Slashdot Mirror


BlackBerry CEO 'Disturbed' By Apple's Hard Line On Encryption (theinquirer.net)

An anonymous reader writes: BlackBerry CEO John Chen said he is "disturbed" by Apple's tough approach to encryption and user privacy, warning that the firm's attitude is harmful to society. Earlier this year, Chen said in response to Apple resisting the government's demands to unlock an iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters: "We are indeed in a dark place when companies put their reputations above the greater good." During BlackBerry's Security Summit in New York this week, Chen made several more comments about Apple's stance on encryption. "One of our competitors, we call it 'the other fruit company,' has an attitude that it doesn't matter how much it might hurt society, they're not going to help," he said. "I found that disturbing as a citizen. I think BlackBerry, like any company, should have a basic civil responsibility. If the world is in danger, we should be able to help out." He did say there was a lot of "nonsense" being reported about BlackBerry and its approach to how it handles user information. "Of course, there need to be clear guidelines. The guidelines we've adopted require legal assets. A subpoena for certain data. But if you have the data, you should give it to them," he said. "There's some complete nonsense about what we can and can't do. People are mad at us that we let the government have the data. It's absolute garbage. We can't do that." Chen also warned that mandatory back doors aren't a good idea either, hinting at the impending Investigatory Powers Bill. "There's proposed legislation in the U.S., and I'm sure it will come to the EU, that every vendor needs to provide some form of a back door. That is not going to fly at all. It just isn't," he said.

202 comments

  1. Disgustipated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would have been a better word.

    1. Re: Disgustipated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You Tool.

    2. Re:Disgustipated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love it!

  2. Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Glad their insecure piece of shit platform is nearly dead

    1. Re:Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glad their insecure piece of shit platform is nearly dead

      It isn't, they just signed a 5 year deal with some US government for crisis communications.

    2. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're only going to get contracts from government. No one wants to use their insecure platform. It doesn't matter what country they're in, they will always roll over to the slightest gov demands, to the detriment of private individuals and businesses. That's the reason why this guy is trolling for government.

    3. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insecure? Since when? They've always had the most secure mobile platform. iOS and Android never came close.

      Given their well-earned reputation for security, Chen's stand here doesn't make much sense. You don't generally toss-out one of your better advantages!

      Well, drive it in to the ground and release QNX to the world.

    4. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So the government will keep their cash flow propped up for a few more years. Big deal. We can start building their coffin anyway.

      I used to carry, and love, a blackberry. But those days are gone and their public goodwill account is bankrupt. This is just saving us a trip to the hardware store for more nails.

    5. Re: Fuck blackberry by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      RIM has always caved in to Government demands for access to BBM data. The CEO's stance is consistent, even as it's also stupid.

    6. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apple's stance on encryption is the company's only redeaming feature.

    7. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't think the iOS auto-correct would be useful?

    8. Re: Fuck blackberry by Quzak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It isn't secure if they give access to any entity...even governments...especially governments. We the people demand encryption that will foil even the strongest government attacks.

      --
      Support your local school shooter, give them your firearms.
    9. Re:Fuck blackberry by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Glad their insecure piece of shit platform is nearly dead

      It isn't, they just signed a 5 year deal with some US government for crisis communications.

      "Crisis communications" is the main activity of Blackberry's CEO these days.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    10. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Auto-correct is Bud Brother, dang it, Best Brother, Bro Brother, shit, see what I mean? I can't type "the government is Correct, Corniest, does Big things, does Badass things, I give up.

    11. Re: Fuck blackberry by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Insecure? Since when?

      Since they stopped thinking about strong encryption as being a good idea?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    12. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That will resist ANY non-authorized attempt to de-crypt, not just the government

    13. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nails?

      This fucker took GRK Ubergrade Screws to the coffin just now...

    14. Re: Fuck blackberry by Wovel · · Score: 2

      You are clearly confused about the meaning of secure. In the article, the CEO of Blackberry says their platform never has and never will be secure. Your comment is strange on a story where the CEO of Blackberry is attacking Apple for being too secure.

      Here is a tip. If a backdoor exists, the platform is not secure. End of discussion. I don't really care about how well Blackberry claims to protect their backdoor. It is a weakness. Not just for government intrusion (which would be bad enough), but to all types of intrusion.

    15. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tru dat.

    16. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget that encryption is defined as, "arms", by US law. Accordingly, encryption is a constitutionally protected technology by the Second Amendment.

    17. Re:Fuck blackberry by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Insecure is a relative term. I designed encryption stuff. If each client has a unique encryption key, and there is a transition consisting of re-encription between sender/receiver, then the sender does not know the recipients encryption key and vice versa. There is a daemon in the middle that decrypts/re-encrypts for both parties, and it is not PGP. Each party uses symmetric key encryption.

      And of course, Blackberry could be using public key algorithms for encryption. That would mean that a physical phone (found or taken by government) will have both public and private keys... Not a great idea.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    18. Re: Fuck blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We the people demand encryption that will foil even the strongest attacks.

      FTFY - computers cannot know that an attacker is government or nongovernment. So stopping attacks means stopping ALL attacks.

  3. Define "Greater Good" by Edis+Krad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "We are indeed in a dark place when companies put their reputations above the greater good."

    I guess Mr. Chen and Mr. Cook have very different ideas of what the greater good is.

    1. Re:Define "Greater Good" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      BB is a failed company. They failed to anticipate the market, and they failed to adapt. Their last gasp is to tear down what others have built with nonsensical arguments in favor of more government surveillance.

      Apparently, the US government doesn't agree. Witness SOCOM purchasing iPhones in a recent Slashdot article.

    2. Re:Define "Greater Good" by Kobun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. I'd also like to hear how Mr. Chen proposes to follow his vision of the greater good, where he has access to everyone's data and will hand it over for any trumped-up warrant, without a backdoor in his soon-to-be-extinct Blackberry's.

      Or is he going to do the politician thing and define "backdoor" to mean something conveniently different than what Blackberry has.

    3. Re:Define "Greater Good" by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      "Greater Good" goes up to 11

      "Lesser Evil" only goes up to 10, so it's 1 louder.

      When you need that extra push over the cliff, you go to 11..

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:Define "Greater Good" by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      I think the more salient point is that no one even gives a damn what Mr. Chen thinks anymore. He's running a company that's probably within a year of killing its hardware business, and whose big plan for turning things around is to become YAAM (Yet Another Android Manufacturer). At some point they're going to run out of money, and just as importantly, out of assets to sell, and then Mr. Chen will doubtless be on to "save" some other company (though really, he was given the impossible task of reversing half a decade's worth of visionless management).

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    5. Re: Define "Greater Good" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He kind of already has. How do you access encrypted devices without some form of backdoor?

    6. Re:Define "Greater Good" by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He's just saying that because Blackberry (then RIM or Research In Motion), after making a big hype about how secure they were, gave the keys to Saudi Rrabis, the United Arab Emerites, and the RCMP

      Just days after BlackBerry’s CEO stressed the company's network has no back doors for law enforcement, a news report alleges the RCMP obtained the ability to decrypt communications on BlackBerry devices.

      Vice reports that the RCMP was able to crack PIN-to-PIN messages related to Operation Clemenza, a large-scale probe into organized crime in Quebec. The investigation launched in 2010 and resulted in dozens of arrests in 2014.

      The RCMP isn’t keeping it a secret that it used BlackBerry communications to crack the case. It states on its website that its use of these messages marked “the first time that this technique was used on such a large scale in a major investigation” in North America.

      "Over one million private messages were intercepted and analyzed as evidence using the PIN to PIN interception technique," the RCMP said.

      But according to Vice, court documents show the RCMP had access to a BlackBerry decryption key — a piece of code that would allow any communications between two BlackBerry devices to be hacked and read.

