BlackBerry Hands Over User Data To Help Police 'Kick Ass,' Insider Says (www.cbc.ca)

Reader Dr Caleb writes: A specialized unit inside mobile firm BlackBerry has for years enthusiastically helped intercept user data -- including BBM messages -- to help in hundreds of police investigations in dozens of countries, a CBC News investigation reveals. For instance, citing a number of sources, CBC says that BlackBerry intercepted messages to aid investigators probing the political scandals in Brazil that are dogging suspended President Dilma Rousseff. The company also helped authenticate BBM messages in Major League Baseball's drug investigation that saw New York Yankees star Alex Rodriguez suspended in 2014. One document obtained by CBC News reveals how the Waterloo, Ont.-based company handles requests for information and co-operates with foreign law enforcement and government agencies, in stark contrast with many other tech companies. "We were helping law enforcement kick ass," said one person.

Comments

All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

RIP BlackBerry, again.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[Lab Rat Jason]

Yeah, a leak like this makes me think someone WANTS to drive another nail in the coffin...

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[MitchDev]

Yeah, a bit too convenient in light of the public reaction to the FBI/Apple fight....

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[macs4all]

Yeah, a leak like this makes me think someone WANTS to drive another nail in the coffin...

So, you're really on the side of hiding this completely voluntary policy on the part of BB from their Customer base?

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[Lab Rat Jason]

I'm not taking any side... I'm just saying that for an insider to leak this at this time, means they're definitely trying to help kill BB. I'm just here for the popcorn and the show.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[MightyMartian]

At this point, it's more like throwing a handful of dirt on the casket.

I'm expecting the BB zombie soon enough, when Chen tries to use what's left of the patent portfolio to turn the company into a patent troll.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

Wasn't there a Slashdot article discussing a rumor about Apple reportedly handing iOS source code and signing keys to the Chinese government, while putting up a show of resistance to a much narrower request from the FBI. Not sure about the veracity of this assertion, but if it is any way true, it really destroy's Apple's arguments, and shows Apple is no white knight.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[TroII]

It doesn't destroy any arguments. Apple can make concessions to the government of China in order to continue doing business there, without volunteering to make the same concessions to the American government. We're supposed to have more rights in the US than they do in China, and people at Apple think those rights are worth fighting for.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[thegarbz]

I'm beginning to think that at this point either all three customers are long departed or are there to stay and can't be disappointed by anything anymore.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, every being has the same rights. Whether a state tramples these rights is another matter.

Re: All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah it does. Apple's argument was never about individual privacy. The San Bernardino shooter's phone was a work phone and he was deceased.

Apple's argument in that case was always about the security of all iOS users getting compromised by developing a tool to crack 5c iPhones.

How giving iOS source code to a foreign government doesn't affect security of all iPhone users in the same or bigger ways is beyond me.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes you think it's a leak. This is official Blackberry policy as announced by the CEO himself that the company has a specially trained group whose sole purpose is to respond to legal requests from legitimate governments to further the law enforcement of those governments.

Specific cases mentioned were investigations into corruption of government officials and use of banned substances in major league sports. Another case is the murder of a Mafia chieftain in Montreal. Surely you do not condone these acts and support law enforcement in these cases as well.

Re: All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

Has anyone actually confirmed that rumor? I have only seen reference to it in comments.

Re: All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple denies it ever did. They admit China made the request but strongly deny that they turned it over.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[MightyMartian]

I see there's still enough BB fanboys that one managed to get mod points.

How bitter and pathetic you must be now, Mr. BB Moderator. Well, at least you'll have some extra toilet paper when your shares are only worth wiping your ass with.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

What, you mean none?

Rights are conferred by those in power, they aren't inherent upon birth.

Re:All three customers will be disappointed

[johanw]

I don't give shit about doping in sports. If they want to use it, let them. And maffia bosses can expect to be assasinated, not my problem.

Re: All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

Voluntary? Because they want organized requests instead of wasting resources and time dealing with inadequate paperwork?

Following the law when served with warrants? All companies have to do that.

Fuck you. Voluntary is Apple not plugging their cloud holes and not needing to be served with warrant because they just get the data directly.

Fucking glass houses and all that.

You think Apple and Google are not doing the same? Remember, those companies don't sell to foreign countries from their US corporations, the whole tax shell games they play provide that they are not US.

I never did see where Snowden leaks showed BlackBerry having their network infiltrated for years without "knowing".

Re: All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

They should also expect to get warrants served for their communications.

Re: All three customers will be disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

It's true! That is, it's true that it's rumored to be true! ;--) (ref:Yes minister)

In before Blackberry shills

[LichtSpektren]

As difficult as it may be to believe, BlackBerry has an intense cadre of shills (or perhaps rabid insane fans) that pollute every Internet article they can find which sheds a bad light on BB.

For us normal humans with functioning brains, we're just waiting for when BB goes under, hoping they sell their patent for a physical keyboard to a respectable Android OEM.

Re: In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

BlackBerry already has gone under. All articles about them are "In Memorium".

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[HumanWiki]

Which is a shame.. They had something.. They were pretty much dominating the mobile workforce solidly with all kinds of great things.. There simply wasn't any other choice at the time, maybe a Treo or something. (which, was a very meh, option but it was better than nothing).

Then, they got lazy, let Apple and Google get a leg up on how they were doing things and now BB is nothing more than a joke and an example of how to not get complacent.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

>everyone who disagrees with me is a shill

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you so much BlackBerry team! The police investigation is really great user friendly and smooth!

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not a huge BB fan, but this really isn't news.

All major companies have done and continue to do what BB is doing as mentioned in the article, even those who refuse to write software to help unlock phones. They got praised for refusing to unlock phones but most ignored when people pointed out they gave up "cloud data" in a heartbeat.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[geoskd]

They got praised for refusing to unlock phones but most ignored when people pointed out they gave up "cloud data" in a heartbeat.

People have no reasonable expectation of privacy with cloud data. Its is well understood that once you send your data out into the world, it is fair game. If you don't like it, encrypt it, or make sure it doesn't leave your private devices. That is why the push for encrypted communications. Third parties are legally required to hand over data, but there is no requirement that the data be decrypted if the third party doesn't have the tools to do so. Apple makes sure that they do not have the tools to decrypt, as do many other software and hardware developers. Blackberry *does* have the tools to decrypt, and they are waaaay too ready to do so.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

People have no reasonable expectation of privacy with cloud data. Its is well understood that once you send your data out into the world, it is fair game.

So Richard Stallman is correct, why do we even bother with passwords? all data is freely available to everyone so why bother securing it?

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[SumDog]

I had a Treo and Centro. Single threaded. No memory protection. You could write to a random memory location and crash the entire OS. Everything was written in C (there was a Java micro edition ... I think it was IBMs, and I could run Opera with it; which was surprisingly decent .. until the Treo crashed).

I even got a Pre. I knew several other people who had them too. Then HP bought them and that was pretty much over.

I hate how we now only have two major players.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[zlives]

BB also provides tools (allbit cumbersome bes) to render their interccept/decrypt useless.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[messymerry]

Now they need the money. I'm sure the TLAs are feeding them bookoo taxpayer bucks for their shilliness...

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[PraiseBob]

Why not say- "People have no reasonable expectation of privacy with postal mail. Once you send the letter from your mailbox, it is fair game."

Except, there are federal laws that specifically make it illegal for another private citizen to snoop on your mail, and require a warrant for law enforcement to snoop on your mail.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[geoskd]

why do we even bother with passwords? all data is freely available to everyone so why bother securing it?

It keeps the honest folks honest, doesn't it?

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[rajafarian]

It is my experience that many if not most corporations (IBM used to be the exception) stop innovating once they get a certain size and the only way they do anything new is by buying smaller companies.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[MightyMartian]

Delusional investors.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

Ive really never seen many BlackBerry shills, far fewer than apple and such. Sometimes a few random people mentioning that they still prefer their BlackBerry.
You seem a little nuts about smartphones though, haha.
Personally, I think the more competition- the better it is for users.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, those shills are also known as "The majority of the population of Kitchener & Waterloo".

I moved back to the area after a few years away and I can't believe how many people around here still carry Blackberries. Not only that, they're *rabidly* fanatical about them. It's insane. I actually got flack from someone in a coffee shop because they noticed I was carrying an iPhone instead of a BB.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

That's maybe not surprising. If this enthousiastically selling out of their customers wholesale to any and all government agency anywhere is known "within the community" (lovely us/them dichotomy there; why are you doing that job again again, LEOs?) then it's fairly obviously where they get their supporters from.

Anyway, I'd still regret BB going under; not because of BB, but because QNX is a technology worth keeping around. Please do open source the whole thing before going into receivership, BB.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[jandrese]

Apple didn't give up iMessage data, which is what this is the equivalent of. That's why the police wanted to break into the phone in the first place.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate how we now only have two major players.

That is generally how things go, though. Competition eventually produces losers, who fold or get bought. Once the pool of winners is small enough they have natural incentives to form cartels and/or merge. They always erect barriers-to-entry, since nobody actually wants to share market wealth with competitors.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to have answered your own question.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[theshowmecanuck]

Then, they got lazy

I call this "Novell Syndrome." Many people here might not remember that at one time Novell built the absolute best LAN server software around. But they got big heads and refused to improve. They wanted to keep LAN administration an arcane art and were killed by Microsoft. Microsoft was to area networks as Apple was to smartphones (and whether you hate Microsoft or not, their server software is now ubiquitous). People wanted certain features and Microsoft/Apple listened while [RIM|Blackberry]/Novell didn't. Now anytime I see a company die because they got too full of themselves, I call it Novell Syndrome.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

is this the new Moooo guy? Copy paste accusations of Blackberry shills into every thread?

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

Then, they got lazy

I call this "Novell Syndrome." Many people here might not remember that at one time Novell built the absolute best LAN server software around. But they got big heads and refused to improve. They wanted to keep LAN administration an arcane art and were killed by Microsoft. Microsoft was to area networks as Apple was to smartphones (and whether you hate Microsoft or not, their server software is now ubiquitous). People wanted certain features and Microsoft/Apple listened while [RIM|Blackberry]/Novell didn't. Now anytime I see a company die because they got too full of themselves, I call it Novell Syndrome.

