Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Blackberry Communications Crime Privacy United Kingdom News

RIM Helping UK Police Track Down Rioters 343

Posted by Soulskill
from the there's-an-app-for-that dept.
jfruhlinger writes "Protests against a police shooting in the poor London neighborhood of Tottenham escalated into rioting and looting this past weekend. Initial reports have it that the activity was coordinated not by Twitter or Facebook but by the relatively old-tech method of BlackBerry messaging. Now the official Twitter account of RIM's UK division has announced that it is 'engaged with the authorities to assist in any way we can,' which presumably means that it's handing over messages sent by rioters. Is BlackBerry being a responsible part of British society, or is it overstepping its bounds?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RIM Helping UK Police Track Down Rioters

Comments Filter:
  • There's a line (Score:3, Insightful)

    by OverlordQ (264228) on Monday August 08, 2011 @03:49PM (#37026078) Journal

    There's a difference between protesting and rioting/looting. So cheers for tracking down rioters and looters.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Seumas (6865)

      I'd say there's also a line between protesting/rioting/looting and shooting a citizen.

      • by Flipao (903929)
        I'd say with can live without both.

        People get shot on a daily basis in London and nobody bats an eyelid. A gangster is shot by the police and the world has to end? Please.
      • Re:There's a line (Score:4, Insightful)

        by DevonBorn (975502) on Monday August 08, 2011 @05:17PM (#37027042)

        If an officer of the law breaks the law then they should be punished by the law. The whole point of the IPCC (Independant Police Complaints Commision) is to work out what the facts are and most of the semi/uninformed speculation is not helping. Deserved/accident/trigger happy cop it doesn't matter. Let the IPCC find out what happened otherwise we're just going on hearsay and rumour.
        Torching cars and stealing TVs is not the solution. The shooting is just being used as an excuse by the rioters and the unhelpful people encouraging them. The rioters don't give a damn about the guy who was shot they just want to riot and loot. This sort of action will bring out a few more people to riot but the rest of the country will be calling for their heads.
        The people worst affected by all this are blameless people who made the mistake of owning shops on a high street or renting apartments above shops or similar things. I mean who didn't see that coming? You live on a high street somewhere and then your house gets torched. It's obvious isn't it? People might think twice in the future before making such an obvious mistake again. That's not going to help anybody.
        People like Ken Livingstone also won't be helping. Taking of advantage of the situation for a bit of inflammatory politics is the action of an inconsiderate jerk (First class Hons. University of Git). Hopefully the people who weren't out there upgrading their home cinemas or using other people's cars to keep warm will recognise this and sort him out next year.
        Shame about the opportunistic cretins in Birmingham. Hope that gets stamped out.

        The only people who are going to benefit from all this are the glaziers.

    • by cayenne8 (626475)
      I've been reading the headlines on this a couple of days....and I'm still not sure what all the rioting is about?

      The police shoot someone over there, and they have a riot? What's the deal with that?

      We don't lose our minds everytime someone get's shot over here unless it is something pretty egregious....I mean, we just finished the trial (not that much national exposure I don't think) about all the people shot on the Danziger bridge post Katrina by the cops. They had an orderly trial, etc. We didn't go all

      • Re:There's a line (Score:4, Informative)

        by jeffmeden (135043) on Monday August 08, 2011 @04:10PM (#37026362) Homepage Journal

        I've been reading the headlines on this a couple of days....and I'm still not sure what all the rioting is about?

        The police shoot someone over there, and they have a riot? What's the deal with that?

        We don't lose our minds everytime someone get's shot over here unless it is something pretty egregious....I mean, we just finished the trial (not that much national exposure I don't think) about all the people shot on the Danziger bridge post Katrina by the cops. They had an orderly trial, etc. We didn't go all apeshit over it and riot in the streets over the shooting. The cops were caught, tried and found guilty, and convicted...end of story.

        Then again, I don't understand it why other towns riot in the streets and burn cars when "their" football/basketball/baseball teams wins the championship.

        Good thinking, point out a verdict that went in favor of "the people". When the Rodney King verdict came down (in the opposite direction) there were many significant riots... Forget about those? You are right, things are so different over there.

      • If by "we" you mean America then you're taking it quite out of context. We live in a huge country with a lot of space; it's a lot harder to organize and protest with our geographic size.

