicly disclosed.

    Also, from the article:

    Obama and other officials won't be able to use Instant Messaging in the White House.

    This is for a variety of reasons, but security is not necessarily one of them. For example, an IM service offered by the DNI's Intelligence Community Enterprise Solutions group does provide instant messaging services using the open Jabber protocol up to the TOP SECRET/SCI level.

    1. Re:Should be interesting... by diersing · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I just hope they cross the GPS signal with another device that is, you know, not tracking the President's exact location.

    2. Re:Should be interesting... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Grrr.. Slashdot ate my link again.

    3. Re:Should be interesting... by SerpentMage · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can buy the top secret nature of the device. That is a legitimate concern. I also agree that his safety is important.

      But to not have a personal device because he is the "President" is pure crap! Since when did the "President" become royalty? So what that he is the leader of the USA, he is just another HUMAN...

      And I am tempted to believe he thinks the same way.

      The argument of the president having aides is exactly the problem of royalty and how their heads were cut off. When a human surrounds themselves with "aides" they surround themselves with "yes-men".

      What I think Obama wants is to not loose contact to the people who got him into office in the first place. And THAT I find commendable.

      I actually have a real problem with the need for "security" in a government where I elected them. The government is the people, and I want complete transparency. The government asks transparency of the financial community, and the car industry. Where is the transparency of the government?

      I happen to like direct democracy because it keeps the politicians close to the people.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    4. Re:Should be interesting... by crmarvin42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the need for security does not stem from fear of those that elected him, but from fear of foreign interests getting their hands on sensitive information. I could care less if China, Al-Queda, Russia, etc. get their hands on his emails from his wife. I do care if any of them were to get their hands on sensitive information like internal comments about on-going negotiations on pending legislate, trade agreements, or human rights issues.

      --
      Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
    5. Re:Should be interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      You. Are. William. Shatner.

      AICMFP.

    6. Re:Should be interesting... by samkass · · Score: 5, Informative

      Rush Limbaugh is quoted on record as saying he wants Obama to fail, and is proud of it.

      TRANSCRIPT
      "If I wanted Obama to succeed, I'd be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he's talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don't want this to work. So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails." (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here's the point. Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, "Oh, you can't do that." Why not? Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don't care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." Somebody's gotta say it. "
      END TRANSCRIPT

      --
      E pluribus unum
    7. Re:Should be interesting... by theaveng · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whatever. "I am the head of the Executive Branch. I will use my crackberry, and you will find a way to make me untraceable just the same as you found a way for me to walk down a D.C. street without getting shot. Is that clear?" "Yes Mr. President."

      The end.

      Probably the solution is as simple as, "Don't use your Blackberry's wireless connection." But I don't know; that's what security experts are for. Everyday I see Congressmen using cellphones; if those can be secure enough to carry day-to-day government business, why not other wireless devices?

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    8. Re:Should be interesting... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Whatever. "I am the head of the Executive Branch. I will use my crackberry, and you will find a way to make me untraceable just the same as you found a way for me to walk down a D.C. street without getting shot. Is that clear?" "Yes Mr. President."

      The end.

      Probably the solution is as simple as, "Don't use your Blackberry's wireless connection." But I don't know; that's what security experts are for. Everyday I see Congressmen using cellphones; if those can be secure enough to carry day-to-day government business, why not other wireless devices?

      Chickenhead congressmen aren't really privy to the sort of information the president is. And securing a crackberry is like trying to secure a paper bag. No president is going to be so stupid as to demand that. The government doesn't control RIM, so they are in no position to change the nature of the communications protocol, no matter what the president demands. A crackberry can't be made secure. That's why they have companies like General Dynamics making Sectera secure phones.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    9. Re:Should be interesting... by Trapick · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The government doesn't control RIM

      No, they don't...but if they get a call from the new president saying "gosh, I'd love to use a Blackberry, giving you rocking publicity, if only it could be nice and secure..." I have a feeling they'll work closely with the secret service on getting it right,

    10. Re:Should be interesting... by AlecC · · Score: 5, Informative

      The don't broadcast their GPS location, but they are in continuous communication with several cell controllers so they can hand over seamlessly as you move from cell to cell. And as they do so, they automatically regulate their transmit power level so that it only just reaches the controller, in order to minimise spill-over to other cells and hence minimise the number of bufer cells before you can re-use the same frequencies.

