FBI lawyer refuses to say whether data extracted from San Bernardino iPhone is 'useful'

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 32
    bcodebcode Posts: 141member
    If the info were useful, they'd want everyone to know that Apple didn't help them get at information that's pertinent to the investigation. The fact that they refuse to tell us, indicates that they didn't find anything worth bragging about.
  • Reply 22 of 32
    singularitysingularity Posts: 1,328member
    bcode said:
    If the info were useful, they'd want everyone to know that Apple didn't help them get at information that's pertinent to the investigation. The fact that they refuse to tell us, indicates that they didn't find anything worth bragging about.
    Just to be argumentative why would they want everyone to know if they found something useful? Potentially tipping off anyone else involved, allowing them to go to ground or destroy evidence etc.
    Personally I don't expect a confirmation either way unless they are forced to by a court order. It works better for them if everyone is in the dark about whether they have or have not broken into the phone.

  • Reply 23 of 32
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,956member
    Let's see, the truth is classified but the content isn't. The FBI could do so much for its image by just admitting that they were going for a precedent, not for the magic bullet. Instead, they appear to be both foolish and dishonest. 
    ai46
  • Reply 24 of 32
    alruialrui Posts: 29member
    Of course it wasnt "useful", it probably wasnt even the killers phone just one they held up and said it was!
  • Reply 25 of 32
    bbhbbh Posts: 134member
    quinney said:
    Whether or not the information is useful is significant for the public relations battle the FBI is waging, but I think it is irrelevant with regard to the legal issues.  I would prefer that people would not fixate on the usefulness.
    I think the legal issues are the crux of the matter here, but it should not be passed over that this was probably a "fishing trip" that has yielded no fish. NOT worth the privacy invasion potential.
  • Reply 26 of 32
    farmboyfarmboy Posts: 152member
    bcode said:
    If the info were useful, they'd want everyone to know that Apple didn't help them get at information that's pertinent to the investigation. The fact that they refuse to tell us, indicates that they didn't find anything worth bragging about.
    Just to be argumentative why would they want everyone to know if they found something useful? Potentially tipping off anyone else involved, allowing them to go to ground or destroy evidence etc.
    Personally I don't expect a confirmation either way unless they are forced to by a court order. It works better for them if everyone is in the dark about whether they have or have not broken into the phone.

    NSA, CIA, and a couple lesser known alphabets have told them to shut up for once. Our agencies don't work well together as people may have noticed. But they hate having important methods denied them for publicity's sake by a political hack like Comey and friends.
  • Reply 27 of 32
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 1,069member
    "...data extracted from an iPhone…is being applied…"
    "…less forthcoming when asked if the phone contained useful information."

    two convenient responses that basically say nothing. i don't believe the FBI was successful, further, they either realized they were never going to get the law to side with them, or their higher ups told them to leave it alone. this response simply saves face.

    on another note, wouldn't it be really cool if apple owned
    cellebrite and was charging money to crack their own phone?
  • Reply 28 of 32
    Oh, come on FBI lawyer! We only want to know if Marisa Tomei *really* won that Academy Award. We just want closure!
  • Reply 29 of 32
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,556member
    Translation:




    edited April 2016 jony0
  • Reply 30 of 32
    toddzrxtoddzrx Posts: 254member
    Why is this news?  Does anyone actually expect the FBI to release details of the contents of the phone that was used by a terrorist on our own soil?  That information is already deemed classified, regardless of its usefulness in an investigation.
  • Reply 31 of 32
    buzdotsbuzdots Posts: 452member
    ceek74 said:
    I guess the FBI can't be "compelled".  Well, except to waste tax payers' money and to be morbidly incompetent.
    They don't have to be compelled, they waste money and are incompetant every day.

    But, the biggest thing they waste is oxygen.
  • Reply 32 of 32
    CMA102DLCMA102DL Posts: 121member
    So they won't let us know if there was a dormant cyber pathogen? For safety ' s sake!
    edited April 2016 spheric
Sign In or Register to comment.