01-25-13 06:09 PM
158 ... 567
tools
  1. Branta's Avatar
    LOL. The post in question was written by Cellebrite's Co-CEO, Ron Serber.
    A bogus post to hype a Cellbrite product in a forum discussion? Around here we call that spamming.
    01-25-13 05:34 AM
  2. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    A bogus post to hype a Cellbrite product in a forum discussion? Around here we call that spamming.
    Lol, well said Branta, well said!
    01-25-13 05:39 AM
  3. hornlovah's Avatar
    That's not what I asked, we all know how prone to making wild promises CEOs are. Can they do it? Is their product advertised as they can do it? Personally the media would've been all over it if it was possible.
    I understood what you asked, but I politely asked your earlier to do your own homework. Personally, I would have checked out Ron's other posts in the forensic forum I linked to and other venues before floating the possibility that he might be "prone to making wild promises." Mr. Serber is very well-respected by the forensic analyst community because of his knowledge and commitment to customer service.

    Anyway, to answer your question: I stated post #137 that “they can do it.” The Cellebrite Co-CEO said “they can do it” in his post, and another forensic services and software vendor, FTS, describes their capabilities in this document: Chip-Off Data Recovery for BlackBerry Devices. They can do it too.
    01-25-13 05:56 AM
  4. Rickroller's Avatar
    A bogus post to hype a Cellbrite Blackberry product in a forum discussion? Around here we call that spamming.
    Around here, I thought it was known as @Blackberryscoop..
    01-25-13 07:37 AM
  5. hornlovah's Avatar
    A bogus post to hype a Cellbrite product in a forum discussion? Around here we call that spamming.
    Over the years, I never seen Ron's posts regarded as spam. Cellebrite's primary forensic product is their UFED line which is an expensive combination of hardware and software. Updates to the software add new extraction capabilities, and are always well-received. UFED devices are primarily used to perform cable based extractions. Chip-off extractions are infrequent and require specialized equipment/expertise. Announcing new features in a forum frequented by analysts that perform chip-off extractions or that analyze chip-off results is welcome and makes perfect sense.
    01-25-13 07:54 AM
  6. anon62607's Avatar
    I think I have to get used to Crackberry discussions. The original discussion was something to the effect of "WhatsApp isn't secure, BBM is" which is rightly a controversial point but I think has been covered sufficiently. Everyone can take away what they want from the topic now because the main points have been discussed - WhatsApp messages are encrypted but the key exchange is vulnerable, BBM messages are encrypted but the key is pre-known. Pick which one is less secure. Both are somewhat safe, at least, from over-the-air sniffing and monitoring by bored hobbyists. Given the descriptions of both systems, I personally would think it naive to think that either system is secure from decryption by any agency with experience and resources, but that's moot - that kind of entity can get RIM or WhatsApp to turn over data without having to attack the message system itself.

    "Standing the test of time" is historically not a good way to judge a cryptosystem (see Venona project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - the USSR would have believed that the one time pad system was completely secure (when they were not using it properly by reusing the pad) and stood the test of time for years, for example). Anyone can make up their own minds about the level of security that any particular system achieves, the more important thing to know is how the system works so at least some kind of judgement can be made about the likely level of security. Even PGP has been successfully attacked ( http://www.schneier.com/paper-pgp.pdf ) and the vast majority of research and resources going into attacking cryptographic systems is not public , and that should be kept in mind as well. It's telling, I think, that among the agences not crying that they can't decrypt BBM are those that by reputation at least have very well funded and resourced cryptanalysis departments. The US usually complains to its allies when they export cryptographic technology above a certain level of difficulty of attacking (the US considers these things munitions and under export control in the US) but so far as I can tell, there is no complaint being made about BBM or Blackberries.

    The whole conversation has been useful to me, I was always interested in BBM, and still am, and I wish that it would be made multiplatform. I went into the thread thinking that the security was much stronger than it appears to be and after doing the reading generated by the thread I personally no longer consider BBM (over BIS) safe from a determined attacker, but I also thought PGP was all but impregnable and it turns out that isn't the case either.

    It certainly hasn't made me any less likely to get a BB10 device, I do wish that the threads would remain a little more fact oriented and less attack-and-insult oriented e.g.,
    "WhatsApp messages are encrypted with a symmetric key that is generated in a easily-reproducable way and then communicated in an easily-to-intercept way"
    "BBM messages are encrypted with a symmetric key common to every BBM in the world"

    From that alone one person might conclude that it's an enormous leap of faith to presume that messages can't be intercepted and decrypted, another might decide because they have no evidence of this ever being done that it can't happen. Both are in some way or another reasonable conclusions - the discussion becomes moot after that except to bring forward new evidence or yet-to-be discussed information about the systems themselves.

    It's very informative until things start devolving into personal attacks, which seems to be a bit of an Achilles Heel of CrackBerry.com's forums.
    Last edited by valeuche; 01-25-13 at 01:27 PM. Reason: it's its grammar
    hornlovah likes this.
    01-25-13 01:25 PM
  7. Branta's Avatar
    It's telling, I think, that among the agences not crying that they can't decrypt BBM are those that by reputation at least have very well funded and resourced cryptanalysis departments. The US usually complains to its allies when they export cryptographic technology above a certain level of difficulty of attacking (the US considers these things munitions and under export control in the US) but so far as I can tell, there is no complaint being made about BBM or Blackberries.
    No surprise at all, but is should also be considered that these are the very agencies who have little need to decrypt BBM traffic when for 99% of the cases it is easier to walk into a RIM or carrier's office clutching a document signed by a judge, and say "Read this". Many of the widely discussed cases from the UK riots were even easier, simply arrest the suspect and read the content on the screen of the prisoner's phone. I understand input from RIM and the carriers was mostly driven by following the breadcrumbs to locate the recipients of the messages, and onward from there.

    The whole conversation has been useful to me, I was always interested in BBM, and still am, and I wish that it would be made multiplatform. I went into the thread thinking that the security was much stronger than it appears to be and after doing the reading generated by the thread I personally no longer consider BBM (over BIS) safe from a determined attacker, but I also thought PGP was all but impregnable and it turns out that isn't the case either.
    I think it is fair to say BBM is generally "secure enough" for normal public use, and the costs and practical difficulty mean that interception. Anyone concerned about interception is either employed in a field where more appropriate devices are available, or they are users most law abiding citizens would really like the authorities to be monitoring.

    It's very informative until things start devolving into personal attacks, which seems to be a bit of an Achilles Heel of CrackBerry.com's forums.
    Sadly the passion for a favored device sometimes overcomes the normal protocols of polite discussion. As moderators we make our best efforts to keep discussion level headed, but we can't be everywhere and read every post in every thread.
    01-25-13 04:32 PM
  8. hornlovah's Avatar
    snip... also encryption set to "Strongest" is considered to be 'not breakable', and the data is NOT retrievable on anything newer than OS 4.5.
    One more post to explain why you'll see forensic researchers/vendors claims that dispute this assertion. In this case, I am referring to overall device encryption, not the BIS BBM shared key scenario. In very simple terms, RIM produces encryption keys, and they use key derivation functions applied to the device's password to protect these keys. These algorithms are published and FIPS approved. RIM has not disclosed how they hide encryption keys however, which led to cries of “security through obscurity” from researchers that want to probe for implementation weakness and mount password attacks. This lack of disclosure benefited BlackBerry owners for many years, but recently we've seen notable improvements in the ability to decode raw memory dumps and isolate encryption keys. This does not mean that BlackBerry encryption is weak or that the phones will lose any security certifications. It does mean that a strong password will provide more protection against an advanced adversary.
    01-25-13 06:09 PM
158 ... 567

Similar Threads

  1. just a thought about verizon
    By gtpx02 in forum BlackBerry Storm Series
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 04-03-09, 06:57 AM
  2. Just a rant about t-mobiles online support:
    By zoi in forum General Carrier Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-15-09, 05:09 PM
  3. I just realized something about my 8830 WE
    By zaydaboss in forum BlackBerry 88xx Series
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-25-08, 02:41 PM
  4. Cool featire i just found out about!
    By btownsoccerstud in forum BlackBerry Curve Series
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-17-08, 10:32 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD