Replies

Thanks for posting that. I wasn’t working on anything that had to be secure when I was playing around with the FIB (I was probing an embedded EEPROM ironically) .... I am familiar with techniques to cover such embedded devices with metal layers as well as introduce traps so that if someone wanted to dig down through the metal with a FIB, they risk cutting power rails and the like. Similar techniques are implemented at the PCB level to prevent sniffing of DRAM busses hidden on inner layers of the PCB (I suspect Apple and other vendors have embedded encryption in front of the DRAM’s physical layer since they develop their own ASICs).

Anyway, I simply got sick of seeing people imply that the iPhone was hacked due to a security issue ... I highly doubted that was the case. Plus there were many people calling you out as if you were wrong about Apple’s security.

Thanks. I knew you knew your stuff. . . I posted the details for the benefit of everyone on here. The Secure Enclave is much more hardened than the Encryption Engine and I sincerely doubt that it will be as easy to get at without destroying/damaging what they are after.

It is difficult being attacked by the know-nothings who are convinced that Apple is doing this purely for PR purposes. . . these short-sighted people cannot see the very serious philosophical underpinnings of what Apple is doing or the long-term consequences of what a loss means for them personally.

Cryptography is covered by United States laws on national security and the import and export of weapons of war. Since Dec 7, 1941 if you violate these laws you've pretty much surrendered your constitutional rights. Read the following:

http://www.emc.com/emc-plus/rsa-labs/standards-initiatives/united-states-cryptography-export-import.htm

and follow the links even deeper if you like. Numerous people have spent a great deal of time in prison for violating these copyright/patent/import and export laws.

All of your numbers of possible combinations and permutations for the AES-256 bit encryption assume a brute force attack. This paper published 22 years ago was "authorized" (ie allowd to be published from worked researched years earlier) and presents mathematical attacks on block ( and stream ) cyphers which significantly reduce the complexity in both time and space of a brute force attack. I am sure that world class mathematicians employeed by numerous .govs around the world have even more tricks up their sleeves. US laws regarding encryption do not protect you from those people who have the brains and resources to attack these cyphers with better methods than brute force only from those who don't have the requisite resources.

This paper is from Canada. I assume the pdf is free of adobe "back doors". (LOL)

Linear differential cryptanalysis

The first casualty of war is truth! Loose lips sink ships! Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear! etc.