DoJ Discovers 'Possible Method' for Unlocking iPhone, Asks Court to Delay Tuesday Hearing With Apple [Update: Postponed]

[JohnGrey]

This is potentially more dangerous than Apple creating something for use. Everyone is worried that if Apple did create a forked version of their OS to comply, it would compromise security for everyone - without question. Now - it MAY be possible for someone who has less corporate responsibility to create a way into a locked phone. This should be more disconcerting than Apple helping. I sincerely hope it winds up being impossible for a 3rd party to hack in.

You're making one fundamentally untenable assumption: that law enforcement, especially at the federal level, isn't populated by lying fascists.

I find it far more likely that either the phone has long since been opened or they know there's nothing of value on it and they aren't going to try.

 

[nfable]

Seems like a time-buying tactic for the Feds.

 

[amirite]

Apple and the rest of us need to push for a constitutional amendment blocking the government from forcing private companies from doing what is the governments job.

I agree. How are you going to push for this?

 

[AdonisSMU]

Seems like a time-buying tactic for the Feds.

They want to let the heat die down then try to slip it under the radar.

 

[0007776]

This is potentially more dangerous than Apple creating something for use. Everyone is worried that if Apple did create a forked version of their OS to comply, it would compromise security for everyone - without question. Now - it MAY be possible for someone who has less corporate responsibility to create a way into a locked phone. This should be more disconcerting than Apple helping. I sincerely hope it winds up being impossible for a 3rd party to hack in.

It can be patched, this will work for phones running whatever version of iOS is on the phone, and Apple can fix that method of attack. The difference with Apple keeping and maintaining a backdoor is there is a known vulnerability that hackers know will not be fixed if Apple has to comply with these kinds of requests.

 

[Datalinks]

Episode 2: Apple sues FBI for violating end-user licence agreement

 

[duffman9000]

They did provide assistance. That's not what this case is about.

Yes that's true, but the FBI turned around and blindsided Apple with accusations through the media. SJ wouldn't forget that easily. I don't expect Tim Cook to forget easily either.

Have you ever had relationships with other companies? I've worked with people from various OEMs. I value having a good working relationship. It makes my job much easier. The agents who engage Apple may soon know what burning a bridge will do to a working relationship.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Seems like a time-buying tactic for the Feds.

It's already been 3 months.

What's a couple more weeks gonna do?

 

[\-V-/]

Yes that's true, but the FBI turned around and blindsided Apple with accusations through the media. SJ wouldn't forget that easily. I don't expect Tim Cook to forget easily either.

Why in the holy goat dookie are you talking about Steve Jobs?

Have you ever had relationships with other companies? I've worked with people from various OEMs. I value having a good working relationship. It makes my job much easier. The agents who engage Apple may soon know what burning a bridge will do to a working relationship.

Burning bridges is generally not good, no. But if the FBI has their way, they won't need bridges.

 

[Gutwrench]

I see two possibilities:

The FBI was under intense pressure to make this case go away due to the unexpected backlash directed at the government and the very likely possibility the FBI would lose, and in the next few weeks we hear, "We got what we needed, okay bye, please forget this ever happened."

Or, the FBI is playing theatrics to try and weaken the argument they are trying to set a precedent, by appearing to try and exercise all other possible options before asking Apple to help.

Either way the FBI looks incompetent.

Or three: Apple helped them all along but can claim they didn't.

 

[duffman9000]

This is potentially more dangerous than Apple creating something for use. Everyone is worried that if Apple did create a forked version of their OS to comply, it would compromise security for everyone - without question. Now - it MAY be possible for someone who has less corporate responsibility to create a way into a locked phone. This should be more disconcerting than Apple helping. I sincerely hope it winds up being impossible for a 3rd party to hack in.

No need to wonder it has happened many times. The FBI looks like fools for saying that it was not possible without Apple's help. For the particular phone, yes, it is possible.

 

[Mac2me]

From all the testimony at the congressional hearing and other national security experts commenting, it sounds to me like probably the NSA has been able to do it and maybe the FBI didn't want to ask because it wasn't the result the FBI was asking for ultimately. No one seems to think there's anything on that particular phone anyway. If they come back and tell the Court they didn't need Apple's assistance after all, I want to know what of anything other than office business was on that phone. Think the nation deserves to know.

