Judge forces Apple to unlock iPhone

[Hulk]

I'm not understanding how this isn't legal? A judge did order this "search and seizure" warrant right? That's how it's supposed to work. The Police or FBI or any government agency can't break into your house or car or whatever and just have a look. They must have probably cause, go to a judge and obtain a warrant. I believe that's what happened.

The government isn't looking for a "master key" to everyone's phone. Just the data in this phone. Can't Apple just crack this phone, hand over the data, and then destroy the software, firmware, and any intellectual property developed to make this happen. Apple and other manufacturers have plenty of secrets that NEVER see the light of day.

 

[BxgJ]

In fact that's very well possible, but not likely. Obviously , if the NSA had the technology to crack encryption (perhaps using quantum computing etc), they would do absolutely everything in their power to keep that fact a secret, and they would not go sharing that info with other agencies (even the FBI). They certainly wouldn't let the cat out of the bag by cracking encryption in such a (relatively) low value case.

I suspect the FBI has the resources to get to the information on this phone, but they view this as an opportunity to be able to get to the information on all phones, not just this one.



Nobody needs to be rounded up to have their phone checked, they are already able to spy on all data being sent to / from the phone. I'm guessing they want to be able to access the phone remotely without needing physical contact (using bluetooth, wifi, nfc etc), that would make it extremely easy to gain access to whatever info they want with the subject being completely unaware.

Don't keep up with this too much, but regarding a quantum computer being used -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

Doesn't Apple use aes 256?

 

[waggy]

I'm not understanding how this isn't legal? A judge did order this "search and seizure" warrant right? That's how it's supposed to work. The Police or FBI or any government agency can't break into your house or car or whatever and just have a look. They must have probably cause, go to a judge and obtain a warrant. I believe that's what happened.

The government isn't looking for a "master key" to everyone's phone. Just the data in this phone. Can't Apple just crack this phone, hand over the data, and then destroy the software, firmware, and any intellectual property developed to make this happen. Apple and other manufacturers have plenty of secrets that NEVER see the light of day.

bwhahahah

right. because they havn't recorded people without court order before in the past...rofl.

 

[Zorba]

I'm not understanding how this isn't legal? A judge did order this "search and seizure" warrant right? That's how it's supposed to work. The Police or FBI or any government agency can't break into your house or car or whatever and just have a look. They must have probably cause, go to a judge and obtain a warrant. I believe that's what happened.

The government isn't looking for a "master key" to everyone's phone. Just the data in this phone. Can't Apple just crack this phone, hand over the data, and then destroy the software, firmware, and any intellectual property developed to make this happen. Apple and other manufacturers have plenty of secrets that NEVER see the light of day.

How can a warrant demand that someone else create/do something? Apple isn't a party to this at all, and forcing them to create something is a clear violation of the the thirteenth amendment.

 

[Brian Stirling]

I'm not understanding how this isn't legal? A judge did order this "search and seizure" warrant right? That's how it's supposed to work. The Police or FBI or any government agency can't break into your house or car or whatever and just have a look. They must have probably cause, go to a judge and obtain a warrant. I believe that's what happened.

The government isn't looking for a "master key" to everyone's phone. Just the data in this phone. Can't Apple just crack this phone, hand over the data, and then destroy the software, firmware, and any intellectual property developed to make this happen. Apple and other manufacturers have plenty of secrets that NEVER see the light of day.

The real goal here is to embarrass Apple and the other tech companies by implicitly calling them terrorist sympathizers and with the ultimate goal of having Apple and the rest end the use of robust encryption or to provide a backdoor. This is all theater and the San Bernardino case is of little value other than to provide the leverage against Apple et al.

Smartphones are just a decade old now and police work existed BEFORE the advent of the smartphone. The police and spy agencies, though, want to be able to spy on anyone and everyone by remote control -- no leg work required. If the tech companies give in and provide backdoors will the intelligence agencies have to go through the same warrant process needed to enter your home -- NO THEY WILL NOT! Instead they have a kangaroo court system, the FISA court, where over the 35+ year history have asked for more than 35K warrants and a total of 12 were not granted. The proceedings are secret -- absolutely beyond scrutiny or outsider review.

The founding fathers had no way of knowing about digital encryption, but they did understand human beings and it's because of that that they made sure the government did not use there weight to crush the little guy. The way the police, intelligence and security agencies have been acting over the last 15 years or so has set alight the Constitution and we must all stand guard to prevent it burning to dust...


Brian

 

[lopri]

Never mind.

 

[lopri]

Here's an excellent article on ArsTechnica.

ty

 

[dawp]

I'm not understanding how this isn't legal? A judge did order this "search and seizure" warrant right? That's how it's supposed to work. The Police or FBI or any government agency can't break into your house or car or whatever and just have a look. They must have probably cause, go to a judge and obtain a warrant. I believe that's what happened.

The government isn't looking for a "master key" to everyone's phone. Just the data in this phone. Can't Apple just crack this phone, hand over the data, and then destroy the software, firmware, and any intellectual property developed to make this happen. Apple and other manufacturers have plenty of secrets that NEVER see the light of day.

the argument is that no, they cant do it for this one phone, they would have to create a vulnerability in all iphones and that once word got out there is no putting that genie back in the bottle.

 

[Brainonska511]

the argument is that no, they cant do it for this one phone, they would have to create a vulnerability in all iphones and that once word got out there is no putting that genie back in the bottle.

I'm not aiming to take a side in the debate at the moment, but it sounds like Apple does have the technical capability to exploit an already existing backdoor, whereas newer devices or potentially future devices would lack this potentially exploitable pathway.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...hone-order-in-the-san-bernardino-case-part-1/

2. The government wants Apple to exploit a security vulnerability built in to older iPhones. There’s a lot of public discussion about whether the order would require Apple to create a “backdoor” into the iPhone. I think it’s probably more accurate to say that this particular model phone, the iPhone 5C, has a built-in security weakness — depending on how you define the term, a kind of backdoor — already. The government’s order would require Apple to exploit the potential backdoor in Apple’s design. Importantly, though, Apple redesigned its phones after the iPhone 5C to close this potential backdoor [but see update below]. Later phones, starting with the iPhone 5S, have apparently eliminated this potential way in. As a result, the specifics of the order in the San Bernardino case probably only involve certain older iPhones.

Here’s some background. The order in this case does not require Apple to decrypt the phone for the government. The phone used the iOS9 operating system. Apple intentionally designed that operating system in a way that Apple can’t decrypt the phone even with a warrant. (That was the big issue back in 2014, when Apple introduced the earlier iOS8.) Instead, the order obtained in this case requires Apple to disable features on the phone that were designed to frustrate password-guessing as a way to break into the phone.

Specifically, the government knows that this particular phone had the iOS9 “auto erase” function turned on before the time of the attacks. Although no one can be sure, that feature was probably still on when the attacks occurred. Apple designed the auto-erase feature to thwart passcode-guessing. If someone guesses the passcode 10 times incorrectly, the phone permanently destroys the data in the phone needed to decrypt the phone. The government wants to keep guessing passcodes until it finds the right one — what is usually called a brute-force attack. But it can’t do that because of the features Apple designed, and that Farook apparently had on, to thwart passcode-guessing.

But there is another way in for this particular model phone. Apparently, Apple has the technical capability to send a software update to the phone that will disable the auto-erase function and some other similar features. Apple designed its system so that the update has to come from Apple, using its unique cryptographic signature, in order for it to work. The Apple software update could let the phone run with the passcode-guessing-frustrating features turned off. The FBI could then use a fast computer to guess passcodes to try to find the one that Farook used. That might allow the FBI to find the passcode quickly, or it might take them years. How long it might take just depends on what kind of passcode Farook used.

But here’s an interesting technical twist. It appears that Apple redesigned its later phones so Apple can’t send a software update to the phone without the user first entering in the passcode. Starting with the iPhone 5S, Apple designed the phones so that this feature is embedded in the hardware. The idea was for Apple to take away its own power to send a software update without the user’s authorization. If the phone Farook used had been an iPhone 5S or an iPhone 6, Apple probably would have been unable to disable the password-guessing features. (I say probably, because there is some speculation that it would still be possible.) But because this phone is an iPhone 5C, it’s at least technically possible for Apple to write a software update that will disable the features that Apple created — and Farook apparently used — to thwart password-guessing.

