Groups > comp.mobile.android > #33030 > unrolled thread

Why would iOS be safer from spying than a well setup Android phone?

Started by	Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com>
First post	2016-08-02 19:37 +0000
Last post	2016-08-08 05:49 +0200
Articles	20 on this page of 127 — 17 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Next page →

#33492

From	tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
Date	2016-08-17 16:12 -0400
Message-ID	<1tk87qb6q18zv.mmajgosn4m1f$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to	#33462

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 23:11:02 -0700, AL wrote:

> How about a Motorola Droid Turbo 2 with 6.0?

To my way of thinking, that's an out-and-out device replacement, not an
Android version upgrade :-) . But thanks for the idea. Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33557

From	Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
Date	2016-08-19 19:12 +0000
Message-ID	<e1p40tFp0mrU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#33492

tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 23:11:02 -0700, AL wrote:
> 
> > How about a Motorola Droid Turbo 2 with 6.0?
> 
> To my way of thinking, that's an out-and-out device replacement, not an
> Android version upgrade :-) . But thanks for the idea. Cheers, -- tlvp

  Sadly enough, that's the state of things these days. If you want/need
a newer version of Android, you 'just' throw away your device and get a
new one.

  Count yourself 'lucky'. You have a device which is many versions
behind and you still can - sort of - use it. That's not what the device
manufacturers want and that's why they obsolete your device after zero,
on or two updates. ('Top brand' Samsung's average is probably one
update.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33560

From	AL <noemail@none.com>
Date	2016-08-19 14:57 -0700
Message-ID	<phLtz.57708$n83.53933@fx43.iad>
In reply to	#33557

On 8/19/2016 12:12 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>   Sadly enough, that's the state of things these days. If you want/need
> a newer version of Android,

Updating is voluntary for me. I usually do it because I enjoy getting 
new toys. (It's called impulse buying... ;)

 >you 'just' throw away your device and get a new one.

Nope. The grandkids get the old ones. Everybody's happy...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33572

From	"Jeff Gaines" <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk>
Date	2016-08-20 07:53 +0000
Message-ID	<xn0k9yu9d6zzylp008@news.individual.net>
In reply to	#33560

On 19/08/2016 in message <phLtz.57708$n83.53933@fx43.iad> AL wrote:

>Nope. The grandkids get the old ones. Everybody's happy...

My grandkids have better toys than me :-(

-- 
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33575

From	Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
Date	2016-08-20 12:56 +0000
Message-ID	<e1r2clF8843U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#33560

AL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
> On 8/19/2016 12:12 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> 
> >   Sadly enough, that's the state of things these days. If you want/need
> > a newer version of Android,
> 
> Updating is voluntary for me. I usually do it because I enjoy getting 
> new toys. (It's called impulse buying... ;)

  I also enjoy getting new toys, but the pain of having to redo all the
configuration stuff is holding me back, especially because there's
always old stuff which is not available on the new device and the new
stuff requires re-inventing the wheel.

> you 'just' throw away your device and get a new one.
> 
> Nope. The grandkids get the old ones. Everybody's happy...

  Doesn't work for me, because I like/love my grandkids!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33465

From	Roy Smith <rasmith1959@live.com>
Date	2016-08-17 03:12 -0500
Message-ID	<np169e$qeq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#33461

On 8/17/2016 12:21 AM, tlvp wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 19:58:56 -0400, nospam wrote:
>
>> In article <msffjqxvq81r$.oopkq1qqd1iv.dlg@40tude.net>, tlvp
>> <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Here on Android 2.3.5
>>
>> yikes. time to upgrade.
>
> I quite agree, but neither Motorola nor Google seems interested in helping.
>
> Ideas? Thanks. Cheers, -- tlvp
>

In most cases having a device that runs an older version of Android like 
yours, the only way to upgrade would be to buy a new device.

-- 

Roy Smith
Windows 10 64 bit
Wednesday, August 17, 2016, 3:12 AM
Thunderbird 45.2.0

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33472

From	nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date	2016-08-17 10:16 -0400
Message-ID	<170820161016064469%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to	#33461

In article <vv6pr5yvstqa.t914kcdpfcsu.dlg@40tude.net>, tlvp
<mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:

> >> Here on Android 2.3.5
> > 
> > yikes. time to upgrade.
> 
> I quite agree, but neither Motorola nor Google seems interested in helping.

why would they? you're using a 5+ year old system and phone. 

