Deal to Avert BlackBerry Ban Could Set International Precedent

[Ben Lahnger]

Deal to Avert BlackBerry Ban Could Set International Precedent

A pact Saudi officials say they reached with BlackBerry could eliminate email privacy

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia August 8, 2010

SOURCE

A preliminary agreement between the maker of the popular BlackBerry smart phone and the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which government officials say grants them some access to users' data, will avert a ban on the phone in that country.

The pact involves placing a BlackBerry server inside Saudi Arabia, Saudi telecom regulatory officials said, and that likely will let the government monitor messages and allay official fears the service could be used for criminal purposes.

Bandar al-Mohammed, an official at the Saudi Communications and Information Technology Commission, told The Associated Press that BlackBerry maker Research in Motion Ltd. has expressed its "intention ... to place a server inside Saudi Arabia."

Even though RIM encrypts e-mails, the deal would open messages to Saudi surveillance, said Bruce Schneier, an author and chief security technology officer at British telecommunications operator BT.

RIM could be setting a worldwide precedent for how technology companies and governments get along. A number of countries see the devices as a security threat because encrypted information sent on them is difficult, it not impossible, for local governments to monitor when it doesn't pass through domestic servers.

Saudi security officials fear the service could be used by militant groups to avoid detection. Countries including India and the United Arab Emirates have expressed similar concerns.

But e-mails sent by BlackBerry users are encrypted only as they pass between phones and the company's servers, Schneier said. Within the server, messages must be unencrypted for sorting and distribution.

"It renders the encryption irrelevant to the Saudi Arabian government," Schneier said. "They'll read everything."

RIM, based in Toronto, declined to comment on the proposed deal Saturday, but referred to a statement it issued last week denying it has given some governments access to BlackBerry data.

John Sfakianakis, who uses three BlackBerrys operated by different telecom companies and is chief economist at the Riyadh-based Banque Saudi Fransi-Credit Agricole Group, said access to messaging, e-mails and the Web was interrupted for a brief period early Friday but was quickly restored. No reason was given for the interruption.

Schneier said the Saudi arrangement is similar to deals RIM has struck in Russia and China, and each time the company strikes a compromise, it undermines the argument that BlackBerry surveillance is technologically unfeasible.

"Now that they're doing it for small, oppressive countries — sure, everyone is going to ask for it," he said.

Al-Mohammed declined to provide more details of the continuing talks before an official announcement, which he said was expected soon.

A second Saudi regulatory official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the details of the deal, said tests were now under way to determine how to install a BlackBerry server inside the country.

The kingdom has been waging a crackdown for years against al-Qaida-linked extremists. The kingdom also enforces heavy policing of the Internet, blocking sites for both political content and obscenities.

"Whatever Saudi Arabia does will be followed by other countries in the region," Sfakianakis said.

"RIM is quite smart. They're seeing this is a very lucrative market. They don't want to take themselves out of this market," he added.

RIM says its technology does not allow it, or any third party, to read encrypted e-mails sent by corporate BlackBerry users. The consumer version has a lower level of security.

Canadian International Trade Minister Peter Van Loan confirmed Friday that Canadian officials were in talks with RIM and Saudi officials to try to avert a ban.

Critics maintain that Saudi Arabia and other countries are motivated at least partly by a desire to curb freedom of expression and strengthen already tight controls over the media.

The United Arab Emirates has announced it will ban BlackBerry e-mail, messaging and Web browsing starting in October, and Indonesia and India are also demanding greater control over the data.

Analysts say RIM's expansion into fast-growing emerging markets is threatening to set off a wave of regulatory challenges, as its commitment to keep corporate e-mails secure rubs up against the desires of local law enforcement.

Saudi Arabia's telecommunications regulator, known as the Communications and Information Technology Commission, announced plans for the ban on Tuesday, saying the BlackBerry messenger service "in its present state does not meet regulatory requirements," according to the state news agency SPA. It had been due to be shut off Friday.

BlackBerry phones are popular both among businesspeople and youth in the kingdom who see the phones' relatively secure communication features as a way to avoid attention from the authorities. Local media estimate there are some 750,000 BlackBerry users in the country.

"Over the past year and a half, its market presence has increased tremendously," Sfakianakis said, describing the devices as "a must" for doing business in Saudi Arabia

Ben - If this becomes a reality, it is a very large domino that is falling. Of more chilling concern is the notion that the Saudi Kingdom would use this capability for more than just deterrence of terrorism; the social implications of private emails being monitored in this Muslim country are huge. Strict Islamic law prevents men and women from meeting. The BlackBerry has become a tool there for secret flirting.

[Hearts_Purple]

This is one of the mainreasons I will never visit or live near the Middle East. I don't want someone's make believe dude in the sky to have any baring on my personal freedom.

[CptSternn]

Its pretty intrusive and shouldn't be allowed, yet the American government does the same thing sure.

[Ben Lahnger]

What? Prevents people from dating? How was I not aware of this?

[JCC.]

This is the least surprising thing ever. Ever since the dawn of the Internet I've expected this shit to happen to every single part of the communications industry. Pretty soon, we'll be living at 451 Fahrenheit. Welcome to the future, kids, same as the past only more so.

[Hearts_Purple]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Its pretty intrusive and shouldn't be allowed, yet the American government does the same thing sure.

Proof. Please provide some.

[JCC.]

