Obama To Get Secure BlackBerry 8830

CWmike writes "President Barack Obama is set to receive a high-security BlackBerry 8830 soon, The Washington Times reported today. The device is said to be in the final stages of development at the National Security Agency, which will check that its encryption software meets federal standards. It might not be ready for months. It was reported that Obama will be able to send text and e-mail messages and make phone calls on the device, but only to those with the secure software loaded on their own devices. The list includes First Lady Michelle Obama and top aides. The security software is made by Genesis Key, whose CEO, Steven Garrett, is quoted as saying: 'We're going to put his BlackBerry back in his hand.' The Sectera Edge was pegged in January by analysts as the top device choice because of its reputation for secure data communications when used by other federal workers. And there are many reasons why Obama might have been told 'no' on his BlackBerry. But Obama may wish he had chosen a Sectera if BlackBerry has more outage problems like its latest last week, which meant no mobile e-mail for hours across the US."

Comments

Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

So....he needs a BLACKberry?
Only a BLACKberry is good enough?
He can't use an iPhone?
Is it because they also come in white?

So many questions, so few goatse rick rolls....

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

The question I have for Obama is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single fat colored mammy sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check?

And as far as BlackBerries go, I'm sure B. Hussein Obama doesn't give a rat's ass. For my part, I give the BlackBerry 8830 two thumbs up.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[4D6963]

Both actually, the single fat coloured mammy sitting at home and so forth is spending part of her welfare check to be one of your clients/customers, and that thanks to her money she's spending at your business that you can thrive and pay your 14 employees.

Now of course you probably stimulate more than she does, because if you're as successful as you make yourself sound, you have more money to spend, and therefore stimulate more. But the welfare check is stimulus money in that that's what allow people on welfare to keep on stimulating. It's the basics of economy really, it astounds me that the boss of such a flourish business such as you are would ignore that.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[CarpetShark]

So....he needs a BLACKberry?

From the sounds of this, he could use any device that supports public key crypto for messages.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[yada21]

But does it stimulate the economy more than it would have done if it had been left in the original taxpayer pocket?

It's the broken window fallacy.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[4D6963]

No it's not, although lots of people mistakenly think it is. The ramifications/implications of those things are pretty deep, even deeper than in the broken window fallacy, but in the case of a welfare mom with 4 kids, the main difference is that by giving her more money she'll give better food, a better health but more importantly a better education to her 4 children, the difference being ultimately that these children will grow up to be more qualified and thus produce more value/wealth, but also move up in social classes.

But to answer your original question, there's probably not much of a difference, although you might assume that the welfare mom being poorer than the original average taxpayers, she might spend that same money more fully and more quickly, thus stimulating faster. Although if you look at it closer, there may be a reason or two why the opposite would happen, but regardless I think the difference in "stimulus" would be quite marginal.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hah, such naivete. Giving welfare mom more money does not necessarily mean a better life for her bastard offspring. It means she can get a new TV, dvd player or drugs...

Just look at how the welfare system is abused in NY State. The more offspring you have, the more money you make. Then the state pays for your children to have healthcare and you get WIC and you get a free house...

It sure pays to be a unemployed mooch around here.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Jurily]

she might spend that same money more fully and more quickly, thus stimulating faster.

It's not the spending that stimulates, but making money by creating something of value. The money exchange is just an arbitrary measure of that value.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hah, such naivete. Giving welfare mom more money does not necessarily mean a better life for her bastard offspring. It means she can get a new TV, dvd player or drugs...

Just look at how the welfare system is abused in NY State. The more offspring you have, the more money you make. Then the state pays for your children to have healthcare and you get WIC and you get a free house...

It sure pays to be a unemployed mooch around here.

Do you have evidence, or just a caricature of a welfare queen that was painted for you by Rush Limbaugh?

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Atlantis-Rising]

I'm not sure it's the broken window fallacy at all. The broken window fallacy requires that value be destroyed from the system in order to 'generate' value (which tends to lead to a total loss of value).

However, in the case of this taxation, what value is being destroyed?

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

In order to stimulate the economy, we need more successful Slashdot trolls like GP to thrive and generate angry responses.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Shakrai]

but in the case of a welfare mom with 4 kids, the main difference is that by giving her more money she'll give better food, a better health but more importantly a better education to her 4 children, the difference being ultimately that these children will grow up to be more qualified and thus produce more value/wealth, but also move up in social classes.

What the heck are you basing this on? It's been my experience that welfare moms beget welfare children. And no, I'm not just parroting Rush Limbuagh. I've spent the last five years working for an agency in the human services field and my SO is a social worker with 13 years of experience. I've yet to see welfare moms produce anything other than welfare children. The welfare system in my experience creates a cycle of dependency that few people are able (or willing) to break out of.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[trickyD1ck]

Wrong. The colored mom destroys wealth while AC creates it.

Reminds me of Keynes's idea of making everyone wealthy by digging holes in the ground and filling them back in. Keynes is bankrupt for like 30 years already, still some buy into his snake oil "stimulation".

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Kjella]

But the welfare check is stimulus money in that that's what allow people on welfare to keep on stimulating. It's the basics of economy really, it astounds me that the boss of such a flourish business such as you are would ignore that.

For there to be welfare money the government must either collect it in taxes, loan money or print money and all three weaken the economy. There might be other good reasons for doing it but taking the money from one that wants to buy a 100$ champagne bottle and redistribute it as welfare to buy 100$ of bread and milk isn't stimulating the economy. In fact, due to the overhead of the system it's probably less than 100$ coming out the other side with no tangible value produced. The reason for welfare is much more that poor and desperate people tend to become a problem all by themselves and cutting them a check keeps those that want to be honest on the honest side. The rest would wouldn't be any less of a problem without welfare, quite the opposite.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[thousandinone]

The value being destroyed is the cost overhead involved in the system. Do you honestly believe that 100% of the amount deducted from your paycheck, ostensibly for social security, is doled out to those collecting social security at a 1:1 ratio? No, there are other fees and costs associated with these systems as well.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

Attempting to dispel an uncomfortable truth by linking the description to an ultraconservative loudmouth does not make it go away.

As a matter of fact, (and it pisses me off to no end) my husband has a couple of nieces who, other than ethnicity, fit this stereotype as if it were tailor-made.

I realize that you don't want to admit that this happens, but maybe you should take a closer look at the world around you.

All I asked for was evidence. The plural of anecdote is not data.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[4D6963]

And where does that money go? Pays people's salary.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[mondegreen]

I'm not sure it's the broken window fallacy at all. The broken window fallacy requires that value be destroyed from the system in order to 'generate' value (which tends to lead to a total loss of value).

However, in the case of this taxation, what value is being destroyed?

The value of the worker's time and effort. Each day individuals trade heartbeats (in the form of work) for rewards (in the form of currency). By seizing and redistributing those rewards, the government devalues the individual's effort.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[4D6963]

Actually it really became popular with Ronald Reagan and his Cadillac-driving welfare queens

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[4D6963]

Spending doesn't stimulate, really? So what if everybody stops spending? The whole economy dies. Money is economy's blood, and spending is the heart that pumps it. The only way you can say that "spending doesn't stimulate" is if you take spending entirely as granted.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you like my husband's niece's names and addresses? Maybe you could marry one of them and get them off the government tit?

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[4D6963]

What does she destroy it? By the way iirc that's not Keynes' idea but Napoleon Bonaparte's, and Keynesian economics are making a huge comeback since deregulation has proven to be madness.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[4D6963]

*How does she destroy it

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

Go take a drive through Bossier City Louisiana. I am sure is plenty of data/evidence there.....

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[samcan]

Mr Obama used a BlackBerry during the campaign---I assume thus that he chose to use a BlackBerry.

Also, you know there is a berry called a blackberry right? And blueberries (Celts)?

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[fractoid]

Hah, such naivete. Giving welfare mom more money does not necessarily mean a better life for her bastard offspring. It means she can get a new TV, dvd player or drugs...