It's not that Novell didn't improve, in fact a lot of modern AD copied a lot of the feature from Netware 4's NDS. In the late 90's/early 2000's, Netware 4's directory services were miles ahead of Active Directory in terms of both performance, functionality, reliability and scalability. It wasn't until XP that AD even became a contender, and, realistically AD didn't reach NDS's versatility until server 2008, and there are still aspects of AD that don't match the versatility NDS.

Novell's biggest problem was that they were hampered by the fact the Netware 3 rocked. DOS and Windows 3.x/9x clients (aka: The DOS client) were solid and reliable. The servers were bullet proof. Sure, it was "only" a file server, but at the time, that's all the vast majority of people needed. When companies started looking at replacing Netware 3, they were probably looking at Netware 5 or Active Directory.

Which brings us to Novell's 2nd biggest problem: Netware 5. It was based off of SuSE Linux, so the servers were stable, but the core of NDS was not, it was a good thing that NW5 had good clustering capabilities because something would crash all the time. They abandoned all of their native tools for NW4, and rewrote them in Java for NW5. And they sucked, as they were both slower they were not feature complete. you still needed the old NW4 applications to configure the server the first time out of the box. And, to add insult to injury, if you had a problem with getting the licensing files to work, you needed to go back and use a NW3 tool to get it to take. And unless you were an old hand at NW3, you would not know about said tool.

Another thing was that a Netware server by itself, couldn't do anything other then host NDS functionality. You couldn't get on the machine, set up NDS and then run Quake on it. Windows 2000+ you could, so it was easier for people to learn on (Remember, at the time you really needed to spend about $1,000 for a machine that approached usability, and to have to buy 2 would be out of most students reach)

Speaking of reach, Microsoft also let you get the server versions of the OS for a 60-180 day trail period. Netware? You had to spend around $1,000 for a 5 user license.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

People with functioning brains will want to keep competition available so big companies can't screw customs any way they want. Sheep with half brain feel safe and smug running in the herd, mocking those who don't.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

I never thought mail theft was a really popular thing. Until I moved to Colorado...
Now keep in mind my job had me visit all 50 states, and only CO have I had problems with.
- from witnessing shady characters taking mail from boxes.
- seeing some dude shim open the trash/recycle mail bins literally at the post office (by the PO boxes). Staff did not care(!?!)
- having mail never make it out of the state (colored envelopes so obvious it's a card. looking for money?)
- and yes incoming mail, ripped so that birthday card dollar for the kid is removed.

Finally after three years of this, we got a letter saying a camera caught sorting center staffer (contractor) pilfering mail. And the end result of months of legal mumbo-jumbo was this person got 5 years federal prison. 5 years! (for taking two dollars in a holiday card).

So yeah- the physical vulnerability & therefore trust we must cultivate with institutions to take care of our communications is valuable. Digital communication would seem to deserve the same treatment as mail, but its electronic nature makes it too grabbable, interceptable, copyable, etcable.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

No the first sentence was poster pretending to be earlier poster- the second sentence was the real reply.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[TigerPlish]

Any genre-saavy company has this. It's nothing new. There was a name for it in the Stone Age -- you know, the BBS and newsgroup days -- the name was "Astroturfing"

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

no respectable Android OEM has the slightest interest in a physical keyboard, phones with them don't sell

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually I never used a BB with a physical keyboard. I did, however, pick up a Z10 with QNX BB 10. Best phone I've ever used, hands down.

Unfortunately, the lack of apps has killed the ecosystem.

Re: In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd actually thought they might recover a couple of years ago. But this kind of cooperation with law enforcement? You'd have to be a special kind of idiot to ever trust them now.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[moofo]

I'm too green to talk about general Novell. However. In a Mac OS X environment you want to keep as platform agnostic as you possibly can, Novell eDirectory kick Active Directory's ass. The Web GUI (iManager) let you toy with lots of the inner working of LDAP without too much fuss. It's a crying shame it didn't take it's place as a wonderful LDAP/Configuration server in general.

I paid a consultant to tailor eDirectory to my needs and it's awesome. License fees are so low. It makes my Microsoft audit people freak out.

I just need to find a way to interface &%?*?&%$?$ Windows to it...

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[illtud]

Many people here might not remember that at one time Novell built the absolute best LAN server software around.

Netware 3.12? I hear you. IPX was a bitch (yes, you could do Netware on IP), but the higher layers were so much sweeter than what we had to move to.

Re:In before Blackberry shills

[johanw]

Not half the amount of windows phone shills who still claim how much everyone who has used the system loves it after each post describing declining sales.

Re: In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

They didn't likely need to ask and got it through the implementated flaws, as usual.

Re: In before Blackberry shills

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd have to be a special kind of idiot to think you're immune to warrants.

Welp

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't fix stupid.

Not smart. Not smart at all.

[Anonymous Coward]

gg

bad plan

[geoskd]

It is simply amazing that the folks calling the shots at Blackberry cant see how downright idiotic this policy is.

From a PR standpoint, its a miserable failure: Every news cycle for the last year, there has been some story or other implying that Cops are out killing innocent people in scores and droves. If you're blackberry, you get up and cheer on the killers.

