iPhone Hack Answered Questions About San Bernardino Attack But Generated No New Leads

[dk001]

By "fanboys," you mean fans of the Constitution, right?

Even though most people here prefer Apple devices, privacy is platform-agnostic. I'm sure everyone would feel the same way if it was an Android phone in question – except that there's doubt that Google would stand their ground like Apple has.

Don't be too sure. There are other ways and the Android model is significantly different than the iOS model. As we see Marshmallow and beyond become the dominant version, it will play out the same. For Android, it is more the OEM's that customize than Google itself.
Point to consider: Eric Schmidt was the "behind the scene" ambassador from the US Government to other countries. Suddenly that stopped. Look at the news around that time frame....
[doublepost=1461165824][/doublepost]

Its onky a matter of time before US Federal law is changed to make unbreakable encryption illegal for personal devices such as phones and messaging systems

I wouldn't count on that.
Watching the recent testimonies before Congress and one point kept coming up: LEO is still trying to use old school investigative techniques as they have no clue how and no drive to develop new ones. That was called out by both sides.
[doublepost=1461166035][/doublepost]

Good this all ended well.

Ended? Hardly. This was one skirmish in a protracted battle in a long term war.
Details at 11.

 

[mildocjr]

So glad my tax dollars went to 18 minutes of nope!

 

[Tycho24]

Gotta love these fanboy replys. Because nothing additional was found on a terrorist's phone, it proves that law enforcement wasted everyone's time trying really hard to investigate a terrorist's phone.

Wtf are you talking about?????????!
Sounds like you're just running your mouth.
Literally NOBODY had issue with the FBI "trying really hard" to investigate a phone; the issue was forcing Apple to break security for us all in order to do that.
You should REALLY consider reading up on a topic prior to posting a bunch of nonsense about it. It may help prevent you from looking rather foolish.
*my 2¢*

 

[DesterWallaboo]

Translation: They found nothing..... big shock.

 

[Tech198]

(that's why you can't take the memory from an iPhone and connect it to a supercomputer to crack it)

and u know that ?

The only reason the FBI didn't do this is i believe not because its impossible, its because it would take too long.

Just because we say it's "impossible" is kind of muddying the waters in what we *really* mean is "yes, we could do that, but it would take forever* I better ask Apple for an easier way in. Which is what I believe why the FBI did what it did.

 

[CFreymarc]

Anticlimactic isn't the word.

Try nugatory.

 

[dk001]

Try nugatory.

Chuckle
Most folks have neither heard that word nor know what it means.

 

[Renzatic]

Chuckle
Most folks have neither heard that word nor know what it means.

I thought it had something to do with noogies. Good thing there are dictionaries on the internet!

 

[vvswarup]

This shouldn't come as a surprise. The phone was the terrorist's employer-issued phone. If anyone was plotting something nefarious, the last place they would leave behind evidence of their nefarious plans is their work-issued electronic device, be it a phone or computer.

If you ask me, I think the FBI was hoping it could use this case to play on the public's fears in order to sway public opinion overwhelmingly against Apple and other tech companies. The FBI was likely hoping that tech companies would be tripping over themselves to break their encryption for fear of being seen as in league with the bad guys in the media. That's not what happened though.

 

[Flight Plan]

Once again, the federal government has all the power to keep terrorists out of the country in the first place, including the San Bernardino Two. We could have prevented this.

They just don't do it and we have been lazy about MAKING them do it. Congress has the power. The president has the power. The courts have the power. But everybody has abrogated their responsibilities. It is time for the electorate to get tough, since government officials have shown that they just can't be bothered.

We need to know who is coming in, where they are, what they are doing while here, and we need to make them leave when their time here has expired. We also need to get a little tougher about why we let them in. Do they have a skill to offer?

There is NOTHING wrong with asking these questions, and other countries already do a better job than the US does. We have to stop being weak and start being strong.

 

[mildocjr]

Once again, the federal government has all the power to keep terrorists out of the country in the first place, including the San Bernardino Two. We could have prevented this.

They just don't do it and we have been lazy about MAKING them do it. Congress has the power. The president has the power. The courts have the power. But everybody has abrogated their responsibilities. It is time for the electorate to get tough, since government officials have shown that they just can't be bothered.

We need to know who is coming in, where they are, what they are doing while here, and we need to make them leave when their time here has expired. We also need to get a little tougher about why we let them in. Do they have a skill to offer?

There is NOTHING wrong with asking these questions, and other countries already do a better job than the US does. We have to stop being weak and start being strong.

Well the government has power, but I really don't think they have mind reading abilities to stop terrorist from coming in and out that haven't left a trail.

