The FBI wants to crack into another deceased terrorist’s locked iPhone. Dahir Adan stabbed 10 people inside a St. Cloud, Minnesota, shopping mall last month before he was shot dead by an off-duty police officer. Daesh (IS) later claimed responsibility for the attack. Adan - like San Bernardino gun attack terrorist Rizwan …
I just can't believe people are falling for this charade. "Oh, look, we're the most powerful spy agency in the world but Apple Security (tm) has foiled us again. I hope the bad guys don't here me say that out loud in a press conference and start using iPhones because then we would not be able to spy on them. Again, I hope terrorists don't start using iPhones for all their secret communications because the iPhone is TOO secure for us to break."
Not recommended, read clause 11.141 of the Note 7 warranty T&Cs:
"We cannot guarantee to spies and the like that the phone will not self destruct before you have received your mission instructions. Samsung will not be held liable for any costs associated with failed missions should this be the case"
The FBI just needs to stop being "the lazy" and do some REAL police work. You know, like the way things were BEFORE smart phones.
Bullying corporations into bending over and "saying hello" like a female bonobo monkey, and accepting whatever 'end around' in evidence rules that the FBI coughs up at themoment, is NOT doing things the RIGHT way.
Or maybe they just need to ASK NICE instead of bashing everything in sight with a (willing accomplice) judge's gavel...
[yeah this is about getting 'special investigative rights' and/or forcing encryption to go away]
of course, you KNOW that some non-US-ian developer will make it possible to encrypt WITHOUT Apple's help, and THEN the FBI can COMPLETELY pack sand. Their best bet: work WITH Apple, not against them.
I bet some clever tech can hook up a JTAG to the device and force decryption on all of the data using Apple's inside knowledge of the system. So maybe all the FBI needs to do is *THAT*, and play nice, and get APPROVAL from a judge to LET Apple do this, and not a commandment for Apple's legal team to object over, ORDERING Apple to COMPLY.
[and they can keep it all "quiet like" and not irritate Apple customers wanting real privacy and protection AGAINST unwanted gummint (or other) snooping]
Seems kind of strange they didn't bother to mention what model it is, what version of iOS it is running, and whether it is using a passcode or password, when they did last time.
Maybe they think bringing this up again during the last month of the election might help put pressure on Apple, but I don't see any reason why public opinion would have changed since the spring.
I wonder if iOS 10 still allows software updates to be delivered in DFU mode? I was thinking that would be something Apple would address to block the FBI from trying to get them to produce a hacked iOS for it.
"....before he was shot dead by an off-duty police officer....." No. Jason Falconer is a part-time cop, but a full-time gun-range owner and NRA-certified firearms instructor, and was (luckily) present as a private citizen who happened to being carrying his licensed firearm. You know, one of those armed citizens the Obambi administration and Shrillary keep insisting we don't want nor need. Strangely, the mainstream media aren't being very quick to point out that bit (/sarc off).
"maybe this crack-shot marksman would have been better kneecapping this terrorist instead of killing him.... no, he's American, kill first, ask questions later.". Another know-nothing hater. If you had bothered to research the event before accepting a spoonfed opinion, Falconer fired each shot with a pause to allow Dahir to give up, and each time Dahir continued his attempt to attack Falconer, leading to the third and fatal shot. Falconer would have been legally justified in emptying a full clip into Dahir and killing him outright, but he tried to give Dahir the option of surrendering. However, I doubt those facts will enable you to overcome your prejudice.
Don't know about iPhones but the Android ones I've seen with the finger print scanner allow the choice of finger print or code. Given the courts have previously decided a person cannot be forced to divulge a code, and the more recent one of a person can be forced to supply a finger print, I personally would opt solely for the code.
Worst case - Now what was my code? Was it my birthday? My cat's name? My other cat's name? My dog's length and height? .......
Presumably, Apple has fixed it so there is literally nothing they can due to retrieve data. Or anyone else.
Thus, I don't see a court battle, unless FBI knows something they aren't telling yet.
I suppose one angle might be using this event as proof anti-encryption laws are needed. But, it still wouldn't help FBI in this case.
What am I missing?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019