So long as they can't actively monitor you enter the key, they can't get into that data
It's called a brute force attack. With most people using numeric PINs that's a trivial task. The only thing that's preventing that is iOS's auto-wipe and cooldown for failed entries. And that's what this is all about: the fed wants Apple to add a backdoor to remove the cooldown so they can brute force their way in.
Google and Facebook will be among those filing a joint amicus brief in support of Apple's position, according to two people familiar with the plans but who weren't authorized to speak publicly on the matter. Twitter said it will join that brief.
Microsoft said it will also file a brief, though its officials would not comment on whether it would be part of the group.
It doesn't really matter. If you encrypt your phone with 3rd party encryption software the FBI can't get in.
In the case of keys that leverage passcodes (or even 4-digit PINs), sure they can. They can brute force it. The issue here is that iOS prevents brute force attacks, and that's where the fed wants a workaround. Nothing stopping the fed from de-soldering the memory chip and soldering into another board* to get around iOS... other than that's hard and can't be done on a mass scale.
* It's probably way more complicated than that in practice considering the hierarchy of keys in use here.
Google said some words of support, but they would still bend over for the govt when requested. They wouldn't actually make a stand like this. and even if they did, it's not clear if the handset oem or if the OS oem would be required to do this.
Good thing we have on official spokespoerson for Google here to clear the air. Thanks!
Why the hell would we let all the damned tracking shit run in the first place?
because that's how websites support themselves, and you like their content i assume right? or you wouldn't care in the first place.
fully support your right not to be tracked. you do that by not visiting the site. but nah, you like their content. you just don't want to compensate anyone for it. screw those people that spend their days producing content for the website. you want your sh** on YOUR terms. good for you man. keep fighting the good fight.
How is using *my* electricity, risking *my* computer's integrity, distracting *my* attention for *your* profit not abusing *my* resources?
because you chose to load their website? how is consuming their content and offering zero compensation to them not abusing THEIR resources? really pathetic. "hey, i disagree with your business model but i still want your sh** so i'm just going to take it, because i can."
with any moral choice, you only need to consider what the world would be like if everyone applied the same logic as you. i hope i don't need to help you any further with figuring this one out.
Oh no! You mean you won't consume their content and offer them no compensation for the massive effort and resources involved in producing it? I'm sure they are all broke up about that.
why should someone offer more information to him, when he offers none himself.
person 1: i really like president obama, but i'm not going to say why. person 2: i dislike obama. person 1: you dislike obama? you'd better provide a good reason for that!
You need to get out of the basement a little more. The latest Surface devices have pretty much attained universal praise. This tablet isn't even in the same league spec-wise. And yes, like Ubuntu is the OS of choice for PCs these days, right? Okay, to be fair, 2016 could be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
consumers will want Windows or Android because they have never heard of Ubuntu or Linux
I think this runs a little deeper than consumer education. Consumers will want a modern spec'd device. This is 2 years ago at best. Consumers will want a mature app ecosystem.
Consumers will require 10 hours of battery life. Android has many restrictions on what apps can and cannot do based on conserving electrons. If you just run a bunch of desktop-developed Linux packages, I can guarantee you, you'll be looking at 4 hours of battery, if you are lucky. Probably less.
i know, analogies can be a tough nut for some people but it's a really useful tool to help understand the world at times.
see how well that logic works?
no, we don't. you said this,
downloading someone else's bot is just pointless
why? we all use tools produced by other people (even you). you may get additional satisfaction from building your own tools, but the benefit of using a tool isn't negated because it was built by someone else. the usefulness of a tool is orthogonal to how it was acquired.
downloading someone else's bot is just pointless. There's no long term progression to gain from, and you don't get the challenge of writing the bot yourself.
buying food grown by someone else is just pointless. you don't get the challenge of growing the food yourself.
private mode is good for keeping pr0n sites out of your web history. private mode is not so good for hiding your illegal activities from determined law enforcement agencies.
Slashdot Mirror
So long as they can't actively monitor you enter the key, they can't get into that data
It's called a brute force attack. With most people using numeric PINs that's a trivial task. The only thing that's preventing that is iOS's auto-wipe and cooldown for failed entries. And that's what this is all about: the fed wants Apple to add a backdoor to remove the cooldown so they can brute force their way in.
https://www.grc.com/haystack.h...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
Google and Facebook will be among those filing a joint amicus brief in support of Apple's position, according to two people familiar with the plans but who weren't authorized to speak publicly on the matter. Twitter said it will join that brief.
Microsoft said it will also file a brief, though its officials would not comment on whether it would be part of the group.
It doesn't really matter. If you encrypt your phone with 3rd party encryption software the FBI can't get in.
In the case of keys that leverage passcodes (or even 4-digit PINs), sure they can. They can brute force it. The issue here is that iOS prevents brute force attacks, and that's where the fed wants a workaround. Nothing stopping the fed from de-soldering the memory chip and soldering into another board* to get around iOS ... other than that's hard and can't be done on a mass scale.