      And, since power is inversely proportion to the square of distance, that actually means the cell controller knows how far away you are. Three such controllers, you can triangulate and find out where you are. And this happens all the time.

      Used by the police in the UK when two girls were murdered. One of their mobile phones was last switched off outside the murderers house.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    11. Re:Should be interesting... by geekmux · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ...But to not have a personal device because he is the "President" is pure crap! Since when did the "President" become royalty? So what that he is the leader of the USA, he is just another HUMAN...

      This has nothing to do with the man himself (he puts his pants on the same way you and I do, one leg at a time), it has to do with the position and respecting the security involved. It's been quite some time since harm has come to the man in that position, and there's damn good Security policy and procedure in place that can attest to that. Certain things you should probably have to give up when you step into those shoes, including your beloved Crackberry.

      Chances are you work for a company who filters porn sites. Are you sitting back there making the same asinine arguement that "just because I'm at work I can't surf porn?!?" I would hope not. Again, it has little to do with you, it has to do with protecting the company.

      I actually have a real problem with the need for "security" in a government where I elected them. The government is the people, and I want complete transparency.

      With regards to the "security" being referenced here (a personal communications device), it has more to do with INFOSEC, OPSEC, and PHYSSEC than anything else.

      I believe the last time a President did not want any "security" encroaching upon him was Lincoln. Unfortunately, we all know how that turned out for him.

    12. Re:Should be interesting... by blincoln · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, they don't...but if they get a call from the new president saying "gosh, I'd love to use a Blackberry, giving you rocking publicity, if only it could be nice and secure..." I have a feeling they'll work closely with the secret service on getting it right,

      The BlackBerry model by design is insecure (from a national security perspective). All of the data communication is routed through systems owned by a Canadian corporation (RIM). They claim it's encrypted end-to-end. I've seen enough of their backend applications (in the form of the BlackBerry "Enterprise" Server) to suspect that even if the communication is encrypted, it would be trivial for someone at RIM to decrypt it.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
  3. DoD use Blackberries by OffTheLip · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since Obama is commander in chief of the military shouldn't he be able to use the same technology (Blackberry) they use? If our national defense is entrusted to a product why would that not be good enough for the boss?

  4. So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by tjstork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It turns out, that, after trashing Bush and Cheney for eight years for not making all of their communications public, the first thing the new Democratic President does is get for himself a means of making private communications based on his word that it will be for personal use only.

    Frankly, I don't dispute the right of any President to have secret communications. He needs to be judged by his work product and not be constantly subject to the Congress. It was wrong for Republicans to harrass Clinton during his Presidency and it was wrong for Bush to be harrassed as well. IT's not because, ideally, the President is above the law, but it is because, he (or she!), is not subjugated to the Congress. They are equal branches of government.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by AdmiralXyz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No one is complaining about Bush's private communications with his family and friends, which is presumably what Obama will continue to use his Blackberry for. That information can and should remain private. The "Bush-trashing" is coming from the refusal of the Bush administration to release communications between, say, administration and intelligence officials, which can and should be a matter of public record, and probably contain a great deal of enlightening information on the administration's many illegal activities (torture, wiretapping, etc.)

      --
      Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
    2. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by jmyers · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The big problem with email and any recorded communication really is that is can be used to craft almost any story you want to tell. Your enemies will always want access to all of your communications. This way they can edit them and release to the public in a way to paint a picture of you using your own words.

      Many people have been slandered this way for many years. So much that you would think that the general public could tell the difference between propaganda and reality. The problem remains that people believe what they want to hear and discount anything they don't want to hear. Give them an irrelevant email out of context and they will eat it up.

      I would recommended against any public figure using email.

    3. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by tjstork · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So goes our karma into off topic land. I think it should be in slashdot that any technical post is NEVER off topic!

      I'll bite. No. Which shell can?

      Powershell for Windows does. It can do this because in Powershell the operating principal of piping is not a text stream but rather collections of objects. In the case of my signature statement,

      ls |where {$_.Length -gt 2000}|format-table Name, Length

      Powershell returns a list of file objects, then, applies the filter function where to it, and the notation $_ is obviously ripped off from Perl, and -gt, well, is to avoid ambiguity I guess with the redirection operator (cheesy parser, anyone?), and then, that gets you a list of filtered file objects. That list then is pumped through the format-table operator, which, uses the name and length arguments to project the given list into a table of just name and length columns.

