[Omnitech]

RIM has not given away encryption keys to anybody. Go back and read Bla1ze aug (front page) article on such. It was one rogue story in the Hinu/India Times that pushed that false narrative.

I never stated anywhere in this thread that RIM gave anyone "encryption keys". What I stated is that BIS and BBM communications are capable of being monitored by law-enforcement. There are various ways of accomplishing that. I can tell you categorically that the state government in many countries (including Canada and the USA) would never give RIM approval to operate their services whatsoever unless monitoring were possible. Rest assured, BIS and BBM are monitor-able. RIM waved their hands around trying to emphasize the fact that it must be only after "due process" was followed (don't remember the precise wording), but what Canadians or Yankees consider "Due Process" and what Saudi officials consider "Due Process" are likely 2 very, very different things. ;-)

In regards to #30 that will be changed.

I have no idea what "#30" means in this context.

[RECOOL]

What did you expect technology is just another tool it will be used period.Those with the best tech usually dominate in their field/craft.
The feds are watching this thread I refuse to talk about my associates.

[TomJasper]

The feds are watching this thread I refuse to talk about my associates.

LOL

[TomJasper]

I never stated anywhere in this thread that RIM gave anyone "encryption keys".

My apologies, I misread.

Rest assured, BIS and BBM are monitor-able.

Proove it.

[Omnitech]

Proove it.

Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's just for starters. Do you honestly think that any law enforcement agency in their right mind is going to make it trivial for someone to get hold of a document that discusses in intimate detail how undercover communications monitoring works? If they did that, then their ability to monitor things is immediately eroded if not decimated.

I have been working long enough in the I.T. and telecom security field to be very very confident of what I wrote above on this.

One thing RIM does NOT do is thumb their nose at national governmental or law-enforcement's legal requirements. Since among other things, those entities are some of their most important customers. We can't even have that speed-trap mapping app in BB World because RIM doesn't want to annoy law-enforcement entities. (Much to my personal chagrin, actually - because I think it's none of their business what independent citizens choose to share in terms of such public information, especially when it is often abused to generate unjustified and confiscatory revenues for local governments.)

[Roo Zilla]

My apologies, I misread.

Proove it.

BBC News - RIM CEO calls a halt to BBC Click interview

Hear what Mike Lazaridis has to say about it, or rather, not say about it.

Also, Dec. 31, 2012 was the last day Indian telcos had to comply with Indian internal security demanding that Blackberry communications be capable of being intercepted. As of yesterday, all BIS transmissions in India are capable being monitored by Indian law enforcement.

[TomJasper]

Omnitech,

I see no proof there, it speaks to wire tap of voice communication.

[TomJasper]

Roo Zilla,

That's not proof, the interviewer was being a d___.

[TomJasper]

RIM is providing an appropriate lawful access solution that enables India's telecom operators to be legally compliant with respect to their BlackBerry consumer traffic, to the same degree as other smartphone providers in India, but this does not extend to secure BlackBerry enterprise communications. As we have stated on several occasions, and as we have set out in our company’s Lawful Access Principles, RIM cannot access information encrypted through BlackBerry Enterprise Server as RIM is not ever in possession of the encryption keys.*

As a reminder of RIM’s longstanding position regarding “lawful access” matters around the world, RIM adheres to its published Lawful Access Principles. These four core principles outline RIM’s approach to providing carriers with the capabilities necessary to address lawful access requirements in their respective countries and include the following:

RIM lawful access principles:

The carriers’ capabilities be limited to the strict context of lawful access and national security requirements as governed by the country's judicial oversight and rules of law.
The carriers’ capabilities must be technology- and vendor-neutral, allowing no greater access to BlackBerry consumer services than the carriers and regulators already impose on RIM’s competitors and other similar communications technology companies.
No changes to the security architecture for BlackBerry Enterprise Server customers since, contrary to any rumors, the security architecture is the same around the world and RIM truly has no ability to provide its customers’ encryption keys.*
Also driving RIM’s position is the fact that strong encryption is a fundamental commercial requirement for any country to attract and maintain international business anyway and similarly strong encryption is currently used pervasively in traditional VPNs on both wired and wireless networks in order to protect corporate and government communications.

RIM maintains a consistent global standard for lawful access requirements that does not include special deals for specific countries.

[Omnitech]

Note the weasel-wording:

"...enables India's telecom operators to be legally compliant with respect to their BlackBerry consumer traffic, to the same degree as other smartphone providers in India, but this does not extend to secure BlackBerry enterprise communications."

The translation of that is: everything but BES is snoopable. Just like I wrote previously.