      Having caved in, he's doubling down rather than admitting he should have refused, fought in court, and pulled service out of countries that demanded access.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    7. Re:Define "Greater Good" by mark-t · · Score: 1

      pulling service out of your own home country from which you are primarily based can often be infeasible unless you have enough international physical presence, and no strong dependence on any foreign head office, to easily relocate

    8. Re:Define "Greater Good" by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      If any warrant can be trumped up, the logical end point is that you don't believe in warrants to begin with.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    9. Re:Define "Greater Good" by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      And what was keeping them from challenging the RCMP in the courts - both the court of law and the court of public opinion? Apple won both of those battles.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    10. Re:Define "Greater Good" by CaptainLard · · Score: 1

      hand it over for any trumped-up warrant, without a backdoor in his soon-to-be-extinct Blackberry's.

      I see what you did there...

    11. Re:Define "Greater Good" by kencurry · · Score: 1

      always appreciative of Tap references; thank you.

      --
      sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
    12. Re: Define "Greater Good" by meerling · · Score: 2

      Use really crappy encryption?

    13. Re:Define "Greater Good" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ""We are indeed in a dark place when companies put their reputations above the greater good."

      Isn't this why PR is a trillion dollar industry exactly?

    14. Re:Define "Greater Good" by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I believe it was a provincial supreme court that demanded that Blackberry cooperate with the RCMP. While they could have theoretically challenged that and taken it to the SCC, given Canada's overall political climate and typical government stance on such matters, it is very unlikely that a higher court would have reversed that decision. All that would have happened is that Blackberry would have had to spend more money defending themselves and delayed the outcome by perhaps a few months to a year or so.

      And if the USSC had ordered Apple to cooperate with the FBI, do you really think they would have refused?

    15. Re:Define "Greater Good" by Radharaman11 · · Score: 0

      Indeed. I'd also like to hear how Mr. Chen proposes to follow his vision of the greater good, where he has access to everyone's data and will hand it over for any trumped-up warrant, without a backdoor in his soon-to-be-extinct Blackberry's. Or is he going to do the politician thing and define "backdoor" to mean something conveniently different than what Blackberry has.

      its amaging your right visit most beautiful hd desktop wallpapers

    16. Re:Define "Greater Good" by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say they failed to anticipate the market. The problem was Apple changed the playing field.
      Pre-iPhone smart phones were about typing. Blackberry was king with there keyboard and pointer it made it a superior smart phone for the market however this keyboard sacrificed screen space. Apple giving a multitouch screen and no keyboard showed that they could allow useful communication with more screen space. This trade off from Apple could had bombed but it didn't making blackberry innovations seem out of date.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    17. Re: Define "Greater Good" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Touchscreen phones existed before the iPhone. What killed Blackberry was a combination of the media fawning all over Apple, the fact that Blackberries were very secure until they lost their trust by cooperating with governments publicly, and the fact that most phones are used for useless and trivial purposes--a market and a population Apple and Google excel with being largely useless and shallow themselves.

      I don't want a corporate locked down device as my personal phone. Then again, the utter bullshit productivity killer that is on screen keyboards is utterly unsuited for business communication and most people are too dumb or simply too caught up in it to realize there is (or was) a better way.

    18. Re:Define "Greater Good" by Lews+Therin+Telamon · · Score: 1

      I definitely hold more to Cook's definition of "greater good" than to Chen's. I am glad I never decided to pull the trigger on a Blackberry device.

    19. Re:Define "Greater Good" by Nunya666 · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say they failed to anticipate the market. The problem was Apple changed the playing field. Pre-iPhone smart phones were about typing. Blackberry was king with there keyboard and pointer it made it a superior smart phone for the market however this keyboard sacrificed screen space. Apple giving a multitouch screen and no keyboard showed that they could allow useful communication with more screen space. This trade off from Apple could had bombed but it didn't making blackberry innovations seem out of date.

      Damn, I would have loved to have had you on my opposing debate teams in high school, since you don't even know how to defend your point of view.

      When Apple "changed the playing field" they changed the market, which BB failed to anticipate. By the time BB did react to the market change. it was too late.

      So, yes, BB absolutely "failed to anticipate the market".

    20. Re: Define "Greater Good" by Wovel · · Score: 2

      There was literally one multi-touch phone on the market for about three months before the iPhone came out. It had a terrible interface, was never marketed at all and they sold three copies. The media did not fawn over the iPhone when it was released either. It succeeded solely because it was better than anything else on the market.

    21. Re: Define "Greater Good" by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Encryption with a backdoor is crappy encryption.

    22. Re: Define "Greater Good" by macs4all · · Score: 1

      the utter bullshit productivity killer that is on screen keyboards is utterly unsuited for business communication

      You've obviously never seen anyone who can really thumb-type. I am certain that they can match, or even exceed, the best BB keyboard typists.

      Add to that the fact that an on-screen keyboard usually actually has larger "targets" for your fingers than physical keyboards, and the advantages of WELL-DONE onscreen keyboards are clear to most people.

    23. Re:Define "Greater Good" by macs4all · · Score: 1

      And what was keeping them from challenging the RCMP in the courts - both the court of law and the court of public opinion? Apple won both of those battles.

      EXACTLY.

    24. Re:Define "Greater Good" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      said another way - "When you have no remaining reputation, you have nothing to lose."

      One of these companies has a reputation among consumers to protect and the resources necessary to say "No." The other possesses neither.

    25. Re: Define "Greater Good" by Immerman · · Score: 2

      The difference is that physical buttons give immediate tactile feedback to keep positioning aligned without having to look at the keyboard itself - aka touch typing - the gold standard for "real" typing, and basically impossible with an on-screen keyboard.

      In addition, many/most thumb keyboards use domed keys, which allows your fingertip to occupy considerably more space than the key itself without fear of triggering adjacent keys, as well as allowing for considerable time for your fingers to "roll" pressure onto the top-of-dome sweet spot while pressing the key.

      Basically, even though the "targets" are smaller, they're easier to hit intentionally, easier to avoid hitting accidentally, and provide the tactile feedback that allows for the constant fine adjustments necessary for touch-typing.

      On-screen keyboards are a wonderful way to allow quick typing without any of the complexity of a physical keyboard, and allow for a wonderful variety of alternate layouts, but they're a poor second when it comes to typing essays, long emails, etc.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    26. Re: Define "Greater Good" by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      And crappy encryption is worse than no encryption.

    27. Re:Define "Greater Good" by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      There was no court order forcing Blackberry to give up the decryption keys to the RCMP. Just Chen being his incompetent self, doing further damage to the brand. He bent over to look like a good corporate citizen to the previous government.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    28. Re: Define "Greater Good" by clubby · · Score: 1

      I couldn't agree more. I have a bluetooth hardware keyboard for my iPad, and I use it whenever I need to type more than 140 characters.

    29. Re:Define "Greater Good" by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Could be... perhaps I am thinking of something else. Anyways, given the Canadian government's stance in the past on such matters, it is unlikely that Blackberry would have won.

    30. Re: Define "Greater Good" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing you use it whenever you are not on Twitter.

    31. Re:Define "Greater Good" by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
      The former conservative government lost more than 75% of the cases they took to the supreme court. That hardly sounds like the government can gett whatever it wants. The odds say that the odds were on Blackberry's side if it went to the courts.

      Unlike the US, judges in the provincial and federal courts are not elected, so once appointed, the judges really don't have to suck up to politicians.

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

      To be clear, BlackBerry never gave them the keys themselves, they gave them access to work stations that did.

      What is unclear in the RCMP case, is whether those stations were set to only decrypt the pins in the warrant/investigation, or if you could put in your buddy's pin and decrypt it.

    33. Re: Define "Greater Good" by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      They gave the RCMP the keys - not just "access to the servers."