Your cynicism blinds you to the greater issue here - that giving welfare mom more money for sitting on her ass doing nothing is teaching her kids to do the same.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[PopeRatzo]

But does it stimulate the economy more than it would have done if it had been left in the original taxpayer pocket?

The short answer is "yes".

When a dollar is spent, there is a multiplier effect. Money that gets into the hands of the lower income levels actually has the highest multiplier effect.

Did you know that the government spending that has the highest multiplier effect is an extension on unemployment benefits, at 1.83?

Government spending on subsidies to oil companies: less than 1

The multiplier effect only applies to our domestic economy. That's why corporate welfare has such a low multiplier, because so much of it leaves the country.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Acer500]

And where does that money go? Pays people's salary.

If you're using the money on nonproductive stuff, then yes, you're "destroying" value.

You might quibble about whether the welfare mom's children will go on to create value - the (admittedly heartless) question is whether the future value will be a better investment that whatever value the taxpayer would have created (or would have been motivated to create, or a motivation to create or whatever).

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[thousandinone]

Yes, it pays salaries, but when it comes down to it, what are the people earning those salaries producing? Nothing of value, just moving funds from one party to another. I understand that those people need to eat and that the fact that we have the service means we need to have people running it, but regardless of all that, these employees are not putting any value back into the economy for their efforts.

Examples follow.

Note: All figures are arbitrary! I am not using exact figures or percentages here. If you know the exact figures for the social security budget and the amount you pay to social security, feel free to substitute those values for mine.

Let 's say that in a given pay period, I earn $1000. It then stands to follow that I have produced at least $1000 worth of goods / services. I would not be worth keeping on as an employee if the cost of employing me was larger than the revenue I generated.

Current figures:
Myself: $1000
Social Security: $0
Recipient: $0.

First arbitrary figure: Let's assume 10% of my pay goes to the social security administration. Now, it looks like this:
Myself: $900
Social Security: $100
Recpient: $0.

Now, the employees of the Social Security administration need to eat as well, so of course a portion of those funds will go to them. I'm going to go with 10% again, as a purely arbitrary figure. So the final totals look like:
Myself: $900
Social Security: $90
Recipient: $10.

Now, we're already assuming I've contributed at least $1000 worth of labour, as I would not be worth keeping as an employee if I did not. Were all that money to remain available for my use, The full $1000 would be going back into the economy. Instead, I'm only putting $900 back into the economy, whereas payroll for social security employees puts back 90, and the social security recipient puts back 10. That totals $1000, so no additional money is being put back into the economy by either the social security employees or recipient. The social security administration produces no goods, and the only services it provides are free- all of their revenue comes from mandatory withholdings from my paycheck. Similarly, the social security recipient produces no goods or services- all of his or her revenue comes from the social security administration.

So up until this point, yeah, I'm losing money, but the overall economy isn't really being negatively impacted. But wait! Theres a little more to it than that.

Assuming I, the social security officer, and the social security recipient all spend money only on products and services that operate 100% out of the US, a grand total of $1000 goes back into the economy. This is the same 'stimulus' to the economy that would occur if The entire $1000 was in my hands. This model assumes no overhead other than payroll for the social security office, which is an impossibly conservative estimate as well.

However, that social security recipient is not likely to spend the money that way. With limited fixed income, a social security recipient is far more likely to purchase inexpensive imported 'sweat shop' goods than goods assembled in america. While most of us spend money on imported products, the frugality imposed by limited income serves to increase the ratio of imported to domestic purchased goods. Not just that- Social Security recipients have a tendency to live in areas where other low income individuals live. These areas have notably higher crime rates. All other things being equal, an individual living in these areas is more likely to spend part of his or her income on drugs, unregistered weapons, prostitution, etc etc, just because of accessibility.

Example: Living in a "nice" neighborhood, you may be of the inclination to try, say, marijuana. Ok, great. Now you have to figure out who has it. 'White collar' pot smokers tend to go through a friend of a friend of a friend to get their fix- I know several of these. On the other hand, if you were living in a

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[c0p0n]

What do you mean coloured, like, purple? Dude and you didn't call an ambulance?

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[rhsanborn]

In general, that dollar is more likely to be spent and more immediately by the welfare mother, as the lower income levels tend to spend a higher percentage of their income. The counter argument is that the rich person who paid that dollar in taxes would have been more likely to invest and generate wealth with that dollar rather than spend it immediately. That dollar will still make it to another rich person who will likely invest spend his portion of the dollar and the cycle continues. The question is where that dollar is better spent, in the hands of the higher income people, or cycling through via the federal tax system to the lower income person.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[rarity]

The plural of anecdote is not data.

"Evidence" isn't a synonym for "data", either.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Jurily]

So what if everybody stops spending? The whole economy dies.

No, it's the people who stop buying food that die.

Economy is not a physical thing, stop obsessing about it. It's just a collection of interactions between people, and money is not God.

The only way you can say that "spending doesn't stimulate" is if you take spending entirely as granted.

Isn't it? Do you grow your own food? Do you chop up wood in the forest to heat your house? Do you walk to work? Do you sow your own clothes? Do it for a couple of years and tell me how it worked out for you.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

Or the DMZ near LSU in Baton Rouge or most of New Orleans...

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Atlantis-Rising]

Rubbish. The government relies on the value of the individual's effort; that's the whole point of taxation. Taxation does not destroy the value created by the worker.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[ivan256]

Due to the way the banking system works, the invested dollar will be spent several times (and counted as a whole dollar each time). It will be deposited, loaned out, re-deposited, re-loaned, invested in something or other, re-deposited, (repeat numerous times), and ultimately spent (probably as somebody's salary).

As aid to a lower-income person, it will be spent once, probably on goods made in another country.

It's all moot anyway. We make decisions based on a plurality of votes, and we have a plurality of people who are on the receiving end of progressive taxation.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[ivan256]

Did you know that the government spending that has the highest multiplier effect is an extension on unemployment benefits, at 1.83?

You're limiting yourself to "government spending". I'm not sure where you got your factors (a google search returned only your comment). I don't doubt that unemployment benefits have the highest factor for government spending, but it doesn't follow that private investment wouldn't be higher still.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[blackest_k]

guess what, social workers tend to deal with the problem cases, the ones that don't manage, who can't cope, and occasionally people smart enough to know that a social worker going to bat for them will improve their situation. Your not seeing the people who struggle day to day maybe get a little help from family when it gets really bad but your just lumping them all in together because you have a job.

  What are people supposed to do when there is no work, the industry drops away and theres 500, 1000 people chasing every job, and your already down on them because they haven't got a job. when GM shuts a factory and the workers are made redundant its not the workers that are defective, the managers thought they can make a bit more by out sourcing, so they did so. Now those workers are just welfare scroungers in your eyes.

it's difficult to get out of a situation like that, and if you work in human services as you say, then your getting your welfare check from the government too. It could even be seen as profiting off the misery of others. sure it might make you feel better to debase them, but they are just as human as you are and your one wage check away from being one of them.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Wyatt Earp]

I'm from a Indian Reservation, lived there for 21 years, still have family and friends back there.

The welfare system from my experience is a terrible system that is more addictive and destructive than any drug.

The system the Federal Government through the BIA created is the worst thing that has happened to the American Indians.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Shakrai]

Now those workers are just welfare scroungers in your eyes.

sure it might make you feel better to debase them

Umm, where the hell did I say that? All I did was question the GP's assumption that welfare lifts the children of those on it out of poverty. You don't have to assume that I look down upon the people who use it just because I question the wisdom of the way the system works.

but they are just as human as you are and your one wage check away from being one of them.

Umm, no, I have savings and could manage to survive for upwards of a year if I lost my job, even without unemployment benefits. I opted to save my extra money during the economic boom instead of blowing it away on material possessions as many did.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[mondegreen]

Rubbish. The government relies on the value of the individual's effort; that's the whole point of taxation. Taxation does not destroy the value created by the worker.

