5 ms·

This is a massive deal if a big company like Apple or Samsung produced the Phone. Modern "secure enclaves" found in nearly every phone and computer should be i

This is a massive deal if a big company like Apple or Samsung produced the Phone. Modern "secure enclaves" found in nearly every phone and computer should be impossible to brute-force or leak secrets. Unless, of course, the phone allowed fingerprint / face-id and the corpse was used. I believe on Android, you still have to use a PIN with every restart. Presumably, Apple is the same. Unsure if time since last unlock is also a factor.

laidoffamazon 2y ago
It's not implausible that the parents of the deceased simply knew and provided the password.
- bangaladore 2y ago
  I agree, in my opinion in order of likelihood: 1. Face-id / touch-id was still available to be used 2. Old phone without modern security measures (can brute force offline) 3. Someone else knew the pin/passphrase ... ∞. They bypassed a modern/certified secure enclave
  - jmkni 2y ago
    They could have had him added as a 'child' in the family settings > If you have an iPhone, iPad or Apple Vision Pro with the latest version of iOS, iPadOS or visionOS and two-factor authentication turned on for your Apple ID, you can change the Apple ID password for a child account in your Family Sharing group. > Tap Settings > Family > your child's account. > Tap Apple ID & Password. > Tap Change [Child’s Name] Password. > Enter your device passcode and follow the onscreen instructions. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/101567 https://support.apple.com/en-gb/101567
Someone 2y ago
That there even is a working phone shows the shooter either didn’t worry about the feds finding out what’s on that phone, or didn’t think things through well. Given that, there’s a decent chance the phone’s password is 1234 or some day of the year that’s relevant for the phone owner.
OutOfHere 2y ago
Odds are high that the password wasn't very strong or long. Who really wants to type a long and complex password every time. This means the phone can be imaged, then brute-forced on a server.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- bangaladore 2y ago
  > This means the phone can be imaged, then brute-forced on a server. No, it cannot be, which is what I'm saying in my comment. You cannot clone "secure enclaves." They are hardware mechanisms, not software. Additionally, things like secure-enclaves have made pin length/commonality being a significant risk factor largely a thing of the past. If you only have ten tries, you will likely miss the correct pin, no matter the statistical likelihood you might find it.
  - OutOfHere 2y ago
    I find the security of the secure enclave to be a bit overrated. It sounds too good to be true. Ultimately, the phone has disk storage. Once the disk is imaged, the secure enclave can be simulated in software, also without the limitation of the number of tries. Only the password is missing.
    - bangaladore 2y ago
      > Once the disk is imaged, the secure enclave can be simulated in software, also without the limitation of the number of tries. Only the password is missing. Yes, good luck breaking a 256-bit or similar key. I'll see you and your quantum computer in 2.29*10^32 years
    - fragmede 2y ago
      The disk storage is encrypted with a key and not the password directly, so you're not guessing a PIN/password with that method, you're trying to guess the decryption key. The key is impractically harder to brute force with current technology - even a million dollar of AWS spend won't do it. If you're interested in the crypto(graphy) used, Apple has a white paper, among other resources that makes this "too good to be true" anything but.

laidoffamazon 2y ago

It's not implausible that the parents of the deceased simply knew and provided the password.

bangaladore 2y ago
I agree, in my opinion in order of likelihood: 1. Face-id / touch-id was still available to be used 2. Old phone without modern security measures (can brute force offline) 3. Someone else knew the pin/passphrase ... ∞. They bypassed a modern/certified secure enclave
- jmkni 2y ago
  They could have had him added as a 'child' in the family settings > If you have an iPhone, iPad or Apple Vision Pro with the latest version of iOS, iPadOS or visionOS and two-factor authentication turned on for your Apple ID, you can change the Apple ID password for a child account in your Family Sharing group. > Tap Settings > Family > your child's account. > Tap Apple ID & Password. > Tap Change [Child’s Name] Password. > Enter your device passcode and follow the onscreen instructions. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/101567 https://support.apple.com/en-gb/101567

Someone 2y ago

That there even is a working phone shows the shooter either didn’t worry about the feds finding out what’s on that phone, or didn’t think things through well. Given that, there’s a decent chance the phone’s password is 1234 or some day of the year that’s relevant for the phone owner.

OutOfHere 2y ago

Odds are high that the password wasn't very strong or long. Who really wants to type a long and complex password every time. This means the phone can be imaged, then brute-forced on a server.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
bangaladore 2y ago
> This means the phone can be imaged, then brute-forced on a server. No, it cannot be, which is what I'm saying in my comment. You cannot clone "secure enclaves." They are hardware mechanisms, not software. Additionally, things like secure-enclaves have made pin length/commonality being a significant risk factor largely a thing of the past. If you only have ten tries, you will likely miss the correct pin, no matter the statistical likelihood you might find it.
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  I find the security of the secure enclave to be a bit overrated. It sounds too good to be true. Ultimately, the phone has disk storage. Once the disk is imaged, the secure enclave can be simulated in software, also without the limitation of the number of tries. Only the password is missing.
  - bangaladore 2y ago
    > Once the disk is imaged, the secure enclave can be simulated in software, also without the limitation of the number of tries. Only the password is missing. Yes, good luck breaking a 256-bit or similar key. I'll see you and your quantum computer in 2.29*10^32 years
  - fragmede 2y ago
    The disk storage is encrypted with a key and not the password directly, so you're not guessing a PIN/password with that method, you're trying to guess the decryption key. The key is impractically harder to brute force with current technology - even a million dollar of AWS spend won't do it. If you're interested in the crypto(graphy) used, Apple has a white paper, among other resources that makes this "too good to be true" anything but.