It all seems trivial if he is successful building this. I suppose it's true that applying tech to poop isn't something a lot of people are researching.
The simple fact is that BitCoin is drawing a lot of mainstream media interest. Given that nobody really knows who's behind it, (and for those really suspicious of a conspiracy, what all this crowd sourced crypto is analyzing), it's certain to draw questions. Like the ST:TNG episode "Clues", we have a series of minor mysteries on our hands.
But nevertheless, it isn't clear to me that Newsweek outed the right guy. As odd as Nakamoto appeared in the article, I'm left with feeling that the reporter is the one that's acting weird.
That may be true in the US, but i've heard from friends overseas that other markets prefer their own stores, like a Chinese phone will have a custom rom and local app store, of which the legitimacy of the apps may come into question.
On the black phone, where did the PRNG come from?
Based on what I understand of the FIPS process (which is little, admittedly), the whole exercise to put your crypto under the microscope results in eliminating a number of coding mistakes and implementation problems. So even if the algorithms themeselves are potentially weakened (we don't know ), a FIPS approved product that's had 3rd party scrutiny is probably still better off than one that wasn't, due to cleaning up implementation issues with the keys, random numbers and algorithms.
the way that mr. fernandez comes across in the interview, it sounds like there is a single definitive history that only he knows about and resistant to share. it's not like movies are used as definitive pieces of history, it's essentially folklore at best.
is that this experience annoyed so many people, a lot of people will turn the feature off. Then when a real alert that affects a large population comes out, such as a Shelter in Place alert, a lot of people won't get the message.
The emergency system should only be used for disasters, not for amber alerts. I personally received the exact same alert 5 times.
The article found two examples of using Tor, and had already identified one from the past. That's the justification for the "increasingly using Tor" headline? Then again, I'm surprised that they didn't run with a headline of "Malware using Tor Doubled!"
Seems like that's a critical part of this story and the reason is not mentioned.
"The most common requests came from police investigating crimes or searching for people". Searching for people would mean that each request would affect one account. 4,000-5,000 requests affecting 10,000 accounts implies that each request touched on average two accounts (a caller and a recipient?). In addition, it doesn't say how much data was slurped out of each request either - is it a particular imessage or a whole dump of all imessage records, or is it tapping all imessages to come?
Encryption is fine and dandy, but your metadata is still exposed. Unless you have a Tor for your mobile traffic, then your metadata is still effectively exposed in the clear.
I don't know of any other place to get most of these nowadays. Lots of memories and magazines that I miss