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  4. Keep sucking and I might give you a govt contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Blackberry's CEO is just positioning itself as the cocksucker for governments.
    Anything for some more contracts, I guess. They need whatever they can get.

  5. Another clueless CEO by zerofoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    John Chen is a bit like gun prohibitionists. It doesn't matter if government requires manufacturers to install back doors. Eventually someone will develop encryption software without a back door - and government will still not have a key.

    Outlawing guns or encryption guarantees that only outlaws will possess those things.

    Apple is smart enough to realize this. They understand that throwing their users under the bus now will not make us safer later.

    1. Re:Another clueless CEO by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      Don't kid yourself. It is possible for the government + corporations to ban things. For example they can lock down a device so you can't add unapproved software to it. Don't think that is possible? It already is on some devices. All they need is a law to not let you connect to the Internet with a non-locked down device. That is coming eventually anyway.

    2. Re:Another clueless CEO by Z80a · · Score: 2

      I think it's quite impossible to stop markets from happening.
      Which is why besides their best efforts, its still easy to buy drugs for example.

      If there's a demand, someone will supply it.

    3. Re:Another clueless CEO by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      It isn't impossible in this instance. Only a handful of tech companies control most core Internet access. This isn't drugs or guns.

    4. Re:Another clueless CEO by Nostalgia4Infinity · · Score: 1

      You mean a device that passes the locked_down test. There is a difference between that and actually locked down.

    5. Re:Another clueless CEO by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Well yes, but as soon they ban, people will at very least crack the devices and create a whole huge parallel market of either cracking software or hardware to sideload programs, as it happens with the game consoles right now.

    6. Re:Another clueless CEO by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Not always. Look at the AppleTV3+, and current game consoles. They haven't been cracked.

    7. Re:Another clueless CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's hard to bother cracking something when there's almost no other users to be impressed by your work ;-)

    8. Re:Another clueless CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Outlawing guns or encryption guarantees that only outlaws will possess those things.

      Were encryption classified as a defense tool and put under the 2nd amendment protection, it would stand a better chance of surviving.

    9. Re:Another clueless CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like gun prohibitionists

      But that's the good kind of prohibition!

    10. Re:Another clueless CEO by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Encryption doesn't help when they also send a copy to government servers that is encrypted with the government's key. Not hard to push out in a software update.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    11. Re:Another clueless CEO by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      You mean users like the PS4 or XBox One? Neither have been cracked. Neither have the last two gens of AppleTVs.

    12. Re:Another clueless CEO by CaptainLard · · Score: 1

      John Chen is a bit like gun prohibitionists.

      You mean he's a red herring?

    13. Re:Another clueless CEO by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Yet.

    14. Re: Another clueless CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The forth amendment already covers it. It's quite clear that, had smartphones been around at the time, that this amendment would have included smartphones and email under personal effects. Unfortunately successive administrations have been whittling away at the principle of this ammendment. It's just plain retarded that email is, for the purposes of law, considered "abandoned" if left on a server for more than 180 days.

    15. Re:Another clueless CEO by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Apple is smart enough to realize this. They understand that throwing their users under the bus now will not make us safer later.

      And it's important to point out that Apple maintained that stance at no small danger to themselves and their reputation. During that whole FBI thing, there were several Congresscritters that were calling Apple "Aligning with Terrists" and "Intentionally Marketing to Terrists" (really! I heard it myself on C-SPAN), and worse.

      And this was in the country that the company was located (USA); so, to the person that said that BB had no choice but to give the RCMP the Keys to the Kingdom because it is located in the RCMP's backyard: Suck it! Apple showed us what REAL PATRIOTISM looks like!

    16. Re:Another clueless CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People are running their own code on PS4s.

    17. Re:Another clueless CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IOW: If North Korea can do it why can't we too?

      I expect there might be a company or few million of them that might object such an idea. Turing-machines? Who needs them? We need toasters. Those damn commies can program them for us, right?

    18. Re:Another clueless CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple showed us what REAL MARKETING looks like!

      FTFY

  6. Didn't they exit the phone business last month? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought they withdrew their Android phone from the market to focus on software?

    If so, what do they care about phones?

  7. Very interesting perspective. by kamapuaa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wish they could have gotten the CEO of Pan Am, Zenith, or RCA to speak up on the subject.

    --
    Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    1. Re:Very interesting perspective. by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      They weren't available as they were all playing golf in Palm Springs with Frank Sinatra.

    2. Re:Very interesting perspective. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I assume that was kamapuaa's point - in 2016, Blackberry is about as relevant as the defunct companies he listed.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  8. Well, if that's your view, then fuck you BackBerry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously. Privacy is privacy.

    If you can't do that then piss off down the toilet.

    Sincerely, BB10DEV (I saw a numberplate in the UK like that once, good job that wasn't mine given Chen's attitude!)

    On the 'other side' I can appreciate the greater god response for this, but seriously, if you're that 'greater good' then please, chen, install a camera that's public in your bedroom and see how that feels.

  9. I'm disturbed... by DiSKiLLeR · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm disturbed by BlackBerry's stance on the situation.

    Under no circumstances should backdoors be allowed.

    --
    You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
    1. Re:I'm disturbed... by kamapuaa · · Score: 0

      Your wife doesn't seem to mind.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    2. Re:I'm disturbed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm disturbed by BlackBerry's stance on the situation.

      Under no circumstances should backdoors be allowed.

      I find it funny also how one sided that Chen's words are.. So yes it is bad for society that Apple did not comply to the government's requests, How is it bad for society exactly that the company that provides their communication devices does not give up the security of their customers so easily? How bad is it that Blackberry apparently would? I don't think that I will ever do business with Blackberry again (Not that I felt like I wanted to, unless they stepped out of 2002!)

    3. Re:I'm disturbed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh. He actually said he was against government mandated backdoors. What he did say was that if someone presents a valid warrant for access to some ones data they should provide it if possible. Saying that all warrants are invalid and under no circumstances should be honored removes one of the key tenets of our judicial system. And as sure as water is wet if the government really wants access to some ones data they will get it one way or another. Any encryption on a consumer device can be broken with enough technical and computer resources and the government has access to both. What the government will not do is waste money and effort trying to perform this on a large scale. The NSA, CIA, or FBI doesn't have the man power to waste unless the target catches their attention. You only have to look at all the violence, computer hacks, and criminal acts that happen everyday. If the government was practicing mass surveillance on everyone's electronic communications then you would think at least some of the more violent crimes would not be happening. The way things are going anarchy is just around the corner. One bad cop means all cops are bad. One questionable warrant means all warrants are bad. One incident of collateral damage in a war zone means all military strikes are bad. One black guy shoots a white guy and all blacks are bad. One white guy shoots a black man and all white men are racists. These are just a few examples of facile arguments in today's society. When does it stop? Why is common sense being abandoned wholesale? It's not the government fucking things up it is the governed masses. I guess it is just easier to blame the government for all your ills instead of taking responsibility for your own choices and behavior.

    4. Re:I'm disturbed... by JohnFen · · Score: 2

      If that's what he meant, then why is he criticizing Apple? Apple has always provided customer information they had available when presented with a warrant. What they refused to do was to hack one of the devices that they manufactured.

    5. Re: I'm disturbed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It stops when you can apply some common sense and reread the constitution with its imposition against general warrants. The founders would not have put up with government officials forcing them to empty their satchels of all papers and making copies at all border crossings, and neither should we.

      Since you force us to choose between that for personal security or finding the bad guy group, then hence the struggle. No one is happy with the security farce system in place right now, so the struggle for dominance continues. When you have a turn-key tyrrany, dominance of class and race matters.

    6. Re:I'm disturbed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with your assessment of limited gov't resources means they cannot be able to wholesale stop illegal activity.

      However, I don't share two assumptions about the rest of your assertions. 1) Gov't (or any of those 'top' level, powerful folks) does not truly want to stop activities merely because they are illegal, but that they only need to control certain context-specific activities that are more closely tied to money/power/politics; the activity being illegal is just the justification to get involved. Just compare the resources allocated to solving the crime of a drug-related killing of a known crackhead pimp scumbag to one of a high profile victim with enough juice to warrant the all-hands-on-deck attention. As a corollary, make just about everything a crime and that gives the gov't carte blanche to get tangled up in your life, any time, for any reason.

      And, 2) Narrowing targets to pressure points or certain critical people would mean the gov't doesn't need the same huge resources required to stop all crime for all the population. An example of this would be the need to only kill the leaders of the army, not the whole army.

    7. Re:I'm disturbed... by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      As a corollary, make just about everything a crime and that gives the gov't carte blanche to get tangled up in your life, any time, for any reason.

      "Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

      - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

      Has anyone told those in power that AS (and equally '1984', 'BNW', Animal Farm, etc) was/were NOT intended as instructions?

      You can attack Ayn Rand all you want, but she's not alone (see works cited above) and events seem to be unfolding in eerily-similar ways to not only significant portions of AS, but also to those other 'future Dystopian world' books.

      But at least we have cool pocket-sized Telescreens, and not those silly console-sized things from the B/W movie! Double-plus good!

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    8. Re:I'm disturbed... by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Has anyone told those in power that AS (and equally '1984', 'BNW', Animal Farm, etc) was/were NOT intended as instructions?

      This kind of phrase has always seemed stupid to me. Those with power have been acting this way for millennia. None of them need to read AS or 1984 to get these ideas. Being able to think of and act on such ideas is exactly how they get into power in the first place. Those books described reality; they didn't precede it.

    9. Re:I'm disturbed... by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Has anyone told those in power that AS (and equally '1984', 'BNW', Animal Farm, etc) was/were NOT intended as instructions?

      This kind of phrase has always seemed stupid to me.

      Maybe you need to re-calibrate your sarcasm meter.

      Just saying.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    10. Re:I'm disturbed... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      Saying that all warrants are invalid and under no circumstances should be honored removes one of the key tenets of our judicial system.

      Indeed. That's probably why no one is making that argument.

      If the government was practicing mass surveillance on everyone's electronic communications then you would think at least some of the more violent crimes would not be happening.

      How would you know about the violent crimes that are not happening? Maybe they're already not happening!

      It's not the government fucking things up it is the governed masses. I guess it is just easier to blame the government for all your ills instead of taking responsibility for your own choices and behavior.

      Yeah, those governed masses just don't know how to act or what's good for them! What they need is a strong authority to keep them on the right path.

      Sorry, how have my choices and behavior led to the government wanting unconstitutional access to my private communications? How have my choices and behavior led to their abusing the powers they have arrogated to themselves? They haven't.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    11. Re:I'm disturbed... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      What he's against is Apple making it so that you would need a backdoor to extract nearly any information on the device, a backdoor that he thinks is a bad idea.
      He's arguing against making everything encrypted.

    12. Re:I'm disturbed... by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      So he's arguing for something arguably worse than a backdoor, then?

    13. Re:I'm disturbed... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Yes, pretty much.

  10. Some Irony There... by TheEyes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Blackberry's CEO is just positioning itself as the cocksucker for governments.
    Anything for some more contracts, I guess. They need whatever they can get.

    A bit ironic, as part of the reason for Blackberry's decline is that businesses can't trust they won't hand over their secure communications to whatever entity asks for it.

    1. Re:Some Irony There... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, not really.

    2. Re:Some Irony There... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Informative
      Yes, really. They gave decription keys to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, They also gave access to all Blackberry services, including Blackberrry Enterprise Server to Pakistan, despite claims to the contrary.

      Not hard to say you never gave the decryption key to BES when you've pushed out a software update that also sends a plain-text copy to the powers that be.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:Some Irony There... by Dog-Cow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The GP meant that RIM handing over the keys are not why businesses have abandoned BB. I agree with the nice Coward. Businesses have abandoned BB because everyone wants iPhones or Android phones. They have more apps, and they work with whatever computer you have at home. Whatever BB has done is too little, too late.

    4. Re:Some Irony There... by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1

      So there's a hard 100% certainty that businesses did not in any way ever take into account Blackberry's track record of giving up data to any government entities without hesitation or resistance? Even if a company used that as .001% of the reason for abandoning Blackberry, and employee lack of enthusiasm over BB was 99.999%, it still makes the GGP's point true: It's still a part of the reason for Blackberry's decline, and probably a much bigger part than the hypothetical .001% that I used here. Also, what's to say that BB's data retention and sharing policies aren't a good part of why users have started ditching BB for the other platforms. Sure...usability, apps, and design decisions were probably a greater part of the reason, but I'm sure BB's stance on data didn't help matters. And if it was at all a part of the users' decision to abandon, by extension it becomes a part of the reason for corporate abandonment of the platform, even if they don't directly realize it.

    5. Re: Some Irony There... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But he said there was no access to secure encrypted BlackBerry enterprise communications or corporate emails as these were accessible only to the owners of these services."

      You and/or the article is misinformed. BlackBerry nor India can decrypt BES traffic, they don't have the keys, the private companies only can. Regardless of what correspondence (not provided) was read that inferred this. Many articles confused BIS with BES and they hardly correct themselves.

      And it took several years to get to that point and pushed back as long as they could.

  11. I'm disturbed by his "non-tough" approach by melted · · Score: 1

    I'm disturbed by his "non-tough" approach. I hope CTOs reading this draw the right conclusions.

  12. Backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Destruction of everyone's privacy is a much greater harm than the failure to prosecute a single individual. Chen is an idiot in charge of a failed company, and the only thing BB had left -- security -- is being usurped by Apple. I have a BB right now, and I plan to upgrade to Apple now that their security is as good as or better than BB. This is just FUD to stem the tide of people like me. /shrug

  13. That ruins the Blackberry brand for me... by BlueCoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And they use to have such a good rep... oh well, someone flush the toilet.

    Apple did what they should do for encryption. They refused to release a signed version of their firmware that would allow any phone with that firmware to be brute force cracked. Even if they took the actual phone into their possession and loaded the special firmware themselves only on that phone it would mean tens of thousands of requests from law enforcement and courts all over the world. They couldn't say no to any of them. A logistical nightmare that doesn't make Apple any money; break even at best but with lots of negative press.

    It's a no win situation. And you can be sure that further into the future they will endeavor to make it impossible for even them to crack their own phones no matter what firmware the device uses.

    Didn't you hear? The USA just bought a ton of apple phones for military special forces.

    1. Re:That ruins the Blackberry brand for me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My father, in his mid-60s, looks to me for advice when it comes to technology. In the past I've encouraged him to use BlackBerry - he travels abroad quite often, and when his co-workers have connectivity issues with their Apple and Android devices, he's talking and doing whatever without any issues. That has always been a strength of BB - it works everywhere.

      But that one selling point has been getting harder and harder to justify when the Apple and non-BB Android devices are easy to use and very well supported. When I see this kind of crap coming out of BB, well. That's the tipping point.

  14. This is just self-serving nonsense... by CAOgdin · · Score: 1

    BB apparently depends on government business for a large fraction of its' income. This is just "dancing to the piper's tune."

    Chen appears to be siding with his major "customer," to forego his failure at making a product that non-governmental customers want to buy. He is also apparently wholly ignorant of constitutional rights to privacy in the U.S., as outlined by Alan Westin's seminal and masterful "Privacy and Freedom" (1967).

    1. Re:This is just self-serving nonsense... by TroII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Pretty much. The only reason BlackBerry exists in India, for example, is because they gave the Indian government a backdoor into all BlackBerry devices. If they'd do it for India, why wouldn't they be happy to do it elsewhere? A company like that isn't trustworthy and it's no wonder their brand has tanked. Apple isn't going to go down the same moronic path.

    2. Re:This is just self-serving nonsense... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That article only refers to the consumer version of bbm messages. One particular messaging program, hardly a backdoor to the device. Blackberry 10 doesn't use BIS for email.
      To quote Apple "When the FBI has requested data that’s in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we’ve offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal."
      Sounds the same as BlackBerry

    3. Re:This is just self-serving nonsense... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 0

      Do you believe anything they say any more? India required that ALL communications be accessible, not just consumer devices. So the fact that they only mentioned consumer devices is just to make you not ask about BES.

      Correspondence reviewed by ET, however, shows that the solution demonstrated by RIM can intercept all BlackBerry services. A telecom department official also confirmed that corporate emails would form part of the services that the government will be able to monitor.

      They set up and then gave BES servers to the government So RIM's Enterprise servers weren't compromised because those servers were no longer RIM's property.

      The Canadian smartphone maker, which had set up servers and other interception facilities in Mumbai last year after India had threatened to shut down BlackBerry services, has now handed over this infrastructure to Indian agencies, internal government documents reviewed by ET reveal.

      Double-speak.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    4. Re: This is just self-serving nonsense... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't know how BES private keys or communications work.

      Protip: it doesn't go through BlackBerry servers.

    5. Re: This is just self-serving nonsense... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.cio.com/article/2371203/blackberry-phone/rim--we-still-can-t-access-encrypted-blackberry-data--we-pinky-swear--.html

  15. There ARE clear guidelines asshole by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    "Of course, there need to be clear guidelines"

    Dear Mr. Chen: There is no such thing as encryption with a back door. That's the guideline moron.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    1. Re:There ARE clear guidelines asshole by CanEHdian · · Score: 1

      All we have to do is to ask Mr. Chen to put all his valuables in this super-secure electronic safe. Of course it has a backdoor. But he won't mind (at least until the next time he opens it)....

      --
      When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
  16. Ingore. Blackberry is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy can safely be ignored as BB is a dead company they just don't 'quite' know it yet. Which makes me a bit sad given that I'm Canadian & BB was a 'huge Canadian company'. But clearly the CEO's didn't/don't have a clue as to what their users/consumers actually WANT so in this realm it's no surprising either.

    It isn't 'nonsense' that BB has the ability to even see any data such that they COULD turn it over to the government even with a 'valid warrant'...I mean seriously I don't want BB acting as the gatekeeper that's for sure.

    But that's ok, I haven't used a BB in years & never will again and this is just one more reason why.

  17. John Chen, SHUT THE FUCK UP! by Chas · · Score: 1

    Seriously. It's already known that your company basically already sold its own encryption keys, and thus isn't a trustworthy platform anymore.

    Stop trying to curry favor. Your company crashed. You're essentially obsolete. Your heyday ain't coming back.

    So please, all you're doing is shaming yourself further, to make a buck.

    What's next? Prostituting your own children for money?

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:John Chen, SHUT THE FUCK UP! by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      What's next? Prostituting your own children for money?

      Blackberry's been around quite a while, and there's no whore like an old whore (or so I'm told).

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  18. sorry, the social contract was violated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking from a USA perspective here, but: for a long time we had the 4th amendment, and it was understood that we granted the government certain powers of search and seizure in exchange for a 4th amendment promise to go through the official process that involves reasonable cause and search warrants. That was the deal. The deal was broken, and not just a little bit, not in one or two isolated cases, but on a country wide scale for decades. Instead of searching probable criminals, we have turned into a surveillance state where every thing that everyone says or does is monitored.

    Sorry, but when that happened, the social contract became null and void. At this point, the pendulum must swing back the other way. Since that is not happening at the governmental and legal level, it must happen at the technical level. We, programmers, technology and encryption experts, must bring tools to the masses to regain our civil rights.

    Will those tools be abused sometimes? Probably, yes. They are still critically important to have. A hammer can build a house, and it can destroy your thumb. Our civil rights can be damned inconvenient sometimes, but we still must safeguard them like they are the most important thing in the world.

    It became a war when the NSA began snooping on my grandmother, her best friend, people talking to their doctors, mothers talking to their children, lovers cybersexing, people shopping, tracking what everyone reads and writes, when it began lying about the origin of evidence ("parallel construction"), and when the spirit of the 4th amendment was murdered and the carcass left to rot in a ditch.

    So, sorry. If we can someday restore the intent the founders of the nation had, then maybe things can be re-evaluated at that point. But for now, and the next years and probably decades, we in the tech community are fucking pissed off. And the one thing you do not want to trifle with is fucking pissed off nerds who build all the shit you depend on for your cushy little modern life.

    You started this shit. We will finish it. It may take years and years, sweat and tears, but finish it we will. We will give the people back their civil rights, over your objections however shrill they may get.

    1. Re: sorry, the social contract was violated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fucking-a, damn right!

      My sentiments exactly. 18 years of my life working for a government that turns out to have shat on my oath. This will not go unanswered.

  19. He *found that disturbing as a citizen* by fustakrakich · · Score: 0

    Then he should renounce his citizenship.

    I will have order!

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  20. It makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see here, a CEO that ran his company almost to the point of insolvency because of its "we'll give your private data to anyone that asks" attitude is "disturbed" by a multi-billion dollar company who's attitude is "we will not help spooks steal your private data". That probably explains why RIM is in a death spiral.

    1. Re:It makes sense by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      To be fair to Chen, Blackberry was already a dead man walking. While it still had significant cash in the bank, its revenue had already collapsed, and he was supposed to be this big white knight who could save the company. It was an impossible task, but what did BB have to lose? But Chen has spouted a lot of crap of late, which leads me to believe he's just grasping at straws at this point.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:It makes sense by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      I know that many people claim that companies must everything they can to maximize shareholder value, but this is a clear example of the opposite. A couple of years ago, perhaps more, Blackberry should have shut down and distributed its cash to its shareholders. Instead, a steady bleeding of cash means that shareholders are losing their investment.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  21. 196 "back doors" by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Every country will eventually NEED to get access to that data. It's far more likely to be used to squash liberty than to solve the cases for 3 or 4 bad guys. If you need to hack a phone to catch someone, you are fishing. The dumb criminals of course will leave the evidence there -- but also everywhere else. The terrorist cell however, will use a burner phone or a damn pigeon.

    America will not get more secure by more spying, but by stronger communities and job opportunities. Every one of these attacks is coming from a loner.

    --
    >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
  22. Well ... by mattyj · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I guess I won't be using this Blackberry any more." - Everyone in 2008

  23. I think the thing is he has nothing to fear by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    economically. Not at his income level. There's little doubt he's got a healthy golden parachute. Being afraid for things like surveillance generally requires quite a bit of economic insecurity. You have to believe the world can and will turn on you at some point, which is an odd thought to have if you've spent all or most of your adult life without worrying about money. It's an entirely different outlook on life you'd only get from a member of the ruling class. The 20th century equivalent to "Let them eat cake".

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re: I think the thing is he has nothing to fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Chen's argument is also an irrelevant straw man ,

      Apple has provided all relevant data it has when presented with a valid warrant.

      However, by increasing use of PKI & end to end encryption ,Apple has been moving towards a point where that data it has is getting less and less, and may eventually be so little it's irrelevant to asking for.

      What Apple has resisted is reversing that direction.

      His argument is politically appealing to factions within government who want back doors, but as government, would you want YOUR devices to have a back door that a foreign government could access on presenting a warrant ?

      Apples position is essentially, we want to sell you a phone - access to your data is between you and who ever is asking for it.

