The United Arab Emirates have announced they will block BlackBerry messaging, e-mail and web browsing services due to the devices operating beyond the government’s ability to monitor. Shortly after the announcement, Saudi Arabia joined in as well.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
UAE and Saudi Arabia to Block Blackberry Services
- Thread starter John_Keck
- Start date
IRSmurf: sensible rational arguments are not allowed on the internet. You may only post:
1: irrational paranoid racist tirades with no basis in fact about brown people and their demon god who want to oppress our women folk.
2: Unicorn humping koombyya "information needs tob e free, man!" delusional utopian silliness.'
Quit raising the bar, man!
1: irrational paranoid racist tirades with no basis in fact about brown people and their demon god who want to oppress our women folk.
2: Unicorn humping koombyya "information needs tob e free, man!" delusional utopian silliness.'
Quit raising the bar, man!
IRSmurf, nice to see some comments on this!
1. This isn't really about backtracking into POP or other protocols that are insecure. Skype can be intercepted and decoded, and they still can use encryption. It's about the facility that gets the requests. Anyway, minor point, nonetheless!
2. I got confused reading your second quote and that might be because of lack of context from the original comment threads elsewhere.
I don't typically see the arguments, "if you have nothing to hide..." and "personal liberty" in the same paragraphs. I don't have anything to hide, but I'd still rather not live with someone shining a camera on my bed at night from now until I move.
Yes, I am engaging in silly hyperbole, but it does make a certain point about how tenuous a line must be danced to maintain personal liberty (read: privacy) while providing for national security. One person's, "you can read my email if you want" is another person's invasion of privacy. Your position seemed a bit "rose-colored" in regards to the US (I won't limit that to the NSA, specifically...).
If you're not in the industry, I'd suggest going even less spooky and talk to CSO/CIOs from medium corps about how they feel on monitoring and privacy, from legal as well as inter-personal perspectives. And eventually maybe get some insight (off the record) from federal interests. This is easier said than done, of course.
1. This isn't really about backtracking into POP or other protocols that are insecure. Skype can be intercepted and decoded, and they still can use encryption. It's about the facility that gets the requests. Anyway, minor point, nonetheless!
2. I got confused reading your second quote and that might be because of lack of context from the original comment threads elsewhere.
I don't typically see the arguments, "if you have nothing to hide..." and "personal liberty" in the same paragraphs. I don't have anything to hide, but I'd still rather not live with someone shining a camera on my bed at night from now until I move.
Yes, I am engaging in silly hyperbole, but it does make a certain point about how tenuous a line must be danced to maintain personal liberty (read: privacy) while providing for national security. One person's, "you can read my email if you want" is another person's invasion of privacy. Your position seemed a bit "rose-colored" in regards to the US (I won't limit that to the NSA, specifically...).
If you're not in the industry, I'd suggest going even less spooky and talk to CSO/CIOs from medium corps about how they feel on monitoring and privacy, from legal as well as inter-personal perspectives. And eventually maybe get some insight (off the record) from federal interests. This is easier said than done, of course.
MotorMouth
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2008
- Messages
- 78
The problem with places in the middle east they want complete control on what you say and see. I bought a GSP company a couple years ago and a couple customers were from UAE. As so as I changed everything over to my URL's they were blocked from accessing it. Because our URL's were not on their safe list. This is not about national security, it's about control! Why do you think they stopped BB messenger first and now are going after the mail servers?
what in the fuck are you talking about?
IRSmurf, nice to see some comments on this!
1. This isn't really about backtracking into POP or other protocols that are insecure. Skype can be intercepted and decoded, and they still can use encryption. It's about the facility that gets the requests. Anyway, minor point, nonetheless!
2. I got confused reading your second quote and that might be because of lack of context from the original comment threads elsewhere.
The NSA exists solely to protect national security. I want these people to have unfettered access to anything they want. If I drive 150mph down the highway, they aren't going to track my phone and send me a ticket. If I sell a fifty gallon drum of marijuana, they aren't going track me down. Even if I am a serial killer who shares pictures on a... forum for serial killers... the people with full access to every one of my communications aren't going to do squat if it's information the FBI isn't privy to. The FBI and local and state police are the people we watch and the people who watch us. The NSA is the ghost in the room you never knew was there. I know there is no reason to have more trust in the NSA than other branches, its just a name and we don't know anything about the people behind those badges or what goes on behind close doors, but if you were to have faith in one branch of the government to protect us from people who want to harm us on a large scale, the NSA seems like a good choice. Or you can trust absolutely no one and die of a heart attack at thirty-seven years of age.
