Rosyna
About
- Username
- Rosyna
- Joined
- Visits
- 13
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 250
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 87
Reactions
Comments
-
gatorguy said: Rosyna said: It is always encrypted. This encryption is non-optional. If the is a passcode set, then the master decryption key for that protection class of data is encrypted with a key derived from the passcode. If the…
-
dick applebaum said: I assume the LA police had the body in the morgue ... if the iPhone used TouchID ... As it has been far than 48 hours, that isn't possible. Furthermore, the source article says the device had been turned off, whi…
-
gatorguy said: Yeah, I think the article author was momentarily confused. AFAICS both iOS data and that from 3rd party apps was encrypted by default in iOS7. What the author perhaps had intended to point out was that unless you used a passco…
-
"This means the device in question was running iOS 7, which did not ship with encryption enabled." Encryption has been mandatory, non-optional since the iPhone 3GS and iOS 3. In iOS 7, all third party app data was encrypted with a key derived from…
-
As NBCUniversal is Comcast, I strongly doubt they'll agree to this. But then again, Comcast channels (Syfy, USA, MSNBC) are on PlayStation Vue. Sadly, the Vue service is restricted to just a few devices (PS3, PS4, iOS devices, Chromecast, Amazon Fir…
-
SpamSandwich said: As I've mentioned a number of times, for any who require complete security with their iPhone, Touch ID should only be used for Apple Pay, but not to open the phone. Anything you "have on you" (including your fingerprint) m…
-
Apple could always use the acid and lasers method to get at the UID (part of the encryption key) embedded in the A8 SoC.
-
That's a super weird way to spin, "As everyone expected, there was nothing useful at all on the San Bernardino iPhone" The shooters destroyed their actual personal phones and left the work iPhone alone, so of course there was nothing on it. The FBI…
-
The date bug was entirely fixed in iOS 9.3. The iOS 9.3.1 update ONLY had changes to swcd, SharedWebCredentials.framework, symptomsd (all for the links bug), and mobileactivationd (for the iCloud activation bug present on iOS devices released in 20…
-
lkrupp said: tallest skil said: HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH No. So who decides? You? Everybody gets to decide whether something is constitutional according to their personal moral compass? Then why even have a Constitution? The SCOTU…
-
lkrupp said: Rosyna said: You just stated the unconstitutional part, that you'd be punished for exercising your rights… "Do this or else" is the very definition of being forced. So all existing law regarding refusal to take a bre…
-
mike1 said: Rosyna said: You just stated the unconstitutional part, that you'd be punished for exercising your rights… Not true at all. There is absolutely no difference between this and a breathalyzer. You agree to submit to a b…
-
konqerror said: Rosyna said: Of course, there's no way to prove you didn't use a hands free system or even that you were the one using the phone. Not if it's a text message and, like the majority of trips, you're the only person …
-
lkrupp said: Rosyna said: As I said, there are no exceptions, including exigent circumstances, to when an LEO needs a specific warrant to search a phone. Had you read the article, you would have understood that. Furthermore, A court…
-
konqerror said: They can do this already. After a major accident, they will subpoena billing records from the carrier. And they will go back 24-48 hours too in order to show whether you got enough sleep the night before, for example. Of c…
-
icoco3 said: tallest skil said: 100% not Constitutional. I’d love to say that means it won’t happen, but of course it will. So it comes down to, refusal to surrender your 4th amendment rights without a warrant and asserting your 5th…
-
lkrupp said: Rosyna said: The Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that this was unconstitutional. Police need a specific warrant to search a phone. No exceptions. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/us/supreme-court-cellphones-search-privacy.h…
-
mike1 said: Rosyna said: You have a 4th Amendment right to not be searched in an unreasonable manner (this law violates that) and you have a 5th Amendment right to due process and protection from self-incrimination (this law violates…
-
lkrupp said: tallest skil said: 100% not Constitutional. I’d love to say that means it won’t happen, but of course it will. Are you saying you have a Constitutional right to drive an automobile? Courts have long ruled that you do no…
-
The Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that this was unconstitutional. Police need a specific warrant to search a phone. No exceptions. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/us/supreme-court-cellphones-search-privacy.html