I didn't say it destroys the value created by the worker. The more money the gov takes from an individual at the end of the day, the less value that day's work for that individual. That individual's time is devalued.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

in the case of a welfare mom with 4 kids, the main difference is that by giving her more money she'll give better food, a better health but more importantly a better education to her 4 children, the difference being ultimately that these children will grow up to be more qualified and thus produce more value/wealth, but also move up in social classes.

Bwahahahahaha!

HAHA HA!

Go spend any length of time in your local government housing project and tell me you actually still believe that crock of shit. You libtards are precious.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[4D6963]

Sorry, turns out you're right, anyone on welfare is a lazy stupid fried chicken and watermelon eating crack head. Oops, did I just speak your mind?

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Burning1]

And if she didn't get the welfare money, what other sources of money are available?

She could get a job.

She could also become a prostitute. She could become a thief. She could deal drugs. She could also have her kids steal, whore, and deal (It's happened.)

What would that teach her children?

A welfare check won't solve her problems, but I'm not so sure that cutting her off would be any better for her, her children, or society in general. Better solutions are needed.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[blackest_k]

What the heck are you basing this on? It's been my experience that welfare moms beget welfare children. And no, I'm not just parroting Rush Limbuagh. I've spent the last five years working for an agency in the human services field and my SO is a social worker with 13 years of experience. I've yet to see welfare moms produce anything other than welfare children. The welfare system in my experience creates a cycle of dependency that few people are able (or willing) to break out of.

you state its your experience that welfare moms beget welfare children ,
I've yet to see welfare moms produce anything other than welfare children,
The welfare system in my experience creates a cycle of dependency that few people are able (or willing) to break out of.

Those are your own words, they don't sound positive do they? They don't suggest that this is any fault but their own, even in your reply you state, to paraphrase "I'd be ok i've got savings behind me" implying your not like they are. Do you think your words are coming across as anything else other than looking down on them?

Don't worry though its a normal human reaction to disassociate from groups that are suffering? We'd all go crazy if we considered ourselves to be part of that group or one step away. It's hard enough dealing with the issues we have to face as it is.

The whole general tone of this thread has been extremely negative making people on welfare sound like candidates for the jerry springer show.

I wanted to put some humanity in to the situation and present a different view point, theres far too much stereotyping going on. You can be a decent person and be on welfare. And really isn't it true you and your partner are going to come into contact with the worst cases.

If the Economy was good, perhaps it would be possible for subsidized childcare and education programs to break these mothers out of the poverty welfare trap. Politically I can't see America being ready for that ever. your more likely to fix your health system first.

note the grandparent was talking about raising the level of welfare payments which could make the difference between survival and being to do something positive to improve the quality of life.

Think about this, I remember talking with a guy who i went to school with his cousin was in my class at school but she wasn't in school much, not because her parents didn't want her in school but primarily because she didn't have shoes! I never realized people could be that poor. That was the cost of her education. I'll tell you another, boy i used to take to school from time to time (as part of my job) was often late up and didn't go. Why? he didn't have an alarm clock. I gave him my old one (which was probably against the rules) and his attendance improved dramatically. It's hard to imagine poverty like that but when there is so little money in a household things get sacrificed.

Your savings don't really matter too much, they will help you survive longer, but they will not give you a job, or clean you of that taint of being unemployed.
That sucks but you must know that being employed is key to getting a new job, certainly anything paying over minimum wage.

The crystal meth comments floating round this thread really annoyed me, do people really think welfare pays enough to support a family and pay for a drug habit?
as the thread title says racism is rampant, I can only hope that the united in United States will eventually mean united and stop Americans being prejudiced against their
fellow Americans.

I hope you get it now the difference between an employed American and an unemployed American is a pay check, and in the current circumstances the chances of going from the former to the latter are improving all the time.

Consider this suppose tomorrow your partner tells you she is pregnant (i'm assuming your a heterosexual man) and suppose you argued and split up. what would stop her from becoming a welfare mom?

I hope the answer

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Firehed]

The ramifications/implications of those things are pretty deep, even deeper than in the broken window fallacy, but in the case of a welfare mom with 4 kids, the main difference is that by giving her more money she'll give better food, a better health but more importantly a better education to her 4 children, the difference being ultimately that these children will grow up to be more qualified and thus produce more value/wealth, but also move up in social classes.

Wishful thinking at its finest. Yes, it does happen, but that's easily the exception to the rule. If that actually worked in practice, then social classes would more or less dissolve in a generation or two; or, at least, you wouldn't see nearly the level of similarity we currently do between generations of a single family.

From what I've seen, most lower-class people tend to be in that situation because they can't manage their money to save their life, not because of their lower-paying jobs. I'm doing (very limited) freelancing between having left a desk job and prepping a startup right now, and going for a month or more making nothing but a dollar in interest on my bank account isn't breaking my back because I knew how to save effectively while I was working a day job and know how to keep my expenses low right now. I've seen houses that have a satellite dish mounted next to their broken windows through which you can see an obscenely large TV - they're making enough to pay the bill for the dish (or somehow managed to get enough credit to postpone that for a while too), but their priorities are so out of whack that they're doing that instead of fixing the damn window. In Vermont. Where winters are pretty damn cold, on a warm year. These people could win the lottery and end up broke again in six months and still have a broken window.

I think I have every right to be annoyed when my taxes go towards their welfare checks. Luckily, they probably go uncashed since I doubt they ever bothered to repair their mailbox since they're too busy trying to defrost their TV in January. I'm all for helping people get back on their feet, but I shouldn't have to explain the absurdity of cutting welfare checks to people that have put themselves in the above scenario.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Firehed]

I think it's safe to say that people who spend their lives on welfare and thereby teach their children that you can get free money by doing nothing are pretty damn lazy, yes. People that use the welfare system as it's intended (making sure you don't starve or freeze to death while you're between jobs) tend not be what most people would consider lazy, and I think most taxpayers can sympathize to at least some degree.

There's absolutely no need to bring racial stereotypes into the picture - it just makes you look like an asshole. I would wager that there's significantly higher usage of hard drugs among those who live their lives on welfare, though.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

Social Darwinism FTW!!!

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is correct. There is plenty of data/evidence comparing the attitudes, behavior, and values of those in situational poverty vs generational poverty. As you would expect, the data is consistent for those with situational vs generational wealth. I am an elementary school teacher in the second poorest community in my state and was raised by educated,upper middle-class, hardworking people in one of the wealthiest areas of our country. I paid my mortgage with the stimulus check.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[laskeyel]

My bet is that the woman with 4 children who is surviving on a welfare check doesn't have much money to spend at this 14 employee company after she buys food, diapers, clothes, pays for the bills, makes the house or apartment payment, etc. She puts some money back in, but not much. The welfare system needs to be there. There are people that need help. Unfortunately, in the United States, the system is very flawed and our dollars aren't being spent as wisely as they could be.

Re:Racism is Rampant...

[arekusu_ou]

I agree, Welfare is a breeding spawn for social pariahs. It's not really their fault, they're only lazy, greedy, or taking advantage of the system. They system isn't doing it's job (and with database and technology these days, there's no excuse not to be more efficient) and all because of the children. If a family on welfare gets another child? Take the children away. That's gross negligence. Don't give them more money. Bleeding heart liberals assume parents aren't selfish bastards and would spend the money on food for the children and not other stuff. And that children are ALWAYS better off with their parents.

One example, I had a mother call into the social service office to get money for CABLE television, because she barely had enough for food and god forbid her child goes without cable. And before people ask, I'm not altruistic or a bleeding heart liberal, I only work there to maintain the IT and make sure they run smoothly and do the most with the equipment they have because it suits my current lifestyle.

If they can do it for him

[Shivetya]

I am in line waiting for similar software to drive any portable device for communication I want to use.

So in other words, how long before laws are drafted keeping the good stuff out of our hands under the guise of it only aids criminals? I can see it all now, a new email bill of rights that somehow strips me of the ones I need or have.

