Menel
Suspended
Correct. A car facelift is still structurally the same. Metal to metal.
5 to 5C got changed metal to cheapo plastic. Like if they took last years' Civic and bolted the engine to a plastic frame.
FBI Director Says Method of Unlocking iPhone Can't Be Used on iPhone 5s or Newer
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
5 to 5C got changed metal to cheapo plastic. Like if they took last years' Civic and bolted the engine to a plastic frame.
PinkyMacGodess
Suspended
But after all their 'shuck and jive', and ten-alarm fire freakout, who the hell would trust ANYTHING that they say. Ever. Again.
Sorry dudes, I'm not buying. I have nothing to hide, but I'm still going to do everything in my power to keep your delusional paranoiac fingers out of it.
Sorry dudes, I'm not buying. I have nothing to hide, but I'm still going to do everything in my power to keep your delusional paranoiac fingers out of it.
These were interesting Google search results though.
[doublepost=1460048280][/doublepost]
What I mean is it actually looks/feels like a new device.
Perhaps you can enlighten us on why Apple did not understand what was going on, because in my book, my personal privacy and security is paramount to unlocking a mobile phone that on a hunch was decidedly labeled as evidence. With all of the resources that were used on getting that device unlocked they could have spent the same amount of money and got better results faster.
[doublepost=1460048446][/doublepost]
Good evidence, now what about that constitution saying free from the tyranny of government... new thread
ericgtr12
macrumors 68000
A hunch? 16 people died in that attack and they had every right to want to access that iPhone. Apple wouldn't (couldn't) provide the resources to do it and someone else did. If that saves one life or leads to more terrorists who can save many more, it's all worth it. It's easy to sit here from the comfort of our computers blabbing about on a message board but as soon as it's your family that's involved, your tune will change in a heartbeat.
A hunch that evidence was to be found on the device.
And I know all too well about losing friends and family to terrorism, but in my experience in the military, I know there are better faster ways to get evidence than by trying to pry a locked phone.
It's about the same equivalent of trying to lock pick a door when a window is wide open.
And I know all too well about losing friends and family to terrorism, but in my experience in the military, I know there are better faster ways to get evidence than by trying to pry a locked phone.
It's about the same equivalent of trying to lock pick a door when a window is wide open.
What good is a forensics company then if you cannot get at what's in all devices ? That's their purpose.
To come across the "one company" (Apple) has is so sophisticated with encryption noting can touch their phones, its ridiculous..
We not playing 'Lord of the Rings' here You gotta tread over all the cruft to get to what really matters.
To come across the "one company" (Apple) has is so sophisticated with encryption noting can touch their phones, its ridiculous..
We not playing 'Lord of the Rings' here You gotta tread over all the cruft to get to what really matters.
MacNut
macrumors Core
So when the FBI wants to look into your phone for a suspicion and you don't have a choice but to let them open it you are ok with that?
doelcm82
macrumors 68040
Forensics is not magic, and even if it were, magicians are not all powerful. The Wicked Witch of the West was unable to magically remove the ruby slippers from Dorothy's feet. She was totally worthless as a witch. So was Glinda, who couldn't just give Dorothy a ride to the Emerald City in her bubble.
peterdevries
macrumors 68040
If it is your opinion than please don't state it as a fact. That is why you were challenged.
rdlink
macrumors 68040
I'm quite sure Apple could have done this. But not even the FBI and DOJ are bats**t crazy enough to believe that a court would force Apple to dismantle an iPhone and perform chemical or laser based surgery on it.
MH01
Suspended
Apple has to love this. FBI just told everyone they need to upgrade their phones.
Apple sales/upgrades spike tomorrow
Seems that way lol.
ardchoille50
macrumors 68020
Perhaps the FBI made that statement in the hopes that Apple would be content and not upgrade security. This would guarantee that the FBI can access future devices.
Remember, we're dealing with a government entity, there's always a hidden agenda behind every statement.
Remember, we're dealing with a government entity, there's always a hidden agenda behind every statement.
zioxide
macrumors 603
The tool from this company is likely not the same thing the FBI wanted Apple to build.
But continue with your ranting without having any knowledge of the industry...
bmustaf
macrumors 6502a
I don't know if there is a Macrumors style guide or if one is chosen as the guide, but this is a style comment. *Please* don't use corporate-speak like "looping Apple in on the situation".
There is no such thing as "looping someone in". It's a non-sensical term invented by middle managers and I don't think it should not be made part of our vernacular any more than the "ummmm, yeah, work on that low-hanging fruit and leverage the synergy to get the ball across the line, mmmmkay? Thaaaaaaaanks." should.
