San Bernardino's top cop says it's likely 'there is nothing of any value' on iPhone the FBI wants A

AppleInsider

The work-issued iPhone used by one of the shooters in the San Bernardino terrorist attack likely has "nothing of any value" saved on it, the police chief of the town has admitted in a new interview, though he still believes Apple should help the FBI crack into the encrypted handset.

The makeshift memorial which appeared in San Bernardino following the shooting.

"I'll be honest with you, I think that there is a reasonably good chance that there is nothing of any value on the phone," San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan said in an interview with NPR on Friday. "What we are hoping might be on the phone would be potential contacts that we would obviously want to talk to."

Burguan admitted he owns an iPhone and an iPad, and considers himself a "fan" of Apple products. But he also said law enforcement has an obligation to "leave no stone unturned" in their investigation of the attack, and not making an effort would be unfair to the victims and their families.

It's also possible, though he admitted it's unlikely, that the iPhone 5c in question could have details on a larger terrorist network or potential plots for future attacks.

"The probability is low, but it could be," Burguan said.

A U.S. magistrate judge has ordered Apple to comply with FBI requests to help extract data owned by one of the shooters involved in the December terrorist attack. Apple says it can't do that without creating a backdoor to its secure iOS platform --?something the company is unwilling to do.

Thanks to a lawsuit filed by the U.S. government publicizing the dispute, the battle between Apple and the FBI has spilled over to the court of public opinion. A war of words has broken out, led by Apple CEO Tim Cook and FBI director James Comey, in which each side is working to paint the other as unreasonable.

beltsbear

Maybe get a few contacts out of a phone vs make millions of phones unsafe and foreign products more appealing.  If it works out like the cloud fiasco we can drive another 100 billion out of the US economy.  Which makes the USA stronger, having 100 billion dollars of economic activity or maybe a few bits of information that can probably be gathered elsewhere?

edited February 2016

jungmark

Contacts? If he called anyone, that would show up on his cell phone records right? No need to hack the iPhone. 

fastasleep

Again, work phone. The personal phone was destroyed. This really should be mentioned in every article on this subject. 

spamsandwich

The Crazy Train just keeps chugging along.

jfc1138

"What we are hoping might be on the phone would be potential contacts that we would obviously want to talk to."

Contacts the murderer never, well, actually bothered to, you know, CONTACT, via that same phone? Because any and all "contacts" actually contacted would be present in the electronic service records for the phone already turned over to the FBI by Verizon and Apple would they not?

sockrolid

jungmark said:

Contacts? If he called anyone, that would show up on his cell phone records right? No need to hack the iPhone. 

Agree.  AT&T (and other carriers) know who you called.
And they give the government anything and everything when asked.

adrayven

jfc1138 said:

"What we are hoping might be on the phone would be potential contacts that we would obviously want to talk to."

Contacts the murderer never, well, actually bothered to, you know, CONTACT, via that same phone? Because any and all "contacts" actually contacted would be present in the electronic service records for the phone already turned over to the FBI by Verizon and Apple would they not?

Exactly.. and its a work phone, they use Exchange mail server which defaults all contacts to be stored on the Exchange Server. Plus, they can get any call logs/records they want from the phone company and access any sites / services they loaded from the phone through the data connection from the Teleco as well. Fact is, they have so many vectors to get at the data, unlocking the phone is mute. This is getting dumber by the minute.

suddenly newton

SpamSandwich said:

The Crazy Train just keeps chugging along.

It won't stop the newly registered accounts from repeating their appeal to emotion over and over again as if it made this case any different from the dozen other All Writs Act cases previously refused by Apple.

mtbnut

"...not making an effort would be unfair to the victims and their families." The loose definition of 'effort' is what's scary here. What type of effort needs to be mounted? Are there are any parameters to this 'effort,' or is the mere mention of the word 'terrorist' code for "by any means necessary"?

edited February 2016

anantksundaram

jungmark said:

Contacts? If he called anyone, that would show up on his cell phone records right? No need to hack the iPhone. 

I don't think that iMessages and FaceTime show up on his cell phone records, and if I am not mistaken, that may be what the unlock request is all about. Happy to be corrected if I am wrong about that.

cnocbui

'Hey, Tashfeen. We must make sure to destroy all evidence that might help the infidels before we leave.'

'Good idea, Syed. We should destroy our phones and the computer.'

(smash, thmp, thump, bang, thump)

'Syed, what about the other phone, over there, what is on it?'

'Oh that - it only has all of the contacts in the Daesh network in the US and Canada and the the plans and dates for the attack in Los Angeles.'

'Oh, that's OK then, we can leave that one.'

edited February 2016

stargazerct

It's funny, LE and the FBI seem to think the terrorist walked out of a cave a few weeks prior to the event and left a treasure trove of terrorist information on his iPhone so all his contacts could be tracked down after his death with all future attacks listed in his notes app. I heard some moron the other day hypothesis "what if he had information on his phone about a possible kidnapping"...are you serious? 

williambayer

Well, it's Obama's Justice Department/FBI, and Hillary's openly running for Obama's third term --- actually GW Bush's fifth term, when it comes to the privacy issue (the W standing for Warrantless Wiretapping) --- and, naturally, all of the republican candidates are on board with the continuing War on Privacy.

So does anyone know who I'm supposed to vote for in November if I'm AGAINST the ongoing War on Privacy?

macseeker

suddenly newton said:

SpamSandwich said:

The Crazy Train just keeps chugging along.

It won't stop the newly registered accounts from repeating their appeal to emotion over and over again as if it made this case any different from the dozen other All Writs Act cases previously refused by Apple.

