In matters of 'hacking'. However hard it looks like this shower will all eventually come tumbling down, police, press and government, I suspect there remains a can of really big juicy worms that will never be opened. That can is tucked away on a top shelf out of view. The one being kicked down the street, for all to wonder and gloat at, is a decoy.
Just one of these fat worms is hinted at with a story in The Sunday Times: ‘Apps spy on phone messages’ (which you cannot access without a subscription).
But the gist of it below is at this link :
http://www.theweek.co.uk/daily-briefing/45566/ten-things-you-need-know-today-sunday-26-feb-2012
3. PHONE APPS SPY ON MESSAGES
Companies, including Facebook, are using smartphone apps to spy on users’ phone messages and gather information about their lives. A Sunday Times investigation also found that some apps can access users’ internet history which is transmitted to third party advertisers, while other apps can remotely control a phone’s camera.
My reading of the publication of this item is to set the ground for if and when it comes out that Screws Indigestible has been doing a lot more than just hacking mobile answer-phones or even computer e-mail. It is to say ‘look folks; everybody’s doing this stuff, its not really so bad and scary. It's the new normal’.
See here an idea of what else is possible when actually 'hacking' mobiles:
http://eubrainwashing.blogspot.com/2011/07/more-to-phone-hacking-than-accessing.html
But the effect of such revelation still has the potential to be devastating for NI and the Mudoiks.
The can chock full of juicy worms could well go deeper still. That would be who helped, who allowed powers reserved for the highest levels of police investigation and state security to be usurped for ‘third-party’ surveillance. Surveillance not only of a meaningless celebrity’s toilet habits but such that could compromise national security and those in positions of real power and authority. And yet deeper; is it only the news rooms of NI that benefited from such knowledge and leverage that may have resulted or could this spying network have a darker beneficiary than just pennies on a news-stand.
Trust that such would not occur, just because it should not occur, is misplaced.
Just one of these fat worms is hinted at with a story in The Sunday Times: ‘Apps spy on phone messages’ (which you cannot access without a subscription).
But the gist of it below is at this link : http://www.theweek.co.uk/daily-briefing/45566/ten-things-you-need-know-today-sunday-26-feb-2012
3. PHONE APPS SPY ON MESSAGES
Companies, including Facebook, are using smartphone apps to spy on users’ phone messages and gather information about their lives. A Sunday Times investigation also found that some apps can access users’ internet history which is transmitted to third party advertisers, while other apps can remotely control a phone’s camera.
My reading of the publication of this item is to set the ground for if and when it comes out that Screws Indigestible has been doing a lot more than just hacking mobile answer-phones or even computer e-mail. It is to say ‘look folks; everybody’s doing this stuff, its not really so bad and scary. It's the new normal’.
See here an idea of what else is possible when actually 'hacking' mobiles: http://eubrainwashing.blogspot.com/2011/07/more-to-phone-hacking-than-accessing.html
But the effect of such revelation still has the potential to be devastating for NI and the Mudoiks.
The can chock full of juicy worms could well go deeper still. That would be who helped, who allowed powers reserved for the highest levels of police investigation and state security to be usurped for ‘third-party’ surveillance. Surveillance not only of a meaningless celebrity’s toilet habits but such that could compromise national security and those in positions of real power and authority. And yet deeper; is it only the news rooms of NI that benefited from such knowledge and leverage that may have resulted or could this spying network have a darker beneficiary than just pennies on a news-stand.
Trust that such would not occur, just because it should not occur, is misplaced.