DOJ withdraws motion to force Apple to unlock NYC iPhone [u]

Posted:
in General Discussion edited April 2016
The U.S. Department of Justice on Friday withdrew an appeal seeking Apple's help in accessing data from a locked iPhone 5s tied to an ongoing New York drug case, saying an unnamed individual furnished the device passcode on Thursday.




Armed with the code, investigators were able to unlock an iPhone used by Jun Feng, who is being tried for drug trafficking in Brooklyn, according to a letter filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

The government respectfully submits this letter to update the Court and the parties. Yesterday evening, an individual provided the passcode to the iPhone at issue in this case. Late last night, the government used that passcode by hand and gained access to the iPhone. Accordingly, the government no longer needs Apple's assistance to unlock the iPhone, and withdraws its application.

It is unclear who provided the vital information, but court documents last year show Feng claimed to have forgotten the code.

Bloomberg also reported on the development earlier today.

In Brooklyn, FBI investigators sought Apple's technical expertise in extracting data from the encrypted iPhone 5s, which was running iOS 7. Apple denied the request, prompting the DOJ to issue an All Writs Act motion to compel the company's assistance. That motion was filed last October.

New York Magistrate Judge James Orenstein in March rejected the motion, ruling the government lacked legal authority to force any company to break its own security protocols. The DOJ subsequently submitted an appeal of Judge Orenstein's decision.

For its part, Apple last week said the FBI "utterly failed" to prove necessity in the case, which is needed to properly assert All Writs.

Today's withdrawal follows a high-profile encryption battle waged in the courts of California. The FBI in February filed an AWA motion to force Apple's help in accessing an iPhone 5c used by San Bernardino terror suspect Syed Rizwan Farook. Like the Brooklyn case, Apple resisted the order, saying FBI requests to create a passcode workaround threatened the security of millions of iOS devices around the world.

Arguments on both sides were rendered moot late last month when an unknown outside party presented the FBI with an alternate means of accessing Farook's device. Prosecutors ultimately withdrew the AWA motion.

Apple's insistence on keeping its encryption technology secure sparked wide debate on how best to balance privacy rights with national security interests.

The Brooklyn case was being watched closely by industry experts as the hardware involved was more advanced than the iPhone 5c cracked in San Bernardino. In particular, iPhone 5s was the first device to incorporate a Secure Enclave, a security coprocessor embedded into Apple's A7 SoC. It is unclear if Apple would have been forced to crack the Secure Enclave, however, as Feng's iPhone was running iOS 7. Apple is technically capable of safely extracting data from iOS versions below iOS 8.

«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 37
     They want Apple to cut them a master key. 
    nouserjbdragonremotizercornchip
  • Reply 2 of 37
    This is almost getting comical.
    nouseranantksundaramcornchipicoco3
  • Reply 3 of 37
    Isn't it funny that once these cases look like they're going to fail, someone, somewhere pops up and is able to obtain access to the device.

    This speaks volumes to either the lack of basic investigation by the government, or that the government is trying to weaken security through legal precedent.
    kent909baconstangSolimwhitecalibrakkennouseranantksundaramjustadcomicsjbdragon
  • Reply 4 of 37
    kent909kent909 Posts: 708member
    apple ][ said:
    slurpy said:
    When one wants to get their daily dose of nasty filth, your posts never disappoint.
    Yes, not liking mass murdering terrorists and wanting to stop them using common sense methods is surely a nasty, filthy thought. The horror.


    Yes, nothing more common sense than fantasizing  about cutting off fingers and such. On one had we have terrorists thinking of ways they can kill us and on the other hand we have their intended victims thinking of ways to kill them. All the while the rest of us have to live in this world of violence and mayhem you all are waging against each other.  You are all so obsessed that you don't see the collateral damage you leave in your wake. And each and every day we get to wake up less safe than the day before wondering what happened to our liberty.
    edited April 2016 fotoformatbaconstangmwhitecaliwilliamlondonbrakkenjustadcomicswetlander
  • Reply 5 of 37
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,437member
    kent909 said:
    Yes, nothing more common sense than fantasizing  about cutting off fingers and such.
    I see nothing unreasonable about that, and the law should be changed to accommodate such circumstances.

    Scenario: A known terrorist who has just murdered 37 people is captured alive, and refuses to provide the unlock code for their phone, no matter how nicely you ask them.

    I can only assume that Slurpy would politely ask the terrorist to unlock their phone, and the terrorist would simply say no, and Slurpy would say "ok, sir" and proceed to order coffee for the terrorist, while the terrorist continues stalling, and another attack from a connected cell happens next week, where a whole bunch of people are killed.