        We don't "lose our minds" by protesting because a lot of people don't care (like that innocent bystander that was shot to death in Miami and another that was shoved to the ground and has his phone smashed for taping it).

        Stop living in whatever red, white and blue wonderland acid trip you're in.

      • by DrXym (126579)

        The police shoot someone over there, and they have a riot? What's the deal with that?

        The family of the victim supposedly arranged a peaceful protest and a bunch of outsiders hijacked it. I expect the shooting made a convenient to engage in a spot of rioting and looting. Probably a mix of local gangs and anarchists. I hope the lot get the book thrown at them.

      • by sjames (1099)

        Perhaps if we made a bit more noise about it, it would happen less often.

      • by quetwo (1203948)

        No, we never experienced anything like the Rodney King incident at all. Nope, never happened.

    • There's also a difference between due process and illegal wiretapping. I'm not sure about london vs united states law, but there is something wrong with just having the information given to the government at will. I don't care if they are alleged rioters, looters, child molesters, terrorists, pirates or murderers. The bottom line is once you give them the power once, they own it indefinitely, if you declare it OK but only during an emergency, there will always be something that can be declared an emergency.
      • by sl3xd (111641)

        But there is something wrong with just having the information given to the government at will.

        The problem is in making the accusation that BlackBerry is just turning the data over, without any evidence to support it. I prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt, because BlackBerry isn't so stupid as to think the law won't catch up with them if they are doing something illegal. They know their actions are going to be scrutinized.

        If BlackBerry received proper warrants, then why shouldn't they publicly state

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I agree... It's just too bad that RIM didn't as feel as deeply for those who were impacted by all the wrong doing that led to the financial crash of 2007-8, the Madoff scandal, Enron, WorldComm, the prosecution of the war in Iraq by Bush II, the Abrahmoff scandal or any of numerous other egregious illegal acts for which they undoubtedly have access to evidence because they provide service to such a wide diversity of clientelle.

      And that about the phone hacking scandal with Rupert Murdoch, or is that a little

    • There's a difference between protesting and rioting/looting.

      From the point of view of individual privacy - no, there isn't. Regardless of the actions they are accused of, all should have equal rights and equal protection under the law.

  • by StillNeedMoreCoffee (123989) on Monday August 08, 2011 @03:49PM (#37026086)

    If you want a messaging infrastruture that people can use and not feel like someone is deciding who else in the world is going to listen in, then yes they are overstepping and changing the contract they have with their users. Good luck RIM UK.

    • by LWATCDR (28044) on Monday August 08, 2011 @03:56PM (#37026180) Homepage Journal

      I don't know about the UK but "I have a court order" means you hand over data.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08, 2011 @04:11PM (#37026378)

      I would suggest you actually read that contract before you go making claims that RIM is changing it. From the BBSLA:

      (i) You and Your Authorised Users will cooperate with RIM and provide information requested by RIM to assist RIM in investigating or determining whether there has been a breach of this Agreement and provide RIM or a RIM appointed independent auditor with access to the premises and computers where the RIM Products, Services or Software are or have been used and any associated records. You hereby authorise RIM to cooperate with: (i) law enforcement authorities in the investigation of suspected criminal violations; (ii) third parties in investigating acts in violation of this Agreement; and (iii) system administrators at Internet service providers, networks or computing facilities in order to enforce this Agreement. Such cooperation may include RIM disclosing Your or Your Authorised Users' username, IP address, or other personal information.

    • by gstoddart (321705)

      If you want a messaging infrastruture that people can use and not feel like someone is deciding who else in the world is going to listen in, then yes they are overstepping and changing the contract they have with their users. Good luck RIM UK.

      This is one of those areas I'd say is getting a little gray.

      On the one hand, you don't want RIM handing over information to every petty dictator who wants to suppress democracy -- which, sadly, nowadays includes the bastions of democracy who historically think themselv

    • by sl3xd (111641)

      I really don't see how it is any different than a regular wiretap: Blackberry gets a warrant on the grounds that the target is involved in a criminal activity, and BlackBerry is obligated to comply. It's certain that compliance with law enforcement is in the contract; they wouldn't be allowed to do business otherwise.

      So my question is: Why do people think BlackBerry has a say in this? When the government asks them to jump, they jump - that is what the law demands. Failure to comply will result in fines and

    • by couchslug (175151)

      "f you want a messaging infrastruture that people can use and not feel like someone is deciding who else in the world is going to listen in, then" ...you use encryption.

