- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Apple already unlocked 70 other iPhones for feds
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:52 am to TexasTiger39
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:52 am to TexasTiger39
quote:
the irony in this statement
lol whatever dude... you are one of the ones im referring to for sure...
im not going to ask you to because im not going to divulge mine, but id love to know what your background in information security is that makes you such the expert on this kind of thing
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 11:54 am
1
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:54 am to gmrkr5
(no message)
This post was edited on 8/8/20 at 10:32 am
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:54 am to CAD703X
Couldn't they come out with a way to bypass the security, and then come out with an updated firmware shortly after? I understand that sets a horrible precedent, but it's an option if they are forced to open it up
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:55 am to gmrkr5
quote:they are stuck on apple's signature.
then why are they stuck unless apple writes the exploit
quote:
They are also stuck from a legal standpoint, i.e., IP law.
well someone else already said it
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:55 am to Hammertime
quote:
Couldn't they come out with a way to bypass the security, and then come out with an updated firmware shortly after? I understand that sets a horrible precedent, but it's an option if they are forced to open it up
they certainly could, but once the toothpaste is out of the tube their is no putting it back in with this kind of thing.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:55 am to TexasTiger39
quote:
I understand that is your implication. Until you know the person on the other side of the keyboard, you cannot accurately make that assessment.
neither can you
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:56 am to gmrkr5
(no message)
This post was edited on 8/8/20 at 10:32 am
Posted on 2/18/16 at 11:59 am to CAD703X
What that doesn't say is that the government wanted the program to do it themselves. Not have apple donor one time, for one person. The government waned the program to use it at will, which is why they declined.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:01 pm to jeff5891
quote:
they are stuck on apple's signature.
you got a link for that? i have not seen one thing indicating the FBI has code ready they just need apple to sign it. not to mention it would be absurd for apple to allow anyone to write an expolit for their OS. FBI or not..
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:01 pm to Tshiz
quote:
What that doesn't say is that the government wanted the program to do it themselves. Not have apple donor one time, for one person. The government waned the program to use it at will, which is why they declined.
Wrong.
the FBI asked for apple to upload the update at an apple facility and let the FBI remotely access the phone
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 12:02 pm
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:03 pm to jeff5891
(no message)
This post was edited on 8/8/20 at 10:32 am
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:05 pm to gmrkr5
quote:
you got a link for that?
yea sure
LINK
quote:
As many jailbreakers are familiar, firmware can be loaded via Device Firmware Upgrade (DFU) Mode. Once an iPhone enters DFU mode, it will accept a new firmware image over a USB cable. Before any firmware image is loaded by an iPhone, the device first checks whether the firmware has a valid signature from Apple. This signature check is why the FBI cannot load new software onto an iPhone on their own — the FBI does not have the secret keys that Apple uses to sign firmware.
a jailbreaker can upload modified image, this isnt hard.
quote:
[Provide] the FBI with a signed iPhone Software file, recovery bundle, or other Software Image File (“SIF”) that can be loaded onto the SUBJECT DEVICE. The SIF will load and run from Random Access Memory (“RAM”) and will not modify the iOS on the actual phone, the user data partition or system partition on the device’s flash memory.
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 12:10 pm
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:09 pm to TexasTiger39
quote:
If anyone is interested in actually reading the court order.
= write us an exploit for your OS
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:11 pm to jeff5891
quote:
yea sure
come on man, that states the technical limitations and thats it. it does not state that the fbi has their own exploit and apple wont sign it.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:18 pm to jeff5891
No dude.
They wanted Apple to develop a program that could crack any iPhone and hand it over. Get your facts right.
They wanted Apple to develop a program that could crack any iPhone and hand it over. Get your facts right.
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:19 pm to gmrkr5
quote:
that states the technical limitations and thats it. it does not state that the fbi has their own exploit and apple wont sign it.
quote:
[Provide] the FBI with a signed iPhone Software file, recovery bundle, or other Software Image File (“SIF”)
or other should kind of tell you they do. but that takes some comprehension skills
quote:thats the FBI's
the FBI with a signed iPhone Software file, recovery bundle
quote:thats apple's
or other Software Image File (“SIF”)
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:22 pm to jeff5891
quote:
Wrong.
the FBI asked for apple to upload the update at an apple facility and let the FBI remotely access the phone
directly from the court order. You're wrong
The SIF will be loaded on the SUBJECT DEVICE at either a government facility, or alternatively at an apple facility
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 12:23 pm
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:23 pm to jeff5891
quote:
that states the technical limitations and thats it. it does not state that the fbi has their own exploit and apple wont sign it.
quote:
[Provide] the FBI with a signed iPhone Software file, recovery bundle, or other Software Image File (“SIF”)
or other should kind of tell you they do. but that takes some comprehension skills
quote:
the FBI with a signed iPhone Software file, recovery bundle
thats the FBI's
quote:
or other Software Image File (“SIF”)
thats apple's
you're stating your opinion and interpretation as fact. it is not fact, its your opinion.
reaching
quote:
[Provide] the FBI with a signed iPhone Software file, recovery bundle, or other Software Image File (“SIF”)
why would the court order state apple must provide something if the FBI already has their own?
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 12:25 pm
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:24 pm to gmrkr5
quote:reading comprehension
or alternatively at an apple facility
just bc i didnt add "at a government facility and apple's" doesnt mean my original statement was wrong. they still did ask apple to do it at apple's own facility
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 12:26 pm
Posted on 2/18/16 at 12:26 pm to jeff5891
quote:
reading comprehension
jesus christ...
quote:
just bc i didnt add at a government facility doesnt mean my original statement was wrong. they still did ask apple to do it at apple's own facility
no they didnt. the court order simply stated the 2 acceptable places it could be performed. i promise you that phone isnt leaving the FBI office
This post was edited on 2/18/16 at 12:27 pm
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News