;) always a scandal. When Dems do it.. Politicians of both parties routinely use apps like wickr and signal. often illegally not following records keeping laws.
I know obama had a special blackberry made so he could use email on mobile.
I'd be surprised if the federal government hasn't created a mobile version of SIPRNet yet?
I work in politics (low level compared to these elected s). most of the committees use signal + email 2fa or similar now. But that does nothing against sate sponsored hackers with 0 days. Maybe rotating burner phones and chat platforms would work better, but probably not worth it for the vast majority unless doing something sketchy.
Not everything Secretary Clinton did was TS/SCI. The common practice is an Android device[0] that is approved to SECRET only. This would suffice for general email and messaging.
My understanding is that President Obama's blackberry [1] isn't really a mobile device as configured. This blackberry device connects to the a custom secure base station [2] or picocell, that follows him around just like the Football[3], when outside certain vehicles.
Another factor is that TS/SCI access is restricted by location. eg. AF1 or the Presidential vehicle.
I'm not sure the Secretary of State would have a full time [*24/7] detail, although as former First Lady, Sec. Clinton would have a Secret Service detail which is funded separately.
It would be more likely that the NSA offered a different solution and State Dept. bureaucrat balked at the cost involved, especially something like following senior staff around with a football.
I recall there being a story about Obama either not being able to use his first choice of phone or else there having had to have been made some sort of accommodation to allow him to at the beginning of his first term.
(I think it was an iPhone vs Blackberry thing)
I haven’t looked into this story too deeply but I find it incredible on its face. If it is true then it’s an absolute shock and a wonder of wonders why it wasn’t compromised sooner.
A couple of years ago I was talking with a guy who works for an Australian federal politician - he said that he wasn't even allowed to have his phone above desk/table level (it had to stay in his lap) in meetings in case the camera had been compromised. He didn't say anything about vetting of software on phones at the time though.
On the other hand, technical capabilities are highly likely to be used against elites and former elites; there often are situations where a country's police or intelligence communities are opposed to some political parties, so if there are backdoors in everyone's (including politicians) communications, they should rightly fear that their phones will be abused by their political opponents.
It may depend who are targeted by this exploits, if the targets are politicians and people with high positions is better to make it public and have this people not use their phones.
Obama used a Blackberry for years before eventually switching to a hardened Galaxy S4 that was so locked down that "it doesn’t take pictures, you can’t text, the phone doesn’t work, you can’t play your music on it" [1]
Trump, on the other hand, does use an iPhone but doesn't have it checked by security experts as often as his aides would like [2]
Obama only uses a blackberry for show when he is in public.
The Whitehouse Communications Office is responsible for maintaining communications with the rest of the government, business and political contacts, and his family. In the event the president needs to take a call, an aide will direct him to a secure tent they setup nearby that is shielded against eavesdropping and electronic surveillance (see http://www.theage.com.au/world/barack-obamas-portable-secrec...). If it is a conversation where they do not expect sensitive topics to be discussed, they might give him a Sectera Edge that is routed over an encrypted satellite link back to the Whitehouse switchboard where the actual call is connected.
One can sympathize with a President's staff trying to provide him with a mobile device.
Any of a mobile's radios could be used to pinpoint his current location, given knowledge of is unique identifiers; that's probably not cool with his physical protection detail. Such knowledge would also make the mobile a prime target for spoofing AP's, cell towers (BTS simulators work for bad guys just as well as for the government), and websites. Then there's all the Tempest issues with inadvertent radiation.
On top of that, his email, and by connection, all of his contacts, are probably the number one spearphish targets in the world.
I wonder if someone makes a phone has hundreds of link level identities and rotates through them?
I don’t think it’s possible to get high level pols to forgo their devices and follow good security hygiene. It’s in their nature to be communicative and available.
I actually believe that certain government officials (including the director of the CIA) are asked not to have personal cellphones because that could reveal their location. IIRC, Obama needed to have some special technical work done so he could use an iPhone.
SecurVoice software by Genesis Key, a short list of contacts that also have compatible communications devices (unclear if that's required or if that's only for classified communications, since a photo caption has Obama calling Romney), and possibly other hardware or firmware modifications that are not disclosed. IMEI kept secret, and the phone might only connect to a special secured base station.
I think it's important to note that this is only known to happen when he uses his personal iPhone. He has a separate, secure line that he also uses.
For that reason, I don't see evidence in this story itself that breaches are becoming more frequent. Previous presidents also had secure lines, presumably because consumer-grade communications have never been secure enough for a president.
For a while the President was tweeting from a consumer-grade Android (!) phone, likely made by China, in the Oval Office. It makes me wonder how many groups pwned that phone and have access to critical national security information.
I could see this being used in e.g. the white house, just in case a foreign adversary has somehow managed to slip a bug in there. Or maybe because the president insists on using an unsecured Android phone.
I'm sure it's easier to snoop on SMS because we're talking about telcos, which definitely have rich histories working with the government. (Remember snowden leaks/verizon?)
Messaging apps on the other hand are what the govt generally CAN'T break into.
I know obama had a special blackberry made so he could use email on mobile.
I'd be surprised if the federal government hasn't created a mobile version of SIPRNet yet?
I work in politics (low level compared to these elected s). most of the committees use signal + email 2fa or similar now. But that does nothing against sate sponsored hackers with 0 days. Maybe rotating burner phones and chat platforms would work better, but probably not worth it for the vast majority unless doing something sketchy.
reply