1. josaki's Avatar
    Apple, Google and other firms are stepping up security measures to regain public trust following in the wake of news from Edward Snowden that the NSA and other government agencies may have been using backdoors to access data from tech companies.

    Apple CEO Tim Cook recently said that the security in iOS 8 makes it almost impossible for Cupertino to pass information over to the feds, and Google’s new Android L operating system will ship with encryption out-of-the-box. Amid all of the bragging of increased security, Google’s Eric Schmidt has stepped in to suggest that Google has long offered more secure servers than Apple.

    “We have always been the leader in security and encryption,” Schmidt explained to CNNMoney recently. ”Our systems are far more secure and encrypted than anyone else, including Apple. They’re catching up, which is great.” Schmidt’s comments were likely made in response to a letter from Tim Cook that suggested “other companies” were selling customer’s private data, a clear jab at Google, which makes a bulk of its profits on ad sales. Schmidt said that it was “unfortunate” Cook believes this about Apple and said Cook must have been briefed by someone who wasn’t up to snuff on Google’s security measures.

    We’re happy to see Google and Apple fighting for customer privacy and security, even if it means fighting against one another, because it should lead to both working round-the-clock to beef up protection against hackers. Still, the U.S. government and the FBI in particular aren’t fond of the new measures. FBI director James Comey recently suggested that both firms were acting above the law by keeping the government out.

    “I just want to make sure we have a good conversation in this country before that day comes,” Comey said recently. “I’d hate to have people look at me and say, ‘Well, how come you can’t save this kid,’ ‘how come you can’t do this thing.”

    The FBI and the Justice Department are both working to stop Google and Apple from moving forward with new software that will block the government from getting court-ordered access to data. On the other hand, security experts have argued that increased encryption prevents all attackers from accessing data, even data owned by the government.

    source: CNN Money via TechnoBuffalo
    10-03-14 06:13 PM
  2. Dave Bourque's Avatar
    John Chen " *****, please..." haha

    Z10STL100-3/10.2.1.3247
    10-03-14 06:41 PM
  3. josaki's Avatar
    Lol

    Posted via CB10
    10-03-14 10:03 PM
  4. crazigee's Avatar
    I posted something last week about the recent announcement by Apple and Google that in upcoming OS releases they won't have a way to override a user's password and gain access to a device even with a warrant. I'm still not clear if BlackBerry has a way around the user's password if served with a warrant. Anyone able to comment?

    Posted using my Z10 via CB10
    Last edited by crazigee; 10-03-14 at 10:25 PM.
    10-03-14 10:13 PM
  5. nuff_said's Avatar
    I posted something last week about the recent announcement by Apple and Google that in upcoming OS releases they won't have a way to override a user's password and gain access to a device even with a warrant. I'm still not clear if BlackBerry has a way around the user's password if served with a warrant. Anyone able to comment?

    Posted using my Z10 via CB10
    I don't believe, with a warrant in hand, Apple or Google would tell the government they cannot access users data. That would place them above the law, and I'm sure a judge wouldn't stand for it. Mind you I'm not a lawyer and don't reside in the US so i could be way off. Anyone with a legal background who can help? I'd love to know what outcome this scenario would lead to
    10-03-14 10:29 PM
  6. crazigee's Avatar
    I don't believe, with a warrant in hand, Apple or Google would tell the government they cannot access users data. That would place them above the law, and I'm sure a judge wouldn't stand for it. Mind you I'm not a lawyer and don't reside in the US so i could be way off. Anyone with a legal background who can help? I'd love to know what outcome this scenario would lead to
    I guess you haven't read the announcements by Apple and Google, or don't understand them. Both companies have announced that they "will not have the ability" to get around a user's password and encryption, not that they would simply tell the government that.

    Posted using my Z10 via CB10
    Bigruss8 likes this.
    10-03-14 10:54 PM
  7. nhanken's Avatar
    Google has always been a leader in security and encryption?? Is Mr. Eric Schmidt smoking crack?


    Posted via CB10
    ekv and RWB3325 like this.
    10-04-14 04:35 AM
  8. w_scott's Avatar
    Google has always been a leader in security and encryption?? Is Mr. Eric Schmidt smoking crack?


    Posted via CB10
    Nonsence. Crack is too old fashion. Google's supposed to be leading...

    Posted via CB10
    10-04-14 04:51 AM
  9. nuff_said's Avatar
    I guess you haven't read the announcements by Apple and Google, or don't understand them. Both companies have announced that they "will not have the ability" to get around a user's password and encryption, not that they would simply tell the government that.

    Posted using my Z10 via CB10
    Thanks for replying. I understand the announcement made by both companies. What I don't understand is would they legally be in trouble if they refused to provide information to the government, if requested, with a warrant. If you can answer this please do. Thanks in advance
    10-04-14 06:54 AM
  10. crazigee's Avatar
    Thanks for replying. I understand the announcement made by both companies. What I don't understand is would they legally be in trouble if they refused to provide information to the government, if requested, with a warrant. If you can answer this please do. Thanks in advance
    How can they provide information they don't have? How can one refuse to provide something they don't have?

    This is the same things as two convenience store employees planning a bank robbery whole at work. The police obtain a warrant to get the video surveillance from the convenience store to show the employees planning the robbery. If the convenience store does have video cameras how could the store get into trouble for not providing the video to the police?

    Let's look at it this way. You buy a home and have new top of the line locks put on the door. You become the suspect in a crime, so the police obtain a warrant to search your home. The police then go to your lock company and say here's the warrant and tell the lock company they must unlock your door. If the lock company truthfully tells the police that they don't have a copy of your key and no way to unlock your door can the lock company get in trouble? How can the lock company refuse to provide something they don't have?

