U.S. Attorney General Asks Apple to Unlock iPhones Used by Florida Mass Shooter [Updated]

[HeadphoneAddict]

Except no, you are wrong. Such a version of iOS would only work on FUTURE uses of the device. Installing that version on the current phone would require wiping the device in the first place because of the security architecture of the iPhone, designed to prevent people from doing exactly what you are suggesting in order to access data. The whole point is to make it so no one can access the data without the passcode, even you (should you forget it).
[automerge]1578980665[/automerge]


Yes, actually we do, its publicly available information. Its built in to the OS and the hardware of modern iOS devices. Its the whole point of the Secure Enclave.

There is actually software that allows you to re-install iOS onto a bricked iPhone (or stuck in infinite boot loop) without wiping the user data, called REIboot. I used it once to restore iOS onto my wife's iPhone 7 about a year ago, since she didn't have a recent backup (iOS got corrupted and stopped doing back ups to iCloud about a month before it went into infinite boot loop).

Theoretically, if Apple made and signed a version of iOS that allowed brute force attacks, and REIboot could install it, the data could be saved in the process. It would still not be unlocked, but it would be easier to brute force attack the phone.

However, I am against breaking the security on our phones or having back doors. I would not like to see this type of iOS get out in the wild, although if it did then Apple could unsign the firmware and it could only be installed on iPhones where the SHSH blobs for the individual iPhone had been saved while that version of iOS was still being signed.

 

[Stephen.R]

If flying in the US, TSA won't ask for permission to open your bag. They will either open lock with a key or cut it off. How all bag manufacturers must add a TSA lock in every bag they make its legal but adding a lock for you phone who will checked with a legal order isn’t? #doubleMoral

the situation with “tsa locks” is a pretty accurate comparison for the encryption debate.

as explained in https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/09/tsa_master_keys.html - an encryption back door for “the good guys” is 100% guaranteed to be leaked at some point. Anyone who tells you otherwise is an idiot or lying, and neither of those are qualities to look for when it comes to security advice.
[automerge]1578993615[/automerge]

National security it’s way more important than the dirty secrets u wanna hide 2 your wife if u don't why u care?

Right because the only applications for encryption are terrorism and adultery.

it’s not like anyone actually uses those other hypothetical things like online banking or shopping, is it?

 

[Kabeyun]

Yes, Apple can. Geez.

Customer Letter - FAQ - Apple

Answers to your questions about Apple and security

www.apple.com

[automerge]1578976512[/automerge]


OP fully understands.

Apple has gone on record several times, stating that it can, in fact, create a version of iOS that allows the access the FBI seeks.

You are misreading that letter. Apple has stated it can create an iOS with a so-called backdoor which would allow access to an iPhone running that version. (They have also stated emphatically, in that letter and elsewhere, that they won’t.) A security backdoor doesn’t allow anyone to access a different iPhone running a unmodified version of iOS, such as the iPhones in question. So, no.

 

[Krizoitz]

There is actually software that allows you to re-install iOS onto a bricked iPhone (or stuck in infinite loop loop) without wiping the user data, called REIboot.

REIboot doesn’t reinstall the OS.

 

[kemal]

No, not even a single chip fragment should be removed from the privacy wall.

 

[Tech198]

But Apple, any security firm would say the same:

"We are continuing to work with the FBI" and yet you do the opposite. How can you claim your helping if their deem it as NOT helping ? Apple's just worried about security and privacy..and that's what they should say

Saying a double standard makes things more interesting though

Nope. That’s not how encryption works. Not only can’t Apple unlock a phone, they don’t WANT to be able to unlock a phone. Because the only way to do that is to create an intentional insecure OS. It defeats the entire purpose.

And yet we can only claim that because [one] company says that. Who's to say hackers can't get at it ? if Apple won't help, that's exactly where the FBI will get it.

This makes 3 shooters now.

 

[return2sendai]

Welp, I guess we know which apps to use.

“Welp”. I like that word.

 

[gnasher729]

Didn't Apple just say at CES that they do scan through their icloud services for pedophilia thus invading peoples privacy?

During upload. All the photos of your dog will be scanned, but nobody ever learns of the result. If you uploaded an image that is recognised as child pornography, then I don't care about privacy.

