Bluetooth file transfer already exists on Android. As the other poster said, it's slower than WiFi:

https://helpdeskgeek.com/netwo...
https://www.lifewire.com/bluet...

AirDrop uses peer-to-peer WiFi. Android's previous ad-hoc file transfer was Android Beam, which is being replaced by this new service. Beam used NFC, which is even slower than Bluetooth:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I can assure you the yearly cadence isn't any better for support.

"Yeah the admin who did this last year isn't with us, I don't know where the private key is."

In addition to data encryption, certificates are used to verify identity of sites and establish trust. Is this the site I intended to communicate with, or is it some man in the middle attack that is going to inject a URL to my phone and take over my network?

Either way, the attacker identifies the phone being targeted and waits for that phone to connect to a website over the cellular data network. The website must use “clear text” which means the URL starts with “http” not “https.”

Stop visiting cleartext websites.

Well they are Sprint employees so they're used to existing in a layoff environment.

It's really not that simple. Videoconferencing apps tend to use TCP for control and signalling and RTP for video/audio streaming which is done over UDP. Most VPN protocols make you choose between TCP or UDP and split tunnel the rest, some other protocols don't but they're not nearly efficient at all for end-to-end, especially when conference calls get to be multiple endpoints.

So they found Satan's toolshed where he stores all his extra pitchforks? I didn't really see any substantial summary in that article about what they found.

Between crap like this headline and all the pandering to your sponsors without full disclosure (e.g. a month of repetitive Zoom hysteria mixed in with Microsoft Teams ads), this site really has turned into Qanon for nerds. Starting to wonder if it's worth even reading any more.

I was told walled gardens are bad, so what is going on here?

SQRL seems to only address authentication. I don't see where it address trust for identity, which X.509 does.

Basically all the things wrong with Team Fortress around 1999-2000. Medics on a CTF map dropping a conc grenade and jumping all the way across the map.

Just SSL, not IDP/SP, X.509, SAML or any other parts of actual identity management.

Must be. I just read the entire thing again and am taken aback at how these two describe IDP authentication as if they invented it.

"The technology used is not new, being based on X.509 certificates and SSL (invented by Netscape some 25 years ago and still the bedrock of secure internet communications). It is the opportunity provided by the modern smartphone with biometric user access, enough memory and power, and a secure enclave to store the private keys of a self-certificate that never leaves the device that is new."

Yeah, who greenlighted this nonsense? Every MDM/UEM vendor out there already does all of this, and has for several years now.

Many vendors already offer this. ADFS + MDM + SCEP/Identity Cert based solutions abound. I fail to understand how this new announcement is different?