Encryption Depiction
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Encryption Depiction | |
| Number | 2693 |
| Broadcast Date | FEBRUARY 19, 2016 |
| Episode Length | 50:47 |
| Hosts | Tom Merritt |
| Guests | Darren Kitchen, Len Peralta |
It’s Fanmail Friday with perspectives on Apple’s encryption fight from SysAdmins law enforcement and more. Plus why one mobile carrier in Europe is putting in network-level ad blocking.Tom Merritt and Darren Kitchen discuss and Len Peralta illustrates.
Guest
Headlines
- Apple has been asked by a California court to aid the FBI in cracking the password of an iPhone 5C. Apple had until Tuesday to respond to the court but Reuters says the company now has until Friday Feb. 26. A New York Times report claims Apple asked the FBI to issue it request for the tool under court seal. Apple has retained Theodore Olson, who won Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010, and media lawyer Theodore Boutrous, both prominent free-speech lawyers.
- Despite the extension the US Department of Justice has not waited to file a motion with the court seeking to compel Apple to comply with a judge's order.
- Facebook released a post of support stating it would “continue to fight aggressively against requirements for companies to weaken the security of their systems.” And Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey posted We stand with @tim_cook and Apple. Mark Cuban wrote on his blog that Apple was doing "exactly the right thing."
- And finally Libertarian Presidential Candidate and Security software developer John McAfee has offered to crack the iPhone 5C in question within three weeks free of charge. McAfee claims he could use social engineering to work out the passcode. McAfee says he wants to do this to save Apple from having to implement a back door. McAfee wrote ”I would eat my shoe on the Neil Cavuto [television] show if we could not break the encryption on the San Bernardino phone.”
- Mobile carrier Three announced it will implement ad-blocking for its customers in the UK and Italy. Customers will be given the choice to opt-in to having ads filtered and removed according to TechCrunch. Three says it wants to reduce customer data charges, prevent tracking and expose customers only to relevant ads. It will use technology from Shine, an Israeli company which also provides its service to Carribean carrier Digicel.
- Strategy Analytics released a report Thursday noting that 8.1 million smartwatches shipped in Q4. For the first time, that’s more than the number of Swiss watches that shipped which was 7.9 million in Q4.
- Garmin announced new fitness bands. The $100-$120 Vivofit 3 now automatically tracks workouts and can track intensity level. You can choose from Garmin’s Style collection of bands or for $40 more from a series designed by Jonathan Adler including purple geometrics, gray and green concentric circles, and a blue Goyard-like chevron pattern. It ships in Q2. The $250 Vivoactive HR ships in Spring and adds optical heart rate sensors, 13-hour GPS battery life, and native tracking for more sports.
- PC Mag reports that starting next year Volvo will offer an app using Bluetooth as an alternative to a physical key. It would allow digital key sharing for families or businesses like rental car companies. A pilot program will begin this spring with Sweden’s car-sharing company Sunfleet at Gothenburg airport.
- Brad Heath of the USA Today points out that Judge Robert J. Bryan has ordered the FBI to disclose the source code of the tool it used to exploit TOR to the attorney of Jay Michaud. Michaud’s defense involves showing the FBI overreached its warrant to use the network investigative technique. The FBI operated a TOR site for 12 days in order catch child pornography offenders.
- Submitted by JackRB
- Mobile World Congress starts Sunday and runs through Thursday February 25th. Most of the big announcements are coming Sunday including Samsung’s UNpacked LG’s G5 announcement something with a stylus from Huawei a phone with Dolby Atmos from Lenovo and and new stuff from ZTE. Sony has an announcement at its booth on Monday and HTC is expected to have a VR announcement though it has nothing scheduled. Alcatel will get the jump with an announcement Saturday. And Xiaomi is waiting until Wednesday to announced the Mi5.
- Microsoft, Samsung, Qualcomm, GE and Intel are among the companies joining to form the Open Connectivity Foundation in order to unify Internet of Things standards. The OCF is a successor to the Open Interconnect Consortium which launched in 2014. But OCF includes Microsoft, Electrolux and Qualcomm who are also members of ANOTHER group called the Allseen Alliance. Apple and Google are not members of any of these organizations.
- THE US Consumer Product Safety Commission has deemed self-balancing scooters often called hoverboards, unsafe after reviewing reports of 52 scooter fires between December 1 and Feb. 17. Scooter manufacturers will be required to gain UL certification before selling boards.
Discussion
- Your Messages!
Pick of the Day
- Yaru recommends the News360 app available for iOS, Android and Windows. It customizes news articles based on topics you’ve indicated you’re interested in as well as your likes and dislikes as you use the app. Yaru likes the design of the app and the ability to save articles to read later. He says, “What's great about the app is the execution, it feels really really smart.”
- Submitted by Yaru
Messages
- Rob from Damasucs, MD points out the iPhone 5C is owned by San Bernardino County.
