The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

Apple definitely lost this battle. They could have just cracked one
phone. Now the FBI has the key to crack them all.

On 03/28/2016 09:54 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

Apple definitely lost this battle. They could have just cracked one
phone. Now the FBI has the key to crack them all.




FBI never should have gone to Apple in the first place, it just made
them look dumb

On 3/28/2016 7:54 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

Apple definitely lost this battle. They could have just cracked one
phone. Now the FBI has the key to crack them all.

FBI needs physical possession of the phone to crack it in this way.
The solution they wanted from Apple would have allowed them to PUSH
an update to any phone IN THE WILD and crack it remotely.

FBI lost this battle. And, Apple can now work on other approaches
to make iPhone7 "impossible" for them to comply with ANY court
ordered mandates.

FBI was stupid in how they handled this one!

On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 22:03:07 -0500, philo wrote:

On 03/28/2016 09:54 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

Apple definitely lost this battle. They could have just cracked one
phone. Now the FBI has the key to crack them all.




FBI never should have gone to Apple in the first place, it just made
them look dumb

That didn't make them look dumb, leaking the hack made them look dumb.
It was better when ISIS thought Apple was bullet proof.

On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 9:36:24 PM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.
--

Darnit I just posted it then discovered you beat me by 2 hours! ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Late Monster

On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 20:12:55 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 3/28/2016 7:54 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

Apple definitely lost this battle. They could have just cracked one
phone. Now the FBI has the key to crack them all.

FBI needs physical possession of the phone to crack it in this way.
The solution they wanted from Apple would have allowed them to PUSH
an update to any phone IN THE WILD and crack it remotely.

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone,
they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not
tell anyone else what they did.

FBI lost this battle. And, Apple can now work on other approaches
to make iPhone7 "impossible" for them to comply with ANY court
ordered mandates.

FBI was stupid in how they handled this one!

On 03/28/2016 11:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 22:03:07 -0500, philo wrote:




FBI never should have gone to Apple in the first place, it just made
them look dumb

That didn't make them look dumb, leaking the hack made them look dumb.
It was better when ISIS thought Apple was bullet proof.




Somehow I just can't imagine that we of the public have been made privy
to the real truth of the matter.

Micky wrote in
:

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone,
they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not
tell anyone else what they did.

.... thereby breaking the chain of custody, and rendering any information retrieved by Apple
completely useless for any criminal prosecution -- so says an attorney I heard discussing the
case on the radio a couple of weeks ago.

On 3/29/2016 4:10 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Micky wrote in
:

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone,
they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not
tell anyone else what they did.

.... thereby breaking the chain of custody, and rendering any information retrieved by Apple
completely useless for any criminal prosecution -- so says an attorney I heard discussing the
case on the radio a couple of weeks ago.

The feds will argue that they aren't looking for evidence, just "tips".

[Of course, any of those other court cases still pending now can probably
be challenged by defense attorneys: "My client claims the 'evidence'
The State has introduced has been tampered with. We demand to know *HOW*
that evidence was obtained. We've retained a crew of former Apple
employees to examine, carefully, the State's claims as to how they
extracted it from this device..."]

Apple was asked to WRITE SOFTWARE, cryptographically *sign* that software
and then introduce it to the phone (via the normal update mechanism).
The feds spelled out EXACTLY what the differences between that software and
the "normal" software would be. I.e., it didn't include anything that
would make a casual user of an "updated" phone realize that it had been
hacked. The changes would only be noticed by a person wanting to
circumvent the protections on the phone:
"Gee, I wonder if my phone has been hacked? How can I test this
theory? Ah! I can deliberately enter a bad passcode 11 times and
see if I end up BRICKING my phone (in which case, it has NOT been
hacked). If it still works after that 11th attempt, I'll know
the phone has been hacked!"
D'uh...

The feds lost this -- and probably KNEW they would lose in the courts.
Now that the feds have an "alternative remedy", they can't argue that they
should be able to compel Apple to "write software" -- even resorting to
200 year old laws! And, Apple can spin this as "why should we be compelled
to 'speak' (the act of writing software is a form of speech) what YOU want
us to speak"?

But, this tool will only help them with phones of which they can gain
physical custody. So, they're stuck in perpetual "catch up" mode.

And, the bad guys now know that they should toss their phone into
a wood chipper before embarking on any evil deeds!

Apple, of course, now knows that they should ensure any future phones
have the protection mechanisms built into *hardware* -- so they can't
be tweeked (under court order) by rewriting the software.

Yes, the feds were stupid to let this boil over into the public...

On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 10:36:24 PM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.


My favorite paragraph:

"The withdrawal of the court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request
details on the method the FBI used in this case. Apple attorneys said last week that
they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful."

In other words, "We didn't help you this time, so please help us make it even more difficult
for you next time."

On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 11:15:40 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 3/28/2016 7:54 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

Apple definitely lost this battle. They could have just cracked one
phone. Now the FBI has the key to crack them all.

FBI needs physical possession of the phone to crack it in this way.
The solution they wanted from Apple would have allowed them to PUSH
an update to any phone IN THE WILD and crack it remotely.


That's not true. The FBI didn't specify how they wanted Apple to
do what needed to be done. There was no requirement that it be "pushable"
or that the FBI even have any direct access to what Apple created.
The FBI even offered to let Apple have possession of the phone, modify
it, then let the FBI access this one phone remotely.



FBI lost this battle. And, Apple can now work on other approaches
to make iPhone7 "impossible" for them to comply with ANY court
ordered mandates.

FBI was stupid in how they handled this one!

