Why would they not? They would be rubbing it in the face of Apple, and tell the public how Apple was wrong. They could shift the public opinion very easily.
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: It's 'Simply Too Early' to Tell if Info on San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone is Valuable
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm with those who read this as nothing useful was found. True, they wouldn't state WHAT was found before an investigations was complete. But given the level of resources dedicated to the effort and the amount of hyperbole used in their legal arguments, they would have been quite keen to claim significant data was found.
Being nice, they probably found a vague text/im to some unusual name they can't track since the information used to make it were never used again saying something like:
text out: I need to meet with you to discuss things
About as incriminating as 100's of my texts from the wife.
her: Did you take care of what I asked you about this morning over lunch.
me: Yes dear.
I could have held up a bank at lunch that she planned out.
Or...I could have did a quick errand as simple as go to the store.
Putting me behind bars if I in fact did rob the bank (if no other evidence to link me exists)....this is not doing that. Nor is it adding to the case against my criminal mastermind wife if one being built up.
text out: I need to meet with you to discuss things
About as incriminating as 100's of my texts from the wife.
her: Did you take care of what I asked you about this morning over lunch.
me: Yes dear.
I could have held up a bank at lunch that she planned out.
Or...I could have did a quick errand as simple as go to the store.
Putting me behind bars if I in fact did rob the bank (if no other evidence to link me exists)....this is not doing that. Nor is it adding to the case against my criminal mastermind wife if one being built up.
They also may actually help stalking victims hide their trails, identity theft victims hide their info, etc. Which are there more of - terrorism victims or stalking victims?
Yep. No way FBI is going to admit that there was nothing useful after this whole charade. By stating "simply too early", makes it sound like they are taking this serious, when they probably decided months ago to say that they uncovered important information. Did they even hack into this phone? How would we ever really know.
It's really pretty sad. A number of posts here, and elsewhere on this and related topics, have raised the issue of not trusting the FBI. I don't trust them any further than I could throw their HQ building, and I suspect that at least half of the people in DC (Our Leaders) are at least partially afraid of the FBI, or what's in the J. Edgar Hoover Memorial Archive of Blackmail Material on them, and can't/won't bring this sad collection of wanna-be G-Men into line. I'm not a fan of Hillary, but I know the FBI is dragging their feet on that stupid email investigation so as to surface revelations piecemeal as needed to make sure she knows where the whip hand is. As far as this iPhone thing is concerned, they'll be pushing out updates like this one until they've decided the media has lost interest and then they'll just let it die.
Whatever FBI say's these days is just verbal diarrhea at this point.
Some of the words they discovered in "Words with Friends" za and qi are being analyzed by the countries top linguistic forensic experts. The FBI will come out with a complete analysis in a couple months about this cryptic code the shooters used.
Yes, it is simply too early. We'll give them another 50 years to figure it out.
The criminals were smart enough to destroy their personal iPhones, but they left this work iPhone alone.
Yeah, it probably is too soon to tell whether the phone contains valuable secrets. Not to early to know, but too early tell us, no doubt!
Yeah, it probably is too soon to tell whether the phone contains valuable secrets. Not to early to know, but too early tell us, no doubt!
That's simply a no. If there were real actionable intelligence it would not be too early to tell, the too early bit is that they are hoping they can develop some of the meaningless noise into something of value' and probably won't.
Whatever was on the phone has already been erased long ago. Those two supposed "terrorists" were nothing more than set up patsies. Many eyewitnesses stated there were 3 male shooters in military gear, not one male and a female. It's all just a show
They get booked for conventions and such. John Lynch (DoJ Cybercrime chief) gave a "debate" (more like round table interview) at a Microsoft convention yesterday. They do this type of thing if there's a tie-in (privacy would be one, MS' big cloud focus with Azure is another) and something of interest. Lynch's talk was much more moderate than the PR has been, and one on one he flat out admitted that both sides had to get very aggressive in the wording of the filings and PR. He appeared to be genuine when he spoke on the idea that the DoJ may face a future where some areas of technology are untouchable by them (even if congressional action produces a key escrow or such) and the world will not end; they'll reset expectations on what they are able to do and may need to educate the public in some very emotional situations if they are blocked by encryption but they will move their focus to the next avenue of investigation. It will always be an arms race of sorts (or whack a mole if you are more cynical) but both sides' dooms day predictions are hyperbole. Bottom line is this is largely philosophical.