I like the idea of the President having access to good, safe, and reliable, technology like this. I just hope that trickle down occurs.

Re:If they can do it for him

[Shakrai]

So in other words, how long before laws are drafted keeping the good stuff out of our hands under the guise of it only aids criminals?

They tried that back in the 90s and it didn't go so well. There's nothing stopping you from using encryption on your cellular phone as it stands now. Back when I was in GSM land I was kind of hoping to get my hands on an OpenMoko and design an encryption system for SMS. It wouldn't be that hard to implement for secure text messaging. Voice may be harder but should still be doable by someone with the right skill set.

Re:If they can do it for him

[Jurily]

I am in line waiting for similar software to drive any portable device for communication I want to use.

What are you talking about?

We already have something like that. It won't run on devices with hardwired OSes of course, but nothing else will, either. Did I miss your point?

Re:If they can do it for him

[Jurily]

Back when I was in GSM land I was kind of hoping to get my hands on an OpenMoko and design an encryption system for SMS. It wouldn't be that hard to implement for secure text messaging. Voice may be harder but should still be doable by someone with the right skill set.

What's wrong with encrypted VOIP and email? Tried, tested, and the provider can't fuck it up for you.

Re:If they can do it for him

[digitalchinky]

You can already get this stuff. Speakeasy (Sold by Telecom - now Telstra) is a nice little encryption box for your normal POTS system. If you are using Symbian there are a few applications around already that will encrypt your voice. Or you could just use VOIP and your own SIP server or something.

Re:If they can do it for him

[characterZer0]

I just hope that trickle down occurs.

It had better, as we are paying for it.

Re:If they can do it for him

[Dan541]

If you encrypt SMS the message will simply be too long. Email on the other hand does not suffer from such limitations.

Re:If they can do it for him

[Anonymous Coward]

QoS

Re:If they can do it for him

[MichaelSmith]

If you encrypt SMS the message will simply be too long. Email on the other hand does not suffer from such limitations.

To encrypt you need to compress. The encrypted message could easily be smaller than the plain text.

Re:If they can do it for him

[Anonymous Coward]

You can have it now:

http://www.cellcrypt.com/

Re:If they can do it for him

[huckamania]

No, we didn't. What are you 5 years old.

This is an existing product that is being evaluated for use by the President. By this logic, if the President wanted to use GCC and compile Ubuntu on his laptop, and the NSA evaluated those two products, then we can claim to have ownership of GCC and Ubuntu.

I had mod points, but you hear convoluted logic like yours expressed on Slashdot all the time.

Re:If they can do it for him

[Penguinoflight]

Encryption does not require compression. Take a look at NTFS where you can do one or the other, but not both. OTOH, with typical SMS message sizes compression wouldn't be too helpful. I think the GP was referring to the added header size necessary with encryption, but any modified protocol should be able to account for that.

Re:If they can do it for him

[BrokenHalo]

Did I miss your point?

No, but you missed the point of the original submission.

Obama is welcome to his new Blackberry, but if it is so fancy that all he can use it for is to tell his lovely wife when he's going to be home for dinner, he might just as well get himself a cheapie Nokia.

Re:If they can do it for him

[fdisk3hs]

If anyone is interested in helping out, there is the talklock project. I started it a little over a year ago to do voice encryption for Blackberries, and as many mobile Java devices as possible.

Most of the pieces are there now, but it is not complete. There are screenshots available and it is GPL.

It can record audio and play audio, and send and receive audio from a web server. I even hacked together a shell script on my Mac to listen to the audio so I could test the code with only one phone :)

I agree, this technology is too important to wait for, we should develop it ourselves! Then it can't be taken away from us.

Re:If they can do it for him

[Anonymous Coward]

Late to the game with this reply, but you should note that the reason you can't compress and encrypt is simply because the encryption process first compresses the data, and then encrypts it. Attempting to compress it further would do no good, as the encrypted data is for all intents and purposes the same as random data, and is not compressible.

CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Shakrai]

I've been successfully resisting efforts by my boss to give me a Blackberry for the last two years. I've seen what it does to co-workers and friends who have them and have no desire to spend half of my next vacation (or weekend or day off) responding to e-mails that could wait. If it's really important they'll call me. If it's not then I guess they can figure it out on their own. I know that some people find them useful but I don't count myself as being one of them.

As an aside, TFA says that the NSA is reviewing the security software. I wonder if they got access to the rest of the source-code and reviewed all of the other software? What does full time encryption do to the battery life and response time of the blackberry? I also wonder if the same restrictions that apply to other Federal workers regarding electronic devices will apply to his Blackberry? Will it be clipped to his waist when he's in the situation room dealing with the next international crisis? Or will he have to keep it out of secured areas?

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

Not just any BB; a sectera. I work for L-3 and just have the 8830 world edition. I wish they would issue me a sectera. As often as I'm running through airports, racing other people in a game I call "the AC outlet musical chair game", and frequently playing BlackBerry bowling as it slips from my hand along the floor, this sturdy hunk of IC heaven would really come in handy for me. If the shelf life of my 8830 battery holds any predictive value as it applies to the sectera and that encryption, the next time you're at an airport crapper and the lights dim for a bit, don't fret, that's just me with my new sectera at one of those musical chairs plugging in.

\\//_

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[PolygamousRanchKid]

I have a cousin who is addicted to his CrackBerry. His wife gave him an ultimatum: "Either you take THAT or ME on our next vacation. Not both."

As an aside, TFA says that the NSA is reviewing the security software. I wonder if they got access to the rest of the source-code and reviewed all of the other software?

I wonder if the NSA has the opportunity to build in back doors, so that they can snoop on the President's communication?

56 bit encryption, indeed.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Organic_Info]

I had a Blackberry Storm foisted upon me (something about making the numbers up to get the next data bundle). But from the outset I made it very clear that outside of working hours the notification options will be set to Phone Calls Only (i.e. no tones or vibrate on texts and e-mails) and Iâ(TM)ll check e-mails at my leisure.

Without being to hostile or overzealous I find myself constantly having to remind people that e-mail is an asynchronous communications medium.

And as for the Storm - nice screen good for reading e-mails, business iPhone competitor it is not and so damn unresponsive at timesâ¦grrrrr. Iâ(TM)m glad I didnâ(TM)t pay for it, not checked if there are firmware updates but in its current form I wouldn't recommend it.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[jimmyfrank]

You've seen what the device does to people or what people do to themselves? The device has a power button, don't be weak and turn it off.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

He didn't just say "vacation", he said "vacation (or weekend or day off)". Employers give out Blackberrys so they can contact people when they are not at work. If you tell them (as I did) that it will always be off outside of work hours, they won't give you one.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[SCHecklerX]

They are a nice device for personal use. I'd never get one for work, though, as it is then expected you are checking the thing all the time. No thanks. Like you said, the culture around those things is wrong, and if it's important, they should call you.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

As an aside, TFA says that the NSA is reviewing the security software. I wonder if they got access to the rest of the source-code and reviewed all of the other software?

I'm sure they did. The blackberry platform has been audited from end-to-end by many, including the governments of Canada, UK, USA, Austria, Australia, New Zealand, Turkey, along with non-governmental organizations:

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

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a cousin who is addicted to his CrackBerry. His wife gave him an ultimatum: "Either you take THAT or ME on our next vacation. Not both."

The other option is to get a blackberry for the wife.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Shakrai]

Employers give out Blackberrys so they can contact people when they are not at work. If you tell them (as I did) that it will always be off outside of work hours, they won't give you one.

The thing is, it doesn't bother me being contacted when I'm not at work if the situation warrants it. With e-mail though it's been my experience that the situation rarely warrants it. People use e-mail for all manner of stupid questions that either aren't that important or that they could answer themselves if they used the time it took to write the e-mail to research the problem on their own.

If it's important enough to warrant bothering me when I'm out of the office then it's important enough for a phone call. If it's not that important then it can wait until next Monday at 8:30am, can't it?

