FBI Director Says Method of Unlocking iPhone Can't Be Used on iPhone 5s or Newer

[Exile714]

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.

I'm not saying he's dumb, I was saying that the statement makes it clear how political this is, rather than an actual security issue. If he wanted anything more than to pressure tech companies into submitting to the whims of the government, they would have approached this issue quietly through back channels. If there was a threat that terrorists might actually benefit from hiding their tracks with newer phones, THAT would be dumb.

But more importantly, I don't think either of us are qualified to comment on the physical characteristics of his balls.

 

[MacNut]

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.

The FBI doesn't want any encryption anywhere, they want an open netwowrk to be able to snoop on your phone at will. This has nothing to do with you being a terrorist.

 

[ericgtr12]

The FBI doesn't want any encryption anywhere, they want an open netwowrk to be able to snoop on your phone at will. This has nothing to do with you being a terrorist.

Well, in this specific case they wanted access to just this iPhone which is why once they got it they dropped the case, however I concede the larger point but that's another discussion.

 

[MacNut]

Well, in this specific case they wanted access to just this iPhone which is why once they got it they dropped the case, however I concede the larger point but that's another discussion.

I honestly don't know what would be on that phone that was more important than his computers. Unless they wanted pictures of his 72 virgins. Why would terrorists go through so much trouble to cover their tracks and then leave an iPhone out in the open.

 

[CheesePuff]

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.

And right here spells out how you clearly don't understand what their request was. They didn't want access to this device. They wanted Apple to create a modified version of iOS that they could utilize to bypass the auto lockout functionality that currently exists so they could brute force their way into ANY iOS device.

 

[MikeyMike01]

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.

All citizens of the US, including suspected criminals, including terrorists, have the same rights as everyone else.

If the FBI only wanted to access this specific phone, they could have a long time ago without any assistance from Apple.

The FBI knew it, Apple knew it, the experts knew it.

What the FBI wanted was to set a legal precedent to be used in the future against other devices and companies.

They chose a case they thought people would be so horrified by that they wouldn't mind allowing the FBI to break the law.

Thankfully the public was smart enough to side with Apple, overwhelmingly, and avert disaster. For now. They'll try again some day, I guarantee it.

 

[bladerunner2000]

Not as unaware as Apple is of how to access their own device, apparently.

LOL, checkmate!

 

[You are the One]

So basically the FBI is waiting for another tragedy to file the next lawsuit for the next "one-time only" event.

That's not really how it works.

They will design and execute another tragedy. Or, just design it and have the execution outsourced to Craft International.

 

[macs4nw]

It just means the "showdown" that was going to happen last month has been delayed until the next major incident occurs where the FBI wants Apple to unlock "just this one phone, just this one time". The 5 & 5c model are a couple years old so not only do they represent a small percentage of iPhones, but that percentage is shrinking every day as millions of 6, 6s & SE phones enter the market. Get ready for round 2.

I agree with that assessment completely. All one has to do is read between the lines of that Comey statement "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" and the implications of that line are crystal clear.

 

[LordBeelzebub]

So, the FBI says their method of hacking an iPhone doesn't work on an iPhone of 5S and higher, only works on "a small sliver" of iPhones, and a lot of you actually believe that huh?

 

[dk001]

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.

They were however bats**t c crazy enough to get a court to say that Apple had to build a new OS version that allow backdoors and requires remote access via whatever method the FBI determines. And all that at conscription rates.
[doublepost=1460070624][/doublepost]

... Remember, we're dealing with a government entity, there's always a hidden agenda behind every statement.

Smoke and Mirrors.

 

[manu chao]

I'm no supporter of the FBI in this situation, but I know a little bit about military security.

And this is the dumbest thing the director could have said. Shouldn't a weakness like "we can't get into these specific phones" be classified? Why would you announce that? That's like saying (during the Cold War) "Hey Russia, we can't launch our ICBMs on February 29th because of a date bug, so if you want to start World War III do it on that date."

If they took this seriously AT ALL, they wouldn't have made this announcement. It's just one more proof that this is a political game more than anything.

I think he is speaking for the FBI only. The FBI is a civilian law enforcement agency that has nothing to do with the military. What the NSA, CIA and the military are able to do is another matter (and classified).

 

[dk001]

Fact: Apple said it would have to write a new backdoor that would take a great deal of time and resources.
Fact: An outside company was able to access it in no time at all.
Fact: Apple was either lying or incapable.

These facts do not care whether or not you believe in them.

Try this:

1. "it will bypass or disable the auto-erase function whether or not it has been enabled" (this user-configurable feature of iOS 9 automatically deletes keys needed to read encrypted data after ten consecutive incorrect attempts)
2. "it will enable the FBI to submit passcodes to the SUBJECT DEVICE for testing electronically via the physical device port, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or other protocol available"
3. "it will ensure that when the FBI submits passcodes to the SUBJECT DEVICE, software running on the device will not purposefully introduce any additional delay between passcode attempts beyond what is incurred by Apple hardware"

The order also specifies that Apple's assistance may include providing software to the FBI that "will be coded by Apple with a unique identifier of the phone so that the [software] would only load and execute on the SUBJECT DEVICE

Now, do you see how incorrect your statements really are? If you want, and maybe you should, go Google and read the original warrant.