Staff: if you want a transcript of that talk I can probably arrange, it was webcast. PM me if interested.
[doublepost=1459914931][/doublepost]
If we're going to judge as bad anything that "may actually help" terrorism there will be a long list of concepts we need to demonize. Let's go right for the jugular of rhetoric (this is in PRSI already right?); depending on which side of the political aisle you are on (immigation|drone strikes) may actually help terrorism. Pick whichever one offends you. Enjoy.
ummm this is a generic responce to a question that law enforcements around the world give, with keywords being "analysing" "leads" " too early" And people are accepting this responce as facts lol....his avoiding the question with a generic BS responce.
[doublepost=1459917808][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1459917808][/doublepost]
my concern is that Tim is all talk, he took the high ground about our privacy and that he would fight this, FBI found a way to get in, and Apple has gone silent on what was such an important issue for them. As of today, of the FBI can access a locked iPhone, so can others, question is does Tim have the balls to acknowledge the method used and close it, he could in the new iPhone, but he will not.....Apple will hope this just goes away...
If "helping terrorists" you mean "unwavering in consumer privacy", i'm all for it.
Apple themselves said they wanted to help the FBI and gave them as much info as they could. What they wouldn't do is jeopardize everybody's god damn security to make it happen.
Most importantly to keep in mind: they will try again later. They'll wait until the winds change – perhaps after another major terrorist attack happens in this country – then they'll likely succeed in passing whatever they wanted here, and more.
Enduring vigilance is the price of freedom.
Pictures of cats, a music library of Celine Dion, and a web history of googling stupid questions. I hope they found whatever they're looking for given the process they've had to employ to get there.
If I recall correctly didn't the shooters go above and beyond to destroy their computer hard drives and other cell phones? In that case, it sounds like they weren't taking risks on the government retrieving the information. I imagine the work phone would have been destroyed too had there been anything if significant value.
That said, you never know what kind of information they could pull off of it to help build a timeline (location data, calendar events, etc)- little bread crumbs that might help solve questions of the bigger puzzle.
If I recall correctly didn't the shooters go above and beyond to destroy their computer hard drives and other cell phones? In that case, it sounds like they weren't taking risks on the government retrieving the information. I imagine the work phone would have been destroyed too had there been anything if significant value.
That said, you never know what kind of information they could pull off of it to help build a timeline (location data, calendar events, etc)- little bread crumbs that might help solve questions of the bigger puzzle.
So basically they issued a court order to try and set a precedent to prove company's aren't more powerful than the government, and when Apple towered over them with the whole world behind them ready for a fight, the FBI backed off and ran scared. Now, after all the commotion, they're saying they don't know if the phone is even worth the effort.
The only thing this legal battle accomplished is to show that Apple will not be bullied, which only weakens the governments position further. Well done FBI.
The only thing this legal battle accomplished is to show that Apple will not be bullied, which only weakens the governments position further. Well done FBI.
Or, 'we couldn't really get in' but we're waiting until the public forgets about this.
I think they do a lot more blackmail and keeping the slaves in line than fighting terrorism. Not saying I necessarily trust Tim either... but at least he probably just wants to make a bunch-o-money.
It's probably a bigger slap to Apple to say they broke into it and leave it at that (whether they did or not). After all of Apple's bluster about security, security, security... and now, un-secure. Ouch!
Hillary, no doubt, has a *LOT* of dirt on Comey and company too. I think they're in kind of a stand-off. My guess, nothing will come of it. If Hillary does get elected, that's exactly the kind of thing you want to be able to hold over her head to keep the leash short.
Yea, it was also a bit ironic timing that Apple released that 'broken' updater (unsigned, if I understand), the day before the FBI dropped the case. Hopefully that's just the conspiracy theorist in me in overdrive.
But, I agree, there are a number of compromised encryption systems and apps out there being touted as systems helping terrorists. So, hopefully Apple's whole 'privacy first' thing isn't just a cover for a back-door agreement they've already made.
I'm actually a bit surprised a phone hasn't been found in Brussels. Maybe they are waiting a bit so it isn't quite so obvious (though, it's not like that stopped them in the past).
How do you know the FBI raised it? There were presumably other people there too.
[doublepost=1459930220][/doublepost]
Think about it for half a second...