From a monetary standpoint, this is a miserable failure. Lets just advertise that we hand out your information to every two bit despot and charlatan that asks. Thats a way to instill confidence in your product as a secure device fit for the leader of the free world. I wonder how sales of their newer devices is doing?

From an ethics standpoint, this is a miserable failure. "Those who will give up fundamental data security for a little perceived safety are morons" -Abraham Lincoln 1859

Re:bad plan

[QuietLagoon]

..."Those who will give up fundamental data security for a little perceived safety are morons" -Abraham Lincoln 1859...

"Don't believe everything you read on the Internet" --- Abraham Lincoln 1854

Re:bad plan

[MitchDev]

I keep seeing stories like this that have me checking the calendar to see if it's April 1st again already....

If real, this "insider" is trying to kill Blackberry...

Re:bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

It's gonna be a good plan if governments ban iOS and Android phones for thwarting law-enforcement, and BlackBerry becomes the only game in town.

Re:bad plan

[CanadianMacFan]

BlackBerry (RIM) always had access to your information and always co-operated with the police. This isn't news. It isn't even news that they handed over the keys to the servers in countries that demanded them where they had a lot of business. BlackBerry only really kicked up a fuss when there wasn't a lot of money to be lost.

I don't really have a problem handing information over when the police have legally obtained information of suspicious activity which they take to a judge who then issues a warrant. And I'm not talking about judges rubber stamping warrants but actually making decisions over them.

Re:bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

..."Those who will give up fundamental data security for a little perceived safety are morons" -Abraham Lincoln 1859...

"Don't believe everything you read on the Internet" --- Abraham Lincoln 1854

"This guy Lincoln, he's as dishonest as the day is long" -- George Washington, 1778

Re:bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

The Public Safety Operations team at BlackBerry's headquarters has streamlined a process to deal with what insiders characterize as a flood of requests from police. Lawyers review warrants and judicial authorizations before giving data analysts a green light to intercept and decrypt messages.

What the hell do you expect them to do? Ignore it?

Everyone does this, but we better burn BlackBerry publically, just because fuck them.

Re:bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

Well now that their company is a miserable failure has after their decline for reasons both related to and unrelated to selling out their customer's security and privacy all they have left is being a sniveling suckup to governments with no concern for privacy in the vain hope that they will be their sugar daddy.

Re:bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

"Bitches and hoes" -Ben Franklin.

Re:bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

..."Those who will give up fundamental data security for a little perceived safety are morons" -Abraham Lincoln 1859...

"Don't believe everything you read on the Internet" --- Abraham Lincoln 1854

"This guy Lincoln, he's as dishonest as the day is long" -- George Washington, 1778

I think the real quote here is:

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin, 1755

Re:bad plan

[StormReaver]

If Blackberry had any hope of snatching viability from imminent collapse, this just killed it.

Goodbye, Blackberry.

And good riddance.

Re:bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

>>From a PR standpoint, its a miserable failure: Every news cycle for the last year, there has been some story or other implying that Cops are out killing innocent people in scores and droves. If you're blackberry, you get up and cheer on the killers.

except that no, it ISN'T. Because they are ALL MORONS. As everyone from Bradley Manning to Edward Snowden, to 'every news cycle for the last year' has repeatedly shown; noone except neckbeards give a flying fuck about the government spying on you anymore. Your mom doesn't care. Neither do your coworkers, your boss, the gas station attendant, your neighbours, your Congressman/MP, or ANYONE. Except those who do it because it's the laziest form of criminal investigation they can find.

Even John Oliver could barely get a rise out of people with his 'dick pics' investigation *with* Snowden. Every muggle out there only cares about being coddled away from THEM DURTY A-RABS, and they don't understand that it's the terrorist today, and them tomorrow.

Re:bad plan

[johanw]

No, to work around it so they can honestly say "sorry, we can't decrypt those messages".

Re: bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

I have never found a reasonable source that confirmed they gave up the keys to any country. They just setup lawful intercept servers to be used with lawful access. That has been said many times.

Re: bad plan

[Anonymous Coward]

They know what kind of scum would be protected. This is why they take pride in helping law enforcement. If you don't feel dirty protecting really scummy people, then fuck you.

From their point of view, they didn't give up all their innocent customers data for years without warrants, unlike Yahoo, Apple and Google.

Fucking double standard cunts...

Thanks, Secy. Clinton!

[Entrope]

Welp, there's one more country that got the emails of our BlackBerry-toting former Secretary of State. I just wish the US had a copy of them all.

Re:Thanks, Secy. Clinton!

[some old guy]

That was my first thought too. FSB or GRU impersonates a "friendly" LEA, and hey, presto!

Re:Thanks, Secy. Clinton!

[Anonymous Coward]

I love how everyone complains that Slashdot is 'too political' then turn around and insert their partisan dipshattery into comments on tech articles. Keep posting political crap and flooding "SJW articles" with comments then be 100% surprised when Slashdot gets MORE SJW AND POLITICAL ARTICLES. How does the internet work!?!?

Re:Thanks, Secy. Clinton!

[TroII]

Don't forget to thank Secretaries Powell and Rice and also George W. Bush. Or is it only bad when a democrat does it?

The request letter

[QuietLagoon]

Called an ICL, "International Cover Letter"...

