Happy to see a privacy-focused carrier, and it has better policies than any other carrier out there. But founder is formerly from Palantir and there’s a lot of VC money behind it (not inherently a problem, just flagging).
Thoughts?
Happy to see a privacy-focused carrier, and it has better policies than any other carrier out there. But founder is formerly from Palantir and there’s a lot of VC money behind it (not inherently a problem, just flagging).
Thoughts?
The feds have already pulled a similar stunt with another manufacturer+software combo. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Trojan_Shield#Distribution_and_usage)
The only thing that makes this smell legit is the fact that it is a provider and probably only eSIMs. But even then, this is not very good opsec to be deliberately using a marketed product that will likely have an identifier for their cell traffic. Graphene works as well as it does because it runs of pre-existing hardware to be more inconspicuous.
Thanks for that link. I didn’t know that. We are below the US in privacy laws! Is there any first world country worst than Australia?
They said all users were criminals, but who knows what they are calling a crime, specially with the retarded laws down here…
It shows what I suspected, that Australian software and servers must be avoided even more than Americans.
Well, opsec can only go so far. At some point you need data packets traveling over real wires, and it’s a question of who do you trust with unencrypted data like SMS? Using a data only VPN is “clunky” for wealthy manbabies, who demand less friction in everything they do.
Simply having your data going to their service is immaterial since it’s likely the phone number also indicates it’s a Cape carrier phone, and the IMEI of the phone doesn’t ping for any other carrier.
It’s a strong “ugh…maybe, we’ll see” from me, but I wouldn’t bother with it for another 6 months and see if it ends up one of those super elitist things wealthy people talk about only to each other.