> Ideas? Thanks. Cheers, -- tlvp

go to the nearest cell phone store and get yourself something new, then
flip the one you have on ebay for a few bucks, or donate it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33477

From	Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com>
Date	2016-08-17 17:11 +0000
Message-ID	<np25sa$1s2o$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#33459

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 19:58:56 -0400, nospam wrote:

>> Here on Android 2.3.5
> 
> yikes. time to upgrade.

In a phone like that, he probably can't upgrade the OS due to lack of
space.

I realize you may have meant upgrade the hardware, in which case, he can
certainly do that. In fact, I just sent a kid my choice of a factory
unlocked phone when I compared the best price performance of Apple versus
Android, which is a nice phone for the money.

Psssst ... compare features & price of:
- iPhone 6
- Galaxy S5
http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=6378&idPhone2=6033

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33478

From	Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com>
Date	2016-08-17 17:11 +0000
Message-ID	<np25sj$1s2o$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#33457

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 19:25:22 -0400, tlvp wrote:

> Here on Android 2.3.5 there's no "Options >". So there's no such tap-path.

Oh. Yuck. Drat. I'm on Android 4.x so that is the only Android I know.
Googling, I find this, which may help you:
 Changing the default music player on Android 2.3.5 device 
http://androidqueries.com/changing-default-music-player-android-2-3-5-device-28558.html

> There is a hard menu button, though, and pressing it at a home screen
> delivers an option Manage Apps. Once that's tapped, I certainly see Amazon
> Kindle, but if I select that as the app to manage, my only choices are
> Uninstall, Clear cache, and Share. There's an informational "Launch by
> default" heading with the info "No defaults set" and an inactive,
> grayed-out "Clear defaults" button. Nothing about "app preferences". 

Googling, I find a few other references which "might" help...

This talks about a default-manager app that you can *add* to Android:
 How To Remove, Change, Or Set Default Apps In Android
 http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/remove-change-set-default-apps-android/

> Sounds like something you Android 4 does that my Android 2.3.5 doesn't do.

Maybe you can *add* the feature to Android 2?
Did you try the Default App Manager Lite, by Appiator app yet?
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appiator.defaultappmanager&hl=en

Dunno if it will work - but it might add the capability you need.
Certainly I've used apps to add capabilities to Android that the stock oS
didn't have (e.g., app ops manager, app redirect, app back up and restore,
etc.).

Try it out, and let us know if it works for you.

>> Here is a screenshot of that action that I just bluetoothed over to my PC:
>> http://i.cubeupload.com/Y3XvcU.gif
> 
> Not to worry, I believe you.

I always try to prove what I says (as I'm *not* a typical iOS user!). :)

> No matter how concerned you are with iOS, I'm not. Now the BlackBerry
> PlayBook OS, *that* could concern me; but not in this thread, thanks :-) .

I care about *all* operating systems.

The users are the same on all operating systems, with the one addition that
a specific set of iOS users are a strange lot that is unique to iOS forums
and not found elsewhere.

The rest of the iOS users are the same as any other technical user - but
that one set is a strange bunch indeed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33493

From	tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
Date	2016-08-17 16:22 -0400
Message-ID	<svta9db05wmv.1iw3wefs3n9zq$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to	#33478

