Posts by Mister Jones 18 publicly visible posts • joined 3 Jan 2024
If an endpoint has been compromised with Pegasus, Signal or Telegram or TeleMessage are all compromised......
...because the miscreant controlling Pegasus can see everything in plain text on the end point!
(1) Just ask Angela Merkel!!!
(2) Have agents elsewhere in the administration used Pegasus on THEIR OWN COLLEAGUES??
Paranoid? No.....not me!!
Here at Linux Mansions Quicken has been running on Linux for about ten years.
......snags: it's a CD-based Windows release from 2006
......and: you need WINE on Linux.....but it installs and works fine with no probs.....
......which makes me wonder......maybe M$ Money would work fine with Linux/WINE?
In summary:
(1) Apple iPhones report back to Cupertino when they find (by Bluetooth) a "Find My" device in the neighbourhood
(2) Apple iPhones report back to Cupertino when they find a handy geolocation service on a nearby WiFi router
(3) Any other mobile phones using WiFi for GPS may be (are?) reported back to Cupertino
One wonders what other "facilities" are buried in:
- The WiFi infrastructure
- The iPhone software
- The Android software
I think we should be told!!!
P.S. Doesn't owning a burner seem increasingly attractive? Just saying!!!
@AC
Quote: ' Use of a burner phone, private encryption, or even a VPN, will immediately flag you as a "person of interest" '
Think about it -- if the personal identity and the end point are both obfuscated..........
...........exactly who is THE PERSON in "the person of interest"??????
@codejunky
Quote: "This sort of thing should be centralised"
What "sort of thing" exactly?????
It's clear that you are thinking about a "centralised" application provider.
But there are other ways of doing this:
(1) Define a STANDARD set of processes for county councils
(2) Develop a STANDARD software package aimed at county coucils
(3) Sell umpty-up licences for individual councils to buy and implement on their own
So.....standard process.....umpty-up individual implementations.
How hard could this be?
.....and it might mean that huge corporations (ORACLE, SAP,.....) don't have a lock in with their huge cloud-based products!!
But......what do I know??
(1) get rid of all that encryption kerfuffle used for payments
(2) replace with good old EBCDIC (mmmmmm....maybe UTF-8.....maybe ASCII) 80-column stuff
Less code, smaller network traffic, simpler hardware (you know 8086 and 16 bit assembler).........
No huge costs for "the cloud".......less money for Jeff Bezos.......
Simples!!!!
Oh....and the SW1 contingent behind the Online Safety Act 2024 would just LOVE THIS SUGGESTION TO DEATH!!!!!
The Americans were listening in to Angela Merkel's phone.
The British were listening in to Belgian telecoms (targets unknown).
The NSA is istening in to almost any voice communication in the USA (and maybe elsewhere too).
Oh......and then there's a long tradition of Fort Meade "influencing" the design of Cisco equipment.
So why is anyone surprised when we learn that the Russians have figured out some of the Fort Meade "enhancements" to Cisco products?
....and not just WebEx!!!!
Quote (William Burroughs): "The paranoid is a person who knows a little of what is going on."
@Helcat
....but who says that when the customer pays up, Meta does actually stop data collection?.....and actually stops selling stolen data?
Who....exactly....will validate that the processes at Meta ACTUALLY DO STOP?
I can only see a promise to stop pushing advertising!
@Mage
........and your point is.......exactly what?
Yes....INMOS was an interesting UK company.......which led exactly where?
Growth......growth is the subject. Growth might mean.....more jobs....more personal income....more profits.....more dividends.....greater ability for ordinary folk to buy houses.....
Where does INMOS figure in that picture?
One central argument for centralised data is that there are huge benefits for improvements in diagnosis, and then perhaps improvements in treatment.
We are also told that personal privacy is protected because the records are "pseudonymised".
Unfortunately, the Government completely fails to mention some central arguments about risks:
(1) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/23/anonymised-data-never-be-anonymous-enough-study-finds
(2) No mention of "data in transit"..... focus only on a final "central database"
(3) Never mind Palatir SELLING the data, or otherwise abusing trust, what about unknown third parties HACKING the database
Then there's the relaibility of each NHS Trust in the first place:
(4) https://www.ft.com/content/6954971e-5d3a-11e9-939a-341f5ada9d40
(5) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/03/google-deepmind-16m-patient-royal-free-deal-data-protection-act
And even Government agencies routinely ignore the law......never mind Palantir:
(6) https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/10/ipco_report_2020/
Yup........It's not just that Palantir is a "contract too far".....Government agencies, NHS Trusts, and the basic technology are all BIG RISKS too!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