* It's probably way more complicated than that in practice considering the hierarchy of keys in use here.
android has been hacked multiple times and many people know that there are many os-level holes that would make any attempts at encryption useles..
references?
Google said some words of support, but they would still bend over for the govt when requested. They wouldn't actually make a stand like this. and even if they did, it's not clear if the handset oem or if the OS oem would be required to do this.
Good thing we have on official spokespoerson for Google here to clear the air. Thanks!
Because my 2G works f-cking everywhere, it's great.
You really have your finger on the pulse of wireless technology don't you?
"These technologies will be immersive, pervasive and responsive to customers. 5G will help make them a reality."
Immersive, pervasive, and responsive?!? F*** me, that sounds awesome. The future is now.
Well, I guess then we can both part ways and neither needs to try to force the other one to bend to their whims, right?
uh, yes? you are the one questioning that. is someone making you bend to their whims? no idea what you are getting at.
Why the hell would we let all the damned tracking shit run in the first place?
because that's how websites support themselves, and you like their content i assume right? or you wouldn't care in the first place.
fully support your right not to be tracked. you do that by not visiting the site. but nah, you like their content. you just don't want to compensate anyone for it. screw those people that spend their days producing content for the website. you want your sh** on YOUR terms. good for you man. keep fighting the good fight.
I root android only to use AdAway.
that's like shooting yourself in the head so when you get shot the next time the bullet will pass cleanly through.
So I can only say to them what I kept saying the RIAA for the past decades: I can live without you. Can you without me?
can they live without you consuming their content and resources and blocking their ability to obtain compensation from you?
yeah, i think so genius.
How is using *my* electricity, risking *my* computer's integrity, distracting *my* attention for *your* profit not abusing *my* resources?
because you chose to load their website? how is consuming their content and offering zero compensation to them not abusing THEIR resources? really pathetic. "hey, i disagree with your business model but i still want your sh** so i'm just going to take it, because i can."
with any moral choice, you only need to consider what the world would be like if everyone applied the same logic as you. i hope i don't need to help you any further with figuring this one out.
Oh no! You mean you won't consume their content and offer them no compensation for the massive effort and resources involved in producing it? I'm sure they are all broke up about that.
isn't the code for a DLL loaded into a shared location in memory?
The code in a DLL is usually shared among all the processes that use the DLL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
so if you copy it to .../MyApp/Foo.dll doesn't that defeat that "feature"? why use a DLL at all at that point?
sincerely yours,
not a windows developer
It wouldn't be secure any more if it did...
OH MAN BURN!!!
why should someone offer more information to him, when he offers none himself.
person 1: i really like president obama, but i'm not going to say why.
person 2: i dislike obama.
person 1: you dislike obama? you'd better provide a good reason for that!
yep, sounds like a pretty reasonable discourse.
It's called being a hypocrite? He offers no explanation for his ire but then insists that someone else back up their opposite opinion. Duh much?
Opinion noted, but could you maybe back it up with something other than itself?
why should he? he provided just as much evidence / facts as you did that unity sucks. none.
This tablet can't be any worse than any version of Android on a tablet, given the quantity of Android Apps with a good tablet UI (not many at all).
Please, explain what sort of app you are looking for, that isn't available on an Android tablet? Oh ... um ...
that you're forced to use at work
You need to get out of the basement a little more. The latest Surface devices have pretty much attained universal praise. This tablet isn't even in the same league spec-wise. And yes, like Ubuntu is the OS of choice for PCs these days, right? Okay, to be fair, 2016 could be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
consumers will want Windows or Android because they have never heard of Ubuntu or Linux
I think this runs a little deeper than consumer education. Consumers will want a modern spec'd device. This is 2 years ago at best. Consumers will want a mature app ecosystem.
Consumers will require 10 hours of battery life. Android has many restrictions on what apps can and cannot do based on conserving electrons. If you just run a bunch of desktop-developed Linux packages, I can guarantee you, you'll be looking at 4 hours of battery, if you are lucky. Probably less.
i know, analogies can be a tough nut for some people but it's a really useful tool to help understand the world at times.
see how well that logic works?
no, we don't. you said this,
downloading someone else's bot is just pointless
why? we all use tools produced by other people (even you). you may get additional satisfaction from building your own tools, but the benefit of using a tool isn't negated because it was built by someone else. the usefulness of a tool is orthogonal to how it was acquired.
downloading someone else's bot is just pointless. There's no long term progression to gain from, and you don't get the challenge of writing the bot yourself.
buying food grown by someone else is just pointless. you don't get the challenge of growing the food yourself.
see how well that logic works?
Are you so naive as to think that the higher the stakes the less likely someone is to cheat?
no, i think that the higher the stakes, the higher the scrutiny and the less chance of cheating successfully.
^^^ this.
private mode is good for keeping pr0n sites out of your web history.
private mode is not so good for hiding your illegal activities from determined law enforcement agencies.
the sooner people figure that out, the better.