    My method would gain easy access to the terrorist's phone, and countless lives would be saved in exchange for some terrorist losing a finger tip or two or three, big deal.



    edited April 2016 cornchip
  • Reply 6 of 37
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,153member
    What a waste of time and money. They wanted Apple to make a master key and failed. Too bad Apple cannot sue the government for legal fees.
    calibrakkenjustadcomicsjbdragoncornchip
  • Reply 7 of 37
    kent909kent909 Posts: 708member
    apple ][ said:
    kent909 said:
    Yes, nothing more common sense than fantasizing  about cutting off fingers and such.
    I see nothing unreasonable about that, and the law should be changed to accommodate such circumstances.

    Scenario: A known terrorist who has just murdered 37 people is captured alive, and refuses to provide the unlock code for their phone, no matter how nicely you ask them.

    I can only assume that Slurpy would politely ask the terrorist to unlock their phone, and the terrorist would simply say no, and Slurpy would say "ok, sir" and proceed to order coffee for the terrorist, while the terrorist continues stalling, and another attack from a connected cell happens next week, where a whole bunch of people are killed.

    My method would gain easy access to the terrorist's phone, and countless lives would be saved in exchange for some terrorist losing a finger tip or two or three, big deal.



    apple ][ said:
    kent909 said:
    Yes, nothing more common sense than fantasizing  about cutting off fingers and such.
    I see nothing unreasonable about that, and the law should be changed to accommodate such circumstances.

    Scenario: A known terrorist who has just murdered 37 people is captured alive, and refuses to provide the unlock code for their phone, no matter how nicely you ask them.

    I can only assume that Slurpy would politely ask the terrorist to unlock their phone, and the terrorist would simply say no, and Slurpy would say "ok, sir" and proceed to order coffee for the terrorist, while the terrorist continues stalling, and another attack from a connected cell happens next week, where a whole bunch of people are killed.

    My method would gain easy access to the terrorist's phone, and countless lives would be saved in exchange for some terrorist losing a finger tip or two or three, big deal.



    Your sounding a lot like your idol. 
    baconstangnasseraemwhitecalisingularitybrakkenjustadcomicsnolamacguypscooter63
  • Reply 8 of 37
    wonkothesanewonkothesane Posts: 1,344member
    I've always believed that Apple devices are magical: FBI can't get into S Bernardo o phone? Boom! Magically they find a solution in the last second. Can't get into next phone? Boom! An "unknown individual" again comes to resume last second. Truly magical. 
    mwhitecalicornchip
  • Reply 9 of 37
    apple ][ said:
    I bet that the passcode was really simple.

    The iPhone that the dead terrorist in the previous case used cost considerably more than a million dollars to get into. That's crazy, but it would be much cheaper for tax payers, basically free, if any terrorists are caught alive, and if they refuse to unlock their phones.

    You can simply demand the unlock code, and if they don't comply, you confidently proceed by cutting off one of their finger tips. Then you ask them again for the unlock code, and you check their answer right away on the phone, to verify if it is legit. If it's not, then you simply continue to chop off various parts until you are able to get into their phone. I am pretty sure that the vast majority of people would instantly grant access reasonably quickly. And some crazy people claims that torture doesn't work? What bollocks. 
    Are you sure that you are not D-T in reality?
    What you are proposing is very illegal and any evidence produced would be breaking the 5th ammendment. Go on Donald, please tell us how you are going to get that repealled?
    Thankfully, I only visit the USA and may stop coming with my Tourist Dollars if DT is elected. The goings on in North Carolina and Missippii are but the tip of the iceberg and a foretaste of the future. I'm sure that it won't be long before the good ole boys start bringing back segregation.
    The N.H. slogan, 'Live Free or Die' is starting to look a bit quaint isn't it?

    baconstangjustadcomics
  • Reply 10 of 37
    The Department of Justice and FBI are such liars. They are also lazy - as described by Apple in its arguments.
    brakkenbaconstangjbdragoncornchipicoco3
  • Reply 11 of 37
    joogabahjoogabah Posts: 117member
    apple ][ said:
    I bet that the passcode was really simple.

    The iPhone that the dead terrorist in the previous case used cost considerably more than a million dollars to get into. That's crazy, but it would be much cheaper for tax payers, basically free, if any terrorists are caught alive, and if they refuse to unlock their phones.

