Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #377378

Re: unloock a phone

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Newsgroups	alt.2600, rec.arts.sf.written, alt.astronomy, sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: unloock a phone
Date	2016-02-28 12:08 +1100
Message-ID	<djevknFhclsU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<56D088CF.6970@ix.netcom.com>

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 27/02/2016 4:18 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> you mean to tell me the F.B.I don't know how to unlock a phone?
>
>
>
> How stupid can they be????
>
>
> I mean...I know the FBI are just a bunch of wet behind the ears
> stupid guys...but i didn't know
> they didn't know how to unlock a phone.
>
> Couldn't they simply do a google search?
>
> Or some 3 year old on youtube could should show them how...
>
>
>
> you mean to tell me the F.B.I don't know how to unlock a phone?
>
>
> i mean...How stupid can they be????
>
>
>
> I mean I don't get it?
>
>
> I mean, if you want to bust out of jail, you do a google search for digging tunnels, right????
>
>
> I mean, a FBI guy should be able to go home and
> ask his 6 year old son "Can you unlock this for me??"
>
>
> Even a 3 year old knows you don't call APPLE!
>

You presumably think any competent hacker could get in.

The problem is that hacking involves the exploitation of mistakes in 
software, and that exploitation requires that the software be willing to 
interact with the hacker to some extent.

The phone is in a state where the only things it's willing to do is to 
accept and check a PIN, and presumably also to accept software updates 
signed by Apple. If that's all it will do, and trying multiple PINS will 
result in its being wiped, then either Apple has to sign a special 
version of the software, or the FBI are stuck.

There are possible hardware attacks, but their feasibility depends on 
exactly how the hardware is structured. In addition, a hardware attack 
risks destroying the electronics, and with it the very information the 
FBI wants to recover.

Sylvia.

Thread

unloock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-26 09:18 -0800
  Re: unloock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-26 22:08 -0800
    Re: unloock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-29 10:58 -0800
      Re: unloock a phone Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-03-01 14:25 +1100
        Re: unloock a phone benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 22:32 -0500
          Re: unloock a phone Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-03-01 22:00 +1100
        Re: unlock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-04 11:27 -0800
          Re: unlock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-04 11:28 -0800
            Re: unlock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-04 11:29 -0800
              Re: unlock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-04 14:40 -0800
                Re: unlock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-12 09:55 -0800
                Re: unlock a phone The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-15 11:40 -0800
  Re: unloock a phone Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-02-28 12:08 +1100
    Re: unloock a phone Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 14:09 +0000
    Re: unloock a phone "Colonel Edmund J. Burke" <burkesgurlz@t-girls.com> - 2016-02-28 06:10 -0800
      Re: unloock a phone Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-02-29 11:24 +1100
        Re: unloock a phone "Colonel Edmund J. Burke" <burkesgurlz@t-girls.com> - 2016-02-28 16:50 -0800
    Re: unloock a phone Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2016-02-29 19:52 +0000
  [OT] "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-02-28 23:30 +0800
    Re: [OT] FromTheRafters <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> - 2016-02-28 10:56 -0500
      Re: [OT] "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 00:10 +0800
    Re: [OT] Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> - 2016-02-28 17:53 -0500
      Re: [OT] "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 19:17 +0800
    Re: [OT] The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-28 19:59 -0800
      Re: [OT] "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 19:19 +0800
        Re: [OT] The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-29 14:44 -0800
          Re: [OT] "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 18:53 +0800
            Re: [OT] The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-01 14:16 -0800
              Re: [OT] "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 21:46 +0800
                Re: [OT] The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-02 18:24 -0800
                Re: [OT] The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-02 22:22 -0800
  [OT] Go misc.phone.mobile.iphone "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 18:58 +0800
  Re: unloock a phone, NO< its about them unlocking everyone's phones tesla sTinker <staff@truecarpentry.net> - 2016-03-13 11:27 -0700

csiph-web