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:11:51 +0000 (UTC), Aardvarks wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 19:25:22 -0400, tlvp wrote:
> 
>> Here on Android 2.3.5 there's no "Options >". So there's no such tap-path.
> 
> Oh. Yuck. Drat. I'm on Android 4.x so that is the only Android I know.
> Googling, I find this, which may help you:
>  Changing the default music player on Android 2.3.5 device 
> http://androidqueries.com/changing-default-music-player-android-2-3-5-device-28558.html
> 
>> There is a hard menu button, though, and pressing it at a home screen
>> delivers an option Manage Apps. Once that's tapped, I certainly see Amazon
>> Kindle, but if I select that as the app to manage, my only choices are
>> Uninstall, Clear cache, and Share. There's an informational "Launch by
>> default" heading with the info "No defaults set" and an inactive,
>> grayed-out "Clear defaults" button. Nothing about "app preferences". 
> 
> Googling, I find a few other references which "might" help...
> 
> This talks about a default-manager app that you can *add* to Android:
>  How To Remove, Change, Or Set Default Apps In Android
>  http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/remove-change-set-default-apps-android/
>  
>> Sounds like something you Android 4 does that my Android 2.3.5 doesn't do.
> 
> Maybe you can *add* the feature to Android 2?
> Did you try the Default App Manager Lite, by Appiator app yet?
> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appiator.defaultappmanager&hl=en
> 
> Dunno if it will work - but it might add the capability you need.
> Certainly I've used apps to add capabilities to Android that the stock oS
> didn't have (e.g., app ops manager, app redirect, app back up and restore,
> etc.).
> 
> Try it out, and let us know if it works for you.
> 
>>> Here is a screenshot of that action that I just bluetoothed over to my PC:
>>> http://i.cubeupload.com/Y3XvcU.gif
>> 
>> Not to worry, I believe you.
> 
> I always try to prove what I says (as I'm *not* a typical iOS user!). :)
> 
>> No matter how concerned you are with iOS, I'm not. Now the BlackBerry
>> PlayBook OS, *that* could concern me; but not in this thread, thanks :-) .
> 
> I care about *all* operating systems.
> 
> The users are the same on all operating systems, with the one addition that
> a specific set of iOS users are a strange lot that is unique to iOS forums
> and not found elsewhere.
> 
> The rest of the iOS users are the same as any other technical user - but
> that one set is a strange bunch indeed.

I'll have to see whether any of those things can get installed on the
device, what with the Google Play Store unwilling to countenance either its
browser or its Play Store app. Thanks for the ideas. Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle &
f'up only to comp.mobile.android, SVP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33555

From	Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
Date	2016-08-19 18:43 +0000
Message-ID	<e1p2abFojo6U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#33457

tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
[...]
> But I *have* an application that knows what a .mobi and what a .azw file
> are, and knows how to open them, too. (That's the Amazon Kindle for Android
> app.) But the part of the Android UI that knows it has no idea what to use
> to open them does *not* have the humility to ask me "what I wanted to use
> to open the file." So 'tain't "that easy."

  What happens if you tap a .mobi or a .azw file in your file manager?

  The possibly results that I know of are:

1. The desired app opens it.
2. An app opens it, but not the desired one.
3. You get a popup with a list of (one or more) apps, which supposedly
   can open this type of file.
4. You get an error message saying somthing like there is no app which
   can open this type of file.

  Please give the requested/resulting information and in case of 2. and
3., give the names of the app(s).

  In any case, read this and all will be revealed [1]:

  "How to set and clear default applications in Android"
   <http://www.greenbot.com/article/2151008/how-to-set-and-clear-default-applications-in-android.html>

[1] But not neccessarily *solved*, because that depends on whether the
'Amazon Kindle for Android' app (or/and your old Android version) is
broken or not.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34042

From	tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
Date	2016-09-09 02:11 -0400
Message-ID	<1fehlk7rg4lp.1btxytcrmxy59$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to	#33555

On 19 Aug 2016 18:43:23 GMT, Frank Slootweg instructed:

> What happens if you tap a .mobi or a .azw file in your file manager?
> 
>   The possibly results that I know of are:
> 
> 1. The desired app opens it.
> 2. An app opens it, but not the desired one.
> 3. You get a popup with a list of (one or more) apps, which supposedly
>    can open this type of file.
> 4. You get an error message saying somthing like there is no app which
>    can open this type of file.
> 
>   Please give the requested/resulting information and in case of 2. and
> 3., give the names of the app(s).

Alas, I get result # 4. PD useless. But I'll look into your recommended
reading ("how to set and clear ...") suggestion. Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34043

From	tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
Date	2016-09-09 02:20 -0400
Message-ID	<1nfwfs2pnesu4$.1daj4hs9v00c2.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to	#33555

On 19 Aug 2016 18:43:23 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> read this and all will be revealed [1]:
> 
>   "How to set and clear default applications in Android"
>    <http://www.greenbot.com/article/2151008/how-to-set-and-clear-default-applications-in-android.html>

Alas, the title promises more than the article delivers. "How to clear
default" (when already present) is there; "how to set default" (when *none*
is present yet) is absent. Nice try, though :-) . Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33421

