Slashdot Mirror


Boeing and BlackBerry Making a Self-Destructing Phone

Rambo Tribble writes: It sounds like a Mission: Impossible scenario, but aerospace company Boeing is teaming with Canadian phone maker BlackBerry to produce an ultra-secure mobile phone that "self-destructs." The phone uses encryption on calls and is intended to serve the high-security needs of government and industry. As Blackberry CEO John Chen said, "We're pleased to announce that Boeing is collaborating with BlackBerry to provide a secure mobile solution for Android devices utilizing our BES 12 platform. That, by the way, is all they allow me to say."

No word yet if you'll need the services of the bomb squad when you go over your minutes.

75 comments

  1. "But it can be circumvented!" by jones_supa · · Score: 2

    Cue in the comments on how that security feature is not completely perfect, so therefore it has to be completely useless.

    1. Re:"But it can be circumvented!" by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Cue in the comments on how that security feature is not completely perfect, so therefore it has to be completely useless.

      You mean like the fact that Boeing already works very closely with the CIA/NSA and therefor this thing is 100% guaranteed to have a government backdoor per-installed AND the purchase of such a phone would automatically put on a watch list that would result in pretty much all of your traffic getting logged anyway?

      Not perfect... more like, this phone likely does exactly the opposite of what it advertises.

    2. Re:"But it can be circumvented!" by Njorthbiatr · · Score: 2

      I'm more curious how superior this is to using a burner phone.

    3. Re:"But it can be circumvented!" by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      this thing is 100% guaranteed to have a government backdoor per-installed AND the purchase of such a phone would automatically put on a watch list

      The target market for this phone is government employees and defense contractors, not drug dealers and terrorists.

    4. Re:"But it can be circumvented!" by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Kaboom. It's the earth shattering kaboom.

      Bursting in flames is so 19th Century.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:"But it can be circumvented!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe, MAYBE, you can be a government employee AND a terrorist?
      Who is a terrorist is just a subjective view in the land of the free these days.
      IDK, maybe if you don't agree to certain gov policies, who knows what could happen to you.

    6. Re:"But it can be circumvented!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While your point about the practical advantages of a security feature -- even one with limitations -- is valid, there is another practical issue to be concerned with; managers. Having worked on software in companies where data security was very important, I have seen the interaction between security and managers first-hand. What happens is managers don't understand security so they like check-box security; compliance, security products, logbooks, locks on doors. Nothing wrong with this, but at the same time major security problems go overlooked.

      So I tend to be towards the kind of person who sees flaws in a security product and will be against it. What will happen is managers will buy it, assume all their security needs are met, and ignore any real problems. "Who could be clever enough to hack this?" -- it is crazy how often I have heard this. It is better to point out all the ways a product can be overcome as people tend to ignore this. So I would rather make something seem less secure than it really is than risk non-technical big-shots thinking all their security needs are met because a sales guy suckered them out of a pile of money.

    7. Re:"But it can be circumvented!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hype/government bashing aside, if the phone had an open/unlocked bootloader, this would be a very nice thing to have.

      One feature that would be nice would be an additional PIN or other authentication for user selectable apps as well as the ability to dump data via ADB. This way, if one is using the phone and it gets swiped, the banking app, the Cracked Lite app, and the Web browser with all the personal bookmarks would be protected.

      Other features that would be nice would be partitions. One swipe, and I have all my stuff for home use. Another tab has my work stuff. Another tab has banking. All separated by completely different virtual machines (ARM is good enough that paravirtualization or full virtualization isn't going to be that much overhead.) This way, if the device is stolen, I can erase the partitions with sensitive stuff [1], and still have one partition tracking the device 24/7.

      Multiple SIM slots is nice as well. That way, all I need from my work is a SIM card, and with VMs, work and home are completely separate.

      All and all, this is a nice device. However, it RIM could add virtual machines, it would be damn near perfect.

      [1]: Having each VM encrypted with a different key and an erase overwriting the keys, as well as doing a TRIM on the blocks will ensure that once gone, it is -gone-, no ifs, ands, or buts.

    8. Re:"But it can be circumvented!" by davester666 · · Score: 1

      It is with BlackBerry. Their cell phones are totally unusable when the keyboard fails. It's a security feature!

