What is the difference between a secure facility and using https on all my webpages with a Mac...

What is the difference between a secure facility and using https on all my webpages with a Mac. I don't want to get hacked or for anyone to see my (((pictures))) folder

what are the odds someone could see into my computer?

scifglobal.com/scif-definition-what-is-a-scif/

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-02-21 at 8.25.52 AM.png (574x584, 467K)

Security through obscurity does actually work if very few people are looking. Linux or BSD will be secure enough. Use an ARM board if you're worried about CPU security flaws.

>what are the odds someone could see into my computer?
>mac fags
>worrying about such trivial shit
>when they upload everything to iCLOUD like the good iTODDLERS they are
you need to be more worried about what apple can see than anybody else, clueless faggot.
> thinks ARM will save anybody
i've been hacking into IoT shit for years, the CPU isn't the issue, it's the cancerous software running on it.

A secure facility has no backdoor

>what are the odds someone could see into my computer?
100%

Attached: 1532704500150.jpg (1200x800, 202K)

If a human knows it exists, it isn't secure.

what if i have all my (((pictures))) on a usb drive

Stop using proprietary operating systems if you care about data security, faggot.

>Stop using proprietary operating systems if you care about data security, faggot.
in what way is an OS made in someone's basement 100% secure

could the NSA or whatever not have plants putting backdoors in the (((open source))) community or similar?

if you want to keep your pepes rare, you need to have them on open source software. don't store your rare pepes in """the cloud"""

>Huge number people who look though the code and try to find bugs
>Everyone can read the code, it would be difficult to implement backdoor without anybody noticing
VS.
>Only the company can read the code
>Secret courts can order companies to comply with demands and the company isn't even allowed to make it public
>Huge amount of malicious software because it's easier, has more potential targets and has retarded users that fall for everything

who really looks at all that code though, how can i be sure

that's where autism works to your favor, people actually do

so i have to trust user autists

>2019
> STILL not using gpg for all friendly communications

>gpg

I'd rather trust some user autists (including many CS professors and security experts) than some company that doesn't even let me see the source of my system or even change parts of it. GNU/Linux is very modular and configurable, many part have multiple projects that solve a similar task, so you can choose which one you trust the most. If some shitty trend like systemd starts, you can just not have it on your system and install something else instead. With a proprietary OS you don't have that option. No system is 100% secure, but with proprietary systems, we know that they steal your data by design and have a shit ton of other security issues. At least with GNU/Linux it's just "Well technically... it's not 100% secure... so I might as well install the botnet myself".

code audits aren't exactly anonymous though, psuedoanonymous at the most, although most the people put their real names.

print your data off, offline data is always the most secure

Put the data on encrypted hard drives (multiple ones so you don't lose it if one breaks) and store them somewhere.

how do you encrypt pics

Wat

>require warrant to wiretap for plain old telephone service (POTS)
>no warrants required for VoIP

will privacy laws ever catch up with the digital age?