Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

FBI Has Found 'Nothing of Real Significance' Inside the San Bernardino iPhone Yet

So CBS has a "source" and people are believing this as fact? As silly as this story is becoming, people really need to take what journalists consider as facts with a pinch of salt these days!

I'm not from the US, but how credible is CBS? Maybe if I saw this story on BBC who bothers to validate thier sources before going to publish, I'd give it some credit.

Looks like another click bait article.....
 
surprised.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Renzatic, Eraserhead, VulchR and 3 others
I knew the phone had nothing important. I mean what were they expecting to find in it?
 
EM2013 said:
I knew the phone had nothing important. I mean what were they expecting to find in it?
Click to expand...
There should be a rule. When investigating a crime (and possible links to other crimes), don't even try to access a work phone. There is nothing there. It's a waste of time. No one would leave a clue on a work phone either on purpose or accidentally.

Just pretend the work phone doesn't exist.

Criminals, your cooperation is required. Don't leave any clues on work phones. The FBI needs to know that you would never do it, so they can make the rule defined above. It's up to you to do your part.

Doesn't anyone watch procedurals on TV? There are always two or three clues that lead the investigators to question the wrong suspects. If they skipped right to the good clues, they would avoid all that wasted effort (and the shows would be 15 minutes long).
 
elmateo487 said:
What? What about the hundreds of apps that people can chat on...... Or pictures with people of significance. Or what if the Find My IPhone feature was turned on, and every location they had been to was logged. Do I need to keep going? Do those things fall into that 1%?

You really think they would call up al-Baghdadi? Or maybe text him? Hey! Got anymore ideas on how we are going to kill these people?
Click to expand...
Based on historical evidence; yes.
The actual phones used are as usual destroyed after use, and in the cases where the crazies did actually plot and conspire (eg. Paris); it was exactly through the basic functions described.

And it may be stating the obvious (except to those working for the FBI), but;
- This iPhone has been set to use and backup with iCloud, and nothing of interest was there (this would likely include more pictures, and deleted items than remain on the iPhone anyway!)
- Communication apps are unlikely to store anything much locally, and you're going to have to somehow log in to them. And more data could be obtained more easily from the accounts than through the iPhone. Assuming any were even installed on a work phone in the first place!
- Positioning data? Logging alone is a big if, let alone it actually being taken anywhere. The other phones are far more interesting, while the best dataset would be through correlating all from the cellular networks.

I think we all have unrealistic expectations; terrorists would appear to be Luddites that only use tech in the most basic way. The FBI simply doesn't understand tech, thinks it's a magic cure-all, and is completely intimidated by anyone using teh interwebz.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eraserhead
Ummm, does anyone believe the FBI actually did break into the phone? Wasn't this all just a smokescreen to run away from the lawsuit they started?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
This was never about the data on this particular phone. This one phone was a proxy war over government access to data more generally and private businesses rights to resist. Finding nothing on this device does nothing to undercut the governments argument for wanting access, just as finding a treasure trove would have done nothing to undercut Apple's.
 
Ya know what throws me off? I believe the fbi and most government agencies have a corrupt nature to them that is really anti American at times. Patriot act? NDAA? So when I hear the fbi freely admitting they found nothing it just...makes no sense. If they are as corrupt as I think they are, why wouldn't they just make up something significant and say "ha! See?" Same for the war on terror and whatnot. Why not falsify more evidence that something is worse than it is?

That just leaves me scratching my head
 
Googlyhead said:
Based on historical evidence; yes.
The actual phones used are as usual destroyed after use, and in the cases where the crazies did actually plot and conspire (eg. Paris); it was exactly through the basic functions described.

And it may be stating the obvious (except to those working for the FBI), but;
- This iPhone has been set to use and backup with iCloud, and nothing of interest was there (this would likely include more pictures, and deleted items than remain on the iPhone anyway!)
- Communication apps are unlikely to store anything much locally, and you're going to have to somehow log in to them. And more data could be obtained more easily from the accounts than through the iPhone. Assuming any were even installed on a work phone in the first place!
- Positioning data? Logging alone is a big if, let alone it actually being taken anywhere. The other phones are far more interesting, while the best dataset would be through correlating all from the cellular networks.

I think we all have unrealistic expectations; terrorists would appear to be Luddites that only use tech in the most basic way. The FBI simply doesn't understand tech, thinks it's a magic cure-all, and is completely intimidated by anyone using teh interwebz.
Click to expand...