From	BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net>
Date	2016-08-16 14:06 -0500
Message-ID	<1oo6rb5374t614m99os6363biacq3rorg4@4ax.com>
In reply to	#33393

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 23:51:06 -0400, tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 00:10:10 +0000 (UTC), Aardvarks wrote:
>
>> On Android, it works like it's supposed to work.
>> 
>> 1. You can unset any specific file association or unset them all.
>
>Really? How? (I ask because I can't, on my Moto Droid X2 w/ A, v.2.3.5).
>
>> 2. Then you can set any specific file association, or leave it at the
>> default.
>
>Again I must ask: how? (Cuz I haven't found out how o my own.)
>
>> On iOS, I don't think you have any choice.
>
>I'm not concerned with iOS. I have no product running iOS.

Then why cross post to an iPhone newsgroup?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33458

From	tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
Date	2016-08-16 19:30 -0400
Message-ID	<1h1kmydvc6wqc$.etnzora83ncz.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to	#33421

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 14:06:10 -0500, BobbyK wrote:

> why cross post to an iPhone newsgroup?

Sheer inadvertence. I read and replied in c.m.android, with the Newsgroups:
header hidden. My sincerest and most abject apologies.

Further f''ups to comp.mobile.android only, please, thanks. Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33345

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2016-08-14 17:56 +0000
Message-ID	<e1bpnaFink7U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#33332

On 2016-08-14, Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> wrote:
> On 10 Aug 2016 17:43:15 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Your idiotic Christmas tree layout is fucking ugly; you should be
>> embarrassed.
>
> I originally had a circle, with the phone in the center, and the apps
> ringed around it in two concentric circles, most important apps and folders
> in the inside.
>
> But I like the pyramid because it's the universal building block with the
> most-often used apps on top.

Both are equally ugly, I'm sure. No thanks. No need for such nonsense.
All of my apps are easily found on a single page.

> Let's see what *your* desktop looks like.

Unlike you, I don't feel I have anything to prove to the world, much
less an established Apple-hating troll. If you weren't so preoccupied
with trolling, you would realize I've already posted screen shots of my
desktop here several times recently. Not that I care what you think.

>> No need to try it, and wouldn't want something that fugly anyway. 
>
> There are so many things you "just can't do" on the more primitive iOS.
> One of them is the ability to put app icons anywhere you like. 

Unlike you, I am perfectly able to find each app on my phone with one or
two taps, and without silly Christmas tree or magical orb icon
arrangements. So this supposed "inability" means exactly nothing to me.

> That's like being stuck in the stone age of desktop guis.

iOS isn't a desktop OS, and a mobile device isn't a desktop computer.

BTW, you're one to talk about stone age - you're still futzing around
with manual Bluetooth file transfers and running FTP servers on your
mobile devices just to transfer files, which is silly, inconvenient, and
slow in this day and age. While you are futzing around, the rest of us
are already out the door. 

> Another thing you can't do on the primitive iOS is put apps icons in
> multiple places. Again, you're stuck in the stone age.

Just because you are so disorganized you need to plaster duplicate app
icons all over the place doesn't mean the rest of us are. While you
spread your app icons all over the place, the rest of us find everything
on our iOS devices with ease. Note the distinct lack of any threads in
the iOS news groups asking for help with finding apps. The fact that the
*only* one making complaints here about not being able to find apps is
*you*, the resident Apple-hating troll, says it all.

> And, another thing you have to do in the primitive iOS is build your own
> App Drawer app from scratch.

Unlike you, I don't need or want app drawers. I don't use them on iOS
and I don't use them on Android either. I place each of my apps in
folders according to the purpose of the app, which suits me just fine.
It takes a maximum of two taps to open any app on my device, and for
many, it's one single tap. And it's fine with me if you rely on crutches
like duplicated app icons and app drawers if you *need* them. What I
dislike is when you get stuck without them on iOS and come here to troll
about it.

> Modern operating system launchers have all that, and (far) more.
> On iOS, you "just can't do it".

"BOOHOO, I can't shoot myself in the head with my iOS devices like I can
with my Android devices. Poor mistreated little old me! Apple suxx!!" : D

>> Many people actually like the iOS launcher and find it plenty useful even if
>> it doesn't fit with your idiotic "my way or you suck" rigid world view. 
>
> You see?
> Do you see how you completely missed the point?

