You're viewing a single thread.
this gonna be an unpopular take, but your mobile phone is worse for privacy than an Alexa or Google Home. And most people's PCs are worse than their phones.
I would say Alexa is actually much worse because there's already been instances where Amazon gave the info up to law enforcement. PCs and phone manufacturers might've also but I think it would be less than a dedicated microphone in your house.
for my original point, I'd say that an Alexa is a single point of access for giving your info to law enforcement, whereas a phone has multiple (ie each app and website) and pcs have more software and less stringent access policies (ie less likely to have facial recognition or fingerprint recognition as the barrier to access) and you can just open the case and take out the hard drive much easier.
But phones have a dedicated microphone and location tracking service built in. If there is a software vulnerability (there is always a software vulnerability) then it can be remotely turned on and monitored.
There are even instances of this happening to targets of governments: journalists and activists, especially. That Israeli company specializes in it and sells access to anyone who is willing to pay.
Idk why you're downvoting the guy WetBeardHairs is right. Pegasus spyware has been a serious threat and was created by a nation state hacking group in Israel called NSO group.
This is why I do the best I can and use GrapheneOS, but there could always be some security vulnerability deep in Android itself. If you're looking for true privacy and security, a burner or something with removable components would be best.
so do laptops, and most pcs will have a webcam and mic attached.
Yep, thanks to Edward Snowden, we've know NSA has been able to turn these on without us knowing (without the red light) for a long time now.
Both Alexa and phones have to be listening to everything to be able to answer when you call them. Considering that data is sent over to Google/Amazon, it isn't much different.
How are PCs worse than phones?
Sticking with "the average pc" and "the average phone" — I'd say there are more vectors of vulnerability in the wide arrange of sites and programs the average person interacts with on their PC than there is on a phone, as well as a PC being a better target to compromise than someone's phone.
Happy to be proved wrong but I rarely hear about someone's phone being randomwared, botnetted, remote accessed etc
Oh yeah, true.
I was thinking about it more as phones have multiple cameras and microphones, are constantly with us, and are usually full of spyware apps.
More vulnerable, probably yes. Phones are very locked down and secured (unless you root or install custom firmware).
But, they are still worse for privacy due to how they're used. The phone (and thus Google and Apple and Facebook and others) has access to your location all the time - your computer doesn't. The computer is only vulnerable when on - the phone is always on.
The threats are different and from different sources. Random hackers mining shitcoins on your computer, big companies knowing what you're doing when you carry your phone.
tbf the avg person anymore probably uses 1 either exclusively for work or 2 rarely even uses one
I mean "average person" can mean a lot of different things, but the plurality of any given person in the world owns both.
I think the average person doesn't even use a PC that much.
Well it depends whether active usage is a vector in how secure a device is. If security is exposure to risk / frequency of use, you are correct, same with exposure to risk / percent of global ownership (66% smart phone, 50% personal computer), but if we're talking about any given device with an even chance it's a pc or smartphone, I'm willing to bet (although I don't have proof) that any given smartphone is slightly more secure.