Judge forces Apple to unlock iPhone

[Virge_]

What could Apple stand to gain by having such a feature?

The October transcript is a pretty good read. The state is arguing, among other things, that:

• Apple has helped them in the past
• Apple has not brought forth any previous objections, nor has apple objected to undue burden which would be their primary case against the state to disagree (Apple to date has not done so, for reasons unknown, and instead opted to design it's iOS in the future in ways which would not allow them to comply)
• The All Writs act can be used to force Apple to design it's product in a way that they can do so in the future even if it violates Apples own wishes, similar to how they have used it with the telecommunications companies to intercept American phone calls, texts, etc - in their opinion setting a precedence for compliance to lawful requests for customer data

There are other arguments but those are the arguments that won the case for the State.

 

[Rakehellion]

The October transcript is a pretty good read. The state is arguing, among other things, that:

• Apple has helped them in the past
• Apple has not brought forth any previous objections, nor has apple objected to undue burden which would be their primary case against the state to disagree (Apple to date has not done so, for reasons unknown, and instead opted to design it's iOS in the future in ways which would not allow them to comply)
• The All Writs act can be used to force Apple to design it's product in a way that they can do so in the future even if it violates Apples own wishes, similar to how they have used it with the telecommunications companies to intercept American phone calls, texts, etc - in their opinion setting a precedence for compliance to lawful requests for customer data

There are other arguments but those are the arguments that won the case for the State.

Apple removed the feature.

You didn't answer the question. What could Apple stand to gain by being able to unlock anyone's phone?

 

[Virge_]

Apple removed the feature.

You didn't answer the question. What could Apple stand to gain by being able to unlock anyone's phone?

Quantify the relevance of the question?

 

[Phynaz]

The comments section of my local news outlet is amazing. There's people saying Apple is a terrorist organization for encrypting their phones. Or that Tim Cook should be imprisoned for treason.

The stupidity of the average American still amazes me sometimes.

 

[Rakehellion]

Apple responds: http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

 

[Rakehellion]

Quantify the relevance of the question?

How is your answer in any way relevant to the topic?



Dodge my question a third time: How would Apple, a publicly traded company, appease it shareholders by installing a backdoor that allows access to a user's personal information yet only works when the device is physically in the possession of an Apple technician?

 

[blankslate]

In light of this story I think it's clear that Benjamin Franklin was the dumbest of our Founding Fathers....

amirite?


______________

 

[yllus]

Apple needs to fight this for business reasons as well as noble ones - if this happens, lots of countries that aren't the U.S. may start to move away from iOS devices and to alternatives (maybe Android as it's open source and can be inspected for backdoors). I imagine at the least government workers and companies worried about industrial espionage would order the halt of use of iDevices.

 

[Virge_]

How is your answer in any way relevant to the topic?



Dodge my question a third time: How would Apple, a publicly traded company, appease it shareholders by installing a backdoor that allows access to a user's personal information yet only works when the device is physically in the possession of an Apple technician?

I could think of a few options. Having lived in corporate land a long time and adapted to changing regulations for almost 20 years, generally speaking the company is forced by law to react however possible. In my experience this involves creating new sides of the business dedicated to things such as finance, law, regulatory compliance, divisional security, auditing, I could go on and on and on.. the fact is, we do this today in various degrees.

Apple would be forced to create a division within the company to guarantee the safety of this data, think like a small three-letter-agency beginning with N and ending with A, to comply with the legal requests while protecting the data from criminals, foreign governments, rival corporations, and the computer hacking community at large.

It's the same way everything else works. Google allows this division access, likely with some strict and obnoxious bureaucratic process to record everything for future auditing and public releases, to be the ultimate authority on the customer data. Apple changes their corporate culture to follow suit using Google et al's already laid out plans and relationships, then proceed to change their use agreements to reflect this authority and they move on with their lives.

As for the technical, this isn't difficult at all. iOS already utilizes encryption past the seven key today, and from the perspective of encryption modification it's not the easiest thing in the world but is ultimately possible to do if forced to and would likely involve Apple getting compensated for this by the US government working directly in conjunction with aforementioned-not-named three letter agency to share a key pair that unlocks all iOS encryption. From there they can either do it through Apple and this division created for this purpose to protect the company (and, consequently, it's constituents, shareholders, and customers), or by accessing direct the same way they have plugged physical government infrastructure into the telco's today.

I guess I don't understand your question. What Apple is asking to do is possible, it's not an issue of technicality - it's an issue of law. I don't follow why you think otherwise.

 

[Rakehellion]

I could think of a few options. Having lived in corporate land a long time and adapted to changing regulations for almost 20 years, generally speaking the company is forced by law to react however possible. In my experience this involves creating new sides of the business dedicated to things such as finance, law, regulatory compliance, divisional security, auditing, I could go on and on and on.. the fact is, we do this today in various degrees.

There is no such law in existence.

I guess I don't understand your question. What Apple is asking to do is possible, it's not an issue of technicality - it's an issue of law. I don't follow why you think otherwise.

Did I say they couldn't do it? No.

 

[Virge_]

There is no such law in existence.



Did I say they couldn't do it? No.

Oh. Well. I certainly don't agree this judges ruling is legal, if thats what you were implying. I think the Supreme Court, at least prior to the departure of Scalia, would have prevented this.. the current 4-4 Supreme Court, however, is pretty much useless to us and will allow this and other things (think a trade agreement nobody knows anything about) to get passed.

Just my two cents.

 

[rudder]

The surest way to be certain you'll never have to hand over your backdoor to the gov is to design a system that basically precludes one in the first place. The phone may be crackable by other more exotic means but I doubt there is a piece of software laying in any dark corner of Apple that can be handed over or even built to accomplish what they want.

Apple for sure doesn't want the risk of a back doors being released. All it would take is a disgruntled employee and a big payout from a Russian mafia group to release something like that.

 

[lopri]

From what I hear FBI's request is not about backdoor, but about the lock-out feature after multiple failed attempt at entering passwords. They want Apple to disable this feature so they can crack it (brute-force, I suppose, but it is entirely possible that the passwords are something silly and easy)

I am not sure what exactly people refer to when they say "backdoor." Is it like a master key of sort people are thinking of? Didn't Apple say that there is no backdoor and even they cannot access encrypted phones? Was that a lie?

 

[master_shake_]

The comments section of my local news outlet is amazing. There's people saying Apple is a terrorist organization for encrypting their phones. Or that Tim Cook should be imprisoned for treason.

The stupidity of the average American still amazes me sometimes.

does it?

really?

 

[maddogchen]

From what I hear FBI's request is not about backdoor, but about the lock-out feature after multiple failed attempt at entering passwords. They want Apple to disable this feature so they can crack it

So how is Apple going to disable that feature? through the front door? how about a side window? or down the chimney?

 

[Jerem]

IIRC in previous cases the Feds turn over the phone with a court order and Apple gives them the information on the device that the court order requests. So why not give Apple this phone and let them do their thing (if they can)? Is this an attempt by the Feds to get a piece of hardware/software/whateverware they can backwards engineer to work on other devices with IOS and use any way they want?

 

[DrPizza]

It turns out I was wrong about the case. In this case it was one of the San Bernadino shooters with an iPhone 5C and one of the later IOS revs.

The judge is asking for a custom firmware that bypasses the auto erase feature and the increased time between code tries so they can brute force the password through USB access.

From posts at Ars it may not be possible to do this on A7 and later processors since the secure store on those will wipe the encryption keys if a new firmware is loaded and the passcode isn't supplied.

Still forcing an Apple designed and signed attack ROM is a dangerous thing to let loose out there.

Thanks. I was able to read up more and see what they wanted Apple to do. It isn't that they want Apple to decrypt the phone, it's that they want to turn off the "erase after 5 unsuccessful login attempts" feature. Imho, if that feature is able to be turned off, there's no point in having it in the first place. Once it's into the wild that it can be turned off, it will be able to be turned off. Once that feature is turned off, then an 8 year old with a little time on their hands can "hack" into the phone. "Let's see. 0000? Nope. 0001? Nope. 0002? Nope..." I'm not a huge Apple fanatic, but I do believe they're wise enough to design the encryption that they've been promoting such that it's not thwarted that easily.

 

[compuwiz1]

Why can't they simply unlock that one unit, then return it to the FBI? I know that sounds way too simple, but I would think Apple would be able to do this, without revealing how they actually did it. I think it's important that they find out what kind of information is stored in that phone.

 

[MrPickins]

From what I hear FBI's request is not about backdoor, but about the lock-out feature after multiple failed attempt at entering passwords. They want Apple to disable this feature so they can crack it (brute-force, I suppose, but it is entirely possible that the passwords are something silly and easy)

I am not sure what exactly people refer to when they say "backdoor." Is it like a master key of sort people are thinking of? Didn't Apple say that there is no backdoor and even they cannot access encrypted phones? Was that a lie?

Make no mistake, the altered firmware would effectively be a back door by making it trivial to brute-force the password.

Thanks. I was able to read up more and see what they wanted Apple to do. It isn't that they want Apple to decrypt the phone, it's that they want to turn off the "erase after 5 unsuccessful login attempts" feature. Imho, if that feature is able to be turned off, there's no point in having it in the first place. Once it's into the wild that it can be turned off, it will be able to be turned off. Once that feature is turned off, then an 8 year old with a little time on their hands can "hack" into the phone. "Let's see. 0000? Nope. 0001? Nope. 0002? Nope..." I'm not a huge Apple fanatic, but I do believe they're wise enough to design the encryption that they've been promoting such that it's not thwarted that easily.

Not just that, they want to be able to enter passwords via the lightning port in an automated fashion.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...to-call-court-ordered-iphone-hack-a-backdoor/

 

[maddogchen]

Why can't they simply unlock that one unit, then return it to the FBI? I know that sounds way too simple, but I would think Apple would be able to do this, without revealing how they actually did it. I think it's important that they find out what kind of information is stored in that phone.

After that one unit, they can unlock the thousands that China wants. China needs to know what their dissidents are hiding on their phones and its very important they find out.

 

[JEDIYoda]

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/san...iphone-n519701


Quote:




A federal judge on Tuesday ordered Apple to give investigators access to encrypted data on the iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino shooters, assistance the computer giant "declined to provide voluntarily," according to court papers.


Apple themselves said they technically can't unlock it so i wonder how this will turn out.

Judge did not force anything! Apple will fight this and Apple will win!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

It's hard to support a company that places profit before people and the country that gave them that ability and opportunity, all of the sudden pretend that that they care about American democracy and has a love for their country, a country that is good enough to buy their products but not good enough to build them.

So what are you smoking??? Your talking out your ass!! You give up your rights just because somebody hollers terrorist??

 

[JEDIYoda]

Millions of women would disagree with you

You trash a thread much??? Or is that all your intellect allows you to contribute?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Why can't they simply unlock that one unit, then return it to the FBI? I know that sounds way too simple, but I would think Apple would be able to do this, without revealing how they actually did it. I think it's important that they find out what kind of information is stored in that phone.

They can unlock the one unit...the problem is the feds want to be involved or at least be present as it happen!! That way they can invade all our phones....

Apple will win this hands down!!

 

[DrDoug]

Someone on another forum posted an interesting link that I thought I would share here. One thing that caught my eye:

The iPhone is the property of the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health where the attacker worked and the FBI has permission to search it.

That's something that I didn't know.