Slashdot Mirror


Worried About Trump iPhone Eavesdroppers? China Recommends a Huawei (reuters.com)

China's foreign ministry has some suggestions for the Trump administration if it is worried about foreign eavesdropping on the U.S. president's iPhones: use a Huawei handset instead. Or just cut all forms of modern communication with the outside world. From a report: The riposte came after the New York Times reported that American intelligence reports indicated that Chinese and Russian spies often listen in on President Donald Trump when he uses his Apple cellphones to chat with old friends. Aides have repeatedly told him that his cellphone calls are not secure, but although the president has been persuaded to use his secure White House landline more often, he has refused to give up the phones, the Times said. Trump called the Times report incorrect on Thursday, and dismissed it as "long and boring." "I only use Government Phones, and have only one seldom used government cell phone. Story is soooo wrong!" Trump wrote on Twitter. In a later tweet, he said, "I rarely use a cellphone, & when I do it's government authorized. I like Hard Lines. Just more made up Fake News!"

109 comments

  1. Silly trolling by Kohath · · Score: 1

    Leave that stuff for the jerks on Twitter

    1. Re:Silly trolling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like Trump?

    2. Re:Silly trolling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh boy. What a doozy of a comment! You really are a credit to the human race. Did you spend all night thinking of that just for our pleasure? Thank god there are people as clever as you.

  2. It's a good idea and perfectly true. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They're right: once you know for sure something is happening then you can stop worrying about it. It's the doubt and uncertainty that's the real killer. Their suggestion certainly removes all doubt on the matter.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  3. So what? by Bert64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends, people he was in regular contact with long before he became president. So long as he's not discussing classified information (and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made) then whats the problem?

    Even if using a government supplied landline, if hes calling regular phones then it can't be encrypted end to end, it has to traverse the public telephone network at some point where it could be subject to interception.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    1. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      So he uses it to talk to Putin. Got it.

    2. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends, people he was in regular contact with long before he became president. So long as he's not discussing classified information (and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made) then whats the problem?

      Most intelligence agencies would kill to know the breakfast menu of the president of the United States. This is a person in a job who can, on a whim, change the world. Other countries tend to like knowing about anything that would affect their mood.

      Even if using a government supplied landline, if hes calling regular phones then it can't be encrypted end to end, it has to traverse the public telephone network at some point where it could be subject to interception.

      Sure, but it is substantially more difficult.

    3. Re:So what? by Freischutz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends, people he was in regular contact with long before he became president. So long as he's not discussing classified information (and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made) then whats the problem?

      Even if using a government supplied landline, if hes calling regular phones then it can't be encrypted end to end, it has to traverse the public telephone network at some point where it could be subject to interception.

      Well, let's see ... he might be discussing crooked business deals, tax cheating, election manipulations, hiring prostitutes for golden shower parties or other things that are not classified information but that would render him vulnerable to blackmail?

    4. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are one the smart ones, eh?

    5. Re:So what? by Moskit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Intelligence obtained from "just chats with old friends" can be just as valuable as from classified communication.
      Who are the friends?
      Which one could extract some additional information in "just chat"?
      Who has influence over president?

      The "secured landline" would be likely used for communicating with other secured lines and blocked from calling regular ones.

      Now please download and install this attached "supercontrol.dll" upgrade for your Linux, it will improve your mileage, trust me! What could be the problem?

    6. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He might also be discussing big foot, ancient aliens, and Santa Claus!

      It's funny how easy it is to project your own view on reality regardless of evidence.

    7. Re:So what? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends, people he was in regular contact with long before he became president. So long as he's not discussing classified information (and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made) then whats the problem?

      It's not so much specific information but developing a picture of what motivates him, his interests, and what he may be thinking. They are just more pieces inn the puzzle.That provides opportunities to gain an edge in negotiations, learn what buttons to push to get desired results, who to approach on specific topics, etc.

      The good (?) news is he apparently doesn't listen to intel briefings so he doesn't have information to reveal.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    8. Re:So what? by gtall · · Score: 2

      Who, at this point, doesn't know what motivates him. He has the depth of a piece of paper.

