Originally Posted by
BanffMoose Seems like a knee-jerk, emotional reaction to me. But ok, to each their own.
When you calm down, why not take a moment to think about BBM encryption. Even if encrypted with 1 global key, it is still encrypted. In the past when the boogie-man was just criminals, it kept those criminals from being able to sniff your BBMs while you logged into the hacked public wi-fi system the criminals installed at your local coffee shop. All the while, those criminals read all the What's App messages, email messages, etc. that were all being sent in plain text. You seem to be giving undue credit to companies that are only recently, beginning to encrypt data streams. BBM, with its 1 global encryption key, has been encrypted all along.
Ponder the fact that BlackBerry was actually complying with laws of probably every country in the world, which requires the ability of governments/governmental agencies to have LAWFUL ACCESS to transmissions made in their country. You may not like the use of 1 key, but it does make it easier for BlackBerry to maintain the security/privacy of the user while also complying with local law. Think too, that transmissions may change geographic borders and legal jurisdictions causing several countries to have claim to legal interest in the transmissions. And let's be honest here, every country should have the right to have legal access to anything that goes in/out of their country. It's part of their souverignty and it doesn't matter if we like their government/country or not.
Think about the fact that through BES, BlackBerry may not have the keys, but the company/entity owning and running that BES has the keys. Therefore, even though it is truly end-to-end encrypted, BlackBerry engineered a way of providing end-to-end encryption while still providing compliance with local laws regarding LAWFUL ACCESS. BlackBerry may not be able to provide access to BES protected data streams, but the entity running the BES server is subject to lawful due process, so the data can still be had.
BlackBerry engineered a means that benefited end users, BES customers and governments alike. Everything about this should be admired and supported.
Now let's look at today's post-Snowden-era, where now, the boogie man includes governments. We know of multiple governments, including those that purport to be the beacons of freedom and democracy, are all about unlawful mass surveillance of not only foreign nationals, but of their own citizens. The tech companies that you and many like you turn to and say "THEY ARE RIGHTOUS! THEY PROVIDE TRUE END-TO-END ENCRYPTION!", those same tech companies were caught being complicit with NSA mass-surveillance efforts!
They are just now turning to "true end-to-end" encryption, when BlackBerry's had it from the start. In the past, those companies were selling us on "trust us, your data is secure" only for news to come out they were sending user authentication or data through the internet in plain text. Many of these tech companies store massive amounts of data on YOU, because YOU put it there. Now YOU think they are more secure or they support privacy more than BlackBerry? Really?
Keep in mind, BlackBerry is the only one of these tech companies that goes to each government and their security rating agency to have them look at their code and certify it as secure. Governments may be friendly to each other, but that doesn't mean they trust each other. The fact is that various governments, who have reason to be suspicious of other governments, have all certified BlackBerry. This should mean something.
Tell me. What other commercial-grade provider has the security chops that BlackBerry has? Who has certified the security Apple, Google, Facebook/What's App, Microsoft, etc deploy? Until they start providing certifications by agencies that actually answer to other entities (as opposed to a certifier that will give a rubber stamp to anyone that pays them), why should you trust them?
You are quick to condemn the one company that actually is forthcoming with what it offers, and from everything I've seen seems to be the one most willing to COMPLY WITH LAWS. I'd like to believe Apple, Google and Facebook/What's App are doing an act of civil disobedience by offering "true end-to-end" encryption with no keys, but I can't get over their past failures. Seems like it's all just PR stunts to ride the anti-government mass surveillance fad. Also seems a massive failure or complete lack of effort on their part to try and provide a means of lawful access. BlackBerry can do it. Why can't they?
You willingly believe the self-serving marketing PR that BlackBerry's competitors are put out. Why?