×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Boeing Preparing an Ultra-Secure Smartphone

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the secret-security-phone dept.

Security 101

bobwrit writes in with a story about Boeing's new secure government phones project. "Earlier this week, it was revealed that aerospace firm Boeing was working on a high security mobile device for the various intelligence departments. This device will most likely be released later this year, and at a lower price point than other mobile phones targeted at the same communities. Typically, phones in this range cost about 15,000-20,000 per phone, and use custom hardware and software to get the job done. This phone will most likely use Android as it's main operating system of choice, which lowers the cost per phone, since Boeing's developers don't have to write their own operating system from scratch."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

101 comments

What about the network side of things? (2, Insightful)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 2 years ago | (#39693929)

How secure is the data at the tower?

Re:What about the network side of things? (4, Insightful)

Skapare (16644) | about 2 years ago | (#39693951)

What data? All you can see are a bunch of scrambled bits.

Re:What about the network side of things? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39693983)

Tower simulation / MITM exists.

Re:What about the network side of things? (4, Informative)

jonwil (467024) | about 2 years ago | (#39694239)

Unless the engineers at Boeing working on this are total idiots (which is highly unlikely) all that a cell tower would see (fake or otherwise) is an encrypted stream (probably a VPN) heading between the handset and some locked down secure server out there.

Re:What about the network side of things? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695253)

all that a cell tower would see (fake or otherwise) is an encrypted stream (probably a VPN) heading between the handset and some locked down secure server out there.

What, like a blackberry? They've been certified by NATO and many other govts:

http://us.blackberry.com/ataglance/security/certifications.jsp [blackberry.com]

Re:What about the network side of things? (1)

luis_a_espinal (1810296) | about 2 years ago | (#39695859)

Tower simulation / MITM exists.

Yeah because they don't need to have the keys. at. all. </sarcasm>

Re:What about the network side of things? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695853)

They know that there are security holes in the OS, and the chip sets that are going to the phones I hope right? If your claiming security you better design from scratch what is the US paying for then if the phone costs 15k? Also then do they have to do java patches since all apps are java apps. What ever a 15k smart phone with a Boeing logo today's 5k Hammer which adjusted for inflation sounds about right.

I wonder if this is an effective use of resources (5, Funny)

ShooterNeo (555040) | about 2 years ago | (#39693967)

Thanks to declassified files and leaked files from the former Soviets, it is possible to figure exactly how the Soviets usually stole their secrets.

It would be very interesting to analyze how often they stole information via technical means (tapping phones, intercepting transmissions, etc) vs. human intel means (sending Anna Chapmen to coach you into giving it all up)

I have a sneaky suspicion that more than 90% of the time, the Russians/Soviets succeed with human intel. Heck, if I knew top secret information, and Anna Chapman came after me with the goal of convincing me to give it all up, I'm not sure how long I could hold out under her interrogation...

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (4, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#39694053)

No, the Russians used to get most aerospace intelligence from the magazine 'Aviation Week and Space Technology' (usually referred to as 'Aviation Leak').

And there reporters weren't even remotely good looking.

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#39694061)

err. there, their - what the hell. This time it's my brain's fault.

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695849)

Hey, it still works, you got lucky with this one :P

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (3, Interesting)

ClickOnThis (137803) | about 2 years ago | (#39695807)

No, the Russians used to get most aerospace intelligence from the magazine 'Aviation Week and Space Technology' (usually referred to as 'Aviation Leak').

And there reporters weren't even remotely good looking.

Well, Aviation Week leaked at both ends: the west got intel on the Soviets with it too.

I heard a funny story once (perhaps apocryphal?) about someone working on photographs taken during the Mayday Parade of all the military hardware the Soviets were showing off. He was trying to figure out basic dimensions and capabilities, etc., by examining the hardware and comparing it to the size of other things in the photographs. Someone came up to him, looked over his shoulder, and said, "Oh hey, the Mayday Parade." The guy with the photographs covered them up along with his work, turned to his visitor, and hissed "You shouldn't be looking at this!" The other fellow sad, "whaddya mean, it's all here in Aviation Week." He opened the magazine to the exact same photograph, with an article containing all of the data the fellow was trying to gather.