 

[citi]

It's just my opinion on the matter with Apple, not sure of the need for personal attacks here.

Your opinion is in direct opposition of facts. You can't say it's my opinion on something that is actually fact based.
[doublepost=1460071344][/doublepost]

So basically the FBI is waiting for another tragedy to file the next lawsuit for the next "one-time only" event.

Waiting or creating? I'm not really sure what the FBI knows and doesn't know on a given moment.

 

[dk001]

I'm not saying he's dumb, I was saying that the statement makes it clear how political this is, rather than an actual security issue. If he wanted anything more than to pressure tech companies into submitting to the whims of the government, they would have approached this issue quietly through back channels. If there was a threat that terrorists might actually benefit from hiding their tracks with newer phones, THAT would be dumb.

But more importantly, I don't think either of us are qualified to comment on the physical characteristics of his balls.

Seriously doubt he is acting on his own. At that level, he has a leash. Likely a shock collar too.
[doublepost=1460072309][/doublepost]

Well, in this specific case they wanted access to just this iPhone which is why once they got it they dropped the case, however I concede the larger point but that's another discussion.

You really need to get your facts straight. The warrant specified one device. The DOJ specified 12 more. Under oath Director Comey stated that it would not be limited to "just one device". Post that event the FBI said it will help other agencies.

Why do you keep belaboring the "One Device" as if it were an indisputable fact?

 

[lostngone]

The FBI shouldn't have to explain anything, they went to Apple, who said no way and then got it done through someone else, that simple. The last thing Apple deserves is an explanation of how someone else was able to do in two weeks what they claimed couldn't be done at all, Apple either lied about it or weren't qualified to do it.

What are you going to say if the FBI(or other governmental agency) kicked your door in and said you are being arrested as a terror suspect from evidence they found on that phone.... Wouldn't YOU want the FBI to show how they got that information so you/your lawyer could make a defense? Right now, all we have is the word of the FBI that any of that information is real and not been tampered with somehow.

 

[Crzyrio]

The FBI shouldn't have to explain anything, they went to Apple, who said no way and then got it done through someone else, that simple. The last thing Apple deserves is an explanation of how someone else was able to do in two weeks what they claimed couldn't be done at all, Apple either lied about it or weren't qualified to do it.

They SHOULD tell apple if they have the public's interest in mind.

Shouldn't the public be protected from hackers, terrorist etc from these people accessing their phones?

 

[thewitt]

If the FBI is telling the truth and their hack only works on the 5C, Apple should be able to find the flaw without their help.

 

[lostngone]

If the FBI is telling the truth and their hack only works on the 5C, Apple should be able to find the flaw without their help.

Don't believe anything the FBI says.

 

[HEK]

Man, that San Bernardino shooter should feel real bad for getting an iPhone 5C instead of a 5S.

Don't think he is feeling anything, as he is dead. And maybe his employer who supplied the phone did not offer any other model. Could be why he used the other two phones he crushed be fore committing the murders, to conduct his terrorist activities. That and the hard drive the FBI still has not found.

 

[LizKat]

What? No it isn't, and was never marketed as such. It's an iPhone 5 in a different shell.

yeah but in iOS 9.3.x you can use WiFi calling on a 5C,5S but not on a 5.

 

[HEK]

I simply don't trust anything Comey says.

He lied under oath to congress. Why wouldn't he lie to American people?

 

[LizKat]

tbh in this whole thing both sides have reason to disinform the public and we'll probably never know whose "truthiness" has the least bs in it.

 

[Wondercow]

You guys can keep attacking me but it was clearly Apple who did not understand what was going on.

You dont seem to understand, perhaps willfully, that Cellebrite has been in business for years, and their business is electronic device forensics. This means that, at some point, Cellebrite had to develop the tools to crack each phone model. Do we know how long it took their engineers to develop these tools? Perhaps it took Cellebrite two months with 20 engineers, where Apple claimed two-to-four weeks with a team of ten. Perhaps Cellebrite did it in one day with a team of one. Any way you slice it, though, Cellebrite had to take time to create the tool, just like Apple said they need time to create the tool.

 

[HEK]

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.

Yeah you right, let's bug everyone, put anyone suspicious in camps. Did it to Americans of Japanese decent during WW ll. After all, what do we need rights for, they aren't important if we can save one life. Say that to all the patriot's that gave up their lives for the precious liberties, right to privacy being one of them.

So the 27 people that died yesterday from drunk drivers, and the 27 more today, and 27 more tomorrow, do they deserve as much attention, money, and effort to save their lives? People do bad things to other people. Taking my liberty and freedom away won't save me from bad people.