That seems to be very unclear to some people: I don't mind at all if the privacy of terrorists and criminals is violated. For example, the laws that in the USA the police cannot search your home without a warrant isn't there to protect criminals. It's all about protecting the privacy of innocent citizens. If Apple can unlock the phone of this terrorist (and I don't mind if they unlock it), then they can unlock the phone of any innocent citizen, and I mind that very much. And since this kind of thing tends not to stay secret, next year criminals can unlock anyone's iPhone and that would be very bad.
[automerge]1579010733[/automerge]

There is actually software that allows you to re-install iOS onto a bricked iPhone (or stuck in infinite loop loop) without wiping the user data, called REIboot. I used it once to restore iOS onto my wife's iPhone 7 about a year ago, since she didn't have a recent backup (iOS got corrupted and stopped doing back ups to iCloud about a month before it went into infinite loop loop).

Apple quite often unlocks iPhone 7's based on court orders. Being able to unlock an iPhone 7 doesn't mean they can unlock on iPhone 7s, and definitely not an iPhone 11.

[automerge]1579011331[/automerge]

Wrong. Apple has already stated that it create a version of iOS that can provide access to a locked iPhone.

That sentence is not proper English, which makes it hard to figure out what you want to say.

Fact 1: Apple's iOS that is installed on your iPhone doesn't allow Apple access to a locked iPhone. Fact 2: Apple could develop a version of iOS that would allow Apple access to a locked iPhone if it was installed on your iPhone. Fact 3: Apple definitely doesn't want to ever create a version of iOS like that. Fact 4: (Bummer) You cannot install a new iOS version on a locked iPhone. To install a new iOS version, you have to unlock the phone first. Therefore the iOS version from (Fact 2) is useless unless you install it on the terrorist's phone before he uses it. And Fact 5: If you use a long passcode (10 digits, or 8 digits + letters) then it is uncrackable.

Apple has gone on record several times, stating that it can, in fact, create a version of iOS that allows the access the FBI seeks.

But Apple cannot install such an iOS version on a locked iPhone.

 

[gnasher729]

He was an Islamist extremist. The main stream news did not want to cover it.

There are indications that he was insulted by an instructor due to his moustache and decided that the right response to this insult was to shoot some people. Just a plain psychopathic murderer. No indication that he was an Islamist extremist.
[automerge]1579012284[/automerge]

They know what they're doing. They know that the general public will go along with reduced privacy in the name of "national security" and the government will have that much more control and surveillance over us.

Well, the general public maybe. However, I former head of the NSA has stated publicly that backdoors in phones would _damage_ national security. Because at some point the bad guys would use this against the good guys. (Of course, being former head of the NSA means he wasn't worried about privacy, just security).

 

[AppleZilla]

Khan Noonien Singh: "Let them eat static."

 

[npmacuser5]

Or this just misdirection on the part of the Government. They already have the information, now they just need the OK to use it legally. Would I give away the knowledge of my magic keys for a conviction. Keep the folks using the iPhone thinking all is well. Maybe Apple just being played. A pawn in the game. Convicting this little fish not the end game here.

 

[2010mini]

Didn't Apple just say at CES that they do scan through their icloud services for pedophilia thus invading peoples privacy?

iCloud services are not owned by users, only their physical devices are.
[automerge]1579020175[/automerge]

iCloud isn’t as protected as the iPhone itself. iCloud isn’t completely encrypted either. They are working on that, but it’s not yet.
Whatsapp and signal don’t use the iCloud so Apple can’t see what’s in these apps as they have end to end encryption. So Barr wants Apple to break those specific iPhones to see if it is possible to find accomplices financiers and the likes.

I really hope Apple will resist this stupid push from governments. It’s not just in the USA, also in the Netherlands, UK and France I’ve seen politicians shout silly ideas.
the US government has at least some leverage by going to court etc. How would e.g. the Netherlands force Apple? Ban sales of iPhones? The would annoy at least 20% of their voters. And not the poorest or not-interested voters.

WhatsApp and signal can provide all the data LEO requires.

 

[2010mini]

If flying in the US, TSA won't ask for permission to open your bag. They will either open lock with a key or cut it off. How all bag manufacturers must add a TSA lock in every bag they make its legal but adding a lock for you phone who will checked with a legal order isn’t? #doubleMoral

How many times does this need to be explained?

The scenario you posted is one lock affecting ONE person. Requiring Apple being able to unlock a phone like affect EVERYONE. They would have to build an insecure software for all users. Also when entering TSA secure area you voluntarily give up rights.

