7 ms·

> if you use a strong alphanumeric password to unlock your phone, there is nothing Apple has been able to do for many years to unlock your phone Is this true e

> if you use a strong alphanumeric password to unlock your phone, there is nothing Apple has been able to do for many years to unlock your phone Is this true even if you use Touch ID?

themagician 11y ago
TouchID disables itself after 48 hours and requires the password again.
- bobbles 11y ago
  Also after 5 failed attempts - you can test with an unregistered finger
- matt_wulfeck 11y ago
  Or if the phone runs out of batteries and restarts.
rdancer 11y ago
If the has been switched off or if >48h passed since the last unlock. Also remember that rubber-hose cryptanalysis is always an option.
- newjersey 11y ago
  Can you be convicted in the US based on evidence obtained with physical torture? Edit: Looks like the answer is it depends and not a resounding no http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/evidence-obtained-through-torture.html http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/evidence-obtained-thr...
  - tptacek 11y ago
    No, you cannot. Evidence derived from facts learned from torture is also excludable.
    - CamperBob2 11y ago
      Sure, you can. It all depends on who gets to define "torture." If they can find a judge who believes the iron maiden isn't torture while the anal pear is, then guess what... the government will use the iron maiden. Even if they can't find such a pliable jurist, they'll have no problem getting a John Yoo to write an executive memo that justifies whatever they want to do to you, and let the courts sort it out later. There's no downside from their point of view.
      - rdancer 11y ago
        > getting a John Yoo to write an executive memo The memos didn't provide de iure indemnity. There is no constitutional basis, in fact the proposition that a memo can supersede the Constitution is idiotic on its face. The failure is the de facto doctrine of absolute executive immunity. It has two prongs: 1. "When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal." 2. When the perpetrator follows president's orders, also not illegal. Nevertheless, since there is no legal basis, there is nothing preventing the next government from prosecuting them.
        CamperBob2 11y ago
        The memos didn't provide de iure indemnity. There is no constitutional basis, in fact the proposition that a memo can supersede the Constitution is idiotic on its face. Yes, and that's what I meant by "let the courts sort it out later." The Constitution's not much help either way, being full of imprecise, hand-waving language and vague terms like "cruel and unusual." It was anticipated by the Constitution's authors that it would be of use only to a moral government. Nevertheless, since there is no legal basis, there is nothing preventing the next government from prosecuting them. I wonder if that's ever happened in the US? Does anyone know?
        rdancer 11y ago
        I would disagree. The Constitution is a bulwark against tyranny. The US have successfully prosecuted waterboarding in the past. It usually only happens when the rule of law is suspended and then resumed. You're a young country, so maybe it hasn't happened before. Robert H. Jackson was an American, though ;-)
  - rdancer 11y ago
    Of course you can. As long as the courts can be persuaded that there is no causal nexus between the torture and the evidence, or if the torture actually isn't legally torture. That assumes that the defendant can show (or is even aware) the torture actually took place. Examples: * prolonged solitary confinement: not legally torture * fellow prisoner violence: not legally torture, no nexus * prolonged pre-trial confinement: not really torture, but we may as well include it * waterboarding/drowning: not legally torture? (Supreme Court declined to rule) * stress positions: cannot show it took place * parallel construction: cannot show / not aware
taneq 11y ago
Does TouchID have any protections against your finger unlocking your phone post-mortem?
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  No, although I'd love to see a HealthKit app that uses your Apple Watch as a dead man's switch, and disables Touch ID or powers the phone off in the event the watch is removed or your pulse is no longer detected.
  - mahyarm 11y ago
    That wouldn't work well with loose wrists and other similar edge cases.
    - jedberg 11y ago
      Then those people could turn it off. But it would be a nice option.
  - Crito 11y ago
    Without a wristprint for the watch to read, what prevents somebody else from wearing it? The pulse and skin conductivity might change, but are either of those reliable enough metrics for such an application?
    - X-Istence 11y ago
      If you take the watch off, it automatically locks. I wouldn't mind it also automatically locking my phone and requiring a passcode instead of TouchID. There is a VERY limited amount of time in which you can take the watch off and switch to another wrist (like milliseconds, you have to practically be a magician to switch wrists (which I do throughout the day)). Apple has the watch, they could use it to beef up security for those that want it.
tptacek 11y ago
Probably not. If you're dead, they probably have your fingers. If you're alive, they can compel you to unlock the device with your fingerprint. The only point I'm making is that Apple already designed a cryptosystem that resists court-ordered coercion: as long as your passcode is strong (and Apple has allowed it to be strong for a long time), the phone is prohibitively difficult to unlock even if Apple cuts a special release of the phone software.
- petra 11y ago
  Using a strong pin is pretty annoying, and a relatively visible signal when using the phone on the street etc, So it can be a good filter(maybe via street cams) to filter suspicious people - which isn't a bad goal for law enforcement.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    That sounds good until you remember the Bayesian Base Rate Fallacy: there are very few terrorists (the base rate of terrorism is very low), so filtering on "people with strong passphrases" is going to produce an overwhelming feed of false positives.
    - contravariant 11y ago
      Be careful not to take the base rate fallacy too far, with enough difference in likelihood even a small base rate won't prevent an effect from being significant, and regardless of the base rate you'll still get some information out of it, it might just not be as much as you wanted.
  - jameshart 11y ago
    Corporate email profiles on BYOD phones often enforce a long passcode requirement, so you've got a lot of Fortune 500 sales guys to screen out if you're stopping and searching anybody with a suspiciously long password.
    - dylan604 11y ago
r00fus 11y ago
If they have access to a live finger for the TouchID, sure they can bypass - but they could do that with the $5 guaranteed coercion method as well [1]. Copying a good fingerprint from a dead finger or a randomly placed print is not easy [2]. It's hard, doable but you get 5 tries so if you screw up, you have thrown away all the hard work of the print transfer. All bets are off if the iPhone is power-cycled. Best bet if you're pulled over by authorities or at a security checkpoint is to turn off your iPhone (and have a strong alphanumeric passcode). [1] https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/ [2] https://blog.lookout.com/blog/2013/09/23/why-i-hacked-apples-touchid-and-still-think-it-is-awesome/ https://blog.lookout.com/blog/2013/09/23/why-i-hacked-apples...
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  > All bets are off if the iPhone is power-cycled. Best bet if you're pulled over by authorities or at a security checkpoint is to turn off your iPhone (and have a strong alphanumeric passcode). Excellent advice. Even better, if you're about to pass through US customs and border patrol, backup the phone first, wipe, and restore on the other side. Of course, this depends on your level of paranoia. I am paranoid.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - FussyZeus 11y ago
    Wiping the phone doesn't help you. Using the strong password renders the information inaccessible, at least as inaccessible as your phone backup is. Touch ID isn't re-enabled until the phone's passcode is used. Presumably if the authorities have access to your phone's memory they also have access to your laptops, and neither will do them any damn good. And it's paranoia if there's a legitimate threat, that's just called due diligence. ;)
    - guscost 11y ago
      > Touch ID isn't re-enabled until the phone's passcode is used. Do the docs confirm that there is no way around this? I'd guess generating the encryption key requires the passcode, which is discarded immediately, and Touch ID can only "unlock" a temporarily re-encrypted version which never leaves ephemeral storage?