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  2. Hints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    1. Entire source code is open source so that it can be audited by independent researchers

    2. It doesn't run anything that talks to any fancy cloud services, which means no Google

    3. Good thing Boeing is in on it. Mentioning a self destructing device in your pocket to TSA could be a bad idea..

    1. Re:Hints by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Maybe it just lets the magic smoke out of the storage and ram chips.

    2. Re:Hints by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      They've been working on it for over 12 years; I wrote the following for my web site in 2002. It will be in an upcoming book. Apologies for the mangled unicode, but slashdot's preview is worthless, since "preview" shows the unicode but the submission displays garbage. Here is the article:

      McCoy: He's dead, Jim
      Several years ago, before PCs were not nearly as com-mon in the home as they are now, a friend of mine asked of my computer, âoebut aren't you afraid it will explode?â
      He was a Star Trek fan, and in the old 1950s and 1960s science fiction and spy shows, computers all had a nasty habit of blowing up. All one had to do to these TV or movie computers to make them explode was shoot them, with either a ray gun or a police revolver. Some TV and movie computers would blow up if you âoepressed the wrong buttonâ; one episode of the 1960s TV show The Prisoner (âoeI am not a number! I am a free man!â) had a computer that could answer any question. The bad guys, who had imprisoned the hero, a spy who had resigned his post, wanted to know why he resigned. Of course, before the bad guys could ask the computer âoeWhy did number six resign his post?â the intrepid number six offered that he had a question the computer could not answer.
      He typed in to the Remington electric typewriter and fed the paper into the computer, which, of course, promptly started smoking, sparking, and ultimately blew up. The question was simply âoewhy?â
      Similarly, in an episode of Star Trek, Spock makes a computer explode by asking it to figure the value of pi to the last decimal place. Of course, any time a Star Trek computer was fired on, whether by a Klingon or Federation phaser, and no matter what civilization designed and built the computer, it would explode in a grand display of fireworks.
      I had to explain to my friend that this was all nonsense, that early computers from the early 1950s used thousands of vacuum tubes, requiring high voltages, which could throw showers of sparks and bright purple flashes with the characteristic âoepop!â if there was a short circuit in its 120-240 volt circuitry but would not actually explode, and that modern computers ran on three to twelve volts and wouldn't even get a spark from a short.
      I had to explain to my friend that the only explosions were in my games; that the computer itself here in the analog world was safe.
      Along with the matter transporter and faster than light travel, the exploding computer was one of those things relegated to science fiction.
      Until now.
      New Scientist reports that they have found a way to make silicon explode on demand, either by shock, as with that .38 caliber police special or by electrical signal.
      âoeThis machine is stolen and will self-destruct in ten seconds.â
      New Scientist says âoeFor instance, the American spy plane impounded by China last year could have used it to destroy its secret electronics systems.â
      They add âoeIn a stolen mobile phone, the network would send a trigger signal to the part of the chip containing the gadolinium nitrate âdetonatorâ(TM), triggering the explosion... and detonate it at will.â
      So not only is Star Trek's computer to blow up, its communicators will too! I can see in five years when these bozos have the anti theft circuits in phones. Drop your phone now and it might break. Drop it in five years and it might take your leg off!
      Of course, the new viruses in ten years will not just reformat your hard drive; the kids will be writing viruses to make people's computers explode in their

    3. Re:Hints by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

      lets the magic smoke out of the storage and ram chips

      You had the same electronics theory professor I did!

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  3. Secure & Android by tysonedwards · · Score: 1

    Misnomers?

    --
    Thirty four characters live here.
    1. Re:Secure & Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misnomers?

      Oxymoron.

  4. Just wondering by lapm · · Score: 1

    This comes with built in NSA backdoor?

  5. Easy Peasy by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

    Just put Sony batteries in them.

    1. Re:Easy Peasy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HACF - - Boing batteries!

  6. Great Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is a great idea, actually.

    In fact, I would take it a step further. If a mobile phone you value is stolen, for example, or taken into custody against your will, having it self-destruct upon tampering is one thing. What if not tampering is done, or too many false PIN attempts? Why not also have logic onboard that says "if my master has not used me or texted me a certain code in such a time, I'll self-destruct also". This would prevent someone from holding onto your phone and simply copying the data from it. If your phone is confiscated and you cannot sent a self-destruct signal because it's in a Faraday cage for holding, it will auto destruct in a given time. If you lose your phone, but can locate it via "find my phone" or left it at a friend's flat, and it has a signal, you could text a code to not destruct.

    1. Re:Great Idea by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      or too many false PIN attempts?

      So some joker in your office can destroy your phone in a couple of minutes while you're in the washroom? That's pretty insecure.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Great Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If, as a mobile phone owner, it's either not on your person, or, if you're a woman, in your purse or in your clutch, jeans pocket, etc., you know nothing about device security. I NEVER walk away from my phone unless I am home. EVER. I also never walk away from my computer w/o locking it. Force of habit after working a for a company for which being away from an unlocked PC was a firing offense -- and they enforced it. I watched three people lose their jobs within 6 month's time. I'm in agreement with the policy still. We were an IT security shop, so we were just enforcing common sense.

    3. Re:Great Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blackberries already had this functionality. If they didn't get a BIS/BES status within "x" amount of time, they could be configured to erase themselves.

    4. Re:Great Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the early 1990s, I learned similar by working in a university setting, where the second someone left a terminal or computer unattended, someone would be pouncing on it, either to send out mail, try to see if they can use the user account to get root somewhere [1]. If not that, then purging the homedir and sending out obscene E-mails from that account to all the profs that were not liked.

      In fact, I even made a trigger switch that plugged into the serial port of the workstation I used, so when I got out of the chair, it automatically reset the connection and killed my session.

      Even in the relative calm environment I have now, I still always lock my stuff. Not that a co-worker would grab it, but better safe than sorry.

      Same with my phone. I'm using it, or it is locked. A stolen iPhone can bring in a lot of cash. It can be sold to someone who will buy it no questions asked, or parted out. $200 for a screen can buy a good amount of meth or a Saturday Night Special.

      [1]: The system had sturdy disk quotas, so the savvier students would hope to get an account with no quotas, so they could create a world writable file that they could stash their stuff into. It also had very tight disk space, so most students ended up filling their homedir, and punching holes in the file in order to store their files. Finding a user that had access to NFS partitions without a quota was like a gold mine.

    5. Re:Great Idea by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

      I used to work systems security at a bigcorp. If a member of our team walked away with his workstation unlocked, someone would immediately jump on it and change his public status message. The standard was: "Don't worry, I'm insecurity!"

  7. I think Sony got there first by Threni · · Score: 1
  8. Only one engineer knows how it works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But just before release, we'll kill her.

    1. Re:Only one engineer knows how it works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      her? it's much more likely to be 'him.' your pc language doesn't change reality.

  9. Good for the next two years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are they building it just for Him, in case He loses it when visiting local restaurants and shops?

  10. High Expectations by TraumaHound · · Score: 3, Funny

    I expect big things, Blackberry have been world leaders in self destruction for the past eight years.

    1. Re:High Expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The smart people left. Only fucking morons like you have stuck around. Or this article is so fucking stupid that it doesn't warrant real conversation. Blackberry is a joke. There is nothing interesting here. Just a dinosaur from the mid 2000s trying to stay relevant. Kind of like you, huh?

      On the bright side, at least idiots complaining about slashdot but still visiting it, hasn't changed? Right?

      You're pathetic.

    2. Re:High Expectations by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Dead heat between them and Sony's battery supplier.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re: High Expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * whoosh* he was clearly making fun of BlackBerry. Moron.

      Did BlackBerry kick your dog or something? Do you seriously want to keep paying higher prices for shitty iPhone upgrades other phones had for years?

      You're clearly a poser who will jump on the next Apple shit they release at ridiculous prices.

      For those who cannot read, Boeing makes the phone, blackberry makes the management back end. If Boeing was smart, theyâ(TM)d also pay BlackBerry for their list of 100+ vulnerabilities BlackBerry found when evaluating android years ago.

      Where the fuck is Apple's management system?

      Why can't they make a device that doesn't need to be rooted to get features BlackBerry and android had for years?

  11. I've had 5 blacberries by maliqua · · Score: 2, Funny

    They've been making self destructing phones for quite some time now.

    But the addition of a feature that allows you to control when and why it self destructs will be a huge improvement.

  12. Great Feature - Fro Blackberry by Phat_Tony · · Score: 1, Funny

    I've gotten a chance to try out a few friends' work-issued Blackberrys in the smartphone era, and I've got to say, a convenient way to destroy the thing entirely sounds like the most useful feature RIM has added in a long time.

    --
    Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
  13. Sounds familiar by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    Is this the same phone that was talked about in February?

  14. I think Nokia has them beat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Of course, it was unintentional.

  15. Destruct as in explode? by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    Ought to be easy to do. Israelis figured this out a long time ago.