    9. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I were the intelligence agency of a foreign power, I'd want to know what Trump wants for Christmas. To either give or deny it to him, depending.

    10. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot, please catch up on the news from last year. We know the fake Russian collusion dossier was written and planted by Hillary cronies

    11. Re:So what? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends

      So Putin then.

    12. Re:So what? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends, people he was in regular contact with long before he became president. So long as he's not discussing classified information (and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made) then whats the problem?

      Even if using a government supplied landline, if hes calling regular phones then it can't be encrypted end to end, it has to traverse the public telephone network at some point where it could be subject to interception.

      Interesting intelligence can be pieced together from seemingly innocuous conversations. You can pick up state of mind, often people will reveal sort of unclassified information coupled with sort of other unclassified information, and put 'em together and what do you got? A classified breach. As well, there are often full fledged slips every so often And if not slips, things can become classified later.

      And if it wasn't interesting, China and Russia and others would not be eavesdropping on the conversations.

      If I was in that position, I would not use an insecure phone again until I was ex-president.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    13. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if using a government supplied landline, if hes calling regular phones then it can't be encrypted end to end, it has to traverse the public telephone network at some point where it could be subject to interception.

      ^ This guy doesn't watch movies.

      Even if it traverses the public network, all you've got to do is start your conversations with "is this line secure?" and the other person says "of course" and the matter is settled.

    14. Re:So what? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Intelligence obtained from "just chats with old friends" can be just as valuable as from classified communication. Who are the friends? Which one could extract some additional information in "just chat"? Who has influence over president?

      You get it. More people to get information from and investigate, possible avenues of compromise, and of course, the occasional bragging slip.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    15. Re:So what? by The+Original+CDR · · Score: 1

      Most intelligence agencies would kill to know the breakfast menu of the president of the United States.

      Most intelligence agencies would find it easier to read the Business Insider:

      In fact, he usually doesn't eat a morning meal. Back in 2016, Trump told People, "Oftentimes I skip breakfast. But usually my favorite would be bacon and eggs — bacon medium and the eggs over-well."

    16. Re:So what? by kiviQr · · Score: 1

      Either we have a standard for securing president or we do not. Using unauthorized phone gives potential enemy his location - very bad idea.

    17. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He posts every thought to Twitter in real time. This spy v spy Cold War iron curtain era subtly is ridiculous, especially with Trump.

    18. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, and so if you had a record that Trump threatens China on days that Trump does order breakfast, some people would want to know when he orders eggs.

    19. Re:So what? by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made

      Iron tight logic there.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    20. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even just talkin about unclassified work related stuff, you can leak a lot. For example: you tell one friend that you went to location X today. You tell another friend you travelled to work on task Y. Someone hearing both of those can now conclude Task Y is worked on at Location X, and that fact *is* classified.

      Itâ(TM)s an issue that should not be dismissed as irrelevant.

    21. Re:So what? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      This was the metadata debate from back when they didn't have the processing power to voice analyze every call.

      "Oh its just who you called and when, no worries!"

      Yeah, dude, big worries. A map of relations between every single person. If anyone in your web commits a crime, now you are a suspect.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    22. Re:So what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends, people he was in regular contact with long before he became president.

      You mean Vladimir Putin?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    23. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone knows it's cocoa puffs and strawberry milk (with a straw for bubble-blowing), duh.

    24. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > So long as he's not discussing classified information (and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made) then whats the problem?

      There is plenty to learn about a person from how they interact privately, what makes them concede an argument, what pisses them off, which porn star they fucked this week, etc. - the conversation does not need to be about nuclear launch codes in order for it to be useful. Same way Facebook and other entities online construct a profile about you based on other activities off-site.

    25. Re:So what? by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      He has the depth of a piece of paper.

      Really? Come on now.

      That's being far too generous. I think you might want to look on the far side of the Planck length instead.