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Shakrai]

But from the outset I made it very clear that outside of working hours the notification options will be set to Phone Calls Only (i.e. no tones or vibrate on texts and e-mails)

I thought about that but I'd have two problems with that:

1) My network monitoring setup sends me SMS'es if it detects problems. Silencing these notifications would defeat the purpose of having them.
2) It would destroy the utility of SMS for personal reasons. I don't want to carry separate phones for work and personal (I've already got enough crap hooked to my belt without adding a second phone) so I'd have to give up on SMS from my friends or deal with notifications for stuff that I don't care about.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Shakrai]

The device has a power button, don't be weak and turn it off.

That kind of defeats the point of having a cell phone, doesn't it? My cell phone is my only phone. I don't feel like I should have to cut off all of my friends just to avoid stupidity from the office, nor do I want to carry separate devices for work and pleasure.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[rts008]

People will go to ridiculous lengths to avoid taking personal responsibility anymore it seems.

Of course it can't be the stupid person's fault..it has to be that evil Blackberry possessing their soul.

And turn it off? Ohhh, no! can't do that..might miss an important viagra email...from a Nigerian Prince!

At an earlier job, one of these obnoxious devices was foisted on me. It never made sense to me, as nothing in my job was 'time critical', but 'everybody is going to this' was the reason. I tried warning them it would not work with me...

So, when I got to work and after parking, I would turn it on as I entered the building, and when I left the building at the end of the day it would get turned off.
Discussions with management usually turned silly:

Boss: 'I tried calling your blackberry last night and all this morning! Where have you been?'
Me: 'Last night I was home, and this morning at my desk, right next to my office phone, working.'
Boss: 'Then why didn't you answer?'
Me: 'My office phone never rang.'
Boss: 'But I was calling your blackberry!'
Me: 'Well, it was turned off.'
Boss: '??!!?? Why?'
Me: 'Because I have a working office phone right next to me, did not need the blackberry on.'
Boss: 'What about last night?'
Me: 'What about it? I was off work at home. I have a phone there also.'
Boss:'?????'
Me: 'You only get me for the hours you pay me for.'
Boss: 'But but, it's a Blackberry!1'
Me: 'Yeah, so?'
Boss:'??????"*blank stare*

Some people just don't get it, no matter how often they get hit with a clue-stick. That crap went on weekly, until I moved on to a better job...with no Blackberry.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Sun.Jedi]

I agree with the others here. (sorry, bud).

The boundary that you are on vacation, or 'not on-call', or even simply not required to respond to e-mails for, as you put it, if the situation warrants it, is just too simple to fix. I'm sure they send e-mails now, that you don't respond to (because your present mobile solution doesn't offer it), unless you spend your days off surfing your mail and responding.

full disclosure: I have a blackberry 8830, and I am one of two admins (and we are the only 2 with UNIX responsibilities) managing 200+ servers in multiple datacenters. We own the environments from rack, power, cabling to consoles, hardware, OS, uptime, performance and capacity planning. We also own the SANs, and the backup strategy.

I get e-mails all freaking day/night long, but if I'm on vacation (like today) I am not required to respond, unless I want to. If a production issue pops up, I am still not expected to respond, or jump in, again, unless I want to. If it's really bad, someone will call me, and I will still not be required to respond. There are times that I just can't pitch in, but I often do for that really important stuff. If it my week on call, I understand thats a 24x7 responsibility, but the escalation process specifically requires that the issue is a production class service or system.

I understand that many admins are the only admin, but that shouldn't stop a proper classification of systems/services into categories of 'what can wait', and 'what needs immediate attention'. Set some reasonable boundaries, and the blackberry will actually make it easier to do your job.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

You can create custom profiles that still notify on SMS, but stay silent for e-mails. Or you could edit one of the built in profiles.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[ReiDragon]

My work gives me a crackberry to use on the job. It makes sense because depending on what's needed, I may be away from my office/laptop for 2-3 hours at a time, and that's the only way for me to get emails. That being said, I leave the blackberry *at work*. I plug it in, lock my computer, and go home. They can contact me at 8am the next morning when I show up.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[mdielmann]

1) My network monitoring setup sends me SMS'es if it detects problems. Silencing these notifications would defeat the purpose of having them.

The settings on a Blackberry allow you to silence email without affecting SMS.
There's no simple solution to issue 2, though.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

I sometimes enjoy getting support requests by e-mail over the weekend. One Sunday I woke up to find an e-mail from someone asking that I unblock the Kiss Army Online website. It got me laughing pretty hard.

Best part is, it was a legitimate request! We're a musical instrument retailer, and the person requesting it was talking to some customers about their favorite band, and trying to look up some info.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[DarthVain]

I couldn't agree more.

I don't do that shit. If someone wants me to work like that they can very well call me and talk to me. E-mail is too easy.

I have realized that work doesn't go away, there is always more, if I worked after hours that is all I would do. It will still be there tomorrow when I come in to work.

I have also realized that 99.9% of the time when there is an emergency, and is needed yesterday, etc... it means that someone didn't plan, or didn't do their own work. It is not my job to bail them out for doing a crappy job.

Sometimes shit does happen that requires immediate attention (that 0.01%) that is pretty much out of anyone's control. In cases like this, I do not mind getting contacted.

Anyway that's my 2 cents. Obviously I am not a surgeon! :)

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[lee1]

His wife gave him an ultimatum: "Either you take THAT or ME on our next vacation.

Well don't leave us in suspense. What did he decide?

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[TooMuchToDo]

It'd be nice on the blackberry if I could silence SMS messages from certain sources but allow from other numbers.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[th0mas_g]

and if it's important, they should call you.

I'm sorry, but I DON'T WANT A PHONE CALL! I'd much rather get an email/SMS and respond quickly, efficiently and without the extra "chatter" that happens during the course of a normal phone call.

Maybe I've finally become the anti-social, datacenter-dweller with no ties to the rest of humanity, but I've found that people are stupid and talking to them wastes time. Quick and precise email makes life so much easier. Tell me what the problem is and I'll fix it... then I'll email you back. My blackberry allows me to do this from just about anywhere (inclusive of the "fix it" portion of the transaction).

I admit... the problem with this approach is expecting stupid people to clearly express their issue via text. Most can't do it verbally, so asking them to type it out is a chore.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[BrokenHalo]

I don't feel like I should have to cut off all of my friends just to avoid stupidity from the office...

That's what blacklisting is for.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Roland Deschene]

Get AlertMatrix. Not cheap, but a must-have for me. You can set up filters to only notify you based on customizable criteria (who it is from, what is the subject, etc).

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[BrokenHalo]

...as it is then expected you are checking the thing all the time...

The same also applies to ordinary mobile phones. Some workplaces seem to operate on the principle that if you have a phone in your pocket, you should be available 24/7, even if you are on the loo or bonking your wife.

What is needed is a simple but comprehensive blocking algorithm that tells unwanted callers to just fuck off unless what they have to say is demonstrably important.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[TooMuchToDo]

Thank you!

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

Hang on, even without that, I can go to profiles, scroll to where it says "Use active profile except for:", "New exception", and select the girlfriend from my address book, and a different profile to use just for her. Isn't that what you need, without paying for an expensive add-on?

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Roland Deschene]

Hmm... that's a good point. I didn't know you could do that. Although that option looks like it's limited to your address book (i.e. no wildcards). AlertMatrix can also continually remind you that you have missed a call and other stuff which still makes it worth it to me, though. And did you know the LED is really R/G/B, and you can make your own colors? Might not be worth $40, but pretty cool!

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Burning1]

People will go to ridiculous lengths to avoid taking personal responsibility anymore it seems.

Of course it can't be the stupid person's fault..it has to be that evil Blackberry possessing their soul.

When you don't have the ability to be contacted by email 24/7, people don't tend to expect you to be available 24/7.

Beyond that, some people have a hard time removing their brain from work mode. Personally, I don't want to think about work until I go in the next day. Having a pager handy kind of forces the issue.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[fm6]

I've seen what it does to co-workers and friends who have them and have no desire to spend half of my next vacation (or weekend or day off) responding to e-mails that could wait.

