Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
Wait a second, I'm pretty sure that Walker was said to have had an eidetic memory on the programs on him that are run on the History Channel. Blocking cameras only blocks poor spies, similar to TJR's comment.
Do you think that would pass security scrutiny?
Yeah, yeah, I'm over thinking this. But then again, having worked for the IT security task force for the IBM Research Division for a few years makes me think at a level a little above that of the normal security desk jockey.
So, once your iPhone has no camera and it is "okayed" by your security department, what prevents you from bringing in another iPhone that hasn't been modified?
If I were the security chief, I would rather opt for #2, because it allows for quick, visual inspection to verify compliance. #1 does not.
I have an iPod touch 32 GB. I also have a basic phone. I am missing connectivity after I leave a hotspot or work.
I am not sure. Most cell phone today, even cheapie ones, can record audio. I could also call my voicemail on my phone and let it record.
If I was head of security and was going to allow people to walk around the facility with 35mm cameras, I'd opt to allow them walk around with tamper-proof tape over the lense instead of allowing them to walk around with cameras that had their guts removed. Again, because I can quickly, readily visually inspect one versus the other (even at a distance) and be sure they can't take pictures.
The customer said "no cameras". There will be no cameras.
Enter your email address to join: