I support LTG Jack Stultz directly (3 star General, literally the top man in the Army Reserve).
He's currently testing an iPad as well as his XO. Several other Generals are now asking for them and we're in the process of getting iOS approved for all Apple devices to be tested in our environment.
My co-worker and I are really pushing this effort because of the capabilities it brings .
Once again the Army shows its predilection for cutting edge technology. When "open" Android becomes the Windows of mobile OS's, virus ridden and hacked to death, the enemy will be selling "find your friend, the soldier" apps on the Android Store.
The Navy wised up a few years ago and switched from Windows PCs to Macs for their more sensitive work.
Security isn't really on the table here, it's a Linux based system & I'm quite sure they are capable of securing it for their needs. First thing to go will be the google app store.
This shouldn't be unexpected though, governments bids always go the the cheapest solution that promises to meet the bid requests.
Apple has never really tried to go for the enterprise market, why do you think they'll go after the dept of defense's business. Do you know how tough it is to do business with the feds? Good call, apple.
If the Army decided to go with iPhones, then can we expect you to say "Why would Apple get involved with these guys? Do you know how tough it is to do business with the feds? Bad move Apple."?
Or would you instead be saying "Fandroids rejected!! Go Apple!!"
Or you could say they abandoned all hope of being successful at Pwn2Own. There were teams that planned to do so, announcing well in advance that they'd be there. These guys work year round, not just for three days in February.
So they announced it well in advance, collected their money from google and stayed home? It is actually more likely then what you suggest. Link your public announcement please, I searched google 15 different ways and could not find a single credible (or otherwise actually) person pre-announce they were going to be there to hack Android.
While we are an the subject. What was the attack? What was exploited? What was the exploiter actually able to do on the devices that were hacked? These details were never released. The requirements for "winning" are unbelievably vague. It is very interesting that there was no contestants for WP7 or Android. Why do we even pay attention to these silly little contests.
What is the definition of "little or no user intervention" . In the case of the iphone was it little or none? So according to this contest, an iPhone go do a web page that will cost the user money on their phone. Thats it, if you go to that page it will cost you money.
Bullshit. Give some details or stfu already. I also believe it is impossible for this to happen on the blackberry.
Is little user intervention clicking on a button that says call this number?
Edit: Actually found a site willing to disclose what happened The user had to go to a page. This page crashed the browser. The user had to reopen the browser and go to the page again. This apparently gave the site access to the address book. If at first you don't succeed...
From the government contract to tailor Android OS for a military smartphone and to develop any apps the military specifically wants..... and for any additional contract for software maintenance....
If you took the time to read the article, the system is being developed not by Google but by another company.
This is what happens when you give stuff away.
The other company will strip out all of the marketing code and be left with what is essentially Linux for ARM.
The only reason this is "bad" for Apple is because they won't sell hardware but it isn't a "win" for Google in any sense of the word.
In what could be a major design win for Google, the U.S. Army is currently undergoing testing of a prototype Android-based smartphone platform for connected soldiers, according to a new report.
Wired reports that a wartime smartphone called the Joint Battle Command-Platform is currently being tested by the Army. The device, which was developed by nonprofit MITRE, runs Google's Android mobile operating system.
According to the Army, the platform's development kit, known as the Mobile/Handheld Computing Environment, will be released to developers in July. The Army is exploring a rank of tasks for the device, including mapping, a "Force Tracker" that keeps track of friendly units and "critical messaging" for exchanging medical requests and on the ground reporting.
As is to be expected, security remains one of the top issues that needs to be resolved. The difficulty of deploying the devices in low connectivity combat environments has also presented challenges for the project.
The Army's vice chief of staff, Gen. Peter Chiarelli, claims that the tested devices can handed the extra wear-and-tear from war zones, the report noted. The Joint Battle Command-Platform weighs roughly two pounds when connected to a radio and is significantly lighter than current solutions, such as the Nett Warrior.
While the current prototype is a long way from the final stages of the project, Android appears to be the early platform of choice, especially since the Mobile/Handheld Computing Environment is meant to run on "any manner of devices."
Last December, ArmyTimes reported that the Army was considering issuing smartphones as standard equipment for soldiers. Apple's iPhone, as well as phones running Google Android, were in the running.
Army officials visited the Apple campus last year to discuss the company's future technology as related to battlefield applications. Apple's "it just works" philosophy had drawn the attention of the Army.