  • Blackberry most likely feels being proactive is better than waiting to be subpoenaed and looking like they are protecting looters and criminals.
    • by rvw (755107)

      Blackberry most likely feels being proactive is better than waiting to be subpoenaed and looking like they are protecting looters and criminals.

      Yeah right!!! Proactive! :-P

      This applies to T-Mobile and Vodafone and all phone and internet providers. Do they look like they are protecting "criminals"? Because right now somewhere somebody is planning a crime over the phone. I hope you see where I'm going.

    • Blackberry most likely feels being proactive and potentially violating individual's civil rights as well as privacy laws is better than waiting to be subpoenaed and looking like they are protecting looters and criminals.

      There, fixed that for you. It doesn't sound nearly so pretty when you include all the facts.

  • The police just get a warrant* for the data and then "Give us the decryption keys or you go to jail" to each BB executive/IP staff member.

    * Or is mumbling "terrorist" sufficient these days?

    • Not necessary. All of the major communications hubs have built-in taps (this sounds awfully tinfoil-hat, doesn't it?)

      Getting humans involved, especially at the carrier end, is expensive, time-consuming, and totally pointless. Instead, someone at Homeland Security just taps the data directly.

  • if RIM were asked to track down users engaged in a peaceful protest, this is a negative commentary on RIM for colluding with a vile regime, and it would paint the british government as a vile regime

    but if RIM were asked to track down out-of-town hooligans intent on turning a peaceful protest into a riot of window breaking and looting (which seems to be the case here), then this is a noncommentary on simple law enforcement, which is justifiable by any government of any free society, and it is expected that c

    • by LWATCDR (28044)

      One mans riot is another's protest.
      I tend to agree with you but others will not.
      What I don't get is the people getting bent over it that do think crimes are happening.
      If you have evidence of a crime you are not allowed to withhold it. If you get a court order you have to turn it over.
       

      • Re:easy answer (Score:4, Insightful)

        by circletimessquare (444983) <circletimessquare@gmail. c o m> on Monday August 08, 2011 @04:05PM (#37026292) Homepage Journal

        a protest is what started in tottenham: peaceful demonstrations in front of the police station

        then hooligans, from outside the neighborhood, came in to turn it into a riot

        and no, i'm sorry "one mans riot is another's protest" is a stinking pile of steaming bullshit

        people marching down the street is in no way the same thing as hooligan assholes throwing rocks through windows and walking off with loot

        in fact, protests around the world and throughout history, protests that in a different universe would move society and government to change policy for the better, have been ruined by hooligan assholes hijacking peaceful protests and using them as an excuse to commit simple crimes. this in turn causes society, public opinion and government to turn from the protesters and their just demands in disgust, through no fault of the protesters

        so no: to confuse criminal rioting with genuine protesting is disgusting

        • by LWATCDR (28044)

          As I said, "I tend to agree with you but others will not."
          Trust me that statement is true and the best part is we have no idea what that one line tweet really means. Everyone is jumping to conclusions.

          • so you doubt that hooligans frequently piggy back and parasitize peaceful protests, ruining them?

            you can't tell the difference between the guy chanting and holding a placard and the guy throwing a rock through the storefront window to walk off with jewelry? what cause is he protesting? what injustice is he correcting? what wrong is he righting?

            he's a criminal, and he is ruining the protest

            it's a clear line, there is no confusing the two

        • by jeffmeden (135043)

          so no: to confuse criminal rioting with genuine protesting is disgusting

          But you admit that for almost any sufficiently long protest, criminal rioting is an inevitability... This is what causes confusion to some not intimately familiar with the details of the event.

          • yes, a peaceful protest is hard to pull off. but when you do, you impress society, public opinion, and the government. and then real justice happens. if someone riots, anyone, the message is muddied. and society and public opinion is unimpressed and disgusted, then government is unmoved

            so a PEACEFUL protest, however it is achieved, is of the utmost importance

      • by madprof (4723)

        Have you even seen what is happening there? Please show me the sane man who thinks this this "protest" legitimately involves smashing things up and burning people's houses, shops and cars?
        Maybe if this "one man's riot is another man's protest" holds true then I can go and shoot some people in the face and steal their wallets, in a protest against the industrial-military complex continuing to subvert the honesty of government and making vast profits from the death and misery of others? I mean it's a nice thi

    • by jeffmeden (135043)

      Easier answer: RIM said "holy ****, we still have users? sure, we will do whatever you want as long as it's proclaimed far and wide that we do indeed have users left!"

