Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.mobile.android > #56151 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-10-01 13:54 -0400 |
| Last post | 2018-10-04 13:14 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 90 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android
Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:54 -0400
Re:Anti-virus? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-01 20:05 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:15 -0400
Re: Anti-virus? Calum <com.gmail@nospam.scottishwildcat> - 2018-10-01 19:55 +0100
Re: Anti-virus? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2018-10-01 22:11 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:14 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2018-10-02 06:18 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:34 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-01 20:49 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:03 -0400
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-02 02:52 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-02 10:29 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 13:30 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 15:09 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 15:31 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 16:33 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-02 02:50 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-02 10:55 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-02 12:32 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-02 09:45 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-02 17:54 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-02 13:15 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 02:38 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-03 10:49 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 12:11 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-03 08:42 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-03 17:32 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2018-10-03 19:02 +0100
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 20:13 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-03 20:09 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 23:23 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-04 13:06 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-04 15:02 +0000
Google does *not* track *you*! (was: Anti-virus?) Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-04 15:44 +0000
Re: Google does *not* track *you*! 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-04 09:10 -0700
Re: Google does *not* track *you*! "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 22:03 +0200
Re: Google does *not* track *you*! 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-07 14:23 -0700
Re: Google does *not* track *you*! Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-04 17:07 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-04 09:10 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 02:36 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 02:34 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-02 20:33 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 04:30 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-02 22:13 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 12:52 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 15:09 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 15:40 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-03 08:42 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-03 15:52 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 23:31 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <123456@123456.com> - 2018-10-03 21:21 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-04 13:07 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-10-04 09:10 -0700
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 13:37 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-03 08:44 -0400
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 12:52 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 15:06 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 15:40 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 20:41 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-08 15:00 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-02 20:42 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 13:44 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 12:52 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 15:14 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 15:31 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 17:47 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 18:20 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 17:18 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 15:39 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-03 17:49 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-03 15:28 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 15:39 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 20:48 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2018-10-07 21:40 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 19:33 -0400
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-03 02:40 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Alek <alek.trishan@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:55 -0400
Re: Anti-virus? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-03 14:08 -0400
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-04 13:07 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-04 10:03 -0400
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-06 02:56 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 20:50 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-08 15:00 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-07 20:54 +0200
Re: Anti-virus? Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-02 02:47 +0000
Re: Anti-virus? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-10-04 13:14 +0100
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 02:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp19us$2i3$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56179 |
On 2 Oct 2018 17:54:24 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: > This has come up before and it's important to note that this is about > *Google* *apps*! It's not about Android itself, nor about non-Google > apps [1]. > > BTW, quite ironic: When I went to the webpage, the website asked me to > give my consent for all kinds of tracking cooking and for ... drum roll > ... *Google Analytics*! Hypocritical much!? :-) c.q. :-( > > [1] That doesn't mean that those don't/can't track. We should likely have a followup tutorial thread for these two topics: 1. How to turn off location tracking on YOUR phone, and, 2. How to turn off other people from reporting your router BSSID. and maybe even the (unrelated to Android, directly) 3. How to set your router so that Google will ignore it even if idiots do have #2 set above to the Android defaults.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen H Holder <arlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 02:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp19r5$2ea$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56177 |