    26. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intelligence obtained from "just chats with old friends" can be just as valuable as from classified communication.
      Who are the friends?
      Which one could extract some additional information in "just chat"?
      Who has influence over president?

      Exactly. This is arguably more informative than simple meta-data, which people here have always seemed to be quick to argue against anyone arguing in favor of collecting "just meta-data".

    27. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. It was written by Clinton cronies, but Trump thought it was written by his own business advisor, because she tricked him! So he started following all the directions. When it got to the parts where Clinton's directions told Trump to commit crimes, then he called meetings with Manafort, Cohen, Jared&Jr and the Russians (just like the directions said he was supposed to) and said, "How do we implement this crime?" They told him their best ideas, it looked like it would work so he agreed to the criminal plan, and they executed it. But what everyone is missing is that it was entrapment. Clinton was pulling Trump's strings, and now she's going to get away with his crimes! It's totally unfair.

      Clinton should be ashamed of having bullied and trolled Trump, taking advantage of his naivety. I think her vicious manipulation of a senile, already-criminally-habituated, slighty-retarded, narcissist old man was DEPLORABLE! Fucking Democrats. Look behind any Republican scandal, and you will find those manipulative motherfuckers tricking honest criminals into getting caught. We shouldn't stand for this shit.

    28. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Clearly you are both wrong.. It was written by the Chinese faking being written by the Russians and given to Mrs Clinton to plant to troll Trump into believe it was written by his own business advisors.

      Geesh people.. Keep up will ya?

    29. Re:So what? by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Hillary Clinton

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    30. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. It was written by Clinton cronies, but Trump thought it was written by his own business advisor, because she tricked him! So he started following all the directions. When it got to the parts where Clinton's directions told Trump to commit crimes, then he called meetings with Manafort, Cohen, Jared&Jr and the Russians (just like the directions said he was supposed to) and said, "How do we implement this crime?" They told him their best ideas, it looked like it would work so he agreed to the criminal plan, and they executed it. But what everyone is missing is that it was entrapment. Clinton was pulling Trump's strings, and now she's going to get away with his crimes! It's totally unfair.

      Clinton should be ashamed of having bullied and trolled Trump, taking advantage of his naivety. I think her vicious manipulation of a senile, already-criminally-habituated, slighty-retarded, narcissist old man was DEPLORABLE! Fucking Democrats. Look behind any Republican scandal, and you will find those manipulative motherfuckers tricking honest criminals into getting caught. We shouldn't stand for this shit.

      I so long for the day when that 'honest criminal' is shown doing the perp walk in an orange jumpsuit that will match his hair...

    31. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The President's schedule is published every day.
      The White House visitor logs are public information.
      The Washington news media has, literally, hundreds of people that do nothing but track which politicians are meeting with whom.

      And you think China is getting valuable information from unsecured phone calls over unsecured telephone networks to people outside the government that none of these other sources could supply?

    32. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stable genius in the Whitehouse has friends? Now that IS news!

    33. Re:So what? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The President's schedule is published every day. The White House visitor logs are public information. The Washington news media has, literally, hundreds of people that do nothing but track which politicians are meeting with whom.

      And you think China is getting valuable information from unsecured phone calls over unsecured telephone networks to people outside the government that none of these other sources could supply?

      Do you seriously think they are not? Do you think that someone is in the room with Trump in the evening when he talks to Hannty from Fox? Or that someone is in his room or follows him to th toilet? Naive defines you. RTFA, Pepe.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    34. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, guess he should have used a private mail server.

    35. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have big brains, the Best Brains!

    36. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump plays 13th dimension quantum chess. Using unsecured communications channels to implement n+1*doublebluff is all matter of routine. It might all look like insanity, right up to the point he teleports behind you, whispers into your ear "it's nothing personal, kid", as you feel a sharp pinch, and your vision fades to black, your eyes turning cold and dead.

    37. Re:So what? by dj245 · · Score: 1

      Well, let's see ... he might be discussing crooked business deals, tax cheating, election manipulations, hiring prostitutes for golden shower parties or other things that are not classified information but that would render him vulnerable to blackmail?

