https://www.oxygen-forensic.com/en/
Some products may be reserved to Law Enforcement or Licensed investigators, but I believe that's all.
I fully expect authorities from any countries to try to get evidences from physical access to electronic devices in the case of criminal investigation. Just like they can go into ones house and open safes with a torch if a judge allows it.
The problem is mass surveillance, not getting data about someone under arrest.
Of course, I unfortunatly also fully expect them to abuse that and use it outside of criminal investigations, without the knowledge of said person.
The manufacturers do their best to protect the users, but when it comes to criminal investigations there are tools[0] that can often make access to smartphone (or computers) data possible.
These tools are often prohibitively expensive and/or only licensed to LEO's (Law Enforcement Officers) and cannot unlock/access "everything", so there is no real "privacy risk" connected to them unless you are charged with a criminal offence and/or arrested.
To give you an example there are cases where an iPhone can be unlocked by two (AFAIK) different tools, one is made by Cellebrite that charges an awful amount of money for each unlock, and the other is Graykey that wants as well a lot of money but you can buy the "unlimited" option:
https://www.forensicfocus.com/forums/mobile-forensics/grayke...
both are only given to authorized investigators (Police/Government) only.
Of course it is possible - in theory - that someone malicious manages to get their hands on one of them and then proceeds to steal the phone from you, and then can afford to spend anything between 3,000 and 10,000 US$ to unlock it and access your data, but I find it improbable.
[0] until the manufacturer patches (if patchable) the vulnerability, and then the race starts to find a new one
I am really surprised they don't do much against Pegasus though. I'm sure the agencies involved know what exploits it uses by now.
I guess because western powers use these tools too is why they don't lock them out.
Of course, even if the article make it sound like a scandal, exchange of anti-privacy software for catching human traffickers [1] is not announced in a worldwide press release, it would defeat its purpose
[1] from the article
Objective of this technology transfer financed from the budget of the EU's "border management program for the Maghreb region": to fight against irregular immigration and human trafficking at the gates of the EU.
Wow. Sounds like someone is on an agenda.
I also don't like the framing of migrants and drugs in the same sentence as both issues are ethically very different. But both are driven by organized crime groups and the migrants are victims too. The traffickers take them for all they're worth. It's a problem that needs to be fought.
I apologies for the mistake, i can't edit the comment anymore unfortunately
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/27/moroccan-autho...
I guess it’s time to reset my phone.
