3 ms·

The "patch" is to not use the physical extraction thingy on iPhones anymore: https://www.google.com/amp/s/9to5mac.com/2021/04/27/cellebrite-physical-analyzer-ip

• roflc0ptic 6y ago
  Wow, that seems really obfuscatory. It's implausible that they only have a vulnerability to iPhone devices, but I guess that's the line of argumentation they'd use to limit the fallout. Sucks to be cellebrite.
  • t0mas88 6y ago
    I think it's related to the stolen Apple DLLs in their product. Any competent legal department would tell them to remove those immediately, because you don't want to get in a lawsuit with Apple over such a clear case.
    • ikeboy 6y ago
      It does seem very clearly a permissible use. Corellium beat Apple's copyright claims and they did far more than just embed a DLL.
      • willstrafach 6y ago
        That is incorrect, Corellium does not ship Apple code.
        • ikeboy 6y ago
          My understanding was that the copyright portion of the suit was over them doing exactly that? Maybe running it in the cloud vs shipping it, but e.g. https://techcrunch.com/2020/12/29/apples-lawsuit-against-corellium-has-been-partly-thrown-out/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/12/29/apples-lawsuit-against-cor... mentions iOS IPSW files. Edit: it seems like they downloaded the file from Apple's site. The order says using the IPSW file was fair use, and that doesn't appear to depend on them downloading it vs shipping it. I don't think that makes a different. The cellebrite usage is also fair use for the same reasons (doesn't compete with Apple, transformative usage, etc)