@ XRY_Mike

Any body who have basics in forensics understand that adding support for physical imaging of memory card or any mass storage device have no relation to a claim of adding physical imaging support to Blackberry. Pointing fingers at somebody or questioning their intentions doesn't discards the merit of the question.  

Understood and thanks for your comments.

As previously pointed out - Blackberry support is limited to the memory card and the user partition area of the device's internal memory. So as already identified by "cyrus" it is not a complete memory dump

We are not attempting to claim anything else, other than to highlight to our customers that we have improved support for Blackberry's in v6.2 and that users now have the potential to get back more data using XRY Physical.  

It is an aggressive marketing anyway you spin it or try to deflect discussion onto other irrelevant topics (don't bother checking, I have NO previous posts). It does not change the fact that the term used is industry known to be one thing while actually delivering something which is far lesser.  

- ForensicFox

It is an aggressive marketing anyway you spin it or try to deflect discussion onto other irrelevant topics (don't bother checking, I have NO previous posts). It does not change the fact that the term used is industry known to be one thing while actually delivering something which is far lesser.

I think with all marketing you have to show a bit of initiative and read into it a bit more. In this case, I think XRY have been fairly honest with the limitations of their "physical support" by stating everywhere that it is user content memory. I'm not sure about you and others who seem a bit confused by what XRY is saying, but when I saw the user content part I knew it wasnt full physical support. Maybe i've been in the mobile forensics market for too long

Maybe if XRY broke down the classifications of support a bit more to say logical, physical, and file system it would make things a little clearer? but i guess if they have said file system support of user content, people might still be confused?  

I haven't had any posts previously either, but I can say that I agree with everyone else here - if you told me that XRY had support for BB physical, I would assume deleted anything and everything I could get my hands on. A better way to state what you are describing would be "XRY now supports recovery of deleted user files stored on removable storage, and in some devices deleted user data (such as pictures and videos) that may be stored on the device itself."

On a side note, Biedubbeljoe (and any others interested) - if you have access to Cellebrite, this does perform what you were inquiring if XRY does (full physical of BlackBerry phones, as well as decryption and parsing of the image). If you do not have access to Cellebrite but need this procedure done, please PM me and we can get you set up for this.

Dizi  

@ Cyrus

What I dont understand is how a physical imaging capability of a mass storage device is related to blackberry imaging ?
By that logic any tool can claim that physical imaging support is there for nokia, samsung, android devices... as these devices also stores user content in removable media.  

- bibinthomas

@ Cyrus

What I dont understand is how a physical imaging capability of a mass storage device is related to blackberry imaging ?
By that logic any tool can claim that physical imaging support is there for nokia, samsung, android devices... as these devices also stores user content in removable media.

Ok, I dont really want to get dragged into a big argument, just saying my opinion I do see you argument, and I certainly dont want to see these companies claiming physical support for a device when it is just removable media.

As far as I can tell, XRY are offering physical (bit by bit imaging) of the BlackBerry User Content. There is no lie in what they are saying, unless you can tell me otherwise? The user content memory is NOT removable media; as XRYMike says, it is internal memory. I think they tried to make it clear, but apparently failed Maybe Dizi357s description would have been better, certainly a lot clearer on what they are offering.