You can always turn the thing off. "Gee, I must have been out of range!" Or just not check the thing more than every couple of hours. Your co-workers and friends' problem is not that they have BBs; its that they get all compulsive about keeping up with them.

Mind you, I won't ever get one either. Not because they're intrusive away from work, but because they're distracting at work. Some of us just aren't that good at divided attention tasks. Obviously we're wired much different from people who carry BBs, not to mention those geeks whose computer desktop always has an IM window and a bunch of RSS widgets.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[fm6]

I hope your cousin has managed to resist the urge to check his BB during sex. Don't laugh, it's a common thing.

Re:CrackBerry: Just say no ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

I also wonder if the same restrictions that apply to other Federal workers regarding electronic devices will apply to his Blackberry?

Personally, as someone who thought we were supposed to now be in a post-racial age, I'm offended that Obama didn't choose a Whiteberry.

More outage problems?

[homey of my owney]

Hey, I got an idea. Lets give one to every member of Congress!

Re:More outage problems?

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems a mod of troll lacks any significant sense of humor. It appear to be a joke.

6821 years?

[Anonymous Coward]

From the title I thought it would take 6821 years to develop a secure BlackBerry.

Will all those that he texts with

[rolfwind]

also get secure Blackberries?

(I assume his immediate family will, as well as WH coworkers, but friends and so on?)

Re:Will all those that he texts with

[Anonymous Coward]

I know reading the article is hard, but not even the summary?

Re:Will all those that he texts with

[Anonymous Coward]

FFS Did you not even read the summary?

It was reported that Obama will be able to send text and e-mail messages and make phone calls on the device, but only to those with the secure software loaded on their own devices.

Re:Will all those that he texts with

[oodaloop]

Summary? I don't even read the titles.

Barackberry

[mc1138]

Hey, its part of what endeared him to me, not just for the tech side of it, but the fact that he likes to stay connected and on top of things.

How can you tell the president "No blackberry"

[Anonymous Coward]

What I don't understand is how anyone can tell the president "No, you can't have a blackberry"
He's at the top... everybody else is below him and reports to him. What are they going to do if he says no, fire him? No... if anything Obama will launch a nuke up the backside of anyone who tells him that he can't carry a blackberry.

Re:How can you tell the president "No blackberry"

[strikeleader]

We all should be able to tell that arrogant ass No! He is not at the top, "We the People" are and he is suppose to answer to us.
Enough of the love fest already.

Re:How can you tell the president "No blackberry"

[subreality]

He's at the top... everybody else is below him and reports to him. What are they going to do if he says no, fire him?

The whole point of three way checks and balances in US politics is that *no one* is at the top. The other two branches explicitly do not report to the president, and ideally, he reports to the people and the Constitution. How well this works in practice has been the subject of occasional debate.

So yes, please fire him if you find he's not living up to expectations in a few years. Call your congresscritter about firing him sooner if it becomes dire. I suggest coming up with a better issue than this one, though.

Re:How can you tell the president "No blackberry"

[mysidia]

Your congresscritter has no ability to fire the president.

The president only gets fired if he commits a high crime or misdemeanor and is found guilty of the criminal act during an impeachment proceeding.

Not meeting the people's expectations doesn't result in forced removal from office (unless the president opts to voluntarily resign on the basis of failure to meet people's expectations or approval)

Usefulness limited?

[worip]

but only to those with the secure software loaded on their own devices

How useful is the phone then really, if you can not even call the dry cleaners down the street? Or maybe Obama only communicates with 5 or so people?

Re:Usefulness limited?

[OutSourcingIsTreason]

President Obama previously used a BlackBerry to help him manage his campaign organization, which was effectively a successful $800 million corporation. Unless you're Rush Limbaugh you would want him to manage the Federal Executive branch at least as well.

Re:Usefulness limited?

[Sun.Jedi]

Unless you're Rush Limbaugh you would want him to manage the Federal Executive branch at least as well.

I'm not Rush Limbaugh.

I hope Obama fails with a nice new 8830 secure Blackberry. The sooner the failure, the sooner a replacement.

Re:Usefulness limited?

[insllvn]

How can you question the president in such a time of crisis? What, do you want the terrorists to win you fascist, hippie-hating, racist, ultra right-wing, America hater? Why do you hate America so much? What has America ever done to you? /sarcasm

Seriously though, this kind of reality distortion usually only shows up around the CEO's of certain fruit companies. Has it occurred to you that hoping for Obama's failure will effect you at least as adversely as it will effect the President? More specifically, do you want the economic collapse to continue, or maybe its that you want a breakdown of security that leads to more terrorist attacks, or perhaps you wish further destabilization in Pakistan so Al Qaeda can finally get their hands on some nukes, or do you just wish America's prestige in the global community would continue to erode? How is it exactly that you wish Barack Obama would fail?

Re:Usefulness limited?

[vertinox]

I wonder who he's got for his Favs!

Re:Usefulness limited?

[fm6]

I think this is less about having a phone in his pocket (it's not like he's not surrounded by people who can give him one) then it is about being able to send quick texts to his underlings. One hopes that he doesn't get too obnoxious that way!

Does Obama run Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm trying to imagine a beowulf cluster of Obamas

Um, last year

[idiot900]

The BlackBerry network does have outages from time to time. But the linked article is from April 18, 2007!

Outage

[AmigaAvenger]

Outage last week? Wow, what happened to ever checking the dates, yes, April 17th, of 2007!!! REALLY old news... I've got a crackberry, had one for forever, now have a non-presidential edition 8830. I would never give it up, in fact, I probably would give up a firstborn for it.

Re:Outage

[Anonymous Coward]

The other bit is that this should only have affected people using their service. I'm sure that Obama's going to be using BES and not BIS.

Re:Outage

[Anonymous Coward]

I probably would give up a firstborn for it.

'A' firstborn? You typically only have one.

Re:Outage

[Anonymous Coward]

I would never give it up, in fact, I probably would give up a firstborn for it.

Pleeease, Daddy -- I want to come home again!

Uh oh

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

When I hear that the President of my country, the commander in chief of its armed forces, is getting a "high security" blackberry which is being developed by our National Security Agency, all I can think of to say is 2 words..........

Uh oh.

Re:Uh oh

[rts008]

What could possibly go wrong? ;-)

Well, unlike in the recent past, at least this way there will be back ups of Presidential e-mails available from the NSA when Congress or the DOJ ask for them....

Re:Uh oh

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

Just seeing it posted on Slashdot makes me nervous, because I now know there at least half a million hackers thinking of it as a fun new challenge. And some of them are accustomed to finding solutions to such obstacles in a matter of minutes.

Re:Uh oh

[arkane1234]

I actually prefer that, myself.

As bad is it may sound, I'd sooner see it shot out of the air as it's taking off than at 30,000 feet...

Re:Uh oh

[Anonymous Coward]

Meh, I'm not that worried. My experience with NSA-style "security" tells me that they understand the key to true security:

Making it absolutely impossible to actually use the device. After all, a communications device that doesn't communicate anything, at all, is impossible to listen in on!

Which of course leads to the "sticky-note-on-the-monitor" problem where people just ignore the "official" secure ways and do things in ways that ACTUALLY WORK, but I'm fairly sure they can create a BlackBerry that is completely secure.

It'd just need to be completely non-functional.

Re:Uh oh

[rts008]

Well, if it's /. hackers, then maybe some good will come of him being 'Rick-Rolled' several times a day...what 'good', I don't know.

Maybe CmdrTaco should get in the /.bunker soon....

Re:Uh oh

[laskeyel]

I think a secure Blackberry is good. How would you like it if the entire country was reading emails you were sending to your kids or wife? Secure is fine - but who is paying for this Blackberry that is going to be used primarily for personal use? I'm sure his wife and kids will have one too. And we're footing the bill? This is one thing that I think should come out of his salary. ...Unless the government wants to pay for one for me and my family. One that will block out their warrentless wire tapping. But I guess that's an issue for another day.