.
From TFA:

...The cover letter demands police sign a confirmation that their request is legal in their home country and affirm that it is "made in connection with the enforcement, investigation, or prosecution of violations of publicly promulgated criminal laws and not the control, suppression, or punishment of peaceful expression of political or religious opinion."...

Re:The request letter

[future assassin]

Yes

Canadians

[jfdavis668]

Even polite to the police.

Luckily Blackberry is secure.

[captaindomon]

Good thing Blackberry is the most secure mobile platform for doing secure things, right? Right?

I don't think we're in Bournemouth anymore.

[Anonymous Coward]

dogging suspended President

This man should come over here and join the Lib Dems - return them their street cred.

It's always been a cozy relationship

[plover]

BlackBerry has always been willing to cooperate with law enforcement agencies in exchange for making a device secure enough that top ranking government officials can trust it. After the election, Obama famously insisted on keeping his BlackBerry, so the NSA tweaked one for him. Both backs were scratched, but once the NSA was wound deeply into the device, do you think they ever let go? Doubt it.

Maybe they can capitalize on this. Imagine this marketing campaign: "People who own BlackBerry Phones are honest and and have nothing to hide [picture of Obama with his BB.] Terrorists hide behind iPhones [picture of police at San Bernadino.] What kind of phone do you want to be seen carrying?"

Re: It's always been a cozy relationship

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually Obama didn't insist.

It was the IT bureaucrats in the Whitehouse who insisted . You know, the same ones insisting on Windows XP...

US government infosec is so inept at so many levels they basically deserve the fact they are utterly pwned.

Re: It's always been a cozy relationship

[guruevi]

Inept? Or do they just want the control?

Re:It's always been a cozy relationship

[Anonymous Coward]

Obama famously insisted on keeping his BlackBerry,...

And then he ordered them to not allow his Secretary of State to be allowed to have a BlackBerry in order to force her to come-up with a workaround that he could later have his FBI bust her for. That was such a dirty trick on his party. It should be illegal to use government agencies like this.

Re: It's always been a cozy relationship

[Anonymous Coward]

Well now they're even after Hillary started the whole birther nonsense.

Re: It's always been a cozy relationship

[Anonymous Coward]

That was a dirty trick in his part to set her up like that especially given her impairment after her stroke.

Re:It's always been a cozy relationship

[Anonymous Coward]

So, the picture would show san benadino police as the terrorists?

Rather accurate.

Re: It's always been a cozy relationship

[Anonymous Coward]

And then he [Obama] ordered them to not allow his Secretary of State to be allowed to have a BlackBerry in order to force her to come-up with a workaround that he could later have his FBI bust her for. That was such a dirty trick on his party.

Those dirty Republicans. They hate us and want us to die.

Re:It's always been a cozy relationship

[Anonymous Coward]

*picture of me holding one iphone to each ear*

And why is this wrong?

[mi]

"We were helping law enforcement kick ass," said one person.

And this is automatically wrong because?..

1. Police aren't doing anything useful
2. We'd be better off without them
3. Their activity is not paid for by taxpayers

Ah, privacy... Well, Blackberry aren't automatically wrong in assisting police investigate genuine wrongdoing any more, than a pizza-guy reporting child-abuse he observed while delivering. The only thing the firm may be accused of is assisting in obviously bogus investigations. Neither the write-up nor TFA make such a claim.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

We know it's on the up-and-up because they make the police sign a letter

...The cover letter demands police sign a confirmation that their request is legal in their home country and affirm that it is "made in connection with the enforcement, investigation, or prosecution of violations of publicly promulgated criminal laws and not the control, suppression, or punishment of peaceful expression of political or religious opinion."...

I'm sure that's about as effective as the US Constitution has been for our own police force.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's absolutely wrong if there is no warrant driving the specific collection of specific data from a suspect's account with Blackberry.

That pesky Fourth Amendment actually does mean something, even if people are so willing to toss it frequently into the garbage.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[mi]

Unless you are prepared to denounce all cooperation with police — in all countries — you'll need to cite concrete examples of cases, where Blackberry should not have helped the authorities in order to blame the company.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Mente]

They probably aren't legally wrong. I'm sure someplace in the 142 page terms of use it says that they can release the data. However, in the course of an investigation, if police want to get into a safe, they don't contact the manufacturer to get them to open it. They apply for, from a judge, a subpoena to have the person of interest open the safe. If they refuse, then that judge can imprison the person for contempt. The safe manufacturer has no legal requirement to respond to such a request. They no longer have a legal interest in the ownership/use of the safe.

This is where the sticky point lies. You own the mobile device, but probably not the OS that runs on it. You only license that from the manufacturer. However, the data needing to be accessed is in storage, on the device which you own. The OS is only the method used to access it, much like the key/combination to the lock. So, is the company under any legal obligation to provide law enforcement with the key/combination? That depends. Apple got around this by having the user hold the key. Apple "can not" unlock the device because it doesn't hold the keys. In the Apple case, it was like asking the safe company to blow the door off a safe, because the user changed the combo and the safe company had no way to get/reset that combo. Its not the manufacturer's responsibility. If law enforcement wants to blow the doors off, it must do it itself. Which they did.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[mi]

That pesky Fourth Amendment actually does mean something

This has nothing to do with the Fourth Amendment — police can ask other people about you without a warrant. It is neither illegal nor unethical for them to do so, nor is it for those people to respond — unless the investigation itself is bogus, of course.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[mi]

They probably aren't legally wrong.

Of course, they are just fine legally. I contend, there is nothing automatically wrong ethically either.

Unless one is prepared to denounce all cooperation with police — and in all countries — one needs to cite particular examples, where Blackberry was wrong to cooperate, in order to accuse the company of ethical lapse(s).

Its not the manufacturer's responsibility.

You are obviously right, it is not. But the manufacturer may choose to cooperate.

I gave an example of a pizza-delivery guy observing a crime (such as child-abuse), while performing a delivery. It is perfectly ethical for him to report it. Moreover, he can even offer to help the police by, for example, wearing a wire or a hidden camera during the next visit to the same house. As long as he sincerely believes, he is helping end a real crime, his actions aren't only ethical, they are commendable!

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Calydor]

By that logic you need to cite concrete examples in which a company's security (read: unlisted FTP server with no password) was breached to blame the company.

It doesn't work that way. Just because it's gone okay until now doesn't mean it will continue to do so. When is a control freak cop going to spy on his wife? When is a CEO's cousin in law enforcement going to check on messages from his kin's corporate opponents?

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

unless the investigation itself is bogus, of course.

I don't know about Brazil, but the way we prove investigations in the US aren't bogus is to get a judge to sign a warrant, or at a minimum, a subpoena.

There may be non-bogus investigations that do not use warrants or subpoenas, but I challenge you to prove it, a daunting task when there's no paper trail, except I guess a fax from another country from a cop doing coppy things trust me I'm a cop I promise cop's honor.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[geoskd]

police can ask other people about you without a warrant.

The problem here is that Blackberry has deliberately built their system in such a way as they will always have access to, and subsequently the ability to divulge, your secrets. If you don't want blackberry decrypting your communications and giving that information to anyone who asks; Don't use Blackberry. That is the lesson they are trying to teach their customers.

Blackberry has deliberately set themselves up as a third party to every conversation such that you as the individual no longer have any reasonable expectation of privacy and as such, the police don't even need a warrant to get at your information. Apple by contrast has gone to great lengths to ensure that they *are not a party to your information*, and as such Apple can't be compelled to give away your secrets because they don't have them.

As always, all bets are off if you use cloud services, but then that just makes you a moron.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, especially since the police are allowed to lie during an investigation.
Since the cover letter is not a legal document, the cops are pretty much allowed to lie on it. A cover letter is not like a EULA that is legally enforceable.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am prepared to denounce all cooperation with people who fax in a piece of paper saying they promise they are police. From any country.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would it for the police be illigal to ask for this information if the investigation is bogus. I am also allowed to ask a company anything about anyone.

The biggest problem is of course companies like the FBI who use National Security Letters to persuade other companies to hand over this information. But according to the FBI an NSL is just a request so no warrent is needed. Of course you are not allowed to ignore the NSL, so we are just a step closer to a police state again.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[mi]

When is a control freak cop going to spy on his wife?

The company claims, it takes measures to prevent abuses.

To claim their measures insufficient, you (or TFA's author) need to cite counter-examples — just as you would need to upload a "tag"-file to an unprotected FTP-server.

Most of the comments here seem to denounce Blackberry simply for cooperation with law-enforcement — as if that were automatically wrong. It is not.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[whoever57]

I gave an example of a pizza-delivery guy observing a crime (such as child-abuse), while performing a delivery. It is perfectly ethical for him to report it. Moreover, he can even offer to help the police by, for example, wearing a wire or a hidden camera during the next visit to the same house. As long as he sincerely believes, he is helping end a real crime, his actions aren't only ethical, they are commendable!

So let me ask you this, who are the criminals in Brazil? Who are the righteous people who should be helped?

If you choose to voluntarily help "law enforcement", then you need to be certain that the people you are helping are really enforcing the laws in a fair and impartial manner and that those laws are not designed to aid corruption. It's very easy to say who is who in your example, but in Brazil? Not so much.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[mi]

If you don't want blackberry decrypting your communications and giving that information to anyone who asks; Don't use Blackberry.

Yes, that's true.

Blackberry has deliberately set themselves up as a third party to every conversation

That may be their design flaw. Or, maybe, that was one of the goals — to avoid becoming "a tool for criminals".

And before you denounce the "KKKorporations" and the "police state" over it, consider the arguments for banning of Yik Yak in colleges — by "offended" students...

Apple by contrast has gone to great lengths to ensure that they *are not a party to your information*

Sure, and that seems to be working out well for them. Is not capitalist competition a great thing?

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Mente]

The flaw in your example is that the pizza delivery guy witnessed the crime. Blackberry in these cases, did not witness, then report. They are simply being asked to blow the doors off the safe that may contain some information of interest. Even that isn't necessarily a problem. Law enforcement might want to contact the safe company and ask for their assistance to make sure the doors are blown off without damaging the contents, and the safe company engineers might be the best people to help achieve that.