    You can simply demand the unlock code, and if they don't comply, you confidently proceed by cutting off one of their finger tips. Then you ask them again for the unlock code, and you check their answer right away on the phone, to verify if it is legit. If it's not, then you simply continue to chop off various parts until you are able to get into their phone. I am pretty sure that the vast majority of people would instantly grant access reasonably quickly. And some crazy people claims that torture doesn't work? What bollocks. 
    Remember when America used to stand for certain ideals? Guess we were just hypocrites all along. How does one keep a population from being dumbed down to the point that it accepts cruelty as a legitimate form of law enforcement? Why would anyone ever consider it in their interest to promote this kind of precedent? What are we fighting to defend if we end up living under a regime that terrorizes and tortures its own people? I remember universal opposition to these methods under any conditions as recently as the 90s. It was a central moral justification for opposition to other political systems. Now we can understand totalitarianism in socialist countries not as a natural and inevitable outcome of a planned economy, but as a reaction to an existential threat from external hostile forces. Because we do it too. Capitalism has in no way protected us from the loss of civil liberties. That was just a lie they used as propaganda and only until they rid themselves of the Soviet Union. Now that they think communism isn't so much of a threat, the mask comes off. But that's kind of stupid, don't you think? They're just setting in motion the same determinants that led to communist revolutions in the 20th century. And this time we have information technology that can exceed the usefulness of money in determining the allocation of goods and services. Their time is over, and they know it, which is why they are spying on their own populations and framing muslims to curtail civil liberties.
    williamlondonjbdragonpacificfilmnolamacguycornchip
  • Reply 12 of 37
    The crypto wars have been going on for a long time. These latest moves by the FBI are an attempt to force companies to implement a software version of the failed "Clipper Chip," providing a law enforcement back door into every device's encryption. It didn't fly then and it won't fly now. If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption.
    baconstangjbdragoncornchip
  • Reply 13 of 37
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 1,886member
    apple ][ said:
    I bet that the passcode was really simple.

    The iPhone that the dead terrorist in the previous case used cost considerably more than a million dollars to get into. That's crazy, but it would be much cheaper for tax payers, basically free, if any terrorists are caught alive, and if they refuse to unlock their phones.

    You can simply demand the unlock code, and if they don't comply, you confidently proceed by cutting off one of their finger tips. Then you ask them again for the unlock code, and you check their answer right away on the phone, to verify if it is legit. If it's not, then you simply continue to chop off various parts until you are able to get into their phone. I am pretty sure that the vast majority of people would instantly grant access reasonably quickly. And some crazy people claims that torture doesn't work? What bollocks. 
    Why you think America is haven for criminals ? Any torture methods should be freely allowed to employ by law long as person is clearly proven engaged in terrorists and criminals act hurting mass.
    edited April 2016
  • Reply 14 of 37
    dewmedewme Posts: 1,999member
    Wow, there are some seriously disturbing posts in here. I'll just assume these individuals are Saudi nationals on temporary visas in the US. Time to go home.

    In the NY case somebody supplied the passcode for the phone. The phone's security was not "cracked." 
    justadcomicsjbdragonnolamacguy
  • Reply 15 of 37
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,007member
    joogabah said:
    apple ][ said:
    I bet that the passcode was really simple.

    The iPhone that the dead terrorist in the previous case used cost considerably more than a million dollars to get into. That's crazy, but it would be much cheaper for tax payers, basically free, if any terrorists are caught alive, and if they refuse to unlock their phones.

    You can simply demand the unlock code, and if they don't comply, you confidently proceed by cutting off one of their finger tips. Then you ask them again for the unlock code, and you check their answer right away on the phone, to verify if it is legit. If it's not, then you simply continue to chop off various parts until you are able to get into their phone. I am pretty sure that the vast majority of people would instantly grant access reasonably quickly. And some crazy people claims that torture doesn't work? What bollocks. 
    Remember when America used to stand for certain ideals? Guess we were just hypocrites all along. How does one keep a population from being dumbed down to the point that it accepts cruelty as a legitimate form of law enforcement? Why would anyone ever consider it in their interest to promote this kind of precedent? What are we fighting to defend if we end up living under a regime that terrorizes and tortures its own people? I remember universal opposition to these methods under any conditions as recently as the 90s. It was a central moral justification for opposition to other political systems. Now we can understand totalitarianism in socialist countries not as a natural and inevitable outcome of a planned economy, but as a reaction to an existential threat from external hostile forces. Because we do it too. Capitalism has in no way protected us from the loss of civil liberties. That was just a lie they used as propaganda and only until they rid themselves of the Soviet Union. Now that they think communism isn't so much of a threat, the mask comes off. But that's kind of stupid, don't you think? They're just setting in motion the same determinants that led to communist revolutions in the 20th century. And this time we have information technology that can exceed the usefulness of money in determining the allocation of goods and services. Their time is over, and they know it, which is why they are spying on their own populations and framing muslims to curtail civil liberties.
    Please tell me when the American government stood for those ideals that you so lovingly think we used to have. The American government at various levels supported lynching, mass detainment of individuals and entire societies it felt were at risk to "our way of life," waterboarding of foreigners who they took all legal rights away from by calling them terrorists, illegal wire tapping, false incrimination and destruction of people they labeled communists (freedom of speech is allowed by the first amendment and McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover violated this and many other laws), and a whole host of other non-American ideals. Torture has been used since the dawn of time to force people to talk and no matter what some people say, it's still in use in the US and around the world. It's, unfortunately, in our DNA and humans might be the only species that engage in torture or its own kind as well as of other species. It doesn't say much for us does it.