      Unless there is video of Trump penetrating underage girls holding up their student ID's, I'm not sure he is blackmailable. Absolutely nothing has stuck so far, including a laundry list of items that would have or have sunk other politicians. The Mueller stuff is probably being cooked until after he is out of office. An impeachment would be incredibly disruptive and a bad thing for the country. And Trump isn't the kind of person who would resign to minimize the disruption, he would make it blow up more.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  4. ARRGGGHH!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ORANGE MAN BAD!

    1. Re:ARRGGGHH!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, fellow thinking and unique human! Literally shaking because orange man bad!

  5. That is some next level trolling right there by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My favorite thing to come out about this story is that the intelligence community doesn't care that our President's communications are bugged because he doesn't bother listening to the briefings. It's like that is Dilbert joke where he'd have to be smarter to do something stupid.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:That is some next level trolling right there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the other responses. Look at what rsilvergun posts every day. Trump is going to win 2020. More people see the absurdity, the on-the-spot made up lies, and choice of ignorance to facts whenever a shrinking subset can hate Trump. I don't know if that's a good thing. I didn't vote for him last time and don't intend to again. But I would bet Nate Silver's career earnings Trump will win again.

      People see the economy booming, the unemployment rate dropping, the wars winding down, no new wars! For over a century nearly every other president started a war to secure their legacy, then the next president stopped it to secure their legacy. Hillary rekindled this stupid cold war throwback paranoia with Russia because she wanted to start a shooting war with Russia while she was secretary of state. Now, for the first time in generations, we have a president that doesn't care about some grand legacy. He already thinks he's amazing regardless.

      Average everyday people see the distortion and voted in 2016 against it. The distortion has only grown, so the people willing to vote for Trump has grown with it.

  6. I think this was mistranslated by sinij · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think what China said was mistranslated. They intended to say that if Trump wanted to make sure that China could eavesdrop, then he should have went with a Huawei phone.

  7. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Orange Man Bad!
    Orange Man Bad!
    Orange Man Bad!

    1. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Orange Man Bad!
      Orange Man Bad!
      Orange Man Bad!

      Dumbing down the message to reach the Trumper population is a good idea, but somehow I don't think this one will work.

  8. Consider the source by MrLogic17 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    China, being one of the largest sources of spying threats, recommends a specific phone. That they happen to make.
    They assure us that they can evesdrop on every other phone, except the one designed & made in their country, with no outside audits.

    Sure. We'll get right on that.

    1. Re:Consider the source by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      China, being one of the largest sources of spying threats, recommends a specific phone. That they happen to make. They assure us that they can evesdrop on every other phone, except the one designed & made in their country, with no outside audits.

      Sure. We'll get right on that.

      Next thing you know they'll offer to give us this big, beautiful horse statue to put on the White House lawn...

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    2. Re:Consider the source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The instructions on the horse stay to store it in a secure location.

    3. Re:Consider the source by kiviQr · · Score: 1

      Already done: https://i.redd.it/tfocl4lxnojy... "Trojan Horse - Arend Van Damn"

    4. Re:Consider the source by antdude · · Score: 1

      A golden colored horse too. ;)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  9. Crypto keys by Harry_Bawls · · Score: 0, Insightful

    This is what happens when a company (apple) gives their crypto keys to a totalitarian government without hesitation.

  10. Is there any difference? by aglider · · Score: 1

    As far as security and privacy, I mean.
    Both gather user information and send it somewhere on internet servers which are very likely exploitable.
    Both have 0-day exploits.
    The idiocy of the user is exactly the same.

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  11. Are you fucking serious? by DogDude · · Score: 0

    and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made

    Are you kidding? You don't think that he tells random people all sorts of US secrets? He fucking Tweets nation secrets.

    If we didn't have a ridiculously corrupt Congress, he's be serving life behind bars for treason.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Are you fucking serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget a GOP Friendly SCOTUS....
      There is next to no chance of him being impeached this side of 2024.
      yes I'm assuming that the electorate is still stupid enough to vote for him again.

    2. Re:Are you fucking serious? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made Are you kidding? You don't think that he tells random people all sorts of US secrets? He fucking Tweets nation secrets. If we didn't have a ridiculously corrupt Congress, he's be serving life behind bars for treason.

      Treason is only applicable during war. We bandy that word around too much.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:Are you fucking serious? by DogDude · · Score: 0

      Treason is only applicable during war.

      That's not true:

      "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    4. Re:Are you fucking serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we didn't have a ridiculously corrupt Congress

      You mean, *If we didn't elect a ridiculously corrupt Congress, and even worse president...* All your problems are self inflicted, and we're looking at more of the same after November. All this blame passing is positively psychotic

    5. Re:Are you fucking serious? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Treason is only applicable during war. That's not true: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

      Sounds like an interpretation on your part. Others may vary. I and many others give the "only" part the most weight.

      This doesn't mean that Trump or any president cannot be prosecuted for espionage type crimes.

      Also, an interesting thing is that if he were to pardon himself - a possible scenario of doing that and being upheld now by the Supreme court, it would have to be remembered that to accept a pardon, admission must be made that the crime was committed.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:Are you fucking serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Treason is only applicable during war. We bandy that word around too much.

      Ok, fair enough. So then what's the name of the crime we're talking about: leaking secret information? You know, the crime that he is still accusing Senator Hillary Clinton of?

    7. Re:Are you fucking serious? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Treason is only applicable during war. We bandy that word around too much.

      Ok, fair enough. So then what's the name of the crime we're talking about: leaking secret information? You know, the crime that he is still accusing Senator Hillary Clinton of?

      Clinton's transgression is at the level of a security violation and reprimand. The "lock her up" is political theater. If workers were all jailed for that level of thing, wee'd have to live in a Stalinesque society, because no one would voluntarily work in such a field. As for Trump, I don't have the evidence, so really can't say. There are a number of people who have the discretion to divulge classified information or make it public. Trump is at that level. Actually Clinton was as well, although her issues were not purposeful. It's a Little Joe Nuclear hand grenade level power though, which might cause the discloser big problems.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    8. Re:Are you fucking serious? by larryjoe · · Score: 1

      Treason is only applicable during war. We bandy that word around too much.

      In the US, Article III of the Constitution says, "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

      So waging war against the US is one form of treason. The other is in "adhering to" or giving aid and comfort to the enemy. So, war is not explicitly required for all forms of treason.

      Moreover, treason is often associated with sedition, and that opens up a whole broader can of worms.

  12. He should get a Google Rape Phone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    James Damore was fired for poor rape performance.

  13. The phone brand doesn't matter by mveloso · · Score: 1

    The phone brand doesn't matter. If it's on wireless it can be stingrayed, and it's already been shown that DC is full of them.

    1. Re:The phone brand doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't think that the intelligence community has designed a method to stop the US president's cell phone to connect to fake access points and towers?

      If they haven't, that would be a pretty damning indictment and a lot of them should be fired.

    2. Re:The phone brand doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The president's phone may connect to Stringray devices, but at least the intelligence community is diverse!

    3. Re:The phone brand doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't think that the intelligence community has designed a method to stop the US president's cell phone to connect to fake access points and towers?

      They did. That's why he has a government issued cell phone.

  14. That's what the USA has become now... a joke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I can't say I feel sorry for you guys. You made a glorified ideology out of turning your brain off and keeping it off. Now the hangover come back to bite you in the ass, and you’re not even half-awake yet. But as you have brewed, so you must drink. Maybe, just maybe, it will teach you... At least for a century, like it taught us here in Germany. (The dumb fucks are at it again now. Partially due to the "help" by the USA and Russia.)

    1. Re: That's what the USA has become now... a joke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You dumbasses keep electing and re-electing that blithering idiot and her party. (Yes I know how German elections work and how she got into office etc)

      When you kick out the third world Muslim barbaric trash she imported to rape your women you will be in a better position to comment on other places.

    2. Re: That's what the USA has become now... a joke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's some great whataboutism there. Hey, I heard you still beat negros in your country!

    3. Re:That's what the USA has become now... a joke. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      You made

      Numerically most of us didn't. We just have a system that allows that.

  15. Story is already debunked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He doesn't use any phone other than government issued. I trust him on that as he railed on Clinton for this. I'm sure somebody posts stuff for him too. You're talking about a guy who never had a computer on his desk. At any point other than a picture in his plane pre-election.

    1. Re:Story is already debunked by lessthan · · Score: 1

      Something like 95% of his tweets are sent from an iPhone. Do you think that he keeps it just for tweets?

      --
      Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
    2. Re: Story is already debunked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha ha ha OMG I can't believe it. You actually said "I believe him" that alone calls your judgement into serious question. And why isn't she all locked up yet? He said she committed serious crimes did you believe that too? When is she going to be indicted already?? This shit puts the famed "cargo cult" to shame. You should be embarrassed to say those words. But like the rest of your infantile cult you have no shame.

  16. He might be calling your mom! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and finding out what your Moms current rates are.

    Far more likely than any of your scenarios.

    Thanks for the laugh though NPC.

    1. Re:He might be calling your mom! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and finding out what your Moms current rates are.

      Far more likely than any of your scenarios.

      Thanks for the laugh though NPC.

      My mom’s current rates? Is that really your best shot?

  17. So Trump is EVIL but the ChiCOMS are Good by WCMI92 · · Score: 1

    This is slashdot.

    I now get modded to -5 by the communists who happen to have mod points.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
    1. Re:So Trump is EVIL but the ChiCOMS are Good by DogDude · · Score: 1

      "ChiCom" is a fake word invented by that drug addict felon on the radio, right?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:So Trump is EVIL but the ChiCOMS are Good by PPH · · Score: 2

      No. It is military slang that dates back to the Vietnam era, or even earlier. To distinguish the Communist Chinese from the Nationalists (Taiwan).

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:So Trump is EVIL but the ChiCOMS are Good by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      "ChiCom" is a fake word invented by that drug addict felon on the radio, right?

      You think that Chinese Communism is fake?

    4. Re:So Trump is EVIL but the ChiCOMS are Good by DogDude · · Score: 1

      You should work on your reading comprehension. I asked if the word was fake.

      It's apparently disparaging slang that's been around for a while: https://www.dictionary.com/bro...

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
  18. Now that was funny. by houghi · · Score: 1

    I thought it was funny. I thought it was velly funny. Just a little playful banter between countries.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  19. Consider the context by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    This isn't a legitimate suggestion to use a Chinese phone. This is a passive agressive quip at the Americans for heaping shit on China only to have their own equipment allegedly tapped by a foreign power.

  20. Same reason Hilary's emails by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    were an issue. You're a high priority target you don't get to take chances.

    Well, not the "same" issue. Private email servers are used throughout Washington and somehow stopped being an issue after 2016. I wonder what changed?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Same reason Hilary's emails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what changed?

      Well, there is that whole judicial precedent that indicates certain crimes will not be prosecuted for anyone in an elected or appointed position.

  21. You made stuff up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and now you're trying to pass bull off as something factual. Seriously turn down the trump derangement syndrome.

  22. DLL for Linux, yeesh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hand in your geek card.

    How stupid do you have to be to believe this nonsense? Stupid enough to try to install a dll file in Linux I'm guessing. At least your not as stupid as animofo who thinks the russians and chinese are flooding Washington DC with phony cell towers.

    The hell of it is that this stupidity will continue for another 2 years. Maybe some of the citizenry will learn how to spot fake news and trolls and I am talking about both sides here.

  23. I have an idea by Sloppy · · Score: 1

    If the public phone system is too insecure for a president to use, then it's probably too insecure for anyone else to use, too. Maybe it should be .. oh, I don't know .. fixed?