The problem with cases like these is that they are increasingly being requested without the proper legal documentation/subpoena that would allow the evidence to be admissible in court. They are being used for fishing purposes. Information that they could use, then use other methods to verify the information obtained. For example, guy suspected in a murder case. They want data from the phone. The person of interest denies the request. Subpoena is requested and approved for the person of interest to turn over any information relevant to the issue at hand over to police. The person of interest refused and is found in contempt, then sent to prison. The manufacturer is asked to unlock the device so police can look through the device for evidence. The manufacturer, in this case, Blackberry complies. Now police have access to everything on the phone. Including a text message sent from the person of interest to someone else with evidence of a robbery that was committed 2 months prior. Now, since the subpoena didn't cover that prior crime, they can simply get a new subpoena for the recipient's device to have that message now meet the legal conditions required to be considered evidence to be used get an indictment on that unrelated crime.

What's the problem with that? I see that as a violation of the person's 5th amendment right against self-incrimination. But it is happening more and more frequently. With mixed results when being fought in court.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[mi]

The flaw in your example is that the pizza delivery guy witnessed the crime. Blackberry in these cases, did not witness, then report.

Please... You are grasping for straws. I gave a second example — of the delivery guy wearing a wire to help police. He does not have to have personally witnessed the crime, he just has to be sincerely believe, there is one in progress.

Now, of course, having personally witnessed something helps develop such sincere belief, but it is neither required nor sufficient. For example, he may have personally heard a child screaming, but that may simply have been somebody watching Home Alone-N upstairs.

So, whether the cooperating party personally witnessed (what seems like) a crime or not, their cooperation with police over it is perfectly ethical as long as they sincerely believe it.

As opposite to, for example, agreeing simply in order to win a major contract or retain a business license.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Due process, fucker.

I have no interest in doing business with a company that will just give up all my data to anybody with a badge. Judicial oversight (and court orders) exist to protect us from corrupt cops. Blackberry bares it all without any checks at all.

Fuck them.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

That pesky Fourth Amendment actually does mean something

This has nothing to do with the Fourth Amendment — police can ask other people about you without a warrant. It is neither illegal nor unethical for them to do so, nor is it for those people to respond — unless the investigation itself is bogus, of course.

Asking to obtain data that could reasonably be categorized within the bucket of "papers or effects", such as phone call data, messaging data, e-mail data, etc. I would generally consider to be skirting the Fourth Amendment.

Further, the Fourth Amendment was written and put in place specifically because of abuse of "writs of assistance", very similar to the purpose of National Security Letters and also similar to what "asking" corporations such as Blackberry to hand over data today is like.

From Wikipedia: "In general, customs writs of assistance served as general search warrants that did not expire, allowing customs officials to search anywhere for smuggled goods without having to obtain a specific warrant. These writs became controversial when they were issued by courts in British America in the 1760s, especially the Province of Massachusetts Bay. Controversy over these general writs of assistance inspired the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which forbids general search warrants in the United States."

Therefore, whether Blackberry willingly complies with weakening the Fourth Amendment or not (and it certainly is today according to TFA), Blackberry or any other corporation does not have my consent to turn over data to government entities without a warrant, even if they snookered it into their EULA.

There is really no justification for any corporation handing over any personal customer data to any government entity without a warrant. That's exactly why we have the Fourth Amendment, and it's sad so many are so accepting of the gross overstepping that occurs every day to trample on the rights that are supposed to be protected by that Amendment.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem here is that Blackberry has deliberately built their system in such a way as they will always have access to, and subsequently the ability to divulge, your secrets. If you don't want blackberry decrypting your communications and giving that information to anyone who asks; Don't use Blackberry.

Yeah, except that is complete and utter bullshit. As we ALL know, the only way to actually have security against this type of lawful order is to have end-to-end encryption where the keys are only known to you and the person you're communicating with.

And BlackBerry does exactly that. For BES. Everything else? BBM? Web Browsing? Third party apps? Nope, you're SOL - just like every other app that exists without end to end encryption.

Re:And why is this wrong?

[illtud]

The problem here is that Blackberry has deliberately built their system in such a way as they will always have access to, and subsequently the ability to divulge, your secrets.

Really? Wasn't there BES (enterprise server) which was secure, and didn't use BB's own infrastructure?

Re:And why is this wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, and they could be the useful idiots/fools. Helping the greater evil get rid of the lesser evil.

In some countries everyone at the top is dirty in some way. And those in line to replace them might be even dirtier and more evil.

When much of your house is made of shit, you don't simply remove some shit just because it's shit. You ask yourself what will happen if this shit is removed.

There goes the stock

[Anonymous Coward]

Dumb move, BB

More like kicking their own ass

[Anonymous Coward]

Untrustworthy platform, 'tis BackBerry (sic!)

Puts a different spin on this article

[funwithBSD]

https://slashdot.org/story/16/...

Maybe people are leaving because of the cooperation violating privacy concerns?

Didn't Hillary Clinton use a blackberry?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah. Nice and secure too.

which police?

[micahraleigh]

Is it the IRS political police?
The police Eric Snowden was working with?
The strangle unarmed black people police?
The NEA political police?
The EPA police who wanted to start crucifying people?
The police who illegally distributed Joe the Plumber's tax problems to the press?
The NASA muslim outreach police?
Was it the police who watched over ambassador Chris Stevens?
The La Rasa police who want to return the Southwest to Mexico who are going after Trump University?


