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

401–410 of 565 posts

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

#401

Post by silisili »

regenschutz wrote: post #359
kstrauser wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or squeeze the power and volume buttons for a couple of seconds. It’s good to practice both these gestures so that they become reflex, rather than trying to remember them when they’re needed.

Sad, neither of those works on Android. Pressing the power button activates the emergency call screen with a countdown to call emergency services, and power + volume either just takes a screenshot or enables vibrations/haptics depending on which volume button you press.

Did you check your phone settings? Mine has an option to add it to the power menu, so you get to it by whichever method you use to do that (which itself is sad that phones are starting to differ in what the power key does).

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

#402

Post by armadyl »

tadzikpk wrote: post #357
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'm sad that a lot more people don't know that Signal for Desktop is much, much less secure against adversaries with your laptop Educate us. What makes it less secure?

In addition to what the other person who replied said, ignoring that iOS/Android/iPadOS is far more secure than macOS, laptops have significantly less hardware-based protections than Pixel/Samsung/Apple mobile devices do. So really the only way a laptop in this situation would be truly secure from LEO is if its fully powered off when it’s seized.

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

#403

Post by OGWhales »

noident wrote: post #387
b8 wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can hold you in contempt for 18 months for not giving your password, https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/02/man-who-refused-... .

That's a very unusual and narrow exception involving "foregone conclusion doctrine", an important fact missed by Ars Technica but elaborated on by AP: https://apnews.com/general-news-49da3a1e71f74e1c98012611aedc...

> Authorities, citing a “foregone conclusion exception” to the Fifth Amendment, argued that Rawls could not invoke his right to self-incrimination because police already had evidence of a crime. The 3rd Circuit panel agreed, upholding a lower court decision.

I do not follow the logic here, what does that even mean? It seems very dubious. And what happens if one legitimately forgets? They just get to keep you there forever?

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

#404

Post by mghackerlady »

rantingdemon wrote: post #397
everdrive wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>* Lockdown Mode disables javascript JIT in the browser - I want fast javascript, I use some websites and apps that cannot function without it, and non-JIT js drains battery more This feature has the benefit of teaching users (correctly) that browsing the internet on a phone has always been a terrible idea.

I'll bite. Why is it so terrible? I'm browsing this site right now on my phone and don't see the horror.

Phone networks by design track you more precisely than possible over a conventional internet connection to facilitate the automatic connection to the nearest available network. Also, for similar reasons it requires the phone network to know that it is your phone

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

#405

Post by overfeed »

snuxoll wrote: post #389
duskwuff wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't reenter a BFU state, but it requires a passcode for the next unlock.

It's close enough, because (most of) the encryption keys are wiped from memory every time the device is locked, and this action makes the secure enclave require PIN authentication to release them again.

> It's close enough

Not really, because tools like Cellbrite are more limited with BFU, hence the manual informing LEO to keep (locked) devices charged, amd the countermeasures being iOS forcefully rebooting devices that have been locked for too long.

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

#406

Post by kingnothing »

827a wrote: post #324

Is there an implication here that they could get into an iPhone with lower security settings enabled? There's Advanced Data Protection, which E2EEs more of your data in iCloud. There's the FaceID unlock state, which US law enforcement can compel you to unlock; but penta-click the power button and you go into PIN unlock state, which they cannot compel you to unlock. My understanding of Lockdown Mode was that it babyif…

It's relatively well know that the NSO Group / Pegasus is what governments use to access locked phones.

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

#407

Post by asadm »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #395
pyrophane wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. I don't think we yet have a good understanding of how many deaths he will have caused as a result of DOGE so abruptly cutting off assistance to so many vulnerable people around the world, but I've heard estimates hover around 600,000. 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…

[flagged]

Correct. But also, it's a bandaid (and a really ineffective one ie. 99% lossy) on real issues of that world.

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

#408

Post by rtkwe »

JasonADrury wrote: post #345
rtkwe wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'd be wary of trying this as it reeks of "one neat trick" thinking applied to law based on a small technicality where law is often subject to the spirit instead of strictly hewing to the most favorable interpretation the exact wording for the citizen. The warrant can just state you're required to unlock the system not simply "make your fingers available".

It's fun to try to find places where the rules seem to leave holes but it's important to remember the courts don't have to hew precisely to how you read the law. I see that a lot on tech centric boards where the law is treated like it's strictly, precisely, and impartially interpreted down to the exact words (though often not using the legal meaning of words which have decades of caselaw and interpretation informing their legal meaning).

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

#409

Post by fragmede »

thecapybara wrote: post #369
mbil wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminder that you can press the iPhone power button five times to require passcode for the next unlock.

Did you know that on most models of iPhone, saying "Hey Siri, who's iPhone is this?" will disable biometric authentication until the passcode is entered?

They disabled that in like iOS 18.

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

#410

Post by rick_dalton »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #380

"Lockdown Mode is a sometimes overlooked feature of Apple devices that broadly make[sic] them harder to hack." Funny to see disabling "features" itself described as "feature" Why not call it a "setting" Most iPhone users do not change default settings. That's why Google pays Apple billions of dollars for a default setting that sends data about users to Google "Lockdown Mode" is not a default setting The phrase "somet…

The intention behind lockdown mode is protection for a select few groups of people such as journalists, that are at risk of having software like Pegasus used against them. It’s to reduce the attack surface. The average user wouldn’t want most of it as a default setting, for example: almost no message attachments allowed, no FaceTime calls from people you haven’t called and safari is kneecapped. Making this a default setting for most people is unrealistic and also probably won’t help their cybersecurity as they wouldn’t be targeted anyway.
Post reply on HN