According to the timeline at the end of the article, that particular bug got fixed. But just like with screen locking, it's a failure in design. If you have an unencrypted video on a third party computer in the clown, I don't see how it can be considered "private" in any meaningful sense, no matter what the database attached to the service says.
Comments are closed because this post is 2 years old.
According to the timeline at the end of the article, that particular bug got fixed. But just like with screen locking, it's a failure in design. If you have an unencrypted video on a third party computer in the clown, I don't see how it can be considered "private" in any meaningful sense, no matter what the database attached to the service says.