On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 09:45:50 -0700, 123456789 wrote: > Hint: Google tracks users even with location data turned off. > https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/google-confirms-that-it-tracks-users-even-with-location-data-turned-off/articleshow/65435086.cms As I recall, I'm the one who first reported that to this ng, but even so, I _think_ they stopped doing that a while ago (when it was reported to the news). Didn't they? PS: I stay away from "India" papers - they're all rehashes. >> True. [only a fool does banking on the phone.] > > What is a safer way to bank online than using the banks own Android app? Physical banking. >> Here, in most of the USA, a commute is on four wheels, where it's >> [phone browsing] unlikely... > > During the commute rush hour here when the freeway is going zero to 10 > MPH (even in the HOV lane) I see lots of phone browsers, most (but not > all) are passengers... Understood. I get dizzy using a phone in a vehicle, so it's not for me. YMMV.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 123456789 <12345@12345.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 20:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pp1d9f$1451$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #56185 |
On 10/2/2018 7:34 PM, Arlen H Holder wrote: > On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 09:45:50 -0700, 123456789 wrote: >> What is a safer way to bank online than using the banks own Android >> app? > Physical banking. Since physical banking is not ONLINE banking that is not a legitimate answer to my question. > 1. Banking is something that needs to be secure. Physical banks have problems too. People can lose money from their physical bank account through many types of fraud. Ask nospam... > 2. Phones are not secure. Do you actually know how secure a bank app is? Encryption? Etc. >>> Here, in most of the USA, a commute is on four wheels, where >>> it's [phone browsing] unlikely... >> >> During the commute rush hour here when the freeway is going zero to >> 10 MPH (even in the HOV lane) I see lots of phone browsers, most >> (but not all) are passengers... > Understood. I get dizzy using a phone in a vehicle, so it's not for > me. YMMV. Sorry about your disability but just so you wouldn't mislead our foreign friends I was pointing out that phone browsing on four wheels here in the USA is actually quite likely...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 04:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp1glp$d65$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56189 |
On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 20:33:03 -0700, 123456789 wrote: >> Physical banking. > > Since physical banking is not ONLINE banking that is not a legitimate > answer to my question. What you seem to be asking is how to handle unexploded ordinance with your bare hands. When I tell you that you shouldn't be handling unexploded ordinance with your bare hands, then you tell me that's not a legitimate answer to your question. OK. Fair enough. I'm just not going to be able to tell you how to do that safely. You handle the unexploded ordinance with your bare hands if you want. >> 1. Banking is something that needs to be secure. > > Physical banks have problems too. People can lose money from their > physical bank account through many types of fraud. Ask nospam... While handling unexploded ordinance with your bare hands is fraught with issues, there are ways to NOT handle unexploded ordinance with your bare hands. If you _insist_ on handling unexploded ordinance with your bare hands, then, well, what do you want me to tell you? I can't tell you that a phone is secure. It's just not. There are just too many holes. HINT: The Maginot line was considered secure too. So was the German Enigma (even with the additional wheel that the Poles never got a hold of). So was Japan's JN24. And the list goes on and on and on and on. Anyone who thinks encryption is secure on a common consumer device in the hands of a common consumer ... is deluding themselves. Again, you're welcome to handle unexploded ordinance with your bare hands. I simply don't recommend it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 123456789 <12345@12345.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 22:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pp1j4u$1bnk$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #56190 |
On 10/2/2018 9:30 PM, Arlen Holder wrote: > On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 20:33:03 -0700, 123456789 wrote: Arlen Holder snipped my question: What is a safer way to bank online than using the banks own Android app? >>> Physical banking. >> >> Since physical banking is not ONLINE banking that is not a >> legitimate answer to my question. > > What you seem to be asking is how to handle unexploded ordinance with > your bare hands. Evasive nonsense. > When I tell you that you shouldn't be handling unexploded ordinance > with your bare hands, then you tell me that's not a legitimate answer > to your question. Evasive nonsense. > I'm just not going to be able to tell you how to do that safely. You > handle the unexploded ordinance with your bare hands if you want. Evasive nonsense. >>> 1. Banking is something that needs to be secure. >> >> Physical banks have problems too. People can lose money from their >> physical bank account through many types of fraud. Ask nospam... > > While handling unexploded ordinance with your bare hands is fraught > with issues, there are ways to NOT handle unexploded ordinance with > your bare hands. Evasive nonsense. > If you _insist_ on handling unexploded ordinance with your bare > hands, then, well, what do you want me to tell you? Evasive nonsense. > I can't tell you that a phone is secure. It's just not. I wasn't asking about the phone, just a banking app. > There are just too many holes. Holes in the banking app? Such as? > HINT: The Maginot line was considered secure too. So was the German > Enigma (even with the additional wheel that the Poles never got a > hold of). So was Japan's JN24. And the list goes on and on and on and > on. Evasive nonsense. > Anyone who thinks encryption is secure on a common consumer device in > the hands of a common consumer ... is deluding themselves. It appears that neither the common consumer nor Arlen Holder has a clue how effective (or ineffective) an Android banking app is at security. > Again, you're welcome to handle unexploded ordinance with your bare > hands. Evasive nonsense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 12:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2e2t$v23$3@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56192 |
On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 22:13:02 -0700, 123456789 wrote: > Evasive nonsense. Let me be even more blunt since you think I was evasive. *A phone is NEVER going to be secure.* So it is *impossible* to do "secure anything* on a typical phone. Period. Is that blunt enough for you yet?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 15:09 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <g1jtceFlsjhU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56208 |
On 03/10/2018 14.52, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 22:13:02 -0700, 123456789 wrote:
>
>> Evasive nonsense.
>
> Let me be even more blunt since you think I was evasive.
>
> *A phone is NEVER going to be secure.*
>
> So it is *impossible* to do "secure anything* on a typical phone.
>
> Period.
>
> Is that blunt enough for you yet?
>
Unsafe how exactly? Prove it by showing reliable links to actual attacks
reports. Short, please.
Note: that google collects data is not valid as proof of not being secure.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 15:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2nsh$e4g$4@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56210 |
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 15:09:33 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > Unsafe how exactly? Prove it by showing reliable links to actual attacks > reports. Short, please. It's a phone for Christs' sake. That means it can be uploaded via cellular signals, right? If we assume Android, that's the same as saying it's a computer ... right? So, we have a computer on the net most likely, right? Now let's get to the user, who, for now, let's assume is "average". That average user is clueless what an app is "really" doing, right? The list goes on and on and on, where a phone is simply a computer on the Internet, and even worse, it's _designed_ to be updated over the air. > Note: that google collects data is not valid as proof of not being secure. You'll _never_ (hopefully) see me equate Google data collection with security as they're two different issues (to me). You know me well - so you should know that I never complain about Google data collection - I just ask for ways to prevent it (which I think I've accomplished). For example, you don't ever need Google Play. You don't ever need a Google login. You don't need location sniffing until/unless you want to figure out where you are, which, I posit, is actually pretty rare since you can figure out where you are from a cross street or topographic indicators, just like we did in the olden days with paper maps. You certainly don't need to be reporting to Google the SSID/BSSID/signal stgrength, GPS location, etc., of your neighbor's WiFi setup (which is the default, but which I turn off instantly when I reimage a new phone). Since I know you, Carlos, to be intelligent, instead of you asking stupid questions, we should work together to edify others who to turn OFF all the Google data collection. I've done it over the years, but I don't have all the tricks assembled into a single location. Do you?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 123456789 <12345@12345.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 08:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pp2o0m$n8f$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56208 |
On 10/3/2018 5:52 AM, Arlen Holder wrote: > On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 22:13:02 -0700, 123456789 wrote: Arlen Holder snipped my question: What is a safer way to bank online than using the banks own Android app? > Let me be even more blunt since you think I was evasive. > > *A phone is NEVER going to be secure.* > > So it is *impossible* to do "secure anything* on a typical phone. > > Period. > > Is that blunt enough for you yet? One definition of EVASIVE is avoiding an answer to a question by subterfuge. So far you qualify... Hint: SAFER does not mean 100% secure.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 16:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2q12$h3f$4@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56222 |
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 08:42:11 -0700, 123456789 wrote: > Arlen Holder snipped my question: You're just playing silly games. Why don't you do something _intelligent_ instead? Like helping us write a tutorial that explains to users how to set up an Android phone so that it doesn't report information that the user doesn't want imported? HINT: That would require more intelligence than your silly games do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 123456789 <12345@12345.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 15:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pp3h6m$v1m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56230 |
On 10/3/2018 9:16 AM, Arlen Holder wrote: Arlen Holder snipped my question (3rd time): What is a safer way to bank online than using the banks own Android app? > You're just playing silly games. It was a simple question. And it seems after 3 posts of evasion you still don't have an answer. > Why don't you do something _intelligent_ instead> Like helping us > write a tutorial that explains to users how to set up an Android > phone so that it doesn't report information that the user doesn't > want imported? More evasion. > That would require more intelligence than your silly games do. When one uses insults instead of facts he is the loser... ;) (Usenet Book of Rules Chapter 3 Verse 21)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 23:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp3jhd$vdm$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56253 |