      It's a pretty big advancement in shell technology, for sure, but its not so fancy or capital intensive that a bright person could not make a better FOSS version for Linux.

      --
      This is my sig.
    4. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by tjstork · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My point is that, as soon as you allow the President to have a means of making "private" communications, then don't you think he or she would use that to keep his or her own deliberations secret? Your guys are chasing after Bush on a presumption of guilt of something, and you demand a right to all of his communications because they exist and prove your point. If Obama were to fall under the same accusations, there's no way that those communications could ever even exist, and therefor, it makes it impossible to even bother trying to go after him. He's got a relatively blank check now, that Bush never had. That's my point.

      My other point is, I think its good that the President have something of a blank check because the last 16 years of Clinton/Bush subpoenas and evidence gathering did little more than to undermine the power of the Presidency relative to the Congress, and right now, the Congress is completely out of control. The job of the Congress is to manage legislation and the federal purse and its failed at both. Meanwhile, it blames its own failures on the Presidency and thus , its not only wrecking itself, it wants to drag another branch of government down with it.

      The bottom line is, Dick Cheney is right. The Presidency needs to be more powerful relative to the Congress, and that is why Obama should get to keep his Blackberry, and -gasp-, even a cell phone, if he could get a secure one.

      --
      This is my sig.
    5. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My point is that, as soon as you allow the President to have a means of making "private" communications, then don't you think he or she would use that to keep his or her own deliberations secret?

      Ok. Where do you draw the line? The President can't use a non-official phone? The President cannot ever be alone with somebody? The President cannot write a birthday card to his Auntie Mabel without a copy going into the permanant record?

      After all, 'best birthday wishes' might be code for 'buy Haliburton; we's invadin' another o'l country!' and 'best wishes on your birthday' might be code for 'sell Microsoft; we're sending Gates to Guantanamo tomorrow!'

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    6. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by Orne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't worry, the press will treat this as fairly as they did when it was revealed that Governor Palin of Alaska had an email account for work use, and a separate email account for home use.

    7. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by BobMcD · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Where do you draw the line?

      Here's my line:

      Is he still the President? Record everything.

      No longer the President? Stop recording.

      Its a volunteer position, and he is there to serve us, not the other way around.

      Don't confuse President with CEO.

    8. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by WindowlessView · · Score: 4, Insightful

      the last 16 years of Clinton/Bush subpoenas and evidence gathering did little more than to undermine the power of the Presidency relative to the Congress, and right now, the Congress is completely out of control.

      Forget about the Blackberry/phone stuff, what parallel universe did you just jet in from?

      The bottom line is, Dick Cheney is right. The Presidency needs to be more powerful relative to the Congress,

      Yeah, screw that whole balance of power thing the founders set up. It's inconvenient.

      --
      Leave the gun, take the cannolis.
    9. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by tjstork · · Score: 3, Informative

      The tax cheat is getting the pass because he's the only guy in the Federal Reserve that correctly forecast the financial meltdown BEFORE it took place. In another time, there's no way he gets the nomination, but, since the whole economy is melting down, being the smartest guy in the room actually matters more than paying your taxes on time.

      --
      This is my sig.
    10. Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... by sandbenders · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the last 16 years of Clinton/Bush subpoenas and evidence gathering did little more than to undermine the power of the Presidency relative to the Congress

      I think if anything, the last 16 years has done the opposite- the power of congress (the *only directly elected representatives* we have in Washington) has been greatly diminished compared to the the presidency.

      The congress used to have exclusive rights to the declaration of war, yet neither of the last two wars (nor any since WWII) were 'declared' by the congress and indeed would have proceeded without their approval.

      The congress used to have the 'power of the purse' yet when they declined to prop up the car companies the president did it anyway.

      The congress used to have not just the power to oversee, but the *responsibility* for oversight. Yet when they asked to see documents concerning various potential violations of the law, including items regarding the outing of Valerie Plame, CIA interrogation techniques, warrantless wiretapping etc. the President refused to acknowledge their subpoenas.