    A warrant give the police or government the right to access or search something. It's their responsibility to figure out a way to do it. If the lock company can give them a key then so much the better or easier for them. If the lock company can't let them in because they have no way to bypass the lock them it is the police's responsibility to figure out another way to get into the house. Be it forcing the lock, breaking down the door, etc.

    If I understand your post correctly (and I apologize in advance if I'm just not getting what you're saying) then you belive that the lock company must keep a copy of each key or have a master key for all of the locks they make in case the police target one of their clients. I don't think that is either feasible or mandated by law.

    Posted using my Z10 via CB10
    Last edited by crazigee; 10-04-14 at 04:28 PM.
    10-04-14 07:21 AM
  11. TGR1's Avatar
    Thanks for replying. I understand the announcement made by both companies. What I don't understand is would they legally be in trouble if they refused to provide information to the government, if requested, with a warrant. If you can answer this please do. Thanks in advance
    This is their way around being forced into handing over the house keys. As crazigee said, they aren't refusing to hand over the data, they have set it up so they aren't able to, and the onus is now on the authorities to figure out a way to do it.
    mornhavon likes this.
    10-04-14 03:23 PM
  12. crazigee's Avatar
    This is their way around being forced into handing over the house keys. As crazigee said, they aren't refusing to hand over the data, they have set it up so they aren't able to, and the onus is now on the authorities to figure out a way to do it.
    Well put. You were able to condense what took me a ridiculously long post to explain into a simple paragraph. Thanks.

    Posted using my Z10 via CB10
    TGR1 likes this.
    10-04-14 04:27 PM
  13. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    Google has always been a leader in security and encryption?? Is Mr. Eric Schmidt smoking crack?


    Posted via CB10
    His statements were in reference to Google's servers and accumulated data. Can you provide one example where Google's servers were hacked and information stolen?

    Keep in mind here... We're talking Google's servers here, and not Android.


    Penned via Tapatalk
    10-04-14 04:40 PM
  14. Ment's Avatar
    His statements were in reference to Google's servers and accumulated data. Can you provide one example where Google's servers were hacked and information stolen?

    Keep in mind here... We're talking Google's servers here, and not Android.


    Penned via Tapatalk
    Gmail was hacked by the Chinese government in 2009 as part of their Operation Aurora project against dozens of US companies but not since then as far as we know. Following that Google stopped censoring its searches for Chinese and have been at odds with the Chinese government ever since which is why there is no official app store for China and Google search is blocked.
    The Big Picture likes this.
    10-04-14 05:32 PM
  15. Alain_A's Avatar
    so people would have to set up their own server to be protected againts
    10-04-14 06:53 PM
  16. byex's Avatar
    So couldn't law enforcement just serve a warrant to the individual whose phone they want access to? And that individual would have to unlock the phone for law enforcement or face jail time?
    I know that defeats the whole purpose of being covert and not letting the target know you're on to them.

    From what I take from this is that Google and apple can't access an individual's password protected phone. No matter how hard they try because of the encryption now used. But if the user backs up their phone data to Google / Android servers or apples icloud service then they will be more than happy to fulfill the warrant.

    How is Blackberry in comparison to apple and android phones on this?

    Posted via CB10
    10-04-14 07:01 PM
  17. Alain_A's Avatar
    i don't think it's different...probably BB has a way to read in us...like we are a tracking number.
    10-04-14 07:08 PM
  18. crazigee's Avatar
    So couldn't law enforcement just serve a warrant to the individual whose phone they want access to? And that individual would have to unlock the phone for law enforcement or face jail time?
    This is a good question and I'm not sure the answer. I think it is law enforcement's burden to figure out a way in. Requiring the suspect to unlock the phone seems like it would violate the suspect's right against self-incrimination.

    Just my own logic. Not sure if I'm right.

    From what I take from this is that Google and apple can't access an individual's password protected phone. No matter how hard they try because of the encryption now used. But if the user backs up their phone data to Google / Android servers or apples icloud service then they will be more than happy to fulfill the warrant.
    This is my understanding as well. Essentially, the are removing back doors.

    How is Blackberry in comparison to apple and android phones on this.
    I would like to know the same thing.

    The fact that BlackBerry didn't make an announcement at the same time Google and Apple did makes me think that BlackBerry do have a back door in. Otherwise, Chen would have pointed out that BlackBerry has had this feature for a long time, as they have done with other features.

    Posted using my Z10 via CB10
    10-04-14 07:16 PM
  19. kfh227's Avatar
    Google has always been a leader in security and encryption?? Is Mr. Eric Schmidt smoking crack?


    Posted via CB10
    I'm sure there server infrastructure is no joke. Bbry fans need to get there heads dislodged.

    Posted via CB10
    mornhavon and TGR1 like this.
    10-06-14 04:19 PM

Similar Threads

  1. Will Google Maps Work Seamlessly on 10.3.1?
    By ibrahim011 in forum BB10 Android App Sideloading
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-26-14, 04:48 AM
  2. Google Docs Not Working On Z30 10.3.0.1130
    By Shifty88 in forum BB10 Leaked/Beta OS
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-05-14, 02:55 AM
  3. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 10-04-14, 08:57 AM
  4. Google is THE leader in security....according to Google
    By stabstabdie in forum General BlackBerry Discussion
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-04-14, 03:42 AM
  5. Why has my BlackBerry OS loading and why am I getting the error 507?
    By CrackBerry Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-03-14, 04:32 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD