4 ms·

> anything running on your device Cellebrite isn’t meant for use with devices you own; it’s meant for use with devices seized by law enforcement. I’m not so su

> anything running on your device Cellebrite isn’t meant for use with devices you own; it’s meant for use with devices seized by law enforcement. I’m not so sure that qualifies here.

javajosh 6y ago
I would expect the toolsets to converge over time. That is, I can't imagine a tool that a LEO would have access to that I would not. Nor can I imagine a tool they might have that I would not want to use myself. That said, I think law enforcement has an intrinsic advantage in practical terms. They have the money to pay for a subscription to known exploits packaged and made easy to attempt, and b) lots of experience using that tool (as well as just ordinary persuasion and coercion) to crack into peoples phones in the real world.
- zenexer 6y ago
  I'm not entirely sure that makes sense here. If I understand correctly, Cellebrite mostly just provides an interface and degree of automation designed for law enforcement; you could, in theory, retrieve the same data on your own without Cellebrite, just without the LEO-centric UX. Depending on the device, I would think the tools to which you have access likely make more sense for a consumer's use case. Even for someone getting a bit more technical and tinkering with their device, tools like `adb` are fairly powerful on their own.
polar 6y ago
> devices seized by law enforcement Not exclusively[1]. [1] https://www.cellebrite.com/en/business-solutions/ https://www.cellebrite.com/en/business-solutions/
- zenexer 6y ago
  Is it actually common for such hardware to be used in civil cases? I'm not sure I'm keen on someone crawling through all my data and potentially storing it indefinitely--including data with security implications (session cookies, partially-decrypted data from password managers, who knows what else) just because they managed to reach the discovery phase of a civil case.

> anything running on your device Cellebrite isn’t meant for use with devices you own; it’s meant for use with devices seized by law enforcement. I’m not so sure that qualifies here.

javajosh 6y ago

I would expect the toolsets to converge over time. That is, I can't imagine a tool that a LEO would have access to that I would not. Nor can I imagine a tool they might have that I would not want to use myself. That said, I think law enforcement has an intrinsic advantage in practical terms. They have the money to pay for a subscription to known exploits packaged and made easy to attempt, and b) lots of experience using that tool (as well as just ordinary persuasion and coercion) to crack into peoples phones in the real world.

zenexer 6y ago
I'm not entirely sure that makes sense here. If I understand correctly, Cellebrite mostly just provides an interface and degree of automation designed for law enforcement; you could, in theory, retrieve the same data on your own without Cellebrite, just without the LEO-centric UX. Depending on the device, I would think the tools to which you have access likely make more sense for a consumer's use case. Even for someone getting a bit more technical and tinkering with their device, tools like `adb` are fairly powerful on their own.

polar 6y ago

> devices seized by law enforcement Not exclusively[1]. [1] https://www.cellebrite.com/en/business-solutions/ https://www.cellebrite.com/en/business-solutions/

zenexer 6y ago
Is it actually common for such hardware to be used in civil cases? I'm not sure I'm keen on someone crawling through all my data and potentially storing it indefinitely--including data with security implications (session cookies, partially-decrypted data from password managers, who knows what else) just because they managed to reach the discovery phase of a civil case.