5 ms·

New phones aboard Air Force One

104 points by staunch 12y ago

rdtsc 12y ago
The thing is that phone underneath could be a SIP/VOIP phone running over a VPN tunnel(or tunnels to provide the MLS -- multi-level security) with a CAC card reader. It probably costs upwards of 10s of thousands if not more per unit. A lot of that is the red tape and overhead related to having it certified and having as much of it produced in US as possible. Also wonder if secret service or FBI will pay extra attention to the author for being a little too interested in that topic. Nothing too serious of course, just some visits to his workplace, maybe interrogating his friends, spouse or kids. (Has happened to a friend of mine, after making an inappropriate joke in a forum, and that was before 2001)
- ghshephard 12y ago
  I would be shocked if the cost-per-phone system was less than $250k/phone, with all costs amortized over the project (Design, Delivery, Installation, Support)
- savoytruffle 12y ago
  I'm sure the USSS will be very interested in this whole thread but what are they gonna do?
michaelt 12y ago
L-3 Communications advertises (pdf) the GSIMS system as the most advanced secure communication system for VIP and Head of States aircraft In the light of Snowden's revelations that we spy on our allies and try to get broken encryption products released, I wonder if any head of state except an American one bothers with an American encrypted phone. If not, I wonder who it's being marketed to?
- XorNot 12y ago
  "in light of" ? This has been an obvious problem since the dawn of communications of any sort. No government on Earth would blindly install foreign systems. They wouldn't blindly install domestically built units (what better way to get the inside track then to accidentally be able to listen in on your government's private conversations). People need to realize that nothing Snowden disclosed was news to any government, especially its security people.
  - moe 12y ago
    They wouldn't blindly install domestically built units http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2648404/Germany-investigates-alleged-NSA-Merkel-phone-tap.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2648404/Germany-inve...
  - Zigurd 12y ago
    Crypto AG is still in business. There's a lot of blindlyness out there.
  - DanBC 12y ago
    > No government on Earth would blindly install foreign systems. Enigma encryption was sold -to governments- for many years after it had been thoroughly broken.
  - 27182818284 12y ago
    >No government on Earth would blindly install foreign systems. They wouldn't blindly install domestically built units (what better way to get the inside track then to accidentally be able to listen in on your government's private conversations). History is full of stories that makes this not true dating back to even Xerox machines that the US tampered with before selling them overseas.
joosters 12y ago
The US is doomed if the country elects a colorblind president. All that red-green color-coding for secure and non-secure calls is going to ruin them...
- jokoon 12y ago
  I see a possible conspiracy theory
- mootothemax 12y ago
  All that red-green color-coding for secure and non-secure calls is going to ruin them... I was surprised by the colour coding as well, albeit more from a usability angle than colour-blindness: What are "danger" red and "success" green meant to represent? My natural inclination would be to have no background colour for insecure, and then [colour of choice] for secure. It makes me wonder how ignorant on the matter I am, and whether red and green are some form of standard for secure/insecure notifications.
  - gergles 12y ago
    > red and green are some form of standard for secure/insecure notifications. They are. If you look at photos that the military/government publishes of facilities, the secure stuff is always red, and the public stuff is always green (well, always is a strong word. It is occasionally black). (I was going to include such an image now but I can't seem to find a search term for it that will find what I want.) I agree, it seems a little backwards, but I guess it's a piece of domain-specific knowledge you don't forget once you've acquired it.
    - Electrospaces 12y ago
      Yes, it's the official color-coding. In the sidebar at the right side of the article about the phones, you can see a box showing bars in five colors that represent the different classification levels, with green being for everything that's unclassified. Red stands for Secret, but in this case, where it's just secure/non-secure, or actually: unclassified/classified, red is used for classified in general.
savoytruffle 12y ago
It doesn't seem that surprising to me that Air Force One has encrypted VOIP phones. But it is always useful to see new info. It is surprising that they are relatively new.
curiousDog 12y ago
Why not always use a secure line? Latency?
- BrentOzar 12y ago
  Because the person on the other end may not be calling from a secure location.
  - kabouseng 12y ago
    Or put another way, the other person might be calling from a normal phone.
    - Electrospaces 12y ago
      Yes, for a secure, encrypted phone call, both ends must have equipment that uses the same encryption system, else it's impossible to decrypt what the other end has encrypted and vice versa.
      - rohit89 12y ago
        So how do calls between leaders of different countries work? Have all of them agreed upon using the encryption system? Or perhaps they have equipment that can choose which encryption system to use depending on who they are talking to?
        tormeh 12y ago
        If the leaders are important enough, you'll just get a new phone that can talk to theirs. Or a translation server. No need to bother the head-of-state with the technicalities. The point is, there's no reason for there to be a clever, all-in-one solution here, since these are allmost one-off solutions.
        Electrospaces 12y ago
        That's still a big mystery... but in general, calls between leaders of countries are non-secure. High-level encryption systems are often highly classified, so one country will not easily give such a system to another country. The exceptions are the "hotlines" between a number of countries, where encryption equipment or algorithms are exchanged so a secure connection can be set up.
throwaway3363 12y ago
Wow. Just wow. I would have thought that that the NSA would be more sly about their unattributed propaganda sites. That whole site is full of bullshit whitewashing.

104 points by staunch 12y ago

rdtsc 12y ago

The thing is that phone underneath could be a SIP/VOIP phone running over a VPN tunnel(or tunnels to provide the MLS -- multi-level security) with a CAC card reader. It probably costs upwards of 10s of thousands if not more per unit. A lot of that is the red tape and overhead related to having it certified and having as much of it produced in US as possible. Also wonder if secret service or FBI will pay extra attention to the author for being a little too interested in that topic. Nothing too serious of course, just some visits to his workplace, maybe interrogating his friends, spouse or kids. (Has happened to a friend of mine, after making an inappropriate joke in a forum, and that was before 2001)

ghshephard 12y ago
I would be shocked if the cost-per-phone system was less than $250k/phone, with all costs amortized over the project (Design, Delivery, Installation, Support)
savoytruffle 12y ago
I'm sure the USSS will be very interested in this whole thread but what are they gonna do?

michaelt 12y ago

L-3 Communications advertises (pdf) the GSIMS system as the most advanced secure communication system for VIP and Head of States aircraft In the light of Snowden's revelations that we spy on our allies and try to get broken encryption products released, I wonder if any head of state except an American one bothers with an American encrypted phone. If not, I wonder who it's being marketed to?

XorNot 12y ago
"in light of" ? This has been an obvious problem since the dawn of communications of any sort. No government on Earth would blindly install foreign systems. They wouldn't blindly install domestically built units (what better way to get the inside track then to accidentally be able to listen in on your government's private conversations). People need to realize that nothing Snowden disclosed was news to any government, especially its security people.
- moe 12y ago
  They wouldn't blindly install domestically built units http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2648404/Germany-investigates-alleged-NSA-Merkel-phone-tap.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2648404/Germany-inve...
- Zigurd 12y ago
  Crypto AG is still in business. There's a lot of blindlyness out there.
- DanBC 12y ago
  > No government on Earth would blindly install foreign systems. Enigma encryption was sold -to governments- for many years after it had been thoroughly broken.
- 27182818284 12y ago
  >No government on Earth would blindly install foreign systems. They wouldn't blindly install domestically built units (what better way to get the inside track then to accidentally be able to listen in on your government's private conversations). History is full of stories that makes this not true dating back to even Xerox machines that the US tampered with before selling them overseas.

joosters 12y ago

The US is doomed if the country elects a colorblind president. All that red-green color-coding for secure and non-secure calls is going to ruin them...

jokoon 12y ago
I see a possible conspiracy theory
mootothemax 12y ago
All that red-green color-coding for secure and non-secure calls is going to ruin them... I was surprised by the colour coding as well, albeit more from a usability angle than colour-blindness: What are "danger" red and "success" green meant to represent? My natural inclination would be to have no background colour for insecure, and then [colour of choice] for secure. It makes me wonder how ignorant on the matter I am, and whether red and green are some form of standard for secure/insecure notifications.
- gergles 12y ago
  > red and green are some form of standard for secure/insecure notifications. They are. If you look at photos that the military/government publishes of facilities, the secure stuff is always red, and the public stuff is always green (well, always is a strong word. It is occasionally black). (I was going to include such an image now but I can't seem to find a search term for it that will find what I want.) I agree, it seems a little backwards, but I guess it's a piece of domain-specific knowledge you don't forget once you've acquired it.
  - Electrospaces 12y ago
    Yes, it's the official color-coding. In the sidebar at the right side of the article about the phones, you can see a box showing bars in five colors that represent the different classification levels, with green being for everything that's unclassified. Red stands for Secret, but in this case, where it's just secure/non-secure, or actually: unclassified/classified, red is used for classified in general.

savoytruffle 12y ago

It doesn't seem that surprising to me that Air Force One has encrypted VOIP phones. But it is always useful to see new info. It is surprising that they are relatively new.

curiousDog 12y ago

Why not always use a secure line? Latency?

BrentOzar 12y ago
Because the person on the other end may not be calling from a secure location.
- kabouseng 12y ago
  Or put another way, the other person might be calling from a normal phone.
  - Electrospaces 12y ago
    Yes, for a secure, encrypted phone call, both ends must have equipment that uses the same encryption system, else it's impossible to decrypt what the other end has encrypted and vice versa.
    - rohit89 12y ago
      So how do calls between leaders of different countries work? Have all of them agreed upon using the encryption system? Or perhaps they have equipment that can choose which encryption system to use depending on who they are talking to?
      - tormeh 12y ago
        If the leaders are important enough, you'll just get a new phone that can talk to theirs. Or a translation server. No need to bother the head-of-state with the technicalities. The point is, there's no reason for there to be a clever, all-in-one solution here, since these are allmost one-off solutions.
      - Electrospaces 12y ago
        That's still a big mystery... but in general, calls between leaders of countries are non-secure. High-level encryption systems are often highly classified, so one country will not easily give such a system to another country. The exceptions are the "hotlines" between a number of countries, where encryption equipment or algorithms are exchanged so a secure connection can be set up.

throwaway3363 12y ago

Wow. Just wow. I would have thought that that the NSA would be more sly about their unattributed propaganda sites. That whole site is full of bullshit whitewashing.