Really depends on the phone and how the controlling organization (whether it’s a private company or the IDF) uses MDM/MAM. It’s totally possible to poorly manage iPhones, and if you do they’ll be insecure as hell. If you were to restrict everyone to a specific Android phone model with hardened software, then you could theoretically do better than deploying all iPhones. Hell, you could even put GrapheneOS on them, but that would be quite an undertaking, and I’m not aware of any company doing it at scale.

Because of the homogeneity of iPhones and how strictly Apple controls them, it’s generally simpler for organizations to manage them and ensure all of their employees are using updated software on a relatively secure phone. So that (in my opinion) is why we’re seeing a lot of organizations just say “screw it, only iPhones allowed”.

The popular use for power delivery through a display cable is charging a laptop from your monitor; it’s already very common with Thunderbolt or USB-4 monitors. But 480W seems a bit overkill for that.

1. If you’re connecting to random free Wi-Fi, you’re leaving yourself wide open to attacks.
2. A lot of security researchers play with penetration testing scenarios like this. It’s how you learn to defend against techniques that real attackers use.

Sometimes these issues happen because of the IP range you’re using. If your local network and your remote network both use the 192.168.x.x range, then there can be conflicts and issues like this. This is a thing that happens generally with VPNs, not sure how Tailscale specifically functions with this issue.

Even if that’s not what’s going on here, you might try setting up your remote node as an exit node, and configuring your local node to route all traffic through it. Theoretically that shouldn’t be necessary, and it will also slow down your traffic if you’re routing EVERYTHING through Tailscale. But it could work in a pinch.

Actually, I’m looking at Tailscale documentation now and I see that they recommend setting up subnet routers instead of exit nodes in most cases. Maybe go that route instead, that makes more sense to me. That way you’re only routing necessary traffic through the remote node, rather than everything.

If you go with TrueNAS, you’re stuck with TrueNAS/Docker. If you go ProxMox, you can theoretically do…anything. But of course that comes with some added complexity.