If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model InExistence
On 3/1/2018 10:02 AM, ultred ragnusen wrote:
Davoud wrote: As for the safety of phones, what I might or might not know about that is not for your eyes. In essence, the safety of your mobile phone lies in the fact that no one is listening. You and your communications are of no importance to the intelligence community. You /wish/ that were the case the our government doesn't illegally spy on our citizens, but you have to remember /many/ a president has broken the Constitution by ordering our own government to spy on our citizens, illegally. Take, for example, the well-known fact of what J. Edgar Hoover did over a series of presidencies, or that Lyndon Johnson ordered the spying of anti-war demonstrators. Also take, for example, those Cessnas flying daily over our cities, scooping up the IMEIs and locations of tens of thousands of innocent people in each flight. Bear in mind that the actual communication (the very words spoken and the texts sent) of law-abiding US citizens are also scooped up very often by the intelligence community, e.g., on any overseas telephone call to your own grandchildren as they travel abroad. Back to the main point, there is no communication device that is secure. None. Anyone who thinks they have security should just read the Zimmermann telegram, or read about the Purple or JN24 or the black code or ultra enigma communications or even the Cairo diplomatic cables of WWII infamy, where entire extremely well motivated and well funded government bureaucracies /thought/ that their communications were secure, which made them /feel/ safe, just as the owners of brand X mobile devices are made to /feel/ safe, that feeling for which they pay through the nose, and which is vapor. All this doesn't mean we should give up on security; it just means that no mobile device is secure when all of them have the same weak links. This will help you: https://www.amazon.com/Electro-Deflecto/b/ref=w_bl_sl_ap_ap_web_15111668011?ie=UTF8&node=151 11668011&field-lbr_brands_browse-bin=Electro+Deflecto -- PeterN |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
In article ,
ultred ragnusen wrote: My main point is that /all/ cellphones have the same set of weakest links where anyone who actually /feels/ safe because the excellent M-A-R-K-E-T-I-N-G of the brand made them /feel/ safe, is a fool. Security isn't binary, it's a continuum. No one is completely safe, but if there's less information on your phone, the danger from the government cracking it is lower. And if the phone has better encryption, then you're more safe. -- Barry Margolin Arlington, MA |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
PeterN wrote:
All this doesn't mean we should give up on security; it just means that no mobile device is secure when all of them have the same weak links. This will help you: https://www.amazon.com/Electro-Deflecto/b/ref=w_bl_sl_ap_ap_web_15111668011?ie=UTF8&node=151 11668011&field-lbr_brands_browse-bin=Electro+Deflecto That's humorous, so if I take that only in the humorous light, no response is needed. However, you'll note that I simply stated that no consumer mobile device is secure, simply because they all have the same weak links. In addition, I proved extremely well documented examples of where entire government bureaucracies /thought/ they were safe, when they were clearly not. Those are simply facts. If the tin-foil hat was merely meant as humor, then that's fine; but if the hat was meant to imply an undue fear of the facts, then you missed the point, because I'm the one who is reasonable and logical in presenting well verified facts. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
In article , ultred ragnusen
wrote: Forget black helicopters, FBI flying surveillance Cessnas over US cities. they can fly them all they want, but all they'll get is encrypted data, which will take a few few billion years to brute force. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
In article , ultred
ragnusen wrote: However, you'll note that I simply stated that no consumer mobile device is secure, simply because they all have the same weak links. that is false. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
Barry Margolin wrote:
Security isn't binary, it's a continuum. No one is completely safe, but if there's less information on your phone, the danger from the government cracking it is lower. And if the phone has better encryption, then you're more safe. You bring up a logical but potentially fallacious argument. It's sort of like saying pregnancy isn't binary, or that death isn't binary, since there are stages to both. More to the point, it's sort of like saying that a chain isn't only as strong as its weakest link, where anyone who wants to break the chain will simply attack the weakest link. Hence, here's a philosophical question for you to ponder, given your statement that security isn't binary. Q: What is the relative immunity of successful penetration by an adversary who is attacking two mobile phones, where both mobile phones have the exact same weakest link? Is that a binary answer, or not? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
nospam wrote:
Forget black helicopters, FBI flying surveillance Cessnas over US cities. they can fly them all they want, but all they'll get is encrypted data, which will take a few few billion years to brute force. You wish. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
nospam wrote:
However, you'll note that I simply stated that no consumer mobile device is secure, simply because they all have the same weak links. that is false. You don't even /know/ what those weak links are. C'mon. We've asked you to back up your assertions, and you can't. What is the weakest link in /all/ consumer mobile phones? I'll wait for your answer.... I'm still waiting... |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
In article , ultred
ragnusen wrote: Q: What is the relative immunity of successful penetration by an adversary who is attacking two mobile phones, where both mobile phones have the exact same weakest link? except that they aren't the same. everything on an iphone is encrypted and for all intents, impossible to crack. cracking encryption on android phones is child's play. most of them aren't even encrypted because it slows the phone down too much. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
In article , ultred
ragnusen wrote: However, you'll note that I simply stated that no consumer mobile device is secure, simply because they all have the same weak links. that is false. You don't even /know/ what those weak links are. not only do i know what they are, but i know what's needed to crack iphone encryption. you do not. all you do is spew nonsense about planes flying overhead (which doesn't actually happen) that scan for imeis, which won't do a damned thing to crack the encryption on the phone itself. for that, you need the passcode, which if it's complex, will take a few billion years to crack, and the imei won't help you at all, |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
iPhone addicts cut-back on their children's food to afford latest iPhone | nospam | Digital Photography | 9 | August 31st 16 05:12 AM |
iphone crybaby sues Nikon (boo hoo! No iPhone support for D500 wifi!! | Mark Storkamp[_2_] | Digital Photography | 15 | June 25th 16 05:20 PM |
my application for iPhone: Model Pose | George Kerby | Digital Photography | 0 | November 12th 08 04:05 PM |
my application for iPhone: Model Pose | Folley Angstrom | Digital Photography | 0 | November 12th 08 07:53 AM |
The Existence of God | Happy Man | Digital Photography | 9 | March 1st 07 06:32 AM |