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (1)

mjwalshe (1680392) | about 2 years ago | (#39694295)

I think most people would twig that something was up if a hottie like Anna Chapman paid attention to you. I would have have probably contacted Thames House to see if they wanted to run a sting on the KGB - of course to keep up the pretense of a besotted nerd under her thumb id need an expense account to keep up the pretense I am embezzling from the MO'ds secret paperclip replacement project.

I recall that some on who knew her slightly in the Uk said he thought she was a high class call girl.

You just broke the Official Secrets Act (1)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | about 2 years ago | (#39694781)

The replacement paperclip project is classified Secret. We don't want the Americans to know we are still using paperclips, and we don't want the Chinese to know where all those paperclips we import are going.

Re:You just broke the Official Secrets Act (1)

PNutts (199112) | about 2 years ago | (#39697741)

The replacement paperclip project is classified Secret. We don't want the Americans to know we are still using paperclips, and we don't want the Chinese to know where all those paperclips we import are going.

Undercover Clippy? God help us...

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (1)

mrmeval (662166) | about 2 years ago | (#39694339)

It's cool that this is public information. This of course is shocking but there are clearance reviews that are just boring paperwork with nothing exciting. The more open they are about it the better. I do however thing Shep should have had to do some hard time for failure to disclose. When I had a clearance if you screwed up you could lose your clearance but if you disclosed a mistake like this upfront it was much easier on you. With that information they can target the whore and feed her misinformation.

http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/doha/industrial/11-05079.h1.pdf [dod.mil]

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (1)

ShooterNeo (555040) | about 2 years ago | (#39698975)

Well, if he'd reported right away (as in the moment he found it missing) I'm not even sure he would have committed a crime of any sort. Perhaps he should have locked the notebook in a safe before letting her in the room, but anyone can slip up and make a mistake (especially when thinking of getting some from a beautiful women).

However, his second huge mistake was admitting that she took it. It would have been simpler to maintain that he didn't know how he lost the notebook, and less likely to get him in trouble.

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (1)

mrmeval (662166) | about 2 years ago | (#39706569)

Not reporting it and not freely admitting the one night stand should have been a fast way of jail time. I'm not sure if he was punished or not.

Losing the ability to get a clearance is a pretty stiff blow as there are few civilian jobs that require a clearance and pay as well.

Re:I wonder if this is an effective use of resourc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694611)

Humor recognized, but the threat is no longer from guys with bad tech. There are several governments ferociously waging cyberwar against each other, intent that controlling the information is akin to controlling ground on a battlefield. The days of cursing "pesky moose and squirrel" are distant memories.

GPL Apply here? (2)

tekiegreg (674773) | about 2 years ago | (#39693969)

So if I take an existing OS (Android in this case) under GPL and I alter for greater security, does that have to be release too if all I'm doing is some sort of internal release? I'm sure this has been answered to death with Linux but just curious.

Re:GPL Apply here? (5, Informative)

sribe (304414) | about 2 years ago | (#39693993)

GPL has NEVER required release of source to anyone other than those to whom you release executable. GPL has NEVER restricted internal forks/releases.

Re:GPL Apply here? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694003)

The GPL only requires that you distribute the source code to the same people you distribute the binary to. (And requires that you give them the same ability in turn.) Presumably, this means that Boeing has to give the government the source code, but that's it. The government could choose to release it, but I doubt they would.

Re:GPL Apply here? (1)

Spykk (823586) | about 2 years ago | (#39701187)

Is the government then required to make the source available to each individual that it distributes the binary to, or are those individuals considered to be the same entity as the government in the context of the GPL?

Re:GPL Apply here? (4, Interesting)

Skapare (16644) | about 2 years ago | (#39694051)

They could do the same with it as they did with SELinux. If it's truly secure, it can be fully open. Just don't leave the keys in it.

Re:GPL Apply here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694671)

I think for the device they want to make it as difficult as possible to make a 'copy' of it in it's working state. I think that is impossible to do, so you have to rely on top secret hardware to just make it difficult.

Re:GPL Apply here? (2)

TrueSpeed (576528) | about 2 years ago | (#39694065)

So if I take an existing OS (Android in this case) under GPL and I alter for greater security, does that have to be release too if all I'm doing is some sort of internal release? I'm sure this has been answered to death with Linux but just curious.

