FBI Agrees to Help Arkansas Prosecutor Unlock iPhone and iPod in Homicide Case

[applelover4u]

What happen to he FBI saying, Just this one time Apple.... Uh HUh

 

[MH01]

You do realize that Apple wasn't trying to prevent the FBI from getting into the iPhone right? Apple was LITERALLY helping them to try and get into the phone and had helped with many other phones in the past.

Apple was trying to prevent the FBI from forcing Apple to break in to the phone...

So...Apple 1. FBI 0.

Apple 1 , FBI 0? We have gone from having a secure phone to one that can be unlocked in the space of a week in news , Apple is silent on the matter after telling us that it privacy and security is the main point here, so using your scorecard Apple 1, FBI 0 , public -2. We were all on zero at the start of this . No idea how you figure Apple is the winner here....it's actually the FBI that got a result, as it continues to gloat about unlocking iPhones, and Apple is silent.

 

[Ed217]

Revisionist history. Each of the statements are actually true.

Re #1, Everybody gets this wrong because they have selective hearing. In his congressional testimony, Comey was referring to the ONE iPhone in the SB shooting as described in the warrant and writ. He was not seeking access to every iPhone on the planet.

Re#2 and #3, those statements were true when he said them. The FBI continued to pursue all avenues to crack the phone, and it was not until several weeks later did a third party appear to assist them on gaining access. You didn't think the FBI was just going to sit around and play CandyCrush while the court proceedings dragged on, did you?

All true as written. You got it wrong.

Revisionist history. Each of the statements are actually true.

Re #1, Everybody gets this wrong because they have selective hearing. In his congressional testimony, Comey was referring to the ONE iPhone in the SB shooting as described in the warrant and writ. He was not seeking access to every iPhone on the planet.

Re#2 and #3, those statements were true when he said them. The FBI continued to pursue all avenues to crack the phone, and it was not until several weeks later did a third party appear to assist them on gaining access. You didn't think the FBI was just going to sit around and play CandyCrush while the court proceedings dragged on, did you?

All true as written. You also got it wrong.

The case initially involved a court brief followed by a court order. Both are available for download. The first is about 50 pages, the second is about 3 pages.

Read the brief, which is what the court order was based on. It uses the term SUBJECT DEVICE many times and single device. They argue it quite clearly.

They state they are unable to complete this task and need Apples help.

In the brief they use the words “Apple has the exclusive technical means…”

That effort went on for weeks. Then the government pulled the order when they found out they were wrong in the means area and others has some abilities in this area.

 

[HEK]

Revisionist history. Each of the statements are actually true.

Re #1, Everybody gets this wrong because they have selective hearing. In his congressional testimony, Comey was referring to the ONE iPhone in the SB shooting as described in the warrant and writ. He was not seeking access to every iPhone on the planet.

Re#2 and #3, those statements were true when he said them. The FBI continued to pursue all avenues to crack the phone, and it was not until several weeks later did a third party appear to assist them on gaining access. You didn't think the FBI was just going to sit around and play CandyCrush while the court proceedings dragged on, did you?

Comey lied to congress. The FBI had not pursued all avenues. The FBI had used Cellebrite numerous times before as indicated by the $2 million it spent with them before the lying testimony under oath was given.

http://www.ibtimes.com/fbi-cellebri...king-iphone-are-old-friends-2-million-2342283

The goal with this SB shooter's phone was to politically pressure Apple to write code to make it easier, cheaper for FBI to get inside this and other phones. Once written and used on this phone, Apple could no longer claim they had no means to get inside the latest iPhone 6s using iOS 9.

Once the FBI saw the public sentiment was not going their way, and some of these embarrassing issues would come up in the court disclosure, they caved and went with Cellebrite once again as the 5s with iOS 8 is older technology able to be brute force attached once the auto erase feature is bypassed.

http://www.ibtimes.com/fbi-can-prob...n-thats-why-it-cant-use-all-writs-act-2341233

 

[dk001]

Theoretically, you're right, there is no such thing as "unbreakable encryption". But in practice, if you use large enough private keys, you can have something that's unbreakable due to the fact that it would take thousands of years with the most powerful supercomputing clusters on the planet to crack.

Now, that likely all will change when quantum computing takes over, but that's also why many of the world's leading crypto experts are working on new methods of cryptography using things like lattices.

That will be interesting. Either quantum will turn things on it's ear or be another Y2K. I'm not sure which I would rather have...

 

[DoctorTech]

Chip makers could make decapping more difficult by storing data at different depths in the chip. By the time you go deep enough to read the passcode, you've shaved off the code for processing the passcode.

Great point. With all the focus on the code itself I had not even thought about how the chip makers could contribute to overall data security.