Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Managing Encrypted Android Devices In State and Local Gov't?

An anonymous reader writes "I am a systems administrator for a mid size state agency. We currently offer Blackberries to our staff, but we are migrating to Android devices in the near future. Since phones have sensative data (email, documents, etc.), what is a good choice for encrypting that data? Options abound, like OS-level encryption from Motorola and Samsung, 3rd party apps from GoTrusted and even a LUKS port for Android. Does anyone have experience managing encrypted Android devices? What are the important features I should be looking at? Many thanks in advance." (And, for that matter, are there good options for doing the same with iPhones? Other options to consider?)

138 comments

  1. state agency will take the best deal not the best by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    state agency will take the best deal not the best for IT.

  2. Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the state isn't doing anything wrong, it doesn't have anything to hide.

    1. Re:Don't encrypt by DerUberTroll · · Score: 1

      ULTRA LOL :-) It's overhead anyway and requires too much processing power.

    2. Re:Don't encrypt by kurt555gs · · Score: 1

      I wish I had Mod points for this one.

      --
      * Carthago Delenda Est *
    3. Re:Don't encrypt by masternerdguy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It doesn't just have to do with hiding immoral actions (btw we don't even know what agency he works for -- he could be fracking parks and recreations), it also prevents tampering.

      I encrypt the disks on my computers not to hide anything, I will gladly decrypt my disk for the FBI if they ever asked, but to prevent outside tampering. Without encryption, an adversary can just load up a linux live cd and tamper with anything they want with root access. By encrypting the entire disk I can prevent that sort of tampering. They can still boot a live cd, but they can't tamper with the installed operating system or the data.

      Besides, there is a metric ton of personal information on any smart phone. How would you like Joe the Laptop Thief to get access to your Google account, or possibly even login information for your online banking?

      --
      To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
    4. Re:Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *woosh*

    5. Re:Don't encrypt by roc97007 · · Score: 2

      > he could be fracking parks and recreations

      Gee thanks. It'll take a long time to get that mental image out of my head.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    6. Re:Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, the OP is using an argument that the government often uses against it's citizens to gain access to encrypted/private information. He is pointing out the irony by humorously turning the statement back at the government. You can be for government and still see that there needs to be limits on privacy invasion.

    7. Re:Don't encrypt by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 1

      If you truly believe the FBI is working for the greater good of humanity, then please read Classified Woman by whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds for an inside look at how they 'get business done.'

      --

      I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    8. Re:Don't encrypt by Calos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sorry, but no, not everything the government has should be open for anyone to obtain and peruse. Take this as an example, or several other blunders made by the UK government or its contractors. This has some data and discussion on the US. Personally, I'm more concerned with the general lack of responsibility for these kind of breaches in both the public and the private sector.

      Don't get me wrong, I agree with your ideal. But ideals can rarely if ever become reality. And they're not always the blessing that they would seem to be.

      --
      I vote based on politicians' actions, unless contrary to my preconceptions. Often wrong, never uncertain. #iamthe99%
    9. Re:Don't encrypt by Last_Available_Usern · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What about personally identifiable information? Should SSN's be flying around unencrypted? Just because encryption is used to conceal wrongdoing doesn't mean it's always used for that purpose.

    10. Re:Don't encrypt by aristotle-dude · · Score: 3, Funny

      > he could be fracking parks and recreations

      Gee thanks. It'll take a long time to get that mental image out of my head.

      No doubt, they should not allow exploration for natural gas deposits inside of parks.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    11. Re:Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the state isn't doing anything wrong, it doesn't have anything to hide.

      You know, if my state processes my income tax data, I'd like that to be private.

      If my state processes my health insurance data, I'd like that to be private too.

      Many governments have been hiding far too much, but it is reasonable to expect that some information is kept confidential.

    12. Re:Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a city government as a client that where an administrator kept asking us to send files containing social security numbers, names, dates of birth, and other information for city employees unencrypted because having email contents encrypted violated their open access laws.

      Don't worry, we didn't actually do what they said. We just said that our policy is to protect all personal information we handle and that they really need to discuss the issue with their legal counsel since we are highly skeptical that the law has to be applied that way and isn't preempted by any federal legislation.

    13. Re:Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the state isn't doing anything wrong, it doesn't have anything to hide.

      Says the AC

    14. Re:Don't encrypt by kevmeister · · Score: 1

      Federal regulation require full disk encryption for any portable disk containing PII. HIPPA (medical) information has even stronger requirements than PII. I assume many state and local government have similar requirements (and should have).

      BTW, I think the Anonymous Coward who posted the initial comment was expecting a rating of "Funny". At least it looked tongue in cheek to me.

      --
      Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
    15. Re:Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STFU you little faggot.

      Thanks for your valuable input to this discussion. To honour you and the merits of your post, all subsequent posts from the same IP will be redirected to the venerable /dev/null Hall of Fame.

    16. Re:Don't encrypt by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I encrypt because I do have things to hide. I'm a normal person. Everyone has things they want to keep private. You wouldn't be happy getting your bank statements on the back of a postcard, would you?

      Hiding stuff is normal. Everyone needs privacy. There is nothing wrong with it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    17. Re:Don't encrypt by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 1

      Should SSN's be flying around unencrypted?

