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

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

In all likelihood, they have been able to access the data already with some sort of unauthorized method. They wanted Apple to break in for future precedent and to allow the data to be used as legal evidence if there's a trial.

They severely underestimated the public backlash against the request, so they decided to shelve it for now.

It's not an unauthorized method, there are a number of commercial software offerings to get them access.

This was always about getting the law changed to allow them to more freely access such data without the need to request pesky stuff like certain types of warrant.

 

[fastlanephil]

Maybe someone has it figured out and waited until now for the best deal with the government.

 

[Bubba Satori]

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.

That's a very likely scenario.
It makes certain parties relax and think they're safe while
the intelligence community propagates the info to enforcement
agencies who terminate targets when they become actionable.

 

[allanfries]

LOL, Guess the Feds didn't think they would meet such resistance. From Everybody!!!
[doublepost=1458609809][/doublepost]

Too much public opposition for them to proceed forward against Apple.

Disaster averted.

Exactly!

 

[agsystems]

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?

There is still a big hole that Apple needs to fix pronto - and that is the DFU bypass which does not required a password to be applied - a password should be required for any update and then if you decide to do a DFU update the phone needs to wipe itself clean before the process.

Jonathan Zdziarski has a full list of tasks for Apple to do before they can say to any government - F**U - we can't help you -
http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5741

 

[citysnaps]

Probably they were worried about a precedent that went against them.

That's exactly it.

1. Tim Cook came out swinging with Apple's views about the matter right at the top of today's event, sending a strong message they weren't going to back down.

2. The FBI realized that, and, the very real possibility they could lose in court, setting an adverse precedent for them in the future.

3. Richard Clarke, former national security and counter-terrorism advisor to two presidents has recently said other govt agencies could gain access to the phone's data, likely through invasive and destructive means, as they have physical custody of the device.

4. The FBI gets their data legally without risking setting adverse precedent, and, still retains the option to argue that in future cases that would likely be much more important.

5. Apple goes home victorious in their fight.

Congratulations to Tim Cook and Apple for staying tough!

 

[iZac]

In my mind the translation from the FBI is:

"This was such a high profile case that we groveled to the NSA to help. They can/already have hacked it for us, but we want to set precedent to have an easier way to break these devices every time under our own jurisdiction. As such we wanted to legally force Apple to do it for us instead.

They called our bluff. *sad face*

We'll pretend we somehow hacked it on our own because we can't publicly demonstrate the true surveillance abilities of the NSA in court documents.

Perhaps we'll pretend that Syed wrote down his passcode in a his My Little Pony diary especially for us"

*removes tinfoil*

 

[Gutwrench]

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

Yes and unicorns were to blame all along.

Nah, want another story?

Impossible, huh? Because?

 

[Mr. Dee]

Anyone wanna bet iOS 10 and OS 10.12 will be all about security?

So secure, not even you or us can get in.

 

[jclardy]

My guess - this is a straight PR move. They severely screwed up on measuring public opinion on the case and pushing it forward is only going to end badly for them. So the solution? Pretend like they know better than Apple and can unlock the phone without any help and be quiet about it afterwards (Because they never actually get into the phone, instead pretend like they do and find nothing.) Then in a few months they can try again with another more pressing case to appeal to the people.

 

[IbisDoc]

It's obvious that Apple is working with the feds in secret here. They both want to avoid this conflict.

Apple knows that its vigorous defense of the privacy rights of terrorists might make it the terrorist phone of choice in the short term, but the long term negative PR will eat away at that short term increased profit.

 

[Zaqfalcon]

This is what they've discovered:

 

[michaelsviews]

It's not an unauthorized method, there are a number of commercial software offerings to get them access.

This was always about getting the law changed to allow them to more freely access such data without the need to request pesky stuff like certain types of warrant.

And the fact that hey Apple wrote the software or Apple did this not the FBI or DOJ. They've had an ace or two up there sleeve since the beginning.

 

[dk001]

Two days later: We messed up, we can't figure it out. Can you help us again Apple?

or ... we really needed Apple. The phone was corrupted by the attempt.
Queueing up for the next try....
[doublepost=1458612607][/doublepost]

I really doubt that. I expect that they will get a national security letter issued so they can pressure Apple without Apple having the public support. Yes they lost in public so they'll go back to trying to hide everything. Hopefully, we have a few more Snowden's around.

That would be interesting. Legally, Apple would have grounds to challenge the NSL based on this attempt.
Personally, I think the FBI/DOJ either needs to try again or drop and move on.

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

And the fact that hey Apple wrote the software or Apple did this not the FBI or DOJ. They've had an ace or two up there sleeve since the beginning.

They wanted to compel Apple to not just produce it for them but bring this into the spotlight so they could get the backing they wanted to make it easier to gain access. Instead, Apple challenged them on it which they didn't want. They couldn't backdown immediately but knew that they'd have to eventually do so if it came to it because they do in fact have access, so asking for access clearly isn't needed.

This was about getting support for easier access, not about the technical ability to do so. They'll try again, with a different case in the future.

 

[LizKat]

Translation for those that don't speak legal jargon, here's what the FBI just said: We got caught with our pants down, the public called us out on it and rather than continue down this PR nightmare, it is much easier to pay a hacker to hack the iPhone than force Apple to do it.

