Over 2,000 law enforcement agencies have iPhone encryption-breaking tools

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 34
    flydog said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    It seems like these cracking devices require a physical port to work (I may be wrong in that). If that’s true then a port less iPhone will be even more secure from, what I see, is the potential for malicious cracking by a bad actor of the device. The new MagSafe charger makes me think the physical ports of the iPhone are soon to be a thing of the past.
    Physical ports will always be present because they are necessary for DFU and diagnostic purposes. 
    Probably, yes, but it's not a necessity.

    You could for instance replace it with dedicated hardware able to reset the other hardware, and then load new firmware through a very short-range high bandwidth wireless solution.

    Then, of course, the firmware of that piece of new hardware couldn't (easily) be upgraded; but that's not different than with how Apple is already including security hardware that can't just have its firmware upgraded in any form of convenient way.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 34
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Personally I don't see any difference between searching a cell phone versus searching a file cabinet or somebody's house or desk.

    Every country has rules and laws in place over legal searches and how and when they can be done (some are looser than others).

    I suspect the biggest challenges here in the U.S. are:
    -- Many police don't seem to want to go through those procedures and instead prefer to grab the phone and search it on their own 'authority"
    -- It seems that often, when police do take a phone to search it the owner never gets it back.   That happened to a mentally ill patient of mine:  police took her phone and it just "disappeared" into the ether somewhere.   When she returned to the station to reclaim it all she got was run around.
    -- Those objecting the most to it are probably those who are doing something wrong -- like tax cheats, pimps, drug dealers and other scum.
    edited October 2020
  • Reply 23 of 34
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    flydog said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    It seems like these cracking devices require a physical port to work (I may be wrong in that). If that’s true then a port less iPhone will be even more secure from, what I see, is the potential for malicious cracking by a bad actor of the device. The new MagSafe charger makes me think the physical ports of the iPhone are soon to be a thing of the past.
    Physical ports will always be present because they are necessary for DFU and diagnostic purposes. 

    i wouldn't want to put a lot of money on that.
    One of the theories why Apple never upgraded the iPhone to USB-C is that they intend to get rid of the port altogether.
  • Reply 24 of 34
    davgregdavgreg Posts: 1,039member
    The Donut Patrol wants to sit on their backside and use your devices as self-incrimination machines. Even better, ones that you bought yourself.
    ronnwatto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 34
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 12,930member
    I wonder why it seems that everyone thinks that the government breaks the law to charge and convict people. There sure are a lot of people that think the government is a criminal enterprise. The US government is "of the people, by the people, for the people" not "against the people".
    Sometimes.
    randominternetperson
  • Reply 26 of 34
    People think "the government" is one big organization where all departments share information with each other the behest of the head of government. In reality, government departments often can't legally share information across departments (sometimes it's just technical incompetence.) In the US, the head of government doesn't create the laws, while in many other countries like Canada and the UK, the head of government does. So the US government has restrictions that most other nations don't (for your own protection.) And this doesn't even mention the fact that there are local and federal governments with conflicting laws and court systems (not to mention military and tribal jurisdictions who also don't share information.)

    I wonder why it seems that everyone thinks that the government breaks the law to charge and convict people. There sure are a lot of people that think the government is a criminal enterprise. The US government is "of the people, by the people, for the people" not "against the people".
    Aww, that's sweet. 

    Your first paragraph invalidates the last sentence.  As you say, "the government" is a complex web of organizations, run by human being, with varying, even conflicting objectives and priorities.  And plenty of times these government bodies and agencies are used to enforce the will of some people against the will of other people.  This can be as big as slavery (in earlier centuries) or as mundane as business regulation and drug prohibitions.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 34
    Personally I don't see any difference between searching a cell phone versus searching a file cabinet or somebody's house or desk.

    Every country has rules and laws in place over legal searches and how and when they can be done (some are looser than others).

