How secure are those pay as you go phones? (secure as in traceable)
And whats the best way to have an all around secure phone? Blackberry still at the top?
>>55475658
twiddles thumbs
>>55475658
BUMB
/G/
>>55475658
I'll bite. Secure from WHAT kind of intrusions anon? Be specific, pls.
>>55476167
traceable
>>55475658
Secure from who? If you want security from police/government you aren't going to get it. Nowdays the metadata on cell phone connections to towers is stored for months on end and modern analytical software can do a pretty good job at correlating burner phones with each other and you unless you're extremely careful. Technology has evolved past the point where surveillance requires eyes on someone at the time of an act and now has the capability of looking back months or sometimes years in the past.
>>55476318
>do a pretty good job at correlating burner phones with each other and you unless you're extremely careful.
this is what im seeking
is your run of the mill walmart phone fine or go to other lenghts via a burner from china or whatever
>>55476388
If you are so retarded that you just seriously asked that question, then no matter what you do you are destined to fail.
>>55476449
PLS RESPOND D:
>>55476388
Listen, fag. There is no "untraceable" cell phone. A burner phone should just be a cheap basic phone. What you're hoping to achieve is anonymity when calling someone, right? Purchase a pre-paid basic with cash. Then give nothing but false info when registering for the carrier's service. Boom. Burner phone. Quit looking for some consumer product-ish guidance from us /g/entoomen. Reeeeeee
>>55476541
Or, if it's not possible to purchase the phone itself with cash then go buy a reloadable visa card (e.g., Greendot, Momentum card) and register the card with false info. The information you provide is whats going to make it "traceable" back to you.
>>55476541
>>55476619
>The information you provide is whats going to make it "traceable" back to you.
Also your habits. If you have your burner phone on at your house then it's rather obvious who it belongs to, and as >>55476318 said they can look back at that months later.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKYNET_%28surveillance_program%29
>>55476694
skynet doesn't real!1