Botched case, big time. They should have saved their war for a better case anyway, something like a kidnapping in progress. They thought the "terror" card would go over better I guess. Well they've used it now. So next up will be the "heartbroken" card. Hope they have better sense of how to play that one.

On or before April 5th the government will say in court that they managed to get into the phone and that due to national security considerations they have nothing further to say --nothing at all-- about the matter.

We will never know if the phone was ever cracked or if so who did it, never mind whether there was anything on there of interest. We'll also never know if the reason they filed for the delay is that the NSA or a hired hack went ahead and took a best shot and messed up somehow and there's nothing functional left of the phone to force Apple to work on anyway.

I am 100% sure the government would never have said there was nothing on that phone, even if they had won their case.
[doublepost=1458613292][/doublepost]

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

/thread

 

[pooleman]

Personally I think it went down like this.....


Apple probably gave them a way in. The FBI and Apple did the dance for a few weeks, Apple looks tough by standing up to the Feds, people feel safe using iPhones again, Apple secretly gives the Feds what they need to access the terrorist scumbags iPhone, and the FBI drops the order and pretends to have gained their own access.

No proof for this. Just speculation.

 

[dk001]

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.

Why? That already exists.
5th Amendment
An amendment to the US Constitution that provides for due process of law where the government is seeking to deprive a person of life, liberty, or property; provides for Grand Jury proceedings for certain serious offenses; prohibits the government from trying a person again after that person has been acquitted; prohibits the government from forcing a defendant to testify against himself or herself; and prohibits government confiscation of private property for public use without just compensation to the property owner.

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.

Unless the HJC comes back for a followup.
[doublepost=1458614610][/doublepost]

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.

Trust is hard to get back.

 

[Robert.Walter]

Tactical retreat by FBI.

Apple needs to triple down on encryption in iOS 10.

 

[dk001]

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.

Don't forget the other "12" plus LEOs thousands just awaiting this little outcome.
I'm wondering if the FBI hadn't been better off just going forward with it.

 

[Robert.Walter]

Personally I think it went down like this.....


Apple probably gave them a way in. The FBI and Apple did the dance for a few weeks, Apple looks tough by standing up to the Feds, people feel safe using iPhones again, Apple secretly gives the Feds what they need to access the terrorist scumbags iPhone, and the FBI drops the order and pretends to have gained their own access.

No proof for this. Just speculation.

No way, because Apple has a strong defense and the FBI has bupkis for an argument, and once you let the govt camel's nose under the tent, he wants IN!

 

[ani4ani]

My guess - this is a straight PR move. They severely screwed up on measuring public opinion on the case and pushing it forward is only going to end badly for them. So the solution? Pretend like they know better than Apple and can unlock the phone without any help and be quiet about it afterwards (Because they never actually get into the phone, instead pretend like they do and find nothing.) Then in a few months they can try again with another more pressing case to appeal to the people.

Actually all of the polls showed public opinion wanted Apple to open the phone, the polls always showed that.

MacRumors is not representative of all public opinion

 

[Larry-K]

The FBI should just say they were able to do it, and they're following promising leads.

That way people doing suspect things won't be sure they can get away with it, and the FBI won't have to parade their weak case in front of everyone.

Alternatively, they could just go back to spying on MLK Jr.
[doublepost=1458617552][/doublepost]

Botched case, big time. They should have saved their war for a better case anyway, something like a kidnapping in progress. They thought the "terror" card would go over better I guess. Well they've used it now. So next up will be the "heartbroken" card. Hope they have better sense of how to play that one.

We may win the war on terrorism some day, but the war on stupidity will go on forever.

 

[jeremiah256]

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.

100% correct.

It was a phone, a county phone to be exact.

Strike one was the county government not putting on the required software that would have given them 100% access, regardless of what the user did.

Strike two was the federal government not contacting a subject matter expert or Apple, who would have told them NOT to reset the iCloud password unless they already had the phone password.

Strike three was trying to use a law that was written to say individuals or companies had to assist the government when presented a legal writ (such as, there is a flaw in your system, show us how to exploit it) and interpreting it as saying you had to create what doesn't exist (we need you to create a new version of iOS that will allow us to crack this phone).

Strike four is that the FBI/DoJ/President miscalculated when they thought they could publicly shame Apple into creating Govt iOS and set a precedent they could use against the tech industry as a whole. They obviously didn't confer with, or if they did, ignored the concerns of the NSA/intelligence community. Apple lawyers would force the FBI to go all the way to Supreme Court if need be. The FBI would have to reveal whether they went to the NSA for help. No? Then the FBI didn't do everything they needed to do in a friggin terrorist case. That means they make the FBI/DoJ/President look weak, unorganized, ignorant and just plain evil with regards to fighting terrorism, especially after the FBI used the survivors and the families of victims to plead their case. Everyone loses. If they answer yes, that they did go to the NSA? Then the NSA is on record saying they can't crack a properly secured iPhone 5S or if they can and did provide the data, the FBI is on record lying to the federal courts. Lose-lose.

Congress needs to bury their boot knee deep up the FBI Director's backside.

 

[Arran]

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

Absolutely: Everyone saves face. Apple more than the rest. Realpolitik in action.

Why the DOJ turned this into a public fistfight in the first place is anybody's guess. Numbskulls.