The FBI already has what it really wanted, enough public support for the Congress to make some changes in the law.
Including our very own Californian, Senator Dianne Feinstein. She has been a supporter of NSA's illegal activities and now this bill. I wonder if she will ever run for office again; there are just too many Silicon Valley people mad at her.
Incompetence. The FBI should be forced to pay Apple's legal bills.
Yup. And given what Apple would have paid its legal team, the FBI may have to borrow the money from Apple (just kidding). And they may be forced to buy Apple phones from now on.
I see a lot of people in this thread are going down the line of there is no way to cracking the encryption and it's a face saving exercise (plus a few added conspiracy theories thrown in for good measure) and not the potentially more worrying thought that they actually have a way in now.
It's probably that security flaw to unlock the phone by asking siri what time it is, then trying to add a new clock then pressing the home button. Just go to youtube and you will see it.
Keep telling yourself that. It helps you sleep at night to think the government is just 'stupid' and not actually the maniacal, evil, co-opted entity that it truly is today.
I think it's funny how so many people believe the FBI is lying...what if they're not? What if they have found their way in to the phone? Doesn't that bring everyone's nightmare of privacy loss to life?
Who's to say this isn't a move by Apple to save it's face and that they haven't gone to the FBI and made a deal behind closed doors? Does anyone really believe that Apple has made the FBI do a public about-face and leave with their tail between their legs?
It's probably that security flaw to unlock the phone by asking siri what time it is, then trying to add a new clock then pressing the home button. Just go to youtube and you will see it.
That flaw where in using the Home button to go home the user inadvertently unlocked his phone using TouchID? That flaw?
When they thought things were going their way, the FBI wanted to set a precedent to use the All Writs Act. Now they look like they are afraid that the precedent to be set would be that they cannot use the AWA to increase their snooping powers.I wonder if the outside party is the NSA. Richard Clarke had been saying that the NSA had the capability, but the FBI did not request them to do so, since the FBI wanted a legal precedent to expand the use of the AWA.
No, the FBI did not ask (or the NSA refused) because anything the FBI does can be subject to a lawsuit, but the NSA doesn't ever want to be in court to reveal its methods. So the FBI and the NSA generally do not work together and the NSA won't share anything with the FBI. Don't know whether the NSA shares with the CIA.
The FBI already has what it really wanted, enough public support for the Congress to make some changes in the law.
I don't think they have enough public support to get the legislation they want. In fact as people got more educated about the whole issue of breaking phone encryption, the more they sided with Apple. Looks more like a face-saving, shall I say it?, backdoor out of the corner that they stupidly painted themselves in.
Actually, I think the general public has sided with the FBI. Maybe not by the participants of this site, but in general outside of the extreme Left and extreme Right, I think most Americans are so scared of terrorism, even though it has taken less American lives than ladder accidents and FAR LESS American lives than guns, that they think Apple should have opened up the phone. They simply don't understand the overall implications of that. Americans are far too willing to give up some freedoms to protect themselves from a terrorist attack, especially when they think that the freedoms that have to be given up won't affect them personally.
And today's attack in Belgium is not going to help things.
Keep telling yourself that. It helps you sleep at night to think the government is just 'stupid' and not actually the maniacal, evil, co-opted entity that it truly is today.
Incompetence and being evil aren't mutually exclusive.
When they thought things were going their way, the FBI wanted to set a precedent to use the All Writs Act. Now they look like they are afraid that the precedent to be set would be that they cannot use the AWA to increase their snooping powers.I wonder if the outside party is the NSA. Richard Clarke had been saying that the NSA had the capability, but the FBI did not request them to do so, since the FBI wanted a legal precedent to expand the use of the AWA.
No, the FBI did not ask (or the NSA refused) because anything the FBI does can be subject to a lawsuit, but the NSA doesn't ever want to be in court to reveal its methods. So the FBI and the NSA generally do not work together and the NSA won't share anything with the FBI. Don't know whether the NSA shares with the CIA.
