Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Senator Reveals FBI Paid $900K for Hacking Tool Used to Open San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone

ibookg409 said:
Sure, but it is irrelevant. If information is classified it can not be leaked just because you don't think it is important or should be classified.
Click to expand...

When about this price tag makes you think it should be classified? The methods aren't revealed, the contractor, or anything else. Only how much public money was wasted. Do you honestly want to assert that rubber stamping something as classified regardless of the reasoning somehow makes it no longer in the public's interest to know? Why not just allow the government to classify all malfeasance then? Perhaps criminal activity? After all, national security and all!
 
  • Like
Reactions: xpxp2002 and tongxinshe
Kaibelf said:
When about this price tag makes you think it should be classified? The methods aren't revealed, the contractor, or anything else. Only how much public money was wasted. Do you honestly want to assert that rubber stamping something as classified regardless of the reasoning somehow makes it no longer in the public's interest to know? Why not just allow the government to classify all malfeasance then? Perhaps criminal activity? After all, national security and all!
Click to expand...
Nothing. But it is not my call to decide if something is classified. The choice was made to classify that data and as such it violate Title 18 to reveal it.
 
dannyyankou said:
It was originally reported that Cellebrite helped the FBI, but then it was reported that wasn't the case. They never disclosed who helped them, I'm suspicious.
Click to expand...

The FBI is denying who helped them because they don't want Apple to know how access was achieved. Because then Apple might cut it off. of course Apple would do it in a way that they could say that it was the 'unfortunate' result of increasing system security against 'bad' hackers.

although that said, I recall rumors that Apple already did exactly this when they added the whole Touch ID/secure enclave to the system. Apparently those can't be hacked using whatever the FBI did. supposedly LEOs tried it and it doesn't work on a 5s or higher. and iOS 8/9? may have changed up system software to make it pretty dang hard as well.
 
charlituna said:
The FBI is denying who helped them because they don't want Apple to know how access was achieved.
Click to expand...

Which is irresponsible of the FBI because the exploit is out there.

charlituna said:
although that said, I recall rumors that Apple already did exactly this when they added the whole Touch ID/secure enclave to the system. Apparently those can't be hacked using whatever the FBI did. supposedly LEOs tried it and it doesn't work on a 5s or higher. and iOS 8/9? may have changed up system software to make it pretty dang hard as well.
Click to expand...

Whatever exploit the FBI used most likely won't work on iPhone 5S and up.
 
ibookg409 said:
It sounds like Feinstein just leaked classified information to the public. Perhaps there should be an inquiry into this as well.
Click to expand...


See what happens when they get too old and won't go away? They start saying stuff they shouldn't say. A lot of them need to retire.
 
drewsof07 said:
I don't see them gleaning any information from the phone itself that had not already been retrieved from NSA/CIA/FBI counterterrorism surveillance databases. Comey himself admitted that ALL domestic communication is collected and tagged. Accessing the database requires a FISA order, but it's all collected.
Click to expand...
Several points here...
Domestic communications do not fall under FISA. (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act)
So no, the FBI cannot get a FISA warrant to read domestic communications.
And there is no way in hell the feds can collect ALL domestic comms. It's physically impossible to collect and store that much information in a database.
The CIA, by it's charter, is forbidden from performing any domestic surveillance. The FBI is the primary agency when it comes to domestic issues.
 
tgara said:
Just as a point of information, the owner of the phone in the San Bernardino shooting incident was actually the shooter's employer, who subsequently granted permission for the government to gain access to the phone after the shooting. However, the government could not access the phone without the PIN code (which the employer did not have), so they asked Apple for help. It was Apple, not the phone's owner or user, that did not want to provide access to the phone, even after a lawful court order instructed them to do so.
Click to expand...

What a misleading statement!!!!!

You sound like that Apple has the PIN but refused to give it to FBI. The truth is, no one has the PIN. And, FBI used this chance to ask Apple to create a backdoor to all iPhones, which for sure should be rejected, by any company with the slightest bit of commonsense (about how corrupted FBI is) and righteous.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jeremiah256
NT1440 said:
The shooter had 2 other cell phones that he went out of his way to destroy...so common sense would dictate maybe those were the ones that might have had info on them?

The FBI ******** was, and still is, a kludge that our politicians are trying to use to mandate broken security on cell phones in the country. The UK released their white paper calling for the same thing this week.
Click to expand...
Wow. Just wow.

Alt-right much? Go back to the cave you belong, and just project one of your loved ones being killed by the terrorists at the site.