      Slightly tangential, but: an SSN (or whichever national equivalent) should be less dangerous to publish than, say, your name and address. It baffles me that it needs to be kept secret in the U.S., furthermore I trust that slashdotters know the difference between identification and authentification. Who where the geniuses that decided that a valid SSN is authentication, and suffices to seriously compromise your personal security? The question is not in jest, quoth the Wiki: ... because it is assumed that no one except the person to whom it was issued will know it.. Of course I understand the motivation of credit institutions who want to make it very easy to get a credit card (and interest-generating debt), and other similar businesses which have invested financial interests in making it easy, but how on earth did it fly under the radar of your authorities?

      I'm genuinely interested in this, Google yields little on the historic origins of SSN as authentication.

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    18. Re:Don't encrypt by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 3, Funny

      s/authentification/authentication/g. I'm ashamed, and shall go to bed after finishing my beer :)

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    19. Re:Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if it's your state he should post your social security number, bank account numbers and balances and any other information he has on you? Duh.

    20. Re:Don't encrypt by westlake · · Score: 1

      If the state isn't doing anything wrong, it doesn't have anything to hide.

      Your medical records, for example?

    21. Re:Don't encrypt by sowth · · Score: 1

      Me thinks the AC was making a sarcastic statement based on the fact many government agents or people speaking about government agents investigating a person will often say: "if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide." Which obviously is wrong.

    22. Re:Don't encrypt by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

      No doubt, they should not allow exploration for natural gas deposits inside of parks.

      Have no doubt: they are.

    23. Re:Don't encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually have the same strategy for antivirus protection. Short of a physical read only/read and write switch, encryption is a barrier that not only stops programs/people from tampering with important stuff, but it also (if done correctly) renders any such tampering as irrelevant. For example, if I have an encrypted OS partition/disk, and a virus writes a hypervisor payload to the begining, it won't be loaded -- it will either load scrambled (and thus defeated) or halt the decryption and boot process.

  3. iPhone by masternerdguy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Considering that any meaningful encryption (I will assume you want some sort of volume group/full disk encryption) will require root access and probably a custom kernel module, you will need android. Personally I would download the source code and hack it myself, add in the encryption and other features I want, and then flash the modified ROM onto a device of choice. You can't do that on an iPhone. It worked for SELinux.

    --
    To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
    1. Re:iPhone by bz386 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Android has builtin encryption starting with ICS.

    2. Re:iPhone by jmorris42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nice propeller spinning but forget all that crap and lets get real.

      If you want to enforce privacy of information you do two simple things.

      YOU DON"T F*CKING ALLOW IT TO WALK OUT THE FRONT DOOR.

      YOU DON"T ALLOW IT TO BE MOVED TO DEVICES OUTSIDE OF YOUR DIRECT CONTROL.

      So just say no to BYOD, let em screech and bitch all they want. Tell em straight up, if your can't work without your precious iPad then go find an employer who doesn't need to deal with laws enforcing privacy. And good luck with that in this crappy economy. Just say no to portable devices, period, unless there is a truly compelling need. Data collection and off site archiving come to mind.

      Otherwise admit you really don't care about privacy at all and get on with it and, again, you don't need to spend a lot of money on tech that won't actually work when it comes to crunch time with end user idiots.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    3. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting as AC @ work

      AirWatch is the solution that my company is going up with to manage iOS devices as the new corporate standard, replacing Blackberry. It was recently selected as the tool to manage several thousand devices.

      Android was a consideration but was not chosen due to security/malware concerns.

    4. Re:iPhone by gweihir · · Score: 2

      While I agree that BYOD is a nightmare security wise, you seem to be unaware that technology cannot really protect against insiders. So let me add:

      YOU DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO WORK WITH IT OR LOOK AT IT.

      That is where the "lock everything down" approach fails and things like data leakage prevention look just as ridiculous as they are.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:iPhone by rogueippacket · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please, I would like to see you say those exact words to your CxO when they come and ask you for help with activating their brand new iPhone/Android/Tablet. You're just going to make my job easier when I sell them a BYOD solution without your consent.
      BYOD is here to stay whether you want to support it or not.

    6. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android was a consideration but was not chosen due to security/malware concerns.

      You are worried about malware so you chose a platform whose primary method of "jailbreaking" is surfing to a particular fucking webpage? Whoever made that call should be fired and summarily executed for stupidity.

    7. Re:iPhone by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      > YOU DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO WORK WITH IT OR LOOK AT IT.

      No, you have to assume your own people are somewhat safe, at least at the level of access you grant each one. Although you also have audit trails of who accesses/changes what to keep everyone honest.

      But the second it leaves the front door you aren't trusting the user anymore, you are trusting the user to be able to retain possession in a hostile environment. Or you are trusting them to actually use the secure features correctly. Do you deal with end users? It only takes ONE to screw up.

      BYOD fails before you even start, the premise is broken. I'm expected to secure a device I don't own or even have ultimate control of? Eh? And if the user was skilled enough to do all that stuff, or even understand why circumventing the security policy is a bad idea, he/she would probably be working in IT.

      You might make it work somewhat if you only allow web apps or similar remote viewing access with no information ever stored on the uncontrolled device but even that has problems. Security access tokens vulnerable, screen caps, cut/paste, etc.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    8. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      iPhone is better for this stuff. but since you want android.

      Spoken like a true iTard who has no idea what he's talking about. Android version 4.0 and above supports full disk encryption using AES you fucking tool.

    9. Re:iPhone by jmorris42 · · Score: 2

      Translation: Security/privacy is just a joke. We will waste a little tax money on security theater and fattening up a preferred vendor but we really don't care. Give me the shiny toy.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    10. Re:iPhone by rhsanborn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is why IT people have such a bad reputation. Yes, portable devices are a security risk. Our job, as IT professionals, is to come up with solutions. On the same bent, I suppose you'd also cut the link to the Internet. Wait, you obviously haven't, because you're posting on Slashdot. But you came up with clever ways to protect your system from the Internet? Then why don't you start working on coming up with ways to secure mobile devices.

      The obstructionism is well intentioned, but we have an obligation to try to support the needs of the business. Staff are more mobile, and the business is benefiting by having people more connected and better able to make decisions, even when they aren't sitting in front of a PC. So, let's make it secure.

    11. Re:iPhone by stewbacca · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I changed jobs last year. I used to work on government contracts and we weren't even allowed to take thumb drives or laptops out of the building. Wasteful and inefficient for very little security returns (with nothing in place to keep me from just forwarding the stuff to my gmail account, and then working on it from home, something everyone did, btw).

      Now I work in a place that is BYOD. We have NO security problems like the old place. Not because BYOD is more secure, but because when you surround yourself with a security circus, all the IT power-mongers make EVERYTHING a security priority and you get a security circus. Allowing BYOD is the first step for the IT dorks to realize that not everything has to be locked down tight just because it is your job to do so.

    12. Re:iPhone by nweaver · · Score: 0

      Any remote p0wn jailbreaks get squished very quickly by Apple. They really really don't like p0wn the phone attacks.

      This is in strong contrast to Android, which has a great security model, but that security model is trivially bypassed when a user says "OK" to an incomprehensible permissions list provided by a random application that displays cartoon kitties or tells you what color of nail polish works best.

      --
      Test your net with Netalyzr
    13. Re:iPhone by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      This isn't a tech problem. Therefore it can't be solved with tech. You don't allow information that you are obligated to protect the privacy of leave your control. Doesn't matter if it is android, a laptop or a briefcase full of files. The other option is roll the dice and hope you aren't there when the press show up to cover the breach. Choose. And if your boss insists you do it anyway make the sum-bitch put the order in writing so your butt is covered when the poop hits the fan. Because sooner or later... BOOM!

      Staff should not be mobile with private information unless absolutely required to do their job and the number of those people haven't changed a lot. Field work is still field work and office is still the office. And the solutions haven't changed a lot either. Avoid copying more information to a portable device than absolutely required to do the job. And with today's connectivity live connection to a remote app is usually the way to go. Only at the edges can tech play a role. Design it right, control it right and you won't get bit in the ass when (not if) the crypto and other fancy tech fails in the hands of end users.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    14. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .... and the encryption (and device password policy) are enforcable through Mobile Device Management (e.g.: MobileIron)

    15. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      user says "OK" to an incomprehensible permissions list

      "This app uses the internet"

      "This app can access your contacts"

      "Incomprehensible"? Really? Are you just that stupid?

    16. Re:iPhone by gorzek · · Score: 2

      When a C-level executive says they want something, do you really think a rank-and-file IT worker, or even the IT manager, is going to get to tell them "no"?

    17. Re:iPhone by Yaztromo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Considering that any meaningful encryption (I will assume you want some sort of volume group/full disk encryption) will require root access and probably a custom kernel module, you will need android.

      iOS devices have AES 256 encryption baked right into the hardware inside the DMA path between flash storage and the main system memory. It's always enabled, and can't be disabled by users, administrators, or anyone else. No custom kernel modules required -- XNU already has built-in AES 256 support, and the platform already implements it for each and every device.

      Yaz

    18. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The list is hardly incomprehensible and that is not "bypassing" the Android security model. It is the Android security model working as intended in that you, the user, are entitled to and required to decide if the function performed by an application does indeed require (or merit, in the case of ads requesting your location) the permissions that it requests.

    19. Re:iPhone by devforhire · · Score: 2

      I think you are correct with everything you said, but you're missing the most fundamental part of security as it's mostly practiced in the real world (there are some places where security is really taken seriously but they are extremely few.) The only thing that is important is the illusion of an extremely secure system. Most normal human beings would never tolerate any truly secure system as it would be too inconvenient to use.

    20. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the second it leaves the front door you aren't trusting the user anymore, you are trusting the user

      o_0

    21. Re:iPhone by jmorris42 · · Score: 2

      > just forwarding the stuff to my gmail account

      Translation: I didn't give a shit about security and worked around it for my convience. I didn't give two rats asses if I passed private information through totally unsecured servers at Google and anyone at Google with legit (or not) access to the servers with that data on them. I passed information I was obligated to protect the privacy of right through who knows how many unsecured pathways between work, google and home. I managed to leave before getting fired when a major scandal broke in the newspapers and now work somewhere where everybody does this sort of crap out in the open so I no longer even worry about it.

      You are the reason privacy breaches happen. Which was what I was getting at in my first post, make up your mind whether you actually give a crap about privacy/security/etc or not. Then follow Yoda's advice. And sometimes forgetting about it might be the better call, a lot of stuff gets locked down for little real reason. And some stuff really should be kept private.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    22. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fantasy, there are serious rules and regulation around this, and this kind of problem is solved by folks like IBM and senior level decision makers, not sys admins asking questions on Slashdot. Unreal.

    23. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to be that extreme if nothing is cached on the device and everything is accessed remotely each time it's viewed.

    24. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken like a true...well, ignoramus. http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2975157&cid=40631807 Best know your shit before you jump on someone else's.

    25. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and this one...http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2975157&cid=40631975

    26. Re:iPhone by stewbacca · · Score: 2

      Better translation: our IT policies were stupid and overly restrictive and nobody could get any work done so EVERYBODY had a work around. You can't fire everyone, but starting with the idiot IT policy makers would have been a good first start.

    27. Re:iPhone by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 1

      When a C-level executive says they want something, do you really think a rank-and-file IT worker, or even the IT manager, is going to get to tell them "no"?

      Presumably the company employs the IT worker for his skills and knowledge in this particular field, while the requirements of a C-level exec probably and rightfully involves more admin skills than technical ones. The task of the IT-worker is to inform them of why this is a bad idea. Explain the risks, document that you've done so, and if they still demand it and the shit hits the fan you're in the clear, at least if you live in a civilised country (as opposed to for instance Ecuador, where you'd still be successfully posted as a scapegoat).

      Since I'm not technically in the IT dept of my employer I've informed them (IT) that while I gladly help coworkers configure Exchange connetions on their iDevices, I strongly discourage the organisation to allow it. Reaction from IT varies from utter non-understanding to "the risk is small". That's wrong, the probability of success approaches 1 for a targeted attack where they steal the phone from an exec while it's not locked.

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    28. Re:iPhone by gorzek · · Score: 2

      The problem I see with the above is that, if this hypothetical IT worker does the necessary ass-covering and the executive gets to use whatever devices he wants, and then there's a breach, on whom is the axe going to fall? The IT guy. Shit rolls downhill, always.

      "I want to use this device."
      "That device isn't secure. You should use this other one instead, which complies with our security policies."
      "Nah, I'll use the one I've already got."
      "Okay, but I'm going to note in our records that you were warned."

      Three months later...

      "Help! My phone's been compromised!"
      "Hah! I have it written right here that I warned you something like this might happen! My ass is safe."
      "That's what you think. You're fired for not preventing this!"
      "But..."
      "SECURITY!!!!"

    29. Re:iPhone by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 2

      just forwarding the stuff to my gmail account

      Translation: I didn't give a shit about security and worked around it for my convience.

      That's the rub. Security will always be traded for convenience. Some employees have a very real need to be able to work with confidential stuff on the go, but for most it's just "I want to have my email just appear on my iPhone instead of having to turn on my PC and log in to that VPN shit".

      A dedicated and knowledgeable attacker *will* get passwords (almost) no matter what you do to prevent it, but it's easier when you have easily stealable access points in the wild. Of course, an offer of a bit of money to the underpaid cleaning people emptying their carts outside early in the morning, in exchange for installing/retrieving a hw keylogger, will accomplish the same thing.

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    30. Re:iPhone by TechLeadNY · · Score: 0

      Any remote p0wn jailbreaks get squished very quickly by Apple.

      Right, which is why visiting a web site would allow you to root any iOS device for years. Why are you lying?

      but that security model is trivially bypassed when a user says "OK" to an incomprehensible permissions list

      As opposed to the permission list iOS shows you? How many copies of your contacts list are floating around? Jokes on you - you can't answer that. Why do you lie so much? What are you hiding?

      I would tell you to stick to academia, but your ignorance of the real world will ensure that you languish there for the rest of your miserable, hateful existence. Enjoy zero job security and low pay, you deserve every bit of it.

    31. Re:iPhone by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 1

      Our job, as IT professionals, is to come up with solutions. On the same bent, I suppose you'd also cut the link to the Internet.

      So, chew on this: where I live, collaboration between companies competing for a government contract is illegal. Suppose two companies, X and Y, compete. You are a criminal, and you knock the CEO of X over the head and steal his (not screen-locked at the time) phone. At this point you could offer Y an insight in the strategy of X (for instance their lowest limit) in exchange for money. Or you could blackmail the CEO of Y which any illicit info you can access. Or blackmail him to not share all his secrets with his competitors. I'm sure there are lots of possibilities, but as I'm not a criminal I'm just giving a few examples.

      So, as a question to you as an IT pro, is enabling that attack vector a sensible move? Remember that you're hired for your expertise in these matters.

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    32. Re:iPhone by westlake · · Score: 1

      If you want to enforce privacy of information you do two simple things.

      YOU DON"T F*CKING ALLOW IT TO WALK OUT THE FRONT DOOR.

      That doesn't solve the needs of the EMT who arrives to find you on the floor and responsive. You'll have privacy a-plenty when you're dead.

      Mobile access to confidential information is not a problem you can simply wish away. There are two many situations in which it is useful, too many situations in which it is vital.

    33. Re:iPhone by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      As an IT pro, I setup the phone to auto-screen lock, encrypt it, and set it up to be remotely wiped. That vector is, for most purposes, now moot. There are definitely ways around it, but there are ways around most things, remember the old XKCD comic with the encryption key and a wrench. I'm willing to bet your data center isn't fully secured against a SWAT team coming in using C4 to blast open the doors either. But we make reasonable efforts to cover most vectors.

      It also depends on the type and volume of the data. If you're carrying the nuclear launch codes, your security is going to look different than if you're carrying the most recent quarterly earnings statement. It's up to IT to present the risk, the options for mitigating it, and letting the business lines decide what actions to take, and what risks are acceptable. But simply saying, "I can think up an attack vector, therefore, no mobile devices" doesn't work.

    34. Re:iPhone by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      This isn't a tech problem. Therefore it can't be solved with tech. You don't allow information that you are obligated to protect the privacy of leave your control. Doesn't matter if it is android, a laptop or a briefcase full of files. The other option is roll the dice and hope you aren't there when the press show up to cover the breach. Choose. And if your boss insists you do it anyway make the sum-bitch put the order in writing so your butt is covered when the poop hits the fan. Because sooner or later... BOOM!

