Apple to fight order to help hack San Bernardino shooter's phone; FBI can now hack any Apple Phone

the Streif

¡¡¡¡sıʞunɹɹɹɹɹɹɹℲ
Donator
#1
Apple to fight order to help hack San Bernardino shooter's phone
Published February 17, 2016
FoxNews.com
Facebook343 Twitter0 livefyre1517 Email Print


Now Playing
FBI searching for missing hard drive in San Bernardino probe

Never autoplay videos
Apple will fight a federal magistrate's order to help the Obama administration break into an encrypted iPhone belonging to one of the shooters in last December's San Bernardino terror attack.

In a statement posted on Apple's website early Wednesday, CEO Tim Cook said the order by U.S. Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym "has implications far beyond the legal case at hand".

"We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good," Cook's statement read in part. "Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone."

Cook's statement was published hours after Pym's first-of-its kind ruling, a significant victory for the Justice Department in a technology policy debate that pits digital privacy against national security interests.

FBI Director James Comey told members of Congress last week that encryption is a major problem for law enforcement who "find a device that can't be opened even when a judge says there's probable cause to open it."

The ruling Tuesday tied the problem to the deadliest terrorist attack on U.S. soil since the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, killed 14 people in a Dec. 2 shooting at a holiday luncheon for Farook's co-workers. The couple later died in a gun battle with police.

Federal prosecutors told the judge in Tuesday's court proceeding — that was conducted without Apple being allowed to participate — that investigators can't access a work phone used by Farook because they don't know his passcode and Apple has not cooperated. Under U.S. law, a work phone is generally the property of a person's employer. The judge told Apple to provide an estimate of its cost to comply with her order, suggesting that the government will be expected to pay for the work.

In his statement, Cook said, "this moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake."

Apple has provided default encryption on its iPhones since 2014, allowing any device's contents to be accessed only by the user who knows the phone's passcode. Previously, the company could use an extraction tool that would physically plug into the phone and allow it to respond to search warrant requests from the government.

The ruling by Pym, a former federal prosecutor, requires Apple to supply highly specialized software the FBI can load onto the county-owned work iPhone to bypass a self-destruct feature, which erases the phone's data after too many unsuccessful attempts to unlock it. The FBI wants to be able to try different combinations in rapid sequence until it finds the right one.

"The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake," Cook wrote. "Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a back door. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control."

It was not immediately clear what investigators believe they might find on Farook's work phone or why the information would not be available from third-party service providers, such as Google or Facebook, though investigators think the device may hold clues about whom the couple communicated with and where they may have traveled.

The couple took pains to physically destroy two personally owned cell phones, crushing them beyond the FBI's ability to recover information from them. They also removed a hard drive from their computer; it has not been found despite investigators diving for days for potential electronic evidence in a nearby lake.

Farook was not carrying his work iPhone during the attack. It was discovered after a subsequent search. It was not known whether Farook forgot about the iPhone or did not care whether investigators found it.

The phone was running the newest version of Apple's iPhone operating system, which requires a passcode and cannot be accessed by Apple, unlike earlier operating systems or older phone models. San Bernardino County provided Farook with an iPhone configured to erase data after 10 consecutive unsuccessful unlocking attempts. The FBI said that feature appeared to be active on Farook's iPhone as of the last time he performed a backup.

The judge didn't spell out her rationale in her three-page order, but the ruling comes amid a similar case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Investigators are still working to piece together a missing 18 minutes in Farook and Malik's timeline from Dec. 2. Investigators have concluded they were at least partly inspired by the Islamic State group; Malik's Facebook page included a note pledging allegiance to the group's leader around the time of the attack.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 

THE FEZ MAN

as a matter of fact i dont have 5$
#2
I don't blame apple for putting up a fight, if the government wants the info they can pay there own contractors to figure it out, or just do a back door deal, don't put it out in the public eye.
 

Mags

A.K.A. Chad
Donator
#3
I don't blame apple for putting up a fight, if the government wants the info they can pay there own contractors to figure it out, or just do a back door deal, don't put it out in the public eye.
Exactly. They have to put up a public fight and let there be a court order.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
#4
You wont hear me say this often, but good for Apple.
 

Lord Zero

Registered User
#5
You wont hear me say this often, but good for Apple.
Apple is a basket of twats, but they're doing the right thing... for now. This is the only time I'll ever be glad that Apple has as much political pull as it does.
 

Mags

A.K.A. Chad
Donator
#6
Apple is a basket of twats, but they're doing the right thing... for now. This is the only time I'll ever be glad that Apple has as much political pull as it does.
Any company should deny this kind of thing and wait for a court order, which will come.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
#7
Any company should deny this kind of thing and wait for a court order, which will come.
It already has, they are still refusing it.
 

Mags

A.K.A. Chad
Donator
#8
It already has, they are still refusing it.

EDIT: Okay, maybe it hasn't. I thought I read that it had.
Oh, they're worried about the govt using a new backdoor tool to access other people's shit illegally.

Why not just do it for the govt and keep the backdoor secret?

Fucking Apple: not doing what anyone wants for years.
 

Lord Zero

Registered User
#9
Oh, they're worried about the govt using a new backdoor tool to access other people's shit illegally.
That's a very well-founded fear.
Fucking Apple: not doing what anyone wants for years.
If the request had gone to the iTunes department, they would've given the FBI the backdoor and deleted the data on the shooter's phone just to make sure that nobody would be happy.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
#10
Oh, they're worried about the govt using a new backdoor tool to access other people's shit illegally.

Why not just do it for the govt and keep the backdoor secret?

Fucking Apple: not doing what anyone wants for years.
Not that simple. It's not a real backdoor. iOS 8 installed encryption that is generated from your password. Not even apple can get into your files. So they will have to develop a brute force way to break through the encryption...encryption Apple developed specifically so not even THEY can get in. If it works on one phone, it'll work on everyone's phone. And if the government has it, it WILL get out.
 
#11
Hand the phone over to Lex of the EDA, the chick with the badass R2D2 flask. She would have it cracked in like 5 minutes, she used to work for a cell phone company so she knows how to do these things.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
#12
Hand the phone over to Lex of the EDA, the chick with the badass R2D2 flask. She would have it cracked in like 5 minutes, she used to work for a cell phone company so she knows how to do these things.
We'll never be free of that book.
 
#13
We'll never be free of that book.
I'm close, I just barely remembered her name but did have to google to come up with EDA. Certainly didn't have to look up the R2D2 flask, can't ever escape that one.
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
#14
Not that simple. It's not a real backdoor. iOS 8 installed encryption that is generated from your password. Not even apple can get into your files. So they will have to develop a brute force way to break through the encryption...encryption Apple developed specifically so not even THEY can get in. If it works on one phone, it'll work on everyone's phone. And if the government has it, it WILL get out.
I have a very hard time believing that even Apple can't get into your shit. I just don't believe they would lock themselves out.

I'm kind of on the fence about this one. On one hand, it is a privacy issue and concerns of abuse, especially when the gov't is involved are completely legit. But on the other hand fuck apple for refusing to help fight savagery. If this was White Christian Planned Parenthood shooter, I'd bet anything they'd be much more amenable to cooperate. Also my attitude it that when you commit a crime against society of that magnitude, you've forefieted your rights to privacy (and the right to not be savagely beaten).
 

Atomic Fireball

Well-Known Member
Donator
#15
Since this is a matter of national security I'm guessing Kirk will be OK with Apple complying with the government this time.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
#16
Why not just do it for the govt and keep the backdoor secret?
Secret from whom? The new encryption was created to protect us from THE GOVERNMENT. Remember the Snowden leak, about the warrant-less spying? That's why this encryption is in place. To stop that.

Besides, Apple says there's no backdoor. So there's nothing they can do to open the phone, the data on it is encrypted, and Apple is just as powerless to crack it as everyone else. The FBI should try guessing the password. Have they tried "Allahu Ackbar" yet? I bet that's it.
 

Mags

A.K.A. Chad
Donator
#17
Secret from whom? The new encryption was created to protect us from THE GOVERNMENT. Remember the Snowden leak, about the warrant-less spying? That's why this encryption is in place. To stop that.

Besides, Apple says there's no backdoor. So there's nothing they can do to open the phone, the data on it is encrypted, and Apple is just as powerless to crack it as everyone else. The FBI should try guessing the password. Have they tried "Allahu Ackbar" yet? I bet that's it.
Well they'd better get crackin.
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
#18
Besides, Apple says there's no backdoor. So there's nothing they can do to open the phone, the data on it is encrypted, and Apple is just as powerless to crack it as everyone else.
Again, I find that highly suspect. Apple is not going to admit there's a backdoor. But even that's the case, they designed the system, they can get around it.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
#19
Again, I find that highly suspect. Apple is not going to admit there's a backdoor. But even that's the case, they designed the system, they can get around it.
It's complicated, and kind of a long story, but the short version is that no, there's no backdoor to the encryption. I don't fully understand cryptography, because it's not my area, but I am a programmer. And I can assure you, that's a scientific fact (meaning it is verifiable by neutral parties...encryption experts not affiliated with Apple). There's no backdoor. Apple can't magically decrypt that phone.

But this isn't really about that. The judge didn't ask Apple to break the encryption. That's just shitty reporting. Federal judges aren't morons, they wouldn't order someone to do something that's a scientific impossibility.

Aside from the encryption, the I-phone also has a security feature that automatically wipes the hard drive clean, if you enter a wrong password ten times in a row. The judge wants Apple to come up with code that would allow the FBI to bypass that feature, allowing them more than 10 tries to guess the password. Such code doesn't exist, right now. So Apple would have to write it, share it (with the FBI for now, but police departments would ask for the same thing, and get it, because the legal precedent has been set), and hope it's not leaked (but, of course, it will be leaked).

That doesn't mean the phone can now be cracked. It's still encrypted. If it's a strong enough password, it's still secure. So, the end result might actually be that Apple is forced to compromise the security of innocent users (who aren't paranoid enough to memorize a long, random password for their I-phone), and it won't even help in this case. They should definitely continue to fight this order, for as long as possible.

Sauce: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...-shooters-iphone-to-create-new-backdoor.shtml
 

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
#20
It's complicated, and kind of a long story, but the short version is that no, there's no backdoor to the encryption. I don't fully understand cryptography, because it's not my area, but I am a programmer. And I can assure you, that's a scientific fact (meaning it is verifiable by neutral parties...encryption experts not affiliated with Apple). There's no backdoor. Apple can't magically decrypt that phone.

But this isn't really about that. The judge didn't ask Apple to break the encryption. That's just shitty reporting. Federal judges aren't morons, they wouldn't order someone to do something that's a scientific impossibility.

Aside from the encryption, the I-phone also has a security feature that automatically wipes the hard drive clean, if you enter a wrong password ten times in a row. The judge wants Apple to come up with code that would allow the FBI to bypass that feature, allowing them more than 10 tries to guess the password. Such code doesn't exist, right now. So Apple would have to write it, share it (with the FBI for now, but police departments would ask for the same thing, and get it, because the legal precedent has been set), and hope it's not leaked (but, of course, it will be leaked).

That doesn't mean the phone can now be cracked. It's still encrypted. If it's a strong enough password, it's still secure. So, the end result might actually be that Apple is forced to compromise the security of innocent users (who aren't paranoid enough to memorize a long, random password for their I-phone), and it won't even help in this case. They should definitely continue to fight this order, for as long as possible.
Hack the planet?
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
#21
P.S. A better solution would be for the FBI (or the NSA) to reverse engineer the system, and write their own code. If Apple can do it, so can the NSA, they just have to try hard enough. That way, the FBI gets what they want, but there's no legal precedent to force Apple to share it with local police.

But, of course, that's not what this is about. The government has been fighting for years to force Apple and Google to keep their encryption vulnerable. That's what they want with this, too.

If the government is willing to spend the money to hack this, Apple can just change the system with the next software upgrade, and that will be that. The system is safe again. Only this phone (and other phones currently in government custody) can be hacked.

On the other hand, if there's a legal precedent set, that Apple can be forced to hack their own system, then they'll be forced to also hack the next upgrade. So the system will stay vulnerable forever. That's why it's important for Apple to refuse to give in. Let the government come up with their own code, if they want it. But I'm willing to bet that this one phone isn't important enough to spend all those resources on. The NSA won't allocate its best talent to cracking one phone, that probably has nothing of value on it. It's just being used as a political prop, to try and set a dangerous precedent.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
#22
Why can't they remove the hard drive and clone it, and just keep trying different combinations on the cloned drives?
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
#23
But, of course, that's not what this is about. The government has been fighting for years to force Apple and Google to keep their encryption vulnerable. That's what they want with this, too.
That's another thing I'm finding hard to believe, that the federal government would even allow a private sector company which sells products mostly to the general public to develop an unbeatable method of encryption. I mean, what do you do if there's a real imminent threat to national security and the authorities were able to recover a suspect's phone? SOL?
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
#24
That's another thing I'm finding hard to believe, that the federal government would even allow a private sector company which sells products mostly to the general public to develop an unbeatable method of encryption.
They're trying to stop them. It's not working, because of the whole constitution/free country thing.You can in fact sell someone a product that fully protects their privacy. It's not against the law.
I mean, what do you do if there's a real imminent threat to national security and the authorities were able to recover a suspect's phone? SOL?
I would suggest torture, to get the password. Unlike ordering Apple to make their phones vulnerable to hacking, torturing a terrorist won't hurt innocent people. Except maybe Diane Feinstein and her constituency's sensible feelings.

Or just nuke the country the terrorist came from, and win the war on Islamic terror once and for all. Either would be a better solution than turning the US into a surveillance state.
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
#25
They're trying to stop them. It's not working, because of the whole constitution/free country thing.You can in fact sell someone a product that fully protects their privacy. It's not against the law.
Well, let's be realistic. It's not like there aren't thousands of laws that dictate what a company can and cannot do. Citing the constitution is not at very realistic argument.

I would suggest torture, to get the password. Unlike ordering Apple to make their phones vulnerable to hacking, torturing a terrorist won't hurt innocent people. Except maybe Diane Feinstein and her constituency's sensible feelings.
I don't disagree with this, but what if the owner of the phone is dead?
 
Top