Then, no stone unturned, [alt] right? /s
 
[doublepost=1494280348][/doublepost]
tgara said:
Just as a point of information, the owner of the phone in the San Bernardino shooting incident was actually the shooter's employer, who subsequently granted permission for the government to gain access to the phone after the shooting. However, the government could not access the phone without the PIN code (which the employer did not have), so they asked Apple for help. It was Apple, not the phone's owner or user, that did not want to provide access to the phone, even after a lawful court order instructed them to do so.
Click to expand...

No. Apple didn't want to crack their own encryption thereby allowing access to all iphones. Good for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer
ibookg409 said:
The hack democrat senator...
Click to expand...
That hack democrat senator is a deeply conservative individual who always uses right wing talking points and aligns herself with hack republic senators, as we could especially see last year when you contrast her with actual liberal senators like Bernie Sanders.
There was no good reason for trying to backdoor every iPhone just to get into one iPhone that might have something on it, at the expense of leaving all iPhones vulnerable to criminals/terrorists hacking them!
 
$900K of US taxpayer money. Fantastic use of funds. I suspect the phone ended up being clean and filled with daily prayer quotes alongside general searches and stupid YouTube videos.
[doublepost=1494282547][/doublepost]
ILikeAllOS said:
That hack democrat senator
Click to expand...
It's quite alright. He's mentioned numerous times in the past how he'd enjoy a ménage à trois with Feinstein and Pelosi. Feel free to ignore him. Most of us do already.
 
ILikeAllOS said:
That hack democrat senator is a deeply conservative individual who always uses right wing talking points and aligns herself with hack republic senators, as we could especially see last year when you contrast her with actual liberal senators like Bernie Sanders.
There was no good reason for trying to backdoor every iPhone just to get into one iPhone that might have something on it, at the expense of leaving all iPhones vulnerable to criminals/terrorists hacking them!
Click to expand...
You lost me at Diane Feinstein is a deeply conservative individual".
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer and tgara
Kabeyun said:
I cringe to ask, but what in this article makes you say that? And if you're just a political true believer who happens not to be aligned with her, and who'd make that comment even if she said something cute about puppies, never mind.
Click to expand...

Finestine is an old coot with one foot in the grave and one side of her brain in a retirement home.
[doublepost=1494283533][/doublepost]
ibookg409 said:
You lost me at Diane Feinstein is a deeply conservative individual".
Click to expand...

LOL!!! NO ****!
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer
theelysium said:
Finestine is an old coot with one foot in the grave and one side of her brain in a retirement home.
Click to expand...
Since my question was about her comments in the article, I reread it but didn't see anything about a coot or a retirement home anywhere. That's so weird. It's got to be in there somewhere...
 
tgara said:
It was Apple, not the phone's owner or user, that did not want to provide access to the phone, even after a lawful court order instructed them to do so.
Click to expand...

It was an attempt to use the screw up of two government agencies to force a company to create a tool that would have granted the FBI unconstitutional powers.

First, the San Bernardino Health Department that owned the phone didn't install the backdoor tool their own regulations required. This tool would have made this whole issue moot. Then the San Bernardino Police requested a reset of the password, thereby making it impossible for Apple to assist as they have in the past every time the FBI has legally requested their assistance.

Once the FBI saw what had happened, they went to Apple and demanded they create a tool that would have given the FBI access to not only the data for the phone in question, any phone they could get their hands on. In addition, every police department in the United States was lining up, saying they wanted the tool. Then foreign national law enforcement agencies would have requested the tool. And then the tool would have fallen into the hands of hackers and that's all she wrote for Apple.

Apple was right and the FBI backed down because they knew they'd lose in a court of law. In addition, it was a move that would have had far reaching consequences for any device or system that uses encryption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer and xpxp2002
jeremiah256 said:
Apple was right and the FBI backed down because they knew they'd lose in a court of law. In addition, it was a move that would have had far reaching consequences for any device or system that uses encryption.
Click to expand...

No, Apple challenged a lawful court order and would have probably lost in court based on standing legal precedents. The only reason the FBI backed away was because they were able to get into the phone through other means and no longer needed Apples help. Don't kid yourself that this battle over encryption is over. It's not. By Sen. Feinstein's comments, the Congress is in no mood for Apple's BS, and she's not the only one. Congress could easily pass a bill that would compel tech companies to unlock encrypted devices and President Trump would sign it. What will you do then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back