    Of course there is a downside, if you are holding it and

  16. What is the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The law will merely be changed to by using of one of these phones and when ordered to surrender it by court order (i you are lucky) it self destructs as proof of guilt of something.

    1. Re:What is the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or they can just use the existing laws they already do in these circumstances like contempt and obstruction of justice.

  17. Boeing and ... by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

    Who?

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
  18. Uh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh ... the data on the phone is encrypted, right? Is this rubber hose protection?

  19. Blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    And for their next act, the whole company will self-destruct. Now that's security!

  20. We should have done this decades ago by Holistic+Missile · · Score: 1

    The self-destruct feature should have been included in every plane, tank, APC, rocket launcher, mortar, rifle, and any other weapons we have been selling to unstable, neurotic dictators in the middle east for decades. Set up to be remotely activated by the U.S., of course. Instead, we have our troops facing down our own weapons.

    --
    When you're dead, you don't know you're dead. It only affects the people around you. Same thing when you're stupid.
    1. Re:We should have done this decades ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't worry about that when you were taking the profits, the military industrial complex were creating 'Jerbs' and it was boom time for all.

      Most of your good life style is based on killing somebody someplace else.

    2. Re:We should have done this decades ago by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, they've thought about that. Most modern high performance weapons need maintenance and spare parts. Get on our shit list, no maintenance and no spare parts. It's either us or the Israelis (who somehow manage to manufacture high performance US weapon systems in their entirety).

      Ask the Iranians. Their 'modern' Air Force has lots and lots of hanger queens. They've gone to making model RC planes since that is the best they can do on their own.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:We should have done this decades ago by Holistic+Missile · · Score: 2

      Not all of us are 'proud to be American' this last decade or so.

      For the record, I've never personally profited from any of our government's shenanigans, nor have I ever worked a defense-related or government-generated job. Like most people that I know, I have gained nothing from the government's imperialistic activities except more disdain for them.

      I have actually communicated directly with my congressman and both of my senators in person and via email numerous times about the subject of making so many surplus weapons and selling them to those countries (or anyone, for that matter). I included the remote self-destruct idea in the event of them being used on a tyrant's own people, or against us or any of our allies. It was like talking to a rock (three of them, actually). Apparently, a big sack of money always wins...

      My lifestyle is actually based on designing and manufacturing medical research and surgical/pharmaceutical products which actually benefit people worldwide. The products I design and make are used in genetic research, blood collection and component separation, heart pumps, stent systems, many laproscopic surgery products, and hundreds of various drugs. While the corporations that I work with are in some ways corporate douchebags, much like the 'defense' contractors, they at least contribute to the well-being of the people of the world in the end. How many lives did your work save today? :-)

      --
      When you're dead, you don't know you're dead. It only affects the people around you. Same thing when you're stupid.
    4. Re: We should have done this decades ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None, except for mine. I don't care for other people. Anyone who takes pride in "saving lives" in an overpopulated world where the vast majority of the population is about to be made redundant by automation is a deluded fool at best. Are they going to ever thank you for the drugs and treatments they cannot afford and could only prolong an existence made of poverty and abject misery? The ones who can afford them will not have to thank you: we're already paying you. So get off the high horse: you don't matter.

  21. police will charge with destruction of evidence by RichMan · · Score: 1

    So the cops pull you over, and as they are now allowed, they start poking around your phone. It clears itself.
    You are going to have some nice vacation time.

  22. What I would like to see by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Is an iPhone case made out of C4, that would detonate whenever the device is placed in Lost Mode. You use Find My Phone to track it when it goes missing, and if you see it floating around in the ghetto, you activate Lost Mode. Kaboom!

  23. God this place has gone downhill by Pope+Hagbard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    30 comments and all but one or two are brain-dead stupid. What happened to the intelligent posters? Slashdot used to be known for having pretty intelligent discussion.

    1. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too easy to go for the low-hanging fruit of "BlackBerry sucks" instead of having an informed opinion of their own.

    2. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happened to the intelligent posters?

      They left... shortly after Dice took over.

    3. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I read the headline "Boeing and BlackBerry Making a Self-Destructing Phone", the only way I could make sense of it was so it will self destruct if you try to use it during takeoff or landing

    4. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the captain has illuminated the fasten seatbelts sign, all seatbacks and tray tables in their upright and locked positions, we are expecting some turbulance due to the number of devices which have initiated their self destruct sequences"

    5. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They turned into intelligent 'posers'.

