For some reason I am reminded of Dr. Frankenstein trying to protect his monster from the angry mob. :)
Posted on 02/23/2016 11:34:59 AM PST by Swordmaker
The Justice Department is pursuing court orders to force Apple Inc. to help investigators extract data from iPhones in about a dozen undisclosed cases around the country, in disputes similar to the current battle over a terrorist's locked phone, according to people familiar with the matter.
The other phones are at issue in cases where prosecutors have sought, as in the San Bernardino, Calif. terror case, to use an 18th-century law called the All Writs Act to compel the company to help them bypass the passcode security feature of phones that may hold evidence, these people said.
Privacy advocates are likely to seize on the cases' existence as proof the government aims to go far beyond what prosecutors have called the limited scope of the current public court fight over a locked iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino shooters.
Law enforcement leaders, however, may cite the existence of the other cases as evidence that the encryption of personal devices has become a serious problem for criminal investigators in a variety of cases and settings.
(Excerpt) Read more at nasdaq.com ...
I haven't seen a single lawyer properly define the case on TV and FOX has dozens of them on staff. They begin by saying apple is helping the terrorists. and every talking head lawyer on FOX other than Napolitano, seem to have as much Apple rage as the ragers on these threads.
No I haven't. You disagree with me, and then ASSERT that I am lying. This is why I think you are a kook.
By his own words, he is obsessed with Tim Cook's sex life, to the point of being completely unhinged.
And yet you are the one who keeps bringing it up. "The lady doth protest too much methinks."
apple tells court it would have to create govtos to comply with ruling
cyrus farivar
feb. 25, 2016
ars technica
How about we find some more programmers and ask them? Who do you know that writes code?
The first is technical, the other philosophical and Constitutional.
The first is a lie, and the second likely doesn't hold legal water either.
And yet you are the one who keeps bringing it up.
You can run, but you can't hide from your own assertions here and here.
They are the center of your irrational hatred of Apple, your willingness to throw liberty to the tyrants.
It bears repeating, because it explains the rest of your blathering.
He’s circling the drain, Sword.
So you think perhaps they are keeping the value of the count in ROM somewhere? :)
I was describing what is supposedly the routine manner in which such an order is drafted. Ordinarily copies of all motions, responses, and so on, including all proposed orders, would be filed and delivered to all legally involved parties in a timely and orderly manner in accordance with all published local court procedures.
I am not aware of what happened in this particular instance. If Apple somehow was not informed, then as I have indicated previously, you do not need a Master’s in biochem to tell when a dead fish smells fishy— or something like that (with apologies to all biochem majors).
So far as I am aware, court procedure when properly followed gives advance notice to all directly affected parties who can be reached by business street addresses so long as they are a party (plaintiff or defendant) to the litigation duly registered with the court for the case under the docket. I am not sure why Apple was not duly notified by the court of an order that directly affected it. Offhand I cannot think of any reason why it should not have been registered with the court as being a party to the litigation if it is going to be ordered to compel production of a document and especially production of live object code for a state of the art handheld device. I must be missing something. I am not a lawyer and I imagine there may be a way in which this could be done legally without direct notification of the primary affected party. However, if I were the judge, it would be very, VERY suspicious to me if I were asked to issue such an order without due notification of the court’s hearing and filings pro and con.
This seems to me like a prima facie case of denial of due process, in addition to various BoR violations as Apple claims in the news headlines. Again I have not had any opportunity to read the filings and I am not a lawyer. So maybe I should not even write anything at all here or anywhere else about it, lol. Just *%&&ing in the wind for now, I guess, until someone knowledgeable about such matters comes along and clarifies the situation for us all... we really need some more lawyers around here. The convention is that the guys in the trenches usually just short-ship the stuff to comply with the quarterly mgmt schedules, and then get to be the fall guys for the next batch of problem tickets, lol... :-)
Govtos? Government Operating System?
That's funny because today on Good Morning America, Tim Cook said they would have to create PHONE CANCER!!!!!!!!!
Can we just throw on some more hyperbole, or do you think this is enough?
Naw, I’m just probably the least qualified guy here to be casting any stones, lol...
I have not been hanging around Cupertino recently but it is still relatively effortless for me to imagine that the Apple folks believe that the two terms are equivalent.
They are both so good, why don't you just print them out? I especially liked this one:
One would think that a faggot CEO would approve of a "backdoor" entry into one of their products.
I thought that one was a real knee slapper. :)
:)
Ah, the LIAR makes an entrance.
