Here's an idea: encrypt the rickroll video with the hardest encryption available, name it something juicy, like "Obama's birth certificate.pdf", or something like that and send it to someone who would be very interested in paying to see it.
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.
Justice Department Officially Drops Lawsuit Against Apple in Ongoing iPhone Unlocking Dispute [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So let me get this straight: your view and Apple’s view is that, on the one hand, it has no obligation whatsoever to help the FBI break into its phones; that it is outrageous that the FBI might ask a federal court to force it do so; that it has a First Amendment right not to and thus that Congress can’t force it to either; and that the FBI is on its own--even when it has a warrant--free to hack devices but without help from the company, at least to the extent that help requires writing code or offending customers.
But, on the other hand, if the bureau happens to manage to succeed in hacking an iPhone--say, with the help of an Israeli company--then it should inform Apple of the nature of the vulnerability so that the company can better secure its devices from future law enforcement investigations. To put the matter simply, not only does Apple have no obligation to give engineering help to the FBI, the FBI has an obligation to give Apple engineering help so that even the company’s most criminal users can be maximally free from FBI surveillance.
Pardon me, but if I were working at the FBI, this wouldn’t sound like a reasonable position to me. As you would say, It's Asinine!!
On the contrary, the FBI should help Apple to make sure that the phones of law-abiding citizens, including army personnel, undercover police agents, the FBI, politicians etc. cannot be hacked.
I don't know what you're talking about. Maybe you've confused me with someone else.
This phone was an iPhone 5c running an A6 processor without a secure enclave. Apple doesn't sell any iOS devices without a secure enclave any more.
The passcode was a 4-digit number.
We know that the DOJ says they can access this iPhone. They can probably access the New York drug case phone, which is even older. Does this mean they can use the same method to access newer iPhones? No. We don't know if they can access newer iPhones. We don't know if they can access iPhones with longer alphanumeric passcodes.
In this case, the DOJ isn't saying how they got in. They don't have to. They can use their new ability to unlock other iPhones that they have in their possession. That's the DOJ's right. It's also their responsibility. If they unlock a bunch of iPhones that have A6 processors and numeric passcodes, but don't unlock newer iPhones or those with strong passcodes, then we'll have a good idea the limits of their current ability. So will Apple. If the DOJ starts unlocking newer iPhones with strong passcodes, then we and Apple have more to worry about.
I think Apple won this round by the measure that is important to me. They weren't forced to hack the security of their own product.
Meanwhile, Apple will continue what they have been doing for the past several years: patching vulnerabilities in iOS at the software and hardware levels (and hopefully not introducing new ones).
The passcode was a 4-digit number.
We know that the DOJ says they can access this iPhone. They can probably access the New York drug case phone, which is even older. Does this mean they can use the same method to access newer iPhones? No. We don't know if they can access newer iPhones. We don't know if they can access iPhones with longer alphanumeric passcodes.
In this case, the DOJ isn't saying how they got in. They don't have to. They can use their new ability to unlock other iPhones that they have in their possession. That's the DOJ's right. It's also their responsibility. If they unlock a bunch of iPhones that have A6 processors and numeric passcodes, but don't unlock newer iPhones or those with strong passcodes, then we'll have a good idea the limits of their current ability. So will Apple. If the DOJ starts unlocking newer iPhones with strong passcodes, then we and Apple have more to worry about.
I think Apple won this round by the measure that is important to me. They weren't forced to hack the security of their own product.
Meanwhile, Apple will continue what they have been doing for the past several years: patching vulnerabilities in iOS at the software and hardware levels (and hopefully not introducing new ones).
After killing 14 people, any search and seizure seems entirely reasonable to me. In this case, not even a search warrant was needed, because the actual owner of the phone agreed to it. Forcing Apple to weaken the security of all phones was not reasonable, but doing whatever can be done to get into this phone was reasonable.
So let me get this straight: your view and Apple’s view is that, on the one hand, it has no obligation whatsoever to help the FBI break into its phones; that it is outrageous that the FBI might ask a federal court to force it do so; that it has a First Amendment right not to and thus that Congress can’t force it to either; and that the FBI is on its own--even when it has a warrant--free to hack devices but without help from the company, at least to the extent that help requires writing code or offending customers.
But, on the other hand, if the bureau happens to manage to succeed in hacking an iPhone--say, with the help of an Israeli company--then it should inform Apple of the nature of the vulnerability so that the company can better secure its devices from future law enforcement investigations. To put the matter simply, not only does Apple have no obligation to give engineering help to the FBI, the FBI has an obligation to give Apple engineering help so that even the company’s most criminal users can be maximally free from FBI surveillance.
Pardon me, but if I were working at the FBI, this wouldn’t sound like a reasonable position to me. As you would say, It's Asinine!!
It would, if you understood that the threat to your entire society through hacking is significantly greater a threat than that of terrorism. But I doubt the FBI gives a crap about hacking as a major risk to society, as they are a bunch of morons when it comes to technology. When they can't even prosecute online stalkers who "SWAT" their victims (among other horrible horrible things), I kind of don't consider them to be all that up on this "internet stuff."
The FBI wanted to make Apple reduce the security, so hacking into the phone would have become cheaper. Now hacking it is just as difficult and expensive as it was before.
Does this mean the FBI will be forced to cover Apple's legal costs?
Not sure what you are referring to. The FBI didn't violate the 4th Amendment here. And in fact they have the authorization from the owner themselves to access the phone.
At issue is the fact the FBI tried to forcefully compell Apple to access the case for the FBI.
At issue is the fact the FBI tried to forcefully compell Apple to access the case for the FBI.
Was never about the phone. That was a convenient excuse. The FBI wanted to bypass CALEA at minimum and backdoor by conscription at most.
JMHO-YMMV
If you're rocking an iPhone 5c or older iPhone and your passcode is numeric, then the slope is indeed slippery for you.
Apple's newer iPhones are harder to crack already. And they're not stopping their efforts to shore up security even more. The slope we were worried about was the FBI being allowed to compel Apple to weaken their own security. I'm glad the FBI was able to get into this phone, and more glad that they did it without forcing Apple to do it for them.
THANK YOU! I didn't know how far I had to read before someone with common sense posted. Saves me the trouble.
Next level: the legislator (blue or red) will make sure an easier way will be enforced ... §§§ finally wins
But thanks
for standing up and keep the position
But thanks
for standing up and keep the position
Really? Prove it. you can't. You have to rely on the word of the FBI/DOJ who are playing fast and loose with the "truth".
I don't care how they did, show us you did. Saying "I did" doesn't maker it so.
Last edited:
Irrelevant. They could always do this, and always knew about this method. They wanted to chance their arm with a court case though to get some legal precedent.
They always had ways to unlock the phone via other means, but those ways wouldn't end up with US legal precedent that says "If the FBI says jump, you say 'here's your backdoor to our encryption'".
Likely. Then again, the NYC DA, LA DA, DOJ, and others will need to be satisfied.
That's the hard thing. The FBI / DOJ lost a lot of trust from all manners of folks and they won't get it back soon.
I would love to hear more detail on the facts. Likely we, except by unintentional info, will likely never hear what really happened.
[doublepost=1459211473][/doublepost]
Unless they go the "stingray route" and drop the indictment(s). That worked for a while. The fall-out sucked for them though.
Apple's ongoing fight with the U.S. government over an order that would require the company to unlock the iPhone 5c used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook has come to an end, after the Justice Department today announced plans to drop its case against Apple.
In a motion asking the court to vacate the original order, prosecutors said the FBI has been able to access the data stored on the iPhone 5c without Apple's help, reports CNBC. From the court filing:Apple was scheduled to square off against the FBI in court on Tuesday, March 22, but just a day ahead of when the court date was set to take place, the FBI asked for a temporary postponement as it had discovered a way to access the iPhone that would not require Apple's participation.
It later came out that the FBI had enlisted the help of Israeli mobile software developer Cellebrite, a company that offers "mobile forensic solutions" to help law enforcement agencies crack the encryption on smartphones to access data. The government has not disclosed the method used to obtain the information on the iPhone, stating only that it has been retrieved.
The withdrawal of the case brings the heated battle between Apple and the U.S. government to a close. The two have been fighting a very public debate over encryption and personal privacy, which kicked off when a court ordered Apple to help the FBI unlock the iPhone 5c in question.
Unlocking the iPhone would have required Apple to build a new version of iOS that bypassed iPhone passcode restrictions and provided the FBI with a way to enter passcodes electronically, something Apple staunchly refused to do as it would set a dangerous precedent for the future of device encryption.
Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.
Article Link: Justice Department Officially Drops Lawsuit Against Apple in Ongoing iPhone Unlocking Dispute
All planned. WHO told them that the company in Israel "may" be able to unlock it...? Didn't Apple buy some tech companies in Israel last year...(read it here on this site)? Quick settlement...each party got what they wanted. Apple looks good and actually will increase trust and sales, Gov. got what they wanted. Win Win on everyone's court. Very smart...
Relevant.
Unless you're saying this is the Feds master plan:
- Ignore known iPhone hack and delay access to perpetrator's iPhone
- Sue Apple
- Escalate rhetoric and galvanize Silicon Valley against us
- Hack iPhone and drop lawsuit
- Fail to get Apple to "jump"
That argument makes no sense to me.
hah that's pretty darn funny but pretty damn realistic too. I wouldn't doubt they'd do it if the DoJ doesn't reveal how it was done.