Is this interesting? Not a shit post question - do routine minor security breaches rise to the level of noteworthy these days?
On the other hand, it did make me consider that there are some accounts that could be compromised that would be very significant: Trump.
* locked to 2fa with security keys * limiting the set of apps that can access account data * better scrutinized account reset - i assume this means it makes your account more resistant to phishing on Google employee's part.
https://landing.google.com/advancedprotection/
Its nice that Google apparently makes this available to anyone who is willing to buy the security keys. It would be nice if all major social media services had such a program.
Trump? I'm not really being facetious when I ask what difference it could possibly make. Of course, sometimes his tweets do appear to move the stock market, but still.
The official policy of the White House is that the President's tweets from @realDonaldTrump can be statements of the President in his official capacity, and therefore binding to the extent that any Presidential order or command can be. He has fired people, he has announced sweeping policy changes, made nominations, and so on through Twitter, which have then been acted on by the executive branch, Congress (which held appointment hearings for a SecDef before a formal nomination, but after a tweet), and the courts.
1. of the executive branch by and through the US Department of Defense, among other examples
2. the legislative branch, by and through committee hearings and acceptance as fact of nominations not yet formally made, among other examples
3. and the judicial branch, by and through accepting as fact the arguments of the DOJ through the solicitor general that statements by the President via Twitter are "official statements of the President", among other examples
That's not wink wink, nod nod. That's just fact. The federal government, in its three branches, accepts as fact that the President issues official edicts through Twitter.
Sure, but pretty much everybody in the world accepts as fact that he uses it to issue random nonsense as well. Surely you don't need examples of this.
Which comes back to my question: would you take real-life, consequential action based solely on a Trump tweet or would you look for verification elsewhere first?