Re:Um, 2 years ago

[toetagger]

The BlackBerry network does have outages from time to time. But the linked article is from April 18, 2007!

Last time I checked, it was 2009...

Who cares about a Blackberry outage?

[geekmux]

"...if BlackBerry has more outage problems like its latest last week, which meant no mobile e-mail for hours across the US."

Boy, anyone remember back in the day when Presidents used to get their information from Generals and top aides holding very flat pieces of compressed wood called paper?

Point here is if ANYONE could get away with a Blackberry outage for "hours across the US", it SHOULD be that man.

What's the big deal?

[mraudigy]

I mean, its really cool that the president will get back his Blackberry back and seems to embrace technology to some degree, but the DoD and the US Army have been issuing secure Blackberry's "encrypted to federal standards" for quite some time now.

Re:What's the big deal?

[wh1pp3t]

Difference is the President's BB is required to be used in a fashion to adhere to the Presidential Records Act.

Re:What's the big deal?

[fm6]

A small quibble: the NSA-certified PDAs that military people use are not Blackberries, they're Windows-based PDAs. Same basic functionality, though.

Anyway, here's the big deal: those secure PDAs are used by many federal employees, but the President has never had one. The Secret Service doesn't like the idea of a device that might be used to track the guy they're protecting. More importantly, the President's lawyers don't like him to use any electronic media, even for non-governmental communication. They don't like the legal exposure. When Bush was elected, he told his family and friends not to expect any email from him until after he left office.

These problems are solvable, but pre-Obama, no President cared enough about online communication to push back at all the people telling him the only solution was to stay offline.

Re:Um, 2 years ago

[oodaloop]

No no, his post was from last year, referring to the year before that.

Stimulating the Economy

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the welfare mother does more stimulating than you do. You provide money to only 14 people and hoard the rest for yourself. Whereas SHE spends her welfare check with her meth dealer, her kids, the guy who robs her house, etc. The meth dealer alone can redistribute wealth to hundreds of people in the absence of police oppression. You can be guaranteed that any money that welfare momma gets is not going to be hers very long. It all goes to the community, one way or another.

Can the iPhone be made as secure?

[javacowboy]

I'm not trolling, just asking an honest question because I'm genuinely curious.

If Obama were to choose an iPhone, could it be made as secure as the solution implemented for his Blackberry?

As far as I know, the iPhone doesn't yet match the Blackberry in security and enterprise users, even though some Fortune 500 companies have started using it.

Why does it need to be secure?

[bugeaterr]

Every communication will be something like this:

Advisor: Mr. President, there's a prob with X, WTF shuld we do?
President Obama: LOL! Throw money at it.
Advisor: Good call, Mr. President. Culd u b more specific?
President Obama: *sighs* Create a new "Czar of X" over the new "Bureau of X", silly.
Advisor: OMFG, BHO ROCKS!

Re:Why does it need to be secure?

[4D6963]

Vice-President Biden : the game, you just lost it. rofl

Re:Why does it need to be secure?

[SrWebDeveloper]

Mr. President, it's the red button on the left side of the suitcase. No, the left, move the cuffs out of the way, please. [10 seconds go by] Sir, you're other left. Now insert and turn the key at the same time and press that... yes, that key... now turn it...the other way, sir... and at the same time... the SAME, meaning you need both hands, sir. [10 minutes of silence] Sir, target destroyed. Thank you for calling the Defense Departments Help Desk. You call has been logged as ticket number 198324344334-E and have a nice day.

Re:Why does it need to be secure?

[fm6]

Great. Political argument via ignorant stereotype. I wish right wingers would grow up all ready and give us arguments based on their ideas instead of making fun of people who disagree with them. Who knows, you might actually convince people, instead of pissing them off. Try to remember why the U.S. elected a leftie President, even though most voters are pretty conservative.

There's a serious question behind your stupid babble, so I might as well answer it: it's not about privacy, it's about security. If a hacker can identify which wireless messages are coming from the President, he can figure out where he is and aim his heat-seeking missile accordingly.

And yes, I know there's an Obama-bashing comeback to what I just said. Please, please, grow up.

Defense Contractors Already Have These...

[djtachyon]

Some defense contractors already offer special encrypted Blackberry phones for their employees. How is this device so different? Just a different set of proprietary encryption software?

That's good. We were worried up here.

[Minwee]

It was starting to look like the USA may have to send their army up to Waterloo to secure their strategic Blackberry reserves.

It will be interesting to watch Metcalfe's Law in

[jra]

That's the one that says that the utility of a network is proportional to the square of the number of things (devices, people, services) connected to it.

I suspect that President Obama (isn't it interesting how many people seem to be avoiding using that 2 word phrase in writing about him?) is about to discover that the useful thing about a BlackBerry isn't the *device*, it's the *people at the other end*.

Whom he won't have.

Open Wireless Network Access

[Doc Ruby]

If wireless networks were required to allow anyone with a contract to access them whenever physically possible, the way the wired telephone/Internet networks are, then one network going down wouldn't disconnect all devices from the overall network. Instead, the US locks each device to a network, then charges roaming fees if connection can be made at all when there's another network's signal.

It's long past time to let any device connect to any wireless network with usable signal, with seamless handoff of voice and data streams when the network is "hopped". Wireless carriers like AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile would hate to lose the roaming money from the lockout, but we need open access to treat the wireless networks like the Internet, with all the growth that comes from it.

Re:Open Wireless Network Access

[Shatrat]

Some carriers in the US use GSM, and some use CDMA.
The phones physically can't operate on all networks, except in a few rare and expensive cases.

I think all US carriers are crooks (with the slight exception of T-Mobile), but I'm more concerned with pricing and features than whether a network carrier to which I don't subscribe lets me connect to their network for free.

Re:Open Wireless Network Access

[abigor]

The great fear of the carriers is that they become dumb pipes. The lockdown of wireless bandwidth is simply shameful, but I can't imagine it changing without legislation.

But what about privacy?

[Anonymous Coward]

If he lets the NSA load stuff on his Blackberry, what about privacy? Won't the NSA be able to record all his conversations?

Obama to get bugged BlackBerry

[viralMeme]

"The device is said to be in the final stages of development at the National Security Agency, which will check that its encryption software meets federal standards. It might not be ready for months"

Really, I would have thought it would be less secure after the spooks got their hands on it. As such I have corrected the title.

iPhone vs. Crackberry - an issue of encryption

[SrWebDeveloper]

I'm anxious to see when Apple will implement both data and transmission mandatory encryption on the iPhone for government and medical use. I attended an "iPhone and Government" meeting at one of Apples facilities in Reston, Va. the other day, with corporate representatives on hand to listen to the feedback of various agency IT/CIO folks and the concensus was Apple is working the DHS, OMB and other agencies to determine how Apple will pursue this. Being the iPhone was introduced only 20 some months ago, and version 3.0 of their OS is due later this year, their growth has been phenomenal, and finally they are devoting resources to the very vocal government sector who has hounded Apple to fully encrypt with sensible remote management and rollout.

For those not aware, the iPhone accounts for 60% of all combined wireless web traffic, offers Wi-Fi support in addition to 3G, and there are over 30,000 apps developed by 50,000 registered app developers. All apps reside in a sandbox, i.e. each has its own keychain of data and content and each requires a signed Apple security certificate authority to even run on the iPhone.

Many enterprise level apps already use proprietary encryption of data and transmission, password authentication and offer remote wipe, but we in the government await complete standardization of those (i.e. FDCC) as well as a vetted C&A process to ensure data integrity and performance.

It's just a matter of time, according to Apple, that Obama and the White House IT Dept. might consider trading in his Crackberry for the much more powerful and user friendly iPhone.

Re:iPhone vs. Crackberry - an issue of encryption

[saforrest]

It's just a matter of time, according to Apple, that Obama and the White House IT Dept. might consider trading in his Crackberry for the much more powerful and user friendly iPhone.