I can't help but wonder if the NSA didn't reached out to them and said look this is bad for the country ultimately, give us the phone since you made this a public terrorism case and we'll tell you what's on it. That's what your telling the Court you're asking for and plenty of people can testify you don't need Apple to do the GovtOS. I really think the intelligence community was very unhappy with this court case seeing how vocal they were in expressing their opinions (former officials of course). Hopefully more members of Congress have learned about the technical aspects of this and not just reacted from their gut and will be around to help illuminate other members about balancing the consequences.

 

[duffman9000]

Why in the holy goat dookie are you talking about Steve Jobs?

Because there are people at Apple who are almost as passionate about Apple as Steve. I doubt Tim Cook would have made it that high on the pole without being crazy passionate about Apple.

 

[\-V-/]

Or three: Apple helped them all along but can claim they didn't.

Yes and unicorns were to blame all along.

 

[Tech198]

An open & shut case...

Ephemeral storage is only to "overcome" wear leveling.... which would otherwise be left... however the data is still there, the keys are not..

Encrypted data can still be got at. (The FBI is finding out the hard way, as they always do)

*now* which one is a marketing ploy ??

 

[Rocketman]

The controlling law says they cannot dragoon Apple to do labor against their will. Apple should do a motion in limine re this.

 

[\-V-/]

The controlling law says they cannot dragoon Apple to do labor against their will. Apple should do a motion in limine re this.

They're a bunch of Panzers.

 

[kdarling]

The latest Time magazine interview with Tim Cook was revealing.

Remember, Apple has aided the government for years (and still does) by giving them iCloud backups, access to user info, and plenty of other assistance including special iOS versions that bypass the passcode for older iOS devices without file encryption. So it's not like Apple has been some bastion of government resistance all this time. They haven't been.

Apparently the reason why Cook publicly resisted this time, was because 1) he was mad that he heard about the magistrate's order from the news instead of from the FBI, and 2) the FBI did it all publicly instead of by sealed order.

The public way the FBI handled things (which ticked off NSA and everyone else) left Cook with what he felt was no choice but to publicly resist. That way, no matter whether they win or lose, Apple looks better in the eyes of many.

 

[agsystems]

A possibility. @MuscleNerd had tweeted this site earlier this morning, which had an interesting take on it.

https://marcan.st/2016/03/untangling-ios-pin-code-security/

Either way, if the FBI gets this info without Apple's help or assistance, this will not turn out good PR-wise for them, nor for those who vilified/vilify Apple for not co-operating.

BL.

Thanks - all good points from a security stand point - Apple already said, that it is technically possible to do GovOS - but they won't - it will need to be ordered by congress or the supreme court.

 

[Michael Scrip]

So... it looks like the FBI might have found a way to unlock this iPhone 5C without Apple's help of writing new firmware.

But what about other phones?

Take my iPhone 6S Plus for example. It has the Secure Enclave which the iPhone 5C lacks. Would Apple even be able to flash new firmware on it?

And even if they did and could turn off the 10-attempt auto-erase... my phone is also protected by an alpha-numeric passcode instead of a 4-digit pin. So there are billions of combinations. There's no way they could brute-force that successfully, right?

I get the impression that Apple has made each iPhone more protected. If the FBI wanted to crack today's iPhones... would they be completely out of luck?

 

[jonnysods]

For real?

 

[Quicklite]

2 weeks is a long time to change public opinion.

Apple could be focusing on making amazing products. Instead are side tracked with this over their head still. Nobody likes uncertainty.

 

[avanpelt]

That's the best of all possible outcomes if the DoJ is able to get into the phone with a third party's help, I think. There's always a "hole in the fence" somewhere. The government was just trying to take the easy way out by trying to compel Apple to create another one for them.

 

[tigres]

What timing

 

[mejsric]

Or three: Apple helped them all along but can claim they didn't.

Nah, want another story?

FBI vs Apple is just a stunt to make believe that FBI can't access iPhone and that makes terrorist will use iPhone believing that.