Greetings suddenly newton; Yes, I'm a newbie here. I do agree with you about the newly registered accounts. Some are strange. For me, I try to base my comments on facts and logic. Emotional posts just muddy the waters and makes everyone else mad. Picking fights is also bad.

bobcat4424

SpamSandwich said:

The Crazy Train just keeps chugging along.

Something that needs to be clearly stated is that the "User" and the "owner" of the phone are one and the same according to Apple Terms of Service ---  San Bernadino County.  They owned the phone and gave it to an employee (the shooter) who signed a statement agreeing to use it only for work.  The FBI is not even asking for access to the phone.  They only want Apple to force a backup because they already have access to the cloud backups.  Apple can do this by simply pushing a phone-specific update to the OS that forces an immediate and full backup.  No back door, no one's privacy rights endangered.  But Tim Cook sees this as a form of free advertising.  The fact is that Apple has a long history of illegal activities.

stsk

Couple this with the fact that their PERSONAL phones were destroyed, which, being Android phones DO NOT HAVE Messages and Facetime, and will therefore be available from carrier records, and the fact that they DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER TO DESTROY the work phone - seriously, anyone who can tie their own shoelaces can't possibly believe there is anything of value on that phone. (which, apparently doesn't include the head of the Federal Bureau of Incompetence). The US Dept. of Justice apparently believes it's worth demolishing the entirety of personal and business privacy and laying waste to whatever advantage American companies enjoy on the world stage, in order to snoop in your underwear drawer. When you add all this up, and combine it with the fact that the Feebs told the SB authorities to change the Apple ID password in order to INTENTIONALLY make whatever data was on iCloud UNAVAILABLE, it's readily apparent that the FBI has obstructed their OWN investigation and defrauded all involved just to do exactly the opposite of what they're telling the public. Comey has continually lied about his agenda - he lied to Congress. He lied to Judge Pym. He lied to Apple. "One phone. One Time" my ass. Since every single current presidential candidate on both sides of the aisle, except Bernie Sanders, has bought in to this nonsense, whether cynically or ignorantly, Comey's obscene disregard for the truth can have real consequences. It should, I suppose, not come as a surprise to anyone who knows the history of the FBI and the Tranny-in-chief founder, (and I have great respect for transvestites other than J. Edgar Hoover) that they would act counter to the interests of the country at large, but really, how long will we allow this rogue agency to continue in its current guise?

jfc1138

anantksundaram said:

jungmark said:

Contacts? If he called anyone, that would show up on his cell phone records right? No need to hack the iPhone. 

I don't think that iMessages and FaceTime show up on his cell phone records, and if I am not mistaken, that may be what the unlock request is all about. Happy to be corrected if I am wrong about that.

FaceTime over cellular would be recorded in service records. 

spamsandwich

WilliamBayer said:

Well, it's Obama's Justice Department/FBI, and Hillary's openly running for Obama's third term --- actually GW Bush's fifth term, when it comes to the privacy issue (the W standing for Warrantless Wiretapping) --- and, naturally, all of the republican candidates are on board with the continuing War on Privacy.

So does anyone know who I'm supposed to vote for in November if I'm AGAINST the ongoing War on Privacy?

This will be (yet again) an election between bad choices. You vote for the "least bad", but really the popular vote is meaningless. It is delegates who choose the president in the Electoral College.

foggyhill

WilliamBayer said:

Well, it's Obama's Justice Department/FBI, and Hillary's openly running for Obama's third term --- actually GW Bush's fifth term, when it comes to the privacy issue (the W standing for Warrantless Wiretapping) --- and, naturally, all of the republican candidates are on board with the continuing War on Privacy.

So does anyone know who I'm supposed to vote for in November if I'm AGAINST the ongoing War on Privacy?

You vote for the lesser evil (the democrats, but only just because they're less likely to go balls to the walls and make a show out of it); it's the pandering and fear mongering that makes the same opinions expressed by the GOP even more dangerous. They can stoke even greater evils.

The FBI is not controlled by OBama (seperate since Watergate), but the DOJ is. No candidate will really change something here, including Sanders, who can say whatever he feels like (pandering in other ways) it since he's got not chance in a general election. It will always turn the same way no matter who gets elected.

spamsandwich

foggyhill said:

WilliamBayer said:

Well, it's Obama's Justice Department/FBI, and Hillary's openly running for Obama's third term --- actually GW Bush's fifth term, when it comes to the privacy issue (the W standing for Warrantless Wiretapping) --- and, naturally, all of the republican candidates are on board with the continuing War on Privacy.

So does anyone know who I'm supposed to vote for in November if I'm AGAINST the ongoing War on Privacy?

You vote for the lesser evil (the democrats, but only just because they're less likely to go balls to the walls and make a show out of it); it's the pandering and fear mongering that makes the same opinions expressed by the GOP even more dangerous. They can stoke even greater evils.

The FBI is not controlled by OBama (seperate since Watergate), but the DOJ is. No candidate will really change something here, including Sanders, who can say whatever he feels like (pandering in other ways) it since he's got not chance in a general election. It will always turn the same way no matter who gets elected.

I guarantee you it will not be Democrats taking the presidency this time around. You seem to underestimate the levels of simmering anger which have gripped the country under two incompetent administrations in a row (Bush, then Obama). Trump may in fact be a third, but I think the swing has gone away from the Left for the time being. The pendulum seems to swing Left in times of prosperity because people tend to forget where all of that "free money" suddenly came from.

edited February 2016