Sailfish on Turing Phones? - Page 21 - maemo.org

hhbbap | # 201 | 2016-02-09, 18:18 | Report

Originally Posted by Dave999 View Post

Has the preorders payed anything?

Changing the OS @ promised delivery day...that is funny. I won't say it's a scam but it looks like a...

Please, do not tell, Jolla, they might get ideas...
I do not want an Android tablet.

Regards, Frode

The Following User Says Thank You to hhbbap For This Useful Post:
LameDuck

gaelic | # 202 | 2016-02-10, 05:54 | Report

Originally Posted by juiceme View Post

Just out from interest, if you have device locked how is someone going to access your data?

The most effective way that I know is to open the device and directly access the memory chip. Mind you, it might well be popchip when you canot even get at the die witout etching open the package...
What else, maybe interface to internal serial IO or JTAG? or maybe FBUS? Do you know how to do that?

If it is not encrypted at all you just plug it via USB. Maybe you have to reboot (battery in/out). But that's it. It is unsafe as hell.

HtheB | # 203 | 2016-02-10, 12:06 | Report

Originally Posted by gaelic View Post

If it is not encrypted at all you just plug it via USB. Maybe you have to reboot (battery in/out). But that's it. It is unsafe as hell.

There is no Data transfer available using a cable on the Turing Phone......

So you can strike out that option

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to HtheB For This Useful Post:
juiceme, mosen

juiceme | # 204 | 2016-02-10, 12:39 | Report

Originally Posted by gaelic View Post

Originally Posted by juiceme View Post

Just out from interest, if you have device locked how is someone going to access your data?

The most effective way that I know is to open the device and directly access the memory chip. Mind you, it might well be popchip when you canot even get at the die witout etching open the package...
What else, maybe interface to internal serial IO or JTAG? or maybe FBUS? Do you know how to do that?

If it is not encrypted at all you just plug it via USB. Maybe you have to reboot (battery in/out). But that's it. It is unsafe as hell.

You must have been eating some really bad mushrooms...
What the hell you are talking about???

1.) If you mean the current Jolla device running SFOS:
There sure is NOTHING you can get out thu the USB port that way.
If the device is locked, you cannot access the device via USB.
If you boot/power-cycle it, it will ask for lock code and not let you thru.

2.) If you are talking about the (hypotethical) Turing device:
It does not even HAVE any USB port...

The Following User Says Thank You to juiceme For This Useful Post:
nodevel

javispedro | # 205 | 2016-02-10, 13:42 | Report

I hate it when someone assumes "full device encryption" = "security".

How many "mortal person" security issues are exactly prevented with full device encryption? Virtually the only ones I can think of are the of the "government employee with nation-wide secrets" variety, where the attackers care enough to actually desolder eMMC chips. But for those you have to take into consideration how probable it is for a government-level agency to be able to break any crypto you throw at them...

This is the reason most known "privacy-unfriendly" (*cough*) are quite happy to offer full device encryption. It thwarts almost no one.

Signed: javispedro, the "anti-security" guy.

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to javispedro For This Useful Post:
ARJWright, billranton, Bundyo, Fuzzillogic, juiceme

gaelic | # 206 | 2016-02-10, 13:51 | Report

Originally Posted by javispedro View Post

I hate it when someone assumes "full device encryption" = "security".

How many "mortal person" security issues are exactly prevented with full device encryption? Virtually the only ones I can think of are the of the "government employee with nation-wide secrets" variety, where the attackers care enough to actually desolder eMMC chips. But for those you have to take into consideration how probable it is for a government-level agency to be able to break any crypto you throw at them...

This is the reason most known "privacy-unfriendly" (*cough*) are quite happy to offer full device encryption. It thwarts almost no one.

Signed: javispedro, the "anti-security" guy.

no encryption is not as safe as encryption. Simple as that.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gaelic For This Useful Post:
pichlo, theonelaw

gaelic | # 207 | 2016-02-10, 13:54 | Report

Originally Posted by juiceme View Post

You must have been eating some really bad mushrooms...
What the hell you are talking about???

1.) If you mean the current Jolla device running SFOS:
There sure is NOTHING you can get out thu the USB port that way.
If the device is locked, you cannot access the device via USB.
If you boot/power-cycle it, it will ask for lock code and not let you thru.

2.) If you are talking about the (hypotethical) Turing device:
It does not even HAVE any USB port...

1) You can leave your insults to yourself
2) While booting there is the possibility to access the device. (recovery mode). No hardware manipilation whatever needed.
3) They have a USB Port (essentially) , as do iPhones. Just the connector is shaped differently. Security by obscurity.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to gaelic For This Useful Post:
Feathers McGraw, pichlo, theonelaw

javispedro | # 208 | 2016-02-10, 14:59 | Report

Originally Posted by gaelic View Post

no encryption is not as safe as encryption. Simple as that.

Too tired to discuss the "benefits" of fake-security, again on this forum, for the nth time.

Originally Posted by gaelic View Post

2) While booting there is the possibility to access the device. (recovery mode).

Not really (and I consider this an annoyance).

I'm so tired of the useless and annoying locking down of devices caused by "security" non-sense that I'm going to don a superhero costume with "the Antisecurity guy" written on it.

"Privacy" is a much better keyword (and arguably Sailfish does not excel at it either, but it can be fixable).

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to javispedro For This Useful Post:
billranton, Bundyo, juiceme, theonelaw

gaelic | # 209 | 2016-02-10, 15:13 | Report

Originally Posted by javispedro View Post

Too tired to discuss the "benefits" of fake-security, again on this forum, for the nth time.

Why should it be fake security. The screenlock as it is is fake security.

Originally Posted by

Not really (and I consider this an annoyance).

I'm so tired of the useless and annoying locking down of devices caused by "security" non-sense that I'm going to don a superhero costume with "the Antisecurity guy" written on it.

Why should it be useless? Why is it annoying?

Originally Posted by

"Privacy" is a much better keyword (and arguably Sailfish does not excel at it either, but it can be fixable).

Privacy without security to protect this privacy is what exactly?

So its just excuses from your side: too tired, etc. That's lame.

The Following User Says Thank You to gaelic For This Useful Post:
pichlo

mariusmssj | # 210 | 2016-02-10, 15:24 | Report

This sums it up

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to mariusmssj For This Useful Post:
ARJWright, billranton, endsormeans, gaelic, javispedro, juiceme