This is what I haven't understood from the beginning of this issue. How would they install a custom version of iOS onto the phone they don't have access to? I would think recovery mode or DFU, but then it would wipe the phone in the process no?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FBI Director 'Not Trying to Set Precedent' With iPhone Unlock Demand
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is what I haven't understood from the beginning of this issue. How would they install a custom version of iOS onto the phone they don't have access to? I would think recovery mode or DFU, but then it would wipe the phone in the process no?
Lol, I read that with a very sarcastic slant towards his name at the end. He has one of those names you can say condescendingly and it sounds so good... whatever.. James!
Like Yoda said, "Do or do not, there is no try." What they are trying to do will set a precedent! Sign the petition! https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/apple-privacy-petition
That sounds like hyperbole.
Let's also remember that proceedings took place and a legitimate court order was ultimately issued and not a summary attack on peoples' rights, there was legitimate reason about the owner of the phone and it wasn't because he jaywalked across the street.
Taking in one phone is not opening up the whole ecosystem unless Apple screwed up its design.
The double standards set by Apple (and other companies supporting it) about private data collection - remember when it was revealed Siri uploads recorded voice to a server farm instead of converting it locally on the phone and people got their chicken little hats on? But that's one issue of many.
I will not sign the petition.
Especially as if this happened last decade when we were told "You are either with us or you are with the terrorists" and Obama did not rescind what George W Bush said because we're still a post-9/11 world...
You truly do not understand how this works. Making an OS with a master key or even the ability to defeat certain security features and giving it to the FBI means that it will eventually be leaked to somebody that shouldn't have it. There is no magic device that can unlock one phone and one phone only. Actually, there is... the owner's passcode.
Is he a ****ing moron? Not trying? But you will set it anyway. That is the biggest logical fallacy i have ever heard.
right. on the suspect's employer-provided work phone. "tons of leads" on there, to be sure.
they think we're all idiots.
they think we're all idiots.
Well, were not quite there yet, but let me ask you, are you willing to have all your privately stored data, incl. banking info, or perhaps details about your political inclinations, sexual preferences, employment history, marital woes, calendars perhaps with appointments alluding to health problems (perhaps even mental health), etc, etc, hacked into by not only US authorities but literally anyone in the world?
Apple's pride and joy is the security of their hardware, software and services, evidenced by features such as strong encryption, Passcodes, Activation Lock, Touch ID-the most technologically advanced fingerprint security, Two-step verification, and the as yet unassailed Secure Enclave in iPhones, the latter the main reason so many retailers and (usually conservative and slow to come on board) banks have seen the 'light' that as far as security is concerned, ApplePay was the way to go, and this despite the fact joining and accepting ApplePay would cost them more.
Companies manufacturing desktops, laptops, tablets and smartphones are a dime a dozen, but none have the (deserved) security reputation that Apple enjoys.
You don't expect them to roll over and give away the farm, without putting up a good fight first, do you?
Their security reputation is one of the major cornerstones of their business.
Last edited:
Smart move by the FBI here. Making it seem harmless will make many believe it is harmless. When the news media and sites like this one report it, many will believe that they mean simply what they say. They won't realize that it also means any other iPhone could be compromised in the same way.
So what magic is Apple using that makes apps bought by one person not work on All iphones? Apple can't use that same magic to make a special version of iOS to work on the ID of one specific iPhone?
FYI, that magic is called a digital signature and only Apple has the key to sign it. Having the special version of iOS leak means nothing without Apple's key to sign it.
They have a preliminary judgment with a request for information. From a magistrate. No need to pretend like this is an order coming from the almighty here.
MR has reported heavily on the side of facts and information all week - just because this one story exists doesn't mean it shouldn't be reported. how do we know what we're fighting if we don't know the opponent's "position"?
Exactly. It's as idiotic as the Supreme Court opening an ruling with "Well we're not trying to set a precedent here...". Everything the government does sets a precedent that will be used to justify later actions. It has always been that way and always will.
If they do get this through and win I wonder how long it will be until they say "Well we don't actually need the phones in our possession to hack them, do we? Surely it'd just be easier to do this over the internet rather than risking our agents lives to obtain the phone"
And then before we know it they're doing PRISM-like surveillance but this time totally legally.
And then before we know it they're doing PRISM-like surveillance but this time totally legally.
Anyone else get that warm and fuzzy feeling of trust and safety while reading his statement...?
/s
/s
Seems to me a good way to end this is to have Apple invite the FBI into Cupertino... work on the issue together and anything done is purely kept in-house.
Trust me... the last thing I want is to see a back-door mandated on smart phones. It would open the door to cyber terrorism which IMHO is our biggest threat. Not to mention the fun the hackers would have just trying to crack our phones and steal information.
Trust me... the last thing I want is to see a back-door mandated on smart phones. It would open the door to cyber terrorism which IMHO is our biggest threat. Not to mention the fun the hackers would have just trying to crack our phones and steal information.
if the court order stated you and your employer/employees had to give up your SS and credit card info to a service that was insecure IN ORDER to comply with the court order, that would raise questions of validity, no?
just because our law makers make laws doen't mean they understand what they're actually doing - and if it's not in our best interest, we stage a protest and bring competent law makers on board.
why act as though laws are infallible and written by deities from the outer reaches? we govern ourselves and we have ways to change harmful laws.
Opposition to government abuses is quite literally the fundamental principle upon which this country was founded. Rosa Parks must have decided she was "above the law" too.
[doublepost=1456148647][/doublepost]
The problem is that this is not about the San Bernardino attack. The FBI has been making an aggressive push for backdoors recently. NY and CA both introduced bills that would outright ban phones without backdoored (and thus fundamentally broken) encryption. We know the NSA has gone so far as to subvert encryption standards with DUAL_EC_DRBG and then pay RSA Security to surreptitiously make it the default PRNG in their BSafe library. It's been just ridiculous in the last couple years.
The FBI has jumped on this case to try to do what they have been trying to do for years. Never waste a crisis. It will not end with the San Bernardino case because that's not what it's about. It's only the beginning.