3 ms·
Signal says: >Not only can Cellebrite not break Signal encryption, but Cellebrite never even claimed to be able to. But the original Cellebrite post says: >D
by Imnimo 6y ago
Signal says:
>Not only can Cellebrite not break Signal encryption, but Cellebrite never even claimed to be able to.
But the original Cellebrite post says:
>Decrypting messages and attachments sent with Signal has been all but impossible…until now.
and
>This time, the encryption is even harder to crack.
It's just that Cellebrite's claim is totally baseless and what they're actually doing is not "breaking" or "cracking" anything. The BBC article should have been more critical of Cellebrite's language, but I don't agree with Signal that their headline was "false".
- coldcode 6y agoThey automated taking pictures of app content on an unlocked Android phone, and bragged about it as a breakthrough tech, then deleted the article and replaced it with fluff. Embarrassing.
- Imnimo 6y agoRight, Cellebrite's clearly way off base here. But the BBC's headline seems to accurately describe their wild claims.
- polar 6y ago> automated taking pictures of app content There's a world of difference between taking screenshots of an application and extracting messages and metadata from a database. I should imagine that Cellebrite's audience of corporate and law enforcement investigators would be very keen on getting access to this breakthrough. OTOH, Cellebrite's competitors have been able to do that for a while!