Ondrej Holzman A truly curious incident happened to an American journalist who, during his three-hour flight from Dallas to North Carolina, among other things, was working on an article about the current dispute between Apple and the FBI over iPhone security breaches. As soon as he landed, he felt firsthand how crucial the issue was now being addressed in the United States.
Steven Petrow for USA Today describing, how like a regular journalist, he got on a plane, used the Gogo on-board internet connection and got to work. He already had a topic in mind to write about: he wondered how much the FBI-Apple lawsuit, where the government wants access to a password-protected iPhone, affected ordinary citizens, including himself. He therefore tried to find out more from his colleagues via e-mail.
As soon as the plane landed and Petrow was about to get off, a fellow passenger approached him from the seat behind him, and moments later the journalist realized how much the issue of encryption and personal data security concerned him.
"You're a journalist, aren't you?"
"Um, yes," replied Petrow.
"Wait for me at the gate."
"How did you know I was a journalist?" Petrow tried to find out.
“Are you interested in the case of Apple vs. FBI?” the stranger continued to ask.
"A bit. Why are you asking me that?” asked Petrow.
“I hacked into your email on the plane and read everything you received and sent. I did it to most of the people on board," the unknown person, who turned out to be a skilled hacker, announced to the scalded journalist, and then practically verbatim recited the mentioned e-mails to Petrov.
Hacking Petrov's email wasn't that difficult because Gogo's onboard wireless system is public and works much like most regular open Wi-Fi hotspots. Therefore, it is recommended to protect sensitive data when working on public Wi-Fi at least by using a VPN.
“That's how I learned you were interested in the Apple case. Imagine carrying out a financial transaction," the hacker indicated the possible risks of working with unencrypted data, and Petrow immediately began to think further: he could send medical records, court documents, but maybe just write with friends on Facebook. A hacker could gain access to everything.
"I felt like an unknown person on the plane robbed me of my privacy," describes his feelings Parsow, who realized how dangerous a precedent would be set if the FBI won the dispute with Apple and the Californian company had to create so-called . "back door".
Because it was precisely through those that were in the Gogo network that the aforementioned hacker got access to the data of practically all users from the entire plane.
Perhaps this belongs to the general principles of using public Wi-Fi... where is the point of this article? Resp. what does this have to do with Apple vs the FBI? To me, it just smells like an ordinary profit-seeking sensationalism of some journalist who is just feeding himself on the current case and wants to make a name for himself.
I really intended this more as a space for discussion, as Daniel writes. Because although the general principles include using a VPN on public Wi-Fi, I think only a fraction of users actually follow it. This too can show how easy it is to steal any data.
Yes, as I wrote in another article about my opinion about privacy on the Internet, many people do not pay attention to it and publicly expose everything around them. It seems to me that there is an unnecessary "halo" around it. People fear for their privacy and yet do the opposite. This case only scares people that anyone will be able to get into their cell phone, but it's stupid.
Please, I would welcome advice on how to use a VPN on iOS and OS X. Are you planning an article like this?
of course it's bullshit
fbi only wants new firmware uploaded to the OnSite device, which means you have to take the phone away as soon as possible. if the FBI takes your phone, you have permission to do so :]
if someone steals your phone, you're still screwed :D
(but we still operate here with the fact that someone will bring the firmware out)
and this article at least proves that people solve the 0.0000000001% chance that some thief will steal their phone and take it to hackers who will first steal the firmware from the FBI in order to extract all your data (by the way, it can be assumed that before they can do that, your passwords have been changed and the only thing they'll see your old e-mails and homemade porn photos), and at the same time, don't worry that they'll connect to unsecured Wi-Fi, that they'll stick some flash drive into the computer, that the populace will drop some shitty attachment that lands in their e-mail or that they download from Warez, that they don't update the OS and software to use short passwords and the same passwords everywhere on websites (even on those that are so amateurish that someone will hack them, and try those emails with passwords everywhere possible, and we will hack a lot more)
ladies and gentlemen, hackers won't mess around with physical devices from thieves, they go in automated attacks :) (if you don't piss someone off to spend that time specifically on you)
Can I just ask for the source of this information? This is the first time I read that you want a modified FW that they would flash there
I'm not saying it isn't, but I haven't read it anywhere yet :-(
I googled another article where Apple allegedly says that they would like to limit it only to the fact that they will flash the firmware at Apple and not that the FBI will flash it themselves
I don't have the article and I'm not going to look for it for you, try to look, it was on the first page in Serp on the keywords I think it's FBI APPLE FIRMWARE, I don't know
Great, thank you. I was against it because all the servers wrote "Backdoor" in light of the new facts, I really, really don't understand what this is all about... It's practically the same as releasing the contents of the iCloud backup to the FBI (which they already did in the case of Farook, only it was 6 months old)
the point is that the FBI is said to want Apple to create a special version of FW that disables locking and possible deletion of data in the event of a brute-force attack on the code lock = you will be able to enter different passwords for as long as you like until you find the right one = a couple of questions for a handy program hours. -> if you are Apple and you give someone a phone with such a modification, where you are sure that that person will not download the modification and will not be able to use it on any phone at any time. This is probably what Apple is about..at least as I understood it - I'm not saying I'm right :)
He is a psycho driven to extremes, but these days it is probably necessary to deal with extremes rather than wondering.
the situation is also said to be such that Apple advised the FBI how to make a new and up-to-date backup on the iC (instead of the outdated one) and then provide it to them again as a file package - but in the meantime some showman from the FBI allegedly reset the password to the iC on the terrorist's PC and he prevented automatic backups from the iPhone.. which is a step that none of the experts (according to various articles on the net) understood and thus somewhat fuels speculation that the FBI is not so much about data as a tool for that data..
But these are just things I found on the net - I don't have any sources from the FBI of course :))
Yes, I read somewhere that I guess with a 4 character pin they are able to decipher the pin within 4 days I guess. Because of the "showman" from the FBI who reset the password, I railed against the FBI all the more, but somehow it doesn't make sense. Even if they already gave them the backups from iC and advised them how to "backup" it again, although it must be fun, hunting the wifi that Farook had access to, but so be it.
Although they can suck the modification, but at least if the data is encrypted on iOS, they still need a key to decrypt it, so practically it can be used for one device, exactly as kk wrote.
I don't know, the more I get public information that goes a little deeper, the more I lean towards the FBI, I guess I'm missing something. If it's not a real backdoor that they could use remotely and they have to have physical access to the given device, then it's not that easy to exploit (probably like if you wanted to brick my phone and set the date to 1.1.1970/XNUMX/XNUMX, you won't do that either).
In my opinion, it is a matter of principle. They gave them a backup with instructions on how to get fresh data. The FBI (for some hard-to-understand reason) blocked it and now they want a tool to unlock iPhones.
iPhone encryption is protected by that very code = if you know/crack it you are in the system and have access to the data. Therefore, code breaking is protected. And the FBI wants Apple to disable this protection — it wants a shutdown tool.
I would be interested in how to turn on data synchronization with a locked phone and what to synchronize specifically :o
question anyway
I'm the only one in the whole apple tree who has read the English documents for the court and knows what it's about? :D
you are not the only one, but you are the only one who believes every line of the text
You're probably the only one who doesn't know what he's talking about and asks rhetorical questions that show his ignorance.. iOS will do a complete backup of the entire system whenever it's connected to power and a known secure Wi-Fi network = at home, at work, at your favorite coffee shop (if the password has not been reset - after the reset, a new one must first be entered in the iCloud settings, which is somehow impossible without the display lock code, right).. Apple then has access to this backup (unlike passwords and codes) and can provide it based on a court decision.
Read more facts than court documents ;)
I can think of two possibilities
1/ maybe you didn't read that you turned off those backups a few months before you died
2/ or consult other people who do not understand the written text
and either one or the other, both indicate that you are an idiot
1) if you turned off the backups MONTHS in advance, how is it possible that Apple gave the FBI a 6 week old backup? :)
Save the insults for the pub, for example. You're just trying to turn everything around - you originally argued that a backup of a locked iPhone is not possible, and when I explained to you that it is, you try to mask your ignorance by attacking = such a discussion loses its meaning.
Have a good time Mr. kk. :)
Well, you're obviously missing the distinction between synchronization,
a
by turning on synchronization and setting what should be synchronized
so I put you in group 2, people who don't understand the written text
And you miss the difference between backup and synchronization. :) We all have something, don't we.
from an IT perspective, backup is a subset of sync
simply put, backup is synchronization with one publisher, synchronization may or may not have more
but yes, if you were confused by this, and you write as if I didn't say a deposit, then I'm sorry, I'm glad that you finally found the truth and can stop blindly defending Apple
and in the context of what I wrote about, what you responded to and what you are trying to order again, the difference is that while we deal with "what and where" with synchronization, the iCloud backup sends all the data to the space from where it is downloaded for the needs of the government - > if they didn't send it, they have the data.
BTW, the FBI has already admitted that they are no longer interested in the data from one iPhone, but rather in the process of getting to others, from other cases - easier and without hassles.
Therefore, I can consider the entire discussion with you (even if it was very informative and entertaining) to be pointless. :)
Have a great time and maybe again sometime :)
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2016/02/encryption-isnt-at-stake-the-fbi-knows-apple-already-has-the-desired-key/
how is it possible to track the communication of others in an unsecured wifi network?
really, just some software is enough? won't it need some kind of antenna or something?
imagine the router as an intersection, you stand next to it and look at the traffic, what cars come from where and where they go .. those cars are data .. and this is exactly what he did .. he looked at what was going from where and where
of course, my point is that I tried it with a laptop a long time ago, and I only saw my communication with the router, not others in the same network (even if password protected)
google: how to read packets of other computers on the same network
it will return lots of links
of course it is possible, only a moron will connect to open wifi, nothing extra is needed, some wifi cards support better modes for monitoring traffic than others, but everything is freely available standard goods and software (kali pentest linux for example)
of course, but it didn't work for me, for example, with wireshark... well, it worked, but I could only see my own communication...
Here, for example, they did a test: http://technet.idnes.cz/falesne-wi-fi-site-nalakaly-tisice-lidi-dy1-/software.aspx?c=A160223_131719_software_nyv
If you don't know how to do such a ridiculous thing as changing the arp table on the wifi router so that it forwards it through you, then you better wrap it up.
PS: it's also fun on the ZSSK train :-D
I don't know, I don't know much about the internet, but I'm interested
if you then forward the communication through yourself, can others find out somehow?
I don't think so. That it should not have an encrypted connection (SSL/TLS) with the e-mail server? That really doesn't seem like much to me these days.
I wonder if he had it set. When colleagues recently told me that their email was not going through the VPN, guess what it was. I disabled unencrypted communication with the mail server (i.e. only at the port level) :-)
Or - according to the article, the hacker was sitting behind him = saw what password he was typing on the keyboard.
Well, in that case it's a "hacker".
The story on mme looks like gibberish.