[UPDATE: It looks like the speculation that this is still possible for newer phones is correct. Apple has plans for future phones and software to no longer allow this, but that is a future plan rather than the current state of technology.]

The “backdoor,” if you want to call it that, is that Apple retains the technical ability to send a software update to the phone that would disable the optional password-guessing-thwarting functions that Farook probably used. Apple hasn’t written that software update, and it strongly opposes being required to write it.

 

[ImpulsE69]

It sets a very dangerous precedent. Ask yourself, would the government answer to the same demands? No. They would fight it with every ounce of power they have. In fact if someone hacked their equipment to find 'data' revolving around government wrongdoing, they'd be trying to try people for treason....oh wait...

And yes, the number of people who actually think Apple is in the wrong here is just stunning. I blame Facebook and the 'if you are doing no wrong then you have nothing to hide' crowd. So many people just don't see the big picture and seem to think the government and companies never do anything wrong or for themselves above all else.

 

[Remobz]

Screw Apple!! I never liked their phones anyway and will NEVER buy one.

BOYCOTT APPLE!!

Apple better hope that Trump does not get elected.

 

[bozack]

the argument is that no, they cant do it for this one phone, they would have to create a vulnerability in all iphones and that once word got out there is no putting that genie back in the bottle.

So when reading these positions from both the Feds and Apple I always try to consider they are going to make the argument which favors their side of the story

The Ars technica piece said it best with the following:

"It's important to note here that the cryptography aspect is robust. The FBI is not asking for, and Apple almost surely could not provide, any kind of bypass or backdoor for the cryptographic parts of the system. There is no "master key" that can decrypt the files or otherwise break the dependence on the PIN key. The cryptography appears to be secure.

......Accordingly, the FBI is asking for Apple's assistance with the scheme's weak spot—not the encryption itself but Apple-coded limits to the PIN input system."

And:

"Such a firmware would not seem to be generally useful for attacking other iPhones, though. The FBI's request is that the special firmware be tied to the specific device. Every iPhone contains a multitude of unique identifiers that are baked into its hardware (the serial number, the cellular radio IMEI, and the Wi-Fi and Bluetooth MAC), and the court order explicitly states that the custom firmware must be tied to the San Bernardino phone's unique identifier, such that it can only run on that specific phone.

Assuming that this can be done (and done robustly), it means that even if the custom firmware were given to nation-states or even published on the Internet, it would not serve as a general-purpose way of performing brute-force PIN attacks. It would be useless on any device other than the San Bernardino device. To make such leakage less likely, the court order does allow for the possibility that the custom firmware might be used only at an Apple location, with the FBI having remote access to the passcode recovery system.

Such an approach is consistent with the way Apple already performs lock screen bypasses on devices running old versions of iOS; law enforcement sends the device to Apple, Apple does the data extraction using tools the company has explicitly created to perform the extraction, and law enforcement receives a FireWire or USB drive with the data. Apple's custom tools never leave Cupertino."

It will be interesting to see how the courts rule on this, my position is that Apple having facilitated this in the past doesn't help their case and they would have been better off being consistent in their approach and just saying no from the outset or fighting it early on.

I do believe Apple can do what they are asking of them and may already have some of these capabilities, but can fully understand why they don't want to admit it nor provide it...as ultimately they want to limit their liability and get out of this completely.

 

[Darwin333]

Really, so if some bad guy shows up at your home and massacre your family before he blows up his brain, would you not want to know why? How nice of him for serving justice himself so that we do not have to waste our time? And everyone should go about with their business as if nothing happened?

I find it odd because it was not long ago some people thought we should round up 11 million people and dump them in the ocean because one of them committed murder (1 victim) in San Francisco. People's ideas of justice appear so disproportionate and incongruent sometimes.

