I thought about this, and when the phone is "cop locked" it shouldn't be totally locked down.
Actually, a locked iPhone _can_ do certain things, like calling emergency services, taking photos (and deleting photos taken while locked), and some other things.
I'm not saying it will pass legal muster. Prosecutors use the pain of the process to wear down defendants. You will be vindicated in the end but be out thousands of dollars in attorney's fees and time spent incarcerated.
You don't get it. When a cop arrests you, he can take a look at your personal possessions. Mostly to make sure you don't carry knifes, guns, spray cans, anything dangerous. Looking at your personal possessions includes your unlocked phone. And it includes putting your finger on the finger print scanner of your locked phone. That's prevented. And in that situation, you cannot be forced to reveal a passcode or use it to unlock your phone.
What you are talking about is cops with warrants, or being in court. That's a totally different situation. Disabling TouchID doesn't help. "Forgetting" the passcode doesn't help, only get's you into trouble. The only thing that helps is having no evidence against you on the phone.
Perforce has a command "obliterate". _That_ command will totally obliterate a file. Remove all copies from version control as if it never existed. Used for passwords accidentially checked in, or for gigabyte uncompressed marketing videos.
I have a little app in the App Store, just for fun. There are copies of the source (1) on BitBucket, (2) on Mac #1, (3) on Mac #2, (4, 5) on two Time Machine backups of Mac #1, and (6) on one Time Machine backup of Mac #2. The repos obviously contain all versions, but might get corrupted. If that happens, three Time Machine backups contain all versions of the repos!
Effort for this: Zero.
will this allow Apple, and as is always the case, any U.S. government agencies to get more insight or even subvert the use of secure communication apps?
1. You are paranoid. 2. From personal knowledge, no.
Unless you're saying iOS is somehow worse than Android in this regard.
That's exactly the point of this change. Using PushKit, your phone can sleep for days and will be woken up by a VoIP phone call. The old method that is deprecated doesn't allow that.
Apple deprecated the old VoIP interface one year ago. Absolutely obvious for anyone interested. But one year warning will obviously come as a surprise to some people.
VoIP required that your phone was turned on, your app was running, and regularly pulled requests. An absolute battery eater. The new feature allows your phone to be asleep, use no energy, and wake up immediately when a call arrives.
Proving it's true would not put a full stop to the suit; it would be a thing that you prove in the suit itself. This is expensive because it means you're paying lawyers lots of money.
Bruce Perens' councel is Heather Meeker of Oâ(TM)Melveny and Meyers, author of a book about use of Open Source software in the enterprise. I wouldn't be surprised if she gives him a good deal for representation in court if needed. (I thought Bruce Perens is a lawyer as well, but probably respects the old saying "a man who represents himself in court has a fool for a lawyer and a fool for a client").
What he said is "It is my strong opinion..." which I think stops what he says from being libel. GrSecurity could have replied "It is our strong opinion that Bruce Perens is incompetent and has no idea what he is talking about", which would probably not be libel for the same reason, being an opinion and not declared to be fact. Suing him has no chance of winning, and the huge risk that a court might agree that Bruce Perens' opinion is actually correct. That's most likely something that he would argue, in addition to the 100% winner argument "I said it was just my opinion".
Not just one count. They published a load of material with these letters illegaly, and this material has been seen by many people as a result. Fans have copied and republished these fonts. All these views count as subsequent "downloads" which are the result of the label's acts of piracy. So they are on the hook not just for a single font license but for hundreds of thousands of them, perhaps millions.
Nonsense. One font = one work = $30,000 or proven damages, whichever is higher. For statutory damages, the number of illegal copies and the value of the work doesn't count.
What DMCA? Has nothing whatsoever to do with this case. Unless you know that the font was somehow protected through encryption and they illegally decrypted it.
This is (allegedly) a case of copyright infringement.
The font maker needs to use the same rules [as the media cartels] when figuring out infringement costs. The media companies love to use a "per infringement" claim. So each instance of each letter of the font that was used should be treated as a separate infringement, plus throw in some wild guest-imates of how many people purchased items containing the font, and how many eyeballs may have seen it in promotions and media since it's first illegal use...
It doesn't work like that. In Apple vs. Psystar, the judge decided that MacOS X 10.5 was one work, and MacOS X 10.6 was a second work, and ordered Psystar to pay $30,000 for copying each of the two works. (Didn't make much difference since they had no money anyway). One font = one work.
I just thought of something; a drone that can fly in the air and dive below water. Or how about one that has automatically composes and edits in dramatic music based on the camera view. Or a drone that can link up with another drone to create 3D video from weird perspectives. Or a drone with a built-in baloon so it can stay in the air much longer. Or... you get the drift.
Oh well. That's four multi-million-dollar scams by charismatic young founders reading slashdot that we can look forward to...
Wouldn't Apple be lobbying FOR encryption in this case?
"Australian proposed encryption laws" mean companies like Apple should be able to break end users' encryption. And Apple doesn't want to. They are lobbying against laws that would require them to break your encryption.
I think this is the point that is lost on many people. The phrase "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" is patently obvious. The problem is that some people do have something to hide, and therein lies the problem with anti-privacy laws.
The counter argument: I have nothing to hide, but what I do is none of your fucking business. In the UK, you could add "if they have nothing to hide, why do MPs don't publish their expenses? And can we hear how many hours highly paid MEPs spent actually doing their job? "
Just saying: His statement wasn't about cybercriminals. It was about serious criminals and terrorists who make use of the easy-to-use encryption just like all small time crooks, politicians, and law abiding citizens do. When you consider cybercriminals, you want the exact opposite: Uncrackable encryption.
That's the problem that these politicians have. For encryption, there are two totally contradictory things that we want: Uncrackable crypto for everyone, easily crackable crypto for serious criminals and terrorists. Yes, I myself would love if communications of terrorists could be made readable. I just know that you can't have that without endangering everything.
The NSA has always said that crackable crypto is all in all bad for US national security. And they have provided us with proof that backdoors will not be kept secret (because their stash of zero day exploits ended up in the hands of criminals). And just recently the former boss of GCHQ has said exactly the same thing
RSA relies on multiplication of large numbers. Fast multiplication of large numbers is usually done using fast fourier transforms. FFT relies on the value of the number Pi.
I'm sure that if you redefine Pi = 3, then you can crack RSA.
There isn't actually any stock. Uber isn't traded on the stock market. Investors have paid huge amounts of money for small percentages of the company. The valuation is just based on how much they managed to charge investors, not on any real value. I'd like to know how much the investors that are now selling are going to lose.
In summary, the delays in responsiveness and interactivity are being caused by context switches, which is the usual culprit. It has nothing to do with the speed and number of CPUs because it is not a CPU resource problem. It is purely a kernel scheduling issue.
It has a bit to do with the CPUs: The reporter had a machine with 24 cores that actually managed to create and destroy 5,000 processes per second. My 4 core machine would have only created and destroyed less than 1,000 processes per second, so no problem.
What are you taking about? UTF-8 is over 20 years old. HTML is even older. It's one thing not to use the newest emoji but to say you won't use encodings that haven't changed in 20+ years because they might change in the future isn't a great reason.
Especially when Unicode guarantees that these characters are _not_ going to change.
However, if you are seeking market space penetration, you need to sell many. For $1200 I can buy many Android phones.
The $1200 comes from an article by Gruber, who thinks (quite rightly) that Apple will continue selling the iPhone 7 which is not exactly cheap, and that the iPhone 8 would be some kind of super luxury edition. The super luxury edition wouldn't have market penetration.
It's like asking Mercedes drivers who paid $50,000 or $100,000 for their Mercedes if they are going to pay $200,000 for a Maybach.
You still need to use a special app from the appmarket to "implant" your ringtone into the system, because you can't just say from the system menu: "Use this file"
What I find fascinating is that I _did_ create a ringtone for my wife's iPhone, and _you didn't_, yet you claim that you know better than I what tools I needed to do it. Don't you think that is rather stupid and pretentious of you?
Slashdot Mirror
I thought about this, and when the phone is "cop locked" it shouldn't be totally locked down.
Actually, a locked iPhone _can_ do certain things, like calling emergency services, taking photos (and deleting photos taken while locked), and some other things.
What would be an even more interesting feature is if you held down a certain key sequence (three long, three short, three long sounds good...SOS)
Just saying... Three long, three short, three long is "OSO", not "SOS".
I'm not saying it will pass legal muster. Prosecutors use the pain of the process to wear down defendants. You will be vindicated in the end but be out thousands of dollars in attorney's fees and time spent incarcerated.
You don't get it. When a cop arrests you, he can take a look at your personal possessions. Mostly to make sure you don't carry knifes, guns, spray cans, anything dangerous. Looking at your personal possessions includes your unlocked phone. And it includes putting your finger on the finger print scanner of your locked phone. That's prevented. And in that situation, you cannot be forced to reveal a passcode or use it to unlock your phone.
What you are talking about is cops with warrants, or being in court. That's a totally different situation. Disabling TouchID doesn't help. "Forgetting" the passcode doesn't help, only get's you into trouble. The only thing that helps is having no evidence against you on the phone.
Perforce has a command "obliterate". _That_ command will totally obliterate a file. Remove all copies from version control as if it never existed. Used for passwords accidentially checked in, or for gigabyte uncompressed marketing videos.
I have a little app in the App Store, just for fun. There are copies of the source (1) on BitBucket, (2) on Mac #1, (3) on Mac #2, (4, 5) on two Time Machine backups of Mac #1, and (6) on one Time Machine backup of Mac #2. The repos obviously contain all versions, but might get corrupted. If that happens, three Time Machine backups contain all versions of the repos! Effort for this: Zero.
will this allow Apple, and as is always the case, any U.S. government agencies to get more insight or even subvert the use of secure communication apps?
1. You are paranoid. 2. From personal knowledge, no.
Unless you're saying iOS is somehow worse than Android in this regard.
That's exactly the point of this change. Using PushKit, your phone can sleep for days and will be woken up by a VoIP phone call. The old method that is deprecated doesn't allow that.
the carrier don't like what was disabled. Now you can't use an iPhone handset to bypass the carrier using VOIP
Please explain this, since your comment means that one of us doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.
Apple deprecated the old VoIP interface one year ago. Absolutely obvious for anyone interested. But one year warning will obviously come as a surprise to some people.
VoIP required that your phone was turned on, your app was running, and regularly pulled requests. An absolute battery eater. The new feature allows your phone to be asleep, use no energy, and wake up immediately when a call arrives.
Perens actually wrote: "it's my opinion that..."
I suppose if they could prove that this was not actually his opinion, but that he lied about it, they might be able to win.
Proving it's true would not put a full stop to the suit; it would be a thing that you prove in the suit itself. This is expensive because it means you're paying lawyers lots of money.
Bruce Perens' councel is Heather Meeker of Oâ(TM)Melveny and Meyers, author of a book about use of Open Source software in the enterprise. I wouldn't be surprised if she gives him a good deal for representation in court if needed. (I thought Bruce Perens is a lawyer as well, but probably respects the old saying "a man who represents himself in court has a fool for a lawyer and a fool for a client").
What he said is "It is my strong opinion..." which I think stops what he says from being libel. GrSecurity could have replied "It is our strong opinion that Bruce Perens is incompetent and has no idea what he is talking about", which would probably not be libel for the same reason, being an opinion and not declared to be fact. Suing him has no chance of winning, and the huge risk that a court might agree that Bruce Perens' opinion is actually correct. That's most likely something that he would argue, in addition to the 100% winner argument "I said it was just my opinion".
Not just one count. They published a load of material with these letters illegaly, and this material has been seen by many people as a result. Fans have copied and republished these fonts. All these views count as subsequent "downloads" which are the result of the label's acts of piracy. So they are on the hook not just for a single font license but for hundreds of thousands of them, perhaps millions.
Nonsense. One font = one work = $30,000 or proven damages, whichever is higher. For statutory damages, the number of illegal copies and the value of the work doesn't count.
Live by the DMCA...die by the DMCA
What DMCA? Has nothing whatsoever to do with this case. Unless you know that the font was somehow protected through encryption and they illegally decrypted it.
This is (allegedly) a case of copyright infringement.
The font maker needs to use the same rules [as the media cartels] when figuring out infringement costs. The media companies love to use a "per infringement" claim. So each instance of each letter of the font that was used should be treated as a separate infringement, plus throw in some wild guest-imates of how many people purchased items containing the font, and how many eyeballs may have seen it in promotions and media since it's first illegal use...
It doesn't work like that. In Apple vs. Psystar, the judge decided that MacOS X 10.5 was one work, and MacOS X 10.6 was a second work, and ordered Psystar to pay $30,000 for copying each of the two works. (Didn't make much difference since they had no money anyway). One font = one work.
I just thought of something; a drone that can fly in the air and dive below water. Or how about one that has automatically composes and edits in dramatic music based on the camera view. Or a drone that can link up with another drone to create 3D video from weird perspectives. Or a drone with a built-in baloon so it can stay in the air much longer. Or... you get the drift.
Oh well. That's four multi-million-dollar scams by charismatic young founders reading slashdot that we can look forward to...
Wouldn't Apple be lobbying FOR encryption in this case?
"Australian proposed encryption laws" mean companies like Apple should be able to break end users' encryption. And Apple doesn't want to. They are lobbying against laws that would require them to break your encryption.
I think this is the point that is lost on many people. The phrase "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" is patently obvious. The problem is that some people do have something to hide, and therein lies the problem with anti-privacy laws.
The counter argument: I have nothing to hide, but what I do is none of your fucking business. In the UK, you could add "if they have nothing to hide, why do MPs don't publish their expenses? And can we hear how many hours highly paid MEPs spent actually doing their job? "
Just saying: His statement wasn't about cybercriminals. It was about serious criminals and terrorists who make use of the easy-to-use encryption just like all small time crooks, politicians, and law abiding citizens do. When you consider cybercriminals, you want the exact opposite: Uncrackable encryption.
That's the problem that these politicians have. For encryption, there are two totally contradictory things that we want: Uncrackable crypto for everyone, easily crackable crypto for serious criminals and terrorists. Yes, I myself would love if communications of terrorists could be made readable. I just know that you can't have that without endangering everything.
The NSA has always said that crackable crypto is all in all bad for US national security. And they have provided us with proof that backdoors will not be kept secret (because their stash of zero day exploits ended up in the hands of criminals). And just recently the former boss of GCHQ has said exactly the same thing
RSA relies on multiplication of large numbers. Fast multiplication of large numbers is usually done using fast fourier transforms. FFT relies on the value of the number Pi.
I'm sure that if you redefine Pi = 3, then you can crack RSA.
There isn't actually any stock. Uber isn't traded on the stock market. Investors have paid huge amounts of money for small percentages of the company. The valuation is just based on how much they managed to charge investors, not on any real value. I'd like to know how much the investors that are now selling are going to lose.
a piece that sounds for all the world like a flight of B17s in a WWII movie
"Nightingales and Bombers", Manfred Mann's Earth Band. Excellent song and excellent album.
In summary, the delays in responsiveness and interactivity are being caused by context switches, which is the usual culprit. It has nothing to do with the speed and number of CPUs because it is not a CPU resource problem. It is purely a kernel scheduling issue.
It has a bit to do with the CPUs: The reporter had a machine with 24 cores that actually managed to create and destroy 5,000 processes per second. My 4 core machine would have only created and destroyed less than 1,000 processes per second, so no problem.
What are you taking about? UTF-8 is over 20 years old. HTML is even older. It's one thing not to use the newest emoji but to say you won't use encodings that haven't changed in 20+ years because they might change in the future isn't a great reason.
Especially when Unicode guarantees that these characters are _not_ going to change.
However, if you are seeking market space penetration, you need to sell many. For $1200 I can buy many Android phones.
The $1200 comes from an article by Gruber, who thinks (quite rightly) that Apple will continue selling the iPhone 7 which is not exactly cheap, and that the iPhone 8 would be some kind of super luxury edition. The super luxury edition wouldn't have market penetration.
It's like asking Mercedes drivers who paid $50,000 or $100,000 for their Mercedes if they are going to pay $200,000 for a Maybach.
You still need to use a special app from the appmarket to "implant" your ringtone into the system, because you can't just say from the system menu: "Use this file"
What I find fascinating is that I _did_ create a ringtone for my wife's iPhone, and _you didn't_, yet you claim that you know better than I what tools I needed to do it. Don't you think that is rather stupid and pretentious of you?