Technology

80724 readers

3730 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

827

FBI Couldn’t Get into WaPo Reporter’s iPhone Because It Had Lockdown Mode Enabled (www.404media.co)

submitted 2 days ago by tonytins@pawb.social to c/technology@lemmy.world

178 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The FBI has been unable to access a Washington Post reporter’s seized iPhone because it was in Lockdown Mode, a sometimes overlooked feature that makes iPhones broadly more secure, according to recently filed court records.

The court record shows what devices and data the FBI was able to ultimately access, and which devices it could not, after raiding the home of the reporter, Hannah Natanson, in January as part of an investigation into leaks of classified information. It also provides rare insight into the apparent effectiveness of Lockdown Mode, or at least how effective it might be before the FBI may try other techniques to access the device.

“Because the iPhone was in Lockdown mode, CART could not extract that device,” the court record reads, referring to the FBI’s Computer Analysis Response Team, a unit focused on performing forensic analyses of seized devices. The document is written by the government, and is opposing the return of Natanson’s devices.

Archive: http://archive.today/gfTg9

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lautan@lemmy.ca 44 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The FBI just wants the public to think their phone is secure. I got news for you, it's not secure. Look up Snowden.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 5 points 12 hours ago

Snowden was pre-lockdown mode but yeah.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Reminder that none of your data is safe on a cloud. Law enforcement can get a judge to sign off and make Google/Apple decrypt your cloud data and give it to them.

If you really want your data private you have to put it on an encrypted hard drive. Recommend Veracrypt.

[–] mcv@lemmy.zip 2 points 13 hours ago

It depends on which cloud. US cloud services are inherently unsafe. Some other countries have more respect for privacy.

[–] phil@lymme.dynv6.net 7 points 23 hours ago

Recommend Veracrypt.

Or Luks which is well integrated with Linux. Are there significant advantages with Veracrypt?

[–] sibachian@lemmy.ml -2 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

and even then, unless you unlock it for law enforcements upon request. you will serve lifetime in imprisonment or until you agree to unlock it and whatever if any crime is within the locker to continue imprisonment. so safeguarding data really doesn't matter in the end anyway because any sensitive data kept anywhere will be used against you either by the law or by criminals. which often times seems to be one and the same.

[–] freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world 7 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Clearly you are not a lawyer, not educated in law, nor do you know a single thing regarding what you are talking about, yet you felt compelled to leave a comment full of complete disinformation. Is letting people on the internet know how dumb you are a family tradition, or is this something new you are trying out for yourself?

[–] sibachian@lemmy.ml 0 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

it's amazing you think not unlocking your shit will get you out of jail.

or maybe you just come from a country where law and logic is just optional or possibly paid for.

[–] MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 1 points 8 hours ago

Can you provide any statute or reporting to indicate a person can be jailed indefinitely over not unlocking a device?

[–] 7101334@lemmy.world 8 points 17 hours ago

unless you unlock it for law enforcements upon request. you will serve lifetime in imprisonment or until you agree to unlock it

I'm like 99% sure that isn't how that works. Held in contempt of court, maybe, but lifetime imprisonment, doubt it.