The point you refuse to acknowledge is there is absolutely no need for
any of the silly things you claim iOS "can't do" because better things
are available.

> You even see having the ability of any solution as a drawback!
> That's proof positive you're stuck in the primitive one-button-mouse
> mentality!
>
> As a whole, iOS users can think in only single-vector solutions.

Lies and insults are all you've got. And insults are the last resort of
the weak-minded when they feel powerless. Troll on.

>>> How do you completely eliminate the AdID on your primitive non-customizable
>>> iOS?
>> 
>> You haven't shown that you can completely eliminated it on Android. You
>> hid it, and then just gave up.
>
> Heh heh 

Laugh all you want, but it's the truth. Maybe you can't handle the
truth: You hid the ID and then just gave up. You didn't bother to look
to see if the ID is still stored internally on the device. You also
didn't bother to check to see if the ID is being transmitted over the
network. You just hid it and gave up.

> ... I'm trying really hard not to say how stupid you sound in your
> every breath.

And yet you managed to do it in that very breath. Hard fail. Troll on.

> I should be more gentle with you so I will only mention that, as above, we
> can do *everything* you can do, and more. 

Another of your oft-repeated lies. There are *many* things iOS does that
Android can't do. On Android, you can't start editing a document on your
phone, put your phone down, and pick right up where you left off on your
computer without any special configuration before-hand or manual file
transfers etc. On Android, you can't view all the tabs you have open in
a web browser on your computer on your mobile devices with zero
configuration or transfers either. On Android, you can't quickly
transfer content over WiFi speeds between mobile devices and computers
where there is no LAN or internet access with a single tap and with zero
configuration either. On Android, you also can't run apps that are
iOS-first or iOS-only. And those are examples among *many* others.
Your platform trolls are lame. Use the best tool for the job. 

> It's trivial for us to get rid of the AdID. 

Another lie. All you have shown is that you can hide the ID from the
user interface.  You haven't even bothered to verify that the ID isn't
still stored within the device, nor that the ID isn't being transmitted
over the network - you hid it and just gave up.

> You can't do it.

You can't refrain from trolling.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33346

From	nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date	2016-08-14 14:09 -0400
Message-ID	<140820161409544299%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to	#33345

In article <e1bpnaFink7U1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > It's trivial for us to get rid of the AdID. 
> 
> Another lie. All you have shown is that you can hide the ID from the
> user interface.  You haven't even bothered to verify that the ID isn't
> still stored within the device, nor that the ID isn't being transmitted
> over the network - you hid it and just gave up.

what he doesn't get is that an ad id is just one of many ways someone
can be tracked, so even if it really is removed, it doesn't actually do
what he hopes to do.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33347

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2016-08-14 18:18 +0000
Message-ID	<e1bqvfFink7U4@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#33346

On 2016-08-14, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <e1bpnaFink7U1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> > It's trivial for us to get rid of the AdID. 
>> 
>> Another lie. All you have shown is that you can hide the ID from the
>> user interface.  You haven't even bothered to verify that the ID isn't
>> still stored within the device, nor that the ID isn't being transmitted
>> over the network - you hid it and just gave up.
>
> what he doesn't get is that an ad id is just one of many ways someone
> can be tracked, so even if it really is removed, it doesn't actually do
> what he hopes to do.

Right, there are *many* different ways to identify someone over a
network connection that have absolutely *nothing* to do with an
advertising ID. He seems to be fixated on the advertising ID because
there is a nifty GUI widget that lets you hide it in Android. And he
seems to naively believe hiding it magically equates to *complete*
removal from the device - without even bothering to check to see if that
is true. He also hasn't bothered to check to see if the ID is being
transmitted over the network. Chances are the ID is still on the device
and is still being transmitted, unbeknownst to him. And of course hiding
the advertising ID doesn't magically make the many *other*
identification vectors disappear in thin air.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33348

From	Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com>
Date	2016-08-14 22:23 +0000
Message-ID	<noqr1o$4i6$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#33347

On 14 Aug 2016 18:18:23 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Right, there are *many* different ways to identify someone over a
> network connection that have absolutely *nothing* to do with an
> advertising ID. 

This is one of the rare times where you have said something that is true.
In fact, on *all* computing devices, you can be tracked.

