[WT44]

Okay, it's 2018/1/17 and I finally got locker mode now.
I like everything about it, except that I think it would be better/safer to not have blurry thumbnails/preview pics/vids of protected photos and videos but just plain black thumbnails/preview pics.

If someone knows what a person probably has photographed, they sometimes still can make out what was being photographed. You can still see the colors and contours of the footage shot when looking at the thumbnails/previews. Not a good thing imho.

So, let's say your profession is a journalist in some dictatorship country and you want to take some quick snap shots of some statue or building and you get caught. While they flip through your previews they sure as hell can see the contours of that statue or building and take you with them for further interrogation without even seeing the actual image. You can't bluff your way out that you were simply checking a message or trying to call someone.

Same for when for instance you would take a photograph of a painting in some museum of at some private exhibition which opens for general public in a month or so. If I want to take a snap shot for personal use and if some of the hosts/guards would like to check my phone to see what they think I did, then I have no chance to bluff my way out what I was doing. The blurriness of the thumbnails/preview image/video does not prevent to figure out what was being shot.

An example.

This is a painting by the Dutch artist Mondriaan.



Take a photo of it using locker mode, and then have a look at the thumbnail/zoomed preview pic. Zero chance to convince someone you were simply checking your e-mail messages or listening to your voicemails when they would ask you to open up the photo app to check if you took a photograph!!

I think this blurriness is a poor choice regarding "privacy" for more serious matters. I can imagine people working in a war zone or other serious profession to still be careful using locker mode and mos likely not use it at all when it matters most.
It shouldn't be a gimmick in my book.

It kinda reminds me of the security levels of paper shredders:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_shredder

You have level Level P-1 to P-7/DIN 1-6:
https://www.abe-online.com/paper-shr...s-of-security.
https://www.shreddingmachines.co.uk/din32757-1.asp
Which Security Level?
https://www.machine-solution.com/Shr...ecurity-Levels

I think the current blurriness compares to P3 at most.

I already expressed my concerns here on October 13th, 2017:
https://forums.crackberry.com/showth...1#post13044828

But I think this subject matter warrants its own thread.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Not sure how big a market there is for working in a War Zone or under a dictatorship. Proable better to focus on general consumers that are just trying to hide a "sexy" pic.


In the end, I expect if they (officials) looked at your phone and found something they could not access... they'd load you up and let someone else find out what your phone and you were hiding. You'd be much better off if the files were invisible (no thumbnails, no file names, no app icon that say SECURITY OR LOCKER OR HIDE ME), unless unlocked. And probable best if your not using a device that is known to have a locker feature too.

[WT44]

The journalist working under such conditions is of course an extreme example, and of course we can debate a lot about the fact that in such countries they will simply just lock you up and grab your finger or amputate your finger and place it on the scanner without any judicial procedure. Such extreme situations can happen, but it is not what the general consumer will experience.

But like I said many times before, something does not always need to be important for the general consumer to be considered important regardless. Some guys don't even find locker mode important at all:
https://forums.crackberry.com/blackb...es-app-1134993 That doesn't mean it can't be useful for the majority who does like to use locker mode on occasion. I'm just trying to say, that the general consumer would also benefit if BB would make a great product even better, even though the regular Joe finds the protection sufficient as it is.

The second example of attending an art galleries (which only opens for the general public at a later time) can be considered a more real life situation; Or while on vacation where you see more and more signs that say you can't photograph the most insignificant things for whatever unimportant reasons.

When I was @ Abu Dhabi airport in 2012, I just took a last selfie in the airport with my relatives before they took off and some guard came up to me asking me what I was photographing. He said it was forbidden to take photographs when there are airplanes on the back ground for some reason. I would have hated if he would have asked for a quick peek on my phone, would see the blurry photo and would identify/recognize the contours of the big window, other airport things like benches, and the back ground figure of a plane and would take me to some room for further investigation to sniff through my recent photos and/or demand deletion right on the spot. I bluffed my way out saying I did a Skype call, but if he asked to take a peek I would oblige and then he would see the contours of the plane in the back ground. Luckily I still have that picture as I haven't seen those relatives of mine ever since and it doesn't seem I will for the next decade.