      Then my point still stands. You don't have any potentially sensitive data connected to the internet, right? Because any vulnerability you can come up with against a screen-locked, encrypted, remote wipeable device, I can come up with something relatively comparable against you're internet attached network. Yep, I walk around with my phone, potentially left or stolen in public. You leave your network attached to the public 24x7x365. And if you don't do that, there is a building that's potentially breachable. We've been dealing with these issues forever. This is simply another issues on the same sliding scale of risk.

    35. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better translation: Our IT policies were not secure enough and didn't lock down the email vector with a whitelist and firewall, so I stole data.

      (Coincidentally, you don't "just use gmail." Gmail is actually unique and very hard to block, as some browsers (at least one version of firefox for ubuntu) have programmed in by default, some weird sort of proxy/alternative way to get to gmail, if it is blocked.)

    36. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only encrypted when the phone is off, though.

  4. BlackBerry = Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd stick with BlackBerry if you want security...

    1. Re:BlackBerry = Security by snowraver1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Has anyone here tried blackberry mobile fusion? Is it good?

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    2. Re:BlackBerry = Security by kuhnto · · Score: 1

      I had it the other day mixed with bananas, Strawberries, Herbal Nutrient Blend, Soy Protein, Turbinado and Honey. Best Smoothie ever!

      --
      "A 'person' is smart. 'People' are dumb, panicky animals and you know that."
  5. Re:state agency will take the best deal not the be by masternerdguy · · Score: 2

    No, the US government actually takes computer security pretty damn seriously.

    --
    To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
  6. Android Supports encription by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://support.google.com/ics/nexus/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2381815

  7. Use Apple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Their phones don't offer any enterprise-level collaboration features whatsoever. No features, no security risk!

  8. technology should fit the budget and user level by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pagers and pay phones are the way to go for state communications.

  9. Built In Encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Android 4.0 and later devices all have options for full-disk 128-bit AES encryption built into the OS.

  10. iPhones are encrypted by default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't speak to android, but iPhones have whole device encryption enabled as standard. For security you would just need to enforce use of passcodes.

    Apple has a pretty great resource on ios security at: http://www.apple.com/iphone/business/integration/ Specifically the PDF under the heading "works with your work".

    1. Re:iPhones are encrypted by default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't speak to android, but iPhones have whole device encryption enabled as standard.

      Android has full AES encryption as one checkbox away on version 4.0.

    2. Re:iPhones are encrypted by default by thegoldenear · · Score: 1

      Settings -> Security:
      - Encrypt device
      - Encrypt SD Card

  11. If they're going to have Active Sync... by nighthawk243 · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you're using active sync, you can make it part of the sync policy to wipe the phone when it is marked lost. We do that quite a bit.

  12. Sandbox Application by rogueippacket · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Try something like Good for Enterprise - allow your employees to bring their own devices (this is the trend, don't try to dodge it) if they wish, and just provide them with an activation key for the application. The days of "work device" and "personal device" are over - users will use one device for both, and issuing a crippled device which only performs one of these tasks is quite draconian. The sandboxed application ensures all critical information is secure, while giving your employees the segregation between life and work they desire.

    1. Re:Sandbox Application by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Yeah. "Sandbox" apps like this will be received better by employees. If you try OS-level encryption with policy enforcements (such as Exchange policy enforcements), users will find ways to bypass the policy enforcements that get in the way of "normal personal operations" and this will also kill the security of the things you want to keep secure.

      Sandboxes like Good for Enterprise don't annoy users when they are engaged in personal use, so they are far less likely to disable security measures.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    2. Re:Sandbox Application by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      despite this ridiculous trend of BYOD - go for a policy of web apps, nothing stored locally and Hardware Tokens (or 1 time 'perma cookie') + regular pass for authentication

    3. Re:Sandbox Application by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Stay away from that trash. I recently attended a presentation on "Good for Enterprise" intended for professionals and it was just pathetic. Some friends, who are not security experts, began poking holes in the statements made in real-time, because the fatal flaws were obvious even to them.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Sandbox Application by businessnerd · · Score: 1

      I will second this option. My company uses Good for Enterprise on both Android and iPhone. The nice thing about it is that it is YOUR phone that happens to have a an app on it to access your work e-mail, calendar and contacts. You can view attachments, but not download them to the actual device. The app itself is password protected so you can choose your own level of security for the rest of your phone. The only bad part is that, well, naming an app "Good" will always result in it being bad. The interface is a bit clunky (GMail app, blackberry mail, etc. are all much more enjoyable to use) and I often have the issue of it not syncing regularly when i'm on WiFi (for some reason it's much more reliable on even a week mobile data connection). Additionally, the app will not install on a rooted or jailbroken phone (for security reasons). The geek in me wants to root my phone, but the other part of me that needs a fully functioning and reliable smartphone is happy limits were put in place. But despite the downsides, it does what I need it to do and it's liveable. The company is happy that their data is encrypted and sandboxed from the rest of the phone. I'm happy that I can do what I want with MY phone and don't have to worry about some rogue app messing with work data. The only

      --
      "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
    5. Re:Sandbox Application by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We use Good and I have a rooted phone. It's an option they turn on to not allow this (because Good is probably less secure on a rooted device.)

