Oct 13 AT 3:31 PM Dustin Earley 16 Comments

Google teams up with the government to tackle BlackBerry security

generic security lock

Research In Motion and BlackBerry have long been considered the undisputed kings of mobile security. BlackBerrys are the go-to devices for the government when it comes to classified communication. If Google has any say in the matter, however, it won’t be that way forever. Google wants to take Android security to the next level, making it the default platform for government and military use.

Google, along with George Mason University, is working very closely with the NSA to develop a top level security certified version of Android. A “hardened” kernel has already been developed and is being tested for its Federal Information Processing Standard 104-2 certification. Eventually, Android will have a higher security clearance than BlackBerry.

The Army, Justice Department, White House and FBI have all shown interest in using the new high security Android in both tablets and phones. The government is looking to push communications away from radios and towards smartphones. According to Michael McCarthy, operations director of the Army’s Brigade Modernization Command’s Mission Command Complex, the move from radios to phones is “potentially a multi-billion dollar effort.” Android will be a huge part of that.

With the pace at which things are currently going, the highly secure version of Android should be available by 2012. Android devices could be deployed as soon as late March of next year.

Via: Android Police

Source: GCN

Dustin Earley: Tech enthusiast; avid gamer; all around jolly guy.

    Most Tweeted This Week

  • Bpear96

    All i have to say is.. WOW :)

  • Panatella

    Also, this would mean ALL traffic will go through Google’s servers. think about that. No wonder a government wants in on this.

    • http://fauxtronic.com fauxtronic

      Why? Has there been a suggestion that Google will copy Blackberry’s model?

  • csampson89

    google surely is ambitious, and they should be

    • Dustin Earley

      If anyone can break into this market, it would be them.

  • Donald

    I love Dustin’s posts. Straight to the point.

    Those posts with loads of questions are kind of annoying.

    Keep it up fella. :)

    • charlie88

      I tuly whole-heartedly agree with you. What’s up with the ridiculous three or four questions at the end of eve post? Or is it maybe sometimes five questions? Or could it be that I like to ask stuff? Will you let me know in the comments? Go ahead, post something!

      It’s kind of irritating and makes me feel like I’m being talked to like a five year old. There are better ways to try and get more interaction from your readers. It’s lead me to totally ignore the last few sentences of all posts on this site.

      • charlie88


  • CactusCat

    This one even dumbfounded the trolls. Nary a troll in sight because this left them speechless.

    • inviolable

      Give it time. They’re just getting last minute direction from Siri before posting.

  • sap26

    The military just recently did a field study using Android, Blackberry, IOS and webOS to find the best and most user friendly devices to use out in the field. I guess this tells us who won that. Glad to see security a big concern as well. Before, the Blackberry 8330 seemed to be the standard issue.

  • http://None CaribGrackle

    Yeah, people can say what they want, I don’t care if Google becomes Skynet… I’ll happily fight for the glory of our Android overlords ;D haha

    This some awesome news, hoping they bring some of that security for civil use.

  • Serpico

    Can you IM me my ID and password, I forgot it.

  • The Android Advocate

    Significant ~ Necessary ~ Bring on the “Hardened Kernel” ~ Will enjoy posting this one

  • SliestDragon

    Wow, that’s really cool. Awesome to see the government taking interest in android. Also nice to see android getting some tighter security. :)

  • Anon

    I see samsung has an android crypto module in process of getting reviewed for Federal Information Processing Standard 140-2 (small mistake in article listing 104-2)