      Blackberry's position is they want to sell you a phone, and then will give your data to whomever it is politically expedient to do so.

      I'll take the "other fruit company" thank you.

    2. Re: I think the thing is he has nothing to fear by macs4all · · Score: 2

      Apples position is essentially, we want to sell you a phone - access to your data is between you and who ever is asking for it.

      Which is a laudable position, indeed.

    3. Re: I think the thing is he has nothing to fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as government, would you want YOUR devices to have a back door that a foreign government could access on presenting a warrant ?

      Exactly! I don't know why we aren't framing the argument like that. If someone is saying "Uncle Sam would never abuse this power", don't try to argue against that position, just ignore it and keep repeating "I don't want my data accessible to terrorists / hackers / foreign governments".

  24. Seeing which company is one of the market leaders by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    this is like a fly telling you not to flush your shit as its for the greater good of fly society to leave the turd in the bowl.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  25. Mr. Chen Doesn't Understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the purpose of encryption is to prevent parties other than the originator and desired recipients to be able to decode and read/see the encrypted content--under any conditions. If the police need access to encryption that bad and the government everyone seems to think can/has broken all available encryption protocols, then there should be no problem. This is not the case. Encryption, if the algorithm and implementation are sound, can be relied upon to work as advertised. In truth, if used and implemented correctly, and barring quantum understand and decryption, the continents will shift before the encrypted content could be made plaintext.

    It's possible to encrypt something of exceedingly-important value and then wrap that again and again in other encrypted containers. If this is done, no one, barring some magical invention, will be able to render the original message as plain text or whatever the content is.

  26. It's Official by jshackney · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1) BB just died with Mr. Chen's comments.
    2) Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that Apple has integrity*. Not a huge fanboi, it pains me terribly to say that.

    *on the matter of encryption/privacy.

    1. Re:It's Official by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

      Seriously, I wonder why he is trying so hard to promote Apple and crap on his own company here, not a good strategy to upsell competitors

  27. yup. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That ruins the Blackberry brand for me...

    Yup. I thought exactly the same thing-- blackberry has just gone from a company I didn't give a shit about to an enemy of decent society. I will be sure to discourage people from using it and mock it when I can.

    Let's make sure everyone knows that the BlackBerry brand has taken the side of poor security by design and a stated deference to the surveillance state.

  28. Re:Keep sucking and I might give you a govt contra by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Agreed!

    It's obviously political grandstanding based on this quote alone: "We are indeed in a dark place when companies put their reputations above the greater good."

    Apple has stated it puts all users ("greater good") at risk to find or create a back-door. Even if the BlackBerry CEO disagrees with the weight of one risk against the other (potentially solving crimes now versus creating more in the future), he should give Apple the benefit of the doubt in terms of internal motivation, and simply say, "I disagree with Apple's weighing of probabilities" rather than question Apple's motives.

    It's unprofessional to publicly question motives unless you have solid evidence of bias. Disagreement about risk probability estimates does not even come close to that level.

    If by chance Apple replies and says BlackBerry is just saying that to get gov't contracts, they'd be committing the same sin of guessing motivations instead of focusing the facts of differing professional assessments.

    Hanlon's Razor.

    Everybody probably has some degree internal biases, some they are aware of and some not. Human nature. Pointing that out doesn't tell anybody anything new, and is rude: it generates heat, not light.

  29. Re:Keep sucking and I might give you a govt contra by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But even governments are abandoning Blackberry devices, and since he's just turning Blackberry into an Android maker, he's lost most of what differentiated BB from everyone else. At this point, it looks like a guy with a horse drawn carriage who he's strapped a gas engine to shaking his fists at the sports cars.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  30. Re:Keep sucking and I might give you a govt contra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, the US government still loves them:

    http://www.canadianmanufacturing.com/technology/blackberry-lands-172348/

  31. That would be unenforceable by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    "Locked down" devices are hacked to allow unauthorized software all the time. But for argument's sake - lets assume a hardware provider does succeed in making unhackable hardware.

    A law prohibiting internet connectivity would require that criminals obey the law - let me give away the ending to that story: Criminals will break the law.

    Forcing such a prohibition via technical means would require re-engineering the entire internet - all the way down the OSI stack to the physical layer. Re-engineering internet, being the global network of networks that it is, would require the cooperation of every single government and every single network operator on the planet.

    That is an unlikely set of circumstances for sure.

    1. Re:That would be unenforceable by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't need to re-engineer the entire internet, just the edges. it is definitely doable, and eventually it will be done I believe. The excuse will be child porn/terrorism/piracy/etc...

    2. Re: That would be unenforceable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that level of censorship reduces market value wherever it is implemented. That is a natural filter.

    3. Re: That would be unenforceable by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      How hilarious. Market value? Somehow I don't think the NSA cares that their monitoring reduces market value.

    4. Re: That would be unenforceable by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      How hilarious. Market value? Somehow I don't think the NSA cares that their monitoring reduces market value.

      Perhaps not. But the powerful people who fund the campaigns of the people who give orders to the NSA do care about market value. Additionally, the US does not control the world, try as they might, and its laws are not applicable outside the country. So international actors may fill the gap.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    5. Re: That would be unenforceable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why wouldn't they? Their mission is to serve the interests of the US - a nation that is commonly described as a corporatocracy. In the end, is there anything that they could be concerned about which /wouldn't/ boil down to money?

  32. Go on roll over by Revek · · Score: 1

    Show them you're belly. How anyone could believe that is beyond me. I bet if someone doxed his ass he would be outraged and scream about his privacy.

  33. Greater good? by Smiddi · · Score: 1

    The "greater good" is for people to disclose their own privacy.

  34. Connectivity is different than control by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    These backbone providers transit data across their networks to other networks. It is not possible for them to know the security status of the devices sending or receiving that data.

    To enable such detection, the entire structure of the internet would need to be redesigned to support that detection.

    Could a backbone provider simply block encrypted data that government can't decrypt? Possibly, but that requires that the internet provider decrypt that data in real time and block any other encrypted data.

    The biggest problem with all of these strategies is that you can simply nest your encrypted data inside a government approved data packet. You can decrypt the outer container only to find the contents are still encrypted and beyond your reach.

    Outlawing encryption entirely is like asking math to become undiscovered. It simply isn't possible to control.

    1. Re:Connectivity is different than control by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Of course that is possible. It is just a technical issue solved by software. Just like you can't provision a cable modem in your house without authorization from the upstream ISP. The ISPs could just declare that you need to use "authorized" cable modems to connect to the Internet and reject all non-authorized one. This is coming already.

    2. Re:Connectivity is different than control by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Even blocking encrypted content would be a losing game - you can just bury the encryption within a layer of steganography and make it arbitrarily difficult to detect. Maybe not suited to downloading the latest season of [insert show here], but amply viable for the sort of communications used to justify building in backdoors.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    3. Re:Connectivity is different than control by Immerman · · Score: 1

      And what does that accomplish? My modem isn't doing the relevant encryption, my computer is. If the data ever leaves my device unencrypted, then its security is already broken. The modem (or ISP's routers) wouldn't just have to have back doors in their own encryption, they'd have to be able to detect preexisting encryption within the data stream they're given to transport and refuse to transmit it - which can be made an arbitrarily difficult task by disguising encrypted traffic as insecure communications, requiring arbitrarily large lag times to detect.

      3 minute ping times are going to be a really tough sell, even "for the children". Voice and videophone communication would be essentially impossible, most online gaming would be dead, web browsing would be horribly painful. The internet would be reverted to the early days of email and long-latency file transfer. And you *still* wouldn't have actually stopped securely encrypted communication - those vacation photos I emailed my buddy could be jam packed with a virtually undetectable encrypted payload.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  35. Re:Canadians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The radiant socialist future, comrade! We will each fit perfectly into the little cube holes given to us from the infinite love of 'The People' while we serve at the pleasure of 'The People'!

  36. Good-bye Blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My new phone was going to be a Blackberry. But, between them killing off the Classic and now the CEO is a raving, anti-privacy lunatic, it's clear they are never getting my business again. RIP Blackberry.

  37. Fair enough by JohnFen · · Score: 1

    I am disturbed by Blackberry's hard line stance, and consider it harmful to society.

  38. Go F yourself RIM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the many reason no one wants to use your phones

  39. God all these idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The average maturity of a Slashdotter has gone down, and the popular short-sighted techno-idealism has blinded most so that they have lost all touch with reality. People being shot ~now~ or worse is MUCH (!!!) more significant than a slight change in risk of something that may or may NOT happen, maybe, at some point in the future.

  40. Dear RIM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your CEO's comments are on par with your own technology.

    Both are irrelevant in 2016.

    In fact, it's shit like this that will kill RIM. Who the fuck is going to purchase anything from these dumb fucks now?

  41. Calling them "blackberry"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Calling them "blackberry" is like calling Microsoft "Windows".

    Blackberry is a brand and a range of products.

    RIM (research in motion) is the company producing said products.

    1. Re: Calling them "blackberry"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      RIM changed their name to Blackberry several years ago.

  42. Seem to be contradicting.... by SeaFox · · Score: 2

    "I think BlackBerry, like any company, should have a basic civil responsibility. If the world is in danger, we should be able to help out." ...
    Chen also warned that mandatory back doors aren't a good idea either.

    I'd like to hear Chen's idea of how he can accomplish access to encrypted data without the user's consent while not having a back door.
    I suppose he doesn't count the vendor having the user's key and using it without permission as "unauthorized access".

  43. If the world is in danger... by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

    If the world is in danger, we should be able to help out.

    That's a big 'if'. Terrorism doesn't kill anybody, statistically speaking (and that's not to say I don't feel sad for all the statistical anomalies in Nice, etc, but let's keep it in perspective), so it should not be something to be afraid of. Governments around the world are using it as a control measure over the population. That's what they always do. Encryption thwarts that control in a minor way, that's why they're scared of it.

    I think this was Blackberry's "Ratner Moment". Bye bye blackberry way.....

    1. Re:If the world is in danger... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Actually, the world is increasingly in danger from the severe (and intended) side-effects of "fighting" terrorism. (No, mass surveillance does not help against terrorism, as the last few cases have very well demonstrated.) Hence "helping out" would actually mean helping to stop the raising fascism in the west. But no, they cheer it onwards. This has happened before and last time the result was a global catastrophe.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  44. Good news for the FBI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If one of the five people still using a BlackBerry phone is a terrorist, we've got a safer world!

  45. I wonder which company is in tune with its users? by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My long time complaint has been that Blackberry was very abusive and disregarded the desires of its users. They would allow telcos to molest their products to maintain a "good" relationship with the telcos. They would allow IT departments to molest their products to maintain a "good" relationship with the IT departments, and now they seem to want the jackbooted thugs who run our secret police to molest their products, but for what?

    They let other people turn their phones into turds an the market spoke.

    Now he is whining because Apple won't turn their phones into turds on the behest of some bunch of assholes.

    The telcos put blackberries onto the bottom shelf the second the iPhone came along, the IT departments switched to everything else, and the jackbooted thugs will probably treat BB with the same respect. This makes me smile.

    For those who aren't Canadian, BB epitomizes everything that the rest of Canada hates about central Canada (where RIM is located). This unrelenting bowing to authority. This treating of the people as peasants who don't know what is best for themselves. A pseudo intellectual belief that the rest of the world will somehow come around to their delusions and make it their reality.

  46. Aren't police/gov agencies good BB customers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is BB trying to be nice w/ government to keep its customers?

  47. This CEO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a character from an Ayn Rand novel.

    It's sad that such leftist extremism has become reality...

    1. Re:This CEO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fucktard

    2. Re:This CEO... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Such leftist extremism like not bending over to the government?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  48. Wrong by s.petry · · Score: 2

    If any warrant can be trumped up, the logical end point is that you don't believe in warrants to begin with.

    No, absolutely not. The logical endpoint is that a warrant is a tool that can be used for either good or evil. All tools should be evaluated on a case by case basis. If your logic was true, it would mean nobody could own a screwdriver or a frying pan. Those tools have been used as a murder devices, so must always be a murder device.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  49. How is this company even relevant anymore.... by Shad0wz · · Score: 1

    How is this company even relevant anymore....

  50. Why is he doing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is he an absolute tool? Is he that stupid? Doesn't he realize it will turn off potential users? Or is he hoping for favors? What's wrong with the man?

  51. Blackberry... A dying breed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With withering user base.

  52. Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Oh, wait, yeah...Blackberry. I remember them. They were a big deal about 15 years ago I think.

    Man, whatever happened to them? They just fell off the face of the Earth and into irrelevance with their zeroish market share. The fact that they bend over and spread their cheeks any time any law enforcement or government agency (from anywhere in the world) asks them to do so is actually a small part of the reason that they failed so miserably.

    I'm an Apple hater from way back, but the fact that they're willing to go to war with the FBI (and not just win, but humiliate them in the process) is something that I think is fucking fantastic.

  53. Re:Keep sucking and I might give you a govt contra by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And that is just it: Sucking up to the authorities in a police-state like the US is _not_ for the greater good. Apple has it right this time, what is demanded of them goes way too far.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  54. Bye blackberry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you Mr. Chen for helping me get over my Blackberry nostalgia.

  55. Re:Keep sucking and I might give you a govt contra by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    But even governments are abandoning Blackberry devices, and since he's just turning Blackberry into an Android maker, he's lost most of what differentiated BB from everyone else.

    Well, they've still got their keyboards. It didn't keep them market leader like they hoped, but since pretty much nobody else has them any more, it could keep them afloat.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  56. ooh-wah-ah-ah-ah... awh awh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No mommy, don't do it again
    Don't do it again
    I'll be a good boy
    I'll be a good boy, I promise
    No mommy don't hit me
    Why did you have to hit me like that, mommy?
    Don't do it, you're hurting me
    Why did you have to be such a bitch
    Why don't you,
    Why don't you just fuck off and die
    Why can't you just fuck off and die
    Why can't you just leave here and die
    Never stick your hand in my face again bitch
    FUCK YOU
    I don't need this shit
    You stupid sadistic abusive fucking whore
    How would you like to see how it feels mommy
    Here it comes, get ready to die

  57. Poor argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... But if you have the data, you should give it to them

    Apple didn't have the data, stop building a straw-man.

    ... any company, should have a basic civil responsibility

    You mean, to read a dead man's work messages? Bad example!

    ... that mandatory back doors ...

    How does that differ from you unlocking the doors for them?

    If the world is in danger ...

    Then remove all encryption from your products: That'll make everyone safe, right?

  58. Translation by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    We alienated our customer base by handing out their privacy and now they should damn well, too!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  59. Re: Canadians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet another moron who doesn't know what the word socialism means, or that the authoritarian behavior of the US and in particular law enforcement is rooted in capitalism and conservatism.

    Then again, in the US the term has come to be a catchall for 'anything I don't agree with politically', 'anyone who thinks corporations shouldn't be able to do anything they want without restriction', or 'anybody who thinks workers have rights'.

    So, as a socialist sympathizer in a mild sense, let me say that this CEO is off his rocker wanting to give in to the authoritarian demands of western right wing governments, and frankly the eastern authoritarian oligarch that lyingly call themselves 'communist' (another word that doesn't mean 'socialist', a distinction which most of the US right wing is too stupid to grasp)

  60. Re: Canadians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No... you obviously do not understand socialism. What political ideology is responsible for the death and enslavement of over 160,000,000 people (conservatively)? Socialism. Socialism, according to the leaders of it, always ends in communism. Hitler. Mao. Stalin. Go read an actual book for some real information. Stop getting your ideas from television.

