TexasCHLforum.com

treadlightly wrote:Sounds like time to repeal the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which prohibits reverse engineering, and free the FBI or NSA to lawfully reverse engineer the iPhone.

I would not be surprised if they already have, and are just using this as the explain to the public (probably including Apple) about how they got the information. Especially since San Bernardino County reset the password at the FBI's request, which prevented Apple from giving them the backups.

Solaris wrote:

treadlightly wrote:Tonight on Fox (O'Reilly, I think), I heard a gentleman argue with passion against the private use of unbreakable cryptography. Plentiful reasons exist to crack terrorist communications wide open.

Ralph Peters is completely off the rails. "Tim Cook is telling terrorists, rapists and thugs, hey buy an iPhone, Apple has your back".

From what I have seen, 99% of the non-tech people think Apple has the key in a safe at Cupertino and is refusing to give it FBI.

Yeah, and it's amazing how tightly they cling to their erroneous belief.

Redneck_Buddha wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Redneck_Buddha wrote:Just throwing out wild theories here, but is there something they can develop that will only work with that phone's unique identifier? Guys who know just enough about these matters just to be dangerous want to know.

That is what the writ ordered.

Gotcha...thanks. So Cook's contention that this hack will be used to propagate a mass breach security is false?

Cook's statement is accurate. The FBI is being disingenuous in that it's impossible to do exactly what they're asking and no more. The technology to bypass security on one iPhone is necessarily the technology to bypass security on any iPhone.

Bitter Clinger wrote:

Pariah3j wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:
As long as your drawbridge was not owned by the city you lived in and used during the committment of capital murder by terrorists who are NOT ISIS affiliated, you seem to have a clear cut infallible argument.

They own the phone, which is the physical hardware - not the IOS software, that is licenced. Apple isn't trying to keep them from hacking the phone, they just aren't hacking it for the FBI (or building a special backdoor for "government use only").

The data belonging to the terrorist is the issue. The IOS is simply the application needed to access it. HAND OVER THE DATA

It simply does not work like that.

flechero wrote:I believe they could unlock that single phone without making the world vulnerable. (and have no facts to prove it) I could also argue both side of this as I think there are good arguments for both sides...

but once the person is dead, and a confirmed terrorist, I fail to see the need to keep his or her privacy And if it leads to crushing the rest of the network that helped, trained, financed them, great- crush them and take their resources as well.

I'm sure in the future, they'll just destroy the phones before they begin shooting or whatever.

*headdesk* This has nothing to do with the "rights" of the terrorists.

Bitter Clinger wrote:

koine2002 wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

rentz wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:Apple has unlocked phones 70 times before says the feds.

Apple does not dispute the figures.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... efore.html

But what model and version of os? Older versions did not have the same security settings on by default . A phone with an older os may very likely be quite easy to get into

The article has a quote that Apple can unlock it and won't, which if true is where I disagree with them since they have a federal court order and the govt followed all required legal requirements ...but it still seems to be a lot of hearsay from both sides

What difference does which version of operating system does it make? They caved 70 times.

Flexible ethics. The hallmark of progressivism.

YUP! Or as made famous during the Clinton years,"Situational Ethics".

Profit motive pure and simple for Apple. They have unlocked many phones before and the FBI is NOT asking for all phones, just this one.

For Apple's Cook, there is obviously no absolute standard against which all things should be measured. But then again, why should we expect him to actually adhere to any moral standards?

There is clearly NO "Do the right thing" moral obligation extant at Apple. Which is why I will never patronize them!

Which means you will not be patronizing Google or Microsoft either. They're standing behind Apple on this one. http://www.cultofmac.com/413014/compani ... cy-stance/

Good point, thanks. I was running out of companies to trash

So, which non-Apple, non-Android, non-Windows products will you be ordering for work?

SewTexas wrote:this may be "simplistic" but if he did a back-up, why can't they just access the back-up on the cloud?

It's encrypted.

rentz wrote:bottom line, unless any of us are iphone developers we don't know and we're just guessing.

I am, at the hobbyist level, at least (anyone hiring?). My claims regarding encryption don't have anything to do with it, though.

Bitter Clinger wrote:Aples claims are nonsense. There is always a solution. The real problem is that there is likely no will to implement it at Apple.

The solution is to physically desolder the flash chips from the iPhone's motherboard, solder them into some nonexistent custom hardware designed to have direct access to them, then spend the next century or so brute-forcing the encryption.

And yes, if Apple made their security system the way they claim they did, and the gov is telling the truth about not having cracked Apple's encryption, that (potentially) really is the only way.

Bitter Clinger wrote: WHY can't Apple just simply open that one phone and provide the needed assistance to that investigation? You know that they can - they simply choose not to.

Because, at least according to Apple's claims, there isn't a mechanism for them to open any phone, regardless of what the warrant says. Assuming they're telling the truth, it's not a matter of willingness — it is literally impossible for them to comply.

Regarding a hypothetical "custom" iOS that doesn't enforce the policy that deletes the phone after 10 failed unlock attempts, it still might not be possible. If that functionality is done in hardware, it won't matter what the OS says because the OS wouldn't be what's doing the deletion. There is precedent for this... iPhones (and iPads) that support TouchID (and possibly the older ones as well... I'm not sure) have dedicated security hardware for verifying that nobody has tampered with the fingerprint scanner. If I were designing a security system, that's how I'd do it. Once you become convinced the device has been compromised, then you have to assume the OS might be as well, so the correct course of action is to do the wiping in hardware, specifically to prevent someone from carrying out the very kind of attack that the courts are ordering Apple to do.

Plus, unless the phone is set to automatically install (not just download) OS updates without asking first, it won't matter because the iPhone in question won't load the new OS.