This cold war on security is nothing but good for end users who just want their papers and things to be private. Especially from overbearing police and regulators.
Worldwide.
Worldwide.
Last edited:
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.
Hardened Security Features of iPhone 5s Successfully Hacked in LAPD Murder Investigation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What I want to know is what difference it makes whether or not he had a verbal argument or one in text. I could have a knock down drag out verbal argument with my husband in person or in text but it doesn't mean he was the one who killed me if I turned up dead. It could have been the butler in the parlor with the candlestick. 
Doesn't law enforcement have more ironclad evidence that this guy killed his wife? If all they have for evidence of motive is a nasty argument in texts on an IPhone, or even a text of apology making the defendent seem nicer, I think either way it's too flimsy for a jury to consider.
Now I could understand the importance of getting to texts saying where a body is buried or a hostage is being kept. But in this particular case I'm not getting why the iPhone is so important. Unless he bludgeoned her to death with it.
Doesn't law enforcement have more ironclad evidence that this guy killed his wife? If all they have for evidence of motive is a nasty argument in texts on an IPhone, or even a text of apology making the defendent seem nicer, I think either way it's too flimsy for a jury to consider.
Now I could understand the importance of getting to texts saying where a body is buried or a hostage is being kept. But in this particular case I'm not getting why the iPhone is so important. Unless he bludgeoned her to death with it.
Or the far more likely scenario where your phone is stolen and you hope the thief can't get into it.
[doublepost=1462453134][/doublepost]
Hopefully that is the case.
Here's a thought. Apple could participate in bug bounty programs like everyone else. Pay people who find flaws in the OS. Heck, Facebook just paid a 10 year old kid $10,000 for an Instagram bug. Not sure why you think Apple should be getting free security help. If any company can afford to pay for it, it's Apple.
Forgive me but "make customers safer" is a weak red herring. There are readily available methods of securing your phone beyond the protection provided by Apple. If one is that concerned about their safety/privacy, it's fairly easy to do something about it. You say it's not Apple's job to make law enforcement easier, yet under some misguided safety logic, it should be law enforcement's job to make Apple's products more secure?
Remember folks, this is just another reminder that any device that a hacker has physical access too is vulnerable, and with enough time and/or money it will be hacked.
Did this iPhone 5S have the ten-attempt wipe turned on?
If not... couldn't they just try every passcode 0000-9999 ?
If that's what they did... that's not "hacking"
If not... couldn't they just try every passcode 0000-9999 ?
If that's what they did... that's not "hacking"
Well, to be fair, you're getting this information on MR. The focus of MR's article is the iPhone, not the details of the case. There are likely better sources to use to form an opinion about the actual case. Trying to form an opinion about a potential murder case based on an article about an iPhone is... well...What I want to know is what difference it makes whether or not he had a verbal argument or one in text. I could have a knock down drag out verbal argument with my husband in person or in text but it doesn't mean he was the one who killed me if I turned up dead. It could have been the butler in the parlor with the candlestick.
Doesn't law enforcement have more ironclad evidence that this guy killed his wife? If all they have for evidence of motive is a nasty argument in texts on an IPhone, or even a text of apology making the defendent seem nicer, I think either way it's too flimsy for a jury to consider.
Now I could understand the importance of getting to texts saying where a body is buried or a hostage is being kept. But in this particular case I'm not getting why the iPhone is so important. Unless he bludgeoned her to death with it.
Here, this might help with your questions. It appears the defense is trying to use the iPhone to dig up an excuse for the murder: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...urdering-wife-trial-delayed-article-1.2504999
Ah, I see. Thanks for the link, now it makes slightly more sense. I do think it's odd that it makes such a difference between premeditated murder and a "heat of the moment" thing. The victim is still dead either way and the killing is still a nasty one, in front of the kids and all. But at least now I understand why they want the phone unlocked. Thank you again.
C'mon MrKramer. The likelihood of a common phone thief having that particular exploit is laughable. Theoretically possible, yes. But highly unlikely. We create the fanciful scenarios without regard for reality. Realistically, if your phone was to be stolen it would end up parted out or on Craiglist for some dumbass to buy, to only realize later they can't use it.
[doublepost=1462455954][/doublepost]
Not certain, but it could be the difference between death penalty and a lesser sentence like life, 30 years, etc. With California seemingly getting ready to executing death row inmates again, it could be a concern.
Last edited:
The FBI is not about protecting Americans, it's about getting its way to do what it wants. Often time that corresponds with protecting Americans, but not always.
How is that?
A MURDER was committed and a search warrant was signed by a judge authorizing access to the MURDER VICTIM's phone.
Are you saying access to the victim's phone for collecting potential evidence useful to prosecuting the crime should not have been pursued by prosecutors and police investigators?
I've sided with Apple in a number of these articles but in this case it's all on Apple. The government has no obligation to be a bug tester for Apple and they have a vested interested in keeping any viable security workarounds to themselves, which I can respect. If Apple were truly concerned about the issue, it would disable all input and output from iPhone save for touchscreen recognition and TouchID. But, because it wants to retain the option to flash the device externally, it won't and has no one to blame but itself.
Thieves don't care what is in your phone, they just wipe it clean and resell it.
[doublepost=1462458818][/doublepost]
LAPD hacked the phone but without the FBI tool.
You're conflating two different things. FBI cracked the 5C using one exploit. They assumed that exploit was not viable against iPhones with Secure Enclave. The LAPD reportedly cracked a 5S with a SE.
That would make sense if Apple helped Justice when crime is committed (you know, privacy enters an special status when investigating crime, because crime data can't be secret for authorities unless you affirm crime is a right).
However, Apple has defended the position that crime is a right (it would be interesting to know their position when crime is against LGBT interests, though), and so I'd say it's legit for Justice to not trust Apple in the fight against crime.
Your post makes no sense, if Apple worked with them to open phones in criminal cases that would mean that Apple would be opening up new vulnerabilities and not trying to close existing ones.
My dear friends, I have got nothing to do. I am wandering aimlessly in life and have a great need to occupy my mind with any old subject matter irrelevant to me but perhaps interesting to my curiosity nonetheless. Please help me by supplying endless thoughts and opinions on anything related to iPhones it doesn't matter how trivial or absurd or obscure or non-consequential, lets just dive in and become immersed in this ocean of titillation.
Last edited:
No one said "warm fuzzy" except you.
[doublepost=1462460077][/doublepost]
Thanks for doing your part.
I think in this situation, the LAPD is more concerned about finding out who murdered who than getting involved in some random tech pundit platform spat.
The Vulnerabilities and Equities Process (VEP) already provides for this.
https://www.macrumors.com/2016/04/26/apple-fbi-security-flaw-disclosure/