From: ultred ragnusen <>
Subject: Re: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
Full headers:
From: ultred ragnusen <>
Subject: Re: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:50:32 -0800
Organization: NNTP Server
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <1xxjbobasi29f.1giw1htnrfcsh$>
References: <O3ulC.173256$mJ1.28255@fx13.fr7> <> <280220181127370843%nospam@nospam.invalid> <> <> <1u0pxuq8eh5vl$> <> <16js8xeniqzb5$.1rsedrk0gykqk$> <> <1m5t0g04z96tw.1d5oa0toqb0ev$> <>
NNTP-Posting-Host: t50vM/wG/8hxNQaM2XV/
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3
Print Article
Forward Article
PeterN <peter,> wrote:

>> All this doesn't mean we should give up on security; it just means that no
>> mobile device is secure when all of them have the same weak links.
> This will help you:

That's humorous, so if I take that only in the humorous light, no response
is needed.

However, you'll note that I simply stated that no consumer mobile device is
secure, simply because they all have the same weak links.

In addition, I proved extremely well documented examples of where entire
government bureaucracies /thought/ they were safe, when they were clearly

Those are simply facts.

If the tin-foil hat was merely meant as humor, then that's fine; but if the
hat was meant to imply an undue fear of the facts, then you missed the
point, because I'm the one who is reasonable and logical in presenting well
verified facts.