121–130 of 136 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a large part of Apple's control/Secure Enclave decisions. These decisions can seem arbitrary and anti-completive from the outside.
I wouldn't call it anti-competitive. Treacherous is a more apt description. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html
Ha, I found myself going down a similar route and threw in the towel once I was trying to decompile/edit/recompile. This is dedication, would love to know the hours involved. I set myself a cutoff and stuck to it.
This was initially an internal post at Texts.com that we decided to share, and I scrapped mention of the fact I had tried the exact same approach a few weeks prior and reached my time-box as well. I initially spent two hours trying to modify different instructions, and then gave up. I saw another blog post written by a reverse engineer by the name of "Hassan Mostafa" (aka cyclon3) that previously succeeded in the sam…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Developers can store items in keychain on your device/icloud account that are only visible to the apps made by that developer (and not you). It is a feature that it works this way, and this whole concept is fucking insane to me.
So how can the user delete it without going through the app or wiping the entire phone? What else is being stored that we aren’t even aware of?
It seems that with ebpf you can read data before TLS encryption : Debugging with eBPF Part 3: Tracing SSL/TLS connections https://blog.px.dev/ebpf-openssl-tracing/
I am curious about the legality of this. I guess I assumed that doing this type of thing would technically a DCMA type breech? So this makes me wonder if my assumption wrong? How does this work legally?
What does copyright have to do with this?
IANAL, but in the US, at least, I think the exemptions for good-faith security research[1] would apply. Maybe even the reverse-engineering for interoperability language in the DMCA itself[2].
[1] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/10/28/2015-27...
[2] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-105publ304/pdf/PLAW...
It seems that with ebpf you can read data before TLS encryption : Debugging with eBPF Part 3: Tracing SSL/TLS connections https://blog.px.dev/ebpf-openssl-tracing/
Routing real app traffic through an intercepting proxy can be a real time-saver depending on what the researcher is trying to do. E.g. if they want to automatically tamper with a parameter in a request that doesn't happen until after some kind of authentication/session setup, it's much faster to let the app do all of that and configure the proxy to just make the one change, versus having to write a whole client that does all of the initial steps and then makes the modified request, or writing an eBPF filter that makes the changes the researcher is interested in.
I can see an argument that software's communication over the network must be inspectable by the owner of the hardware.
I guess it's the fact that in my mental model any supporting library doesn't have to be modified to allow viewing the traffic, and no cert-pining-breaks required
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This only works on Android, we had no interest in intercepting the Android application.
Out of interest, why not? I've needed to reverse engineer APIs in the past and using Android apps was always much easier so we always did that when the APIs were available.
I am curious about the legality of this. I guess I assumed that doing this type of thing would technically a DCMA type breech? So this makes me wonder if my assumption wrong? How does this work legally?