Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 24th Sep 2012 22:34 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless It's going to be a rough month for what was once one of the most successful smartphone companies in the world. Between all the Android and iOS violence, it's easy to forget there's this Canadian company which was still growing its userbase every month. However, it's expected the company will lose subscribers for the very first time.
Order by: Score:
RIM security...
by gagol on Mon 24th Sep 2012 23:32 UTC
gagol
Member since:
2012-05-16

If susbribers are down, it mainly means corporate customers got sucked into coolness and laissez-faire from security stand-point.

Reply Score: 1

RE: RIM security...
by Soulbender on Tue 25th Sep 2012 23:05 UTC in reply to "RIM security..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Or maybe they're just fed up with RIM's rip-off plans.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by NuxRo
by NuxRo on Tue 25th Sep 2012 07:33 UTC
NuxRo
Member since:
2010-09-25

Security what? There's no security on a smartphone.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by NuxRo
by gagol on Tue 25th Sep 2012 08:51 UTC in reply to "Comment by NuxRo"
gagol Member since:
2012-05-16

But BlackBerry encrypts as much as it can, it is unmatched as far as I know, that was my point... Leaving blackberry is no good news from security standpoint. If this is a trend... you imagine.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by NuxRo
by TM99 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 12:07 UTC in reply to "Comment by NuxRo"
TM99 Member since:
2012-08-26

Security what? There's no security on a smartphone.


My sibling works at the DoD & Pentagon. They are allowed modified Android phones with extra security software and strict protocols and Blackberry phones only. Despite the desire to hop on the Apple bandwagon, iPhones are not allowed for usage.

That security?

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by NuxRo
by TM99 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 13:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by NuxRo"
TM99 Member since:
2012-08-26



Seriously, do you Apple fanatics even read the articles that you post in defense?

Read it carefully again. It does not say that the DOJ, LEO, or other security government professionals use the iPhone or even recommend it to their employees for work.

This article, however, backs up my original post:
http://www.muktware.com/news/3145/android-approved-pentagon-dod-usa...

Nothing has changed as of yet with these policies.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by NuxRo
by MOS6510 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 14:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by NuxRo"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

An article from December last year, suggesting you use Dell phones running Android 2.2? Well, have fun with that.

I think the truth is more that governments have trouble peeking in an iPhone than an Android one. Your own users are the biggest security risks and you don't want them to use devices you can't get access to.

You claim "They are allowed modified Android phones", while in reality it is only one model phone, an obscure Dell phone. It is only allowed after it received its modification. This says nothing about iPhone security.

They took an Android phone because it's easy to modify and add their own backdoors to it. So if you're fond of privacy and security never ever use a phone given to you by a government agency.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by NuxRo
by TM99 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 15:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by NuxRo"
TM99 Member since:
2012-08-26

An article from December last year, suggesting you use Dell phones running Android 2.2? Well, have fun with that.


Specifications are constantly updated. Obviously you know nothing of how government and military work with regards to technology. They are slow to implement and use 'outdated' tech by current pop standards.

I think the truth is more that governments have trouble peeking in an iPhone than an Android one. Your own users are the biggest security risks and you don't want them to use devices you can't get access to.


Please don't kid yourself that iPhones are the height of security. Your second sentence is one important aspect of a 'secure' phone for corporate or government use.

You claim "They are allowed modified Android phones", while in reality it is only one model phone, an obscure Dell phone. It is only allowed after it received its modification. This says nothing about iPhone security.


Again, one illustrative article but not where it stands almost a year later. I won't do the research for you on this one. Get out of your bubble and do it yourself, if you are truly interested.

They took an Android phone because it's easy to modify and add their own backdoors to it. So if you're fond of privacy and security never ever use a phone given to you by a government agency.


Again, seriously? If you work for a government agency, you have no choice. Period. That is different than private phone security, but I think you know that, right?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by NuxRo
by MOS6510 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 15:38 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by NuxRo"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

So in summary:
* You say you posted an outdated article, although Wikipedia still claims the Dell Venue is the only allowed phone.

* What you claim and what the government does doesn't say anything about iPhone (or any other phone, including Android ones) security.

* Government issued phones don't offer the user any personal security or privacy advantages, only disadvantages.

I conclude it was another piece of anti-Apple FUD once again based on very dodgy logic and strange assumptions.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Comment by NuxRo
by TM99 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 16:53 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by NuxRo"
TM99 Member since:
2012-08-26

So in summary:
* You say you posted an outdated article, although Wikipedia still claims the Dell Venue is the only allowed phone.


Wikipedia, that bastion of peer-reviewed scholarly research?

* What you claim and what the government does doesn't say anything about iPhone (or any other phone, including Android ones) security.


Security is one of the selling points of RIM Blackberries. Government agencies know a hell of a lot more about 'security' than you.

* Government issued phones don't offer the user any personal security or privacy advantages, only disadvantages.