I wouldn't be willing to throw the constitution out of the window or potentially allowing a tool that circumvents security on a huge portion of smartphones into the wild (or even just the .gov) in order to find his reasoning. Would I like to know, sure. Would I be want the .gov to gain the ability to break the encryption on every phone just so I could find out what was in that one phone, no.

 

[Darwin333]

I'm not understanding how this isn't legal? A judge did order this "search and seizure" warrant right? That's how it's supposed to work. The Police or FBI or any government agency can't break into your house or car or whatever and just have a look. They must have probably cause, go to a judge and obtain a warrant. I believe that's what happened.

The government isn't looking for a "master key" to everyone's phone. Just the data in this phone. Can't Apple just crack this phone, hand over the data, and then destroy the software, firmware, and any intellectual property developed to make this happen. Apple and other manufacturers have plenty of secrets that NEVER see the light of day.

The government hasn't issued a warrant for something that is already in existence though. They have issued a warrant to try and force a company to produce something that doesn't currently exist. If they can force Apple to produce this then whats to stop them from forcing any company to make/produce/design/etc.. whatever the hell they want in the future? Hell this is wrong just on the basis of a judge being able to order a company or person that hasn't been charged nor convicted of a crime to do forced labor. We keep talking about how this would give the FBI to much power but it would also set a precedent which gives the judicial system way to much power too imho.

 

[Brainonska511]

The government's motion to compel Apple's compliance: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...cument-motion-to-compel-apple-compliance.html

I wouldn't be willing to throw the constitution out of the window or potentially allowing a tool that circumvents security on a huge portion of smartphones into the wild (or even just the .gov) in order to find his reasoning. Would I like to know, sure. Would I be want the .gov to gain the ability to break the encryption on every phone just so I could find out what was in that one phone, no.

They're not asking Apple to break the encryption. They're asking Apple to use their existing backdoor on the device to disable the 10 attempts and wipe feature on the device so that the government can brute-force it. According to the motion (see above link), Apple can even take possession of the device such that the software never leaves Apple's possession and is free to destroy the software afterwards. The motion also outlines prior precedent for forcing third parties to help in the execution of a legal warrant.
----

I don't want companies building in backdoors into their encryption schemes as that weakens encryption overall, but it sounds like in this particular instance, a backdoor already exists and the government is trying to compel Apple to cooperate, as Apple voluntarily did in the past and has the legal obligation to do under the law.

 

[zinfamous]

Well, not all of us can be as important as you.

tbh, your argument of "I'm not important enough for this to matter" is the selfish argument here.

All should give up their privacy because you don't care?

I don't like it.

 

[K1052]

I don't want companies building in backdoors into their encryption schemes as that weakens encryption overall, but it sounds like in this particular instance, a backdoor already exists and the government is trying to compel Apple to cooperate, as Apple voluntarily did in the past and has the legal obligation to do under the law.

Maybe I missed it but the government's reasoning seems to be that while the mechanism does not in fact exist that they can compel Apple to build it since coding falls under their normal course of business.

I do not find the argument that it doesn't matter what that code actually does or that they are compelled to create something they would otherwise never create their possession to execute this to be persuasive as to why they should be compelled.

Reading the motion makes me ethically nauseous.

Edit: From a practical standpoint I'm not sure even Apple could make it's employees produce the required software if the company decided to cooperate. If the people who build iOS refuse the company probably isn't going to fire them but what then?

 

[sportage]

Trump said to boycott Apple.
Well I didn't really need the iPhone 6S, already having the iPhone 6, but i just ordered the 6S anyway (seriously) to piss off Donald Trump.
Can you imagine Trump as president telling Americans what to buy and what not to buy.
Talk about a slippery slope.

Forget about bashing Apple.
If we want to understand this issue with Apple and personal security, we need to twist this around.
Say the police wanted to search every car going door to door because someone in the area was caught with drugs, or an unregistered gun, or a child was abducted in the area and the police wanted to search every home within a ten mile radius. And that just happened to include your car or your house. Would YOU object to a full on. no holes barred search of your property?
Now, say the government want to search every bank account, tax return, car, home in America because of some new national security protection plan.
Would you agree to go along?