Another example. Last time in Singapore I wanted to take a snap shot inside a tax-free shop as I had to bring back a bottle of booze but they didn't know the name of the brand any longer. They knew which one they wanted if they would see the bottle. I took a quick snap shot of the shelf and was asked to not take photographs. Surely they would not ask me to go through my gallery to delete said picture, but hypothetically if they would ask, I would rather just have them see nothing at all (meaning a black thumbnail or whatever) without a chance to go through all of my protected pics. Result: I wasn't able to buy any bottle of booze. If I had locker mode and if the blurriness would be less identifiable, I would probably take a few photos of two other shelves while acting like I was making a phone call. Now I had to chicken out.

Another example. My cousin was @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checkpoint_Charlie not so long ago and must have missed the sign that it wasn't allowed to take snap shots inside the museum: Welcome to the Mauermuseum - Museum Haus am Checkpoint Charlie - The Original Wall Museum An employee asked him to leave the premises. I can imagine that with his charm and by playing the "dumb tourist" he could've bluffed his way out of it by opening the gallery and showing that he didn't took a photograph of that little blue car. https://www.instagram.com/p/BLtuKL0D...ed=mauermuseum Now the contours of that car and the blue color could unmistakably be identified as said car. No way to bluff your way out of the situation.

Why not make a privacy feature a little bit more all-encompassing and thus make it a little bit more private IF it is something that could be incorporated easily? That's all I wanted to convey.

And while you're at it, kindly have a look at another annoyance: the semi-transparent bars while shooting footage: https://forums.crackberry.com/showth...1#post13076543

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

It's TCL App, maybe they'll put more effort into refining it and it will better meet your needs in the future.

[WT44]

It's TCL App, maybe they'll put more effort into refining it and it will better meet your needs in the future.

I know that the camera app can't be found under BlackBerry Limited in the Google Play store any longer, but are you saying that the camera app (and its development) has nothing to do with BlackBerry any longer? All future updates/improvements (if any), such as recently locker mode and the accompanying files is 100% TCL developed?

I thought that BlackBerry somehow just considered the cam app a finished project and that any (small) improvements that are still in the pipe are easy enough to simply add with any software update (like they did for locker mode/files) and that that's the reason the app got pulled from Google Play store.

I also thought the tech people from BlackBerry were still responsible for everything software related (apps + OS). And that the tech guys who are working on this and who are active here are BlackBerry employed: https://forums.crackberry.com/blackb...-forum-1103064

Software = BlackBerry and Hardware = TCL (starting with devices after the Priv) is probably not correct any longer then? Did I miss some kind of announcement on CrackBerry?

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

I know that the camera app can't be found under BlackBerry Limited in the Google Play store any longer, but are you saying that the camera app (and its development) has nothing to do with BlackBerry any longer? All future updates/improvements (if any), such as recently locker mode and the accompanying files is 100% TCL developed?

I thought that BlackBerry somehow just considered the cam app a finished project and that any (small) improvements that are still in the pipe are easy enough to simply add with any software update (like they did for locker mode/files) and that that's the reason the app got pulled from Google Play store.

I also thought the tech people from BlackBerry were still responsible for everything software related (apps + OS). And that the tech guys who are working on this and who are active here are BlackBerry employed: https://forums.crackberry.com/blackb...-forum-1103064

Software = BlackBerry and Hardware = TCL (starting with devices after the Priv) is probably not correct any longer then? Did I miss some kind of announcement on CrackBerry?

THe OS and ome Apps are BlackBerry, Hardware, Drivers and some Apps are the OEMs (TCL) in this case - for the Aurora it was who ever made it for BB Merah Putih.

For the KEYone, BlackBerry had all ready done most of the work as it had been in development for almost a year by that point. But going forward, app like the camera are more hardware specific. And TCL already had most these other apps that the added on their TCL and Alcatel lines. Made sense to round out the user experience on their BlackBerry branded devices.