Irrelevant. This point was already dismissed by another user.

I conclude it was another piece of anti-Apple FUD once again based on very dodgy logic and strange assumptions.


Again, though this apparently has to be repeated ad nauseum with regards to anything 'negative' concerning Apple these days, I have used Apple products since the 1970's. In the last ten years, things have dramatically changed with them both corporately and with those who pyschologically 'love' them. Deal with it.

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by NuxRo
by Laurence on Tue 25th Sep 2012 21:11 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by NuxRo"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

So in summary:
* You say you posted an outdated article, although Wikipedia still claims the Dell Venue is the only allowed phone.

For all we know, Wikipedia was probably written based off that article.


* Government issued phones don't offer the user any personal security or privacy advantages, only disadvantages.

You're getting carried away with yourself now. You didn't even know about the Dell phones until today, much less know details about their security. So to make the claims you're now, you'd have to based them on 100% pure bias and paranoia.


I conclude it was another piece of anti-Apple FUD once again based on very dodgy logic and strange assumptions.

anti-apple or not. You can't then take an even more extreme view point with completely made up facts about a handset you've never seen and its intentions to spy on you to your employers. That's taking FUD to a whole new level!

Somewhere in this discussion there's a sane middle ground, but I fear we're beyond ever reaching it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by NuxRo
by Laurence on Tue 25th Sep 2012 15:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by NuxRo"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

This says nothing about iPhone security.

That's because nobody was discussing iPhone security until you jumped in


They took an Android phone because it's easy to modify and add their own backdoors to it.

That's likely part of the reason. But the article did list a number of other specific reasons why iPhones weren't used.


So if you're fond of privacy and security never ever use a phone given to you by a government agency.

If you were that paranoid that the government are watching you, then you wouldn't be applying for jobs in the DOJ to begin with :p

The fact is, everyone is watching and logging your activities. Google, Apple, your ISP, the web servers you connect to, your telecoms company every time you make a call, your bank every time you make a transaction....everyone. We only enjoy relative anonymity due to the scale of the data collected (aka security through obscurity), but don't think governments nor private entities (if just via civil lawsuits) couldn't access a wealth of data against you should they decide to single you out.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by NuxRo
by MOS6510 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 15:46 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by NuxRo"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I reacted to:
Despite the desire to hop on the Apple bandwagon, iPhones are not allowed for usage.

That security?


So it was not I that brought up the iPhone.

All smart phones are tracked in some or multiple ways. The goverment wants to track it their way, so they modified a Dell Venue. This motivates someone, somehow, that iPhones are not secure.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by NuxRo
by TM99 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 17:00 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by NuxRo"
TM99 Member since:
2012-08-26

Yes, I brought up iPhones because currently they are the 'cool' phones that every one from corporate to academia to government agencies want to use in place of more secure and frankly better & cheaper products.

Funny that a single negative mention of anything Apple set you off on a tirade to defend them as if it was a personal attack on yourself. Psychologically, this is akin to religious beliefs and fundamentalism.

http://www.psfk.com/2011/05/secrets-of-the-superbrands-how-apple-pr...

As I pointed out before, I neither 'love' nor 'hate' any brand - Microsoft, Apple, Samsung, Google, etc. I recognize the good and the bad. I will level criticism when deserved at all, and if there is praise, I will give that as well. I personally have not found much reason to give praise for Apple's corporate behavior in the last decade. Again, deal with it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by NuxRo
by Laurence on Tue 25th Sep 2012 21:02 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by NuxRo"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I reacted to:
Despite the desire to hop on the Apple bandwagon, iPhones are not allowed for usage.

That security?


So it was not I that brought up the iPhone.

Ahh sorry yes. My mistake.

To be honest I didn't think his post was arguing that iPhones were less secure and Android. Just that the government haven't reacted to employees pressure to support iOS just yet.

Having worked for the government in the past, I've seen first hand how glacial things move. Often with superior technology inexplicitly passed over.


All smart phones are tracked in some or multiple ways. The goverment wants to track it their way, so they modified a Dell Venue. This motivates someone, somehow, that iPhones are not secure.

I think you're drawing several false conclusions there. Mainly the assumption that the Dell phones are modified to make it easier for the government to snoop. That's just plain silly as there's a whole plethora of strict checks that applicants have to pass before they're employed in positions like the DOJ. The security on the Dell phones would almost certainly be preventing data getting lost.

Plus the government doesn't need to hack Android to snoop anyway: employees e-mails would be sent via their mail servers anyway and any phone conversation can easily be tapped.

I can understand a healthy distrust when it comes to matter of security, but I think you're boarding on tin-hats with your Dell allegations. As I said before, having worked in IT for the government in the past (albeit the British gov) and have actively worked on projects regarding securing confidential data and it's distribution. So the official reports on the DOJ Dell's seem reasonable to me based on the experience and i've had projects I've worked on.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by NuxRo
by No it isnt on Tue 25th Sep 2012 15:54 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by NuxRo"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Oh wow, looks like the RDF still works fine without Jobs.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by NuxRo
by MOS6510 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 16:18 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by NuxRo"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Oh wow, that's some great arguments.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Comment by NuxRo
by No it isnt on Tue 25th Sep 2012 17:47 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by NuxRo"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Well, it's better than some unsourced nonsense (read it: it is) from a click-funded consumer gadget blog.

Reply Score: 3

Comment by bolomkxxviii
by bolomkxxviii on Tue 25th Sep 2012 12:06 UTC
bolomkxxviii
Member since:
2006-05-19

This is a lie or a government coverup or something.

At least that is what they are saying on Crackberry.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by bolomkxxviii
by chrish on Tue 25th Sep 2012 12:39 UTC in reply to "Comment by bolomkxxviii"
chrish Member since:
2005-07-14

If you read the article, it's an opinion piece filled with what analysts "think" will happen when RIM announces their numbers at the end of the quarter. Of course, it's got a nice doom and gloom headline, and everyone's treating it as fact...

Is someone shorting RIMM stock again?

Disclosure: I work for RIM.

Reply Score: 3

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

That's kind of the way the market reacts to widespread analyst forecasts. The article sites a number of analysts at a variety of companies. This isn't to say that its a guaranteed going to happen kind of thing, but its closer in accuracy to a seasonal weather report than a random guess.

Reply Score: 3

pcunite
Member since:
2008-08-26

I've always had a soft spot for Blackberry; my last phone was the 8320. But I always wanted a phone that was great at email, text, GPS, and web surfing. The iPhone 4 was all that. But ... I also want a phone that syncs more naturally to my PC, thus I look forward to WP8 phones like the Nokia lumia 920.

Reply Score: 1

Security
by kwan_e on Tue 25th Sep 2012 13:54 UTC
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

All those comments about security... I would have thought high security areas would ban the use of phones all together...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Security
by TM99 on Tue 25th Sep 2012 14:57 UTC in reply to "Security"
TM99 Member since:
2012-08-26

All those comments about security... I would have thought high security areas would ban the use of phones all together...


Simply impossible in this day and age, however, decisions about which 'phone' to use is still important. From my contacts it is still Blackberry 1st and modified versions of Android 2nd.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Security
by B. Janssen on Tue 25th Sep 2012 15:19 UTC in reply to "Security"
B. Janssen Member since:
2006-10-11

All those comments about security... I would have thought high security areas would ban the use of phones all together...

And they are. There are plenty of installations, even in private business, you may not enter with any mobile computing device or cellphone.

But what do you do if you want or need mobile phone capabilities and want to do it as secure as possible? RIM's BB are a good choice then.

Reply Score: 3

Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Wed 26th Sep 2012 01:37 UTC
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

What I find funny are the number of people on here hand wringing regarding the situation at RIM - as if the 'hype of <insert company here>' is to blame for the fact that customers themselves are leaving voluntarily - in many cases not always for the market leaders regarding Android smart phones. Talk to anyone regarding Blackberry and there is definitely a silent user base who are fed up with Blackberry but pretty much stuck to it because it was the only thing available at the time. Fast forward to 2012 and Blackberry isn't the only one on the block, the lock in and lack of competition which kept Blackberry customers glued has come unstuck and now have viable alternatives.

What do they need to do? stop cutting engineering numbers for starters and get Blackberry 10 out on time and make sure that it isn't as buggy as hell. Secondly, open up the Blackberry messaging network. Thirdly, find a way to separate the two ensure that the service side moves forward rather than stagnating. Fourthly, ensure that Blackberry 10 supports what people need, ActiveSync, IMAP/POP3/CalDAV/CardDAV and so on.

The situation Blackberry is in is due to their own doing and only they have the way to get out of the situation they're in right now.

Reply Score: 4

what a load of crap
by unclefester on Thu 27th Sep 2012 08:10 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

RIM has added an extra 2 million subscribers. The RIM share price has increased by 10% to $7.00 since 24 September.

Reply Score: 3

RE: what a load of crap
by wargum on Thu 27th Sep 2012 20:25 UTC in reply to "what a load of crap"
wargum Member since:
2006-12-15

It's now official: 80M subscribers, cash reserve increased by 100M to 2.3B, despite costs for employee layoffs.

In other words: another BS story on RIM based entirely on speculation. Not that this suprises anyone, this is going on for years, many people want RIM dead but they refuse to die which makes those people even more desperate!

Anyway, RIM will make a comeback, in that I have faith!

Reply Score: 4

Retract or Edit
by elzurawka on Fri 28th Sep 2012 21:48 UTC
elzurawka
Member since:
2005-07-08

The claims in this article have been proven wrong. The headlines/story should be updated to reflect real numbers.

Reply Score: 1