> if you use a strong alphanumeric password to unlock your phone, there is nothing Apple has been able to do for many years to unlock your phone Is this true even if you use Touch ID?

themagician 11y ago

TouchID disables itself after 48 hours and requires the password again.

bobbles 11y ago
Also after 5 failed attempts - you can test with an unregistered finger
matt_wulfeck 11y ago
Or if the phone runs out of batteries and restarts.

rdancer 11y ago

If the has been switched off or if >48h passed since the last unlock. Also remember that rubber-hose cryptanalysis is always an option.

newjersey 11y ago
Can you be convicted in the US based on evidence obtained with physical torture? Edit: Looks like the answer is it depends and not a resounding no http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/evidence-obtained-through-torture.html http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/evidence-obtained-thr...
- tptacek 11y ago
  No, you cannot. Evidence derived from facts learned from torture is also excludable.
  - CamperBob2 11y ago
    Sure, you can. It all depends on who gets to define "torture." If they can find a judge who believes the iron maiden isn't torture while the anal pear is, then guess what... the government will use the iron maiden. Even if they can't find such a pliable jurist, they'll have no problem getting a John Yoo to write an executive memo that justifies whatever they want to do to you, and let the courts sort it out later. There's no downside from their point of view.
    - rdancer 11y ago
      > getting a John Yoo to write an executive memo The memos didn't provide de iure indemnity. There is no constitutional basis, in fact the proposition that a memo can supersede the Constitution is idiotic on its face. The failure is the de facto doctrine of absolute executive immunity. It has two prongs: 1. "When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal." 2. When the perpetrator follows president's orders, also not illegal. Nevertheless, since there is no legal basis, there is nothing preventing the next government from prosecuting them.
      - CamperBob2 11y ago
        The memos didn't provide de iure indemnity. There is no constitutional basis, in fact the proposition that a memo can supersede the Constitution is idiotic on its face. Yes, and that's what I meant by "let the courts sort it out later." The Constitution's not much help either way, being full of imprecise, hand-waving language and vague terms like "cruel and unusual." It was anticipated by the Constitution's authors that it would be of use only to a moral government. Nevertheless, since there is no legal basis, there is nothing preventing the next government from prosecuting them. I wonder if that's ever happened in the US? Does anyone know?
        rdancer 11y ago
        I would disagree. The Constitution is a bulwark against tyranny. The US have successfully prosecuted waterboarding in the past. It usually only happens when the rule of law is suspended and then resumed. You're a young country, so maybe it hasn't happened before. Robert H. Jackson was an American, though ;-)
- rdancer 11y ago
  Of course you can. As long as the courts can be persuaded that there is no causal nexus between the torture and the evidence, or if the torture actually isn't legally torture. That assumes that the defendant can show (or is even aware) the torture actually took place. Examples: * prolonged solitary confinement: not legally torture * fellow prisoner violence: not legally torture, no nexus * prolonged pre-trial confinement: not really torture, but we may as well include it * waterboarding/drowning: not legally torture? (Supreme Court declined to rule) * stress positions: cannot show it took place * parallel construction: cannot show / not aware