"Apple technologies offer unique and proven solutions with intuitive designs that allow users to learn quickly without a training manual," Ron Szymanski, lead computer scientist with the Army's Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center, reportedly said. "The Army would like to leverage Apple's experience when designing military operations."
Several iPhone apps have been developed by the Army's Communications-Electronics Research and Development Center in recent years: COIN Collector, a counter-insurgency information collection tool, and MilSpace, a planning and social networking environment.
Photo courtesy U.S. Army, credit C. Todd Lopez
In 2008, it was revealed that the Army had begun using custom iPods as an affordable and lightweight solution for field translation work in Iraq. iPods and iPod nanos were attached to armbands and speakers and modified to run a translation app.
An iPod nano with Vcommunicator Mobile, armband and speaker for use in the field. | Image credits: U.S. Army.
So they announced it well in advance, collected their money from google and stayed home? It is actually more likely then what you suggest. Link your public announcement please, I searched google 15 different ways and could not find a single credible (or otherwise actually) person pre-announce they were going to be there to hack Android.
No need to go re-hash the whole thing. Follow the links I've given in my previous posts. It's all there. No one was paid to stay home, nothing sneaky or underhanded. Matters not if you believe it. Android does not have the the security problems you and others may think it does. Fact.
I think you're probably right. I said pretty much the same thing several pages back. No financial benefit to Google that would be obvious. I don't know if Google even cares whether their OS is chosen, other than for the fact it gives them perhaps a bit more respect from a enterprise standpoint.
Google isn't building the sloppy, virus-ridden, insecure operating system some Apple owners have been led to believe. Apple's OS may be the most stable and trouble free of all. Dunno. But if so I don't think Android is far behind.
If any of you have ever worked on a govt software project, then you know the simple fact that the govt must OWN the source code used for the project. That automatically excludes Apple, since we know that wont happen. The code used will be far far far from a stock android build.
This is pretty much a 'no brainer' for the US Army. They aren't going to deploy ANY device, in the field, unless they can modify the source code. I doubt Apple, Microsoft, or HP are going to provide or allow them this privilege. The US Military was one of the first to adopt Open Standards and in fact had a large hand in designing what is now the Internet. The US Army has some extremely sharp people and you can bet that the utmost care and consideration was taken in this decision. For the average consumer, choosing a smartphone is not a life or death decision. In a combat situation, such decisions can literally save/cost lives. What soldiers choose for their personal use is their own business, but if the Army is going to deploy something in a battle zone they absolutely need to customize the device to suit the mission...
I am not suprised by this decision and I agree with it 100%. The Iphone is a cool and hip platform but that does not matter for military applications. Apple's closed system pretty much killed its chance at any military contract. Commercial and Military worlds are vastly different. The android platform allows for the government to have more control over the software on it's military smartphone, allow for competitive bids on upgrades, etc. Different contractors can bid on contracts to upgrade the government's smartphone software. If they went with Apple, they would be chaining themselves to a single source for the smartphones and upgrades as apple would never allow another company access to its iOS software even if it is a variant just for military smartphones. Fragmentation is not an issue for the military. The only flavor of android that matters is the one that will run on the military smartphone. I would not be surprised if the ability for the user to download and install apps is disabled for this phone as it is sucha blatant security risk. Any apps that the military needs will be developed for the military under a government contract. Any military specific apps such as Situational Awareness ("Force Tracking") needs to be specially developed anyways and will most likely be preinstalled iwth the OS. The military will not care if Angry Birds or Netflix can't run on its smartphone. If you all just drop your Apple Pom Pom's for a second and seriously think about what the military really needs out of a smartphone you will realize that teh Android platform is a better fit than Apple's proprioetary iOS.
You have no clue. Here's the rub, it's not iOS being closed that's a problem, almost ALL the development the military does is on proprietary closed systems. That's the easiest way to wrap support into the contract.
The problem is that a civilian phone -- as in ALL civilian phones, give off certain signals that are easily exploitable. It comes from the chip level. So I would not want to give a soldier an indiscriminate beacon to take into the field - even when the phone is turned off! You have to remove the batteries.
No, what these prototype programs are doing is creating custom hardware using military grade electronics that don't scream Target Me!!! via leaky signals. It happens that contractors can install Android on those custom phones. A custom iPhone with these different electronics wouldn't be an iPhone anymore, it would be a frankenphone trying to run iOS, and not do it very well. Yes these phones from the OP run Android, but you would be thoroughly disappointed by the power requirements and how fast you run through the batteries. For a soldierr though you would be happy to carry the extra three or four battery packs if you aren't carrying a targeting beacon with you.
