The FBI just wants the public to think their phone is secure. I got news for you, it's not secure. Look up Snowden.
Technology
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
Snowden was pre-lockdown mode but yeah.
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.
It depends on which cloud. US cloud services are inherently unsafe. Some other countries have more respect for privacy.
Recommend Veracrypt.
Or Luks which is well integrated with Linux. Are there significant advantages with Veracrypt?
This is just an advertisement. There is no phone the government cannot get into if they wanted.
Is this an advertisement? Sure, yes. The government can get into any phone? No.
Any iPhone? Almost certainly.
Virtually any phone I would say, yeah. Either by rubberhose cryptanalysis or by sheer time, money, and tools, they most likely can.
So "any phone" turned into "virtually any phone", and the owner needs to be alive and apprehended, and then they "most likely" can, maybe.
See, I mostly agree with what you said. But you can see how we have moved the goalpost away from "there is no phone the government cannot get into", to "the government can get into most phones", which is quite a different statement.
I am not moving goalposts or making different statements, I'm not the user you were replying to.
I also mostly agree with you, but my angle is that the difference between "the government can get into virtually any phone" and "the government can get into most phones" is that the latter makes it seem like you can be "smart/knowledgeable enough" to avoid that, and that's untrue. You should assume everything you keep on your phone can be extracted because of the nature of smartphone manufacturers, the supply chain etc, but I do not believe no phone can't be broken into like OP was saying, thus "virtually any phone" seems fitting.
Big claims require big proof. But I bet all you have is a hunch.
The big claim is that they couldn't get into the reporter's iPhone. You are right to demand proof before believing something so obviously made up.
Unless there's an incredible amount of people "not in" on some universal secret, maths gonna maths, and physics gonna physics. Actual encryption works well in a proven way, computational power isn't as infinite as some people think, and decent software implementations exists.
Getting hold of anything properly encrypted with no access to the key still requires an incredible amount of computing power to brute force. Weak/bad implementations can leave enough info back to speed this up, malicious software can make use of an extra, undocumented encryption key, etc. but a decent implementation would not be easy to break in.
Now, this does not say anything about what Apple actually do. They claim to have proper encryption, but with anything closed source, you only have your belief to back you up. But it's not an extraordinary claim to say that this can be done competently. And Apple would have a good incentive in doing so: good PR, and no real downside for them since people happily unlock their phone to keep their software running and doing whatever it wants locally.
Or, they walk in through the back door.
Math have little room for backdoors.
Big claims require big proof. But I bet all you have is a hunch.
I work alongside law enforcement. Part of my job involves helping detectives follow the instructions Apple/Google provide to them for downloading and unencrypting people's phone data once a judge has given permission for them to request it from Apple/Google.
Now, I'm not familiar with "Lockdown Mode". Maybe that uses separate encryption to encrypt data stored on your phone that ISN'T cloud synced data. But even then, if that Lockdown Mode is software created by the manufacturer, then they could have the decryption algorithm to decrypt it and I wouldn't trust it. I would only trust open-source encryption software, like Veracrypt.
Bottom line is I'm here to guarantee you that if the data is synced with a cloud, which most people's phone data is, it absolutely can be obtained by law enforcement.
Not that it's particularly relevant, but typically when law enforcement get into the data, it's usually because they have reasonable suspicion and it's usually kiddie porn or chat logs proving they were trying to meet up with underage individuals. And I'm here to tell you that shit is way more prevalent than I think most people realize.
You can read more about lock down mode here: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/105120
Again, like you said, what is described in the article is a big claim, and it should require a big proof, not some trust-me-bro apple marketing.
Stop requiring accounts just to view content.
Fucking scumbags
I tried GrapheneOS on my Pixel, and it's pretty cool, but unfortunately I want my phone to have full functionality. I'll sacrifice some privacy and just practice digital minimalism, which ultimately is the best form of privacy.
What didnt work for you?
I just got tired of everything being a hack. I simply need my phone to work and I also see a bit of irony installing play services just to receive proper notifications. I know I know the whole app sandboxing bit. But still, it seems counterintuitive I don't have to worry if my phone's going to let me down if I'm driving a need to download some obscure parking app or if I need tap to pay to function which in the United States I do. One time I was at Costco, renewing my membership, they needed me to download the app real quick to do something on the account. But because the app wouldn't function right, my wife had to do it.
I needed to buy some ribs the other day, but I forgot my wallet. If I had tapped to pay on my phone, that wouldn't have been an issue.
You don't NEED tap to pay. I literally never use it, ever, unless I have a card with a bad chip (happened once).
Forgetting your wallet like a dummy doesn't mean you NEED tap to pay, it means you need to remember to bring your wallet.
Also, there is nothing you NEED the Costco app for, an org like that can't lock things behind an app to function because their customer base is too broad, they will inevitably have old people with T9 Nokia bricks still. It might have been the most convenient way to achieve it, but it's not a requirement - even if that particular sales associate didn't know how and would have to phone a friend.
All that to say I'm not trying to convince you to use gOS; I fully recognize that security is on one end of the spectrum from convenience, and we all choose where we want to be on that spectrum. But I felt the need to counter your claims.... Nobody NEEDS tap to pay smh. If you care about privacy at all you wouldn't be linking cards to apple or Google, adding yet another layer of giant data collection to some of your most intimate data.
they needed me to download the app
They wanted you to, but i get your point.
receive proper notifications. I know I know the whole app sandboxing bit
Still worth it for the sandbox
This news sparks joy. It’s a shame the FBI is wasting their time on petty political bullshit like this instead of going after real crime. What a shameful chapter for the FBI, and that’s really saying something given their illustrious history.
Social contract is breaking.
No need to see any legitimacy in this government or its goons.
You act like there's a cabal of kid rapist running the world.
The "funny" thing is that anybody thinking that a mere 5 years ago would have been deemed a conspiracy nutter.
That's not by accident. Every right wing conspiracy is a ridiculous pastiche of the shit they are really getting up to, or intend to in the near future. No doubt Pizzagate was invented to make people incredulous about claims of secret cabals of kid rapists in elite circles. Every accusation a confession.
Every accusation [is] a confession
That is indeed something which has been very visibly and very often proven, again and again and again, in the last couple of years.
I reckon it was always so, but we just forgot it during the period after WWII and the ressurging of the far-right.
Best advertisement I've heard for an iPhone ever. Now that Android moving to the same walled garden business model...