[BBgeeqed04]

I've been thinking about how BlackBerry can turn their assets into assets. In recent news, security issues have become the bane of smartphones. Well, BlackBerry has the best security of any phone on the market. Despite this, they apparently aren't doing well, at all.

My solution is to follow the route of Las Vegas. No... not prostitution. Though that does sell. What I'm suggesting is to make security sexy. The ad line would be similar to Las Vegas', What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. However, the ad line would be, What happens in BlackBerry stays in BlackBerry.

BlackBerry needs to start selling their best asset... security. Make it something everybody wants and has the right to have it. Oddly, they do. So, sell it like you own it and flaunt it like a stripper in Vegas.

P.S. I've never been to Vegas, but I've seen the ads on TV .

Posted via my super-duper Z10

[MartyMcfly]

Is a non bes bb more secure than ios and android?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

[bekkay]

I am not sure about security, but redheads are.

[BBgeeqed04]

From what I've read and understand, yes. The design of the system is inherently more secure. However, I will allow more experienced and knowledgeable people answer.

Posted via my super-duper Z10

[GadgetTravel]

Is a non bes bb more secure than ios and android?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

That is part of the problem, maybe the biggest part. I tried using security when I tried to get our IT guys to get BES. They said SSL is good enough for us. I have nothing to do with the security biz, I have no idea if they are right or not. But I think it is pretty apparent that security is relative, and what other devices have is enough for most people, at least in their own minds. And that, is probably what matters.

[RECOOL]

Is security sexy?? yeah has been since cave men era.Thats why rich dudes not considered good looking ,have hot trophy wives and so forth..

[Hydde]

Security marketing alone will not do it.

Most consumers do not care about "security" as a main reason to buy a phone.

The common consumer could care less about microsoft peeking at their skype accounts.

Nowadays consumer want Apps, want big screens, want to see thir phones as an all around communication-entertaiment device, as soemthing "COOL", not as a security box.

They need to change the perception to something more "In" and modern, which can be used by teenagers and adults alike.

"we bring you security, but if you want fun, go somewhere else" sounds BORING AS ****.

Security will only attract geeks and business men, which are not the main population of the market share. But the big part of the pie lies around stupid teenagers who wanna look cool and adults who follow trends.

They should market the phone like a TOY, but make it work like a TOOL.

[BerryPirate]

The average consumer\user is clueless about security and doesn't care. And as for privacy, (which is a subset of security) well I don't think they care either, because they are not abandoning the Google\Android\Gmail ship after Google said that Gmail users can expect no privacy.

Security is extremely sexy for the Military, Govt, and Industry (especially sensitive industries like nuclear, aerospace, and defense.) This is why Blackberry will survive in some form or another. It is a big piece of the security infrastructure in many organisations, where device security is primordial. And with the Department of Defense giving their "Authority To Operate" stamp of approval to only Blackberry, and NO ONE ELSE, we can all rest assured that Blackberry will survive.

[BBgeeqed04]

I know you're right, but why can't we have both security AND fun? Add into it high-performance specs, which BlackBerry meets, then we have achieved the goal.

Posted via my super-duper Z10

[amazinglygraceless]

No, security is not sexy. I have said this before but to the general buying public, security is an irrelevant notion. What is "sexy" to them is PRIVACY or as I once put it, the simple knowledge that whatever they do on their phone is free from the prying eyes of their nosy roommate, jealous husband, crazy as$ girlfriend, etc...

The problem with this question is that people use the terms security and privacy interchangeably and they are two entirely different animals.

[Hydde]

And with the Department of Defense giving their "Authority To Operate" stamp of approval to only Blackberry, and NO ONE ELSE, we can all rest assured that Blackberry will survive.

Thats the problem. They MAYBE will survive.... but as something else... not as the smartphone creators we know and love.

Surviving as BES10 service provider is being dead in my eyes, as a smarthphone user. So no, to me that doesnt mean survavbility.

[Hydde]

AND fun?

Thats the thing. BBs stopped to be "fun" in the eyes of many, and the board does **** about it.

[BerryPirate]

No, security is not sexy. I have said this before but to the general buying public, security is an irrelevant notion. What is "sexy" to them is PRIVACY or as I once put it, the simple knowledge that whatever they do on their phone is free from the prying eyes of their nosy roommate, jealous husband, crazy as$ girlfriend, etc...

The problem with this question is that people use the terms security and privacy interchangeably and they are two entirely different animals.

I wouldn't call being free from the prying eyes of a crazy as$ girlfriend, a privacy issue. I'd call it that a major relationship problem.

[Jerry A]

The average consumer\user is clueless about security and doesn't care. And as for privacy, (which is a subset of security) well I don't think they care either, because they are not abandoning the Google\Android\Gmail ship after Google said that Gmail users can expect no privacy.

Security is extremely sexy for the Military, Govt, and Industry (especially sensitive industries like nuclear, aerospace, and defense.) This is why Blackberry will survive in some form or another. It is a big piece of the security infrastructure in many organisations, where device security is primordial. And with the Department of Defense giving their "Authority To Operate" stamp of approval to only Blackberry, and NO ONE ELSE, we can all rest assured that Blackberry will survive.