  13. Use Good - from Good Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use Good from Good Technology (www.good.com). If you are familiar with Blackberry Enterprise Server, its a very similar system but works for Android, iPhone and Windows mobile devices. Once you set up the server infrastructure and licenses (its a pay product like BES) you or your end users just install the free app from the Play Store/App Store/etc and then provide their email address and the activation code (very similar to BES) and boom. It creates an encrypted partition where all the contacts, and company email are stored. User must input password to access the app. It keeps their personal and company data separate. The phone can get stolen and they will only lose their personal data not company/government, unless of course they use a password like 1234.

  14. Re:state agency will take the best deal not the be by Picass0 · · Score: 1

    It's not a federal agency. OP said it was a "mid-sized state agency".

  15. Hardware encryption / acceleration chip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone doing an android phone with this on board that can be used to reduce overhead with things like file / volume encryption and network / vpn

  16. Wrong: iPhone is encrypted by default... by nweaver · · Score: 2

    And in fact its non-disableable. The remote wipe is, in fact, "kill key store".

    Apple's propaganda, err, whitepaper on the subject

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
  17. Re:state agency will take the best deal not the be by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    well take the security software that locks stuff down to much and is a pain to work with.

  18. Re:state agency will take the best deal not the be by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Not always. Some states do worry about technical merit.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  19. use android 4 and meraki.com's free MDM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Meraki provides a nice mobile device management system, has recently added android support, is cloud based, and best of all is free (a loss leader). Remote wipe and other features are there too.

  20. Seperation of use by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Id prefer to have 2 devices over the 'boss' having access to mine, in ANY manner. ( even active sync which gives them far too much control over MY device )

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  21. Err, proper propaganda link... by nweaver · · Score: 2

    Proper propaganda link, silly me, forgot the http

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
  22. Droid Encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We use Google Apps builtin in encryption and mobile device management. http://support.google.com/a/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1734200 Works great. Free too.

  23. Touchdown or Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those are the best options--you have to pay for them, but provide the best Exchange compatible option.

    1. Re:Touchdown or Good by mlts · · Score: 1

      That is exactly my suggestion, although I'd not bother with Good and just use Nitrodesk's Touchdown.

      This allows IT to keep all their Exchange data separated from the data of the phone. This also benefits the user because a remote wipe only will destroy that app's data, and not erase the phone.

      Touchdown is not perfect -- it has some user interface quirks, and only works with one Exchange account, but it does a decent job.

      Another good Exchange program is RoadSync. I use this so I can get functionality that I don't get with the Android OS, such as flagging messages, setting tasks, etc.

    2. Re:Touchdown or Good by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Looks like Touchdown is Android only, while Good supports ios, android, and windows.

  24. Not crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Blackberry was your best bet for security. All the others are spyable from the US government by their own admission. Blackberry was the one carried by all those in the know, outside of the us. They had stopped the production of the old style berries at the request of some-one not listed. But the house of saud wass involved about 5 years ago.
    All of the current units, the programing can be hacked, reported by the security magazines, for the last three years. Dont trust a one of them. If your company-state-government has to have mobile e-mail make them carry a portable stick,a card that is encrypted with/for them. that card when added to their unit, will now display the encrypted communications they have recieved. Do their e-mail as a crypted illustration as a captia, you know looking like garbage, but readable by the stick. But a nice simple way is to get pgp. Set up a key on the stick for the person, and a reader for translation.

  25. Android Communication Encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are looking for secure wireless communication and storage that can be used on off the shelf mobile devices, I would suggest looking into Apriva. They have a communication suite that was designed for that purpose. This might be a reasonable option for a agency to utilize (not really for an individual consumer though). Hope this helps.

  26. You have no security. by Animats · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Assume that your carrier, cloud provider, and handset manufacturer all have access to everything on the phone.

    With Blackberry, you could run your own server, and nothing in the public infrastructure had access to unencrypted data. With Android, Google has a direct tap into your data. Encryption won't help when the layer that reads the keys is under the control of the provider.

    1. Re:You have no security. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the demise of RIM is coincident with the rise of Homeland Security! Cool.

  27. there are open source solutions by ZonkerWilliam · · Score: 1

    There is Open PGP for Android phones. http://www.thialfihar.org/projects/apg/

  28. Fed govt customer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We use Maas360 at DOI ans so far, so good.. http://www.maas360.com/

  29. Hardware-grade encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may give TrustChip a shot (www.koolspan.com).

  30. Try a Few Managing Systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://aerstone.com/government-mobile-device-integration/ Basically has every suggestion that may help you

  31. Enterproid's Divide by noah_fense · · Score: 1

    NYC startup enterproid has a product call Divide that you should check out: http://www.divide.com/

    No iphone solution, but I'm sure it is next on your list.

    1. Re:Enterproid's Divide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iphone version is coming soon according to their twitter

    2. Re:Enterproid's Divide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iOS is coming soon! :)

  32. VMware Horizon App by bnyrbl · · Score: 1

    This requires certain models of phone with the hypervisor loaded by the manufacturer, but creates two partitions on your phone, one like the blackberry (encrypted, remote wipeable, secure, app streaming, no access to add user apps but system can administer global apps in the work partition), and the other a personal android phone. Even has separate work and personal phone number identities. Just swipe the screen back and forth, and you switch between personal and work spaces. http://www.vmware.com/products/mobile/overview.html

  33. Re:state agency will take the best deal not the be by dsvick · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would think that the fact the OP is taking to the time to ask the question and even went so far as to ask for help with things he realizes he might not even know enough to ask is pretty good evidence that they are taking security seriously. Granted, he probably has to get it approved if it a pad app, but the cost of that should be pretty small compared to the cost of the phones themselves.

  34. mobile management choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It really seems like your choices are Activesync, Blackberry server, or Good Mobile for Enterprise. We recently migrated from BB, and needed to setup a different secure mobile management solution that could handle Iphone and Android devices. Good was pretty much the only logical alternative. Works well for Exchange integration, syncing, app management, and security. Lost devices can be wiped, updates can be approved, and setup of new devices is painless. All major carriers support the system, and users are provided with a whatever choice in OS.

    Server sits inside the network, communicates with only the Good NOC, and doesn't require any additional firewall rules. Similar to BB servers.

    Good luck!

  35. Plethora of MDM. Find your fit. by HideyoshiJP · · Score: 1

    There are plenty MDM solutions out there. I am quite happy with AirWatch (Gartner Magic Quadrant 2012), though I was impressed with Good Technologies. AirWatch was cheaper, but was not sandboxed. Most Android devices will also require the Touchdown client ($15-20 per license) for the deployment of email profiles unless you're only supporting devices with OEM MDM extensions. You'll find a lot of MDM solutions require Touchdown, which definitely has quirks end-users will notice. Biggest things: Make sure you find the product that fits your budget (naturally) Take your corporate culture into mind when looking at a solution. Are they going to be totally baffled when their email disappears because their PIN doesn't meet requirements? Do plenty of testing with actual devices. If you need device-level encryption, target 3.0 devices. Be wary of products that feel kludgy. Some vendors have tacked 3LM pieces onto their existing iOS management.

  36. BoxTone and BES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We use a combination of BoxTone and BES to manage our Android, Blackberry and IOS devices. I would recommend it as a solution.

  37. NSA Security Recommendations for iOS by weezel · · Score: 1

    Here's the NSAs recommendations for securing iOS devices: http://www.nsa.gov/ia/_files/os/applemac/Apple_iOS_5_Guide.pdf

    --
    EOF
  38. iOS has encryption and management built-in by plsuh · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm a former Apple engineer, current independent consultant, so I'm not going to address the Android side. That's a lot more complicated -- I'll stick with talking about the iOS info that I know about.

    That said, wow, there's a lot of snarky comments but not a lot of information posted.

    iOS has full-device hardware encryption built-in on the iPhone 3GS and later, activated as soon as you set up a passcode. This top-level encryption layer is for quick device wipes, not for data protection. Each user data file is then encrypted on top of that using its own unique key, then set into a protection class by the app developer:

      - Complete Protection - decrypted only when the device is unlocked; file key is removed from memory when the device is locked.

      - Protected Unless Open - decrypted when the device is unlocked; if file is open when the device locks, the file stays open/decrypted.

      - Protected Until First User Authentication - decrypted on first unlock, stays decrypted until reboot

      - No Protection - file system encryption only; no per-file encryption key

    Apple has really been on developers cases to tighten down the data protection classes for their apps on iOS.

    In addition, iOS has a huge number of remote management options. Apple provides a basic management tool called Profile Manager in Lion Server, and there are third-party Mobile Device Managers (MDMs) that take the basics and go even further. You can force complex passcodes, pre-configure e-mail accounts, restrict usage of features, and so on. The enterpriseios.com site has a pretty complete listing.

    One of the cool things about using iOS MDM is that all of the configuration profiles are tied to the management profile that gets installed when the device is first enrolled with the MDM. If you're in a BYOD situation and a user leaves on bad terms, the IT department can retract the management profile, which automatically retracts all of the other configuration profiles. This will delete corporate e-mail accounts, remove in-house apps (and their data!), take away VPN and 802.1X access, and so on, without erasing the person's device entirely. All of the pictures the person took are still there, not blown away as they would be after a complete device wipe.

    Anyway, a few links that may help you out:

    http://www.apple.com/iphone/business/integration/
    http://images.apple.com/ipad/business/docs/iOS_Security_May12.pdf
    http://www.enterpriseios.com/
    http://consultants.apple.com/index.php - look for consultants with the Mobility specialization
    https://help.apple.com/advancedserveradmin/mac/10.7/ - go into "Manage Users" --> "Profile Manager" on the right

    Hope this helps.

    --Paul

    1. Re:iOS has encryption and management built-in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My question has always been: if someone takes an iPhone apart, can they bruteforce the passphrase?

    2. Re:iOS has encryption and management built-in by Spad · · Score: 1

      iOS MDM is pretty laughably limited, you can't even disable WiFi or Bluetooth through it, set a proxy server (other than as part of a VPN connection) or otherwise restrict web access without turning off Safari entirely. Apple being Apple, of course, if they don't offer it as a setting, you can't do it without Jailbreaking, which few companies really want to have to mess around with.

    3. Re:iOS has encryption and management built-in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need to take the phone apart, you can brute-force it through the dock connector. A 4 digit PIN takes roughly 30 minutes to crack, and there are devices on the market right now that do it. They are primarily sold to law enforcement agencies. It doesn't just apply to iOS either, Android is affected as well. The best solution is to expand your keyspace by using a strong passphrase instead of a PIN.

    4. Re:iOS has encryption and management built-in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you elaborate on what protection class is applied to recently-opened ActiveSync email attachments? Our testing has shown that attachments (and calendar entries) are retrievable via a jailbreak attack [Physical possession of passcode-locked device -> redsn0w -> upload OpenSSH -> SSH over WiFi -> profit].

