FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
321–330 of 565 posts
Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
We don't know if they did the right thing here. With a previous case it seemed (to me) like Apple might have pushed an update to give access ... they presumably could do that, remotely copy all the data, then return the device to the former state. One can't know, and this sort of thing seems entirely tenable. FBI don't have to tell anyone they accessed the device. That maintains Apples outward appearance of security;…
> 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 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 updated its transparency reporting and will “detail these kinds of requests” in a separate section on push notifications in its next report.
Apple statements are quite distinct from what they do behind the scenes.Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#323Sadly, 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.
Did she have Bitlocker or FileVault or other disk encryption that was breeched? (Or they took the system booted as TLAs seek to do?)
Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#324My understanding of Lockdown Mode was that it babyifies the device to reduce the attack surface against unknown zero-days. Does the government saying that Lockdown Mode barred them from entering imply that they've got an unknown zero-day that would work in the PIN-unlock state, but not Lockdown Mode?
Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#325Remember...they can make you use touch id...they can't make you give them your password. https://x.com/runasand/status/2017659019251343763?s=20 The FBI was able to access Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson's Signal messages because she used Signal on her work laptop. The laptop accepted Touch ID for authentication, meaning the agents were allowed to require her to unlock it.
Reminder that you can press the iPhone power button five times to require passcode for the next unlock.
Out of habit, I keep my phone off during the flight and turn it on after clearing customs.
Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
Link which doesn't directly support website owned by unscrupulous trillionaire: https://xcancel.com/runasand/status/2017659019251343763?s=20
[flagged]
Assuming that number turns out to be close to reality, how do you weigh so many unnecessary deaths against VTL rockets and the electric cars?
Perhaps a practitioner of Effective Altruism could better answer that question.
Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#327Can a hacked phone (such as one that was not in Lockdown Mode at one point in time) persist in a hacked state? Obviously, the theoretical answer is yes, given an advanced-enough exploit. But let's say Apple is unaware of a specific rootkit. If each OS update is a wave, is the installed exploit more like a rowboat or a frigate? Will it likely be defeated accidentally by minor OS changes, or is it likely to endure? Thi…
Even a cursory glance would show it's literally impossible on IOS with even a basic understanding.
Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#328Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Plausible deniability” is a public relations concept. It doesn’t confer any actual legal protection.
It absolutely offers some legal protection. If it is implemented correctly, no legal framework for it is required. Government forces you to enter your password. You comply and enter "a" password. The device shows contents. You did what you were asked to do. If there is no way for the government to prove that you entered a decoy password that shows decoy contents, you are in the clear. Done correctly (in device and OP…
No, you did something fake to avoid doing what you were asked to do.
> If there is no way for the government to prove that you entered a decoy password that shows decoy contents, you are in the clear.
But there are very effective ways to find hidden encrypted volumes on devices. And then you’ll be asked to decrypt those too, and then what?
This sort of thing is already table stakes for CSAM prosecutions, for example. Law enforcement can read the same blog posts and know as much about technology as you do. Especially if we are hypothesizing an advertised feature of a commercial OS!
Re: FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled
#330Remember...they can make you use touch id...they can't make you give them your password. https://x.com/runasand/status/2017659019251343763?s=20 The FBI was able to access Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson's Signal messages because she used Signal on her work laptop. The laptop accepted Touch ID for authentication, meaning the agents were allowed to require her to unlock it.
Link which doesn't directly support website owned by unscrupulous trillionaire: https://xcancel.com/runasand/status/2017659019251343763?s=20