LoopDoGG

About

Username
LoopDoGG
Joined
Visits
0
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
-6
Badges
0
Posts
2

Reactions

2Like0Dislike0Informative

  • User security, privacy issues draw sharp contrast between Apple iOS, Google Android in FBI encrypti

    LoopDoGGLoopDoGG
    slimpotato said:
    What bothers me is that Tim Cook seems to be implying that it is actually POSSIBLE for Apple to comply with the FBI Order. That means current, existing iPhones (like the SUBJECT DEVICE) are NOT secure, and already have a back door. The FBI are NOT asking for a NEW version of iOS with a backdoor. They are asking Apple to "crack" an existing iPhone so that brute-force attack can be made. It may not technically be a backdoor for the encryption, but if there is a way to gain access to the data using a "brute force" approach, then it is the same thing. The data is ultimately NOT secure. I want Apple to make a phone that even THEY cannot crack. I thought they had claimed such, and it is disturbing to find out that that was apparently wrong.

    Firstly, this can be only done on IPhone 5 and before. The OS handles most of the security. Apple of course is the only one with the source code for IOS 8. Theoretically, they can develop an OS with the required security features missing and "upgrade" The software on the suspects IPhone 5c. Iphone 6 has a "security enclave", making this scenario impossible 
    jony0

  • User security, privacy issues draw sharp contrast between Apple iOS, Google Android in FBI encrypti

    LoopDoGGLoopDoGG
    Everybody forget that encryption on Android has been possible on Android since Kit Kat and that it will be on by default on 6.0 and beyond? On my Samsung I have extra layer of security, KNOX. Android can be just as secure as Apple. We are reading too much into Google being silent. Though, if they stay silent too long, that can be suspect 
    singularity