We want iPhones, but understand why we wouldn't really want to use them in the field. Since the app is what it's all about we'll just have to live with whatever we get that runs the apps we need.
Actually some of the world's top hackers have yet to be successful at penetrating Android's security protocols to gain assess to the OS itself, something Apple has had some issues with. Wouldn't that make Android one of the best possible OS solutions from a security standpoint?
The applications that were removed from the Android Market for GAINING ROOT ACCESS and installing trojans beg to differ.
Such an application could have been used in Pwn2Own if anyone had bothered (I guess there was no challenge.), upload an obscure application to Android Market and it would have been game over as soon as you downloaded and installed it, if on the off chance Google had found and removed it then enable other sources in settings and install a backup hosted somewhere else.
I had a look at that, you can't even find my house, it shows I travelled up a road 200 miles away from where I actually drove basically you'd learn more from Facebook and Foursquare check-ins,
The applications that were removed from the Android Market for GAINING ROOT ACCESS and installing trojans beg to differ.
Such an application could have been used in Pwn2Own if anyone had bothered (I guess there was no challenge.), upload an obscure application to Android Market and it would have been game over as soon as you downloaded and installed it, if on the off chance Google had found and removed it then enable other sources in settings and install a backup hosted somewhere else.
/boom, headshot.
That requires a user to physically accept an application and install it. That's not how
Apple, Firefox, Microsoft and the others were attacked, nor should it be. You can't design an OS to cover all instances of stupid. The Browsers and OS's failed to keep out an intruder because of inherent issues with the OS itself. The whole idea behind the Pwn2own competition is to assist companies in finding security problems with their operating systems. And so far no one has been able to find one in Android. Or chrome.
Assume you have a security system in your home. Audio and video. You hear a knock on the door and look to see who it is: A man in a white uniform. You turn off security, open the door and invite him in. The man attacks you and demands money. Did your security system fail to protect you from an attacker? Or was that you?
In the case of the Apple, Blackberry products, the security service failed. The guy in the white jacket got in without your knowledge and is waiting around the corner to grab you when you walk by. With Android, that guy in white is still outside looking for a way in. He may eventually find one.. . but not yet.
Comments
I support LTG Jack Stultz directly (3 star General, literally the top man in the Army Reserve).
He's currently testing an iPad as well as his XO. Several other Generals are now asking for them and we're in the process of getting iOS approved for all Apple devices to be tested in our environment.
My co-worker and I are really pushing this effort because of the capabilities it brings
So far? Lieutenant General Stultz LOVES his iPad.
Once again the Army shows its predilection for cutting edge technology. When "open" Android becomes the Windows of mobile OS's, virus ridden and hacked to death, the enemy will be selling "find your friend, the soldier" apps on the Android Store.
The Navy wised up a few years ago and switched from Windows PCs to Macs for their more sensitive work.
Security isn't really on the table here, it's a Linux based system & I'm quite sure they are capable of securing it for their needs. First thing to go will be the google app store.
This shouldn't be unexpected though, governments bids always go the the cheapest solution that promises to meet the bid requests.
Apple has never really tried to go for the enterprise market, why do you think they'll go after the dept of defense's business. Do you know how tough it is to do business with the feds? Good call, apple.
If the Army decided to go with iPhones, then can we expect you to say "Why would Apple get involved with these guys? Do you know how tough it is to do business with the feds? Bad move Apple."?
Or would you instead be saying "Fandroids rejected!! Go Apple!!"
Or you could say they abandoned all hope of being successful at Pwn2Own. There were teams that planned to do so, announcing well in advance that they'd be there. These guys work year round, not just for three days in February.
http://thetechjournal.com/electronic...own-2011.xhtml
So they announced it well in advance, collected their money from google and stayed home? It is actually more likely then what you suggest. Link your public announcement please, I searched google 15 different ways and could not find a single credible (or otherwise actually) person pre-announce they were going to be there to hack Android.
While we are an the subject. What was the attack? What was exploited? What was the exploiter actually able to do on the devices that were hacked? These details were never released. The requirements for "winning" are unbelievably vague. It is very interesting that there was no contestants for WP7 or Android. Why do we even pay attention to these silly little contests.
What is the definition of "little or no user intervention" . In the case of the iphone was it little or none? So according to this contest, an iPhone go do a web page that will cost the user money on their phone. Thats it, if you go to that page it will cost you money.
Bullshit. Give some details or stfu already. I also believe it is impossible for this to happen on the blackberry.
Is little user intervention clicking on a button that says call this number?
Edit: Actually found a site willing to disclose what happened
From the government contract to tailor Android OS for a military smartphone and to develop any apps the military specifically wants..... and for any additional contract for software maintenance....
If you took the time to read the article, the system is being developed not by Google but by another company.
This is what happens when you give stuff away.
The other company will strip out all of the marketing code and be left with what is essentially Linux for ARM.
The only reason this is "bad" for Apple is because they won't sell hardware but it isn't a "win" for Google in any sense of the word.
In what could be a major design win for Google, the U.S. Army is currently undergoing testing of a prototype Android-based smartphone platform for connected soldiers, according to a new report.
Wired reports that a wartime smartphone called the Joint Battle Command-Platform is currently being tested by the Army. The device, which was developed by nonprofit MITRE, runs Google's Android mobile operating system.
According to the Army, the platform's development kit, known as the Mobile/Handheld Computing Environment, will be released to developers in July. The Army is exploring a rank of tasks for the device, including mapping, a "Force Tracker" that keeps track of friendly units and "critical messaging" for exchanging medical requests and on the ground reporting.
As is to be expected, security remains one of the top issues that needs to be resolved. The difficulty of deploying the devices in low connectivity combat environments has also presented challenges for the project.
The Army's vice chief of staff, Gen. Peter Chiarelli, claims that the tested devices can handed the extra wear-and-tear from war zones, the report noted. The Joint Battle Command-Platform weighs roughly two pounds when connected to a radio and is significantly lighter than current solutions, such as the Nett Warrior.
While the current prototype is a long way from the final stages of the project, Android appears to be the early platform of choice, especially since the Mobile/Handheld Computing Environment is meant to run on "any manner of devices."
Last December, ArmyTimes reported that the Army was considering issuing smartphones as standard equipment for soldiers. Apple's iPhone, as well as phones running Google Android, were in the running.
Army officials visited the Apple campus last year to discuss the company's future technology as related to battlefield applications. Apple's "it just works" philosophy had drawn the attention of the Army.
"Apple technologies offer unique and proven solutions with intuitive designs that allow users to learn quickly without a training manual," Ron Szymanski, lead computer scientist with the Army's Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center, reportedly said. "The Army would like to leverage Apple's experience when designing military operations."
Several iPhone apps have been developed by the Army's Communications-Electronics Research and Development Center in recent years: COIN Collector, a counter-insurgency information collection tool, and MilSpace, a planning and social networking environment.
Photo courtesy U.S. Army, credit C. Todd Lopez
In 2008, it was revealed that the Army had begun using custom iPods as an affordable and lightweight solution for field translation work in Iraq. iPods and iPod nanos were attached to armbands and speakers and modified to run a translation app.
An iPod nano with Vcommunicator Mobile, armband and speaker for use in the field. | Image credits: U.S. Army.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
So much for keeping our solders safe.
If you took the time to read the article, the system is being developed not by Google but by another company.
This is what happens when you give stuff away.
The other company will strip out all of the marketing code and be left with what is essentially Linux for ARM.
The only reason this is "bad" for Apple is because they won't sell hardware but it isn't a "win" for Google in any sense of the word.
The "other company" is MITRE corp -- a special, semi-autonomous company to support the military:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitre_Corporation
This effort could be based on any mobile OS the Army cares to choose.
So they announced it well in advance, collected their money from google and stayed home? It is actually more likely then what you suggest. Link your public announcement please, I searched google 15 different ways and could not find a single credible (or otherwise actually) person pre-announce they were going to be there to hack Android.
No need to go re-hash the whole thing. Follow the links I've given in my previous posts. It's all there. No one was paid to stay home, nothing sneaky or underhanded. Matters not if you believe it. Android does not have the the security problems you and others may think it does. Fact.
Details: http://thetechjournal.com/electronic...#ixzz1KOrETxsn
http://nbnl.globalwhelming.com/2011/...e-pays-hacked/
The "other company" is MITRE corp -- a special, semi-autonomous company to support the military:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitre_Corporation
This effort could be based on any mobile OS the Army cares to choose.
Yes, but Google (tries) to make money off advertising and tracking Android users.
I can guarantee you that none of that will exist in the final product.
So what does Google gain from this in terms of their bottom line?
The have no revenue model, they Army can use Android for free.
Google isn't building the sloppy, virus-ridden, insecure operating system some Apple owners have been led to believe. Apple's OS may be the most stable and trouble free of all. Dunno. But if so I don't think Android is far behind.