      I for one want my directly elected representatives to be given their power back. I have some respect for Obama, and I hope that he will have the balls to put the power back where it belongs.

      Or in /. terms: Obama- please be Galadriel, not Saruman. Thanks.

      --
      Eagles may fly, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
  5. And... by retech · · Score: 5, Informative

    RIM gets an unlimited amount of free advertising over this being headline news for a month!

  6. Wondering what a Sectera is? by Ender_Stonebender · · Score: 5, Informative

    So was I. It's a "Secure Mobile Environment Portable Electronic Device", it's made by General Dynamics, and you can read more about it here.

    --
    Loose things are easy to lose. You're getting your hair cut. They're going there to see their aunt.
  7. Idiotic WashPo Story by Cornwallis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Washington Post had a truly idiotic story today entitled: "Staff Finds White House in the Technological Dark Ages" that seemed (to me) silly. Among the statements: " The team members, accustomed to working on Macintoshes, found computers outfitted with six-year-old versions of Microsoft software." seemed the silliest in that it implies that six-year old software (WinXP?) is "old". The author needs to be told that just because newer is available doesn't mean there is a business sense to use it! From the article: "What does that mean in 21st-century terms? No Facebook to communicate with supporters. No outside e-mail log-ins. No instant messaging. Hard adjustments for a staff that helped sweep Obama to power through, among other things, relentless online social networking." The young'uns should learn there are reasons to make those things unavailable. Like, uhhh, security? Think back to when Clinton took office and his minions were saying the same kinds of things about the WH phone system left by Bush 1...that is used "dial phones" (for christ's sake!)...and everything had to go through the WH switchboard. There was a reason for that as the Clintonites found when they "modernized". Suddenly the WH began leaking info like a sieve when the "new technology" was adopted. Watch for the same thing to happen here! For the record: I didn't vote for Obama or McCain but it seems like this article was another kick at GWB.

    1. Re:Idiotic WashPo Story by crmarvin42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Expect to see this kind of thing for at least the next 100 days. The press likes to make a big deal about this 100 day honeymoon period. They cut the president some slack, and spend their time on other things.

      Over the last 8 years, nothing has given the media more joy than kicking Bush around. I watched MSNBC last night for an hour and every discussion of Obama quickly turned into a burning in effigy of Bush, instead of a commentary on what I wanted to here about. "What is Obama doing, or planning to do during his administration!" I already know what Bush did, and what I think about his actions. I Don't care what Obama's appointies think of them, only what they plan on doing now that they have the power.

      Obama may claim to be above politics, and there is even evidence that he is trying. However, the media and those I've seen on TV who are members of the new Obama administration are not even pretending.

      --
      Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
  8. National Security by javacowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To put my comments in their proper context, it's a good idea to disclose that I'm Canadian.

    Having said that, I understand the national security concerns with Obama using a Blackberry. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't all Blackberry traffic pass through RIM's servers in Waterloo, Ontario. Given the fact that such information can be intercepted on foreign soil should be worrisome to a U.S. security agency such as the NSA.

    Other smartphones don't appear to have that problem. Perhaps the NSA can persuade Obama to get an iPhone instead? :D

    --
    This space left intentionally blank.
  9. Update by CompMD · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know its not popular here, but if you RTFA and pay attention to other news sources, you'll find out that the NSA has modified Obama's Blackberry to the point that they are satisfied with it. Good enough for me.

  10. Personal, explains itself by StrifeJester · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If your wife was shooting you a text on your personal phone about waiting for you naked when you got home would want that sent out to a company wide distribution list. Give the man his personal belongings let him worry about using it properly and trust him a bit. I didn't even vote for the guy but this has been one of the stupidest arguments since the initial debates. We deal with this everyday at work, not on a grand scale like the presidency but the same principal, maybe worse we are always so scared of HIPAA around here.

  11. It is always refreshing by coryking · · Score: 3, Interesting

    To hear people on Slashdot talk positively about marketing / sales people. In any other case, you'd have a dozen posts about "those stupid sales weenies told some stupid president that we have to make this thing 'secure' and do it in 3 days with no extra help".

    What those whining programmers sometimes fail to see is sometimes the sales/marketing staff know what they are doing. If I was RIM management, I sure as hell wouldn't want to loose the president as a client, bitching programmers be damned.