There is no such thing as "looping someone in". It's a non-sensical term invented by middle managers and I don't think it should not be made part of our vernacular any more than the "ummmm, yeah, work on that low-hanging fruit and leverage the synergy to get the ball across the line, mmmmkay? Thaaaaaaaanks." should.
i
After disclosing its method of accessing the iPhone 5c of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook to a few U.S. Senators, the FBI today released a new sliver of information regarding the highly secretive invasive steps the organization has taken to get into the iPhone in question.
FBI director James Comey gave a few hints about "a tool" from a private party that it used to gain access to Farook's iPhone (via CNN).
In a speech at the Biennial Conference at Kenyon University, Comey mentioned that the tool purchased from the private party -- reportedly Israeli mobile developer Cellebrite -- only works on a "narrow slice of phones," which does not include models of the iPhone 5s and after. Although that range allows the FBI to enter into Farook's iPhone 5c, the beefed up security of the A7 chips of the 5s and onward limits the organization's ability to use Cellebrite's tool for any of its more recent security-locked iPhone cases.
After the FBI said it found a method of getting into the iPhone used in the San Bernardino terrorist attacks, the Cupertino company promised it would insist on obtaining the details of the exploit if the case were to move forward. Since the Justice Department officially dropped the case against Apple, the company can't ask for that information, and Comey said the government is contemplating the pros and cons of looping Apple in on the situation.
Even though the official legal battle is over, Apple's statement at the end of the lawsuit referred to the company's continuing promise to "increase the security" of all its products as the threat against user data becomes "more frequent and more sophisticated."
Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.
Article Link: FBI Director Says Method of Unlocking iPhone Can't Be Used on iPhone 5s or Newer
thisisnotmyname
macrumors 68020
Apple was asked for something very specific and different than what the vendor provided. Your third fact is just plain wrong, fact
zioxide
macrumors 603
Here's the real fact:
This company is a digital forensics firm that specializes in data recovery. They ALREADY had this tool built. The FBI just bought it.
Another real fact: You don't actually understand what's going on here.
MikeyMike01
macrumors 6502
They're talking about the 5c pal
[doublepost=1460055279][/doublepost]
No, it's not worth it. At all. Ever.
This is the same illegal, immoral, disgusting, and embarrassing thought behind travesties like the patriot act or NSA.
tongxinshe
macrumors 65816
You obviously have intentionally misguided your own mind into a state of fully ignoring what FBI exactly asked Apple to do in the first place.
[doublepost=1460057742][/doublepost]
I see, in your logic, a new cloth your parents put on you 40 years ago stays new forever, even after you have died.
[doublepost=1460057945][/doublepost]
except that you intentionally misstated the real fact. The real fact is, FBI used the court order to ask for a special version of iOS, which is essentially an easy-to-use backdoor for them.
Last edited:
lazyrighteye
macrumors 601
Wouldn't Apple have a legit case against the FBI for hacking their product? Only heightened by their refusal to share the hack details with Apple?
And/or wouldn't the FBI's refusal to share the hack with Apple the exact type of reasoning they sued Apple in the 1st place?
Bizarre.
And/or wouldn't the FBI's refusal to share the hack with Apple the exact type of reasoning they sued Apple in the 1st place?
Bizarre.
yaxomoxay
macrumors 604
Comey is not stupid. I disagree with him on this issue, but he's one of the smartest dudes in government. And he has square iron balls.
With his declaration he's saying that he still needs special access to iPhones, and that in this case he was just lucky that someone had the tool to unlock an old iphone ready.
ericgtr12
macrumors 68000
This was the iPhone of a known terrorist who murdered people, they had a very good reason for wanting to access it. You guys here are dealing in extremes, where you believe they have to access all or nothing.
Maybe, just maybe, they wanted to access THIS specific iPhone without the need to access millions of others. As for it not being worth it, when your son or daughter is killed I want to be the first to hear you defending access the person's device who did it. Just PM me.
yaxomoxay
macrumors 604
Legally this argument has absolutely no value. There's a reason why victims and or relatives can't be on a jury. Of course I would want to access that phone, but that doesn't mean that because I am suffering a grave loss I am right.
Your problem is you wish what happened in San B. to happen to others, that's pretty messed up and probably the biggest reason why no one is on your side. If you could justify your argument without repeating that someone's kid would get killed then you might have some supporters.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or even the one. -Spock
17 people getting killed is unfortunate, but 100M+ people without privacy is another issue altogether as people have the right to privacy. So do you infringe on the rights of 100M people just so you have a slim chance of a possible lead on a cell phone?
Pretty sure this is Ethics 101 all over again
ericgtr12
macrumors 68000
Hypothetically, if I killed 16 people and had suspected terrorist ties then that would be a resounding yes. Nobody in their right mind would question this IMO.