[Omnitech]

Omnitech,

I see no proof there, it speaks to wire tap of voice communication.

OK, this is just becoming stupid now - are you just being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn?

CALEA is the law of the land in the USA, and it stipulates that telecom traffic MUST be snoopable.

Got that now?

And no, it is NOT just "voice communication". Read the document.

[TomJasper]

Omnitech, I don't doubt you have your convictions, nothing person, just want to see 100% proof.

Note the weasel-wording:



The translation of that is: everything but BES is snoopable. Just like I wrote previously.

[TomJasper]

Stubborn , nope, not in the least. You agree BES is un snoopable yet you say BIS is snoopable, they are both telecom traffic by the loosely written act you posted are they not.

OK, this is just becoming stupid now - are you just being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn?

CALEA is the law of the land in the USA, and it stipulates that telecom traffic MUST be snoopable.

Got that now?

And no, it is NOT just "voice communication". Read the document.

[Omnitech]

The exception is BES - and that is because even if the spooks can capture the traffic going over the "wire" (or the air in this case), if that traffic is encrypted with strong enough encryption, and you don't have the decryption key or a "backdoor", then it passes securely.

If governments tried to force RIM to provide a "backdoor" or decryption keys to governments for every BES installation, it would completely destroy what is viewed as one of the most fundamental values of that platform: secure business communications. Do you really think IBM, Boeing or Exxon wants RIM to give China the decryption keys to every staff-person's communications using a Blackberry in China? If they did, the security of BES would be essentially worthless.

And if they gave it to one country (ie Canada or the USA), every other country would demand the same accomodations.

So my guess is that all the back/forth negotiations we heard about in re: to the countries I previously mentioned, revolved primarily around what to do if someone is running a BES. I don't think anyone ever expected BIS/BBM communications to be impervious to lawful law-enforcement snooping, though for casual communications they're probably more secure than if you were on Android or iOS - it's just that all bets are off when you get a search warrant pertaining to possible terrorist activity or something.

Just like during the UK riots, as previously mentioned in this thread.

[Omnitech]

And BTW - the NSA can probably de-crypt BES communications too, using fancy algorithms running on massive classified supercomputers - but it's not practical to apply those resources to every data stream, and if time is critical you often don't have the luxury of that kind of brute-force method.

So I imagine that in places like India that has lots of terrorism problems, or Saudi Arabia, North Korea etc which are police-states, you'd probably need to file for a license to run a BES server, just like if you wanted to build an ICBM, and/or provide a way for the government to monitor your BES traffic.

And since BES requires a specific sort of wireless account to communicate with Blackberries, it shouldn't be too hard for the government to figure out if some entity had Blackberries connected to an unlicensed BES. Most likely even getting a BES-enabled cellular account in a place like that would be very difficult.

[TomJasper]

Ok, that scenario makes sense and without written confirmation I tend to agree with you. Sure would be nice to see it written out in black and white. My understanding was London (at that time) was BBID's/ GPS / some coughing up like Sabu.

The exception is BES - and that is because even if the spooks can capture the traffic going over the "wire" (or the air in this case), if that traffic is encrypted with strong enough encryption, and you don't have the decryption key or a "backdoor", then it passes securely.

If governments tried to force RIM to provide a "backdoor" or decryption keys to governments for every BES installation, it would completely destroy what is viewed as one of the most fundamental values of that platform: secure business communications. Do you really think IBM, Boeing or Exxon wants RIM to give China the decryption keys to every staff-person's communications using a Blackberry in China? If they did, the security of BES would be essentially worthless.

And if they gave it to one country (ie Canada or the USA), every other country would demand the same accomodations.

So my guess is that all the back/forth negotiations we heard about in re: to the countries I previously mentioned, revolved primarily around what to do if someone is running a BES. I don't think anyone ever expected BIS/BBM communications to be impervious to lawful law-enforcement snooping, though for casual communications they're probably more secure than if you were on Android or iOS - it's just that all bets are off when you get a search warrant pertaining to possible terrorist activity or something.

Just like during the UK riots, as previously mentioned in this thread.

[Omnitech]

...just want to see 100% proof.

For the reasons I gave previously, you are NEVER going to get "100% proof".

It's like asking the White House PR desk to give you "100% proof" the president is sitting at a particular geographical coordinate in his office at that particular moment, so you can target him with an ICBM strike.

[TomJasper]

So I imagine that in places like India that has lots of terrorism problems, or Saudi Arabia, North Korea etc which are police-states, you'd probably need to file for a license to run a BES server.
_______
SIM/BES server - roam away,lol

[Omnitech]

...some coughing up like Sabu.

