FBI backs off of Apple

[Zambonie]

 

    The FBI has backed off of Apple and it's San Bernardino iPhone case after a company has stepped up to the FBI and told them they have possibly found a way to unlock the phone. The method still isn't prooven, as testing is still needed in order to make sure that the method will not delete any of the phone's data. As the FBI is now no longer reliant on Apple's help of unlocking the iPhone, tomorrow's (3.22.16) court hearing has been canceled, and the government will have to file a status report by April 5'th.

 

Quote

On Sunday, March 20, 2016, an outside party demonstrated to the FBI a possiblemethod for unlocking Farook's iPhone. Testing is required to determine whether it is available method that will not compromise data on Farook's iPhone. If the method is viable, it should eliminate the need for the assistance from Apple Inc. ("Apple") set forthin the All Writs Act Order in this case.

 

However, if the method for unlocking the iPhone 5C does not work, and somehow fails, it is possible for the FBI to reopen the court hearing and issue Apple to the court in order to talk about unlocking the phone.

 

My Opinions: I really don't care that much about the whole situation, but its just interesting to follow, and this could possibly change the track in the whole case.

 

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2016/03/21/fbi-backs-off-apple-finds-another-way-into-iphone-5c/

[Ace0100]

if the FBI figure out how to unlock it apple would need to update that exploit huge as security risk on peoples phones and people would be mad asf

[TechFnatic]

All they did was solidify their plan on spying on people.. made them look likes goofs

[Centurius]

Yeah in all of this cheering about them backing off of Apple I feel the larger point of the FBI now being able to hack iPhones is getting lost.

[mathmeister]

I'm happy that if this works, FBI gets the information and then Apple fixes the exploit and the FBI doesn't get back in. But I was hoping for there to be more of a fight to make a point that information and privacy is important. Many people say, "I'm not doing anything wrong so why does it matter." This goes back to the argument of not caring about free speech because you have nothing to say.

[That Norwegian Guy]

And they didn't name the source? Hope Apple sues the FBI now then for assisting in industry espionage, if they won't name this alleged company.

 

Doesn't work in America? Move out of America.

 

Maybe what Murica needs is for all tech companies to GTFO and leave it in the stone age.

[dalekphalm]

Here's the thing that worries me:

 

No precedent is set still - meaning that the FBI still has grounds to challenge Apple in court in the future, especially if Apple fixes whatever Exploit is used by the FBI to get in.

 

So, at best, this is a temporary victory. If Apple leaves the exploit in place, the FBI (and others, since it will just be a matter of time before the details leak to the world at large - and hacker groups specifically) will still have an avenue of access into potentially any iOS device. If Apple fixes the exploit, then the FBI can go after them in the future to get access still.

[CommandMan7]

I would've much rather preferred this had gotten settled in court. Now we're still left in the dark on whether or not the FBI has access to all Iphones.

[Dark_Fuzzy]

3 hours ago, Centurius said:

Yeah in all of this cheering about them backing off of Apple I feel the larger point of the FBI now being able to hack iPhones is getting lost.

I believe the 5c doesn't have as good security measures,pretty sure someone explained in one of these topics but it isn't as hard as other Iphones.

[handymanshandle]

1 hour ago, That Norwegian Guy said:

And they didn't name the source? Hope Apple sues the FBI now then for assisting in industry espionage, if they won't name this alleged company.

 

Doesn't work in America? Move out of America.

 

Maybe what Murica needs is for all tech companies to GTFO and leave it in the stone age.

That'd be horrible for the Americans themselves but I guess it might the government realize that trying to spy on the citizens isn't cool which I mean fortunately it's not totally happening yet but it does get closer and closer to that already.

[byalexandr]

Why don't they just update that phone only? Honestly, how the hell is this a security issue?

[Tech_Dreamer]

An Apple a day , Keeps the Feds away

[ShadowCaptain]

Hmm I seemingly doubt this alternative way, cancelling a court appearance on a hunch? that seems rather lax of the FBI in what they deem an important case

I think its more about crushing all the negative media around the FBI, and trying to kill this thing quietly before they look like the bad guys

 

#cynical

[Prysin]

I cant wait until you need DNA, voice, fingerprint and pin code to open a device

[79wjd]

9 hours ago, Dark_Fuzzy said:

I believe the 5c doesn't have as good security measures,pretty sure someone explained in one of these topics but it isn't as hard as other Iphones.

Doesn't the 5c not have a 'secure enclave' since it has no TouchID?

[captain cactus]

9 hours ago, byalexandr said:

Why don't they just update that phone only? Honestly, how the hell is this a security issue?

Once one phone is unlocked it'll be a hot minute before every single agency in the world wants phones unlocked. The legal steps required to make this software actually useful and lawful in court means it'll pass by so many people it's impossible to keep it safe from the baddies who will then abuse the everliving shit out of it in order to get at as much data as possible. 

[LukeTim]

I so hope that the third party is John McAfee

[typographie]

 

20 minutes ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

Once one phone is unlocked it'll be a hot minute before every single agency in the world wants phones unlocked. The legal steps required to make this software actually useful and lawful in court means it'll pass by so many people it's impossible to keep it safe from the baddies who will then abuse the everliving shit out of it in order to get at as much data as possible. 

If every single agency in the world has a legitimate search warrant to unlock the phones of known murderers under the reasonable assumption that there might be valuable evidence on it, then they absolutely should. All the FBI has asked for is the phone of Syed Farook to be unlocked. It's Apple that made this about more than just one iPhone, that software should never be necessary in the first place.

 

And maybe the truth is that they really cannot unlock Farook's iPhone without unlocking all iPhones… but if that's the case, I have to say that is a colossally stupid way to design their security. They need to be able to comply with a legal search. If it's an illegal search, fine, they should fight it out and I'll thank them for it. But this is not that situation.

[dragosudeki]

23 minutes ago, typographie said:

And maybe the truth is that they really cannot unlock Farook's iPhone without unlocking all iPhones… but if that's the case, I have to say that is a colossally stupid way to design their security. They need to be able to comply with a legal search. If it's an illegal search, fine, they should fight it out and I'll thank them for it. But this is not that situation.

This doesn't really make any sense. How in the world can you expect one of the mass produced phones have a method to be unlocked and the other thousands of phones not have that. They didn't produce Farook's phone any differently than any of the other phones... If one phone truly had a flaw in security, do you honestly expect that it should get past QA?

The entire fight is not about the FBI wanting the data on the phone. They have clearly made a statement that they want a key to unlock all the phones they get their hands on. All the corporate giants (as far as I know) have pretty much sided with Apple's side, so how about questioning the FBI for a change? Just because they are a government agency, doesn't make them completely trustworthy or right, I mean look at the NSA.

[dalekphalm]

37 minutes ago, typographie said:

 

If every single agency in the world has a legitimate search warrant to unlock the phones of known murderers under the reasonable assumption that there might be valuable evidence on it, then they absolutely should. All the FBI has asked for is the phone of Syed Farook to be unlocked. It's Apple that made this about more than just one iPhone, that software should never be necessary in the first place.

 

And maybe the truth is that they really cannot unlock Farook's iPhone without unlocking all iPhones… but if that's the case, I have to say that is a colossally stupid way to design their security. They need to be able to comply with a legal search. If it's an illegal search, fine, they should fight it out and I'll thank them for it. But this is not that situation.

I have to say, you're wildly missing the point here.

 

So, sure, you trust the US Government to abide by ethical laws that means only a court order will come for criminals like murderers and terrorists.

 

Do you trust the Chinese Government? The Russian Government? Various South American and African Governments? Because every single country that Apple operates in (Which, is most of them) will start demanding the same thing. And you can be damn sure that Russia and China will have "warrants" to get Apple to do what they want.

 

The difference is, in Russia, the warrant could be about a known homosexual (Since being gay is illegal in Russia), or it could be a political dissident, etc.

[79wjd]

41 minutes ago, typographie said:

 

If every single agency in the world has a legitimate search warrant to unlock the phones of known murderers under the reasonable assumption that there might be valuable evidence on it, then they absolutely should. All the FBI has asked for is the phone of Syed Farook to be unlocked. It's Apple that made this about more than just one iPhone, that software should never be necessary in the first place.

 

And maybe the truth is that they really cannot unlock Farook's iPhone without unlocking all iPhones… but if that's the case, I have to say that is a colossally stupid way to design their security. They need to be able to comply with a legal search. If it's an illegal search, fine, they should fight it out and I'll thank them for it. But this is not that situation.

EDIT: @dalekphalm phrased that all around better, ignore what i said. 

 

If I genuinely believed that the backdoor would never be used with any malicious intent, then I would be all for giving the fbi access. However, giving them access will result in others gaining access AND as an innocent individual I have the right to privacy -- and while you might not think the FBI would start spying on US citizens, a more controlling/communist government might (and frankly I don't trust any government to not overstep their bounds of given enough power).

[Zah]

Rather this than what the FBI wanted initially (because Apple can fix what was found instead of releasing something which could go into the while), but as everyone said, now we don't have precedent for courts to follow since the FBI went "Well, we don't need apple now, just unlock the phone".

 

Really, though, anyone who doesn't think the FBI doesn't have the need to break into the phone has no idea what they are talking about, since their job is to gather criminal information.  It merely depends on what they are allowed to ask of other people (asking Apple for the backdoor is overstepping, because it would jeopardize other phones likely).  I just hope that one of the two parties tell apple the backdoor so that they can fix it. 

[typographie]

27 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

I have to say, you're wildly missing the point here.

 

So, sure, you trust the US Government to abide by ethical laws that means only a court order will come for criminals like murderers and terrorists.

 

Do you trust the Chinese Government? The Russian Government? Various South American and African Governments? Because every single country that Apple operates in (Which, is most of them) will start demanding the same thing. And you can be damn sure that Russia and China will have "warrants" to get Apple to do what they want.

 

The difference is, in Russia, the warrant could be about a known homosexual (Since being gay is illegal in Russia), or it could be a political dissident, etc.

It's up to Apple what countries they want to operate in, and if they don't want to follow the laws (unfair or otherwise) in those countries then that's a factor in their decision to operate in those territories. You already know I can't provide a good answer to that, I'm not sure anyone can. Companies and governments have to deal with shady characters as a matter of course in the globalized world and it's an ethnical dilemma sometimes. But I don't see why that should impede the ability of the FBI to investigate a real crime.

 

As for me "trusting" my government: if you can't trust a reasonable court-issued search warrant, then how can you trust any government—democracy or otherwise—to do anything? Why aren't we in open rebellion yet, if that's the case? You have to have a baseline somewhere in order to live as part of a civilization, and that's ideally your country's constitution. Applied to this situation, the Fourth Amendment under which this warrant was issued allows for reasonable search and seizure.

 

27 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

EDIT: @dalekphalm phrased that all around better, ignore what i said. 

 

If I genuinely believed that the backdoor would never be used with any malicious intent, then I would be all for giving the fbi access. However, giving them access will result in others gaining access AND as an innocent individual I have the right to privacy -- and while you might not think the FBI would start spying on US citizens, a more controlling/communist government might (and frankly I don't trust any government to not overstep their bounds of given enough power).

I didn't say I wanted Apple to put out the necessary security patch to implement a backdoor for the FBI to every iPhone, obviously that would make matters worse. The search warrant system is in place to make sure law enforcement has to have the approval of a higher legal power than themselves to conduct such a search, and for them to have the tools to circumvent that system would be a serious problem.

 

What I said was that I think it's stupid they designed their systems in such a way that that's the only way they can comply with a court order. I'd rather Apple were able to extract data from the phone they were ordered to extract it from within their own walls, just as any other business is expected to when given a search warrant.

[79wjd]

50 minutes ago, typographie said:

It's up to Apple what countries they want to operate in, and if they don't want to follow the laws (unfair or otherwise) in those countries then that's a factor in their decision to operate in those territories. You already know I can't provide a good answer to that, I'm not sure anyone can. Companies and governments have to deal with shady characters as a matter of course in the globalized world and it's an ethnical dilemma sometimes. But I don't see why that should impede the ability of the FBI to investigate a real crime.

 

As for me "trusting" my government: if you can't trust a reasonable court-issued search warrant, then how can you trust any government—democracy or otherwise—to do anything? Why aren't we in open rebellion yet, if that's the case? You have to have a baseline somewhere in order to live as part of a civilization, and that's ideally your country's constitution. Applied to this situation, the Fourth Amendment under which this warrant was issued allows for reasonable search and seizure.

 

I didn't say I wanted Apple to put out the necessary security patch to implement a backdoor for the FBI to every iPhone, obviously that would make matters worse. The search warrant system is in place to make sure law enforcement has to have the approval of a higher legal power than themselves to conduct such a search, and for them to have the tools to circumvent that system would be a serious problem.

 

What I said was that I think it's stupid they designed their systems in such a way that that's the only way they can comply with a court order. I'd rather Apple were able to extract data from the phone they were ordered to extract it from within their own walls, just as any other business is expected to when given a search warrant.

Except the device is personal property -- it's not Apple's property. Apple, nor any other company, should have any way of accessing data that I encrypt. And in a world where everyone is honest and trustful, then it's fine since the government would have to get a warrant -- but what about the times when the government decides to ignore those restrictions (*cough* NSA *cough*), or the government doesn't have to abide by those restrictions (china/russia/etc...). 

[typographie]

13 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Except the device is personal property -- it's not Apple's property. Apple, nor any other company, should have any way of accessing data that I encrypt. And in a world where everyone is honest and trustful, then it's fine since the government would have to get a warrant -- but what about the times when the government decides to ignore those restrictions (*cough* NSA *cough*), or the government doesn't have to abide by those restrictions (china/russia/etc...). 

Did you encrypt it? Or did Apple encrypt it for you, probably without your input? It may well be a situation where the law hasn't caught up with the times, but I don't think a company in any other context is allowed to hide information in such a way that it cannot be obtained under a legal warrant. Just because it's a tech product, I don't think that should change anything.

 

We aren't talking about the times when the government decides to ignore the restrictions, and we aren't talking about China or Russia. This is an American case and they do have a warrant.