The Linux part of Android is under the GPL. The other is under the Apache License.

this is the phone I'd want to carry (1, Troll)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 2 years ago | (#39693985)

imagine if you get stopped while driving and the cop wants to take a browse thru your phone, for his usual fishing-for-crimes spree.

it would probably be impossible, by design, for him to invade your privacy with a phone like this.

finally, one that is safe to carry around outside.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694043)

imagine if you get stopped while driving and the cop wants to take a browse thru your phone, for his usual fishing-for-crimes spree.

Don't consent to the search, since he doesn't have a warrant.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (3, Insightful)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 2 years ago | (#39694097)

if only it was that easy.

the story goes that if you are arrested (so far; perhaps later it can be pre-arrest) you lose all property rights. at least that's what 'law enforcement' wants us to believe. they carry guns and can ruin our days; its usually best not to contradict that kind of element.

your phone will be 'scanned' on the spot by special usb adapters. you won't have anything to say about it; you'll be in cuffs.

do I like our police state? HELL NO! I'm simply stating the facts of what life is like in the US, these days. if you travel with a smartphone and are stopped by cops, you COULD have your privacy invaded right there on the spot.

its horribly wrong; but a lot of what the police state does is wrong, today.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (1)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | about 2 years ago | (#39694767)

You're talking about two completely separate things:

When you are arrested your right to privacy disappears -- this is sort of almost true. Therefore once arrested you cannot have said non-existent privacy invaded.

So no, the cop can't pull you over and start going through your phone (and even if they did it would be inadmissible). They can pull you over and arrest you, THEN search your phone, car, house, pretty much what they please.

You missed the continuity there, and jumped straight from random traffic stop or some such to arrested (for what exactly?)

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (3, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | about 2 years ago | (#39695755)

You missed the continuity there, and jumped straight from random traffic stop or some such to arrested (for what exactly?)

For resisting arrest, of course! It's the new black.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (1)

shilly (142940) | about 2 years ago | (#39698137)

Mod this up! That is the wittiest black humour pun I've seen in ages

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about 2 years ago | (#39704005)

Cannot be arrested for resisting arrest. There has to be something else first. I know, because I had a cop try to arrest me for it once. And no, being an asshole is not an arrestable offense.

So now, my standard phrase to a cop talking to me is "I'll resist your interrogation until you arrest me. Am I free to go or are you arresting me?" They have no choice at that point, the relationship has become adversarial, they have to let you go, or arrest you. If they arrest you, they better be arresting you for something other than "resisting arrest". And no, resisting is no the same as interfering.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (1)

sjames (1099) | about 2 years ago | (#39704605)

I didn't say the arrest would be legitimate, just that it seems to be popular these days. While it may be ultimately futile, the process of getting the arrest thrown out is in itself punitive.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (1)

PPH (736903) | about 2 years ago | (#39695157)

your phone will be 'scanned' on the spot by special usb adapters. you won't have anything to say about it; you'll be in cuffs.

Considering who is developing this (Boeing) and what their typical lines of business are (DoD contracts), I don't think the average cop wants to get caught anywhere near one of these phones. If they read the wrong stuff, they might even get one of those secret plane rides to some unknown federal facility in the middle of the night.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695513)

your phone will be 'scanned' on the spot by special usb adapters. you won't have anything to say about it; you'll be in cuffs.

do I like our police state? HELL NO! I'm simply stating the facts of what life is like in the US, these days. if you travel with a smartphone and are stopped by cops, you COULD have your privacy invaded right there on the spot.

Or, you could get a blackberry, where the contents are easily encrypted with AES, and you can't access the contents by usb until it's unlocked.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695629)

Blackberrys really have a lot going for them, notwithstanding their fumbles in the marketplace. When I build up the cash, I'm intent on replacing my Android (on a 2-year contract) with an unsubsidized blackberry. The android is good for car navigation and music but not much else. My former blackberry was far superior in terms of its inbox, its speaker (I almost never missed calls), its sound profiles, its call quality, and its reliability in terms of staying connected to the network. I'm really disappointed with the nexus s.

Re:this is the phone I'd want to carry (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694703)

Yes then he just claims he smelled weed coming from your phone and then has the right to search...

