Oh for real? Learn something new today.
umami_wasbi
joined 2 years ago
The buyers/downloaders don't get caught is just because there are too many of them and going after the distributor is an easy target.
it can. I'm not saying it does, but it absolutely can
WhatsApp? It can by piggybacking the content on the client itself. It can't read on the server if it's as advertised as following the Signal Protocol.
But that kind of functionality either need targeted deployment, or have that built-in to the client in public channel. It doesn't matter if they does it or if they can do it, the logic of that functionality still have to exist somewhere. I would believe some nerds would pickup some indicators and had that reversed engineered long ago.
Without a solid proof, I would on the err side and refrain from claiming such.
They both are bad in privacy in one way or the other. WhatsApp is collecting vast trove of data about you, though it can't read the chat itself. Telegram doesn't have end-to-end encryption enabled by default, means anyone have access to the server can read your chat history, though you're last subject to data collection.
If you're doing illicit activity though, WhatsApp is better than Telegram because the chat contents are the evidence those law enforcements are going after, not the connection. They can't arrest you because you make friends with a criminal, but they absolutely can because you have a criminal action recorded in chat history.
Meanwhile, the UK is asking for blanket access to all data from Apple.
Also, how expensive is it to get updates from Cisco and patch those routers?
Ah, I see. That's the efficiency they're looking for.
I used to use dedicated server from OneProvider in Paris.
Disable iCloud backups, and do backup manually with iTunes plus the backup password set.
Run Wireshark on the client to see if you actually got the reply.
I recently switched to NextDNS. I used to run my own AdGuard Home with multiple DNS provider as upstream.
(Rant)
At somepoint, HSBC decided KDE Connect installed via F-Droid is less secure.
Then it decide non-whitelisted keyborads are a security risk. Only Gboard and Samsung Keyboard is confirmed within the whitelist.
I understand the point that risk can be introduce at various points, yet this is simply too much. Yeah there are people phone infected by malware but from Play Store. Not a single time I heard one ever happened on F-Droid distributed apps, at least not from the official repo. Also, I will put more trust on an open source keyboard than any proprietary keyboard.
Furthermore, I'm shocked that an app can read my app list, and current keyboard (introduced in Android 14). This just make building a profile much easier as I belive everyone almost have an unique set of apps they like. I don't think any apps need such functionality. Why the f it needs to care what input devices I uses? This make me worry more about untold (aka burried deep in Privacy Policy) data collection.
162
Malaysia's plan to block overseas DNS dies after a day, but still need to stay vigilant
(www.theregister.com)
view more: next ›
Being privacy consious and the act of requesting to had your info removed is just put you on their radar as "normies" doesn't care.