Turkish authorities seeking Apple's help to unlock iPhone 4s found on assassin

Posted:
in iPhone edited December 2016
Following the assassination of the Russian ambassador to Turkey, Apple has reportedly been asked to unlock the shooter's iPhone 4s recovered after the gunfight for more information regarding the man, and insight on his colleagues.




According to MacReports, the iPhone 4s owned by the killer is protected by a four-digit passcode, and will be scavenged for potential co-conspirators to the shooting that garnered international attention, and drew parallels by media to the start of World War I. Reportedly, attempts to penetrate the device have been unsuccessful by local law enforcement.

It is unknown what path Apple will take regarding the request, but given history the company is expected to refuse to help the situation beyond providing whatever resides in any iCloud backup. Also unknown is what version of the iOS the device is running.

Regardless, the Russian government is reportedly sending a technical team to assist with the unlock effort.

The request on the surface is similar to that made by the FBI demanding that Apple assist in penetrating the San Bernardino shooters' county-owned iPhone 5c. Neither phone contains Apple's "secure enclave" which debuted with the iPhone 5s A7 chip.

Ultimately, the FBI obtained the help of a third party at exorbitant cost, thought to be Israeli company Cellebrite, but also rumored to be a vague group of "grey-hat" hackers. No useful data linking the San Bernardino shooters to other suspects or deeper ties to terrorist organizations was discovered.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 36
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,862member
    Why wouldn't this assassin wipe his phone right before the attack or make sure there was nothing on it that could lead him to anyone else?
    jony0
  • Reply 2 of 36
    Turkey should be vetting its police officers better. Anything to distract attention away from them being partly to blame for this. I hope Russia makes them their B.
    ronntallest skil
  • Reply 3 of 36
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,329member
    Why would Apple refuse to help?
    This was clearly an inhumane act and it is possibly they can help.
    Apples conflict with the FBI had to do with a demand to help, possibly backed up by the law.
    This is a request, if I understand correctly, so Apple will help I think.
    edited December 2016 tallest skil
  • Reply 4 of 36
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,329member
    tyler82 said:
    Turkey should be vetting its police officers better. Anything to distract attention away from them being partly to blame for this. I hope Russia makes them their B.
    U.S. soldiers turned to the 'dark side' and killed 'their own', so it seem this can happen to any country.
    But it might be a good idea to investigate whether it was (gross) negligence on the recruiting and/or psychological support part.
    hike1272
  • Reply 5 of 36
    Apple must tread carefully with this request from Turkey. While Apple instinct is to deny requests for such technical help if it threatens customer privacy or privacy policy in general, Turkey and other repressive and intolerant governments are looking for reasons and excuses to excise threats to their totalitarian tendencies. This would be the perfect feign for bringing that hammer down on Apple.

    I believe that in this case and others similar I am aware of, Apple should provide expertise to authorities. This could take place within Apple approved guidelines and would be easier to safely and securely roll out with an Apple designated 'go team' that would assist on a case by case basis, guided by Apple policy. The team would come in, privately solve the problem and move on.

    This need is going to continue to increase, Apple has a responsibility to provide help at times and at others, to hold firm.

    If Apple does not develop this flexibility, governments will find ways to shut them down, with out thinking twice, al la Chinese limitation of several tech companies.
  • Reply 6 of 36
    I think it may be time for Apple to create a standalone division with a team of ethicists, security experts, and lawyers that can act as ombudspersons, to deal with what will surely be a barrage of such requests that are starting to come down the pike from the world over.

    I cannot obviously think of all the organizational structures and process for such a group, but I would envisage it as being mostly funded by Apple, and will probably have a separate board and oversight process. I am sure better minds than mine can think up more sensible and substantive structures that simultaneously combine integrity, respect for privacy, and the ability to deal with the case-by-case read-offs between privacy and security.

    I think it would be real innovation, and one that shareholders would gladly support. Think of it as part of the ecosystem that Apple offers. It would not be that different from Apple's investments in environmental and supplier responsibility. Think of it as investments in "security and privacy responsibility" that makes the company's products and services more attractive in the consumers' minds.
    edited December 2016 apple jockey
  • Reply 7 of 36
    The iPhone 4 is easily cracked according to stories that have appeared here previously. Even the iPhone 5 is easily cracked.
  • Reply 8 of 36
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,329member
    I think it may be time for Apple to create a standalone division with a team of ethicists, security experts, and lawyers that can act as ombudspersons, to deal with what will surely be a barrage of such requests that are starting to come down the pike from the world over.

    I cannot obviously think of all the organizational structures and process for such a group, but I would envisage it as being mostly funded by Apple, and will probably have a separate board and oversight process. I am sure better minds than mine can think up more sensible and substantive structures that simultaneously combine integrity, respect for privacy, and the ability to deal with the case-by-case read-offs between privacy and security.

    I think it would be real innovation, and one that shareholders would gladly support. Think of it as part of the ecosystem that Apple offers. It would not be that different from Apple's investments in environmental and supplier responsibility. Think of it as investments in "security and privacy responsibility" that makes the company's products and services more attractive in the consumers' minds.
    Actually, this is a good idea, maybe even make it possible for other companies, with similar request, to join.
  • Reply 9 of 36
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,355member
    Soli said:
    Why wouldn't this assassin wipe his phone right before the attack or make sure there was nothing on it that could lead him to anyone else?
    Why wouldn't an assassin load his phone up with false and misleading information that would cast suspicion on his enemies? 
    I think it may be time for Apple to create a standalone division with a team of ethicists, security experts, and lawyers that can act as ombudspersons, to deal with what will surely be a barrage of such requests that are starting to come down the pike from the world over.

    I cannot obviously think of all the organizational structures and process for such a group, but I would envisage it as being mostly funded by Apple, and will probably have a separate board and oversight process. I am sure better minds than mine can think up more sensible and substantive structures that simultaneously combine integrity, respect for privacy, and the ability to deal with the case-by-case read-offs between privacy and security.

    I think it would be real innovation, and one that shareholders would gladly support. Think of it as part of the ecosystem that Apple offers. It would not be that different from Apple's investments in environmental and supplier responsibility. Think of it as investments in "security and privacy responsibility" that makes the company's products and services more attractive in the consumers' minds.
    Time for Apple and Tim Cook to sign the Sokovia Accords. 

    tyler82 said:
    Turkey should be vetting its police officers better. Anything to distract attention away from them being partly to blame for this. I hope Russia makes them their B.
    In Soviet Russia, your B finds *you*.
    king editor the grate
  • Reply 10 of 36
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,447member
    I think it may be time for Apple to create a standalone division with a team of ethicists, security experts, and lawyers that can act as ombudspersons, to deal with what will surely be a barrage of such requests that are starting to come down the pike from the world over.

    I cannot obviously think of all the organizational structures and process for such a group, but I would envisage it as being mostly funded by Apple, and will probably have a separate board and oversight process. I am sure better minds than mine can think up more sensible and substantive structures that simultaneously combine integrity, respect for privacy, and the ability to deal with the case-by-case read-offs between privacy and security.

    I think it would be real innovation, and one that shareholders would gladly support. Think of it as part of the ecosystem that Apple offers. It would not be that different from Apple's investments in environmental and supplier responsibility. Think of it as investments in "security and privacy responsibility" that makes the company's products and services more attractive in the consumers' minds.
    No.  Because no matter where you draw the line, there's always pressure to move it.   While this was a terrible act, is the life of the Russian ambassador really any more valuable than the life of Mr. Smith down the street who was gunned down by a crazy person who then killed himself?   So then would Apple have to break the phone of any murderer anywhere?   And then it becomes, "well we need to get into this phone because we think this person we arrested is actually a terrorist and we think they're planning something."  So then the phones of any dissidents or immigrants or members of political opposition parties are up for grabs by the authorities, who may be doing nothing more than fishing.   

    The fact is that if Apple is telling the truth, they have no way of breaking into the phone, EXCEPT for downloading a new OS to the phone that doesn't have a limit on the number of password tries.   But aside from that, there's supposedly nothing they can really do.    

    Rather than going after Apple, let the authorities go to their own courts and get permission to force the phone's owner to use their finger.    If their own courts deny that because it's an infringement of civil liberties or constitutional rights, then why should Apple help?

    In New York City, the Manhattan D.A. has several hundred phones he wants Apple to break into.   Where does it stop?  If there isn't any other evidence tying someone to a crime, then they've got a very weak case.   And if there is other evidence, let them convict on that.  
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 11 of 36
    Hahaha a 4S?? thats wack B.
    christophb
  • Reply 12 of 36
    anomeanome Posts: 1,270member
    As difficult as it might be, Apple needs to be consistent about this. They should offer the same assistance they offered the FBI in the San Bernardino case, and no more. It's more complicated since this isn't American law enforcement, but a foreign government, and it involves the murder of a high profile diplomat, but they have to remain consistent lest it become a slippery slope.

    Also, why aren't the FBI offering to assist with the solution they have to the San Bernardino phone? It would earn them and the US government a lot of goodwill in both Turkey and Russia to at least offer to help out.
    baconstang
  • Reply 13 of 36
    zoetmb said:
    I think it may be time for Apple to create a standalone division with a team of ethicists, security experts, and lawyers that can act as ombudspersons, to deal with what will surely be a barrage of such requests that are starting to come down the pike from the world over.