    As for @apple ]['s comment, it brought a smile to my face because I saw it as being a little sarcastic but I also saw it as something we know US government organizations have been involved with, maybe not to the point of actually cutting off fingers but getting close to that. There have been Americans who have done that and not just in the movies. 

    Do I agree with what @apple ][ suggests? Absolutely not. But I would like to see more honesty coming out of the US government especially since I'm a law-abiding, tax-paying citizen. I want the FBI to tell the truth about what they're doing. I want to know who they used to hack into the iPhone 5c. I want to know what they found. What I don't want to know is all the half-truths and blatant lies and misdirections being spewed by Comey and others. They demand to know the truth, so do we. 
    baconstangpscooter63
  • Reply 16 of 37
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,819member
    apple ][ said:
    kent909 said:
    Yes, nothing more common sense than fantasizing  about cutting off fingers and such.
    I see nothing unreasonable about that, and the law should be changed to accommodate such circumstances.

    Scenario: A known terrorist who has just murdered 37 people is captured alive, and refuses to provide the unlock code for their phone, no matter how nicely you ask them.

    I can only assume that Slurpy would politely ask the terrorist to unlock their phone, and the terrorist would simply say no, and Slurpy would say "ok, sir" and proceed to order coffee for the terrorist, while the terrorist continues stalling, and another attack from a connected cell happens next week, where a whole bunch of people are killed.

    My method would gain easy access to the terrorist's phone, and countless lives would be saved in exchange for some terrorist losing a finger tip or two or three, big deal.



    A much more likely scenario would be the terrorist in custody has the location and detonation codes for a nuke in a major U.S. city. How far would those who oppose “enhanced interrogation” techniques go in getting that information out of the terrorist? Would they be willing to sacrifice millions of lives to preserve their ideology and sense of righteousness?
  • Reply 17 of 37
    irelandireland Posts: 17,552member
    This is almost getting comical.
    Almost. It's messed up how much your own government is against you. Very worrying.
    tallest skil
  • Reply 18 of 37
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,509member
    lkrupp said:
    apple ][ said:
    I see nothing unreasonable about that, and the law should be changed to accommodate such circumstances.

    Scenario: A known terrorist who has just murdered 37 people is captured alive, and refuses to provide the unlock code for their phone, no matter how nicely you ask them.

    I can only assume that Slurpy would politely ask the terrorist to unlock their phone, and the terrorist would simply say no, and Slurpy would say "ok, sir" and proceed to order coffee for the terrorist, while the terrorist continues stalling, and another attack from a connected cell happens next week, where a whole bunch of people are killed.

    My method would gain easy access to the terrorist's phone, and countless lives would be saved in exchange for some terrorist losing a finger tip or two or three, big deal.



    A much more likely scenario would be the terrorist in custody has the location and detonation codes for a nuke in a major U.S. city. How far would those who oppose “enhanced interrogation” techniques go in getting that information out of the terrorist? Would they be willing to sacrifice millions of lives to preserve their ideology and sense of righteousness?
    Nice apocalyptic fantasy you have going there. I wish you guys would stop using the cute little nickname "nuke" like they're pieces in some game. Filthy imagination from bad mental hygiene, just like your "enemies." Or just bad hygiene period.

    Anyway, the simple rule of political justice is that you reap as you sow. If you approve of torture to insure your own safety, you give permission for torture to be used against you or anyone close to you. Certainly you don't earn the right to save your own ass.
    baconstangnolamacguywetlander
  • Reply 19 of 37
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,509member

    ireland said:
    This is almost getting comical.
    Almost. It's messed up how much your own government is against you. Very worrying.
    Also worrying is how many bootlickers like Apple ][ who have sprung up to accept and bow to government police and military authority. 

    Trump is playing these guys for chumps, but even worse is that Cruz is dead serious about being one of them. 
    singularitybaconstangnolamacguy
  • Reply 20 of 37
    This is almost getting comical.
    Almost?
    frac
Sign In or Register to comment.