NSA is supposed to pass domestic intelligence to the FBI and foreign intelligence to the CIA. The NSA does not really help out with investigations. In fact, it is not their job to crack phones for the FBI or CIA, though I am sure they would at times. These are distinct agencies with their own unique mandates and ambitions. The NSA is part of DOD while FBI is part of the DOJ. We are too compartmentalized for our own good. I see this in private industry as well. Each agency is trying to build its own tower of babel. And there are not 3 agencies, but more like 12 intelligence agencies. The reason for 9/11 was not lack of relevant information, but lack of
cooperation between CIA and FBI.
No, the FBI did not ask (or the NSA refused) because anything the FBI does can be subject to a lawsuit, but the NSA doesn't ever want to be in court to reveal its methods. So the FBI and the NSA generally do not work together and the NSA won't share anything with the FBI. Don't know whether the NSA shares with the CIA.
NSA is supposed to pass domestic intelligence to the FBI and foreign intelligence to the CIA. The NSA does not really help out with investigations. In fact, it is not their job to crack phones for the FBI or CIA, though I am sure they would at times. These are distinct agencies with their own unique mandates and ambitions. The NSA is part of DOD while FBI is part of the DOJ. We are too compartmentalized for our own good. I see this in private industry as well. Each agency is trying to build its own tower of babel. And there are not 3 agencies, but more like 12 intelligence agencies. The reason for 9/11 was not lack of relevant information, but lack of
cooperation between CIA and FBI.
There may be a lot of truth in both of the above quotes. Inter-departmental friction and the need for secrecy must be playing a part in the encryption tussle. Could it be that the FBI is tired of saying "pretty please" or "uncle" and having to roll over and have their belly tickled by agencies like the NSA who have the powerful forensic tools to prise devices open for them.
Or could it be that this was a government attempt to "fob off" the onus, responsibility for and cost of decrypting devices on to the manufacturers themselves, who are considered to be making a pretty penny off the latest consumer craze (hence their choice of Apple as first target, given their monstrous profit share of the mobile device market)?
I see a lot of people in this thread are going down the line of there is no way to cracking the encryption and it's a face saving exercise (plus a few added conspiracy theories thrown in for good measure) and not the potentially more worrying thought that they actually have a way in now.
Either you don't know what you're talking about or we don't know what you're talking about. I don't recall anyone here saying that the "encryption" can't be broken. On this iPhone. So long as the data is still in the iPhone, entering the correct passcode is all that is needed to break the "encryption".
But before that can happen, one has to defeat the 10 wrong guess and data gets deleted and the built in time delay before entering another passcode, with each wrong guess. After ten wrong guesses, it's over an hour wait before one can enter another passcode. These security features are built into iOS. What the FBI wanted in their court order was for Apple to create an iOS without these features (plus add in a feature that will allow the use of a computer to enter the passcode) (govtiOS) and load it into the iPhone. The FBI was going to break the" encryption" using brute force in their own lab once they get the iPhone back with the "govtiOS" loaded. Breaking the "encryption" by entering all possible combinations of the passcode is easy once this is done. But it may take awhile if it's a 6 character alpha numeric passcode (Which I believe is the default for iOS 9). It could take years. But if it was changed back to a simple 4 digit numeric passcode. It would then only take hours. But it may also be an 8 or more character alpha numeric passcode. In which case, it may take centuries.
Which brings up the question as to what the FBI was really after from Apple. If this iPhone has a 6 character alpha numeric passcode (highly likely since it may have been protecting private medical data), then what use is the data if it's going to take years or centuries of guessing at the passcode? If you read the court order, all the FBI wanted from Apple was a way to allow a brute force attack. No where it is mention that Apple was to help in breaking the "encryption" on the data in the iPhone or help in determining the passcode. What the FBI really wanted as a legal precedent that they can use the next time they need a tech company to create special spyware, to spy on their own customers, on behalf of the FBI.
So far no one is saying the the FBI found a third party that could actually break the "encryption" and provide the data, un-encrypted, without guessing at the passcode. Just that they may have a way of allowing the FBI to brute force the passcode without having Apple create and load in a special iOS. But the FBI don't really care about the data in this iPhone, they just needed a way out of this case as it looks like Apple was going to win this case and a legal precedent would end up in the hands of Apple and all tech companies.
