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?

  • ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I think they mean private as in, not a publicly traded company. Palantir would never ever ever respect anyone’s privacy, and under no circumstances ever can it be assumed that they will have ethical business practices.

    This is a hard no. Fuck Palantir. Also, fuck Theil too. Hope he rots.

  • ExtremeDullard@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 days ago

    The cynic in me immediately thinks it’s a honeypot to trap privacy-conscious individuals.

    I’ll look it up. But I suspect it’ll be just another case of a company pinky-swearing to respect your privacy, like Apple.

    • James R Kirk@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Something can’t be both “100%” and vibes based lol

      Unless you mean “I am 100% basing the following opinion on vibes”.

      You need evidence. Please don’t respond with more vibes.

      • Gravitywell.xYz@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        I am sure it is a honeypot, they will work with feds. I base that on the people behind it.

        Also it reminds me a lot of encrochat which had similar vibes about it.

          • Gravitywell.xYz@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Im not basing anything on vibes, this is how venture capital funded operations work.

            If you expect some rich assholes to keep your chats secure and not cave after the slightest preasure, you’re going to get taken for a ride.

            • James R Kirk@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              I can’t believe I need to explain to someone that claiming you don’t need evidence to declare something to be true is faith based on vibes. Tiktok has truly broken the younger generations brains.

    • ivn@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      What makes you think encrochat was a honeypot? Am I missing something?

      • Gravitywell.xYz@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Because they literally operated it as a honeypot and gave police full access to chats while advertising to criminals that it was safe.

        EncroChat first came to the attention of the media when it was revealed that high-profile criminals Mark Fellows and Steven Boyle had been using the encrypted devices to communicate during the May 2018 gangland murder of John Kinsella in Rainhill, England.[16][9][17] The service resurfaced in the media during the summer of 2020 after law enforcement agencies announced that they had infiltrated the encrypted network and investigative journalist Joseph Cox, who had been reviewing EncroChat for months, published an exposé in Vice Motherboard

        • ivn@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          Where did you read that they gave police full access? I thought they were hacked.

          • Gravitywell.xYz@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            That’s even worse then because they didn’t even have a secure network from start. Be it willful ignorance or intentional assistance, its still a honeypot. This was a huge “I told you so” by a lot of the dark net community when it happened, a lot of people called it WAY ahead of time.

            Encrochat isn’t the only example, so i may have conflated it with one of these other Honeypot operations: ANOM, Phantom Secure , Ghost , SkyECC

            You might be able to see a pattern here. People who actually want security and anonymity know that you can’t trust those things over to a corporation or a bunch of tech broligarchs, they will either betray you intentionally or due to their incompetence.

            • ivn@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              I don’t see how being hacked make it “still a honeypot”.

              • Gravitywell.xYz@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                because it was being used to attract criminals into thinking it was a safe and legitimate service, while under theee surface it was relaying all the messages to law enforcement.

                • ivn@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Yes but

                  1. as far as we know they had no idea that it was hacked, so I don’t see how you can get a “vibe” if they are blind to it
                  2. the criminals were already using it when LE discovered it and then hacked into it
  • communism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    It looks like a honeypot, and wtf is a “private cell network”? How are they gonna do that? SMS and phone calls aren’t E2EE

    • DiagonalHorse@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’ve seen this ad here in Australia where cell towers are essentially all owned by a single telecomm (Telstra), who leases them out. No idea how their cell network could be private given that info

  • HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    Gonna guess a company that has no problem engaging with Reddit’s invasive targeted ad system is not that privacy conscious.

  • PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Cell providers such as Telekom, Verizon, Yettel etc. have to provide Lawful Interception support for countries’ law enforcement agencies, and these are implemented in a way, that not even the cell providers is aware when a said subscriber / user is being listened on.

    Otherwise I would guess a cell provider can’t operate in that country if it isn’t willing to provide this support?

    • titanicx@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      And almost every cell provider that is small is only piggybacking of one of the big 3.

    • collar@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t have an issue with telcos complying with lawful warrants, which is what Lawful Interception requires. but if your telco can only turn over limited amounts of data because that’s all it has access to, then that’s a plus.

      Separately, do you have a source that telcos are unaware when LE is wiretapping? LE would likely need the assistance of the telco to do so and the telco should require the warrant.

      • PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Well I have read it in a 10 year old ppt training at my telco provider company where I work at, which only mentioned this with 1 sentence without any source either, and probably that would have been an internal document too, so unfortunately you have to take my word for it.

      • Catalyst@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I refuse to believe they didn’t do this for their benefit. Especially at the price tag. I feel the same about Proton. The minute the government knocks without a warrant they’ll still turn you over.

        • collar@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Maybe, I couldn’t say if it’s a premium for privacy, marketing, or what.

          As for turning over data without a warrant, I don’t have a problem with companies complying with lawful orders, as Proton does. I don’t think there’s any evidence to support the notion that Proton complies with non-legal or mere requests from LE. Correct me if I’m wrong.

  • NullGator@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    I think their tech works, they’re used by the army. The founder was the cofounder of Palantir, which I think is worth noting. Their focus is on US government use first and the average consumer second.

  • magic_smoke@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Jmp.chat provides sim activations for xmr but honestly no matter what anything with a cell radio is being logged by its upstream carrier.

    If you want a truely private number, use jmp.chat with a separate xmpp server over something like mullvad.

    For what its worth, the sim swap protection might be worth it considering how many services force you to use SMS for 2fa, and they seem to ask for less data than usual.

    Is it better than your average carrier? Maybe. Is any SMS/phone call coming out of your personal number something you should consider private from the government? Probably not.

    Its still going to have to go over the big boy carriers, and its still probably going to be tied to a phone number several institutions will know is yours if its your main number.

    If it isn’t, use jmp.chat, alongside a good XMPP provider and VPN, or forego the PSTN all-together.

    • collar@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      “Is any SMS/phone call coming out of your personal number something you should consider private from the government? Probably not.”

      Well your phone calls themselves – the actual conversation – shouldn’t be accessible without a warrant for a wire tap, that’s pretty longstanding precedent in the U.S. Cell phone location information is also protected by a warrant (Carpenter v. U.S.), but pen registers (logs of who you call) do not require a warrant (Smith v. Maryland). I’m not sure if governments are prevented from purchasing data from carriers, just as any data broker could do. Additionally, who knows if governments are secretly collecting phone call and cell phone data and storing it, but only accessing it once they have a warrant. It’s impossible to know what’s fully happening on the back end between big telco companies and the gov’t.

      Either way, at the end of the day, whether you have Cape or some other service, if you’re at the level of the government getting a warrant for your data any legitimate company is going to comply. That’s why the best thing is to have a company that can only turn over limited amounts of data because that’s all they have.

      • Steve@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        By the cops or FBI maybe. The NSA is absolutely recording any and all phone calls that touch five eyes phone networks. That’s what Snowdon warned us all about.

        • collar@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          Collecting and monitoring are two different things. If NSA is still dragnetting communications in the post-Snowden era, it’s likely storing and then accessing when something gives the reason. The sheer volume of communication data is far too large to monitor everything.

          • FutileRecipe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            The sheer volume of communication data is far too large to monitor everything.

            By people, sure. Run it through a magical analytical algorithm that flags stuff for people to look? Or if that’s still too much everywhere, they could focus it on a certain area’s towers and process that data. Will it catch everything or not generate false positives? No, it’s not perfect, but I could see it helping them and being done.

            I doubt an agency like this would just hoard the info and not proactively use.

  • einkorn@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    So, how is this supposed to work? From what I can gather at a quick glance it appears to be a VPN of some sorts but for cellular data?

    • NullGator@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      They offer IMEI spoofing, geofenced profiles, etc. It would function better than a VPN in theory.