    I cannot obviously think of all the organizational structures and process for such a group, but I would envisage it as being mostly funded by Apple, and will probably have a separate board and oversight process. I am sure better minds than mine can think up more sensible and substantive structures that simultaneously combine integrity, respect for privacy, and the ability to deal with the case-by-case read-offs between privacy and security.

    I think it would be real innovation, and one that shareholders would gladly support. Think of it as part of the ecosystem that Apple offers. It would not be that different from Apple's investments in environmental and supplier responsibility. Think of it as investments in "security and privacy responsibility" that makes the company's products and services more attractive in the consumers' minds.
    No.  Because no matter where you draw the line, there's always pressure to move it.   While this was a terrible act, is the life of the Russian ambassador really any more valuable than the life of Mr. Smith down the street who was gunned down by a crazy person who then killed himself?   So then would Apple have to break the phone of any murderer anywhere?   And then it becomes, "well we need to get into this phone because we think this person we arrested is actually a terrorist and we think they're planning something."  So then the phones of any dissidents or immigrants or members of political opposition parties are up for grabs by the authorities, who may be doing nothing more than fishing.   

    The fact is that if Apple is telling the truth, they have no way of breaking into the phone, EXCEPT for downloading a new OS to the phone that doesn't have a limit on the number of password tries.   But aside from that, there's supposedly nothing they can really do.    

    Rather than going after Apple, let the authorities go to their own courts and get permission to force the phone's owner to use their finger.    If their own courts deny that because it's an infringement of civil liberties or constitutional rights, then why should Apple help?

    In New York City, the Manhattan D.A. has several hundred phones he wants Apple to break into.   Where does it stop?  If there isn't any other evidence tying someone to a crime, then they've got a very weak case.   And if there is other evidence, let them convict on that.  
    There are many international NGOs that resist such pressure rather -- or mostly -- well, e.g., ICANN, EFF in just the digital realm. There numerous others on other important global issues.

    I have no idea whose life is worth more, when, why, or how. That's the kind of thing that courts and lawyers and ethicists are paid to do all the time.

    And, nobody is "going after Apple." In fact, it would be a way to forestall that.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 14 of 36
    eightzero said:
    Time for Apple and Tim Cook to sign the Sokovia Accords. 

    Um.. perhaps you're trying to be cute (or funny), I don't know, but what does that have to do with the issues at hand?!
  • Reply 15 of 36
    Idealism must be grounded in reality. The problem is only going to get worse. Apple must take a proactive stance, clearly laying out its fundamental ethics and bottom line. But, to ignore its corporate responsibility within sovereign nations, repressive at that, would only lead to a quickening of what well could easily become reality of Apples exclusion, under certain circumstances. Governments offer access to their borders and citizens at their discretion. As mentioned, many are itching to erase that good will to the bearers of open and uncensored(less) communication and data channels.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 16 of 36
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,862member
    eightzero said:
    Soli said:
    Why wouldn't this assassin wipe his phone right before the attack or make sure there was nothing on it that could lead him to anyone else?
    Why wouldn't an assassin load his phone up with false and misleading information that would cast suspicion on his enemies? 
    Even better.
  • Reply 17 of 36
    People have a right to private encrypted communication. If they become a criminal, they become a criminal. That doesn't change the rights people are entitled to.

    Why do they need to unlock his phone? So they can find out that he's a radicalized Islamist being influenced by other radical Islamists? Let me save you the trouble.
    equality72521tallest skil
  • Reply 18 of 36
    People have a right to private encrypted communication. If they become a criminal, they become a criminal. That doesn't change the rights people are entitled to.

    Why do they need to unlock his phone? So they can find out that he's a radicalized Islamist being influenced by other radical Islamists? Let me save you the trouble.
    Minor point of disagreement:  A right is not an entitlement, it is inherent. In the US the Constitution protects certain individual rights. It does not grant them.
    equality72521tallest skil
  • Reply 19 of 36
    Soli said:
    eightzero said:
    Soli said:
    Why wouldn't this assassin wipe his phone right before the attack or make sure there was nothing on it that could lead him to anyone else?
    Why wouldn't an assassin load his phone up with false and misleading information that would cast suspicion on his enemies? 
    Even better.
    Yeah... Clinton emails or Trump videos -- you pick 'em!

  • Reply 20 of 36
    People have a right to private encrypted communication. If they become a criminal, they become a criminal. That doesn't change the rights people are entitled to.

    Why do they need to unlock his phone? So they can find out that he's a radicalized Islamist being influenced by other radical Islamists? Let me save you the trouble.
    Minor point of disagreement:  A right is not an entitlement, it is inherent. In the US the Constitution protects certain individual rights. It does not grant them.
    Well Said!

    SpamSandwich
Sign In or Register to comment.