Obama Fighting For His Blackberry... But May Be Losing
from the the-lawyers-win!-the-lawyers-win! dept
Right after the election, there was plenty of talk about how President-elect Obama would need to give up email just as President Bush did when he took office eight years ago. As plenty of people pointed out at the time, this seems like a pretty silly concept. There should be at least some way to allow Obama to continue to use this important and useful form of communication -- if only to allow him some access "outside the bubble" of DC. And, indeed, Obama made it clear that he would fight to figure out some way to keep emailing -- especially via his precious Blackberry. However, the latest news isn't looking good -- as Obama is noting that he still has been unable to convince both the security folks and the lawyers that he should be allowed to keep the Blackberry. Apparently, there are times when it's not so good to be the king.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: barack obama, email, open records, president
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
the signal from cell phones.
Why on earth would any security service allow their
leader to have a wireless device which has a signature
which can be scanned out of the air, acting as a
homing beacon?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The hole in your assertion becomes clear when you realize that you're talking about secret service agents, not the people that they're protecting.
It wouldn't take long to create a device that could hunt someone through their Blackberry PIN or the like, and merely knowing that someone is within 75 yards is more info than you might want known about a world leader at a specific time, especially in a zone that's a lot harder to secure than, say, the Whitehouse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
communications systems. But, even if they did, you
don't know what frequency, and you don't know the
individual identifiers of each device.
The blackberry is using a known frequency,
so it's just a 'locator beacon' as another person
points out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You can't buy worse publicity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I say let him use email...just have them purge it if needed every month.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
POTUS needs to be connected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: POTUS needs to be connected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: POTUS needs to be connected.
Well,look at who's living in the past 8 years... reality is the now...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: POTUS needs to be connected.
Does that actually mean anything?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: POTUS needs to be connected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: POTUS needs to be connected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: POTUS needs to be connected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: POTUS needs to be connected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Silly?
What he possibly thinks he's going to write to someone that anyone on earth will eventually read, I have no idea.
And how he thinks he will be able to cope with any tech savy sicko being able to know his location to within 1/2 mile, idk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Silly?
Indeed. But as long as you recognize that and communicate accordingly, what's the problem?
And a blackberry is basically a locator beacon in a fancy shell.
That's a totally bogus reason. If it were true, no one in the President's company could bring a mobile phone with them. Hell, if it's really a problem, just keep rotating phones. This is pretty straightforward.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Silly?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Silly?
It's the same technology that the DOD uses for authenticating people when they login to secure communications systems.
I think that a bigger worry would be that Blackberry's servers are controlled by a foreign power (Canada) and there is a legal requirement to track and catalog all presidential communications.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good to be the king?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Good to be the king?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Good to be the king?
Harvey Korman as Count de Monet: "Sire, the people are revolting."
Mel Brooks as King Louis XVI: "Your right... they stink on ice."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Presidential Blackberry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Presidential Blackberry
And two, the president should not be carrying any device that continuously transmits an easily detectable radio signal, especially if that signal is transmitting easily decipherable communications!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Presidential Blackberry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Presidential Blackberry
The world changes significantly over a presidential term, especially in these turbulent, technology-driven times. Do we really want the president's only view of the world from this day forward to be the one filtered throuhg special advisors?
"And two, the president should not be carrying any device that continuously transmits an easily detectable radio signal, especially if that signal is transmitting easily decipherable communications!"
Anyone using such a device for matters of national security would be a fool, and I doubt Obama is such a person. Without classified data on the device, what's the danger? If you're thinking of triangulating his position, I'm sure the device would be disabled when he's in any kind of danger or where the device would pose some other physical risk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Presidential Blackberry
It's not like people around him don't have these devices, or people he's meeting. How many times have you seen other world leaders on cell phones....
Fundamentally, this is misplaced paranoia and a question of institutional control.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I got the answer for the beacon problem
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why did you post this article
i read this site for the insightful analysis and news, and i'm honestly disappointed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: why did you post this article
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
> their leader to have a wireless device which has
> a signaturewhich can be scanned out of the air,
> acting as a homing beacon?