My employer (big tech company) issued me an iPhone. If the FBI wanted to access it legally, they would speak to my employer and with proper legal documents, they'd use their MDM (mobile device management) software to unlock it and provide whatever they were required to.
There is a very serious (and common) failing on the part of San Bernadino county to properly manage their technical assets. If it were a BYOD situation, that'd be different. - Sent by Rob from Damasucs, MD
- Rob from Damasucs, MD points out the iPhone 5C is owned by San Bernardino County.
- Mike is a law-enforcement officer and writes:
I may be misunderstanding, but it seems that the government is not asking Apple to break their encryption… but simply asking Apple to not prevent them from breaking the encryption on one single phone. It seems to me that Apple can create a custom version of iOS that only works on this one specific phone, and in this one specific instance. This is far from a master key, and in reality has no affect on any other iPhone in the world. The encryption and protection against brute force in my phone is in no way affected by these actions. Perhaps this is a distinction without a difference, but I don’t believe so.
People who are opposing this court order are essentially saying that they no longer agree with the 4th amendment and that you have an unbreakable right to privacy in all instances, no matter what. This is simply not the case. By choosing to commit crimes you are essentially gambling with your rights. The more heinous the crime, the more you gamble. - Sent by Mike
- Mike is a law-enforcement officer and writes:
- I believe that if this software is created and has gone through developers and testers at Apple, then investigators and other agents at the FBI, it seems likely that the crippled version of iOS will leak out beyond its intended limited use. Think of how Stuxnet, which was targeted, manage to surface outside of its targeted area.
You can't unwrite code, and software (like digital media) is infinitely copyable. This seems like a risk that hackers like Darren understand and are legitimately concerned about as well. - Sent by Alan
- I believe that if this software is created and has gone through developers and testers at Apple, then investigators and other agents at the FBI, it seems likely that the crippled version of iOS will leak out beyond its intended limited use. Think of how Stuxnet, which was targeted, manage to surface outside of its targeted area.
- If Apple were to be compelled to give in to the FBI, then what will prevent any other nation-state or governmental actor from coming in and saying, "Yeah, that thing you gave the FBI? Give us some of those so we can prosecute criminals and terrorists, too. Here's the order from our supreme leader--err, I mean court. If you don't follow it, there will be repercussions..."
- Sent by Rich in Chapel Hill
- I heard an interesting question about the whole iphone decryption issue--what does the FBI expect to find on the phone? Any communication, by definition, will be somewhere else besides that phone.
...what do you need to unlock the phone for? What could be on that phone that they COULDN'T find elsewhere?
Be curious to see what I'm missing! - Sent by Mink
- I heard an interesting question about the whole iphone decryption issue--what does the FBI expect to find on the phone? Any communication, by definition, will be somewhere else besides that phone.
- I don't think the analogy of the locksmith refusing the job is right. It's the government trying to make the manufacturer of the safe give them a way to bypass the whole point of the safe.
Plus, Apple should be able to prove its a burden since they sell security as part of their package which could damage their position in the marketplace, and they would need to divert key resources away from their job for an indefinite period of time to make this work for one specific phone. (And for every case involving an iPhone in the future.)
Just my 2 cents.
Regards, - Sent by Vince, Co-Executive Producer
- I don't think the analogy of the locksmith refusing the job is right. It's the government trying to make the manufacturer of the safe give them a way to bypass the whole point of the safe.
- To me, this screams of Apple, through Tim Cook, being opportunistic. Marketing! That is all this is. Apple is using this case to market. Cooks letter to Apple users and its appealing the order accomplishes two things. 1. We can't open this device if we wanted to. and 2. We shouldn't be made to help in any way open a device.
1=see, this is why you buy our stuff. So don't worry. 2=see, this is why you should buy our stuff.
If this is not the case, why did Apple fight behind closed doors with the DOJ for months. - Sent by James
- To me, this screams of Apple, through Tim Cook, being opportunistic. Marketing! That is all this is. Apple is using this case to market. Cooks letter to Apple users and its appealing the order accomplishes two things. 1. We can't open this device if we wanted to. and 2. We shouldn't be made to help in any way open a device.
- If Apple wins this case that the FBI will come after them fit their signed certs and code base. He points to a similar situation where the government asked Lavabit to do the same leading lavabit to shut down.
Keep in mind that the FBI doesn't want to have to do this kind of work themselves but if push comes to shove they will go after the code base and certifications needed to accomplish this and who's to say that stuff doesn't end up making its way to the NSA or other agencies.
Apple is in a catch 22 because it doesn't want to do it but by fighting against breaking the encryption they will eventually have to give up their code base and certs because it's something they physically have. - Sent by Michael a San Diego Software developer
- If Apple wins this case that the FBI will come after them fit their signed certs and code base. He points to a similar situation where the government asked Lavabit to do the same leading lavabit to shut down.
YouTube
Links
| Preceded by: "Federal Bureau of iPhone" |
Encryption Depiction |
Followed by: "DTNS Briefing - Mobile World Congress" |