    • by JockTroll (996521)

      if RIM were asked to track down users engaged in a peaceful protest

      It can still happen, the UK has a history of sending FITs (Forward Intelligence Teams) to photograph, film, identify and intimidate anyone who is engaged in peaceful protest. It's a highly effective tactic because people who would otherwise participate in the protest out of personal belief would give up and go home in fear of being harassed by the police later, or end up in some black list and be sentenced to life unemployment. It will happen. The UK is fully committed to the Safe Society For the Upper Clas

      • it seems that scotland yard has been contracting that sort of murky work out to murdoch's scumbags lately

      • by madprof (4723)

        Where is the black list that stops people from employing you? This must be one hell of a list because the police would have to go to every single employer in the country and make them follow it. Which they don't.

        • by Cederic (9623)

          Where is the black list that stops people from employing you? This must be one hell of a list

          Oh, it is. It even has its own website:
          http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agencies-public-bodies/crb/ [homeoffice.gov.uk]

          Don't be thinking anything foolish like "only criminals will be on there" either. The police are perfectly willing to tell people what you were once arrested for, no matter how wrong that arrest might have been, or comically what you were once accused of, without even mentioning that the person accusing you has a history of lying about such things and there was insufficient evidence to even inform you of the accus

  • by Samalie (1016193) on Monday August 08, 2011 @03:53PM (#37026130)

    You know, even though I long ago forsook my BB, I understood why business & government wanted them.

    Secure reliable communications.

    Today....reliability? Sure, if you pull the battery once a day (yes, I know you can reset it without yanking the battery. Still stupid as fuck you have to reboot them constantly) Secure? RTFA.

    RIM is toast...and fuck it, let them die already.

    And I even get it...they're trying to put "bad people" away. BUT THAT ISN'T THEIR FUCKING PLACE IN THE WORLD. It would be one thing to answer a suponea. It is another entirely to hand over records voluntarily.

    Fuck RIM. Fuck them right in the ear.

    • I'm just surprised this many people use it that RIM can even help.

      Was just at GenCon in Indianapolis and one of our GM friends was using her BB to try and scan QR codes for a contest; it was hilarious to see.

      • by idontgno (624372)

        our GM friends was using her BB to try and scan QR codes

        You have genetically-modified friends? That may explain the continued use of a Blackberry.

    • Secure? Use BES. Still secure.

      • by Samalie (1016193)

        Use BES? That somehow brings the magic?

        Bullshit.

        You are still routing every single byte of every single message through THEIR equipment. THEY have physical access to the equipment. They have the keys...and even if they actually don't have the keys (bullshit), they have physical access to the servers.

        Secure my ass.

    • by hawguy (1600213)

      You know, even though I long ago forsook my BB, I understood why business & government wanted them.

      Secure reliable communications.

      Today....reliability? Sure, if you pull the battery once a day (yes, I know you can reset it without yanking the battery. Still stupid as fuck you have to reboot them constantly) Secure? RTFA.

      Which BB did you have to reboot once/day? I have a BB Tour and I've never had to reboot it (aside from software upgrades). And it runs for 3 - 4 days on a single charge (as opposed to about the 18 hours I get on my Android device).

      As for security, I read TFA and though it speculates that RIM handed over the unencrypted chat messages, it's not clear that they did or even can.

      But it doesn't matter to me because as a Corporate user, I'm more concerned about the security of my emails, not my SMS's, and the enc

    • by Lehk228 (705449)
      I don't know what you did to your blackberry, but mine crashes no more than about once in a month, and I use it all the time, a much better rate than my android tablet or windows PC, the only machines I have that are more stable are my three linux laptops, two running xubuntu and the third running the asus EEE 701 custom linux
  • How come PGP instant messaging isn't a reality yet?
    Private messages that turn out to NOT be private will have a chilling effect on technology. I would think that these companies would encrypt everything just so they were not put in a position to have decide IF they should rat out their customers.

    • The US government would just force them to store plaintext copies. Just like they forced Google to put a backdoor in Gmail. Just like they tap your phones and sniff your dirty packets.
    • by sl3xd (111641)

      As always, the problem with PGP comes down to trust. Do you trust:
      - The other user's key
      - The other user's key has not been compromised (i.e.. stolen, 'missing', used by somebody else.)
      - The other users's device isn't compromised remotely (at the service provider level)
      - Keys the other user may have signed (or the other user's restraint in signing keys) are also valid - and so on along the chain.

      And so on...

      Encryption is a false security blanket in this case - it's already a given that mobile devices are,

      • We are not looking for a panacea here. If you raise the bar to the level where you have to actually take possession of one of the users phone in the conversation, it would become a matter for a judge to decide in US. That costs lots of money which means it won't happen willy nilly. I just want surveillance of the people by the government to not be trivial. I don't think that is a lot to ask.

    • Who's going to get on the wrong side of Homeland Security by providing it?

      Bear in mind that a carrier's messaging traffic is a data gold mine. In a totally open market (as distinct from the cosy oligopoly that telecom really is) you might see one carrier offer security as a value-added marketing advantage. Sort of like SMS at less than the per-minute voice charge.

      However, getting on the wrong side of Homeland Security just makes it that little bit less attractive to step out of line.

  • by synthesizerpatel (1210598) on Monday August 08, 2011 @03:55PM (#37026166)

    Yeah, not quite.

    This is part of Blackberry's effort to ingratiate themselves to Government. First with their security compliance, now with the 'Hey, we'll do anything we can to help you!' regarding text messages.

    My guess is Blackberry is positioning themselves to be the handheld client of government since they don't have any competitiveness in the consumer market.

    • by Nick Fel (1320709)
      Actually, Blackberry's are massively popular with the country's yoofs. I was surprised to find this out a few months ago myself, but apparently they really like BBM
      • Indeed, reportedly a third of young people have Blackberry here. It makes sense: BBM is the killer app for them, they don't even necessarily use the email functionality. It offers the functionality of SMS, but free (from their POV) and allows multi-recipient.
  • Damn, they're easy (Score:3, Informative)

    by overshoot (39700) on Monday August 08, 2011 @04:01PM (#37026242)
    Looks like the Brits are still not getting the basics right. Back in the 60s we'd already taught the authorities who tapped our phones, read our mail, and sent ringers to our gatherings not to trust that kind of "intelligence."

    It only takes a few cases where they prosecute someone based on that kind of "evidence" and it turns out that the defendant was in another country to make the prosecutor a laughing stock. Again.

  • When authorities corrupt one messaging platform, users will either switch or employ more sophisticated means of masking their activity.

    Anyone remember which credit card payment service cut off Wikileaks? That kind of memory sticks with the collective a long time. Sell out your users and you can expect them to remember a long, long time.

    I don't think this is good for the state or RIM. There are other ways to get the same information that rely on nothing more than good old fashioned police work. RIM v

  • by Kupfernigk (1190345) on Monday August 08, 2011 @04:03PM (#37026272)
    Yeah, right. Richer than most of the UK. One view of what is going on (and favoured by this former North Londoner) is that the police shot a "professional criminal" and the criminal gangs of North London are retaliating by demonstrating their ability to get out the foot soldiers. This is an area popular with the BNP/EDL, a stronghold of the original National Front, the British Nazi equivalent. The subsequent riots were mainly in strongly BNP areas like Enfield.

    This looks like the Mob trying to intimidate the Government and the police because one of its capos got shot. If this is in fact the current line, RIM is obliged to co-operate. It is probably nothing whatsoever to do with poor people opposing Government cuts.

  • When you are hurting innocent people, your right to privacy is tossed out with the first firebomb. I know that can be an excuse for governments to try to suppress valid protest; but this is criminal looting, not political protests. People are losing their homes and livelihoods to these thugs. Put them in jail.
    • by hjf (703092)

      Put them in jail.

      Sure buddy, gotta catch them first. Do you see the police even trying? And the government is just whining and blaming twitter. Fuck people like you. Wake up and realize the problem is the government NOT DOING SHIT, and not the people rioting and looting.

      Just drop a few tear gas grenades and rubber bullets, and this ends today. But the government isn't doing it. And as long as they don't, this will go on. NEWSFLASH! you can't arrest and charge everyone on the street at the moment of the prot

    • by couchslug (175151)

      "People are losing their homes and livelihoods to these thugs"

      The victims also have no legal right to effective self-defense because there is no practical unarmed self-defense against a mob.

      If someone came to torch my home in the US, I would be well within my rights to kill them on the spot and the world would be a better place for their passing.

    • When you are hurting innocent people, your right to privacy is tossed out with the first firebomb.

      No, it isn't. Because if you do, you're essentially tossing the very basis of a free society on the trash heap in the name of expedience.

      this is criminal looting, not political protests. People are losing their homes and livelihoods to these thugs. Put them in jail.

      Yes, let's put them in jail - after adhering to the law and following due process.

  • Wow. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LWATCDR (28044) on Monday August 08, 2011 @04:05PM (#37026308) Homepage Journal

    I just love this! It was a tweet by RIM.
    This is all that it says.
    "We feel for those impacted by the riots in London. We have engaged with the authorities to assist in any way we can."
    This can mean anything from providing extra coverage of the area so any police using blackberries get coverage or buying people free beagles?
    Wow what a jump to conclusions this has inspired.

    • by Loosifur (954968)

      Hey, I don't know. If you give somebody a free beagle maybe they'll be so distracted with puppy-cuddlin' they'll stop rioting. Shoot, I might go throw a can at a cop if they'd give me a pug or something for it.

  • by xirtam_work (560625) on Monday August 08, 2011 @04:24PM (#37026522)

    I've got two friends who are now homeless and have lost everything apart from the clothes on their backs and their mobile phones after scum broke into a jewellers in Tottenham on Saturday night and then proceeded to torch the place. They lived above the shops and barely got out with their lives. For twenty minutes the Police were nowhere in site. My friends were posting on Facebook as the riots got closer and were frightened that they'd have to arm themselves to protect against a home invasion and then their worse fear happened - fires were started.

    These kids aren't making a statement, they aren't fighting the system, they aren't protesting against jack shit. They just want to run riot, smash shit up and set fire to stuff whilst getting away with stealing as much as possible.

    I'm quite happy the RIM are helping. Hopefully Skype, MSN, etc. will be on the case too. I'd send in the army with tear gas and rubber bullets (to start with) if I was in charge.

  • Is BlackBerry being a responsible part of British society, or is it overstepping its bounds?

    These useless questions at the end! Is Slashdot trying to look like journalism or is it mocking it for its wicked ways?

  • BBs are actually quite popular amongst the young here in the UK. It is the BB messenger that seems to be the driving force too.

  • Hello? Seriously, no one here think that the government and the police are to blame - not for "shooting someone", but instead, for letting the situation escalate to this?

    Hello? Tear gas? Water jet trucks? Rubber bullets? Seriously, look at the images. The UK cops don't even have decent riot shields! What are they going to do, blind people to death with their yellow vests?

    Apparently slashdotters here are up in arms when there's a "privacy" issue, but if a policeman shoots someone - even if he executes him s

    • by shilly (142940)

      Ya know, from several thousand miles away, you might want to be a bit more cautious about your jumps to conclusions. Tear gas, water cannon and rubber bullets have *never* been used in mainland Britain, despite a very long history of rioting. The police and gov't will be well aware that those tactical options exist, but will be extremely reluctant to deploy them as it would be a tacit admission that other tactics were no longer working, would represent a major escalation of force and a serious erosion of po

  • At this point, pretty much the only selling point a BB has over its competition is the security of its messaging and email system. But if they are willingly cooperating with police to out their customers, then they really do not have a led to stand on anymore.

    Don't misunderstand me, in cases like the London riots such behavior is justified. But these cases also undermine any security argument they make. Then there are also the servers set up in Saudi Arabia and in other places that are expressly under gover

    • by narcc (412956) on Monday August 08, 2011 @05:08PM (#37026956) Journal

      Someone doesn't understand the difference between BIS and BES. You're still secure in Saudi Arabia if you're communications are secured over BES.

      I won't bother to list the many other advantages that the BB offers over the "competition" as you only seem interested in spreading misinformation and not actual facts.

      (Yes, "competition" is in quotes. No other company offers a phone that is even remotely comparable in terms of utility and security.)

    • I swear, I've read this exact post before. Its as inaccurate now as it was then. Public instant messaging is just as secure or more [recurity-labs.com] secure [apple.com] than other phone vendors

      Fortunately folks like you don't make the security related decisions at large corps or governments and savvy private individuals can see through the hyper and misinformation.

1 1 was a race-horse, 2 2 was 1 2. When 1 1 1 1 race, 2 2 1 1 2.

Working...