    6. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They all went to soylentnews.

    7. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Both of them?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask Bennett Hazelton

    9. Re:God this place has gone downhill by Pope+Hagbard · · Score: 1

      Pish. We had Jon Katz back in the day.

  24. Who didn't see this coming. by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

    The phone uses encryption on calls and is intended to serve the high-security needs of government and industry.

    As opposed to the security needs of consumers, which are obviously non-existent. No doubt it will come with a CALEA exemption, because Boeing. (Watch for a one sentence rider inserted into an otherwise totally unrelated bill some time in 2017.) Of course they will be absurdly expensive, but the Citizens who possess them will easily be able to afford them. If you can't pay, you definitely don't deserve security. But you can't have one unless you are on The List anyway. After all, they're CALEA exempt. You must have been background checked, approved, and sponsored before you can get on The List.

    Remember, Service Brings Citizenship! Enlist today!

    Does this sound paranoid? Think about your answer for a second.

  25. Nevermind the circumvention by DigitAl56K · · Score: 1

    For almost any use you might have the biggest threat to the security is going to be all the ways that your communications can be compromised while you are actually using it. Baseband exploits, protocol exploits, software vulnerabilities, poor or crippled RNGs, compromised platform or application updates, cloud storage of sensitive information, etc. etc. the list goes on.

    Oh what? It can self destruct? It's probably way too late by then, and assuming it's been compromised the attackers would probably rather you keep the thing. Less work for them!

  26. "Secure phones" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Baseband is a closed source blob. You can now stop making news about "privacy" in phones.

  27. PHOOM by DrunkenTerror · · Score: 1

    Finally I'll be able to get that o-bomb-a-phone that they're always talkin' 'bout on the talky radio.

  28. But Will The Theme Play? by tmjva · · Score: 1

    So will a voice announce the 5 second warning with the Mission Impossible theme song?

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT
  29. Maybe a dye pack, too by John.Banister · · Score: 1

    As long as they're giving extra oomph to the CA compliant remote kill switch, perhaps an exploding dye pack, too.

  30. Blackberry experienced in self-destructing by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1

    Considering Blackberry has almost self-destructed itself, there is no doubt it is the best qualified company to develop such smartphone.

    --
    Achille Talon
    Hop!
  31. that isn't just a self-destructing phone by swschrad · · Score: 1

    it's a self-destructing company!

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  32. Inspector Gadget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't worry chief, Inspector Gadget is always on duty!

    *explosion*

  33. The real question. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    The real question isn't will it self-destruct.
    Slashdotters want to know - WILL IT BEND :-)

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  34. This is old hat ...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .....my Apple iPhones have been self-destructing for years. Add water and poof!!

  35. Destruct is simple, Fail-Safe design is not. by Senior+Engineer · · Score: 1

    I see this as situational. Does one need to Destroy "Just" the Data or is rendering the device itself- forever/irrecoverably DEAD a pass/fail element? Let's skip that Fail-Safe for Destroy Device aspect for a moment- and go back to Data alone. Consider an app level tool to lower Data In-or-Out risks... with simple Ramdisk tech.. IF that level of security is Good Enough, all we're left with is risk-reward calcs on LN2 attacks in the REAL world.

  36. Boeing and BlackBerry Making a Self-Destructing Ph by Gallomimia · · Score: 1

    Hilarious that Boeing would want a self-destructing phone, because a phone that blows up would be the perfect thing to have on an aircraft!

    At least, it will raise the sales of Boeing as airlines replace planes that blow up!

    Just kidding! Obviously the phone won't physically blow up.

    --
    Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
  37. Self destruct by Boeing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Powered by Dreamliner batteries.

  38. Haters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The haters will hate. Blackberry may have lost their lead position in the cellular phone arena, but they have started to explore other areas of revenue like embedded systems that I think will keep them around a little longer.

    That said, I still love using my Q10. Like Linux, I want choice and not just two distros (Android and iOS...okay three with Windows). I'm glad I can still opt for a distro (BB OS 10) that does what I need and want it to do.

  39. self destruct and encrypted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well as has been pointed out
    Use it and your calls are recorded.
    Second. What ever it ends up doing.
    That they claim it self destructs, means you will never get on a plane with it.

    A simple in breakable pin, and a remote wipe.
    Is about as good. Cell phones these days can't really be intercepted except by the gov anyways.