Replies

I see from one online document somewhere that all A7 processors have secure enclave capability. I also see that IOS 7 runs on A7 processors. If both are true, it still does not necessarily mean that IOS 7 uses the secure enclave. And there are IOS revisions for every major release to consider.

Maybe this is a situation in which both of you are technically correct or close to correct, but talking past each other due to fine details(?)

My pickup truck is in dire need of some welding attention, but this secure enclave stuff is mildly interesting. I would like to have a chance to get back to studying it further. I only see a few online articles discussing it and none that seem to discuss it to sufficient depth that I feel confident that I could represent what they seem to try to communicate accurately (possibly due to ambiguous writing). Meanwhile, thanks to both of you and I do think it is worthwhile to continue disucssion, particularly since most of the articles out there are written by non-technical folks for other non-technical folks. (Maybe if nothing else we collectively have a chance to cut through some of that and bring some more illumination to bear to the topic.)

I also sense that there is a separate legal issue of what the appropriate venue is for resolution. I am not a lawyer but hopefully we will get some timely clarification on that from legal folks.

I meant to add somewhere along the line a pointer to the FR discussion of another possibly pertinent article here:

Apple’s Involuntary Servitude
Judge Andrew Napolitano

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3401654/posts

I see from one online document somewhere that all A7 processors have secure enclave capability. I also see that IOS 7 runs on A7 processors. If both are true, it still does not necessarily mean that IOS 7 uses the secure enclave. And there are IOS revisions for every major release to consider.

According to this spec sheet, and according to Wikipedia, the Iphone 5C uses the A6 processor.

Maybe this is a situation in which both of you are technically correct or close to correct, but talking past each other due to fine details(?)

I'll grant the possibility that it is true, but I have always thought that Swordmaker was not really understanding that the particular phone in discussion did not have all the protection features he kept going on about.

His "the code you are referring to is burned into SILICON" is an example.

the 5C uses the A6 chip

http://web.archive.org/web/20131115020122/http://www.apple.com/iphone-5c/specs/

I see from one online document somewhere that all A7 processors have secure enclave capability. I also see that IOS 7 runs on A7 processors. If both are true, it still does not necessarily mean that IOS 7 uses the secure enclave. And there are IOS revisions for every major release to consider.

No, in this case, DiogenesLamp is correct, the iPhone 5C runs on a A6 processor. It has a different system than the Secure Enclave, but it does have the secure systems built-in to the Secure Boot system. Apple had not yet moved them to the Secure Enclave for a higher level of security. This is the reason that Apple CAN get around the security on this model of iPhone with defeating the boot systems. . . but those approaches can conceivably also be used on later iPhones as well. However the Apple Signatures and BootID is also written in the BOOT silicon and it is signed to the A6. It's a tell me twice system instead of the tell me thrice system of the A7 and later system which requires all three to be present for everything to be present. For the A6, both have to be present. Remove or alter one, and the system is forced into the DFU mode that requires a FACTORY level reset, erasing all data. See above about low level erasure of data locations. Recall, please, that the iPhone in question is running iOS 9.2, not iOS 7, regardless of the A7 processor.

I also sense that there is a separate legal issue of what the appropriate venue is for resolution. I am not a lawyer but hopefully we will get some timely clarification on that from legal folks.

Did you notice the Court Order from the Magistrate judge was not even signed, but rubber stamped? That indicates it was most likely handled as in administrative nature, probably by the court clerk, just as a matter of routine, in a pile of other documents. It makes me wonder if the judge even reviewed it. She may have grabbed onto a tiger's tail and wondering desperately how she can let go without getting clawed to death.