Not sure I want those police kicking anyone's rear.

Re:which police?

[nitehawk214]

Exactly.

I always enjoy how these "if you have have done nothing wrong..." folks don't volunteer their own private information and communications to become part of public record.

They'll give data to any government person...

[evolutionary]

And this is so open to abuse with no oversight, no proper procedure, no warrant. Just a few guys employed by the FBI or CIA (or foreign equivalent), reminds me of a film about East Germany:"The Lives of Others" where a corrupt politician gets the secret service to investigate a high profile writer simple because he has the hot's for (and is sleeping with under threat of career torpedoing) his girlfriend (who is living with him and is publically known and accepted as common law). Seriously, who is watching the watchmen, certainly not Blackberry. Glad I never used them, but since Microsoft and Yahoo gave info to China for the purpose of finding, and torturing of reporters to disagreed with the government...we know they will (if haven't already) gone the direction of Blackberry. Apple and Google are a bit better, but with Google apparently going to the White House once a week...who knows...

Yeah, about that

[Anonymous Coward]

These days police mostly just want to steal from people.

all the "stay away from BlackBerry phone" stories

[Anonymous Coward]

are not suspicious at all....

To Help Police 'Kick Ass,'

[The Grim Reefer]

Is that kid in the green and yellow scuba suite really that out of control?

Wait

[Dunbal]

People still use Blackberry?

ALL the user data?

[Opportunist]

Given their market share that means they had to burn it onto a CD.

Mostly because nobody has 3.5" floppy drives anymore.

fuck fuck fuck the police

[Anonymous Coward]

kat.cr/tails-1-4-1-i386-iso-multilang-tntvillage-t10922671.html
http://i.imgur.com/QLGyQYf.jpg

hand ovah deeeeeeeeeeeeez nuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuutz

That's stupid.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want somebody signing into my amazon account and buying a bunch of stuff on my card, even if my entire purchase history is publicly available. Hence, passwords. That should be outright obvious.

If you have a secret to keep, Store it on a Linux box with encryption and a honeypot.

 

Business/government. Get it?

[AutodidactLabrat]

And the winner for most enthusiastic source of otherwise illegal wiretaps goes to....Capitalists

you're stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

If you have a secret to keep, Store it on a Linux box with encryption and a honeypot.

unless it's your credit card number, in which case feel free to transmit it to anyone

Hence, passwords.

oops, what security?

idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

The company claims, it takes measures to prevent abuses. To claim their measures insufficient, you (or TFA's author) need to cite counter-examples

in other words "trust them even though you have no reason to do so"

Re:idiots

[mi]

in other words "trust them even though you have no reason to do so"

Yes. Otherwise known as "innocent until proven guilty".

Blackberry vs Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

An important distinction to remember under Canadian law is that BB is also an ISP by virtue of offering BBM services, and so they are subject to different rules than simple device manufacturers. That said, their willingness to voluntarily help law enforcement is completely inexcusable, ethically wrong,and probably the final nail in the coffin for the firm.

Get GOOD INFORMATION

[Anonymous Coward]

www.rt.com

www.presstv.ir

Or at least, don't only eat the shite from your 1%.

What Is Good For the Goose

[Anonymous Coward]

...is good for the gander.

www.rt.com

www.presstv.ir

Get yourself shitfree information !

So ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Get rid of 1% aiding bastards. Good Riddance.

If they had Due Process in place, it would be OK. Instead they covertly enable a shady outfit to get whatever the outfit demands.

Have they found hillary's emails?

[Anonymous Coward]

everyone else has.

Not that Blackberry needed any more nails....

[Anonymous Coward]

...but let's superglue that coffin lid shut, shall we?

OMG corporations are evil too!

[Anonymous Coward]

Iz not juz da NSA no mor!?

Why all this hatred is focussed on Blackberry?

[ControlsGeek]

I'm not sure why all this is on Blackberry when they are just following what a lawful court ordered. After all even with Apple strenuously resisting in the San Bernadino terrorist case the FBI still hacked into the phone with private help. Shouldn't the vitriol be focused on the government that ordered this infringement of liberties? After all Snowden's leaks have illustrated that no one is safe if the government wants to get into your phone and your business.

Microsoft has 'Novell Syndrome'.

[stoicio]

Look at the 'Shift in Focus' that usually comes with flailing. Novell, Palm, Be (computer internet appliances), "Microsoft Zune/Phones/Bob/We're shifting to services and making everything work like an X-Box".

The OS is now gratis. The software development at MS will soon cost more than any profits they could glean. Thus the new focus on 'Services' aka 'the cloud' and software as a service.

Gandma's computing business making Atari games is dead because the desktop computer is dead. The software service is owned by companies that were doing that 20 years ago (Amazon, Google, Apple).

In total Microsoft is doomed. Any attempt at creating a service business selling apps, music, books, etc. will just end up being another 'Zune'.

Good Old Abe...

[Anonymous Coward]

If there were more people with guns at that show Abe Lincoln would be alive today. .....Oh yeah....everyone at that show had guns.....