    5. Re:iOS has encryption and management built-in by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      As Yaz wrote above:
      iOS devices have AES 256 encryption baked right into the hardware inside the DMA path between flash storage and the main system memory. It's always enabled, and can't be disabled by users, administrators, or anyone else. No custom kernel modules required -- XNU already has built-in AES 256 support, and the platform already implements it for each and every device.

    6. Re:iOS has encryption and management built-in by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      From what I read, using the iPhone Configuration Utility app for Enterprise users, you can disable WiFi and bluetooth in the provisioning.

    7. Re:iOS has encryption and management built-in by SignOfZeta · · Score: 1

      If you're talking about unlocking the phone via the lock screen like people do, that's a no-go. There is an option to erase the device after ten failed unlock attempts, and (correct me if I'm wrong) it's turned on by default. Even though there are only 10,000 possible combinations, you'll only have the chance to try 0.1% of them before the phone self-destructs, no matter how long you wait between attempts.

      If you're talking about bypassing iOS and attacking the flash chips directly, then post a link. I'm curious.

    8. Re:iOS has encryption and management built-in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course doing it on the screen is a no-go, which is why I said "through the dock connector."

      Anyway, here's the link:

      http://www.apple.slashdot.org/story/12/03/27/212254/cops-can-crack-an-iphone-in-under-two-minutes

  39. TEOPAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can use TEOPAD
    Simple efficient but not free
    http://www.thalesgroup.com/Teopad/

  40. My state phones have sensative data send to me! by Qubit · · Score: 2

    Oh wait, was this the article about spammers hiring better copyeditors so they could steal your data more better, or was it the other one?

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
  41. We use MAS-360 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MAS-360 for both iPhones and Android Devices. Primarily for Email and contact management. Android Devices end up using Touchdown for Exchange with a policy that encrypts the data and forces secure use (passcodes etc). iOS devices use stock mail client with the service.

    Remote wipe doesn't wipe the whole phone just the data involved. Location services etc...

    Works pretty good.

  42. Need Corp safe phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The much maligned BlackBerry is the only game in town.

  43. Re:state agency will take the best deal not the be by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

    No, the US government actually takes computer security pretty damn seriously.

    Well, they'd better hope the bad guys don't buy the same hardware that the MET police in Europe, and in the US, the Michigan State Police, are using to "slurp" all the data from smartphones, even when protected/encrypted.

    http://grownupgeek.com/police-now-slurp-cell-phone-data-minutes

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  44. Airwatch checks for jailbroken devices by daninaustin · · Score: 2

    You can automatically remove all corporate data when the device is jailbroken. I prefer android devices, but the security on the IOS devices is still better than android.

  45. Why not use Android's built-in encryption? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not just Settings > Security > Encrypt Phone?

  46. Actually they do by maccodemonkey · · Score: 1

    Read the Government/Secure deployment guide, which Apple wrote for this exact purpose.

    iPhones do hardware encrypted disk, passcoding, ActiveSync, and support MDM (mobile device management) servers to enforce policy.

    Android's support for these things is much more... fragmented. I think iPhones would be the better option here.

  47. McAfee EMM by IMightB · · Score: 1

    Don't know what exactly your requirements are, but you can look into McAfee EMM, supports iOS, Android, Windows Phones and Blackberry

    http://www.mcafee.com/us/products/enterprise-mobility-management.aspx

    Disclaimer: I work for McAfee but a different division

  48. VMKnoppix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    VMKnoppix is a good example of excellent encryption setup with the exception that the virtual TMP is not trusted to the hardware because TPM does not support doing this. I would recommend that HP (I think there the ones who bought and probably will squash VMKnoppix) implement vTPM extensions on their hardware. Virtualization with TPM/vTPM in my honest opinion is an effective combination and could be extended to be trusted to a central site on a central server. This type of sandboxing could be the ultimate sandbox.

    If only there was enough processing power to keep it encrypted in memory(Google mathematicians determined this was possible but not on existing computers at their relatively small processing power).

    Keeping it encrypted over links and on the hard drive and right up to the point its been PROCESSED and set as output to the screen (or hmm or even better right into the trusted party brain) would give us an uncompromisable solution (with the exception of brute force.)

  49. Re:NSA Security Recommendations for Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's the NSAs recommendations for securing Android devices.

    FTFY. The NSA has a full blueprint for a government trusted secure android device. Given that the US also built a secure linux distro, I'm thinking that this is the product you want.

  50. You have not researched this very much by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    - You propose a bunch of obtuse and/or manufacturer specific options, when Android has had full disk encryption available out of the box since 4.0

    - Encryption is not your primary problem. Endpoint Management is. It doesn't matter a lick if your device is encrypted if it is swiped while it is unlocked, or if it gets malware inserted into it via an SD card or browser exploit. You need to be able to enforce what is installed on the phone so that you can force malware detection software. You also need to be able to remotely wipe and de-provision the phone on demand, including wiping the SD cards. There are solutions for this, like Tivoli Endpoint Manager.

  51. Afaria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While not on the exact topic of encrypting devices, you may want to look into remote management of the device. My company asked me to put a program called Afaria by Sybase on my personal device (I don't have a business one). I decided not to because of the insane control it gives my company over my personal device. But looking at it, it would be great to have for people with company/government devices.

    http://www.sybase.com/products/mobileenterprise/afaria

  52. Device Policy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use the Android Device Policy app to enforce encryption
    http://support.google.com/a/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1408902
    (see "device settings" section)

    Available since Honeycomb:
    http://source.android.com/tech/encryption/android_crypto_implementation.html