3 ms·
He would not be alive today no matter what phone he used.
by imwillofficial 5y ago
He would not be alive today no matter what phone he used.
- smoldesu 5y agoHard to say, his phone was the one that ratted him out.
- simonh 5y agoThe dude booked an appointment at the Saudi Embassy in advance and walked right into it. What did his phone have to do with it?
- doc_gunthrop 5y agoThe abductors obtained that information through his fiance's iPhone. This iPhone was infected with NSO's Pegasus malware and the infection was executed by sending a zero-click text message with automatic payload delivery. There isn't a notification when the message is received so the fiance wouldn't have known it was happening. This zero-click iMessage exploit is unique to iPhones.
- imwillofficial 5y agoYou missed my point. With an adversary that sophisticated, the actual method of compromise doesn’t matter. If he had an android the result would have been the same. Or a flip phone, or a landline, or if he lived in a cave.
- doc_gunthrop 5y agoYour point is that the device doesn't matter. If Khashoggi and his fiance had Android devices and used an encrypted messaging app such as Signal (or something similar like Session, Briar, etc.) his abduction would not have occurred as it did (even if MBS and his cohorts had control of an operator at the telecom). As I said, the zero-click exploit is exclusive to iPhones using iMessage. An Android device that receives a similar SMS requires the user's knowledge and willful intent in order to activate. The last zero-click SMS exploit had been patched back in 2015. So the device (and protocol) does actually matter.
- imwillofficial 5y agoNo, it doesn’t. It was said that He would be alive if He wasn’t using an iPhone. This is stupid. The end objective is that Saudi Intel wanted him dead. If He used Android, an Android zero day might have been used, of which there are many. In this case, He used an iPhone. A different phone, or no phone, would have made no difference to a state level actor.