    I suspect the biggest challenges here in the U.S. are:
    -- Many police don't seem to want to go through those procedures and instead prefer to grab the phone and search it on their own 'authority"
    -- It seems that often, when police do take a phone to search it the owner never gets it back.   That happened to a mentally ill patient of mine:  police took her phone and it just "disappeared" into the ether somewhere.   When she returned to the station to reclaim it all she got was run around.
    -- Those objecting the most to it are probably those who are doing something wrong -- like tax cheats, pimps, drug dealers and other scum.
    I don't think anyone's saying that police departments can't give it the old college try to access what's on smart phones.  That's where the analogy works.  However, do police departments require (or try to require) safe manufacturers to build in a mechanism for anyone with a master key to unlock any safe (like those TSA locks)?

    Personally, I look forward to the day when the next iOS/iPhone update makes those 2,000 police-department-own devices obsolete (for Apple devices).  And, no, I'm not a tax cheat, drug dealer, or other scum.  Sometimes it's the principle of the thing. What's on my phone is no one's business but mine. 
    ronnwatto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 34
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Personally I don't see any difference between searching a cell phone versus searching a file cabinet or somebody's house or desk.

    Every country has rules and laws in place over legal searches and how and when they can be done (some are looser than others).

    I suspect the biggest challenges here in the U.S. are:
    -- Many police don't seem to want to go through those procedures and instead prefer to grab the phone and search it on their own 'authority"
    -- It seems that often, when police do take a phone to search it the owner never gets it back.   That happened to a mentally ill patient of mine:  police took her phone and it just "disappeared" into the ether somewhere.   When she returned to the station to reclaim it all she got was run around.
    -- Those objecting the most to it are probably those who are doing something wrong -- like tax cheats, pimps, drug dealers and other scum.
    I don't think anyone's saying that police departments can't give it the old college try to access what's on smart phones.  That's where the analogy works.  However, do police departments require (or try to require) safe manufacturers to build in a mechanism for anyone with a master key to unlock any safe (like those TSA locks)?

    Personally, I look forward to the day when the next iOS/iPhone update makes those 2,000 police-department-own devices obsolete (for Apple devices).  And, no, I'm not a tax cheat, drug dealer, or other scum.  Sometimes it's the principle of the thing. What's on my phone is no one's business but mine. 

    The "Old college try"?   Breaking and entering is a crime -- whether its done with or without a badge.  There are rules when and how private property can be searched.

    But, since there is no difference that you could (or did) site between searching a home and searching an iPhone, then are you saying that police should not be able to search your home either (if done legally) -- since you claim "what's on my  _________ is no one's business but mine".
  • Reply 29 of 34
    Personally I don't see any difference between searching a cell phone versus searching a file cabinet or somebody's house or desk.

    Every country has rules and laws in place over legal searches and how and when they can be done (some are looser than others).

    I suspect the biggest challenges here in the U.S. are:
    -- Many police don't seem to want to go through those procedures and instead prefer to grab the phone and search it on their own 'authority"
    -- It seems that often, when police do take a phone to search it the owner never gets it back.   That happened to a mentally ill patient of mine:  police took her phone and it just "disappeared" into the ether somewhere.   When she returned to the station to reclaim it all she got was run around.
    -- Those objecting the most to it are probably those who are doing something wrong -- like tax cheats, pimps, drug dealers and other scum.
    the Police can't and won't just search phones on their own "authority" unless there's cause such as someone pointing an individual out and saying that they were just taking pictures of their child which probably still wouldn't be enough and even then the accused would have to unlock their phone for the search to be conducted. Any evidence procured during an unlawful search would immediately get thrown out of court so the cops are not going to risk it...unlike an illegal search of a vehicle, it would be a lot harder for a cop to play the 'plain sight' card. 

    And what was the purpose of noting the mental condition of a patient during your point? Seems pretty unprofessional whether or not anyone here could actually figure out who the individual is...