Well, they carry the Briefcase of Nuclear Doom just fine...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Can anyone confirm if that has a 24,000 mile cable attached to it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What reasons?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
more money for consumers
A friend of mine suggested to me 2 major problems in this country dealing with finances - the credit bureau and the irs, without these 2 thorns in the consumers pocketbook, the american people could save and look forward to the future instead of worrying about social security benefits. FICA score prevents the consumers from getting credit, and the irs tax the consumers thousands and millions of dollars every year. The consumer has to paY the tax person from $100 and up to file their taxes and in some cases the consumer HAVE TO PAY IRS.
Thank You
Veronica Eaton
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: more money for consumers
http://economy.kansascity.com/?q=node/709
What really grinds my gears is that the bailout money isn't being used to lend to businesses or consumers. This is key in maintaining open stores and purchasing. Instead, TARP seems to be used to maintain day-to-day business for the financial institutions and also fund buyouts of banks. In the process, it seems to be triaging THEIR OWN risk down to their customers, and in the process, setting their customers up for times of financial hardship.
However, things get even more cumbersome when people start to learn that in the past 7 years, many companies have started using consumer credit screening as part of hiring and even internal promotion process for candidates. Passed up for a promotion? Maybe your too high of a credit risk. What a scary thought! But when the dust storm settles, and the economy is fixed (by whatever means that happens) I have a feeling many people will be very angry at these types of practices once they realize this is happening.
But yes, I agree, it's best to safeguard your FICO score, guard it with your life, don't buy luxuries, and save the best you can, (which is counter-direction of a debtor society). Who knows, you may be in a better position for that promotion than you thought!
But there's going to be a lot of changes and perhaps the definition of an EOE needs to expand to a company that doesn't need to determine if you need a promotion based on your (private life) FICO score.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
all at once?
This type of communication, at this point, is one of the most secure that the military has got -- precisely because it cannot be distingushed from background noise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lots of Ignoramuses here.....
It's that email is the most unsecure form of communication out there (as an earlier poster noted). It is sent in the clear, no encryption. Email travels a lot of places before arriving at its destination. So anyone at any stop can technically see it. I am in IT an handle many exchange servers. You'd be suprised the stuff I see that getws trapped in filters, or stuck in SMTP servers, etc. People are so stupid when it comes to this and they also belileve that once they delete email its gone. Uh no....its all archived and can be retrived....
Second reason is the most obvious....its IN WRITING. Unlike a phone conversation (unless its recorded, everything said is memorialized and part of legal discovery.
So I am not a fan of NObama, I emphathise with him because I am a Crackberry user too, but this just exemplpifies his inexperience alomost as bad as picking Panetta, a person with NO intelligence record, as CIA chief. Just unbelievable and dangerous in these times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: lots of Ignoramuses here.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: lots of Ignoramuses here.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
His code
So... Let him have it. If the terrorists use it to attack, they can't know what signal to track.. I mean, how could they know? I'm not trying to be snarky, but I'm curious how a terrorist can learn the presidents personal "pin"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: His code
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obama Fighting For His Blackberry... But May Be Losing
Granted, the security folks, Secret Service etc., will have their objections concerning his security, but when it comes right down to it, all they can do is advise. I don't really see how they can force him to give it up. When it comes down to the final decision it's his choice to make, not theirs, on how much he follows personal security routines.
Myself, in his shoes, I'd just tell them to go to hell and I'll use the phone. The Secret Service folks wouldn't like it, but ultimately it's still his decision to make, not theirs.
If I remember correctly, way back at the start of Clinton's first term there was a bit of a brouhaha over security on his daily morning runs. Clinton finally gave in enough to allow one security agent to accompany him on those morning runs. The Secret Security people distinctly didn't like it, but all they could do was advise, not command. The final decision wasn't for the Secret Service to make.
So, if Obama wants to use his Blackberry, in spite of any increase of personal security it might cause, it's his choice and more power to him. It's his life and his decision on just how much of a security blanket that will be around him. You don't give that up just because you became President.
Personally, I think it's ridiculous that there is even all this much discussion about the subject. It tell's me that the newspapers/TV new/reporters either have too much time on their hands or it's a slow news month and they aren't capable of thinking of anything else important enough to comment about.
No wonder I quit reading newspapers for my news! I get it faster and, more importantly, with considerably more accuracy via the Internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Classified information and cell phones
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Classified information and cell phones
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
blackberry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
y87y7ughhu
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]