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 15:52:06 -0700, 123456789 wrote: > When one uses insults instead of facts he is the loser... ;) More silly childish fifth-grade games you play.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 123456789 <123456@123456.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 21:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pp44fi$1i38$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #56256 |
On 10/3/2018 4:31 PM, Arlen Holder wrote: > On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 15:52:06 -0700, 123456789 wrote: >> When one uses insults instead of facts he is the/a loser. > More silly childish fifth-grade games you play. Evasive nonsense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 13:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp539p$9nr$2@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56260 |
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 21:21:07 -0700, 123456789 wrote: > Evasive nonsense. Instead of playing your childish games, why don't you innervate the synapse in your brain and help out by adding value to this thread on privacy. What are the common settings to change on an Android 7.0 Nougat phone for privacy? <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/b9Ck9JSyKXY> HINT: It would likely be "too hard" for you to actually add value.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 123456789 <12345@12345.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 09:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pp5e1r$1sha$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #56279 |
On 10/4/2018 6:07 AM, Arlen Holder wrote: > Instead of playing your childish games, why don't you innervate the > synapse in your brain Evasive nonsense. > and help out by adding value to this thread on privacy. The thread is "Anti-virus", not privacy. My question you refused to address was actually ON TOPIC which is unusual for me too...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 13:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <g1jnvjFknuvU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56185 |
On 03/10/2018 04.34, Arlen H Holder wrote:
>
>>> True. [only a fool does banking on the phone.]
>>
>> What is a safer way to bank online than using the banks own Android app?
>
> Physical banking.
Actively discouraged by many banks.
How? By charging on office, and not charging online, for instance. By
having few staff, so that lineups form and forcing waits up to an hour
or more.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 08:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <031020180844227213%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #56201 |
In article <g1jnvjFknuvU2@mid.individual.net>, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > >>> True. [only a fool does banking on the phone.] > >> > >> What is a safer way to bank online than using the banks own Android app? > > > > Physical banking. > > Actively discouraged by many banks. > > How? By charging on office, and not charging online, for instance. By > having few staff, so that lineups form and forcing waits up to an hour > or more. or not having a physical branch at all. there are several banks and brokerage firms for which online access is the only option. or, being too far away from a branch to be practical.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 12:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2e2s$v23$2@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56201 |
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 13:37:23 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > Actively discouraged by many banks. But for completely different reasons. Those reasons are completely unrelated to the security of phones.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 15:06 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <g1jt6tFlqd3U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56207 |
On 03/10/2018 14.52, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 13:37:23 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> Actively discouraged by many banks.
>
> But for completely different reasons.
>
> Those reasons are completely unrelated to the security of phones.
Which they say are safe, thus not an issue.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 15:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2nsf$e4g$3@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #56209 |
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 15:06:37 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: >> Those reasons are completely unrelated to the security of phones. > > Which they say are safe, thus not an issue. Since I know you, Carlos, to be intelligent, instead of you asking stupid questions, we should work together to edify others who to turn OFF all the Google data collection. I've done it over the years, but I don't have all the tricks assembled into a single location. Do you?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android
csiph-web