Except they're not the only one with an ARO. That wording of their press release was misleading in that regard. Also, it was for BES10, not the devices themselves.

Don't be mislead by simple marketing words. The competition is already making significant inroads.

At the iPhone level, their security architecture was actually lightyears ahead of BBOS. It's only with BB10 that they're presenting something that's competitive on the modern stage.

[BBgeeqed04]

No, security is not sexy. I have said this before but to the general buying public, security is an irrelevant notion. What is "sexy" to them is PRIVACY or as I once put it, the simple knowledge that whatever they do on their phone is free from the prying eyes of their nosy roommate, jealous husband, crazy as$ girlfriend, etc...

The problem with this question is that people use the terms security and privacy interchangeably and they are two entirely different animals.

I'll agree to a point. And the point where I disagree is that people do care about security. Did you lock your door when you left the house or apartment? Or did you leave the door unlocked? Did you advertise that you locked the door? And with the assumption that you locked your door, would you advertise leaving your door unlocked? Curtains are for privacy. Locks are for security.

Posted via my super-duper Z10

[anon62607]

From what I've read and understand, yes. The design of the system is inherently more secure. However, I will allow more experienced and knowledgeable people answer.

Posted via my super-duper Z10

Security in terms of what? If you mean a lost, encrypted device can't be decrypted then iphone 5 and blackberry are more or less the same as each other. If you mean communications that can't be intercepted - that's sort of a wash. Blackberry is less secure in a sort of hypothetical sense because there are more encrypted / security apps available for the other platforms at the moment but that's not any kind of inherent limitation in blackberry.

It is something blackberry could focus on. Right or wrong, the public does equate blackberry with security and blackberry could market that.

(edit)

On the other hand, security when there is a business or government need is sexy. That's like working in a building with security guards and perimeter fence and and has a slick, professional visage.

Security when you are a 34 year old everquest player living with his parents is more akin to the locked, boarded up basement that everyone assumes has a few kidnapped women in it.

[Jerale Hoard]

Is a non bes bb more secure than ios and android?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

Has anyone ever found a way to hack through BlackBerry's QNX mickrokernal core ecosystem?

Posted via CB10

[amazinglygraceless]

I'll agree to a point. And the point where I disagree is that people do care about security. Did you lock your door when you left the house or apartment? Or did you leave the door unlocked? Did you advertise that you locked the door? And with the assumption that you locked your door, would you advertise leaving your door unlocked? Curtains are for privacy. Locks are for security.

That has to be the mother of all false equivalencies

[BerryPirate]

Except they're not the only one with an ARO. That wording of their press release was misleading in that regard. Also, it was for BES10, not the devices themselves.

Don't be mislead by simple marketing words. The competition is already making significant inroads.

At the iPhone level, their security architecture was actually lightyears ahead of BBOS. It's only with BB10 that they're presenting something that's competitive on the modern stage.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Department of Defense has only approved Blackberry's MDM solution along with the Z10 and Q10 to allow these devices to connect directly to the Department of Defense network to access DOD assets. No one else has that approval. This is the highest level of security clearance for a device. I don't believe Iphone nor Android have that clearance. I'm talking about accessing DOD data that are stored on DOD servers in the DOD network. This clearance is not about making phone calls, sending personal or work emails, or browsing the web via a wifi network. It is about accessing military assets that are stored on servers via a Blackberry device.

[MartyMcfly]

Has anyone ever found a way to hack through BlackBerry's QNX mickrokernal core ecosystem?

Posted via CB10

Heck if I know.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

[anon62607]

Has anyone ever found a way to hack through BlackBerry's QNX mickrokernal core ecosystem?

Posted via CB10

QNX : Security vulnerabilities

[MartyMcfly]

Has anyone ever found a way to hack through BlackBerry's QNX mickrokernal core ecosystem?

Posted via CB10

I see people sideloading banking apps all the time. I'm sure that's a security risk, right?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

[anon62607]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Department of Defense has only approved Blackberry's MDM solution along with the Z10 and Q10 to allow these devices to connect directly to the Department of Defense network to access DOD assets. No one else has that approval. This is the highest level of security clearance for a device. I don't believe Iphone nor Android have that clearance. I'm talking about accessing DOD data that are stored on DOD servers in the DOD network. This clearance is not about making phone calls, sending personal or work emails, or browsing the web via a wifi network. It is about accessing military assets that are stored on servers via a Blackberry device.

Blackberry has an ATO (&and approval to connect, I presume). It's not a security clearance or clearance level and I certainly wouldn't consider a system that has an ATO necessarily any more secure than one that doesn't have an ATO.

[anon62607]

I see people sideloading banking apps all the time. I'm sure that's a security risk, right?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

And confusing kernel security with overall device security is something of a mistake anyway. I presume by kernel security the question is "is there some system of privilege elevation or unauthorized kernel memory access". It's possible to not have that kind of vulnerability but still have a security issue on the device.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

If iOS and Android are good enough for the government, not sure the average Joe is going to think they need anything better.