I think you need to look up how the government handles people coming in on a passport, they already do those checks. They do know who comes in, they can only go off of where they say they are going, and what they will be doing. Almost every country does this. Making them leave, there's a debate, some might say you can't just make them leave because if you are visiting the UK on business and your business trip extended, if they make you leave and the jobs not done it creates a problem for someone. If they don't make them leave, well the visitor could be a potential problem.

Where is your proof that other countries are doing a better job because if I'm not mistaken most 1st world countries do the same thing we do and we are just as tough on visitors as they are. I would know as having been outside of the country several times as well as my career in the military.

You probably didn't put a lot of thought into your post as it seems very emotional without any factual links to back it up.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
- John F. Kennedy.

Maybe we all just need to think about that statement for a minute, if you need it in context you can find it in the media here.

What it means to me, relating it to your post, is that our government is doing what they can, but in order to really fight against tyranny from adversaries, we need to do what we can to make up for the government's shortcomings.

I think that Americans could be doing more to keep us, America, free from terrorism, if you think the government should be doing more, that just means we aren't doing enough.

 

[HEK]

Well, I wonder what the reaction here would have been had something like 9/11 happened again, and 2 weeks later the feds hacked the iPhone and found all the evidence that would have stopped it?

Quite simply if the evidence pointed in any way to the Saudis, then it would not be released. Just like the 28 pages of the 9/11 report that are still kept from us because they make the Saudis look bad.

Besides, deaths are only made a big deal of when it is terrorists. 10,000 drunk driving deaths a year, so what. Thousands of handgun deaths a year, so what. But the boogyman man terrorist's kill some people and we go hog wild, create new departments, hire hundreds of thousands of people, spend several trillion dollars on security, and have the longest war in our history killing millions and destabilizing an entire region.

 

[dk001]

Well the government has power, but I really don't think they have mind reading abilities to stop terrorist from coming in and out that haven't left a trail.

I think you need to look up how the government handles people coming in on a passport, they already do those checks. They do know who comes in, they can only go off of where they say they are going, and what they will be doing. Almost every country does this. Making them leave, there's a debate, some might say you can't just make them leave because if you are visiting the UK on business and your business trip extended, if they make you leave and the jobs not done it creates a problem for someone. If they don't make them leave, well the visitor could be a potential problem.

Where is your proof that other countries are doing a better job because if I'm not mistaken most 1st world countries do the same thing we do and we are just as tough on visitors as they are. I would know as having been outside of the country several times as well as my career in the military.

You probably didn't put a lot of thought into your post as it seems very emotional without any factual links to back it up.



Maybe we all just need to think about that statement for a minute, if you need it in context you can find it in the media here.

What it means to me, relating it to your post, is that our government is doing what they can, but in order to really fight against tyranny from adversaries, we need to do what we can to make up for the government's shortcomings.

I think that Americans could be doing more to keep us, America, free from terrorism, if you think the government should be doing more, that just means we aren't doing enough.

Biggest part of the problem: HS. The single biggest boondoggle currently in existence.

 

[Flight Plan]

Biggest part of the problem: HS. The single biggest boondoggle currently in existence.

Do you mean Homeland Securtity or High School? Because valid arguments could be made for both being the biggest part of the problem.
[doublepost=1461274649][/doublepost]

Well the government has power, but I really don't think they have mind reading abilities to stop terrorist from coming in and out that haven't left a trail.

I think you need to look up how the government handles people coming in on a passport, they already do those checks. They do know who comes in, they can only go off of where they say they are going, and what they will be doing. Almost every country does this. Making them leave, there's a debate, some might say you can't just make them leave because if you are visiting the UK on business and your business trip extended, if they make you leave and the jobs not done it creates a problem for someone. If they don't make them leave, well the visitor could be a potential problem.

Where is your proof that other countries are doing a better job because if I'm not mistaken most 1st world countries do the same thing we do and we are just as tough on visitors as they are. I would know as having been outside of the country several times as well as my career in the military.

You probably didn't put a lot of thought into your post as it seems very emotional without any factual links to back it up.



Maybe we all just need to think about that statement for a minute, if you need it in context you can find it in the media here.

What it means to me, relating it to your post, is that our government is doing what they can, but in order to really fight against tyranny from adversaries, we need to do what we can to make up for the government's shortcomings.

I think that Americans could be doing more to keep us, America, free from terrorism, if you think the government should be doing more, that just means we aren't doing enough.

No, no, no sir or madam. Congress' and the President's first and most important tasks are to ensure the welfare of the country from all threats foreign and domestic.