No one has to fly.

 

[alecgold]

Can you provide us with a link to an article please, never heard about this, the dutch government actually asked the opposite what you are implying.

Dutch: Nederlandse regering wil uitleg VS over backdoor Apple, Google en Facebook

Sorry for the slow respons. Minister of justice mr grapperhaus did so on the 5th of December.

Minister Grapperhaus pleit opnieuw voor toegang overheid tot versleutelde berichten

Minister Ferd Grapperhaus (Justitie en Veiligheid) heeft opnieuw gepleit voor een 'achterdeur' in de versleuteling van informatie bij techbedrijven, zodat opsporingsdiensten in bijvoorbeeld kinderpornozaken berichten kunnen ontsleutelen.

www.ad.nl

 

[Morgenland]

As a United States Attorney General, one should actually have enjoyed a good education and have a basic knowledge of technical possibilities or money to be able to ask at least one consultant whether this demand is technically and socially reasonable. If a poor beggar had made this point, I would have been more lenient.

Presumably, however, this action might only meant to distract from the weapons legislation again. Such shootings happen worldwide almost only in wars or... in the USA.

 

[alecgold]

If flying in the US, TSA won't ask for permission to open your bag. They will either open lock with a key or cut it off. How all bag manufacturers must add a TSA lock in every bag they make its legal but adding a lock for you phone who will checked with a legal order isn’t? #doubleMoral

Bit silly comparison as you can add a padlock to a suitcase. You can seal/plastic wrap them as soon as you are trough customs. Any if anything is stolen, it’s just your dirty underwear after binging in Acapulco.
but a backdoor in software can be opened at any time, e.g. while the phone is in your pocket, and not just by the TSA, but by every smart hacker that can not just steal your dirty underwear, but also plunder your bank account, steal your identity, set up a huge loan, stop your health and car insurance, basically lock you out of every account. You seem to have no idea how much sensitive information there is in these devices andhow much harm and pain unlimited access can do.
[automerge]1579025117[/automerge]

Apple turns off the passcode limit and allow FBI to brute force the passcode.

Doesn’t solve an alphanumeric code... could take decades to break.

 

[justperry]

Sorry for the slow respons. Minister of justice mr grapperhaus did so on the 5th of December.

Minister Grapperhaus pleit opnieuw voor toegang overheid tot versleutelde berichten

Minister Ferd Grapperhaus (Justitie en Veiligheid) heeft opnieuw gepleit voor een 'achterdeur' in de versleuteling van informatie bij techbedrijven, zodat opsporingsdiensten in bijvoorbeeld kinderpornozaken berichten kunnen ontsleutelen.

www.ad.nl

Thanks for sharing, I noted this in the article though...

De minister gaat met zijn uitlatingen in tegen het staande kabinetsbeleid.

So, the Dutch government opinion differs from what Mr Grapperhaus says.
What about the right to encrypt, read somewhere the EU wants this to be law.

 

[mrbrown]

As a United States Attorney General, one should actually have enjoyed a good education and have a basic knowledge of technical possibilities or money to be able to ask at least one consultant whether this demand is technically and socially reasonable.

You're missing the point - this is about messaging, public relations, and making Apple and other tech companies look "evil" (i.e. "siding with terrorists") in an attempt to get support for what they ultimately want -- legislation requiring law enforcement access to mobile device data. Barr and just about everybody in DOJ down know, very well (along with just about every state law enforcement officer and prosecutor), that as it stands now, most of the mobile devices on the market are encrypted and inaccessible to law enforcement.

 

[alecgold]

Thanks for sharing, I noted this in the article though...



So, the Dutch government opinion differs from what Mr Grapperhaus says.
What about the right to encrypt, read somewhere the EU wants this to be law.

You have the right to encrypt, as long as grapperhaus can decrypt? 😁
But that is why, If I remember correctly, I wrote about politicians talking from the top of their head. But the minister of justice is a lawyer, Professor iirc and a pretty experienced one at that. It’s not just some backbencher or new junior shouting his mouth off.

And you know how it goes with “proefballonnetjes”: before you know it is government policy if there is not enough resistance and push back.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

It seems to me that the DOJ or FBI or whoever is involved does not believe that Apple cannot unlock the device - because they are a suspicious type, they find it inconceivable that Apple wouldn’t have snuck in a backdoor, because if they had been running Apple themselves then that’s what they would have done.

