The terrorist is dead?if the FBI wants the phone unlocked why not this take it too the shooter in jailed and have then put in his passcode and there easy and done with
The terrorist is dead?if the FBI wants the phone unlocked why not this take it too the shooter in jailed and have then put in his passcode and there easy and done with
For some reason I can't get this junk PC I'm stuck with to copy the link to this, so here is the headline and byline.It's the full text of the story posted elsewhere.
Apple Tells Employees Why it Won't Help Hack Shooters Phone
By Tami Abdollah and Eric Tucker
Associated Press
Way down it reads:
"The case would not have existed if the county government that owned the iPhone had installed a feature on it that would have allowed the FBI to easily and immediately unlock the phone. San Bernardino County had bought the technology, known as mobile device management from MobileIron Inc., but never installed it on any of the inspectors' phones, including Farook's, said county spokesman David Wert said.
There is no countywide policy on the matter and departments make their own decisions, he said.
The service costs $4 per month per phone."
Dale
I'm sure Apple already has a backdoor version of iPhone made... like they did for PowerPC and Intel... "just in case scenario"
Correct authors, wrong story.
Interesting. The whole story, the one containing the quote in my first post (103) came in on my Yahoo Finance feed early this morning on my iPhone. The link you posted is to a different story. I went back to my iPhone and emailed the story link to myself to post here, but got the same link you posted. Someone seems to be messing with the free distribution on information here. But that's what we are actually discussing, isn't it?
Dale
Wow, that's weird. I Googled the article title and authors and was presented the story you referred to. Now the link is incorrect.
Correct authors, wrong story.
Interesting. The whole story, the one containing the quote in my first post (103) came in on my Yahoo Finance feed early this morning on my iPhone. The link you posted is to a different story. I went back to my iPhone and emailed the story link to myself to post here, but got the same link you posted. Someone seems to be messing with the free distribution on information here. But that's what we are actually discussing, isn't it?
Dale
ReutersWow, that's weird. I Googled the article title and authors and was presented the story you referred to. Now the link is incorrect.
San Bernardino County, which employed Farook as an environmental health inspector, requires some, but not all, of its workers to install mobile-device management software made by Silicon Valley-based MobileIron Inc MOBL.O on government-issued phones, according to county spokesman David Wert.
That software is designed to secure corporate data. It also allows information technology departments to remotely unlock phones, even without assistance of the phone's users or access to the password needed to open the phone and unscramble the data.
"If that particular iPhone was using MobileIron, the county's IT department could unlock it," MobileIron Vice President Ojas Rege told Reuters.
Who would have thought the much-maligned iPhone 5c would be one of the most secure phones on the market....
I really want to assume there are people working in the fbi that release how bad of an idea it is for Apple to build a back door and it's just a few old guys at the top that are clueless about tech demanding this.
The reason Apple can't break this encryption is because of the fail safe measures put in place by themselves in their own products, using an architecture that they designed for themselves (however similar to others). This has nothing to do with Open Source - and AES encryption was not an Open Source endeavor. And of all security through obscurity, Open Source would be the best candidate for that. We saw what happened with OpenSSL and Heartbleed almost 2 years ago, for instance.
Either shows their own weaknesses or ignorant, I think.So the FBI have backups to October 19th yet want Apple to code a completely new version of iOS for a few days worth of data. If they understand the implications of their own request, then they are insane, if they don't then they are incompetent.
So is Apple sitting hard on the key, or is there simply no key? The former would indicate Apple is, as accused, using this as an opportunity to generate warm fuzzies from its customers. The latter would be more palatable, to me anyway.
As a megacorp, I've always found it rather unbelievable that Apple doesn't have the ability to crack it's own keys. But if they won't decrypt this phone because they genuinely can't, wouldn't that be a better argument to the Feds?
You clearly don't understand how encryption works.
Lets make it very simple, they "key" is 256 bits long, that means there is over 1.15 x10^77 possible combinations, each one of those bit is either a 0 or a 1. Now guess what the combination is.
Now consider a lottery where they have 40 balls and you have to select 6 of them, there is a 1 chance in 3.8 Million
The lottery easy, VERY easy in comparison, so how many times have you won a major prize ?
So decrypting it is NOT an option.
So is Apple sitting hard on the key, or is there simply no key? The former would indicate Apple is, as accused, using this as an opportunity to generate warm fuzzies from its customers. The latter would be more palatable, to me anyway.
As a megacorp, I've always found it rather unbelievable that Apple doesn't have the ability to crack it's own keys. But if they won't decrypt this phone because they genuinely can't, wouldn't that be a better argument to the Feds?
Such a nice reply. It appears you have a hair trigger and came to this thread to blast people with your superior knowledge of all that is common. I really don't see how my statement warranted such a response.
There is nothing clear about "they know how the internals work" to suggest I "clearly don't understand how encryption works."
In fact, there is a damn good chance that you don't know how security and encryption work if you think the only way into that phone is through its "key."
How does the FBI get into physical safes? They go to the same maker. (And I'll shut down your next point - the physical safe has flaws and that the security enclave doesn't. The safe maker is still better suited than someone else)
What kills me is the fact that if Apple chose to rewrite iOS, this device in question would need to be updated or restored, therefore possibly destroying evidence. After all, they can't back up and restore the device because the password is different now. FBI just might be screwed in this case.
Hey, if the court knows so much, let them do it.Per the court order the new iOS must run in ram and not modify the iOS on the phone.
Per the court order the new iOS must run in ram and not modify the iOS on the phone.
Everyone talks of striking or walking out or putting up resistance. Is Cook going to be paralleled to Mandala, Ghandi, King, or others, with any issues that might tarnish the "good guy" visage being swept under the rug, but it's nice to see him win people over with the dog and pony show he's putting on.
Maybe he'll finally get around to fixing the child labor, worker suicides, other human rights abuses, and the latest chapter: http://fortune.com/2016/01/19/apple-child-labor/ (if those companies are linked, then so are the customers? Why or why not? Can everyone simply "vote with their wallets" or is reality a little less simple than what we delude ourselves with via quotes such as that one? )
- iOS can be set to erase its keys after 10 incorrect passcode guesses. The FBI wants software with this feature disabled.
- iOS imposes increasingly long delays after consecutive incorrect passcode guesses to slow down guessing (this is commonly called rate limiting). The FBI wants software that accepts an arbitrary number of guesses with no delays.
- iOS requires individual passcodes be typed in by hand. The FBI wants a means to electronically enter passcodes, allowing it to automatically try every possible code quickly.