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  24. Big clue there by necro81 · · Score: 0

    Trump called the Times report incorrect on Thursday, and dismissed it as "long and boring." "I only use Government Phones, and have only one seldom used government cell phone. Story is soooo wrong!" Trump wrote on Twitter.

    I could write a long screed about Trump's short attention span (probably he got bored with the article because it didn't have enough pictures). But instead, I will point out that he wrote his comeback on Twitter. Trump doesn't have a desktop computer - he does his tweeting from a phone. Soooooo, he shot off this tweet from his Government Phone? I'm guessing that his government phone has been modified so that it can't have twitter (or most anything else) installed on it.

    1. Re:Big clue there by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that his government phone has been modified so that it can't have twitter (or most anything else) installed on it.

      I'm guessing if Twitter was the only real hold-up, the NSA would make him a special hardened Twitter app for his phone.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  25. No you're mixing truth with fantasy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Collusion made up by Clinton cronies - true

    Rest of what you written - sounds like fan-fiction.

  26. So much made in China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    US companies abandoned US electronics manufacturing a long time ago. Were paying the price now, because American's wanted to buy more electronics at cheaper prices. Now were concerned that China is slipping stuff into these electronics to spy on us. Its very possible Apple is very committed to privacy for its iPhone users, its also very possible as with the Bloomberg report that Apple is clueless what is going into their hardware made in China of which most of it is. The argument then would be if smartphone's all come from China, many times with parts made also in China. Is any one brand more secure then another and has companies like Apple actually have data and hardware control proof that in fact they are.

  27. U.S. gov wants him to use a phone THEY listen on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How exactly would a foreign country eavesdrop on the U.S. president's iPhone? They can't claim this without saying that all iPhones can be eavesdropped on, or that they no longer have control over their own mobile networks.

    Obviously, he's using a phone and Telegram or something else, so that the NSA or CIA can't listen in, but if he agrees to accept a "secure" phone from CIA or NSA, then obviously it will prepared in such a way that they can listen to every phonecall me makes.

  28. Don't get our hopes up by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    'Or just cut all forms of modern communication with the outside world.'

    I wish.

  29. China is mocking Trump -- and the U.S., too by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    That's what this is, plain and simple: Huawei is mocking Trump, and all of us here in the United States along with him. That is what this man has done to us: made us a laughingstock, all over the world.

    1. Re:China is mocking Trump -- and the U.S., too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because banning Winnie The Pooh because someone said it looked like you is not a laughingstock. Because starting a "social scoring" system is not a laughingstock. Requiring religious people to register, and destroying all of their buildings and rounding up the members is not a laughingstock. This, telling a president to use their copycat phone, is what makes a laughingstock.

      Wow.

    2. Re:China is mocking Trump -- and the U.S., too by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      What the actual fuck are you even talking about, or are you overdosing on something? For fuck's sake STFU and GTFO, you're an idiot.

  30. Russia, China, if you're listening... by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    we could sure use some transcripts of Trump's phone calls...

    "I love wikileaks!"

    Lock him up! Lock him up!

    Morons...

  31. Where's the Huawei evidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We all know, or at least assume and understand, that any electronics like compute devices are subject to tampering by Chinese intelligence. What I have not seen is hard evidence, which I think would be very beneficial for the public to see. They likely use a complex series of subtle tactics that allow for different forms of monitoring and reporting. If some folks, advanced enough for the task (that's NOT me!), unravel some of these mechanisms and expose it on the Internet. Switches, phones, computers, etc.... just post it, expose it.

  32. How ironic!!! by sentiblue · · Score: 1

    The Chinese is recommending a phone to avoid evesdropping? WTF!!!

  33. Security requires both phone to be hardened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It wouldn't be effective for Trump alone to have a secure phone. If Trump calls someone else without a secure phone, then it can leak on that end just as easily.

  34. Obama's African American berry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is no one talking about it and how it was secured?

    And was trumps iPhone secured in the same way?

  35. Worried about eavesdroppers on iPhone? by Joolz50 · · Score: 1

    Get a Huawei, then it's guaranteed