For some reason I am reminded of Dr. Frankenstein trying to protect his monster from the angry mob. :)
Excuse me, CodeToad, I never stated that. I have always said that Apple could do it on an iPhone 5C. I said they could. They said they could. They said it would not be easy, which is also what I have been saying. You are LYING again.
Apple has just told the Court in their request to Vacate that they estimate it would take a TEAM of between six to ten engineers plus a team leader, a quality assurance engineer, and either a tool writer, or a document writer, plus another development team to enable the ability of a remote connection for the software to hook in to brute force the password, about two to four weeks, as this does NOT exist in the system as currently built.
THEN they would have to test the whole thing, and run tests on multiple iPhones to make sure it doesn't somehow damage the data on the FLASH drive all before they could release it to the FBI to use.
They would ALSO have to write documentation and record every step of the process in case they were called into court for ANY criminal charges where the defense would question the protocols.
YOU said YOU could do it in 10 minutes from your desk. That's another obvious lie.
Nothing I have said was WRONG. Everything you said was. . . and you claim I don't know what I am talking about?
You repeatedly lie about me. . .
My guy is Ted Cruz. I was quite disappointed that every single one of the Republican candidates are still thinking this Apple vs. FBI is only about this ONE iPhone of the Terrorists and it will not affect all iPhones. Unfortunately, they are ill informed.
Sharing is caring... :-)
My name is Bill. Bill from (pause) San Antonio. Yes, it is I, Bill from San Antonio. Go Oilers!
Do not pay attention to that person who claims he can fix your software problem in 15 minutes. This is because I can fix it in 10 minutes. 10 minutes only, guaranteed!
Yes! I am highly trained in a five star university! I will develop the fix in half the time the other guy promised you, at a savings to you of 20% from what the other guy would charge you. There is absolutely no reason to go with him. Go with me!
You can trust me! I will also give you, at no extra charge, platinum support if anything goes wrong. But since nothing of mine ever goes wrong, you need not worry about this. Trust me!
100%!
Just a moment to let my manager talk to you about an installment plan for payment. Have your VISA ready please!
:-)
They keep it in a non-reachable area that cannot be modified by anything you can load into RAM. You assume that there are only ROMs available which are readable by the A5 and A6. Inside the A5 and A6 there is a specialized processor Crypto Engine, the predecessor to the A7's and later processor's Secure Enclave.
Every iOS device has a dedicated AES 256 crypto engine built into the DMA path between the FLash storage and main system memory, making le encryption highly effcient. Along with the AES engine, SHA-1 is implemented in hardware, further reducing cryptographic operation overhead.The device's unique ID (UID) and a device group ID (GID) are AES 256-bit keys fused into the application processor during manufacturing. No software or firmware can read them directly; they can see only the results of encryption or decryption operations performed using them. The UID is unique to each device and is not recorded by Apple or any of its suppliers. The GID is common to all processors in a class of devices (for example, all devices using the Apple A5 chip), and is used as an additional level of protection when delivering system software during installation and restore. Burning these keys into the silicon prevents them from being tampered with or bypassed, and guarantees that they can be accessed only by the AES engine.
The UID allows data to be cryptographically tied to a particular device. For example, the key hierarchy protecting the file system includes the UID, so if the memory chips are physically moved from one device to another, the files are inaccessible. The UID is not related to any other identifier on the device.
Apart from the UID and GID, all other cryptographic keys are created by the system's random number generator (RNG) using an algorithm based on Yarrow. System entropy is gathered from interrupt timing during boot, and additionally from internal sensors once the device has booted.
Securely erasing saved keys is just as important as generating them. It's especially challenging to do so on Flash storage, where wear-leveling might mean multiple copies of data need to be erased. To address this issue, iOS devices include a feature dedicated to secure data erasure called Effaceable Storage. This feature accesses the underlying storage technology (for example, NAND) to directly address and erase a small number of blocks at a very low level.
This citation comes from the archived data that Ray76 posted earlier for the antique iPhones.
Although the Crypto Engine is inside the A5 and A6, it is walled off from all other processor functions and inaccessible to them, including blocking the A5 and A6 from reading the UID.
You might notice how little difference there is between this May 2012 description and the Secure Enclave description in the September 2015 White Paper. That is because the basic security principles did not change much, just got better and far more secure by divorcing them completely from the actual processor.
The main difference was moving the log-in and count routines from the Secure iBoot System to the Secure Element Processor and putting it all inside a totally unreachable silicon sub-processor system. Instead of a tell me TWICE check linked chip system, they went to a tell me THRICE linked system, where all three chips have to be present and untampered with for the boot to continue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.