As an Apple shareholder, I would prefer such an exploit comes from outside Apple. In 3 months, when it is out in the wild compromizing millions of bank accounts in the hands of nefarious agents, Apple can plead innocent to the damage done.
The FBI always had every right to try and break into the phone by any means at their disposal. What they can't do is compel somebody (or a company) to create something that doesn't exist in order to help them.
Just because the police have a warrant to enter a home, does not mean they can force the local locksmith to make a key. They use a battering ram instead. This or any company helping break into the phone is their battering ram.
If they do get in the phone, it means there was a vulnerability that Apple should close up. It always has been and will always be a game of cat and mouse.
Now if the favorite phone company of the terrorist had just helped the FBI when first asked then the probably would have only cracked this phone which may, and probably will save American lives and even gained more support from Americans as a great company. But now that we know Apple = Islamic terrorist, the FBI had to develop a tool to crack every phone they so chose.
Now if the favorite phone company of the terrorist had just helped the FBI when first asked then the probably would have only cracked this phone which may, and probably will save American lives and even gained more support from Americans as a great company. But now that we know Apple = Islamic terrorist, the FBI had to develop a tool to crack every phone they so chose.
Consumers (including me) paid for Apple's iPhone encryption features.
Apple's seeing to it that we're getting our money's worth. There is no way Apple would have gained "more" support had they gone in the other direction on this.
Now if the favorite phone company of the terrorist had just helped the FBI when first asked then the probably would have only cracked this phone which may, and probably will save American lives and even gained more support from Americans as a great company. But now that we know Apple = Islamic terrorist, the FBI had to develop a tool to crack every phone they so chose.
Congratulations on your second post and donning the guise of a government 'tool'
Well, there's one company that's just lost it's Apple developer credentials...
Nope, they've been around a long time, and pulling info off iPhones for a long time. I was integrating their data into gov't intel analysis software back in 2012.
Pretty ironic comment coming from someone with the username "ireland"...guess you never heard of a little group called the IRA...the only difference is that this technology didn't exist in their heyday but if it had, they wouldn't be allowed to slide because they were christians.
But, as it stands today, you don't have a global christian extremist problem where you have christians beheading people or blowing themselves up in crowded, public spaces..unless they're a mass media conspiracy keeping these events quite and only focusing on besmirching the good name of Allah.
There is a widespread Christian problem of violence and killings, particularly on the African continent, but it is not global. These violent groups tend to focus their activities only in their more immediate environment.
right, but, depending on who you talk to, they'll tell you the christians are reacting to previous treatment by muslims. you began to see the uprising of christians only after Michel Djotodia stepped down.
As soon as any evidence from that phone is used in any case anywhere, there'll be a defendant. The defendant's lawyer will demand "chain of custody" to see how the evidence used to accuse his(her) client was obtained. They'll demand detailed specifications on all of Cellebrite's hardware and software. If any of that is not forthcoming, the evidence will be thrown out. If it *is* revealed - to the judge, the law teams on both sides, their expert witnesses (etc.) - then it'll probably leak, and whatever the flaw is can be patched. If it doesn't leak the first time, it'll leak eventually.
That's why Apple refused to create such a tool - I wonder what Cellebrite is thinking?
I doubt the FBI would advertise a successful break-in. Why not get the cake and eat it too by claiming failure (succeeding in secret), and then still taking Apple to court?
Would the FBI advertise a successful break-in? Why not have the cake it eat it too by advertising failure (succeeding in secret), then still take Apple to court and try to get the precedent so that floodgates of surveillance are unleashed?
It's interesting that security firms want to sell their exploits to the government instead of Apple when currently Apple has so much cash they could almost certainly outbid the USG on any contract. The DOJ's entire budget is "only" $27 billion, and no matter how you parse Apple's $215 billion "cash on hand" being non-liquid and overseas, there's no question Apple could pay more for a job than the government would.
Now if the favorite phone company of the terrorist had just helped the FBI when first asked then the probably would have only cracked this phone which may, and probably will save American lives and even gained more support from Americans as a great company. But now that we know Apple = Islamic terrorist, the FBI had to develop a tool to crack every phone they so chose.
As Hans Gruber once said "...Theo, I give you the F.B.I."
As soon as any evidence from that phone is used in any case anywhere, there'll be a defendant. The defendant's lawyer will demand "chain of custody" to see how the evidence used to accuse his(her) client was obtained. They'll demand detailed specifications on all of Cellebrite's hardware and software. If any of that is not forthcoming, the evidence will be thrown out. If it *is* revealed - to the judge, the law teams on both sides, their expert witnesses (etc.) - then it'll probably leak, and whatever the flaw is can be patched. If it doesn't leak the first time, it'll leak eventually.
That's why Apple refused to create such a tool - I wonder what Cellebrite is thinking?
I agree with the point about using the info as evidence and chain of custody issues. The thing is, I don't think the FBI intends to use the data as evidence. I believe they intend to use the data as potential probable cause for obtaining more search warrants. The burden of proving that the data is pristine seems to be much lower in applying for search warrants, in practice.
A four digit passcode can easily be broken with a brute force attack with only 10,000 combinations. The FBI needed the automatic erase function deleted to mount the brute force attack. It is technically feasible.
A true passcode with combinations of letters, numbers, symbols and sufficient length would render the brute force method meaningless. And terrorists will increasingly turn to this method.
It also does nothing in the event that someone physically destroys the device like the shooter did with his own personal phone. It's exceedingly unlikely that anything of any benefit would remain on the work phone.
The FBI, CIA and NSA need to start doing their jobs the hard way. It means putting people on the ground and physically investigating people. Not the wanton violation of the privacy of hundreds of millions of people just to find a few bad actors. Besides, not everyone who spouts vitriol will turn to violence. And not everyone who espouses peace won't turn to violence. Especially for random acts done individually.
The FBI showed that they were inept when it came to the unabomber. And the guy hated technology. Maybe Mr. Kaczynski had a legitimate point?
What he did was wrong, but maybe his view of technology has some validity. After all, the tyranny of a government is far worse than random acts of violence. I would rather live in the Middle East as a free man despite the terrorism than totally subject to the government dictatorship in North Korea.
If these shooters were christian and there was a chance that there may be a network of people promoting this type of activity among other christians the case probably would exist.
this was an office shooting, workplace violence. the shooters were deranged lunatics, and merely ISIS wannabes -- there were not members of ISIS or any terror cell. the definition of terrorism is violence in the pursuit of political objectives. these two clowns weren't part of any global or regional attempt to influence US policy, and were instead just disgruntled and pissed off at their coworkers and decided to go down in a blaze of self-perceived glory.
I wholeheartedly agree. It's amazing how people will buy into what the government, and media feeds them.
According to an article from Computerworld, the FBI is going to try NAND mirroring to unlock the phone. Something similar was discussed by Congressman Issa in the apple vs. FBI hearing in Congress. Comey knew already about mirroring at the time and the word "mirroring" came out of his mouth, not Issa's. How come the FBI dismissed those options as futile, but now they are good? Is legal recourse and arm twisting the No. 1 approach by the FBI while hard work in the lab the No. 2 option? Can the FBI embarrass itself even more?
this was an office shooting, workplace violence. the shooters were deranged lunatics, and merely ISIS wannabes -- there were not members of ISIS or any terror cell.
How many members does it take to be considered a cell? I think it could be argued that they were part of a conspiracy to commit terror. When it was disclosed that friend, purchaser of the weapons and Muslim convert Enrique Marquez was planning with Farook to bomb a freeway and then murder the stranded occupants of the stalled vehicles, should surly be enough to characterize them as a terrorist cell. Hell, just pledging allegiance to ISIS should be enough to make them a terrorist cell.
Comments
What they can't do is compel somebody (or a company) to create something that doesn't exist in order to help them.
Just because the police have a warrant to enter a home, does not mean they can force the local locksmith to make a key. They use a battering ram instead. This or any company helping break into the phone is their battering ram.
If they do get in the phone, it means there was a vulnerability that Apple should close up. It always has been and will always be a game of cat and mouse.
We shall see!
Consumers (including me) paid for Apple's iPhone encryption features.
Apple's seeing to it that we're getting our money's worth. There is no way Apple would have gained "more" support had they gone in the other direction on this.
they intend to use the data as potential probable cause for obtaining more search warrants. The burden of proving that the data is pristine seems to be much lower
in applying for search warrants, in practice.
A true passcode with combinations of letters, numbers, symbols and sufficient length would render the brute force method meaningless. And terrorists will increasingly turn to this method.
It also does nothing in the event that someone physically destroys the device like the shooter did with his own personal phone. It's exceedingly unlikely that anything of any benefit would remain on the work phone.
The FBI, CIA and NSA need to start doing their jobs the hard way. It means putting people on the ground and physically investigating people. Not the wanton violation of the privacy of hundreds of millions of people just to find a few bad actors. Besides, not everyone who spouts vitriol will turn to violence. And not everyone who espouses peace won't turn to violence. Especially for random acts done individually.
The FBI showed that they were inept when it came to the unabomber. And the guy hated technology. Maybe Mr. Kaczynski had a legitimate point?
What he did was wrong, but maybe his view of technology has some validity. After all, the tyranny of a government is far worse than random acts of violence. I would rather live in the Middle East as a free man despite the terrorism than totally subject to the government dictatorship in North Korea.