←back to thread

511 points moonsword | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.217s | source
Show context
threeseed ◴[] No.42168350[source]
I suspected this was being managed in the Secure Enclave.

That means it's going to be extremely difficult to disable this even if iOS is fully compromised.

replies(1): >>42168578 #
karlgkk ◴[] No.42168578[source]
If I’m reading this right:

Reboot is not enforced by the SEP, though, only requested. It’s a kernel module, which means if a kernel exploit is found, this could be stopped.

However, considering Apple’s excellent track record on these kind of security measures, I would not at all be surprised to find out that a next generation iPhone would involve the SEP forcing a reboot without the kernels involvement.

what this does is that it reduces the window (to three days) of time between when an iOS device is captured, and a usable* kernel exploit is developed.

* there is almost certainly a known kernel exploit out in the wild, but the agencies that have it generally reserve using them until they really need to - or they’re patched. If you have a captured phone used in a, for example, low stakes insurance fraud case, it’s not at all worth revealing your ownership of a kernel exploit.

Once an exploit is “burned”, they distribute them out to agencies and all affected devices are unlocked at once. This now means that kernel exploits must be deployed within three days, and it’s going to preserve the privacy of a lot of people.

replies(6): >>42168622 #>>42168651 #>>42168686 #>>42168793 #>>42168941 #>>42169466 #
op00to ◴[] No.42169466[source]
If reboot doesn’t happen kernel panics, at least that’s what the article says.
replies(1): >>42171725 #
1. aaronmdjones ◴[] No.42171725[source]
That's only because the kernel tells the userland to reboot. If the kernel is compromised, they can stop it from telling userland to reboot and stop the kernel panicing.