Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 565 posts

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#341

Post by xoa »

parl_match wrote: post #319
patrickmay wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the knowledge of which finger to use protected as much as a passcode? Law enforcement might have the authority to physically hold the owner's finger to the device, but it seems that the owner has the right to refuse to disclose which finger is the right one. If law enforcement doesn't guess correctly in a few tries, the device could lock itself and require the passcode. Another reason to use my dog's nose instead…

I really wish Apple would offer a pin option on macos. For this reason, precisely. Either that, or an option to automatically disable touchid after a short amount of time (eg an hour or if my phone doesn't connect to the laptop)

As another alternative, rather than using Touch ID you can setup a Yubikey or similar hardware key for login to macOS. Then your login does indeed become a PIN with 3 tries before lockout. That plus a complex password is pretty convenient but not biometric. It's what I've done for a long time on my desktop devices.

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#343

Post by intrasight »

afavour wrote: post #264
intrasight wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is very logical, as revealing a password is considered testimonial and is protected by the fifth amendment.

Right, and pressing your finger on a fingerprint sensor is also revealing a password, just via different means.

But is not legal testimonial

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#344

Post by dboreham »

Zak wrote: post #271
skeptic_ai wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still go to prison for not showing. So until devices have multiple pins for plausible deniability we are still screwed. What’s so hard to make 2-3 pins and each to access different logged in apps and files. If Apple/android was serious about it would implement it, but from my research seems to be someone that it’s against it, as it’s too good. I don’t want to remove my Banking apps when I go travel or in “dangerous”…

Assuming the rule of law is still functioning, there are multiple protections for journalists who refuse to divulge passwords in the USA. A journalist can challenge any such order in court and usually won't be detained during the process as long as they show up in court when required and haven't tried to destroy evidence. Deceiving investigators by using an alternate password, or destroying evidence by using a duress…

I think it's pretty clear at this point that rule of law isn't functioning. Perhaps it never was. It was just rule of law theater.

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#345

Post by JasonADrury »

rtkwe wrote: post #231
mock-possum wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re saying she complied willingly?

If the police get the warrant you either allow them to take it or you face an obstruction charge. The only safe way to fight a warrant like that when signed is after the gathering is done in court or at trial.

You would at the very least make them guess which finger, there's no indication that happened here.

The court can compel you to make your fingers available, it can not force you to disclose which finger or the manner in which you touch that finger on the fingerprint sensor. Apple devices allow only limited attempts.

If you're not being actively helpful, the investigators may end in a rather awkward position.

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#346

Post by GeekyBear »

bigyabai wrote: post #322
GeekyBear wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With a previous case it seemed (to me) like Apple might have pushed an update to give access You're going to have to provide a cite here, since Apple has publicity stated that they have not and will not ever do this on behalf of any nation state. For instance, Apple's public statement when the FBI ordered them to do so: https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

> Apple has publicity stated that they have not and will not ever do this Apple has also said that the US required them to hide evidence of dragnet surveillance: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-... Apple has since confirmed in a statement provided to Ars that the US federal government “prohibited” the company “from sharing any information,” but now that Wyden has outed the feds, Apple has…

Providing a copy of push notification data (or any data) that you host on your server in response to a warrant is not what we are talking about.

No company can refuse to do that.

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#347

Post by AnonHP »

fpoling wrote: post #332
parl_match wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish Apple would offer a pin option on macos. For this reason, precisely. Either that, or an option to automatically disable touchid after a short amount of time (eg an hour or if my phone doesn't connect to the laptop)

You can setup a separated account with a long password on MacOS and remove your user account from accounts that can unlock FileVault. Then you can change your account to use a short password. You can also change various settings regarding how long Mac has to sleep before requiring to unlock FileVault.

I didn’t understand how a user that cannot unlock FileVault helps. Can you please elaborate on this setup? Thanks.

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#348

Post by afavour »

intrasight wrote: post #343
afavour wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, and pressing your finger on a fingerprint sensor is also revealing a password, just via different means.

But is not legal testimonial

Right. Like I said, that's not logical, that's just legalese to gain access where you didn't have it before.

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#349

Post by mrandish »

nxobject wrote: post #146

Sadly, they still got to her Signal on her Desktop – her sources might still be compromised. It's sadly inherent to desktop applications, but I'm sad that a lot more people don't know that Signal for Desktop is much, much less secure against adversaries with your laptop.

I would have thought reporters with confidential sources at that level would already exercise basic security hygiene. Hopefully, this incident is a wake up call for the rest.

Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled

#350

Post by ezfe »

macintux wrote: post #274
ezfe wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this curious?

There appear to be a relatively few possibilities. * The reporter lied. * The reporter forgot. * Apple devices share fingerprint matching details and another device had her details (this is supposed to be impossible, and I have no reason to believe it isn't). * The government hacked the computer such that it would unlock this way (probably impossible as well). * The fingerprint security is much worse than years of ev…

The reporter lying or forgetting seems to be the clear answer, there's really no reason to believe it's not one of those. And the distinction between the two isn't really important from a technical perspective.

Fingerprint security being poor is also unlikely, because that would only apply if a different finger had been registered.

Post reply on HN