4 ms·

Actually we know it wouldn't. The agents arresting him did in such a way that they prevented him from touching his laptop (by creating a diversion), because th

by 323 5y ago

Actually we know it wouldn't. The agents arresting him did in such a way that they prevented him from touching his laptop (by creating a diversion), because they were feared that such a protection might exist.

zionic 5y ago
If done properly the agents grabbing his laptop/snatching it away from him would have severed the power connection to the battery-remove laptop locking it permanently.
- Hamuko 5y ago
  >If done properly The man was running a multi-million dollar drug marketplace in a public library.
  - FearlessNebula 5y ago
    What was the logic behind that? So he couldn’t be traced back to his house?
    - 323 5y ago
      There was no logic. A public library is even worse for that purpose, because of security cameras and witnesses.
FearlessNebula 5y ago
What if he clipped it to his belt?
SamBam 5y ago
> The agents arresting him did in such a way that they prevented him from touching his laptop (by creating a diversion), because they were feared that such a protection might exist. But that's literally the scenario this physical-separation killswitch was designed for. He wouldn't have had to touch his laptop to trigger this. Quite the opposite.
- 323 5y ago
  You must be talking about a different device, because the one shown on this site only triggers if you carelessly move the laptop. It has no remote part, it doesn't matter how far the user is. If you're thinking about attaching the trigger to your hand with a lanyard, the agents could easily hold your hand in place, cut the lanyard, ... I don't understand why people always assume the FBI is brain-dead and could not use countermeasures against devices such as this if they become wide spread.
  - SamBam 5y ago
    You must have missed part of the description where they said the kill switch should be attached to the user's body. If the user is attached to the switch and moves more than 50 cm or so from their laptop, the switch is triggered.

by 323 5y ago

zionic 5y ago

If done properly the agents grabbing his laptop/snatching it away from him would have severed the power connection to the battery-remove laptop locking it permanently.

Hamuko 5y ago
>If done properly The man was running a multi-million dollar drug marketplace in a public library.
- FearlessNebula 5y ago
  What was the logic behind that? So he couldn’t be traced back to his house?
  - 323 5y ago
    There was no logic. A public library is even worse for that purpose, because of security cameras and witnesses.

FearlessNebula 5y ago

What if he clipped it to his belt?

SamBam 5y ago

> The agents arresting him did in such a way that they prevented him from touching his laptop (by creating a diversion), because they were feared that such a protection might exist. But that's literally the scenario this physical-separation killswitch was designed for. He wouldn't have had to touch his laptop to trigger this. Quite the opposite.

323 5y ago
You must be talking about a different device, because the one shown on this site only triggers if you carelessly move the laptop. It has no remote part, it doesn't matter how far the user is. If you're thinking about attaching the trigger to your hand with a lanyard, the agents could easily hold your hand in place, cut the lanyard, ... I don't understand why people always assume the FBI is brain-dead and could not use countermeasures against devices such as this if they become wide spread.
- SamBam 5y ago
  You must have missed part of the description where they said the kill switch should be attached to the user's body. If the user is attached to the switch and moves more than 50 cm or so from their laptop, the switch is triggered.