Sabu from Anonymous was ratted-out by one of his former Anonymous compatriots. No Blackberry snooping required.

[TomJasper]

Sabu from Anonymous was ratted-out by one of his former Anonymous compatriots. No Blackberry snooping required.

Go back and review the IRC, read carefully how he interacted with Penny(HBGary), he was already working for the Fed right then and there.

[southlander]

So if a national government wants to monitor BES users, basically they have to invoke state security laws and compel anyone who runs a BES to give them access in some way.

Right. You can force a company to do this. But a criminal...

Sent from my BlackBerry Torch 9850 using Tapatalk

[Omnitech]

Right. You can force a company to do this. But a criminal...

Unless that criminal operates their own private cellular network, it's really not an issue.

See my comment #91.

[ThaSwapMeetPimp]

I have always guessed that criminals use Bb because of the encryption that comes with the device and now I just read an article that confirms that!

Australian Police say that they cannot intercept messages on BBM, so it makes their jobs alot harder

Organised crime gets smart with technology

On a related note: thereason that many celebrities and criminals use BBM, is because of the pin-to-pin messaging, where someone's name and number stays anonymous but they can still add a contact and talk to each other without giving much info. From what i have seenof BB10, it seems that RIM is removing this feature and now you can invite anyone through FB or LinkedIn. Do you think BBM will lose its appeal to those people?

Yes, we do use BB. Even though I am no longer a criminal in the eyes of my state, I spent the last 16 years of my life breaking the law every day (til the law was changed last year), and yes, I chose blackberry because there are more hurdles to warrantless info grabbing than with apple or android. But even if criminality wasn't a concern, I would choose BB for the same reason. I don't have to be breaking the law to be smart enough to realize that it is a bad thing for governments and corporations to know everything about me, where I am at, what I am doing, who my friends are, etc...

A lot of people say to me "I'm not breaking the law, so what does it matter if they know what I am doing?"

Do you know what they are doing 24/7? Can you call up Google or Apple and demand to know what each and every politician or head of a corporation is doing, where they are at, who their friends are, based off of info accessible through their phone service? If they cannot be that transparent with you, why should you be that transparent with them? Just because they are government entities? Or own global means of production or the network that carries and accesses your information?

"It's okay, they are just trying to protect us from terrorists" Frank Herbert wrote this great book called Dune, and there's this very pertinent line in that book "Fear is the mind killer". If you are afraid, you are not thinking. If you are not thinking, you accept whatever tactics they present to make you feel safe again. That feeling of safety then causes you to accept whatever conditions your fear allowed you to succumb to as your new normal

When you recognize freedom is scary, that it is not just the freedom to prosper and live happily but also the freedom to suffer and die miserably, and accept that fact, truly accept it, no threat other than losing that freedom becomes scarier. Because historically, if you are not born entitled to that freedom, the choice made for you and the masses is to suffer and die miserably, so that a few may prosper and live happily. At least if you are free, it's your choices that lead you to suffer or prosper, not theirs.

Privacy is a very important aspect of both freedom and mental health. It is impossible to enjoy freedom when one is under constant scrutiny, and it is impossible to remain sane without some space, both physical and mental space, that exists unintruded upon. Say about 30 feet in all directions (for me personally that is, I feel intruded upon during my most personal moments (sorrows, mostly) If I don't have that much space), physically. And obviously, thoughts that are private, not shared with anyone (facial recognition tech has gotten pretty good at detecting facial tics indicating specific thought patterns, and I wouldn't be surprised if we were either really close to or already able to create sensors that can tell what neurons are firing in your brain as you go about your daily business).

We are not cattle. We are not hive insects. We can not exist as a herd, or a hive mind. We are and always will be moderately gregarious pack animals, more like wolves than cattle or insects. We stand alone within our own minds, possessing varying skill sets that we use to complement the packs we are accepted by and choose to exist in. To force any other state leads to neuroses, and the triggering of other mental defenses, which we see as mental illnesses, but are really the signs of a healthy mind defending itself from constant assault and intrusion. We need to be able to run free, when we choose to, to realize our full potential as civilized, sentient creatures.

[Shanerredflag]

Your assuming that federal systems can monitor/snoop on private / corporate systems....nope, not a chance...to many systems, language codes, band aid patched up Crap systems running throughout governments let alone corporations. Can authorities request information legally from the party they want this info from....yes. Just my two cents.

[MADBRADNYC]

Yes, we do use BB...

Keep doing so... Thanks for your support... LoL.
I'm really not interested in your past activities or the content of your post...
It seems you've been through it and became a better person.
But I damn sure LOVE your user name!