3 ms·

There are allegations that the FBI could easily decrypt the phone if they actually wanted to, found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/46exkr/j

There are allegations that the FBI could easily decrypt the phone if they actually wanted to, found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/46exkr/john_mcafee_ill_decrypt_the_san_bernardino_phone/d04tyzm https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/46exkr/john_mca... https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/46np5t/san_bernardino_shooters_apple_id_passcode_changed/d06q9ff https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/46np5t/san_bernardino... Any truth to this?

cmurf 11y ago
In the government's filing, they claim Apple has exclusive technical means to gain access, and FBI is explicitly stated as being unable to. What are the implications of lying to the court in a legal filing?
- swang 11y ago
  absolutely nothing, the fbi lied to congress and no one is in jail.
citizensixteen 11y ago
If the government hacks the iPhone themselves, they don't get the legal precedent they are so desperate to establish in this case. This paves the way for legislation that forces technology companies to install backdoors in software/hardware. This case is not about the data on the phone itself, the government is simply continuing its march towards comprehensive surveillance systems. Secret Memo Details U.S.’s Broader Strategy to Crack Phones http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-19/secret-memo-details-u-s-s-broader-strategy-to-crack-phones http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-19/secret-mem... "Silicon Valley celebrated last fall when the White House revealed it would not seek legislation forcing technology makers to install “backdoors” in their software -- secret listening posts where investigators could pierce the veil of secrecy on users’ encrypted data, from text messages to video chats. But while the companies may have thought that was the final word, in fact the government was working on a Plan B. In a secret meeting convened by the White House around Thanksgiving, senior national security officials ordered agencies across the U.S. government to find ways to counter encryption software and gain access to the most heavily protected user data on the most secure consumer devices, including Apple Inc.’s iPhone, the marquee product of one of America’s most valuable companies, according to two people familiar with the decision."
- ekianjo 11y ago
  Plan B seemed to be "wait till terrorist action occurs and use it to make it look unreasonable to prevent back doors". This always works, in about every country.
- rtpg 11y ago
  > This paves the way for legislation that forces technology companies to install backdoors in software/hardware But... the fact that Apple can do anything is a result of the OS update backdoor in the first place in this case! If this were a 5S this entire court case wouldn't be possible. This court ruling is not "Apple needs to install a backdoor". It's "Apple needs to exploit the backdoor they have a key to".
  - nickysielicki 11y ago
    Bingo. Not enough people in here are understanding the legal side of this. Someone in this community could quite reasonably root against apple, on the basis that a DOJ loss would give the DOJ a lot of fuel to push for legislation mandating backdoors. It's a very different situation when Apple can reasonably do something to undermine encryption and when there's nothing they can do, and the precedent going forward from this case is negligible considering that the 5C is the last holdout of an enclave-less iPhone. What we should fear is legislation that bars the creation of truly secure phones. A ruling for Apple might aid in the creation and passing of such legislation.
    - citizensixteen 11y ago
      >Not enough people in here are understanding the legal side of this. This is just one more step towards winning the Crypto Wars- The Crypto Wars is an unofficial name for the U.S. government's attempts to limit the public's and foreign nations' access to cryptography strong enough to resist decryption by national intelligence agencies (especially USA's NSA) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars
  - pja 11y ago
    The argument is that once they have this precedent in hand, they can then use it to force Apple to alter the code in the secure enclave of all current Apple devices so that the security services can gain access to them on demand. Or else, even if this case doesn’t give them sufficient precedent to force that kind of access, it’s certainly a legal stepping stone along that route, which is precisely why the FBI is taking the case all the way even though it’s clearly not necessary in this specific case - the NSA is perfectly capable of gaining access to the phone in question if they want to & according to Snowden they even have the legal right to do so since it was a work-issued phone where the issuee had signed over the right to scrutinise it at any time.
alblue 11y ago
As I noted in my InfoQ piece (linked elsewhere in another comment) the FBI prevented themselves from being able to get recent automated backups by asking the owners to change the iCloud password. The phone stopped backing up at that point.
unfamiliar 11y ago
For the first link, they are talking about working with the chip directly, which may or may not be possible. For the second link, where they suggest turning off the phone after a passcode attempt, I believe that hole was patched with an iOS update at some point.

cmurf 11y ago

In the government's filing, they claim Apple has exclusive technical means to gain access, and FBI is explicitly stated as being unable to. What are the implications of lying to the court in a legal filing?

swang 11y ago
absolutely nothing, the fbi lied to congress and no one is in jail.

citizensixteen 11y ago

If the government hacks the iPhone themselves, they don't get the legal precedent they are so desperate to establish in this case. This paves the way for legislation that forces technology companies to install backdoors in software/hardware. This case is not about the data on the phone itself, the government is simply continuing its march towards comprehensive surveillance systems. Secret Memo Details U.S.’s Broader Strategy to Crack Phones http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-19/secret-memo-details-u-s-s-broader-strategy-to-crack-phones http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-19/secret-mem... "Silicon Valley celebrated last fall when the White House revealed it would not seek legislation forcing technology makers to install “backdoors” in their software -- secret listening posts where investigators could pierce the veil of secrecy on users’ encrypted data, from text messages to video chats. But while the companies may have thought that was the final word, in fact the government was working on a Plan B. In a secret meeting convened by the White House around Thanksgiving, senior national security officials ordered agencies across the U.S. government to find ways to counter encryption software and gain access to the most heavily protected user data on the most secure consumer devices, including Apple Inc.’s iPhone, the marquee product of one of America’s most valuable companies, according to two people familiar with the decision."

ekianjo 11y ago
Plan B seemed to be "wait till terrorist action occurs and use it to make it look unreasonable to prevent back doors". This always works, in about every country.
rtpg 11y ago
> This paves the way for legislation that forces technology companies to install backdoors in software/hardware But... the fact that Apple can do anything is a result of the OS update backdoor in the first place in this case! If this were a 5S this entire court case wouldn't be possible. This court ruling is not "Apple needs to install a backdoor". It's "Apple needs to exploit the backdoor they have a key to".
- nickysielicki 11y ago
  Bingo. Not enough people in here are understanding the legal side of this. Someone in this community could quite reasonably root against apple, on the basis that a DOJ loss would give the DOJ a lot of fuel to push for legislation mandating backdoors. It's a very different situation when Apple can reasonably do something to undermine encryption and when there's nothing they can do, and the precedent going forward from this case is negligible considering that the 5C is the last holdout of an enclave-less iPhone. What we should fear is legislation that bars the creation of truly secure phones. A ruling for Apple might aid in the creation and passing of such legislation.
  - citizensixteen 11y ago
    >Not enough people in here are understanding the legal side of this. This is just one more step towards winning the Crypto Wars- The Crypto Wars is an unofficial name for the U.S. government's attempts to limit the public's and foreign nations' access to cryptography strong enough to resist decryption by national intelligence agencies (especially USA's NSA) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars
- pja 11y ago
  The argument is that once they have this precedent in hand, they can then use it to force Apple to alter the code in the secure enclave of all current Apple devices so that the security services can gain access to them on demand. Or else, even if this case doesn’t give them sufficient precedent to force that kind of access, it’s certainly a legal stepping stone along that route, which is precisely why the FBI is taking the case all the way even though it’s clearly not necessary in this specific case - the NSA is perfectly capable of gaining access to the phone in question if they want to & according to Snowden they even have the legal right to do so since it was a work-issued phone where the issuee had signed over the right to scrutinise it at any time.

alblue 11y ago

As I noted in my InfoQ piece (linked elsewhere in another comment) the FBI prevented themselves from being able to get recent automated backups by asking the owners to change the iCloud password. The phone stopped backing up at that point.

unfamiliar 11y ago

For the first link, they are talking about working with the chip directly, which may or may not be possible. For the second link, where they suggest turning off the phone after a passcode attempt, I believe that hole was patched with an iOS update at some point.