This is just so weird.
"The security chief for Amazon chief executive Jeff Bezos said on Saturday that the Saudi government had access to Bezos' phone and gained private information from it," Reuters reports.
But in addition, the National Enquirer's lawyer "tried to get me to say there was no hacking," writes security specialist Gavin de Becker.
It seems the Saudis were not happy with Bezos' owned Washington Post coverage of the Kashogi murder, and that there are wheels within wheels. Naturally since its the Daily Beast the whole thing winds up being cause by Trump, somehow. That guy gets around, eh?
But the take-home is that the Saudis hacked Jeff Bezos' phone and peeled it like a banana, then tried to blackmail him with the contents.
So the moral of the story is, don't have compromising pictures on your phone.
Long term, I forsee a resurgence of Polaroid and 35mm film cameras. Because you can't remote hack a piece of film.
The Phantom
3 comments:
And with synthetic images, having a genuine film negative might be more meaningful thing than a collection pixels.
Hi Orvan. Agreed. I think a photo would be unfalsifiable due to the grain structure.
With as visible as he is, I'm surprised that Bezos didn't know this already... or was he arrogant enough to think that he was different?
I wonder if they were connected to the recent blackmail attempts against him, using a third party front - it wouldn't be surprising; the Saudis tend to play hardball.
Of course, the best way to prevent anybody from getting hold of embarrassing or incriminating images is to not take any to begin with! (which is my philosophy).
Post a Comment