The decision to use a signal knockoff was a planned and managed one, not just on a whim. Who's responsible for managing the phones?
It's not really a knockoff, it's a deliberately cracked version of a B2C app to adapt it to a corporate setting
Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
131–140 of 387 posts
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using separate apps for government and external communication might have prevented the recent scandal.
It wouldn't actually. The contact in his phone (incorrectly added by Apple AI from a forwarded email) would be the same regardless which app he was using. Instead, Signal (and this forked version) would have to do its own independent contact management, maybe based on in-person scanning of QR codes plus web-of-trust.
Signal does have its own contacts management and doesn't have to be allowed access to OS-native contacts.
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no "don't change titles" rule, though it's interesting how the actual rule gets truncated to that in people's minds! Here's the actual rule: " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. " - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html In this case I was thinking of both the 'misleading' and 'linkbait' bits of that 'unless'. (By the way, this is common HN modera…
the "use" assume nothing happened after the report (app still in managed domain). "used" assume an extra action taking place, which is a stretch imo. but i assumed wrong that you added the "d", not that you're only exempting the submitter title. thanks for the insight into your always nice moderation. follow up question: you work seven days a week??
> i assumed wrong that you added the "d"
dang seems to be saying that he did add the “d” though?
FWIW I would have preferred it to be just left as “uses” per the article title.
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It was incontrovertibly approved as it is only installable via MDM. Only if this his standard govt issued phone. It's also been shown they are also using their own personal phones. The could easily be using unapproved phones some random DOGE'er bought gave them with an MDM setup, without any real oversight.
The device would have to be jailbroken right? These apps are (obviously) not in the App Store, I mean one of them is a cracked WhatsApp ...
No, you can distribute custom managed apps through Apple's MDM programme. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/deployment/dep575bfed8...
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wouldn't actually. The contact in his phone (incorrectly added by Apple AI from a forwarded email) would be the same regardless which app he was using. Instead, Signal (and this forked version) would have to do its own independent contact management, maybe based on in-person scanning of QR codes plus web-of-trust.
Signal does have its own contacts management and doesn't have to be allowed access to OS-native contacts.
If only it would a- not ask you to access your contacts and b- accept when you say no instead of saying "we'll ask again later" (and then, indeed, asking again later).
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
The device would have to be jailbroken right? These apps are (obviously) not in the App Store, I mean one of them is a cracked WhatsApp ...
No, you can distribute custom managed apps through Apple's MDM programme. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/deployment/dep575bfed8...
Sorry yes I meant for personal devices. These are designed to be deployed under MDM on corporate devices
edit: found their install doc! https://smarsh.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#30000001FgxH/a/Pb000...
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you’d prefer, we can call it unclassified communication rather than personal communication. The point is that it was not used for Secret, Top Secret, or other classified communications. For that, he had the SME-PED device. So, again, it’s not a parallel to the current situation. Nobody is saying the SecDef and other staff shouldn’t have unclassified devices as well as their classified devices, the issue is that th…
[flagged]
That's not a counter-argument. You're introducing a hypothetical with no substantiating evidence, trying to create a parallel to a situation where we have unambiguous evidence of non-classified devices and software being used to discuss classified material. The onus is on you to prove the claim, not on others to prove a negative.
It has been eight years since Obama's presidency, had there been any use of this hardened BlackBerry for classified communications it would have emerged by now. Similarly, all messages on that device were subject to the Presidential Records Act, and are archived by NARA. You can FOIA them if you want to.
There were also no claims made during his administration that he ignored security protocols. Even his insistence on retaining a BlackBerry for unclassified communications was done through a compromise and an NSA-hardened device, not by ignoring the rules.
Similarly, how do we know that Reagan didn't hold cleartext phone calls with his aides on the Top Secret plans to contain the USSR? We don't, but in the absence of any supportive evidence over the years it's safe to assume he did not.
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
That's not a counter-argument. You're introducing a hypothetical with no substantiating evidence, trying to create a parallel to a situation where we have unambiguous evidence of non-classified devices and software being used to discuss classified material. The onus is on you to prove the claim, not on others to prove a negative. It has been eight years since Obama's presidency, had there been any use of this hardene…
[flagged]
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are compliance reasons where you want the communications encrypted in flight, but need them retained at rest for compliance reasons. Federal record keeping laws would otherwise prohibit the use of a service like Signal. I'm honestly impressed that the people involved actually took the extra effort for compliance when nothing else they did was above board...
I would not assume the archives were meant for compliance and federal records.
We also have no evidence it was in use back in March. It may be a response to that oops.
Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not a counter-argument. You're introducing a hypothetical with no substantiating evidence, trying to create a parallel to a situation where we have unambiguous evidence of non-classified devices and software being used to discuss classified material. The onus is on you to prove the claim, not on others to prove a negative. It has been eight years since Obama's presidency, had there been any use of this hardene…
[flagged]
My statements were complete. You were not completing them, but trying to spin them in a way that implies wrongdoing when no evidence exists of it. I can only presume you're doing so for partisan reasons, to try to defend the actions of the current administration.
Whatever the reason, I have made my case. Feel free to make yours with a similar level of evidence.