It seems a bit unfair to decry the BlackBerry 8830 as being inferior in power to the iPhone, when it was being sold long before even the first-generation iPhone was available. Compare it to a Bold or a Storm.

Re:iPhone vs. Crackberry - an issue of encryption

[SrWebDeveloper]

Unfair, sure. True? Also quite, quite sure.

This isn't about Bold or Storm which do not dominate the government sector and never will. Please bear in mind I mentioned iPhone is only 20+ months old to disclaim it's youth, and don't forget I also made clear that Blackberry is ahead of iPhone in encryption by government standards. My diatribe was to let folks know that likely sooner, not later, iPhone will be cracking the CrackBerry market share, as it already has dominated other sectors such as wireless broadband and Wi-Fi. I also should mention there is no central server in the network topology for an iPhone office network. Only management servers for initial configuration, rollout and remote wipe. Besides all that, iPhone is so intuitive that IT managers will also likely see a substantial drop in HelpDesk calls. This has already been proven in the limited markets iPhone dominates now. That's a very important matter in the government sector.

Re:iPhone vs. Crackberry - an issue of encryption

[Anonymous Coward]

Are they gonna offer an iphone model without a camera?

That is a big issue for many government employees.

Re:iPhone vs. Crackberry - an issue of encryption

[SrWebDeveloper]

It can be disabled via profile settings using ActiveSync, if I recall. Even if not, Apple is aware of this and should add that option to any management software. But Oracle, who now owns WebEx, demonstrated their iPhone app version of the popular web conference software and folks in government actually asked if the camera could be put on the other side (smile) for remote video conferencing.

Re:iPhone vs. Crackberry - an issue of encryption

[SrWebDeveloper]

Sorry, meant to say Cisco owns WebEx Communications, not Oracle.

What is Obama trying to hide?

[mrshowtime]

Sure, on the surface, this seems like a good idea. Bring the president into the 21st century with an encrypted device for communication. The problem? EVERYTHING the president does is recorded and aside from classified/top secret stuff, supposed to be available for the public record. Obama gets around this by using this encrypted device. Who's he calling, or texting on his blackberry? We'll never know. Truth is, he's the PRESIDENT, he has hundreds of people constantly following him around, assisting him. He does not need a blackberry.

Its African-AmericanBerry8830...

[Phizzle]

You insensitive clods!

Re:Its African-AmericanBerry8830...

[jag7720]

ROFLMAO

Re:Racism is Rampant... in my nose

[Panaflex]

Give this man a point.

Moreover - blame politicians for ENGINEERING a political class totally dependent on his hand. It's brilliant - voters who depend on government assistance have practically no choice but to vote for the guy. And yes - I'm looking at republicans AND democrats.

Can anyone explain how congress can get a measly 13% approval rating and still re-elect over 90% of it's members in the same month?

This is so awesome

[jag7720]

Oh wait... who gives a flying rat's ass!!!

How about focusing on the economy and the country

Re:This is so awesome

[Anonymous Coward]

You kidding, right? He is the fucking Messiah, jizzing out Change and Hope all over the faces of the adoring nation! The Chosen One FTW!

Two words....

[Anonymous Coward]

Secure Porn.

It's all about the weight, stupid!

[jeremycec]

Blackberry 8830 = 4.73 oz.
Sectera Edge = 12 oz.

And that's before you add on a CAC sled.

Of course Obama would go with the one that has a third the weight of the other one.

Just holding that Sectera Edge brick, I start getting carpal tunnel syndrome.

Re:Racism is Rampant... in my nose

[Shakrai]

Can anyone explain how congress can get a measly 13% approval rating and still re-elect over 90% of it's members in the same month?

Gerrymandering?

Personal style

[Anonymous Coward]

The Blackberry won't control you. I love mine for just the opposite, my 8GB card holds my music, I can check my person emails via IMAP client and I can browse the web casually without having to be hooked into a desktop or laptop (good for waiting for appointments or reading in bed).

I never got all the people who seem to believe using a Blackberry would turn them into a work-a-holic.

How much is this going to cost?

[cptnapalm]

If it is relatively cheap, then ok, cool. The President wants a Blackberry and it won't be too expensive. No problem.

But that isn't what it sounds like. Take months? How many man hours at what price per hour will be required so he can read his fan mail now instead of 30 minutes later? If the price is going to be exorbitant and this is little more than a vanity item, then no. Just no.

Re:How much is this going to cost?

[mysidia]

It's a high-security BB. He won't be allowed to make a call or text message on the device except to someone on the approved list.

If you ask me, on the surface, it sounds more like a parental control feature than a legitimate security feature.

Re:Racism is Rampant... in my nose

[ivan256]

Clearly people disapprove of other district's congress-people.

Yeah, but...

[geoffrobinson]

It may be a joke, but it funny because it strikes a deep truth. We would be better off with Congress doing as little as possible.

"Buy American"

[abigor]

I wonder if any Republicans will make hay out of the fact that Blackberries are made by a Canadian company, and the President is unpatriotic for using one.

Re:"Buy American"

[Anonymous Coward]

did you notice that the latest "Buy American" campaign is spearheaded by... President Obama?
Fucking republicans!

Re:"Buy American"

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, you're right...my apologies! In my defense, I'm not even American, which makes my "joke" even worse.

Re:"Buy American"

[markdowling]

Think of it like the Canadarm, but a phone :)

The President is not affected by BB outages

[192939495969798999]

Unlike the rest of us, if the president can't make a call on his BB, there are a handful of high-security folks around that can make the call for him on some other device.

E-Mail is not really the issue

[PPH]

TFA makes a big deal about the hackability and record-keeping issues surrounding e-mail. But that's really a non-issue, as RIM supports numerous corporate customers who have similar requirements. Its possible to configure a Blackberry to operate through a private enterprise e-mail system rather than the Canadian NOC. This answers many of the issues with record retention, encryption, and authentication (closely related to encryption).

The one valid issue is the ability to track the device's location. Even without cracking message or voice encryption, any device using a cellular network can be located rather easily. I'm not certain whether the Sectera Edge uses a government (military?) network different than the commercial ones. If not, it will be as easy to follow as any cheap phone.

I'll take famous titties for $800, Alex.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't even try to read the words correctly.

Re:Racism is Rampant... in my nose

[Anonymous Coward]

Because people disapprove of OTHER representatives for funneling money into OTHER districts. Of course, they love the pork that comes *their* way........

turn it off

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen what it does to co-workers and friends who have them and have no desire to spend half of my next vacation (or weekend or day off) responding to e-mails that could wait.

Here's an idea: turn it off.

Or, if you're on GSM, take the SIM card out of the BB and put it into a "normal" phone that only does voice.

I wonder

[SlashDev]

If anyone against the Obama administration policies worked on the software / hardware security. I would certainly not want a 'special' made piece of equipment that is supposedly secure.

Sectera = 2001 phone

[Harold of the Rocks]

As a user of a Sectera GSM phone, I'd have to say I was a bit disappointed when I got it that it seemed straight out of 2001: one color display, complicated interface, poor form factor. Other than being able to go secure, it's not that great a phone IMHO. I've never used the Sectera handheld, but I would guess if RIM could pull off a secure BB solution they'd have a leg up on the Sectera just from a form-fits-function standpoint.

Confused...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can somebody explain to me how there can be a Blackberry 'outage'?

Is RIM / Blackberry an email provider as well as a device manufacturer? I thought that you just bought the device, and then configured it with your IMAP / POP settings.

Am I wrong?

Made in China

[aaaantoine]

If the rumors about China sneaking back-doors into their chips is true, the Chinese government could soon have direct access to Obama's telecommunications.

Well... More direct than it's been so far, at least...

1 site was letting people know in real time.

[sk0alman]

http://www.dataoutagenews.com/ reported on the outage as soon as it hit. As many .gov and .mil people that are subscribed to their mail lists, I'm sure they knew about it and had other ways to work around them.