03-11-17 05:16 PM
57 123
tools
  1. shawnpandey's Avatar
    No, Ted, not really.

    As has been said countless times (whether it sank in is a different question), you're gonna get tracked, by someone. Websites, OEMs, and now the government (not that it was a secret). You can feel safe in your usual tweezer-assisted onanistic frenzy about the superiority of BB10 and how Google AdSense is the second Holocaust or some other reason why lead paint is bad. Enjoy the validation; BlackBerry shows up eight times in Vault 7 and none of those instances have any relevance to exploits, just asides from articles about how irrelevant BlackBerry is.

    The fact that should be inscribed on a diamond tipped drill is that it's impossible short of moving to a cabin in Montana to completely avoid any government or non-government entity noting something down. It's a transaction. What do I get out of, say, Google services? Quite a lot; off site backup for media and files, easy syncing, an app store that actually has worthwhile offerings, things normal people use. What would I get out of tinfoil hattery? High blood pressure, paranoia, and a God complex.
    Whoa buddy put away the thesaurus. Just relax and take a deep breath.

    Posted via CB10
    03-11-17 06:19 AM
  2. fatclue_98's Avatar
    "When a person sends a letter, the contents of the letter are protected by the Fourth Amendment, because the letter is sealed.

    When a person sends data on the Internet, would the same argument hold?
    The internet is not a conduit owned, maintained and serviced by the government. The US Postal Service is. You send a letter and it never comes in contact with public hands until it reaches its destination. While the USPS may use contracted operators at times, they are bound by the same rules as if it were Postal Service employees.

    Anything you send over the internet is fair game because there is no expectation of privacy, whether real or imagined, simply because you've chosen a private conduit for information transfer.
    03-11-17 04:15 PM
  3. deadcowboy's Avatar
    Cars can be driverless without having to be connected to the internet.
    It's such a waste of bandwidth and energy. It's much more energy efficient to avoid a 1Gb/s link to the cloud.
    There is enough room and battery in a car to have all its brains and clouds in the car. But the powers at be have no interest in driverless cars that can think for themselves and do not report to the big brother.

    Posted via CB10
    You don't want to drive around in a radiation-soaked cancer car?

    Posted via CB10
    03-11-17 04:34 PM
  4. deadcowboy's Avatar
    The internet is not a conduit owned, maintained and serviced by the government. The US Postal Service is. You send a letter and it never comes in contact with public hands until it reaches its destination. While the USPS may use contracted operators at times, they are bound by the same rules as if it were Postal Service employees.

    Anything you send over the internet is fair game because there is no expectation of privacy, whether real or imagined, simply because you've chosen a private conduit for information transfer.
    Wait a second. Could I go hop on public wifi at starbucks and steal a bunch of people's banking info, ssn's, possibly confidential govt emails from the guy in the corner...and then I could post it online, as there is no expectation that this info is private? I'm in the clear, right?

    Posted via CB10
    85_305 likes this.
    03-11-17 04:37 PM
  5. conite's Avatar
    Wait a second. Could I go hop on public wifi at starbucks and steal a bunch of people's banking info, ssn's, possibly confidential govt emails from the guy in the corner...and then I could post it online, as there is no expectation that this info is private? I'm in the clear, right?

    Posted via CB10
    "Federal law makes it illegal to intercept electronic communications, but it includes an important exception. It's not illegal to intercept communications "made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public."
    03-11-17 04:53 PM
  6. fatclue_98's Avatar
    Wait a second. Could I go hop on public wifi at starbucks and steal a bunch of people's banking info, ssn's, possibly confidential govt emails from the guy in the corner...and then I could post it online, as there is no expectation that this info is private? I'm in the clear, right?

    Posted via CB10
    What you're suggesting is no different than plucking mail out of a letter carrier's bag - they're both illegal. What I was referring to is that if you send a letter through the USPS and the Postal Service wants to take a peek, they'll need to find a drunk judge to sign off on a warrant. An ISP on the other hand......read your terms and conditions. You may want to think twice about sending sensitive information over the internetz. I have Comcast and they spell it out clearly - any communication with a 3rd party (i.e. anyone other than you or Comcast) and you are on your own as far as risks and security. Assange has made a living out of this.

    Sent from Alcatel Idol 4S with Windows via mTalk
    03-11-17 04:54 PM
  7. AluminiumRims's Avatar
    Does this mean the keyone is safe or not safe?
    That means that KeyOne is just as safe as any Android phone.
    03-11-17 05:16 PM
57 123

Similar Threads

  1. What's in your phone graveyard and what still works?
    By RoyaleWChz in forum Rehab & Off-Topic Lounge
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-24-17, 07:49 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-08-17, 01:19 PM
  3. Is the KEYone worth getting if not part of an enterprise?
    By CrackBerry Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-07-17, 10:07 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-07-17, 08:17 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-07-17, 07:48 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD