I dont know what this whole privacy hoopla by Apple was about when hacking the phone was that easy. I did mention in another thread that this all seemed like a publicity stunt by the company. Unhackable password protection my ass
We all knew it already that FBI (with help of NSA or outside contractor, in this case cellebrite, an Israeli cyber security firm) can hack that iPhone, but they wanted Apple to weaken its encryption, they wanted apple to build a backdoor for them to open any iphone they want. Apple was right to stand against such requests, iPhone (not huge fan of iOS) is almost impossible to hack unless you have the physical access to the device and got facilities like NSA and Cellebrite has to clone/dump the memory/whole phone and brute-force the password.
OK, i think i should elaborate bit more. FBI was never after Apple for a single phone, they wanted Apple to weaken the secure enclave they built into their CPUs, they wanted Apple to build a backdoor to unlock iphones, they wanted an exploit not to unlock the phone, but to make it so they could have more attempts.
OK, i think i should elaborate bit more. FBI was never after Apple for a single phone, they wanted Apple to weaken the secure enclave they built into their CPUs, they wanted Apple to build a backdoor to unlock iphones, they wanted an exploit not to unlock the phone, but to make it so they could have more attempts.
I think that FBI was actually simply looking for a legal judgement against Apple, thus creating a precedent for Google. Because simply getting access to iphones is not enough, as more than 70% of users use Android phones. And because of the open source nature of android, there could be 100s of different variations of security encryption in android based phones. And having to go back to the drawing board for every other phone will be tedious for FBI, or any hacking firm. Hence having a legal precedent was necessary.
I think that FBI was actually simply looking for a legal judgement against Apple, thus creating a precedent for Google. Because simply getting access to iphones is not enough, as more than 70% of users use Android phones. And because of the open source nature of android, there could be 100s of different variations of security encryption in android based phones. And having to go back to the drawing board for every other phone will be tedious for FBI, or any hacking firm. Hence having a legal precedent was necessary.
Yes, it was more to do with making a legal precedent than hacking one single phone. The whole tech industry stood behind Apple for this, this will force every phone/tech company to hand over their private keys to FBI/DOJ on request, thats bad, bad for everyone involved.
Android is insecure (from a huge android fan), 99% of the phones doesnt have encryption turned on by default (only new Nexus phone with Android 5 Lollipop and up are encrypted by default, even they suffer a lot without proper hardware based encryption). 100s of different variants of Android doesnt mean 100s of different encryption methods, there are few, mostly AES based encryption standards that everyone follows. Your pass-code based screen lock is easy to break in, we are dealing with encrypted storage here, not device lock. iPhones are by default encrypted, iPhones with the 64bit CPU (iPhone 5S and above) has a secure enclave (hardware based encryption/ key store) built into them thats almost impossible to break without Apple's help. In this instance it was an iPhone 5C without the secure enclave, that made bit easy to break. There are many ways to break in, i think they might have cloned the NAND storage or entire phone and brute forced the key or they might have found an exploit to get more attempts or simply decrypt the NAND storage, this wont work on iPhone 5s and above as the key is stored on the secure enclave.
its almost 50-50% in US for Android and iPhone unlike rest of the worlds 80-15% share of the market.