    I do agree somewhat around the point of the people most upset by this...you could fit every police station in America with one of these devices and there is a 0.01% chance it would ever be used on the average person.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 34
    I saw that Cellebrite device in an Apple Store. They were using it to quickly transfer Android data to the iPhone during the setup of the customer’s newly purchased iPhone.
    How long ago did you see this as most of the Apple stores I have been in have gotten rid of them over a year ago. I think it had something to do with them getting into the unlock game. 
    Not recently, so they may have gotten rid of them as you noticed.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 34
    NinjaMan said:
    the Police can't and won't just search phones […]
    Just like the police can't and don't kill black people in the USA quicker, and with less cause (besides them being afraid of black people), and in greater number (comparatively) than white people? Just like the police in the USA investigate crimes happening to indigenous people just as well as they do when the victim lives in a predominantly white and rich neighbourhood?

    Sadly we've in many countries seen the police go from representing safety to doing anything that they can get away with; and the one country where that is the most obvious, and without it being caused intentionally by political leaders, is the USA, where they basically get not real training at all before they are let lose on the streets.
    ronnGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 32 of 34
    Not this again. 

    Backdoors are built in. But when they are discovered, they are dismissed as “security vulnerabilities and flaws - that get patched and a new backdrop is introduced and update pushed out to hacking hardware. 

    Obama had a “dinner” with big tech. Next thing you know, we had Snowden. 

    The iPhone is still the most secure phone and probably always will be. 

    But... it’s going to get cracked by those who pay enough and work hard enough to do so. 

    Mostly this means law enforcement. But it may mean anyone with the means to secure these devices and associated support. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 34
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    NinjaMan said:
    Personally I don't see any difference between searching a cell phone versus searching a file cabinet or somebody's house or desk.

    Every country has rules and laws in place over legal searches and how and when they can be done (some are looser than others).

    I suspect the biggest challenges here in the U.S. are:
    -- Many police don't seem to want to go through those procedures and instead prefer to grab the phone and search it on their own 'authority"
    -- It seems that often, when police do take a phone to search it the owner never gets it back.   That happened to a mentally ill patient of mine:  police took her phone and it just "disappeared" into the ether somewhere.   When she returned to the station to reclaim it all she got was run around.
    -- Those objecting the most to it are probably those who are doing something wrong -- like tax cheats, pimps, drug dealers and other scum.
    the Police can't and won't just search phones on their own "authority" unless there's cause such as someone pointing an individual out and saying that they were just taking pictures of their child which probably still wouldn't be enough and even then the accused would have to unlock their phone for the search to be conducted. Any evidence procured during an unlawful search would immediately get thrown out of court so the cops are not going to risk it...unlike an illegal search of a vehicle, it would be a lot harder for a cop to play the 'plain sight' card. 

    And what was the purpose of noting the mental condition of a patient during your point? Seems pretty unprofessional whether or not anyone here could actually figure out who the individual is...

    I do agree somewhat around the point of the people most upset by this...you could fit every police station in America with one of these devices and there is a 0.01% chance it would ever be used on the average person.

    LOL.... That is the biggest part of the problem here:   Police searches without warrants.   That's illegal.

    As for why I mentioned that the victim of police bullying was mentally ill?   To point out that she was just another helpless victim of police malfeasance.   Sorry if you disapprove.
  • Reply 34 of 34
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    svanstrom said:
    NinjaMan said:
    the Police can't and won't just search phones […]
    Just like the police can't and don't kill black people in the USA quicker, and with less cause (besides them being afraid of black people), and in greater number (comparatively) than white people? Just like the police in the USA investigate crimes happening to indigenous people just as well as they do when the victim lives in a predominantly white and rich neighbourhood?

    Sadly we've in many countries seen the police go from representing safety to doing anything that they can get away with; and the one country where that is the most obvious, and without it being caused intentionally by political leaders, is the USA, where they basically get not real training at all before they are let lose on the streets.

    All true -- except that they do not receive training.   They do.   The problem is that it is mostly military style training focused on killing 'the enemy' while protecting themselves and their own rather than how to keep the peace.   It's demonstrated when we see an unarmed black man with 20 bullets in him laying in a street in a pool of blood
    ronn
Sign In or Register to comment.