121
Cover up (lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] baines@lemmy.cafe 4 points 17 hours ago

it’s not in a threat profile because phones are not allowed around those places of higher security

well unless you are Trump or this ahole

[-] Aqivex@fedinsfw.app 0 points 15 hours ago

I'll risk being pedantic, because it matters and I was very careful with my prior wording, enough that if you apply the same mental trick on a re-read, maybe what I intended will land.

Phones are not allowed in some forms of high security settings for most people, because that is the response to their place in the threat profile.

The fascists have to be abide by the same concepts, and they have their own threat profiles to contend with.

Doofus pictured is breaking the easiest solution to his profile with tape, because he's decided the convenience of having the phone outweighs the easy security of an assistant outside the secure digital perimeter standing by to relay messages, and has enough backing resources to even possibly back that hubris up.

Your comment has nothing to do with mine however.

Which is that the kind of person who needs to worry about having their camera remotely operated without their authorization, the kind of person for whom that level of care in their threat profile applies to, is no longer limited to just being the Head of Shitheads somewhere.

The technology to sort through a bunch of random cock and ball flashing random pictures to find the one time a target's phone captured something useful six months ago, is trivial now.

All it takes to go from not having your camera turn on as a concern, to it being wise to be covering your camera nowadays and in the near future, is simply having posted the wrong memes, and having the wrong sort of app on your phone or otherwise any sort of miscalculation in your software security profile.

[-] baines@lemmy.cafe 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

lmao it really doesnt matter, could you be any more up your own ass

but anyway this isnt about having google or apple scanning your phone files

anyone paranoid (rightly or not) enough to think they need to physically cover their camera shouldnt have a phone with a fucking camera

there is a reason presidents in the past got a special locked down phone, and the fact certain idiot heads of state not using those special phones while discussing even state secrets is a big deal

if you are covering the camera but not worried about the mic…

and lol if you think this cant be done remotely with 0 user input

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/21/trump-phone-security-risk-hackers-601903

anyone this important needs to be using a safe device, said device would not need a sticker on its camera, and probably would not have a camera to begin with

[-] Aqivex@fedinsfw.app -2 points 13 hours ago

You're arguing with yourself, while agreeing with me, while calling me up my ass?

Who's your drug dealer, I want to meet 'em.

[-] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 points 11 hours ago

my point hasnt changed

if you couldnt get how it was relevant the first time that is on you

and i called you up your own ass because of the very thing you are doing here again

anyway, waste of time have a block

this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2026
121 points (90.6% liked)

Privacy

5061 readers
652 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS