The privacy sub may be even more paranoid than the stim subs.

This haunts them in their sleep:

programming-communism

  • ChaosMaterialist [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    That's not protection, and worse its giving you a false sense of security. I don't make my recommendations because I hate tech, but because (from a security posture) the attack surface is so large it is impossible to verify it cannot be used against you, and the consequences of that mistake are life-altering.

    • A SIM merely says you are Authorized to use the network. The phone still makes connections to the cellular network. All phones on the market allow emergency calls even without a SIM card.

    • Both your cellular chip and your WiFi chip broadcast their unique MAC address to every router/tower they see, and all of this information is logged.

    • Just like a burner phone, police can get the location data from the carrier and towers, and use that to trace where that phone went. If you brought that phone near other devices, those devices or your own location can be deduced.

    You see this over and over: Big Protest ➡ Police Geofence warrant ➡ Cell logs ➡ Arrests. Given the criminalization of protests this will become the norm. If you want to get rid of advertising, many of the suggestions here are fine. But none of them go far enough to protect you beyond that, even from Big Tech surveillance.

    • LoveSausage@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      1 year ago

      True that for just using a sim card less phone.

      However

      GOS airplane mode disable any connection to the cellular network. If I'm wrong if love to hear some evidence to the contrary.

      • ChaosMaterialist [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        If I'm wrong if love to hear some evidence to the contrary.

        It's not that we are wrong or right, we cannot verify. That is the danger. In a high security environment I treat everything as suspect until proven otherwise. However when you do not use technology you categorically exclude an entire attack surface, and it is extremely simple to get right.

        • LoveSausage@lemmygrad.ml
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure , not using a phone is of course the best option. If that is an option. For most people, activist or criminals of any kind. Not usually an option.

          You can at least verify the Foss code. Or trust the people that verify it.

          • ChaosMaterialist [he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            I'm not responding to be mean, so I'm sorry if this feels like bullying. I've had friends and comrades arrested and jailed, and I don't want anybody falling into that trap if it can be easily avoided. I'm trying to point out the Ideologies (*sniff* zizek-fuck ), the things you don't know you know, so that you can operate a much stronger security posture.

            Sure , not using a phone is of course the best option. If that is an option. For most people, activist or criminals of any kind. Not usually an option.

            • The first Ideology is using the same device in both high and low security environments. Don't. Use multiple devices and compartmentalize aggressively. In security posture, you are only as secure as your weakest point. This is why those "criminals" use a different burner phone. Using a single device to communicate with grandma and radicals is a recipe for baking and arrest. I consider hexbear-retro a low-security place where I shitpost and goof off, but I absolutely do not engage in any hexbear-direct-action here because it would be trivial to trace it to me. Same with my regular cell phone, which I text grandma baking recipes but never use it during protests.

            • The second Ideology is thinking you are excluded from those so called "activists and criminals" while participating in very leftists and public online spaces. I guarantee cop and fedposting watch both Lemmygrad and Hexbear as I type this, and they don't give a single post-hog! Rude! To them we are all being gay and doing crime. Have fun giving them PIGPOOPBALLS but you deliberately never go beyond that.

            You can at least verify the Foss code. Or trust the people that verify it.

            • This is the third Ideology. You are trusting somebody you don't know for your safety, and you are trusting they did their job. Likewise, yes you can verify yourself, but did you actually verify yourself? Again, attack surface. Yes there are ways to mitigate this, and yes you could verify, but it's mitigation not exclusion. Excluding tech renders you invulnerable to this. Freedom/Libre software can only guarantee your freedom, not your security/safety, and this is why every FOSS license disclaims all liability for use of their software. Looking at it another way, why put yourself in a position where you must trust somebody else for your safety?