Heck ... even CPAP medical machines now have cellular modems in them such
that someone can track your sleep patters as it "phones home" every
morning. [They usually also have an airplane mode to prevent this.]

> He seems to be fixated on the advertising ID because
> there is a nifty GUI widget that lets you hide it in Android.

Have you never read a single thread in this newsgroup?

One by one, I identify, learn about, and then resolve each possible exploit
that is possible to resolve.

It just so happens that the Android ApID is trivial to resolve whereas, on
iOS, it's impossible.

That's just the way it turns out.

> And he
> seems to naively believe hiding it magically equates to *complete*
> removal from the device - without even bothering to check to see if that
> is true. 

It's gone. You know that, which is why you keep screaming about imaginary
blue hairy monsters in the closet, which, if you close the closet door, in
iOS, that makes you *feel* safe.

The fact is that the app that *creates* the AdID is gone.
And the app that *transmits* the AdID is not enabled.

You can scream all you want about Martians being among us, but until you
show that they're somehow there, then I can't prove to you that they're
not.

The onus is on you, not me, to prove something that doesn't exist, to
exist.

> He also hasn't bothered to check to see if the ID is being
> transmitted over the network. 

It's not even *generated*. 
And the app that tracks it is gone.
It's gone.

You need to prove that something which no longer exists, exists.
I can't prove to you that your imaginary creature exists.

> Chances are the ID is still on the device
> and is still being transmitted, unbeknownst to him.

It's impossible.
You just say that because you can't do it.
Sour grapes.

> And of course hiding
> the advertising ID doesn't magically make the many *other*
> identification vectors disappear in thin air.

Which is exactly why the title of this thread is why do Apple iOS users
*feel* so safe when they're actually no safer than anyone else (and
probably far less safe)?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33363

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2016-08-14 23:32 +0000
Message-ID	<e1cdc0Fo020U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#33348

On 2016-08-14, Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> wrote:
> On 14 Aug 2016 18:18:23 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Right, there are *many* different ways to identify someone over a
>> network connection that have absolutely *nothing* to do with an
>> advertising ID. 
>
> This is one of the rare times where you have said something that is
> true.

Projection - you routinely lie and insult people in the Apple news
groups.

>> He seems to be fixated on the advertising ID because there is a nifty
>> GUI widget that lets you hide it in Android.
>
> Have you never read a single thread in this newsgroup?
>
> One by one, I identify, learn about, and then resolve each possible
> exploit that is possible to resolve.

Actually, what you do is ignorantly *claim* you have learned about
things while simultaneously proving by your own words you haven't
learned a thing; then when people who know better confront you about
that, you turn around and insult them and lie about them. You're a
pitiful transparent troll, and the only person you are fooling is
yourself, which seems appropriate.

> It just so happens that the Android ApID is trivial to resolve

You have proven no such thing; all you have proven is you have hidden it
from the user interface, without offering a shred of evidence that the
ID is absent from the device, nor any evidence that the ID is no longer
transmitted over the network. Such naive assumptions only make you look
like a fool.

>> And he seems to naively believe hiding it magically equates to
>> *complete* removal from the device - without even bothering to check
>> to see if that is true. 
>
> It's gone.

You haven't backed that assertion up with a single shred of proof. Until
such time your assertion is assumed to be neither true or false, but
just plain bullshit.

> The onus is on you, not me, to prove something that doesn't exist, to
> exist.

Nope. You're apparently not very familiar with sound logic. Since *you*
made the claim the ID is gone, and it is *your* job to prove that is the
case. Until then, I call bullshit.

>> He also hasn't bothered to check to see if the ID is being
>> transmitted over the network. 
>
> It's not even *generated*. 

You haven't proven that.

> It's gone.

Nor have you proven that. 

>> Chances are the ID is still on the device and is still being
>> transmitted, unbeknownst to him.
>
> It's impossible.

Nonsense. The ID can easily be stored somewhere on the device, and the
ID can easily be transmitted over the network from the device.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Next page →

csiph-web

Why would iOS be safer from spying than a well setup Android phone?

Contents

#33492

#33557

#33560

#33572

#33575

#33465

#33472

#33477

#33478

#33493

#33555

#34042

#34043

#33421

#33458

#33345

#33346

#33347

#33348

#33363