|
Post by ntsf on Feb 17, 2016 22:42:15 GMT
I have my doubts that apple can go back and change the ios on the phone.. I mean..you are talking about software that does not exist at this point--is the govt going to pay apple staff to do this? if it is possible?
|
|
|
Post by RiverIsis on Feb 17, 2016 22:48:44 GMT
I have my doubts that apple can go back and change the ios on the phone.. I mean..you are talking about software that does not exist at this point--is the govt going to pay apple staff to do this? if it is possible? Software they are telling us doesn't exist. 60+ thousand employees and none of them have fully explored the ios on the phone? It is possible but is it probable?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 23:00:41 GMT
I haven't seen a single person who works in tech and supports the government's side in this. My developer friends are all adamantly opposed to it. Oh I know they will be against it, I just want to know how much Apple is bullshitting everyone. TBH at the moment, I don't for one moment believe they don't already have the technology they just aren't going to admit it. Well, only those who are inside Apple know for sure if they have it, and they can't comment. But the developers I know are all Mac and iOS developers - many of whom have worked at Apple previously - and they seem in agreement that Apple doesn't have that capability.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 17, 2016 23:11:37 GMT
I have my doubts that apple can go back and change the ios on the phone.. I mean..you are talking about software that does not exist at this point--is the govt going to pay apple staff to do this? if it is possible? I have zero doubt that they can modify the iOS to not delete after 10 wrong passwords. That's a relatively new feature that's been added. I'm betting they can modify the delay between wrong attempts to make a brute force with a good passcode feasible, but I'm willing to entertain explanations on why it would be difficult.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 23:31:46 GMT
This is an extremely informative article on iOS/iPhone security.Especially interesting that what the FBI is asking would truly not be possible on an iPhone 5S or later, but is theoretically possible on a 5C (with the caveat that it depends on how long the terrorist's PIN was - if it was 8 digits, this is all a moot point because it could take basically forever to brute force).
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Feb 17, 2016 23:33:22 GMT
I am such a goody two shoes that I think if a governmental agency wants to delve into the inner secrets of my phone, they won't find a whole lot more than my friends and I bitching about our ex husbands.
But, while I wouldn't have an issue with handing the keys of my own house over based on a vetted warrant to search my property, I would have a serious issue with the powers that be that ask for a master key that fits my own home, my neighbor's homes, or any other home based on the idea that they may be hiding something in the future so they have the right to the master key just in case. (Which if I am interpreting the request correctly, the FBI wants the key that works for this phone and every other one too, not just the specific information for this phone.)
I have to admit though, isn't the majority of the information that is available through the phone accessible through other avenues? As in, phone records subpoenaed from the service provider? Tweets through Twitter? Etc? What is on this phone that can't be found elsewhere?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 23:36:00 GMT
I have to admit though, isn't the majority of the information that is available through the phone accessible through other avenues? As in, phone records subpoenaed from the service provider? Tweets through Twitter? Etc? What is on this phone that can't be found elsewhere? Not necessarily and they may not know where to look even if it is elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Feb 17, 2016 23:37:48 GMT
I have to admit though, isn't the majority of the information that is available through the phone accessible through other avenues? As in, phone records subpoenaed from the service provider? Tweets through Twitter? Etc? What is on this phone that can't be found elsewhere? Not necessarily and they may not know where to look even if it is elsewhere. I am a technodolt. What else is on the phone beyond the apps?
|
|
|
Post by SnowWhite on Feb 17, 2016 23:41:29 GMT
Not necessarily and they may not know where to look even if it is elsewhere. I am a technodolt. What else is on the phone beyond the apps? Data inside the apps that the cell provider would not have access to. His provider can tell you who he exchanged phone calls with, but not who he exchanged text message with or the message contents. Any other communications that occurred inside of applications (think like Facebook Messenger or the private messaging system on this board) could also be stored on the phone. It could also reveal email accounts that are previously unknown.