Although this an extreme analogy, it is like how most of you wouldn't normally allow men to handle your package, but you allow your doctor to examine them. You have faith your doctor is there to serve your best interests.
If the NSA is pointing a camera on your bed at night, who cares? Even if you're having sleepovers like Michael Jackson, the NSA can't do squat. Are you afraid one analyst is going to lean over to his cube mate and make a joke about stuffed animal? In my opinion, that is an acceptable risk.
As for the people protect us from violence, theft, murder and, worst of all, tax fraud, they're going to have to put up a fight and provide damn good reasons for needing to take away my liberties.
And far be it from any Saudi to break party lines. They have no protection for speaking the truth.
He's saying almost everyone on the internet is 'black or white' on these kinds of issues, serving only one extreme (extreme pro-nationalist) or the other (anarchist). Most people argue to win or make their opponent go away. It is hard to find people who put much thought into arguing online. Maybe they've been raised to believe arguments are bad things.
Thanks for the response, IRSmurf! I think you're correct; if any entity should be trusted, it would/should be the NSA. We both just take that to different degrees, I think, is all. I think the term would be...I'm just more cynical!
In having spent only about 10 minutes pondering this topic, it would seem to me the differences between the US gov't and another more repressive one would be:
- checks and balances
- transparency
Our trust in our gov'ts, the people who run them, the people who make it up, and thusly things like the NSA stem from our trust in those two items.
Then again, you'd think people would trust their IT or better yet security teams...
I think the term would be...I'm just more cynical!In having spent only about 10 minutes pondering this topic, it would seem to me the differences between the US gov't and another more repressive one would be:
- checks and balances
- transparency
Our trust in our gov'ts, the people who run them, the people who make it up, and thusly things like the NSA stem from our trust in those two items.
Then again, you'd think people would trust their IT or better yet security teams...
TheCommander
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2003
- Messages
- 2,999
Thanks for the response, IRSmurf! I think you're correct; if any entity should be trusted, it would/should be the NSA. We both just take that to different degrees, I think, is all.
In having spent only about 10 minutes pondering this topic, it would seem to me the differences between the US gov't and another more repressive one would be:
- checks and balances
- transparency
Our trust in our gov'ts, the people who run them, the people who make it up, and thusly things like the NSA stem from our trust in those two items.
Then again, you'd think people would trust their IT or better yet security teams...
It's the politicians many people don't trust and rightfully so. The NSA, CIA, FBI, etc.. are just doing their jobs but there probably are some unsavory people there as well.
What the heck are you talking about.
firas
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 2,458
not an expert here but as far as I know, dating is not easy in that area, corporates are not really aware of the Blackberry existence, holding it makes you look suspicious since it’s the new way to meet girls.
and maybe the opposition movements is using the BB service to reach people now.
and maybe the mobile service providers didn’t like the idea of people texting all day for a small amount of money that is way less than their insane price’s so the company’s CEO had a business dinner with the minister of freedom restrict and agreed with him to block it.
the need to control what people can see is their but I don’t really like to think of it this way. I mean every house in the Middle East and specially in Saudi Arabia has an internet connection now, first graders know about Hotspot Shield, anonymous browsing sites and other unblocking methods before knowing Google, it looks like everyone now own that DreamBox satellite receiver that can break the paid channels protection which means thousands of channels specially the American ones. forget about that, free channels like the MBC group are injecting us with American shows all day, it’s like everywhere I go it’s either Opera, Dr. Phil, Late Show, Tonight Show, The Insider, TMZ, P1MP my ride (love it), Amazing race, that show where Jessica Simpson travels around the world, etc.
so I don’t understand what’s there to block in the Blackberry!!
on the other hand, we (Jordanians) don’t have their (Gulf) resources (OIL), actually we don’t have anything hehe. so we have to meet the “standards” in order to receive our aids. those standards will prevent our government from doing such things, problem solved. the only thing I’m aware of that our government is blocking is this one man newspaper www.arabtimes.com and that’s because he’s ridiculous, the man writes a whole article full of filthy jokes about the kings testicles and similar topics.