And then they infect everyone around them to believe that these manufacturers all put in backdoors but refuse to cooperate, because the manufacturer would have to let the cat out of the bag if they unlock it.

 

[raghu8912]

I’m all for privacy. Except in cases like this. If Apple can unlock these phones then they should given the circumstances.

And yet when Apple admits to scanning every photo uploaded to iCloud for signs of child abuse this is acceptable? What happened to privacy? It’s excused as saying Apple is committed to child safety. Sounds noble. As would assisting with unlocking a suspected terrorists iPhone.

there should be no exceptions, do you think once Apple creates backdoor Law enforcement would not ask Apple to provide additional information from phone for petty theft ? And what if route actors get access to backdoor ?
[automerge]1579083851[/automerge]

Apple doesn't care about privacy. At any moment in time Apple will do or say whatever increases the value of Tim's bonus. That's all.

Apple has access to any information user has stored in iCloud, and Apple will provide it to law enforcement if they have a warrant, Apple doesn’t have access to data that’s not stored on iCloud and only stored in iPhone.
You don’t understand how this works, so stop spreading wrong information.
[automerge]1579084100[/automerge]

Unless the government is China. It will be no problem..

Doesn’t matter which government it is, there is no backdoor on iPhone.
Apple does store all the I loud data if China customers in China and all the data that is in Apple server will be provided to Law enforcement with a warrant including US, which they did in this situation.
[automerge]1579084171[/automerge]

If I recall correctly, most of those wide-scale surveillance powers got signed into law by Obama's predecessor.

They used 9/11 as an excuse to force this **** on US Citizens.
[automerge]1579084292[/automerge]

True, but they're points that don't have a lot to do with the situation at hand, except in the shallowest "all arguments in favor of privacy are making the same point" sense. Which I'm sure a lot of people here will agree with. I see both sides of this situation. I understand the arguments against putting in a back door. On the other hand, people celebrating the FBI's inability to access this phone seem not to have any grasp of what it means to try to be protecting lives. The flip side of the argument for uncrackable security is that IRL in the USA no one an absolute right to privacy anywhere, not even in their homes. You do not have a right to be protected from any and all kinds of search and seizure. You have a right to be protected from unreasonable search and seizure. And there's a difference. The zealot is the person who thinks that in a complicated equation, only one term gets 100% weight. There are a lot of them in this debate. Most seem to fall only on one side of this issue. Zealotry make things simple, but not in a way that really solves problems.
[automerge]1578972045[/automerge]

Your better comparison doesn't hold water, because your home can easily be entered and searched without that key. You realize that, don't you? Your house might have a draft afterwards. But firefighters and police have to enter locked houses all the time.

Law enforcement is still getting all the data synced to iCloud, they just can’t access data that’s in the phone.

 

[raghu8912]

National security it’s way more important than the dirty secrets u wanna hide 2 your wife if u don't why u care?

You are so wrong about this, it doesn’t matter if I have anything to hide, there shouldn’t be back doors.

 

[DDustiNN]

Seems more likely the right wing trumpists wanted to suppress a Saudi military pilot training at US Air Force base got vetted to be here, passed all security protocols, and came from a country who’s leader has news men murdered and chopped up. Remember the majority of 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. Maybe bush attacked wrong country?
[automerge]1578973240[/automerge]

Ah, the good ol’ terrorist defenders... I’ll never understand criminal sympathizers.

Seems more likely the right wing trumpists wanted to suppress a Saudi military pilot training at US Air Force base got vetted to be here, passed all security protocols, and came from a country who’s leader has news men murdered and chopped up. Remember the majority of 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. Maybe bush attacked wrong country?
[automerge]1578973240[/automerge]

How exactly are the “right wing trumpists” going to suppress the extremely left-biased news media?

 

[HEK]

Ah, the good ol’ terrorist defenders... I’ll never understand criminal sympathizers.

I know, right. Just so they can build a hotel the good ol’ terrorist defenders will even dance with the murderers.

[automerge]1579091779[/automerge]
[automerge]1579091850[/automerge]

 

[kaneda]

Apple can unlock iPhones in China, but not in the US?

Who told you that?

"China also did ask Apple to relocate the datacenters for all their PRC users to China. And by law China has access to all the local datacenters it wants. That's much worse than the USA asking Apple to unlock a phone only to get rejected by Apple."