I think we need to stand back and look at the entire picture here. Not just focus on this one issue.

 

[dainthomas]

Here's an excellent article on ArsTechnica.

There's absolutely no way they don't have a development firmware version laying around with the limit turned off. At least for testing. This blows another hole in their supposedly noble stance against the government.

 

[LPCTech]

The stupidity of the people who are NOT supporting Apple on this is STAGGERING.

Desperate to give away their rights and everyone else's to maybe possibly get some info that might help avoid some kind of potential fantasy negative consequence.

How old is that phone now? Dont you think any pertinent info is no longer valuable at this point and the one and only goal in this for the government is to gain access to a system they cant access.

This will set a precedent that means:

Anytime anyone develops a system of security that the government cant easily crack and monitor they will be able to have a court order that person or company to allow them access or share the ability to defeat the security.

If you support the FBI on this. You ARE stupid.(or simply do not understand the issue) No beating around the bush, You are a stupid human being with no critical thinking skills and no right to call your self an American. You disgrace every soldier who ever died defending our freedom.

If this happens. It means no form of communication will ever be secure ever again.

And no this is not an exaggeration at all. If you think so, again, you do not understand the issue.

This is about LEGAL precedence not technology.

 

[brycejones]

Screw Apple!! I never liked their phones anyway and will NEVER buy one.

BOYCOTT APPLE!!

Apple better hope that Trump does not get elected.

Murica!!!!

 

[Fern]

The stupidity of the people who are NOT supporting Apple on this is STAGGERING.

Nah. There's so many versions of the facts here I don't see how a reasonable person can draw a conclusion.

This is about LEGAL precedence not technology.

Depends on whose 'facts' you believe.

Fern

 

[Ns1]

Screw Apple!! I never liked their phones anyway and will NEVER buy one.

BOYCOTT APPLE!!

Apple better hope that Trump does not get elected.

Let me get this straight - you, a person who has never liked iPhones and will never buy one, is boycotting apple. Sounds effective?

 

[LPCTech]

Nah. There's so many versions of the facts here I don't see how a reasonable person can draw a conclusion.

Depends on whose 'facts' you believe.

Fern

How many versions of the facts are there? Every news story is saying the exact same thing lol.

You are soo right I dont know all the facts so i should be in support of the governments ability to spy into anything at any time and force corporations to be complicit in it.

Why would apple deny something like this? A marketing stunt that will make half the idiots in this country dislike them lol makes tons of sense.

Its not just apple you know, The letter Tim Cook sent was supported by Microsoft, Google, AOL, Yahoo, Facebook, Dropbox, Evernote, Twitter and on.

Thats the reason they gave to keep marijuana illegal too. We dont have all the info. So our way goes.

Hey guys we dont have all the info, lets let the govenment just do whatever.

Ridiculous. This is exactly what I mean by stupidity. Blatant willful stupidity.

BTW: I dont own any Apple devices, not one, in fact I was anti Apple till this all started, but I think its time to try an iphone.

 

[Fern]

How many versions of the facts are there? Every news story is saying the exact same thing lol.

No hell they're not. Just read this thread.

I've seen everything from the FBI wants Apple to get the data from this one phone, and Apple can do it at its facility and just hand over the data to the FBI to they want Apple want to write a bunch of new software and give it to the FBI so it can get data from any IPhone.

You are soo right I dont know all the facts so i should be in support of the governments ability to spy into anything at any time and force corporations to be complicit in it.

Hey guys we dont have all the info, lets let the govenment just do whatever.

WTF? You can't read? Reread what I wrote, you'll appear less of a boob. I said a reasonable person cannot draw a conclusion. How in the hell do you translate 'no conclusion' to a conclusion supporting the govt?

Why would apple deny something like this? A marketing stunt that will make half the idiots in this country dislike them lol makes tons of sense.

The answer you seek is below:

BTW: I dont own any Apple devices, not one, in fact I was anti Apple till this all started, but I think its time to try an iphone.

Ridiculous. This is exactly what I mean by stupidity. Blatant willful stupidity.

Indeed.

Fern