Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Plausible deniability is better (Score 1) 205

They don't usually do this at a border check, but if they use a forensics terminal it's not running the OS, they basically do a backdoor boot and look at what the hardware reports.

The key point here is that data's security isn't enforced by the OS, but rather by the encryption algorithm itself. A non-OS forensics terminal would see the raw contents of the hard drive, which is to say, blocks of random-looking bytes that might be encrypted data or might just be truly random; without the corresponding password, there is no way to to tell.

Without any password (and assuming a robust encryption implementation), that's as far as they'd get. With a password, they'd be able to decrypt the blocks associated with that password and view the files for that account, but not any of the other blocks/accounts.

At that point, the FBI's nerds might well suspect that there are other accounts on the phone that they don't know about, but short of coercing the phone's owner into providing additional passwords, that's as far as they could get.

Comment Re:A canary test for thorough comprehension? (Score 4, Informative) 129

Your Van Halen comment knocked some cobwebs down in my brain. I recalled reading about rider contracts for bands on tour on TheSmokingGun.

"Made famous by Van Halen’s contractual demand that brown M&M's be plucked from the group’s candy bowl"

https://www.thesmokinggun.com/...

Enjoy

Comment Re:Does this end them sooner, or is it irrelevant? (Score 1) 38

I mostly do heavy multi-disciplinary engineering problems (these I also use for checking an AI, as they're typically not good at these sorts of problems), complex coding, OS analysis, stuff like that. However, sometimes I do throw the occasional odd-ball - I've used ChatGPT to propose a workable quantum mechanics that will cope with Doctor Who canon, for example, and to produce an outline for a story in which symphonic metal appears in 1964 that is compliant with current sociological and psychological models of behaviour.

Claude Opus 4.6 was coping surprisingly well with just about everything I threw at it (but ran out of credits fast), but Opus 5 is churning out incoherent babblings to the point I'm worried I may have accidentally summoned Cthulhu.

But Gemini, Grok, and DeepSeek got hopelessly confused on just about everything past a very low level of complexity. They can handle large problems, yes - Gemini has a huge context window - but complex interactions baffle them.

ChatGPT is able to identify issues correctly, but can only outline solutions, it's just not good at depth. 5.6 is a lot better, but still not good at deep answers. ChatGPT is also prone to agreeing for the sake of it, which makes me nervous about trustworthiness.

Comment Re:Does this end them sooner, or is it irrelevant? (Score 1) 38

That is fair enough. I've been trying out Kimi on the free model, and have subscriptions to Claude and ChatGPT. If Kimi is actually as good or better than ChatGPT, at the pro level, then it might be worth my while moving over as ChatGPT has become very disk-hungry of late and I'm pushing right to the very limits on what it can reliably process.

Comment Re:Plausible deniability is better (Score 1) 205

If they plugged it into a forensics terminal they'd likely see right away that the device OS isn't reporting the correct blocks.

The goal would be to have a device OS with no concept of "correct blocks", i.e. there are only a bunch of blocks, all equally correct, and the OS uses some subset of them based on the password that was entered. Ideally the OS wouldn't even have the ability to tell anyone how many viable subsets there are.

Slashdot Top Deals

Take care of the luxuries and the necessities will take care of themselves. -- Lazarus Long

Working...