President Obama reveals he is not allowed to use Apple's iPhone due to security risks

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 93
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post





    Kardashians? What's that? A successor race to the Cyclons? Or perhaps predecessor?



    Sounds like a carnivorous animal. "In the Pleistocene jungles, the mighty kardashians preyed on all, powerful long-necked herbivores as well as fast, nimble hunters".

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 42 of 93
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    What an inflammatory piece of yellow journalism. Being able to pose with an iPhone does not make you tech savvy. Obama has demonstrated a remarkable ability to not grasp technology nor the business world. The list of failure his administration has created is long but includes the like of A123, Soylandra and many others. In a nut shel he doesn't have a clue about technology.

     

    Thanks for being a continual fool. The Soylandra and A123 make me laugh. The DoE under his administration has a remarkable Green Tech investment metric.

     

    Then again, Soylandra has heavy backing so these folks must all be morons too, right?

     

    Keep running off at the mouth. I'm sure he's worried about your scientific prowess, on where the DoE should invest tax money.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 43 of 93
    virtuavirtua Posts: 210member
    So does this article mean he wants an iPhone .....or just meaningless article - I mean it could have been Obama can't use an HTC on the equivalent HTC insider site.....or any other phone lol. Obama can't use a land line...,Obama can't use a pay phone. How about fisher price?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 44 of 93
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    What an inflammatory piece of yellow journalism. Being able to pose with an iPhone does not make you tech savvy. Obama has demonstrated a remarkable ability to not grasp technology nor the business world. The list of failure his administration has created is long but includes the like of A123, Soylandra and many others. In a nut shel he doesn't have a clue about technology.

     

     

    Watching Fox News makes you a fool.

    I am sure your Republican candidate knows about biz.

     

    Politics is our personal view of the world, it is not a sacred thing, it is just an opinion.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 45 of 93
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by virtua View Post



    So does this article mean he wants an iPhone .....or just meaningless article - I mean it could have been Obama can't use an HTC on the equivalent HTC insider site.....or any other phone lol. Obama can't use a land line...,Obama can't use a pay phone. How about fisher price?

     

     

    Since when is this about Obama?

    Isn’t the article about iPhone’s security, or the iPhone’s perceived security or lack to it?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 46 of 93
    virtuavirtua Posts: 210member
    Clues
    ochyming wrote: »

    Since when is this about Obama?
    Isn’t the article about iPhone’s security, or the iPhone’s perceived security or lack to it?

    Clue is in the title of the article? ;p
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 47 of 93
    Could it be that Blackberry was chosen to allow security services to spy on Obama?
    RIM were said to have deals with Russia, China and of course US to allow snooping.

    Reality and perception do not always mix well.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 48 of 93
    Blackberry phones were built for business usage. It still has an unbreakable cypher that was invented in 2005. Many countries have tried but it way beyond today's technology still. Most expert think it could be as long as a century give today's computer speed advancements.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 49 of 93
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ochyming View Post

     

     

     

    Since when is this about Obama?

    Isn’t the article about iPhone’s security, or the iPhone’s perceived security or lack to it?


     

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by virtua View Post



    Clues





    Clue is in the title of the article? ;p

     

     

    Really?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 50 of 93
    virtuavirtua Posts: 210member
    ochyming wrote: »


    Really?

    Really :)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 51 of 93
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    harry wild wrote: »
    Blackberry phones were built for business usage. It still has an unbreakable cypher that was invented in 2005. Many countries have tried but it way beyond today's technology still. Most expert think it could be as long as a century give today's computer speed advancements.

    Ahem:

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/how-the-nsa-spies-on-smartphones-including-the-blackberry-a-921161.html
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 52 of 93
    Konqerror is correct. It takes YEARS to get these crypto modules approved. I'm told this is because of the backlog of verification of other standards that NIST is reviewing for approval. As the other person said, they aren't reviewing or verifying the operating system of the phone - only the crypto module and it's implementation into the operating system to insure it is functioning correctly. I work in government and the length of time it takes to get these things approved for different devices is a giant pain in the ass. By the time something gets approved, 2 newer items are on the market and now THEY have to go through an approval process.

    Further, it's not necessarily the hardware or the software that holds back a device from being used, it's the DATA and it's sensitivity level that makes it tricky to use one product over another.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 53 of 93
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    xserenityx wrote: »
    Frankly, there are still security concerns about the Blackberry he uses, or him using a cellphone at all. He also has been photographed repeatedly violating communications security protocols with that stupid Blackberry, such as making calls on it right next to his secured landline (which interferes with the encryption and can allow for eavesdropping). Many TCSM professionals have commented on this. Him not using an iPhone is a nonissue, IMO.

    Obama's BB has a extra layer of security that the average BB doesn’t have.

    http://www.securdigital.com/securvoice.html

    He also has own cell site that travels with him and connects directly to a secure satellite.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 54 of 93
    I guess the President has enough knowledge of technology to use it to put both Romney and McCain on the bus. It is unfortunate that the IT personnel cannot give up their old faithful blackberry security system, and force the President to use such an antiquated system. We need some IT housecleaning at the federal level.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 55 of 93
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Obama's BB has a extra layer of security that the average BB doesn’t have.

    So did Brigit Bardot.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 56 of 93

    Not surprising. Even rocket scientists cannot use the newest technologies. The Curiosity Rover's computer uses a (hardened) PowerPC chip, far less powerful than those in the newest phones. This is generally true of all satellites launched. These systems are in design 20 years before launch and are paced through years of certification and testing. 

     

    The fact that it would take years to certify and harden devices the President and other high ranking officials use is not surprising and is necessary. Those commenters thinking otherwise or suggesting the reason is incompetence or lack of tech savviness have blown their claim to being anything but programming hacks. 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 57 of 93
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    philboogie wrote: »

    Nobody in this world has the raw computing power that the NSA has.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 58 of 93

    <QUOTE>

    BlackBerry is known to have solid security and was the go-to device for the U.S. government before the rise of the iPhone

    </QUOTE>

     

    As I remember it was found that while there was some authentication, they didn't exactly encrypt the data between the carrier and the account. So all those messages are in the free and clear if you can intercept.

     

    However, not pretending to be an expert on that. It's just that the "more secure" is an old impression and BlackBerry hasn't made as many changes as the iPhone.

     

    But to be honest, there are a lot of features now that would make ANY smart phone a security risk. Does anyone in the Secret Service not read up on all the security services now competing with devices to legally spy on everyone in a given zone? They advertise equipment that you can walk into an airport and be scanning everyone's phone and wiFi traffic in a minute.

     

    So the "illusion" of security might be intact with BlackBerry, because nobody is talking about it anymore. They "talk" about security issues with a major phone like the iPhone because;

    1) More features means more points of failure (possibly).

    2) The security company needs fear, uncertainty and doubt to be relevant. Sending out warnings is a way for them to look like they are on top of things.

    3) FUD is paid for by competitors.

     

    They should be talking to the CIA and NSA for what those guys think on security. Likely Obama needs to have an assistant with a "burner phone." He's just looking for a reason to stay with a device he likes to use (and not change), but security is really a bad excuse -- there is none. All these devices have GPS built in unless you physically disable it -- and it's there whether YOU use it or not.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 59 of 93
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by virtua View Post





    Really image

     

    I'd say it's more about the security of the iPhone than Obama. Must be other people who are not allowed to use it as well... unless they are all named Obama.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 60 of 93
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by waldobushman View Post

     

    Not surprising. Even rocket scientists cannot use the newest technologies. The Curiosity Rover's computer uses a (hardened) PowerPC chip, far less powerful than those in the newest phones. This is generally true of all satellites launched. These systems are in design 20 years before launch and are paced through years of certification and testing. 

     

    The fact that it would take years to certify and harden devices the President and other high ranking officials use is not surprising and is necessary. Those commenters thinking otherwise or suggesting the reason is incompetence or lack of tech savviness have blown their claim to being anything but programming hacks. 


     

    "Hardened" in this case is "radiation hardened." It isn't about security, it's about EM and radioactive charges. It's harder to harden newer, faster chips because the process is smaller 22-15nm on the latest. So any tiny charge or noise is going to cause more problems or even damage the CPU. They have to shield these things and probably add in a lot more "error detection." There is always check-sum and error detection going on even in earth-bound CPUs and memory storage, it's probably a factor of 10 greater for something on Mars, though.

     

    And "certification" is just a process -- it doesn't guarantee security. But fewer features means fewer vectors of attack. But "secure" would mean someone on an encrypted hot point, transmitting to a hard line and no cell phones at all. The protocols that Cell Phones use to communicate with towers do not preclude a "man in the middle attack."

     

    But really, other than embarrassing the President, there isn't much worth intercepting anymore. All this data can be bought from a contractor working for the NSA. It's called Capitalism. The important spying going on is with one corporation on another mega corporation -- where the real decisions are being made.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.