"Android as it's main operating system" (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 2 years ago | (#39694033)

Read out loud: ''there's an 'as' too many in this fragment.''

Or is that 'ass'?

Excuse me for any spelling errors -- which after all are less grave than grammatical errors.

My question... (1)

mlts (1038732) | about 2 years ago | (#39694073)

Will the bootloader be locked or unlocked? It would be nice to have a secure variant of CM7 or CM9 on this device.

Re:My question... (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#39694401)

Will the bootloader be locked or unlocked? It would be nice to have a secure variant of CM7 or CM9 on this device.

On a secure device?

On a device that security would depend on complete control of it's configuration?

The answer is left as an exercise for the student.

Boeing is designing it ... (4, Funny)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | about 2 years ago | (#39694127)

And they still won't allow you to use it on a fucking plane.

Re:Boeing is designing it ... (1)

TrueSpeed (576528) | about 2 years ago | (#39694389)

And yet they still allow for Snakes on a Plane.

Re:Boeing is designing it ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694811)

Shut up, I've had it with these motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking plane!

Re:Boeing is designing it ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39700603)

Go down to Arkansas and Kansas and they will tell you all about snakes on a plain.

Re:Boeing is designing it ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39699367)

For ten years I have followed a ritual: Board plane with cell phone off. Wait for plane to reach ~5000 ft. Turn phone on, wait for it to find a tower. And wait. And wait. It never does. I don't want to place a call, I just want to know whether a whole lot of calls, some of them very damned hinky, were all made on one morning from cell phones on hijacked airliners.

A bit hypocritical isn't it? (4, Interesting)

dryriver (1010635) | about 2 years ago | (#39694159)

So the people who feel entitled to intercept everybody else's emails, text messages, instant messaging, social media usage, phonecalls, internet browsing, credit card usage, GPS driving data and much more, preferably without any legal warrants of any sort being required, feel entitled to having "highly secure means of communicating" when it comes to themselves? Doesn't this create a strange division in society, where a small, select group of individuals enjoys complete communication privacy/security in their day to day dealings, while everybody else's supposedly "private" data is one easy keypress or mouseclick away from being fully searchable/viewable? How can there be any "accountability", "fairness" or "balance of power" in a society where a few select people enjoy "total communication privacy" and are completely "untransparent" and "invisible" as a result, while Joe Ordinary, who pays for all of this to happen with his taxes, has his own right to "personal privacy" completely annulled, and is forced to become completely "fully transparent" to the system at press of a key? I don't see how this kind of starkly assymetric "privacy rights inequality" can be good for a society, and least of all for a supposed "free & fair" Western democracy where people are - in theory - supposed to enjoy equal rights, as well as "basic rights", like the simple right to personal privacy.

Re:A bit hypocritical isn't it? (2)

chemicaldave (1776600) | about 2 years ago | (#39694265)

So the people who feel entitled to intercept everybody else's emails, text messages, instant messaging, social media usage, phonecalls, internet browsing, credit card usage, GPS driving data and much more, preferably without any legal warrants of any sort being required, feel entitled to having "highly secure means of communicating" when it comes to themselves?

I don't think it's going to be available to blackhat and defcon attendees.

nsa publishes blueprint for top secret android pho (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694173)

http://it.slashdot.org/story/12/03/01/2246232/nsa-publishes-blueprint-for-top-secret-android-phone

hope they (Boeing) will implement those recommendations....

ADA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694183)

Will the software be written in ADA and the hardware cost 1000x more?

Application Management Issues (1)

bosef1 (208943) | about 2 years ago | (#39694207)

Improved secure smartphones sound like a good thing, but I would be interested to know how Boeing plans to handle the application installation issues associated with a secure platform. If the platform really is to be secure, you probably don't want the end user to just install any random applications on the phone. So you'll need to have a management process to either: develop in-house applications that duplicate existing functionality; or a mechanism of approving outside applications for use in the secure environment (or both).

Developing in-house applications is expensive, and everyone complains about how the government is wasting money duplicating existing capabilities. And since there's only a limited number of approved developers, it takes a long time to get new and improved applications to the end user.

Approving outside applications for use on the phone is expensive and takes a lot of time. You have to fully audit the application looking for "bad stuff", and then you've only approved that specific version of the application. If a new version comes out in a month, you have to start all over. And since there is only a limited number of code-auditors, it takes a long time to get new and improved applications to the end user.

Re:Application Management Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695105)

Whitelists suck. However that is one way to do it.

You also must be running the applications that make sure nothing else is running.

It is doable. It just takes a different way of thinking than 'i can put whatever I want on my phone'. It also takes submitting to a central control. Also periodic/random turn ins and scans would probably curb out any one trying to work around it.

Also the way most companies do it (at least the ones with 'locked down environments' do exactly what you suggest. They have audit groups. They approve or deny applications. They then keep up with the patches too. Then push them out after a bit of soak test.

Being secure takes work. There is no 'magic bullet' that lets you be 100% secure. It takes deligance and LOTS of work.

Re:Application Management Issues (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | about 2 years ago | (#39697133)

Google Play is of course the first component to go. The next is other installer code, that allows installation of stuff. Only pre-approved, possible in-house developed apps will be allowed.

Remember it's ultra-security so highly locked down. The implementation of such policies is the hard part: proper vetting in place, keeping on top of any and all security issues in the OS, etc. You may assume this device can also not connect to the Internet. Encrypted VPN to the mothership, web/mail/whatever from there, no more. No random browsing.

And sure developing all that stuff by yourself is expensive. You may be able to use third-party stuff that releases the sources for inspection. At least they're not trying to write a complete OS themselves this time around.

plausible deniability (2)

mspring (126862) | about 2 years ago | (#39694245)

Phone should have a "plausible deniability" mode where it appears like a regular, non-secure phone, easily giving up lots of details to any browsing / scanning attempt, while hiding all secure content.

15,000-20,000 what? (2)

tirerim (1108567) | about 2 years ago | (#39694257)

15,000 to 20,000 dollars? If so, seriously? Does that just factor in R&D to develop the software for a very small number of phones, or is there some other reason why they should be so expensive?

Re:15,000-20,000 what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694633)

15,000 to 20,000 dollars? If so, seriously? Does that just factor in R&D to develop the software for a very small number of phones, or is there some other reason why they should be so expensive?

Several reasons:
There will only be a small number sold,

The senior designers will have very expensive clearance

The ordinary designers will have just plain old expensive clearance and be paid well to help keep them quiet.

The software will have to be scrutinised be another bunch of very expensively cleared bodie.

So will there be a Boeing app store? (1)

John Hasler (414242) | about 2 years ago | (#39694267)

n/t

Re:So will there be a Boeing app store? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695085)

Where else would you put the following apps?
1. BunkerBuster-Lat-Long
2. RF-Jam-Lat-Long
3. EMP-Lat-Long
4. LiveFootageIR-Lat-Long

and no...they won't be 99 cents each. The price field is now a long integer, preceed by "$" and followed by an "m"

So secure they brag about it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694275)

hackity hack hack
wait till you lose one on the tarmack.....

Re:So secure they brag about it (2)

million_monkeys (2480792) | about 2 years ago | (#39695115)

hackity hack hack wait till you lose one on the tarmack.....

First they have to find some way to keep their developers from leaving the prototype in a bar. For some reason, that isn't as easy as you'd think.

Re:So secure they brag about it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695299)

One of requirements will a tamper wipe of all data and code. It might even go as far as physical self destruction. I've worked on unclassified projects where that was a requirement.

New GSA reward for employees? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694343)

The GSA will be killing each other to get their hot little hands on these...

To the "conference" attendees with the secure line:
"Hey everybody! Appetizers in penthouse 1, open bar in penthouse 2 and pearl necklaces in penthouse 3! --- YeeHaaa!"

we should all have these (4, Insightful)

schlachter (862210) | about 2 years ago | (#39694355)

Everyone should have an ultra-secure smart phone. Get the costs down and make it a standard feature for smartphones. It shouldn't be something only for the gov.

Re:we should all have these (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39695281)

Everyone should have an ultra-secure smart phone. Get the costs down and make it a standard feature for smartphones. It shouldn't be something only for the gov.