I wouldn't be surprise if Apple dropped the hint to the FBI that this third party could provide what the FBI wanted Apple to do. All along, the FBI have been claiming that only Apple can provide what the FBI needed from them. And thus a court order using the AWA was issued. If Apple could show in court that there are other third parties that could possibly provide the same, then the courts would rule in favor of Apple, as the FBI had not explored all other possibilities before resorting to the use of the AWA to force Apple into breaking into their own device.
Comments
Including our very own Californian, Senator Dianne Feinstein. She has been a supporter of NSA's illegal activities and now this bill. I wonder if she will ever run for office again; there are just too many Silicon Valley people mad at her.
Yup. And given what Apple would have paid its legal team, the FBI may have to borrow the money from Apple (just kidding). And they may be forced to buy Apple phones from now on.
Who's to say this isn't a move by Apple to save it's face and that they haven't gone to the FBI and made a deal behind closed doors? Does anyone really believe that Apple has made the FBI do a public about-face and leave with their tail between their legs?
Actually, I think the general public has sided with the FBI. Maybe not by the participants of this site, but in general outside of the extreme Left and extreme Right, I think most Americans are so scared of terrorism, even though it has taken less American lives than ladder accidents and FAR LESS American lives than guns, that they think Apple should have opened up the phone. They simply don't understand the overall implications of that. Americans are far too willing to give up some freedoms to protect themselves from a terrorist attack, especially when they think that the freedoms that have to be given up won't affect them personally.
And today's attack in Belgium is not going to help things.
What a bunch of "lying dormant cyber pathogens" (or words to that effect) they've turned out to be!
Or could it be that this was a government attempt to "fob off" the onus, responsibility for and cost of decrypting devices on to the manufacturers themselves, who are considered to be making a pretty penny off the latest consumer craze (hence their choice of Apple as first target, given their monstrous profit share of the mobile device market)?
But before that can happen, one has to defeat the 10 wrong guess and data gets deleted and the built in time delay before entering another passcode, with each wrong guess. After ten wrong guesses, it's over an hour wait before one can enter another passcode. These security features are built into iOS. What the FBI wanted in their court order was for Apple to create an iOS without these features (plus add in a feature that will allow the use of a computer to enter the passcode) (govtiOS) and load it into the iPhone. The FBI was going to break the" encryption" using brute force in their own lab once they get the iPhone back with the "govtiOS" loaded. Breaking the "encryption" by entering all possible combinations of the passcode is easy once this is done. But it may take awhile if it's a 6 character alpha numeric passcode (Which I believe is the default for iOS 9). It could take years. But if it was changed back to a simple 4 digit numeric passcode. It would then only take hours. But it may also be an 8 or more character alpha numeric passcode. In which case, it may take centuries.
http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/
Which brings up the question as to what the FBI was really after from Apple. If this iPhone has a 6 character alpha numeric passcode (highly likely since it may have been protecting private medical data), then what use is the data if it's going to take years or centuries of guessing at the passcode? If you read the court order, all the FBI wanted from Apple was a way to allow a brute force attack. No where it is mention that Apple was to help in breaking the "encryption" on the data in the iPhone or help in determining the passcode. What the FBI really wanted as a legal precedent that they can use the next time they need a tech company to create special spyware, to spy on their own customers, on behalf of the FBI.
So far no one is saying the the FBI found a third party that could actually break the "encryption" and provide the data, un-encrypted, without guessing at the passcode. Just that they may have a way of allowing the FBI to brute force the passcode without having Apple create and load in a special iOS. But the FBI don't really care about the data in this iPhone, they just needed a way out of this case as it looks like Apple was going to win this case and a legal precedent would end up in the hands of Apple and all tech companies.
I wouldn't be surprise if Apple dropped the hint to the FBI that this third party could provide what the FBI wanted Apple to do. All along, the FBI have been claiming that only Apple can provide what the FBI needed from them. And thus a court order using the AWA was issued. If Apple could show in court that there are other third parties that could possibly provide the same, then the courts would rule in favor of Apple, as the FBI had not explored all other possibilities before resorting to the use of the AWA to force Apple into breaking into their own device.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fbi-might-hack-iphone-without-221622200.html
EDIT: OH BOY I SURE AM HAPPY THAT GIFS DON’T ANIMATE ANYMORE