It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!
On the "we know the attacker used WhatsApp 2 minutes before the attack, how do they know that?
Presumably if they have his phone, it's a case of hacking into the phone like the recent case in the US? Once into the phone, just open up the app to read everything?
I'm guessing that the only reason they know that WhatsApp was used is data from network carriers? Presumably WhatsApp uses a Defined port number so that it can be identified as a service but the content of any message cant be decrypted?
That's the whole point of Signal...such that even the FBI (unofficially) recommends people use it for sensitive conversations, because it's essentially uncrackable.
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!
If the authorities can unlock the phone (not heard the manufacturer mentioned yet ) they can read all of the WhatsApp content sent between the various parties?
In a technical sense no, because it's an entirely different architecture. In a practical sense...yes, because the encryption key for the messages is stored on the phone.
It pisses me off when people think that they can record my private activity under the banner of protection just because I'm doing it across public/third-party infrastructure.
Edit: Sorry wrong thread. Thought this was the dashcam one.
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!