taneq 11y ago

Does TouchID have any protections against your finger unlocking your phone post-mortem?

toomuchtodo 11y ago
No, although I'd love to see a HealthKit app that uses your Apple Watch as a dead man's switch, and disables Touch ID or powers the phone off in the event the watch is removed or your pulse is no longer detected.
- mahyarm 11y ago
  That wouldn't work well with loose wrists and other similar edge cases.
  - jedberg 11y ago
    Then those people could turn it off. But it would be a nice option.
- Crito 11y ago
  Without a wristprint for the watch to read, what prevents somebody else from wearing it? The pulse and skin conductivity might change, but are either of those reliable enough metrics for such an application?
  - X-Istence 11y ago
    If you take the watch off, it automatically locks. I wouldn't mind it also automatically locking my phone and requiring a passcode instead of TouchID. There is a VERY limited amount of time in which you can take the watch off and switch to another wrist (like milliseconds, you have to practically be a magician to switch wrists (which I do throughout the day)). Apple has the watch, they could use it to beef up security for those that want it.

tptacek 11y ago

Probably not. If you're dead, they probably have your fingers. If you're alive, they can compel you to unlock the device with your fingerprint. The only point I'm making is that Apple already designed a cryptosystem that resists court-ordered coercion: as long as your passcode is strong (and Apple has allowed it to be strong for a long time), the phone is prohibitively difficult to unlock even if Apple cuts a special release of the phone software.

petra 11y ago
Using a strong pin is pretty annoying, and a relatively visible signal when using the phone on the street etc, So it can be a good filter(maybe via street cams) to filter suspicious people - which isn't a bad goal for law enforcement.
- tptacek 11y ago
  That sounds good until you remember the Bayesian Base Rate Fallacy: there are very few terrorists (the base rate of terrorism is very low), so filtering on "people with strong passphrases" is going to produce an overwhelming feed of false positives.
  - contravariant 11y ago
    Be careful not to take the base rate fallacy too far, with enough difference in likelihood even a small base rate won't prevent an effect from being significant, and regardless of the base rate you'll still get some information out of it, it might just not be as much as you wanted.
- jameshart 11y ago
  Corporate email profiles on BYOD phones often enforce a long passcode requirement, so you've got a lot of Fortune 500 sales guys to screen out if you're stopping and searching anybody with a suspiciously long password.
  - dylan604 11y ago

r00fus 11y ago

If they have access to a live finger for the TouchID, sure they can bypass - but they could do that with the $5 guaranteed coercion method as well [1]. Copying a good fingerprint from a dead finger or a randomly placed print is not easy [2]. It's hard, doable but you get 5 tries so if you screw up, you have thrown away all the hard work of the print transfer. All bets are off if the iPhone is power-cycled. Best bet if you're pulled over by authorities or at a security checkpoint is to turn off your iPhone (and have a strong alphanumeric passcode). [1] https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/ [2] https://blog.lookout.com/blog/2013/09/23/why-i-hacked-apples-touchid-and-still-think-it-is-awesome/ https://blog.lookout.com/blog/2013/09/23/why-i-hacked-apples...

toomuchtodo 11y ago
> All bets are off if the iPhone is power-cycled. Best bet if you're pulled over by authorities or at a security checkpoint is to turn off your iPhone (and have a strong alphanumeric passcode). Excellent advice. Even better, if you're about to pass through US customs and border patrol, backup the phone first, wipe, and restore on the other side. Of course, this depends on your level of paranoia. I am paranoid.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- FussyZeus 11y ago
  Wiping the phone doesn't help you. Using the strong password renders the information inaccessible, at least as inaccessible as your phone backup is. Touch ID isn't re-enabled until the phone's passcode is used. Presumably if the authorities have access to your phone's memory they also have access to your laptops, and neither will do them any damn good. And it's paranoia if there's a legitimate threat, that's just called due diligence. ;)
  - guscost 11y ago
    > Touch ID isn't re-enabled until the phone's passcode is used. Do the docs confirm that there is no way around this? I'd guess generating the encryption key requires the passcode, which is discarded immediately, and Touch ID can only "unlock" a temporarily re-encrypted version which never leaves ephemeral storage?