[deleted]
Apple Is Said to Be Working on an iPhone Even It Can’t Hack
411–415 of 415 posts
Re: Apple Is Said to Be Working on an iPhone Even It Can’t Hack
#412Earlier quoted context omitted.
When something you create is public, you no longer have a right to dictate it. You do not have a right to be forgotten. That would be an attempt at some sort of thought control, and you don't get to tell us that this comment you just wrote can and should be forgotten. If I choose to remember it, outside of your wishes, there's nothing you can do about it. Private information is another matter, but when people presume…
Umm excuse me, but go yourself. You do not in any way own anything I create just because you may or may not have seen it on the Internet. I am not a public figure simply because I walk around in public. My words do not belong to you simply because I put them in a place where you can see them. Everything about your post is wrong in the worst possible ways. You are the opposite of the idea of freedom of information. Yo…
What are you on about? I didn't say anything about me owning it; I said you don't own it. It's part of the universe now. There's nothing you can do about that.
I think it's hilarious that you accuse me of information tyranny when you're ostensibly arguing for your ability to dictate what I am and am not allowed to know or remember. Freedom of information is, in fact, the freedom of information, apart from the wishes of those who would control it.
And as a true believer of freedom of information, I implore you to continue posting your silly, illogical statements all over the internet.
Re: Apple Is Said to Be Working on an iPhone Even It Can’t Hack
#413Earlier quoted context omitted.
Umm excuse me, but go yourself. You do not in any way own anything I create just because you may or may not have seen it on the Internet. I am not a public figure simply because I walk around in public. My words do not belong to you simply because I put them in a place where you can see them. Everything about your post is wrong in the worst possible ways. You are the opposite of the idea of freedom of information. Yo…
What are you on about? I didn't say anything about me owning it; I said you don't own it. It's part of the universe now. There's nothing you can do about that. I think it's hilarious that you accuse me of information tyranny when you're ostensibly arguing for your ability to dictate what I am and am not allowed to know or remember. Freedom of information is, in fact, the freedom of information, apart from the wishes…
Please don't post uncivil, unsubstantive comments to HN.
Re: Apple Is Said to Be Working on an iPhone Even It Can’t Hack
#414Earlier quoted context omitted.
Binaries can be converted back to assembly and quite often even back to equivalent C; bugs are most often found by fuzzing (intentional or not) which does not require source code. The difference between open and closed source is that open is more often analysed by white hats who rather publish vulnerabilities and help fixing them, while closed by black hats who rather sell or exploit them in secret.
You misunderstand; if you can't even decrypt the binary, you can't disassemble, much less run a decompiler over it. As someone who has done quite a bit of reverse engineering work, I have no idea how I'd identify and isolate a vulnerability found by fuzzing without the ability to even look at the machine code.
If it runs, it has to be decrypted (at a current level of cryptography); at most it is obfuscated and the access is blocked by some hardware tricks which may be costly to circumvent, but there is nothing fundamental stopping you.
Re: Apple Is Said to Be Working on an iPhone Even It Can’t Hack
#415Earlier quoted context omitted.
" they don't obviously get to impose penal sanctions on people for saying no" I wonder if there is any negative effects associated with being refused entry by a CBP? Could it be the case that if you are refused entry once, that in the future they will be more likely to refuse you entry? If so, that's a fairly significant penalty/power that the CBP person has.
> I wonder if there is any negative effects associated with being refused entry by a CBP? Could it be the case that if you are refused entry once, that in the future they will be more likely to refuse you entry? If so, that's a fairly significant penalty/power that the CBP person has. Yes, some categories of non-citizen visitors (I don't remember which) are asked on the form if they have ever been refused entry to th…
> If they're using the same passport number as before, CBP likely also has access to a computerized record of the previous interaction.
(They might also be able to search their database by biographical details such as date of birth, so getting a different passport may not prevent them from guessing that you're the same person.)