There are LOTS of things not being done, that should be. The first thing is that we don't know who's here or what they're doing here. We have the right to know. By the way, Mexico and New Zealand both have very restrictive entry policies for foreigners. There are others. I certainly hope it was apparent that I was NOT referring to France or Belgium in my prior comments.

 

[dk001]

Do you mean Homeland Securtity or High School? Because valid arguments could be made for both being the biggest part of the problem....

Homeland

HighSchool, while valid, is at a much lower level of competency and cheaper.

 

[Flight Plan]

Homeland

HighSchool, while valid, is at a much lower level of competency and cheaper.

Homeland Security may screw up and a city dies. But when High School (the institution of government education is what I'm really referring to; not just one school) fails, it has much farther-ranging adverse impact. It damages entire generations, and hurts the entire culture).

Edit: Both are bad things, but it takes longer to fix generational damage.

 

[dk001]

Homeland Security may screw up and a city dies. But when High School (the institution of government education is what I'm really referring to; not just one school) fails, it has much farther-ranging adverse impact. It damages entire generations, and hurts the entire culture).

Edit: Both are bad things, but it takes longer to fix generational damage.

What I see coming out of the local LAUSD / Charter schools in my area, I have to agree. I keep hoping some of them will step up surprise us all.

Does anyone know how many in all areas that HS employs?

 

[iRock1]

By "fanboys," you mean fans of the Constitution, right?

Even though most people here prefer Apple devices, privacy is platform-agnostic. I'm sure everyone would feel the same way if it was an Android phone in question – except that there's doubt that Google would stand their ground like Apple has.

Still, it needs to be noted that it's not that US-based tech companies, like Apple, love your privacy and constitutional rights and therefore want to protect you. US-based tech companies have been happily collaborating with your government and giving away your private information for years. It's only now, after Snowden revealed what the f*ck was going on, that companies have started to make a stance so they don't lose clients overseas—clients that have wisely started to see the U.S.A. as a terrible threat to their privacy and security.

Don't get confused. In the end is great—speaking from a strictly practical point of view—that Apple and other companies are defending our rights currently, but don't be naïve about their true motivations and the way this whole thing has worked for years. Cook's nice speech about freedom, security and privacy is plain bs (A.K.A. marketing).

 

[dk001]

Still, it needs to be noted that it's not that US-based tech companies, like Apple, love your privacy and constitutional rights and therefore want to protect you. US-based tech companies have been happily collaborating with your government and giving away your private information for years. It's only now, after Snowden revealed what the f*ck was going on, that companies have started to make a stance so they don't lose clients overseas—clients that have wisely started to see the U.S.A. as a terrible threat to their privacy and security.

Don't get confused. In the end is great—speaking from a strictly practical point of view—that Apple and other companies are defending our rights currently, but don't be naïve about their true motivations and the way this whole thing has worked for years. Cook's nice speech about freedom, security and privacy is plain bs (A.K.A. marketing).

Single minded opinion? Before the latest spat of the DOJ vs. Encryption shenanigans, when has either Apple or Google marketed full device encryption? They haven't. Kind of kills the underlying assumption of your post.

 

[iRock1]

Single minded opinion? Before the latest spat of the DOJ vs. Encryption shenanigans, when has either Apple or Google marketed full device encryption? They haven't. Kind of kills the underlying assumption of your post.

Sorry but I don't follow you.

 

[dk001]

Sorry but I don't follow you.

Before the recent court cases, neither Apple nor Android ever marketed the fact that your device was fully encrypted. Encryption has never been a marketing line for either company.

 

[iRock1]

Before the recent court cases, neither Apple nor Android ever marketed the fact that your device was fully encrypted. Encryption has never been a marketing line for either company.

No, they didn't market the fact that devices are "fully encrypted" (which they aren't) before these cases, but they started to speak openly about privacy and security after Snowden's leak and the NSA case exploded.

 

[dk001]

No, they didn't market the fact that devices are "fully encrypted" (which they aren't) before these cases, but they started to speak openly about privacy and security after Snowden's leak and the NSA case exploded.

True however not from a marketing perspective (ads). Then again you could technically call it all "marketing".
Understandable though. I suspect the mass hacks and media screaming about the latest device hack/malware lent a significant amount of angst that the different OS designers tried to calm.

 

[JamesPDX]

File Under: Well, well, well...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36165678

 

[dk001]

File Under: Well, well, well...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36165678

This isn't from the suspect iPhone. Too soon and the phone access would be challenged in court.
This came the old fashioned way; good solid investigation - man hours.