  61. 'Greater Good' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time I hear 'Greater Good' used in a justification or explanation, I have this puckering/tightening of my sphincter.
    It is like they are telling me that what they are talking about will NOT be for the greater good, but will be good for someone (else)...
    Everyone else had better just lube it up... they are gonna get it...

  62. Sheesh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is Chen the CEO of Blackberry, or the PR mouthpiece of the Chinese government? They would sound exactly the same in this context.

  63. Greater Good by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

    "We are indeed in a dark place when companies put their reputations above the greater good."

    If it were truly for the greater good, perhaps they wouldn't be risking their reputations. The thing is, the authorities have proven themselves to be untrustworthy. They define "bad guys" as not only those who wish to harm people, but also those they deem to be threats to the System or the status quo. So while we can all agree that we want to know what's on the phone of a mass murderer, we should be more circumspect about the data belonging to Occupy protesters or the ACLU. Unfortunately, the authorities generally are not. Saying that helping them in all cases, or as a matter of policy, is a matter of the greater good is not a cut and dry as he seems to think.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  64. Re: Canadians by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

    No... you obviously do not understand socialism. What political ideology is responsible for the death and enslavement of over 160,000,000 people (conservatively)? Socialism. Socialism, according to the leaders of it, always ends in communism. Hitler. Mao. Stalin. Go read an actual book for some real information. Stop getting your ideas from television.

    I'm wondering what books you've been reading.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  65. Wow, what a stupid way to kill a company by hyperar · · Score: 1

    Who on their right mind will use their products now?

    1. Re:Wow, what a stupid way to kill a company by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Governments and their contractors.

  66. only super loser dorks like me will get this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haha, Chen.

    *honk* *honk*

  67. Re: Canadians by blackomegax · · Score: 1

    Those all turned into fascist dictatorships. True communism and socialism are peaceful and non-deadly. It's the humans that fuck it up in its' own name.

  68. "If the world is in danger"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously what kind of crazy hyperbole is this? Get Jack Bauer on the phone!

    Oh and how does he plan on giving access to encrypted data without a back door?

  69. Fuck you, John Chen by macs4all · · Score: 1

    It's OUR data, not yours, and CERTAINLY not the Government's.

  70. Remember when by bravecanadian · · Score: 1

    one of BlackBerry's selling points was that they were secure end to end and even they could not see messages being transferred through their NOC by enterprise customers who had their own keys installed on BES?

    Apple's stand on encryption is the correct one. You can't backdoor encryption and have only the "good guys" have access.

    Anyone who believes that is a realistic possibility is idiotic.

  71. Re: Canadians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it fucks up every time its tried, stop trying it. If you do anyway, the dead people are on your head.

  72. Perspective by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    One thing to keep in mind in line with Chen's comments is that Canada has some of the best privacy legislation in the world. Sure it has issues, and has been challenged politically in recent years under the guise of terrorism and protecting children, but in the end it survives and is pretty powerful. So from his perspective in Canada his point of view is pretty consistent and has merit. However is the US, it is a bit of a different story. In much of the world it is even more so. India is one example people will cite. However BB has made a few stands on ethics such as Pakistan where the proposed governments use wasn't aligned with what BB thought was reasonable, so they suspended service to that country (they do not do business there).

    So anyway take what he says with a bit of grain of salt considering where he is coming from. I think what Chen is failing to comprehend is there there are citizens out there that are reasonable people that live in places where privacy laws are not as strong as some might like, and for those people there is a demand for "artificially" imposed privacy by technology rather than legislation which they lack the power to seemingly implement. Apple (particularly after the whole Snowden thing) I think sees this and is trying to capitalize on it. How long they can get away with it is the key point. The funny (or depressing) part is, the only reason they can probably get away with it is the general popularity of their devices. Where should they say "fine, we're not changing our phones, we just won't sell there any more" people would get very upset and it would quickly become political. Much more so however than a bunch of people actually getting together that disagree with the privacy laws in a particular country and actually doing something about it. In this way Apple is playing a bit of chicken with governments on the issue. I don't for a minute thing that Apple would do it, but I don't think political leaders are willing to take that chance which is as I mentioned a bit crazy.

  73. Re:Keep sucking and I might give you a govt contra by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    It hasn't even given them enough sales to break even. The number of people looking for keyboards on phones is so small it's hard to call it even a niche.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  74. Chen? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    Is this guy on Apple's payroll or something? To my ears, he might as well be begging me not to buy BlackBerry. (Do they even sell phones anymore?)

  75. Whats a blackberry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it good for society to have too many chinese who are not from free democratic countries or not raised that way by their parents in the US. They dont even understand freedom. East Asian countries are fascist dictaorships under the hood so why give this goon the time of day

  76. Businesses are NOT people. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    Businesses do nhot make decisions the same way that consumers do. That's why they have IT departments. And those IT departments would have heard about Blackberry's willingness to give them up without a fight.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  77. review by CarmellaVict · · Score: 1

    Forward Head Posture Fix Review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Are you looking for an overview of Mike Westerdal and Rick Kasel Forward Head Posture Fix ? You are in the right place! Do you know, low energy, shortness of breath, inebriation, and neck and back pain are just some of the problems you may suffer from? But why? How a perfectly healthy, athletic person who eating well and trains still suffer? Allow me to explain Over 90% of US population has been suffering from forward head posture or texting neck. This is a problem that no one is tackling, that doctors are not able to diagnose and that creates just as many health risks as obesity and you’re likely to suffer from it, too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... It affects almost everyone, regardless of your age and fitness level. This is a problem that originates in only one area of your body but affects the overall health, including your mental and your physical condition. Forward head posture fixes it the simplest program you can use to immediately improve your position for greater strength, better health and energy in less than 15 minutes a day. If you want to stand up, look slimmer, improve your breathing and sleep while to get rid of text messages the neck, you must apply for this Forward Head Posture Fix program. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Few Info About Forward Head Posture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Your neck is designed to remain upright, keeping your weight in the skull ideal line from the top of head right down through your body to your feet. As you look at yourself in the mirror from the side, your ear, shoulder and your hips should be all in a straight line down to the floor. If it is unaligned and your ear t is in front of your shoulders it’s a sure sign of the position of the head forward. You see, the average head weighs 10-12 pounds. When your head fits perfectly on your neck and shoulders, the body naturally adjusts to hold this weight. But if your head is constantly pulling forward, pulling the weight of your head on the neck and puts pressure on the spine. When your head is pulled forward the additional pressure on the neck, shoulders and back rises sharply causing serious tissue damage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... In fact, every inch of your head is pushed forward from its natural position adds an additional 10 pounds of stress on the neck, shoulders, back and spine. That’s why you may have developed that ugly hump below the neck; to combat stress keeping your head up, the body’s reaction has been to increase bone mass and adipose tissue in order to compensate and protect the spine from the C7 vertebrae. Forward head postures not just leave you looking uncomfortable No matter how hard you train or how well you eat, if you do not start fixing your head posture right now, it might not be possible to reverse the damage has already been done https://www.youtube.com/watch?... My Recommendation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... I am sure you will see results within a few days, I am happy to make this daring promise that if you are not satisfied for any reason, he insist on giving you a full, hassle-free, no-questions-asked refund -asked refund. Instead, from the first time you watch a video walkthrough with Rick, you know exactly why this program has been so popular, you will be almost immediate use. In just 15 minutes a day, you will find the program very easy to incorporate into your daily routine and within a week you will notice the little aches and pains in your shoulders, back and neck disappeared. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... You f