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Feb 17, 2016 23:50:18 GMT
I am a technodolt. What else is on the phone beyond the apps? Data inside the apps that the cell provider would not have access to. His provider can tell you who he exchanged phone calls with, but not who he exchanged text message with or the message contents. Any other communications that occurred inside of applications (think like Facebook Messenger or the private messaging system on this board) could also be stored on the phone. It could also reveal email accounts that are previously unknown. Okay-the unknown accounts I get, but the private messages through pretty much all applications are unavailable-that is a problem throughout all platforms and why most people who are trying to hide behaviors use them and favorites of terrorists, right?. If you, for example send an IM through Twitter and delete the information, it is not going to be available no matter who is scrutinizing your computer or phone. Also, while I may not be able to see the contents of a text, I can see the phone number as part of my standard bill. If I deleted the text, it is gone and having the physical phone wouldn't be of any advantage. I swear I am not trying to be obtuse. As part of trying to decide how I feel about the FBI pushing the issue I am trying to figure out precisely what they are looking for. It seems to me the problems of what will be on the phone are exactly the same problems that have been ongoing with all technology-whether it is us parents trying to track down what are kids are up to or the powers that be trying to follow the footprints of a terrorist.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 23:55:32 GMT
Data inside the apps that the cell provider would not have access to. His provider can tell you who he exchanged phone calls with, but not who he exchanged text message with or the message contents. Any other communications that occurred inside of applications (think like Facebook Messenger or the private messaging system on this board) could also be stored on the phone. It could also reveal email accounts that are previously unknown. Okay-the unknown accounts I get, but the private messages through pretty much all applications are unavailable-that is a problem throughout all platforms and why most people who are trying to hide behaviors use them and favorites of terrorists, right?. If you, for example send an IM through Twitter and delete the information, it is not going to be available no matter who is scrutinizing your computer or phone. Also, while I may not be able to see the contents of a text, I can see the phone number as part of my standard bill. If I deleted the text, it is gone and having the physical phone wouldn't be of any advantage. I swear I am not trying to be obtuse. As part of trying to decide how I feel about the FBI pushing the issue I am trying to figure out precisely what they are looking for. It seems to me the problems of what will be on the phone are exactly the same problems that have been ongoing with all technology-whether it is us parents trying to track down what are kids are up to or the powers that be trying to follow the footprints of a terrorist. They don't know what they are looking for. They are hoping information might reveal ties to other terrorists. However, if they were actually cooperating with any other terrorists, said terrorists all know that they are dead and their phones are in the hands of the FBI. So... with months and months of time, I tend to think that if there is anything on there that *may* have been useful, its utility is long gone. Identities changed, plans scrapped, etc. If they gain access to the phone, they aren't going to get anything beneficial out of it... except a legal precedent to do this again in the future. And I think THAT is the actual endgame here.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 0:01:37 GMT
Google's CEO just weighed in via Twitter
|
|
raindancer
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,095
Jun 26, 2014 20:10:29 GMT
|
Post by raindancer on Feb 18, 2016 0:07:02 GMT
Okay-the unknown accounts I get, but the private messages through pretty much all applications are unavailable-that is a problem throughout all platforms and why most people who are trying to hide behaviors use them and favorites of terrorists, right?. If you, for example send an IM through Twitter and delete the information, it is not going to be available no matter who is scrutinizing your computer or phone. Also, while I may not be able to see the contents of a text, I can see the phone number as part of my standard bill. If I deleted the text, it is gone and having the physical phone wouldn't be of any advantage. I swear I am not trying to be obtuse. As part of trying to decide how I feel about the FBI pushing the issue I am trying to figure out precisely what they are looking for. It seems to me the problems of what will be on the phone are exactly the same problems that have been ongoing with all technology-whether it is us parents trying to track down what are kids are up to or the powers that be trying to follow the footprints of a terrorist. They don't know what they are looking for. They are hoping information might reveal ties to other terrorists. However, if they were actually cooperating with any other terrorists, said terrorists all know that they are dead and their phones are in the hands of the FBI. So... with months and months of time, I tend to think that if there is anything on there that *may* have been useful, its utility is long gone. Identities changed, plans scrapped, etc. If they gain access to the phone, they aren't going to get anything beneficial out of it... except a legal precedent to do this again in the future. And I think THAT is the actual endgame here. anxiousmom I think the reality is this is an excuse they are using to create legal precedent and nothing more. They don't care about this guys phone. It's all a ruse. And demanding that a company develop a product (and that is what an os is) is completely overstepping their bounds as a government agency.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 0:19:20 GMT
They don't know what they are looking for. They are hoping information might reveal ties to other terrorists. However, if they were actually cooperating with any other terrorists, said terrorists all know that they are dead and their phones are in the hands of the FBI. So... with months and months of time, I tend to think that if there is anything on there that *may* have been useful, its utility is long gone. Identities changed, plans scrapped, etc. If they gain access to the phone, they aren't going to get anything beneficial out of it... except a legal precedent to do this again in the future. And I think THAT is the actual endgame here. anxiousmom I think the reality is this is an excuse they are using to create legal precedent and nothing more. They don't care about this guys phone. It's all a ruse. And demanding that a company develop a product (and that is what an os is) is completely overstepping their bounds as a government agency. I thought I could get pretty cynical but I have to tell you next to you I'm a wimp. Holy cow. What makes you think the FBI doesn't want the information on the phone?
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Feb 18, 2016 0:21:47 GMT
They don't know what they are looking for. They are hoping information might reveal ties to other terrorists. However, if they were actually cooperating with any other terrorists, said terrorists all know that they are dead and their phones are in the hands of the FBI. So... with months and months of time, I tend to think that if there is anything on there that *may* have been useful, its utility is long gone. Identities changed, plans scrapped, etc. If they gain access to the phone, they aren't going to get anything beneficial out of it... except a legal precedent to do this again in the future. And I think THAT is the actual endgame here. anxiousmom I think the reality is this is an excuse they are using to create legal precedent and nothing more. They don't care about this guys phone. It's all a ruse. And demanding that a company develop a product (and that is what an os is) is completely overstepping their bounds as a government agency. I have to fight a natural skepticism when it comes to seeing an argument for the government trying to take away freedoms-I always think that is the bailiwick of the crazy conspiracy theorists. In this case though, I am having trouble understanding the reasoning here. Everything I have read suggests to me that there really is no benefit for THIS phone, but will have greater implications for OTHER phones as a whole rather than the time honored vetted process of subpoenas for individual phones (physical and available ancillary applications.) I would like to think that while I am a technodolt when it comes to technology I am with it enough to follow the actual arguments and what is happening. But I do wonder if I am missing something...
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 18, 2016 0:28:14 GMT
This is an extremely informative article on iOS/iPhone security.Especially interesting that what the FBI is asking would truly not be possible on an iPhone 5S or later, but is theoretically possible on a 5C (with the caveat that it depends on how long the terrorist's PIN was - if it was 8 digits, this is all a moot point because it could take basically forever to brute force). Hmmm - this article directly contradicts Apple's letter that if they built this software it could open any iPhone. Is the A7 not as secure as thus author believes or is Apple exaggerating the impact?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 0:33:24 GMT
This is an extremely informative article on iOS/iPhone security.Especially interesting that what the FBI is asking would truly not be possible on an iPhone 5S or later, but is theoretically possible on a 5C (with the caveat that it depends on how long the terrorist's PIN was - if it was 8 digits, this is all a moot point because it could take basically forever to brute force). Hmmm - this article directly contradicts Apple's letter that if they built this software it could open any iPhone. Is the A7 not as secure as thus author believes or is Apple exaggerating the impact? I don't know. Purely conjecture, but I wouldn't be surprised if what the FBI has asked for (before the court order) is more expansive than what is discussed in the article.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Feb 18, 2016 0:34:25 GMT
It's interesting to me that they chose this case to push forward on the request. Both players are dead - decrypting their phones isn't going to lead to a conviction; not decrypting their phones isn't going to lead to an acquittal. So this would serve no other purpose than setting a precedent for future cases. And/Or they're fishing - if that is the case, they need to find a way to find information that doesn't put the privacy of everyone else in jeopardy. Could they be looking for associates of the bombers?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 0:39:40 GMT
Hmmmm... this is interesting. Sounds like the Secure Enclave *could* be flash updated on newer phones with what the FBI is asking for, bypassing the way it's supposed to work (which is what is described in Stratechery article I linked upthread). Various links in this articleDarcy Collins
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Feb 18, 2016 0:43:39 GMT
A ) I'm guessing they couldnt warm up his cold dead fingers and get access that way when it first went down?
B ) if they made zero effort to destroy it I doubt there's a single thing in it.
C ) if it's his work phone how the heck does his employer not have access? I'm sort of shocked by that. I know my employer has access to every piece of electronics they issued me, most remotely. Thru software installed prior to issuing it, though my work phone is not an I-phone. My employer has access to my laptop ( remotely ), our team tablet ( remotely ), my vehicle electronics ( probably remotely not positive ) and my cel phone but they have to have it turned in, they can not access it remotely. There is software for nearly everything that can be installed prior to a company issuing electronics that gives them access. I'm surprised a government agency would issue a brand of electronics that didn't have a method available that allows them master access.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 0:43:45 GMT
It's interesting to me that they chose this case to push forward on the request. Both players are dead - decrypting their phones isn't going to lead to a conviction; not decrypting their phones isn't going to lead to an acquittal. So this would serve no other purpose than setting a precedent for future cases. And/Or they're fishing - if that is the case, they need to find a way to find information that doesn't put the privacy of everyone else in jeopardy. Could they be looking for associates of the bombers? Do you really think that any terrorist associates of the shooters would still be using any names, contact information, plans, suppliers, etc. that they may have discussed with these people, after knowing the FBI has had their phones for months? If they had gained access to the phones in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, then there absolutely could be useful information on there. But now? Two and a half months later? There's nothing there that's still valid.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Feb 18, 2016 0:46:14 GMT
I have no idea and neither do you. I'm just speculating.
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Feb 18, 2016 0:46:32 GMT
It's interesting to me that they chose this case to push forward on the request. Both players are dead - decrypting their phones isn't going to lead to a conviction; not decrypting their phones isn't going to lead to an acquittal. So this would serve no other purpose than setting a precedent for future cases. And/Or they're fishing - if that is the case, they need to find a way to find information that doesn't put the privacy of everyone else in jeopardy. Could they be looking for associates of the bombers? That's what I meant by fishing. They don't even know if their are associates. Instead, they want access to all iPhone data in order to go fishing on the off chance of finding a name they can use. Firstly, I don't know what good it would do them given the time that has passed and, secondly, I'm not cool with making everyone's information available on an 'off chance'. It's all a little too Patriot Act for me.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 0:55:15 GMT
|
|
raindancer
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,095
Jun 26, 2014 20:10:29 GMT
|
Post by raindancer on Feb 18, 2016 1:17:18 GMT
anxiousmom I think the reality is this is an excuse they are using to create legal precedent and nothing more. They don't care about this guys phone. It's all a ruse. And demanding that a company develop a product (and that is what an os is) is completely overstepping their bounds as a government agency. I thought I could get pretty cynical but I have to tell you next to you I'm a wimp. Holy cow. What makes you think the FBI doesn't want the information on the phone? For all the reasons I've said and Busypea has said. The likelihood that there is anything of value on that phone at this point is very low. And as that is the case, then what else would they do with the information other than set precedent for future legal cases. And where do we draw that line? Is it for anyone accused of a crime? Is it now easier for low level hackers to access anyone's phone? I don't think that our government does enough to protect and assist those impacted by identity theft, but they want to open up the door for that to increase. And they want to do it under the guise of "protecting" us. Which is highly suspect, and not one person here has given any strong reason why/how this would protect us from anything. I don't appreciate having people expecting my to sacrifice my privacy by tugging on my heart strings. It's manipulative bullshit. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's that time and again our government agencies have shown themselves to be incompetent fools, who are reactive and behind the times in all things tech. I am highly critical of the ways in which our government has approached this 'war' on terror, and their inability to attack it in a proactive manner. There are too many gaps in their skill sets, their communication skills, and their knowledge base. That is a direct result of their inability to pay. In this business you pay the best and the brightest to stay ahead of the competition and the US government doesn't have that ability or desire. So their people won't be able to stop misuse. In addition, until/unless there are some pretty darn clear rules and laws with some actual consequences for hurting the general public with their craptastic plans and actions, I don't trust them to use the information to protect us. The problem with a huge gaffe on their part, is that there is no putting the cat back in the bag. It will be done, and they will only say "Oops, sorry" and then nothing will happen.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 1:53:07 GMT
As much as I want to rid the earth of terrorist scum, this is Pandora's box, for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 18, 2016 3:05:17 GMT
Hmmm - this article directly contradicts Apple's letter that if they built this software it could open any iPhone. Is the A7 not as secure as thus author believes or is Apple exaggerating the impact? I don't know. Purely conjecture, but I wouldn't be surprised if what the FBI has asked for (before the court order) is more expansive than what is discussed in the article. You can read what is specifically asked for - I linked to the Magistrates ruling a few pages ago. ETA oops - looks like there's more in this thread I need to catch up on. I just saw your other post
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 22:21:29 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 3:07:50 GMT
I don't know. Purely conjecture, but I wouldn't be surprised if what the FBI has asked for (before the court order) is more expansive than what is discussed in the article. You can read what is specifically asked for - I linked to the Magistrates ruling a few pages ago. I was talking about the negotiations that went on before the court order and speculating that what the FBI really wants is more than what was granted in the order. But as more technical information comes out, it seems that what they were granted is indeed as bad as what Apple said in their statement.
|
|
|
Post by 950nancy on Feb 18, 2016 4:38:28 GMT
One of things I appreciate about Apple is that hacking/viruses are kept to a minimum compared to other products. My fear isn't with the FBI looking at my information. My fear is that this technology could open up Apple products to be hacked much more easily. I've already had my SSN stolen from Turbo Tax and that was no fun to fix and it probably won't ever be fully fixed. So for now, I am on Apple's side until I hear more information about this subject.
|
|
|
Post by mrsloafbot on Feb 18, 2016 21:01:36 GMT
Apple does not have a back door. No reputable phone company does or would ever.
There is not one for a very good reason. If it existed, others could hack into it. It's a huge security flaw to have a back door to any OS. Even if only one person had the "keys" code to be able to get into your OS, others would figure it out. It would just be a matter of time. Thus why security is such a big deal. Hackers go looking for loop holes and back doors to exploit them. Programmers spend a lot of time closing those holes. No company that wants their customers data to be secure would allow for a back door to their programming.
This is a terrible precedent if allowed.
|
|