What, like a blackberry? Certified by NATO, common criteria, FIPS, yada yada yada:
http://us.blackberry.com/ataglance/security/certifications.jsp [blackberry.com]

In fact you can buy blackberries pretty cheap these days since most people are focused on OOOOH!!! SHINY! instead of real security.

Two weeks ago we bought some spare 3G blackberry curves for the office. Unlocked, they were $100 each.

Re:we should all have these (1)

jaymemaurice (2024752) | about 2 years ago | (#39698459)

No, Blackberries are under a media assult to make them look unattractive so that the normal phones people use are not of the secure type...

Re:we should all have these (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | about 2 years ago | (#39697167)

Hardware on client side is only part of the equation.

Encrypted networks, secure e-mail storage, secured communications channels, security-checked apps: it's all part of the package. How good is your ultra-secure phone when you can install random 3rd party software that can do who-knows-what to your phone?

Even if it's highly secured, well I'd say especially when it's highly-secured, you must assume that there are security bugs in the underlying software. Besides fixing them as soon as you find them, you will want to make sure that no software that is installed on the secure device is doing anything it's not supposed to do, thus preventing attacks to happen to begin with.

Is this just copy and paste from the NSA?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39694367)

A key reference is this "http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401074,00.asp"

Looks like an erector set phone based on other peoples work

Units, you fuckers (3, Informative)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 2 years ago | (#39694777)

Typically, phones in this range cost about 15,000-20,000 per phone

Is that in Turkish Lira? Bargain!

Re:Units, you fuckers (1)

Pascal Sartoretti (454385) | about 2 years ago | (#39695467)

Typically, phones in this range cost about 15,000-20,000 per phone

Is that in Turkish Lira? Bargain!

1 Turkish lira = 0.55 USD

Re:Units, you fuckers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39702513)

That's not the Turkish Lira. That's the New Turkish Lira.

Re:Units, you fuckers (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | about 2 years ago | (#39697179)

More like Chinese Yuan, ex-factory price. Before shipping and retail mark-ups.

What you saying, that factory is not in China?

Considering what ... (1)

PPH (736903) | about 2 years ago | (#39695121)

... ended the careers of a [wikipedia.org] few [wikipedia.org] of their exec, I can understand why Boeing in particular would want more secure communications.

Yawn. NSA already announced theirs (2)

drdread66 (1063396) | about 2 years ago | (#39695813)

The Fishbowl project was covered in great detail at the RSA conference a month ago. NSA has already built it, certified it, and conducted trials. Unless Boeing is just replicating Fishbowl, they may find it a tough sell.

Boeing, a phone? with wings? :p (1)

youn (1516637) | about 2 years ago | (#39695887)

am I the only that saw the headline boeing making a phone and was like... ha, say what? :) yes, I am sure they got the competences for that but not their core business as far as I know

Uncrackable phone being developed. (2)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 2 years ago | (#39695963)

See Boeing is Seattle Washington. Some super smart engineers were laid off by another tech company in town and Boeing scooped them up for a low price in the depths of the recession. They pitched this idea involving some, "protected audio path", "protected video path", "Signed drivers" etc that essentially guarantee uncrackable computing platform. One of the engineers "it is impossible to crack it because, even legitimate users can hardly use it, hackers? foggetabotit"

Yeah, cost. That's it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39696943)

This phone will most likely use Android as it's main operating system of choice, which lowers the cost per phone, since Boeing's developers don't have to write their own operating system from scratch.

Having worked with Boeing for a while now, I can safely say that it has nothing to do with cost, and everything to do with the fact that the engineers would still be sitting in meetings five years from now trying to figure out who needs to authorise cubicles and hardware for the project.

Boeing is the least efficient, least appealing company in the known universe.

Android security holes? (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about 2 years ago | (#39697241)

20 kUSD seems awfully expensive for a device that will simply inherit any android security hole.

Open webos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39697373)

i would love to see something Like OpenWebos on these phones. software is open source and free as well as secure from the get go

It's its, not it's (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39697913)

This phone will most likely use Android as it's main operating system of choice

Yeah, yeah. I know.

I'll buy seven ... (1)

RockDoctor (15477) | about 2 years ago | (#39705611)

... as long as I can be sure that no filthy thieving foreigners have got the keys.

Oh, where is it made?

USA?

I'm sure I can get one from a safe(-er) location.

No sale.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...