You are full of it. You discredit everything, yet you know nothing about the phone. Do you even know that iPhones log every location by default? And how many times you have been there? And what makes you think they didn't take this phone somewhere.

And why would you assume that an iCloud backup be a replica of the phone? When anyone who watches the news, and sees J Lawrence nudes knows you can turn off photo backup.

Point is. The device could have had useful info on it. People are people, and make mistakes.
 
So how do we know they even got in there? "found nothing yet of significance" so what did they actually find? any examples? Where are the bad selfies? The porn sites they browsed? The poorly spelled TXT messages? And what apps are used by terrorists so we can see if our friends are leaning that way?

As a previous poster said, the phone records of calls to and from that phone probably would tell more.
 
doelcm82 said:
There should be a rule. When investigating a crime (and possible links to other crimes), don't even try to access a work phone. There is nothing there. It's a waste of time. No one would leave a clue on a work phone either on purpose or accidentally.

Just pretend the work phone doesn't exist.
Click to expand...


That's right :p

just "assuming" is always better than checking for proof ....I seriously doubt we would operate like that, and if we did, there would be alott more miss-fires. because 99% of the time it would be the wrong criminal..

And u don't need to break int a phone o see who you've called... just get it from the phone company, so the government should already know that ahead of time.

You don't break into a house expecting to find a shovel do you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ghost31
Tech198 said:
That's right :p

just "assuming" is always better than checking for proof ....I seriously doubt we would operate like that, and if we did, there would be alott more miss-fires. because 99% of the time it would be the wrong criminal..

And u don't need to break int a phone o see who you've called... just get it from the phone company, so the government should already know that ahead of time.

You don't break into a house expecting to find a shovel do you?
Click to expand...
How would the phone company know who you have messaged using iMessage, or WhatsApp, or Skype, or FaceTime, or Facebook Messenger? Why would you assume that the phone company has all the records of communication from the phone?

This is not 1999 any more. There are many common ways to communicate that don't go through the phone company's system in a manner that the phone company can or does log it.
 
And u are also assuming he used internet based apps..

Just pointing out logical sense if may have used a his mobile carrier
 
elmateo487 said:
What? What about the hundreds of apps that people can chat on...... Or pictures with people of significance. Or what if the Find My IPhone feature was turned on, and every location they had been to was logged. Do I need to keep going? Do those things fall into that 1%?

You really think they would call up al-Baghdadi? Or maybe text him? Hey! Got anymore ideas on how we are going to kill these people?
Click to expand...

So if i understand you correctly.... you think that although they went to all the effort of completing destroying their personal phones, in order to cover all tracks and destroy evidence... they just completely forgot to do something about their work phones? Clearly the fact that they did not destroy those also is a pretty clear indication that they knew there was nothing of importance on them. Or that they wanted them to waste their time trying to find anything on them.
 
gavroche said:
So if i understand you correctly.... you think that although they went to all the effort of completing destroying their personal phones, in order to cover all tracks and destroy evidence... they just completely forgot to do something about their work phones? Clearly the fact that they did not destroy those also is a pretty clear indication that they knew there was nothing of importance on them. Or that they wanted them to waste their time trying to find anything on them.
Click to expand...

CLEARLY. Clearly you have presented all of the facts. And CLEARLY that is the case.
 
elmateo487 said:
CLEARLY. Clearly you have presented all of the facts. And CLEARLY that is the case.
Click to expand...

Am i wrong? Did they not destroy their personal phones? Pkease link to any article stating that they did not.
And if i am right... And they did destroy their personal phones... What facts am i leaving out that are relevant to my assertion?
TY
 
gavroche said:
Am i wrong? Did they not destroy their personal phones? Pkease link to any article stating that they did not.
And if i am right... And they did destroy their personal phones... What facts am i leaving out that are relevant to my assertion?
TY
Click to expand...

You are so full of it. Lol.
 
elmateo487 said:
You are so full of it. Lol.
Click to expand...

Really? You won't tell me if my premise was incorrect. And after telling me i'm leaving so much out, you won't tell me what i'm leaving out. And i'm full of it. You make such wonderful sense. You should be a debate team captain or something. A real genius.
If you are going to call someone out for something they say, at least have the courage or integrity to tell them why they are wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Googlyhead and decafjava
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back