Comment on FBI Couldn’t Get into WaPo Reporter’s iPhone Because It Had Lockdown Mode Enabled
floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day agoI am not moving goalposts or making different statements, I’m not the user you were replying to.
I also mostly agree with you, but my angle is that the difference between “the government can get into virtually any phone” and “the government can get into most phones” is that the latter makes it seem like you can be “smart/knowledgeable enough” to avoid that, and that’s untrue. You should assume everything you keep on your phone can be extracted because of the nature of smartphone manufacturers, the supply chain etc, but I do not believe no phone can’t be broken into like OP was saying.
dev_null@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
I get what you are saying but I’m seeing this from a different perspective.
The first statement is saying “there is nothing you can do”. You shouldn’t care about your privacy, you shouldn’t try to be careful, you shouldn’t fight for yourself. The government is all powerful and you should accept your fate. That’s why I don’t like these sweeping absolute statements. They promote giving up.
The other is “this is hard, but it’s possible to win”. And sure, you probably won’t win if the government is specifically targeting you and sending agents with rubber hoses against you. But in all likelihood they aren’t. And there are many things you can do to prevent actual passive surveillance affecting you.
floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
I am not saying privacy is a lost cause, I fully agree with you on your approach. But there’s a big difference between minimizing your footprint to avoid passive surveillance, and the FBI having your phone