but yes IRSmurf , the USA government is just as bad as Arab governments, I mean common guys, after all what we have done and the US is not supporting our nuclear program?! we are not Iran, we know even Taliban can wipe us out in less than a week, a Jordanian royal family prince was killed among the seven CIA agents in that base in Afghanistan. we can’t declare it in the open that our royal family and government are CIA agents, our nickname is already the traitorous among other Arabs so let’s just keep this info between us and pass that nuclear program please (more aids would be nice) and we’ll be cool again.
and maybe the opposition movements is using the BB service to reach people now.
and maybe the mobile service providers didn’t like the idea of people texting all day for a small amount of money that is way less than their insane price’s so the company’s CEO had a business dinner with the minister of freedom restrict and agreed with him to block it.
the need to control what people can see is their but I don’t really like to think of it this way. I mean every house in the Middle East and specially in Saudi Arabia has an internet connection now, first graders know about Hotspot Shield, anonymous browsing sites and other unblocking methods before knowing Google, it looks like everyone now own that DreamBox satellite receiver that can break the paid channels protection which means thousands of channels specially the American ones. forget about that, free channels like the MBC group are injecting us with American shows all day, it’s like everywhere I go it’s either Opera, Dr. Phil, Late Show, Tonight Show, The Insider, TMZ, P1MP my ride (love it), Amazing race, that show where Jessica Simpson travels around the world, etc.
so I don’t understand what’s there to block in the Blackberry!!
on the other hand, we (Jordanians) don’t have their (Gulf) resources (OIL), actually we don’t have anything hehe. so we have to meet the “standards” in order to receive our aids. those standards will prevent our government from doing such things, problem solved. the only thing I’m aware of that our government is blocking is this one man newspaper www.arabtimes.com and that’s because he’s ridiculous, the man writes a whole article full of filthy jokes about the kings testicles and similar topics.
but yes IRSmurf , the USA government is just as bad as Arab governments, I mean common guys, after all what we have done and the US is not supporting our nuclear program?! we are not Iran, we know even Taliban can wipe us out in less than a week, a Jordanian royal family prince was killed among the seven CIA agents in that base in Afghanistan. we can’t declare it in the open that our royal family and government are CIA agents, our nickname is already the traitorous among other Arabs so let’s just keep this info between us and pass that nuclear program please (more aids would be nice) and we’ll be cool again.
The ban didn't get live yet, and the decision wasn't without negotiation with BB owners (RIM).
Dubai Gov. stated that the negotiations weren't successful, and till the path clears up with further studies and or proper actions, they will temporary ban BB service starting in OCT till then.
In other word :
Mind your own business, stay off harms way! Specially since you are not affected by any means or way.
I myself, wish it gets banned here too! More than zillion of times when I pass any car I find a BB held by the driver! I swear it's like watching a drunk driver.
Drives slow, and shifts from left to right slowly... They are not obeying the rules! There is a fine to use a phone while driving! Yet no one follows these rules. I hate phones over all when held by a driver.
Dubai Gov. stated that the negotiations weren't successful, and till the path clears up with further studies and or proper actions, they will temporary ban BB service starting in OCT till then.
In other word :
Mind your own business, stay off harms way! Specially since you are not affected by any means or way.
I myself, wish it gets banned here too! More than zillion of times when I pass any car I find a BB held by the driver! I swear it's like watching a drunk driver.
Drives slow, and shifts from left to right slowly... They are not obeying the rules! There is a fine to use a phone while driving! Yet no one follows these rules. I hate phones over all when held by a driver.
Umm, normally they have no reason to lie when people will figure out the facts shortly afterwards, and it's not Iraq or Iran when it comes to nonpolitical issues like this one. The telecom companies specifically said no orders similar to the UAE situation were given.
Having said that, I'm surprised they allowed Blackberry there in the first place. They used to ban plain old GSM phones that had cameras in them.
bigpimpatl
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2006
- Messages
- 473
the gulfis just want more and more control over what information goes on their territory. this is no secret: the whole middle east operates this way. What i want to know is what role the americans play in this, and how much the gulfis are bending over for them.