Matt’s Comments

• Feb 23rd, 2016 @ 6:47am

  Re: Re: Apple Must Open The San Bernardino Terrorist's IPhone.

  on No, A Judge Did Not Just Order Apple To Break Encryption On San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone, But To Create A New Backdoor
  "No one here accepts that it is possible to design an impenetrable security system-- or that the design engineer would not be able to reverse or unlock a system he/she designed."
  
  I mean, that's the idea. And if a design engineer was able to unlock a system he/she designed, that would be a TERRIBLE system that was not safe. Also, if Apple DIDN'T disclose the details of their security protocols that would also be a very bad thing.
  
  Security that is done secretly is bad security because once someone figures out the flaw they can exploit it. Much better is to (as is actually done) publish all the protocols and let everyone figure out the flaws and fix the flaws.
  
  Why should an engineer have access to encrypted data? That makes no sense. Do people believe that when Apple says they can't access the data, that they are lying and can actually access the data?
• Feb 17th, 2016 @ 12:06pm

  Re:

  on No, A Judge Did Not Just Order Apple To Break Encryption On San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone, But To Create A New Backdoor
  No, it is not that easy to break AES-256 encrypted data (which, after a cursory google search, it seems Apple uses). If there is a side channel attack available to cracking an iPhone due to a flaw in Apple's implementation of the protocol then that is a different matter. Apple introducing a backdoor (which, contrary to what the title of this article states is EXACTLY what is being demanded) would be a HUGE flaw in implementation and would render the phone insecure.