So how is Google suppose to make money off this endeavor?
You're asking a serious question in this stupid thread.
Don't.
China seems to like FreeBSD http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/sec...secure-os/1682
I am not suprised by this decision and I agree with it 100%. The Iphone is a cool and hip platform but that does not matter for military applications. Apple's closed system pretty much killed its chance at any military contract. Commercial and Military worlds are vastly different. The android platform allows for the government to have more control over the software on it's military smartphone, allow for competitive bids on upgrades, etc. Different contractors can bid on contracts to upgrade the government's smartphone software. If they went with Apple, they would be chaining themselves to a single source for the smartphones and upgrades as apple would never allow another company access to its iOS software even if it is a variant just for military smartphones. Fragmentation is not an issue for the military. The only flavor of android that matters is the one that will run on the military smartphone. I would not be surprised if the ability for the user to download and install apps is disabled for this phone as it is sucha blatant security risk. Any apps that the military needs will be developed for the military under a government contract. Any military specific apps such as Situational Awareness ("Force Tracking") needs to be specially developed anyways and will most likely be preinstalled iwth the OS. The military will not care if Angry Birds or Netflix can't run on its smartphone. If you all just drop your Apple Pom Pom's for a second and seriously think about what the military really needs out of a smartphone you will realize that teh Android platform is a better fit than Apple's proprioetary iOS.
You have no clue. Here's the rub, it's not iOS being closed that's a problem, almost ALL the development the military does is on proprietary closed systems. That's the easiest way to wrap support into the contract.
The problem is that a civilian phone -- as in ALL civilian phones, give off certain signals that are easily exploitable. It comes from the chip level. So I would not want to give a soldier an indiscriminate beacon to take into the field - even when the phone is turned off! You have to remove the batteries.
No, what these prototype programs are doing is creating custom hardware using military grade electronics that don't scream Target Me!!! via leaky signals. It happens that contractors can install Android on those custom phones. A custom iPhone with these different electronics wouldn't be an iPhone anymore, it would be a frankenphone trying to run iOS, and not do it very well. Yes these phones from the OP run Android, but you would be thoroughly disappointed by the power requirements and how fast you run through the batteries. For a soldierr though you would be happy to carry the extra three or four battery packs if you aren't carrying a targeting beacon with you.
We want iPhones, but understand why we wouldn't really want to use them in the field. Since the app is what it's all about we'll just have to live with whatever we get that runs the apps we need.
Actually some of the world's top hackers have yet to be successful at penetrating Android's security protocols to gain assess to the OS itself, something Apple has had some issues with. Wouldn't that make Android one of the best possible OS solutions from a security standpoint?
The applications that were removed from the Android Market for GAINING ROOT ACCESS and installing trojans beg to differ.
Such an application could have been used in Pwn2Own if anyone had bothered (I guess there was no challenge.), upload an obscure application to Android Market and it would have been game over as soon as you downloaded and installed it, if on the off chance Google had found and removed it then enable other sources in settings and install a backup hosted somewhere else.
/boom, headshot.
You mean by not having consolidated.db file??
I had a look at that, you can't even find my house, it shows I travelled up a road 200 miles away from where I actually drove basically you'd learn more from Facebook and Foursquare check-ins,
I was surprised at how little it actually shows.
The applications that were removed from the Android Market for GAINING ROOT ACCESS and installing trojans beg to differ.
Such an application could have been used in Pwn2Own if anyone had bothered (I guess there was no challenge.), upload an obscure application to Android Market and it would have been game over as soon as you downloaded and installed it, if on the off chance Google had found and removed it then enable other sources in settings and install a backup hosted somewhere else.
/boom, headshot.
That requires a user to physically accept an application and install it. That's not how
Apple, Firefox, Microsoft and the others were attacked, nor should it be. You can't design an OS to cover all instances of stupid. The Browsers and OS's failed to keep out an intruder because of inherent issues with the OS itself. The whole idea behind the Pwn2own competition is to assist companies in finding security problems with their operating systems. And so far no one has been able to find one in Android. Or chrome.
Assume you have a security system in your home. Audio and video. You hear a knock on the door and look to see who it is: A man in a white uniform. You turn off security, open the door and invite him in. The man attacks you and demands money. Did your security system fail to protect you from an attacker? Or was that you?
In the case of the Apple, Blackberry products, the security service failed. The guy in the white jacket got in without your knowledge and is waiting around the corner to grab you when you walk by. With Android, that guy in white is still outside looking for a way in. He may eventually find one.. . but not yet.