dpkonofa

16 ms·

181.
by dpkonofa 4y ago
Then why are you unable to answer the question. What is the crime you're accusing him of and where is the evidence from the laptop to support that? It was not a lie. Unless you can prove that any of these claims are true, it wasn'
182.
by dpkonofa 4y ago
It wasn't a lie, though. The supposed smoking gun wasn't there. That's still a classic earmark of a Russian disinformation operation. You take something real and apply something false to it. The laptop may have been real but
183.
by dpkonofa 4y ago
That is not evidence. What is the crime that has supposedly been committed and what is the evidence that supports that accusation? Dumping the contents of a laptop and then shouting conspiracies isn't the same as making a claim and the
184.
by dpkonofa 4y ago
The people making the claims about the laptop are the ones that need to provide evidence. To date, nothing of substance has been released from the laptop (which has supposedly been in the possession of the parties making the claims for at l
185.
by dpkonofa 4y ago
It would simply be a connotation if Twitter's own documentation on what that tag means didn't explicitly state that the tag means that the source's editorial process may be influenced by the government organizations funding t
186.
by dpkonofa 4y ago
Is English your first language? This is pretty clear to mean that 100% of the cobalt used in the production is recycled and not sourced from outside their supply. If their production used some recycled cobalt and that filled in gaps using s
187.
by dpkonofa 4y ago
>They've not reduced waste, they're just producing less waste than they were before. reduce (n) - To bring down, as in extent, amount, or degree; diminish. synonym: decrease. This is the worst kind of pedantic because it's
188.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
This isn't the first time I've seen a vulnerability like this and it surprises me that people who make security focused software still have any of their features based on things like headers that are not trustworthy to begin with.
189.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
But that's the whole point. The display and the FaceID sensor are cryptographically signed. That's the entire complaint now. Before, it was the FaceID assembly that was part of the display assembly. Now they're separated bu
190.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
What are you on about? All you'd need to do is find the place where your target is going and either bribe the teenager behind the counter or, depending on the value of the target, compromise the distributor from wherever the parts are
191.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
Yes, because we definitely don't have the capability to connect hardware to some kind of wireless, global communications network... You people are ridiculous.
192.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
You don't think that would be more noticeable than something that's inside the computer?
193.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
Both of your statements are factually untrue for reasons already in the source article. You cannot just swap parts from one phone to another. The entire point here is that you cannot harvest the most profitable parts anymore because they ne
194.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
It’s not meant to prevent screen replacements, that’s the whole point. It’s meant to verify the chain of trust of the hardware involved in the security function of the device. If you move that from one device to another, you haven’t broken
195.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
You’re acting like they’re bypassing FaceID. They are not. They’re just moving an existing chain of trust to a new device.
196.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
Except it does. The only thing the “amateur repair technicians” have succeeded in doing is reactivated an existing FaceID sensor. That doesn’t mean they’ve bypassed it so, yes, it does prevent hacking.
197.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
It literally is an option. You can make fully encrypted backups locally without ever touching iCloud.
198.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
That's not how it works. You're the one making the claim, you have to show the evidence to support that claim. They have only claimed that their intention in doing this is to improve security on these devices and they've lite
199.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
>Someone who purchases an iPhone does not automatically endorse every single aspect of the iPhone. While this is true, it does point out that that's not an important enough factor for them to not buy the phone, though. All these c
200.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
Apple is not a monopoly so the rest of your statement is meaningless drivel. Also, if I recognize you from other threads, you tend to be pretty sensationalist so forgive me if I feel like you're the one selling a boogeyman.
201.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
While your general point is understandable, it's not really that my position is that I trust that Apple knows what's best for me and, if that's what you took away, then you've misunderstood my point. My point is that App
202.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
Physically moving the soldered chip from the original to the replacement doesn't disable FaceID, though. It just allows you to continue using FaceID. That means you still need the person whose phone it is to unlock it or the passcode u
203.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
As opposed to putting it where? Where else would you put the front-facing camera?
204.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
This is not true. Apple doesn't make a profit off of repair services.
205.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
>interests of consumers Clearly this isn't the case. It seems that the majority of consumers prefer the higher security posture of the iPhone as opposed to the low repairability. You claim it's a negligible security difference
206.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
The parent comment wasn't talking about simple DRM. They were making a specific point that Apple's motivation for hardening the hardware security of phones had nothing to do with actual security but was "anti-competitive garb
207.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
That's why this exists, though. You can't compromise the person if the hardware signing/check are done via software that's connected to a server. There's nothing a person can do to override that if the hardware does
208.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
Or, you know, you could just get access to the repair facility and compromise the phone that way...
209.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
Yes. If you can replace the microphone jack, or any of the other hardware you mention without verifying its integrity, you can add surveillance hardware to the device. I could replace your microphone with one that records everything and sen
210.
by dpkonofa 5y ago
You're wrong to say that the element of security it provides is low because, even with this workaround, you still don't have access to the data on the device. All this "workaround" does is keep the chain of trust from th

More ›