The Patriot Act:

Section 225 - "No cause of action shall lie in any court against any provider of a wire or electronic communication servicethat furnishes any informationin accordance with a court order or request for emergency assistance under this Act"

Basically, it means that if the Government taps yr shit, you can't take your provider to court for allowing the government to do it. Read more about it for extra fun.

[Hearts_Purple]

Originally Posted by JCC.

The Patriot Act:

Section 225 - "No cause of action shall lie in any court against any provider of a wire or electronic communication servicethat furnishes any informationin accordance with a court order or request for emergency assistance under this Act"

Basically, it means that if the Government taps yr shit, you can't take your provider to court for allowing the government to do it. Read more about it for extra fun.

That is not proof. Show me that they monitor and prevent most of the people from dating and/or sending racy texts or having phone sex on pain of death.

US =/= Middle East

[Ben Lahnger]

No, that's not the same thing. I was already protesting the email scanning that was being done as a result of the Patriot Act years ago, although I was taught early in the BBS age that I should treat email correspondence as no more secure than a post card. So that isn't a big stresser to me.

I still want evidence that the U.S. Government uses surveillance of private electronic correspondence to enforce religious edicts against dating as the Saudis are likely to do, since Sternn said the U.S. does the same thing.

[JCC.]

He didn't say that the U.S. does it for religious reasons, he said that they do it, which they do. "It" being electronic surveillance. Which the Patriot Act allows. If they didn't do it, why the fuck would they write that in? Were they almost out of printer ink and needed it completely empty before they got their refill?

[Ben Lahnger]

JCC. - he responded to our posts and did not clarify that he was only suggesting the U.S. does PART of what I was talking about. Here in order are the statements:

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Ben - If this becomes a reality, it is a very large domino that is falling. Of more chilling concern is the notion that the Saudi Kingdom would use this capability for more than just deterrence of terrorism; the social implications of private emails being monitored in this Muslim country are huge. Strict Islamic law prevents men and women from meeting. The BlackBerry has become a tool there for secret flirting.

Originally Posted by Hearts_Purple

This is one of the mainreasons I will never visit or live near the Middle East. I don't want someone's make believe dude in the sky to have any baring on my personal freedom.

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Its pretty intrusive and shouldn't be allowed, yet the American government does the same thing sure.

He said, "yet the American government does the same thing sure" which came right on the heels of previous statements, and certainly doesn't mean what you just said.

[JCC.]

You, as the voice of reason on GNet, should know better of Sterrn than that.

[Ben Lahnger]

I know Sternn has ADD and reads less than half of the material he responds to, but that doesn't mean I'm cutting him any slack when he misses the point of my post in the first place.

[JCC.]

The idea, as far as I gathered, mostly from the title of the thread, was that an actual money trading deal between a Government and a communications company would set a precedent. The fact that the country in question is heavily religious was just the kick start. Greed and power is just as powerful a motivator as religion.

[Ben Lahnger]

Um, but I summarized my point in a brightly lit color at the end of the article ... and you are brighter than Sternn.

[JCC.]

OK, this is how I read it as:

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Ben - If this becomes a reality, it is a very large domino that is falling.

Meaning that other countries would want to take RIM up on the offer.

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Of more chilling concern is the notion that the Saudi Kingdom would use this capability for more than just deterrence of terrorism; the social implications of private emails being monitored in this Muslim country are huge. Strict Islamic law prevents men and women from meeting. The BlackBerry has become a tool there for secret flirting.

As a point on why this country in particular makes the case interesting, specifically the emphasised part. RIM is apparently allowing Governments to read their customers mail, which is particularly harmful because of the strict laws of Islam in the Saudi Kingdom surrounding the bonding of the sexes. Apply that to other countries, like the U.S., the U.K., Korea, where the fuck ever, where they are jerking off to the concept possibly right now, Religion is not that much of a factor in those countries where the ideal is power, and lots of that shit. Either I read that shit wrong, or the point wasn't clear or I'm a 'tard or something, but that's what I got. Applying religion as a reason for brokering a deal with a communications company to somewhere like Russia doesn't make much sense, as they're not exactly known for that crap.

[Hearts_Purple]

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Um, but I summarized my point in a brightly lit color at the end of the article ... and you are brighter than Sternn.

No, he's really not.

[JCC.]

Two things stand out about this statement:

1) That you have obviously either not read anything I've ever posted or you are projecting your own insecurities onto my posts.

2) You are a dumbass.

[Hearts_Purple]

Your are so lacking in intellect that you can't even think of something yourself to insult me with. Dumbass. It's amazing how brightly the idiocy shines out of such a dim bulb as yours.

[JCC.]

I have always thought I was amazing, so it makes sense.

[Hearts_Purple]

As always, misinterpretting what's been said. Not surprising coming from you.

[JCC.]

You're actually pretty fun for a schmuck!

[CptSternn]

Does it matter why the government gives itself the power to listen in on your private conversations?

The 'why' to me does not as matter as much as the fact they do it.

Arresting people who speak ill of the American government in a private conversation is no different than arresting people for racy talk IMHO.

It might be a more drastic consequence, but the fact of the matter is, it is no less intrusive and totalitarian than the former example.

[Hearts_Purple]

Sternn, you do realize that if they actually arrested people just for speaking ill of the government that probably 90% of Americans would be in jail, don't you?

JCC, awww, I feel the same about you! <3

[Ben Lahnger]

I wouldn't reply directly to any of Sternn's anti-American shite if I were you ... he's a non-responsive responder. Plus, he's just jealous because more people want to emigrate here than anywhere else in the world.