I'd say Apple lost the battle. It's clear now that an outside third
party, which could be anyone from someone at a security firm to a
hacker, provided the FBI with a way into Apple's phone products which Apple
claims are so super secure. What's better? Apple having cooperated
quietly? Or Apple having raised a big stink and now everyone knows
that at least some unknown person out there knows how to crack their
phones? The only remaining step if for the technique to be made public
on the web, finishing the humiliation of Apple.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 3:58:41 AM UTC-4, Micky wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 20:12:55 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 3/28/2016 7:54 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

Apple definitely lost this battle. They could have just cracked one
phone. Now the FBI has the key to crack them all.

FBI needs physical possession of the phone to crack it in this way.
The solution they wanted from Apple would have allowed them to PUSH
an update to any phone IN THE WILD and crack it remotely.

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone,
they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not
tell anyone else what they did.



+1

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 7:37:57 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 3/29/2016 4:10 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Micky wrote in
:

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone,
they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not
tell anyone else what they did.

.... thereby breaking the chain of custody, and rendering any information retrieved by Apple
completely useless for any criminal prosecution -- so says an attorney I heard discussing the
case on the radio a couple of weeks ago.

The feds will argue that they aren't looking for evidence, just "tips".

[Of course, any of those other court cases still pending now can probably
be challenged by defense attorneys: "My client claims the 'evidence'
The State has introduced has been tampered with. We demand to know *HOW*
that evidence was obtained. We've retained a crew of former Apple
employees to examine, carefully, the State's claims as to how they
extracted it from this device..."]

Apple was asked to WRITE SOFTWARE, cryptographically *sign* that software
and then introduce it to the phone (via the normal update mechanism).

Completely wrong. Read the actual court order. It says nothing
at all about that. It simply asked Apple to:

1 - Disable the 10 strike erase feature

2 - Give them a means to electronically present passcodes via, USB, wifi,
etc.




The feds spelled out EXACTLY what the differences between that software and
the "normal" software would be. I.e., it didn't include anything that
would make a casual user of an "updated" phone realize that it had been
hacked.

BS. Read the court order.


The changes would only be noticed by a person wanting to
circumvent the protections on the phone:
"Gee, I wonder if my phone has been hacked? How can I test this
theory? Ah! I can deliberately enter a bad passcode 11 times and
see if I end up BRICKING my phone (in which case, it has NOT been
hacked). If it still works after that 11th attempt, I'll know
the phone has been hacked!"
D'uh...


BS. Read the court order.


The feds lost this -- and probably KNEW they would lose in the courts.

Sure, that's why they went to court, right?


Now that the feds have an "alternative remedy", they can't argue that they
should be able to compel Apple to "write software" -- even resorting to
200 year old laws! And, Apple can spin this as "why should we be compelled
to 'speak' (the act of writing software is a form of speech) what YOU want
us to speak"?


The remaining step is for whoever helped the FBI or some other hacker
to put the method on the web. See how Apple likes that.



But, this tool will only help them with phones of which they can gain
physical custody. So, they're stuck in perpetual "catch up" mode.

And, the bad guys now know that they should toss their phone into
a wood chipper before embarking on any evil deeds!

Apple, of course, now knows that they should ensure any future phones
have the protection mechanisms built into *hardware* -- so they can't
be tweeked (under court order) by rewriting the software.

Yes, the feds were stupid to let this boil over into the public...

It's not over. It's very likely another police agency with soon
resume, where this left off. This wasn't the only iphone.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:04:03 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 10:36:24 PM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.


My favorite paragraph:

"The withdrawal of the court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request
details on the method the FBI used in this case. Apple attorneys said last week that
they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful."

In other words, "We didn't help you this time, so please help us make it even more difficult
for you next time."

The FBI may choose to share their new tool with other law enforcement
too. Or whoever helped them may decide to put it out on the web.
Or another hacker may decide that since it's clearly possible, they
want to take up the challenge. How Apple thinks that's better than
Apple just quietly doing it, IDK.

On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:05:03 -0500, Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 9:36:24 PM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.
--

Darnit I just posted it then discovered you beat me by 2 hours! ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Late Monster

Yeahbut. The guys here know what they're talking about
on these 'puter things.
I can find the on-off switch on a good day.


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:21:38 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:04:03 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 10:36:24 PM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.


My favorite paragraph:

"The withdrawal of the court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request
details on the method the FBI used in this case. Apple attorneys said last week that
they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful."

In other words, "We didn't help you this time, so please help us make it even more difficult
for you next time."

The FBI may choose to share their new tool with other law enforcement
too. Or whoever helped them may decide to put it out on the web.
Or another hacker may decide that since it's clearly possible, they
want to take up the challenge. How Apple thinks that's better than
Apple just quietly doing it, IDK.

I *think* you're agreeing with me, but I'm not sure. ;-)

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:31:14 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:21:38 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:04:03 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 10:36:24 PM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.


My favorite paragraph:

"The withdrawal of the court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request
details on the method the FBI used in this case. Apple attorneys said last week that
they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful."

In other words, "We didn't help you this time, so please help us make it even more difficult
for you next time."

The FBI may choose to share their new tool with other law enforcement
too. Or whoever helped them may decide to put it out on the web.
Or another hacker may decide that since it's clearly possible, they
want to take up the challenge. How Apple thinks that's better than
Apple just quietly doing it, IDK.

I *think* you're agreeing with me, but I'm not sure. ;-)

Yes, I'm basically agreeing with you, that Apple isn't going
to know how the FBI finally got in. Except I don't see how Apple
would ever be able to legally "request" and get anything from the
FBI if it had gone the other way. If Apple had just done what the
FBI asked, what the court ordered, then Apple would automatically
know what they did. Even without knowing what they did, Apple
already knows how they would have approached it, how they would
have done it, and can use that knowledge to harden any future
products. Apple may find out what this method was, depending on
who helped the FBI.

On 3/29/2016 5:28 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/28/2016 11:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 22:03:07 -0500, philo wrote:




FBI never should have gone to Apple in the first place, it just made
them look dumb

That didn't make them look dumb, leaking the hack made them look dumb.
It was better when ISIS thought Apple was bullet proof.




Somehow I just can't imagine that we of the public have been made privy
to the real truth of the matter.

I agree with that. I don't think we ever heard the whole story. It all
seemed too pat for me.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:45:27 AM UTC-4, SeaNymph wrote:
On 3/29/2016 5:28 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/28/2016 11:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 22:03:07 -0500, philo wrote:




FBI never should have gone to Apple in the first place, it just made
them look dumb

That didn't make them look dumb, leaking the hack made them look dumb.
It was better when ISIS thought Apple was bullet proof.




Somehow I just can't imagine that we of the public have been made privy
to the real truth of the matter.

I agree with that. I don't think we ever heard the whole story. It all
seemed too pat for me.

none of it matters

Apple will make the next OS version more secure and make it impossible for their own engineers to crack. Apple doesn't want to be in this position again.

In that sense, Apple won becasue no leagal precident was set that can stop them from making their OS more secure, which is what they want to do.

Which is the right answer. There should be a limit to what a govt (any govt) can demand.

What if it was a Samsung phone? Can the FBI make demands on a non US company? Can another govt make demands on Apple? Its a can of worms.

If the FBI or NSA or KGB can crack it without Apples help, fine. Have at it. Just don't ask me to help.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 9:04:31 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:45:27 AM UTC-4, SeaNymph wrote:
On 3/29/2016 5:28 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/28/2016 11:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 22:03:07 -0500, philo wrote:




FBI never should have gone to Apple in the first place, it just made
them look dumb

That didn't make them look dumb, leaking the hack made them look dumb.
It was better when ISIS thought Apple was bullet proof.




Somehow I just can't imagine that we of the public have been made privy
to the real truth of the matter.

I agree with that. I don't think we ever heard the whole story. It all
seemed too pat for me.

none of it matters

Apple will make the next OS version more secure and make it impossible for their own engineers to crack. Apple doesn't want to be in this position again.

In that sense, Apple won becasue no leagal precident was set that can stop them from making their OS more secure, which is what they want to do.


There was never any such issue in this case to begin with. Nothing
involving what Apple can or can't do with future products was at issue.
It was about helping the FBI get into one existing phone.



Which is the right answer. There should be a limit to what a govt (any govt) can demand.


There are. Unfortunately now we don't know where that line is. But
we likely will because I expect other law enforcement, somewhere, will
bring a similar case.



What if it was a Samsung phone? Can the FBI make demands on a non US company? Can another govt make demands on Apple? Its a can of worms.


Samsung would probably have helped. And it's the job of courts to sort
out those issues.



If the FBI or NSA or KGB can crack it without Apples help, fine. Have at it. Just don't ask me to help.

I see, so you have a problem with legitimate court ordered search warrants
to access terrorist's phones? Nice.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:43:33 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:31:14 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:21:38 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:04:03 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 10:36:24 PM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.


My favorite paragraph:

"The withdrawal of the court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request
details on the method the FBI used in this case. Apple attorneys said last week that
they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful."

In other words, "We didn't help you this time, so please help us make it even more difficult
for you next time."

The FBI may choose to share their new tool with other law enforcement
too. Or whoever helped them may decide to put it out on the web.
Or another hacker may decide that since it's clearly possible, they
want to take up the challenge. How Apple thinks that's better than
Apple just quietly doing it, IDK.

I *think* you're agreeing with me, but I'm not sure. ;-)

Yes, I'm basically agreeing with you, that Apple isn't going
to know how the FBI finally got in. Except I don't see how Apple
would ever be able to legally "request" and get anything from the
FBI if it had gone the other way. If Apple had just done what the
FBI asked, what the court ordered, then Apple would automatically
know what they did. Even without knowing what they did, Apple
already knows how they would have approached it, how they would
have done it, and can use that knowledge to harden any future
products. Apple may find out what this method was, depending on
who helped the FBI.

OK, now that we're on the same page, I'm going to disagree with *you*,
somewhat.

You said: "How Apple thinks that's better than Apple just quietly
doing it, IDK"

I'm sure you realize that there is no way on God's green earth that
Apple could have done it "quietly". It would have gotten out. There
is no way that it wouldn't have been leaked that Apple help the govt
access personal information on one of their phones.

That would have started a crap storm from customers and the media alike.

The only way around that - and it's not a great solution - would have
been for them to publicly announce that "for the safety of humankind,
we are going to help the FBI find every one of the *******s that were
involved in this horrendous act".

It still wouldn't have been pretty, but it would have been better than
having it leaked that they did it "quietly".

Apple was - and still is - between a brick (pun intended) and a hard place.

Help the FBI and lose all credibility when it comes to saying that they care
about protecting their customer's data or (as has now happened) have the
world find out that their phones aren't quite as secure as they led us all
to believe.

The next question is this: Did someone within Apple know about the
vulnerability that was exploited by the person who helped the FBI? If so,
how high up did that knowledge go?

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 9:44:15 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:43:33 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:31:14 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:21:38 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:04:03 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 10:36:24 PM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.


My favorite paragraph:

"The withdrawal of the court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request
details on the method the FBI used in this case. Apple attorneys said last week that
they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful."

In other words, "We didn't help you this time, so please help us make it even more difficult
for you next time."

The FBI may choose to share their new tool with other law enforcement
too. Or whoever helped them may decide to put it out on the web.
Or another hacker may decide that since it's clearly possible, they
want to take up the challenge. How Apple thinks that's better than
Apple just quietly doing it, IDK.

I *think* you're agreeing with me, but I'm not sure. ;-)

Yes, I'm basically agreeing with you, that Apple isn't going
to know how the FBI finally got in. Except I don't see how Apple
would ever be able to legally "request" and get anything from the
FBI if it had gone the other way. If Apple had just done what the
FBI asked, what the court ordered, then Apple would automatically
know what they did. Even without knowing what they did, Apple
already knows how they would have approached it, how they would
have done it, and can use that knowledge to harden any future
products. Apple may find out what this method was, depending on
who helped the FBI.

OK, now that we're on the same page, I'm going to disagree with *you*,
somewhat.

You said: "How Apple thinks that's better than Apple just quietly
doing it, IDK"

I'm sure you realize that there is no way on God's green earth that
Apple could have done it "quietly". It would have gotten out. There
is no way that it wouldn't have been leaked that Apple help the govt
access personal information on one of their phones.


Apple has cooperated with numerous law enforcement many times before.
I think the FBI said in it's filing that they had helped the FBI
dozens of times before. I never had heard stories about any of those,
prior to this winding up in court. Maybe something was out there, but
if it was, it was minimal, not front page news worldwide.


That would have started a crap storm from customers and the media alike.

The only way around that - and it's not a great solution - would have
been for them to publicly announce that "for the safety of humankind,
we are going to help the FBI find every one of the *******s that were
involved in this horrendous act".

It still wouldn't have been pretty, but it would have been better than
having it leaked that they did it "quietly".

Apple was - and still is - between a brick (pun intended) and a hard place.

Help the FBI and lose all credibility when it comes to saying that they care
about protecting their customer's data or (as has now happened) have the
world find out that their phones aren't quite as secure as they led us all
to believe.


I don't see that at all. Apple cooperating with a legitimate search
warrant in a high profile terrorist case doesn't equate with not caring
about protecting their other customers, who are legal, not criminals,
etc. You'd have to be a fool to think that Apple can't get around
almost anything they put into their phones in one way or another.
Everyone knows that. So, I don't see the problem with Apple saying
sure, we recognize the legitimate need of law enforcement, pursuant
to a search warrant, to get into locked products and we will help
them. THAT in fact has been there policy, until apparently Tim Cook
decided to make a big spectacle and grandstand.



The next question is this: Did someone within Apple know about the
vulnerability that was exploited by the person who helped the FBI? If so,
how high up did that knowledge go?

Apple won't be able to know, because as you pointed out, the FBI
isn't going to tell them who helped them, how it was done, etc.

On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 7:36:24 PM UTC-7, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

So far, the FBI has only extracted some old photos of J Edgar Hoover in drag and the location of Jimmy Hoffa's body from it

"Shade Tree Guy" wrote in message
...
On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 7:36:24 PM UTC-7, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

So far, the FBI has only extracted some old photos of J Edgar Hoover in
drag and the location of Jimmy Hoffa's body from it

They also found evidence of successful log ins to Hillary's toilet server.

On 3/28/2016 11:12 PM, Don Y wrote:


FBI was stupid in how they handled this one!


Yes! All we should have heard is, "the FBI was able to read information
from the phone" and that is all. And some junior high kid could have
been $20 richer for having cracked it for them.

On 3/29/2016 7:10 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Micky wrote in
:

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone,
they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not
tell anyone else what they did.

... thereby breaking the chain of custody, and rendering any information retrieved by Apple
completely useless for any criminal prosecution -- so says an attorney I heard discussing the
case on the radio a couple of weeks ago.


Who they going to prosecute? The dead terrorist? What they need to
know is what else may be planned and who is involved. I personally
don't care about chain of custody if they pull a bomb out or the garage
down the street from my house.

On 3/29/2016 8:12 AM, trader_4 wrote:


I'd say Apple lost the battle. It's clear now that an outside third
party, which could be anyone from someone at a security firm to a
hacker, provided the FBI with a way into Apple's phone products which Apple
claims are so super secure. What's better? Apple having cooperated
quietly? Or Apple having raised a big stink and now everyone knows
that at least some unknown person out there knows how to crack their
phones? The only remaining step if for the technique to be made public
on the web, finishing the humiliation of Apple.



Once it hit the 11 o'clock news they both lost.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 11:20:52 AM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 3/28/2016 11:12 PM, Don Y wrote:


FBI was stupid in how they handled this one!


Yes! All we should have heard is, "the FBI was able to read information
from the phone" and that is all. And some junior high kid could have
been $20 richer for having cracked it for them.

I wouldn't be surprised that the FBI paid actually paid $50K, $100K+ for it.
I'd certainly have demanded payment.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 10:55:57 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 9:44:15 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:43:33 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:31:14 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:21:38 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 8:04:03 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 10:36:24 PM UTC-4, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.


My favorite paragraph:

"The withdrawal of the court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request
details on the method the FBI used in this case. Apple attorneys said last week that
they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful."

In other words, "We didn't help you this time, so please help us make it even more difficult
for you next time."

The FBI may choose to share their new tool with other law enforcement
too. Or whoever helped them may decide to put it out on the web.
Or another hacker may decide that since it's clearly possible, they
want to take up the challenge. How Apple thinks that's better than
Apple just quietly doing it, IDK.

I *think* you're agreeing with me, but I'm not sure. ;-)

Yes, I'm basically agreeing with you, that Apple isn't going
to know how the FBI finally got in. Except I don't see how Apple
would ever be able to legally "request" and get anything from the
FBI if it had gone the other way. If Apple had just done what the
FBI asked, what the court ordered, then Apple would automatically
know what they did. Even without knowing what they did, Apple
already knows how they would have approached it, how they would
have done it, and can use that knowledge to harden any future
products. Apple may find out what this method was, depending on
who helped the FBI.

OK, now that we're on the same page, I'm going to disagree with *you*,
somewhat.

You said: "How Apple thinks that's better than Apple just quietly
doing it, IDK"

I'm sure you realize that there is no way on God's green earth that
Apple could have done it "quietly". It would have gotten out. There
is no way that it wouldn't have been leaked that Apple help the govt
access personal information on one of their phones.


Apple has cooperated with numerous law enforcement many times before.
I think the FBI said in it's filing that they had helped the FBI
dozens of times before. I never had heard stories about any of those,
prior to this winding up in court. Maybe something was out there, but
if it was, it was minimal, not front page news worldwide.

Just looking for clarification:

You said "Apple has cooperated with numerous law enforcement many
times before."

and then you said:

"I think the FBI said in it's filing..."

and

"I never had heard stories about any of those..."

So are you saying that Apple *has* helped or that you *think* Apple
has helped?

(I don't know the answer, so I'm just asking)


That would have started a crap storm from customers and the media alike.

The only way around that - and it's not a great solution - would have
been for them to publicly announce that "for the safety of humankind,
we are going to help the FBI find every one of the *******s that were
involved in this horrendous act".

It still wouldn't have been pretty, but it would have been better than
having it leaked that they did it "quietly".

Apple was - and still is - between a brick (pun intended) and a hard place.

Help the FBI and lose all credibility when it comes to saying that they care
about protecting their customer's data or (as has now happened) have the
world find out that their phones aren't quite as secure as they led us all
to believe.


I don't see that at all. Apple cooperating with a legitimate search
warrant in a high profile terrorist case doesn't equate with not caring
about protecting their other customers, who are legal, not criminals,
etc.

You don't see it that way, but don't you think that many others on various
sides of the issue will say things like "I can't trust Apple any more" or
"Apple is now part of the Big Brother family", etc. How that might impact
their image is unknown, but they probably didn't want to take that chance.

You'd have to be a fool to think that Apple can't get around
almost anything they put into their phones in one way or another.
Everyone knows that.

I ain't no fool. ;-)

So, I don't see the problem with Apple saying
sure, we recognize the legitimate need of law enforcement, pursuant
to a search warrant, to get into locked products and we will help
them. THAT in fact has been there policy, until apparently Tim Cook
decided to make a big spectacle and grandstand.

Again, is that actually the case? I can't tell from the wording of your
first paragraph. (I'm not being lazy - or maybe I am - but I don't have
the time to research that right now, so I'm trusting that you'll let me
know that Apple has actually unlocked phones in the spirit of justice.

If they've done it in the past, why are they pushing back so hard now?


The next question is this: Did someone within Apple know about the
vulnerability that was exploited by the person who helped the FBI? If so,
how high up did that knowledge go?

Apple won't be able to know, because as you pointed out, the FBI
isn't going to tell them who helped them, how it was done, etc.

I'm guessing that they already know. As you said, they know how to get
around anything they've put into their phones, so they must know all of
the hacks. I'm sure the specifics of this case will get out, maybe only
at the highest levels and behind closed doors, but nothing stays hidden
any more.

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...
On 3/29/2016 7:10 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Micky wrote in
:

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone,
they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not
tell anyone else what they did.

... thereby breaking the chain of custody, and rendering any information
retrieved by Apple
completely useless for any criminal prosecution -- so says an attorney I
heard discussing the
case on the radio a couple of weeks ago.


Who they going to prosecute? The dead terrorist? What they need to know
is what else may be planned and who is involved. I personally don't care
about chain of custody if they pull a bomb out or the garage down the
street from my house.

an as yet unknown accomplice. perhaps.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:36:17 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
wrote:


The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

"Technology experts reveal that an Israeli company could dramatically
circumvent the legal conflict between the FBI and Apple by hacking the
iPhone of San Bernardino terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook.

Cellebrite, a multinational cellular forensic company headquartered in
Petah Tikva, has a sole-source contract with the FBI and provides the
intelligence service with the Universal Forensic Extraction Device
(UFED), which can break into locked iPhones and Android devices."

http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/israeli-company-helps-fbi-break-apple-security/2016/03/23/0/?print

The story has been out days now.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 11:43:21 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:

Just looking for clarification:

You said "Apple has cooperated with numerous law enforcement many
times before."

and then you said:

"I think the FBI said in it's filing..."

and

"I never had heard stories about any of those..."

So are you saying that Apple *has* helped or that you *think* Apple
has helped?

(I don't know the answer, so I'm just asking)


I'm saying that the govt said in it's court filing that Apple has
cooperated with them in the past, I think it was dozens of times.
And that Apple itself has said that it has cooperated with law
enforcement many times to get data out of iPhones. And that prior
to this spat, none of that got much attention, if any, in the
media. It's the first I ever heard about it. Sounds like you
didn'tsee it reported in the media prior to this either.






That would have started a crap storm from customers and the media alike.

The only way around that - and it's not a great solution - would have
been for them to publicly announce that "for the safety of humankind,
we are going to help the FBI find every one of the *******s that were
involved in this horrendous act".

It still wouldn't have been pretty, but it would have been better than
having it leaked that they did it "quietly".

Apple was - and still is - between a brick (pun intended) and a hard place.

Help the FBI and lose all credibility when it comes to saying that they care
about protecting their customer's data or (as has now happened) have the
world find out that their phones aren't quite as secure as they led us all
to believe.


I don't see that at all. Apple cooperating with a legitimate search
warrant in a high profile terrorist case doesn't equate with not caring
about protecting their other customers, who are legal, not criminals,
etc.

You don't see it that way, but don't you think that many others on various
sides of the issue will say things like "I can't trust Apple any more" or
"Apple is now part of the Big Brother family", etc. How that might impact
their image is unknown, but they probably didn't want to take that chance..


So, instead, everyone found out that Apple had been quietly cooperating
in the past. And now everyone just found out that the very thing that
Apple said would happen, ie that all the iPhones in the world would
be compromised, has happened, assuming you believed Apple to begin with.
Tim Cook said that if Apple did anything with that one phone and kept
whatever they did to themselves, it would forever compromise all the
iPhones out there, their customers, etc. So, instead, far worse has
happened. The phone has been unlocked and instead of it happening in
a secure Apple lab, we have no idea where it happened, who did it, etc.
Could be a hacker in Romania that did it. And could be others coming
who took up the challenge, are not far behind, not white knights too.
Seems far preferable for everyone if Apple had just cooperated quietly
like they had in the past.



You'd have to be a fool to think that Apple can't get around
almost anything they put into their phones in one way or another.
Everyone knows that.

I ain't no fool. ;-)

So, I don't see the problem with Apple saying
sure, we recognize the legitimate need of law enforcement, pursuant
to a search warrant, to get into locked products and we will help
them. THAT in fact has been there policy, until apparently Tim Cook
decided to make a big spectacle and grandstand.

Again, is that actually the case? I can't tell from the wording of your
first paragraph. (I'm not being lazy - or maybe I am - but I don't have
the time to research that right now, so I'm trusting that you'll let me
know that Apple has actually unlocked phones in the spirit of justice.


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/feds-app...phones-before/

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/23/politi...ce-department/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...es-before.html

"But in a similar case in New York last year, Apple acknowledged that it could extract such data if it wanted to. And according to prosecutors in that case, Apple has unlocked phones for authorities at least 70 times since 2008. (Apple doesn't dispute this figure.)"

Those are what came up quickly with Google. That's from a similar case in
NY, so I guess that's where the govt made the claim, cited the numbers,
not specifically in the SB filing.




If they've done it in the past, why are they pushing back so hard now?


That's what inquiring minds would like to know. What Cook claims is
that because this instance requires them to make some modifications
to the software, that it will have implications that those 70 other
assistances didn't. If the FBI was to get the new code, there would
be merit to that argument. But since the govt offered to let Apple
remain in control of it, IMO it's BS.




The next question is this: Did someone within Apple know about the
vulnerability that was exploited by the person who helped the FBI? If so,
how high up did that knowledge go?

Apple won't be able to know, because as you pointed out, the FBI
isn't going to tell them who helped them, how it was done, etc.

I'm guessing that they already know. As you said, they know how to get
around anything they've put into their phones, so they must know all of
the hacks. I'm sure the specifics of this case will get out, maybe only
at the highest levels and behind closed doors, but nothing stays hidden
any more.

Typically developers don't know all the possible ways of getting around
what they create. That's why MSFT for example has to keep issuing
security updates almost every week. So, Apple won't know for sure
exactly how it was done, unless someone tells them. OMG, all those
Apple customers who are so worried about their security better
throw the phones away.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 12:28:27 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 11:43:21 AM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:

Just looking for clarification:

You said "Apple has cooperated with numerous law enforcement many
times before."

and then you said:

"I think the FBI said in it's filing..."

and

"I never had heard stories about any of those..."

So are you saying that Apple *has* helped or that you *think* Apple
has helped?

(I don't know the answer, so I'm just asking)


I'm saying that the govt said in it's court filing that Apple has
cooperated with them in the past, I think it was dozens of times.
And that Apple itself has said that it has cooperated with law
enforcement many times to get data out of iPhones. And that prior
to this spat, none of that got much attention, if any, in the
media. It's the first I ever heard about it. Sounds like you
didn'tsee it reported in the media prior to this either.






That would have started a crap storm from customers and the media alike.

The only way around that - and it's not a great solution - would have
been for them to publicly announce that "for the safety of humankind,
we are going to help the FBI find every one of the *******s that were
involved in this horrendous act".

It still wouldn't have been pretty, but it would have been better than
having it leaked that they did it "quietly".

Apple was - and still is - between a brick (pun intended) and a hard place.

Help the FBI and lose all credibility when it comes to saying that they care
about protecting their customer's data or (as has now happened) have the
world find out that their phones aren't quite as secure as they led us all
to believe.


I don't see that at all. Apple cooperating with a legitimate search
warrant in a high profile terrorist case doesn't equate with not caring
about protecting their other customers, who are legal, not criminals,
etc.

You don't see it that way, but don't you think that many others on various
sides of the issue will say things like "I can't trust Apple any more" or
"Apple is now part of the Big Brother family", etc. How that might impact
their image is unknown, but they probably didn't want to take that chance.


So, instead, everyone found out that Apple had been quietly cooperating
in the past. And now everyone just found out that the very thing that
Apple said would happen, ie that all the iPhones in the world would
be compromised, has happened, assuming you believed Apple to begin with.
Tim Cook said that if Apple did anything with that one phone and kept
whatever they did to themselves, it would forever compromise all the
iPhones out there, their customers, etc. So, instead, far worse has
happened. The phone has been unlocked and instead of it happening in
a secure Apple lab, we have no idea where it happened, who did it, etc.
Could be a hacker in Romania that did it. And could be others coming
who took up the challenge, are not far behind, not white knights too.
Seems far preferable for everyone if Apple had just cooperated quietly
like they had in the past.



You'd have to be a fool to think that Apple can't get around
almost anything they put into their phones in one way or another.
Everyone knows that.

I ain't no fool. ;-)

So, I don't see the problem with Apple saying
sure, we recognize the legitimate need of law enforcement, pursuant
to a search warrant, to get into locked products and we will help
them. THAT in fact has been there policy, until apparently Tim Cook
decided to make a big spectacle and grandstand.

Again, is that actually the case? I can't tell from the wording of your
first paragraph. (I'm not being lazy - or maybe I am - but I don't have
the time to research that right now, so I'm trusting that you'll let me
know that Apple has actually unlocked phones in the spirit of justice.


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/feds-app...phones-before/

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/23/politi...ce-department/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...es-before.html

"But in a similar case in New York last year, Apple acknowledged that it could extract such data if it wanted to. And according to prosecutors in that case, Apple has unlocked phones for authorities at least 70 times since 2008. (Apple doesn't dispute this figure.)"

Those are what came up quickly with Google. That's from a similar case in
NY, so I guess that's where the govt made the claim, cited the numbers,
not specifically in the SB filing.




If they've done it in the past, why are they pushing back so hard now?


That's what inquiring minds would like to know. What Cook claims is
that because this instance requires them to make some modifications
to the software, that it will have implications that those 70 other
assistances didn't. If the FBI was to get the new code, there would
be merit to that argument. But since the govt offered to let Apple
remain in control of it, IMO it's BS.




The next question is this: Did someone within Apple know about the
vulnerability that was exploited by the person who helped the FBI? If so,
how high up did that knowledge go?

Apple won't be able to know, because as you pointed out, the FBI
isn't going to tell them who helped them, how it was done, etc.

I'm guessing that they already know. As you said, they know how to get
around anything they've put into their phones, so they must know all of
the hacks. I'm sure the specifics of this case will get out, maybe only
at the highest levels and behind closed doors, but nothing stays hidden
any more.

Typically developers don't know all the possible ways of getting around
what they create. That's why MSFT for example has to keep issuing
security updates almost every week. So, Apple won't know for sure
exactly how it was done, unless someone tells them. OMG, all those
Apple customers who are so worried about their security better
throw the phones away.

Thanks for doing my homework for me. :-)

I was getting my oil changed at a place with a real slow internet
connection...oh wait...now I sound like Painted Cow.

Never mind...I meant my iPad had just been hacked by this guy and I
couldn't get to Google:

http://images.halloweencostumes.com/...nt-costume.jpg

If the FBI or NSA or KGB can crack it without Apples help, fine. Have at it. Just don't ask me to help.

I see, so you have a problem with legitimate court ordered search warrants
to access terrorist's phones? Nice.

I've discussed this with you before.

Many other people agree that this case is NOT just about this particular phone.

This case IS all about setting a legal precident.

You refuse to acknowledge that fact.


So YOU are ok with helping the KGB? (if you read what I wrote)

"taxed and spent" writes:

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...
On 3/29/2016 7:10 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
Micky wrote in
:

No, they didn't ask for that. In fact, though the FBI had the phone,
they were willing to give it to Apple to let them work on it and not
tell anyone else what they did.

... thereby breaking the chain of custody, and rendering any information
retrieved by Apple
completely useless for any criminal prosecution -- so says an attorney I
heard discussing the
case on the radio a couple of weeks ago.


Who they going to prosecute? The dead terrorist? What they need to know
is what else may be planned and who is involved. I personally don't care
about chain of custody if they pull a bomb out or the garage down the
street from my house.

an as yet unknown accomplice. perhaps.



Given that the phone in question was issued by the county, and used for
work by the shooter, who had (and very completely destroyed) a personal
phone as well, it is _highly_ likely that they got nothing from it.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 1:40:29 PM UTC-4, wrote:


If the FBI or NSA or KGB can crack it without Apples help, fine. Have at it. Just don't ask me to help.

I see, so you have a problem with legitimate court ordered search warrants
to access terrorist's phones? Nice.

I've discussed this with you before.

Many other people agree that this case is NOT just about this particular phone.

This case IS all about setting a legal precident.

You refuse to acknowledge that fact.


So YOU are ok with helping the KGB? (if you read what I wrote)

How am I helping the KGB? The KGB is a party here? Does the KGB have
a search warrant from an American court allowing the search? Good grief.
And what precedent exactly are we setting? Apple has already assisted the
govt with unlocking cell phones in 70 other cases. It's just that in
this most heinous of cases, that suddenly Tim Cook for some reason got
the urge to not cooperate. Hope he and you are happy. Instead of Apple
doing it quietly, now the phone was unlocked by persons unknown, could
be a teenage hacker who's next move is to post the solution on the internet.
Or it could be posted by one of 100 others who may also be trying to crack
it, just they are a little further behind. So, are you happy now? Apple
happy? Are Apples customers better off now instead of Apple doing it
quietly?

On 3/29/2016 6:04 AM, wrote:
none of it matters

Apple will make the next OS version more secure and make it impossible for
their own engineers to crack. Apple doesn't want to be in this position
again.

Exactly. They will design the *hardware* so that NO SOFTWARE UPDATE can
alter these behaviors. When "ordered" to comply, they will say, "OK,
give us the phone, we are going to erase the CIRCUITRY and lay down NEW
CIRCUITRY; in the process, effectively DESTROYING the phone and its
contents But, hey, if that's what you want...."

In that sense, Apple won becasue no leagal precident was set that can stop
them from making their OS more secure, which is what they want to do.

Yes. And, if laws are enacted to prevent them from making a secure device,
can they simply become a FOREIGN CORPORATION? Can they simply refuse to
offer their products for sale in the US?
"Dear iPhone customer, As of date your $600 telephone will no
longer be supported. Nor will your government allow you to purchase
a new product from us. Oh, and, by the way, your congresscritter's
phone number and email address appear on the screen below this message..."

Which is the right answer. There should be a limit to what a govt (any
govt) can demand.

What if it was a Samsung phone? Can the FBI make demands on a non US
company? Can another govt make demands on Apple? Its a can of worms.

Amusing considering how the same government went to bat *for* Apple to
prevent it from caving to similar demands of the *Chinese* gummit!

If the FBI or NSA or KGB can crack it without Apples help, fine. Have at
it. Just don't ask me to help.

It's not a question of *asking* but, rather, of FORCING assistance. "Forced
speech".
"Mr Cronkite, we want to exploit YOUR GOOD NAME AND REPUTATION for our
benefit. This court order insists that you tell everyone to vote
Republican in the upcoming election on each of your newscasts between
now and the election."

The feds blew this. They insisted Apple could develop this technology and
"magically" contain it from getting out into the wild. Now, amusingly,
they find themselves in exactly the same position: can they be sure their
employees (cough snowden) and the employees of whatever firm assisted
in the operation will continue to keep secret (from big, bad apple) the
means by which they gained access to the phone's contents?

When prosecuters from those other jurisdictions seeking to crack iPhones
for ongoing CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS (no dead terrorists but, rather, murderers,
rapists, drug dealers, tax evaders, pedophiles, etc.) start asking for
*their* phones to be unlocked, will the feds willingly "share their
secret"?

When the defense attorneys for each of those defendants challenge the
integrity and validity of any such evidence obtained (in an OPEN, *US*
court, not a "secret court" -- guantanamo), will the feds be able to say,
"Trust us, that's what was in the phone. We're not going to tell you
how we know -- cuz Apple might find out! Madame Zelda has never been
wrong when it comes to her tea leave readings..."?

Do we suddenly start shipping everyone with a cracked iPhone off to
gitmo just so we can suspend the rule of law?

So, its a foregone conclusion that Apple *will* (!) know what exploit
was discovered. For the feds to say "we're not going to tell you"
can then be parlayed into "The feds WANT your iPhone to be hackable!
Write your congressman demanding your right to privacy!" Of course,
pointing to J Flaming Edgar, McCarthy, Nixon, Snowden, etc. to further
stoke the fears of government abuses -- should play right into the
hands of those "big government" foes...

And, given their public stance, Apple will probably go out of their way
to ensure that exploit is fixed -- in software and/or hardware (when
you are making hundreds of millions of anything you can easily
slip a change into production without having to recall every unit in
the field).

If they feel their reputation as been sullied, they can "simply" offer
$50,000 to the first person (or firm) that can demonstrate a NEW hack
of their next product -- and publicize how long the prize goes unclaimed
("Gee, I guess no pimply faced teenagers interested in a $50K prize?
Maybe we should up the ante to $100K? $250K?? I.e., add a few pennies
to every iPhone sale to pay for a POTENTIAL crack??")

[Rivest et al. did this when they introduced their breakthrough technology
in the late 70's But, they were "mere mortals" without the deep pockets of
the largest corporation on the planet!]

And, NONE OF THIS does anything to anticipate the next attack -- unless
they stumble upon PHYSICAL POSSESSION of another iPhone before such an
attack (which, as seems to be the case in Belgium, could just ACCELERATE
the timetable for it).
"Gee, you've got all these tools to pry into our secrets (all the
while getting REALLY UPSET when YOURS are leaked) yet you STILL
can't keep us safe?"
Or, when/if it gets into the hands of hackers and Apple publicizes the
fact that this is "probably" a result of the Feds very public effort of
prying into their technology? Or, the firm that assisted in the effort
being hacked (e.g., by a NATION STATE intent on gaining access to that
technology)?

And, does absolutely nothing to protect against someone using an encryption
technology that Apple doesn't control! That the phone doesn't *preserve*!
etc. Just because the feds make obvious blunders:
"Reset the cloud password for this phone! (Ooops!)"
"OK, boys, lets UNPLUG this computer and pack it up to bring down to
the digital forensics lab for analysis..."
etc.
doesn't mean folks who are intent on doing wrongs (in a VERY BIG WAY) will
be similarly inept.

Finally, it still leaves the issue of precedent unresolved. They *may*
have some stale (?) information (clues to an attack in Belgium?) from
two lone wolves but have made their work going forward all the more
difficult (while raising expectations as to what they *will* be able
to do!)

Yes, the feds lost big time!

On 3/29/2016 5:26 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:05:03 -0500, Uncle Monster wrote:

On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 9:36:24 PM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story:
http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.
--

Darnit I just posted it then discovered you beat me by 2 hours! ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Late Monster

Yeahbut. The guys here know what they're talking about
on these 'puter things.

Sadly, that is *not* the case, in this discussion.
From the responses I've seen, folks don't know:
- the difference between a "computer" and "an appliance" (phone)
- what's involved involved in the design of a "complex system"
- "programming"
- software engineering
- cryptography (in theory and in practice)
- memory technology
- power management
- volume manufacturing
- local vs. remote exploits
- how to research and *read* what's been published on the subject
(instead of idly speculating on what's involved)

The comments are naive and ignorant. It's like a plumber feeling
qualified to discuss/explain heart surgery "cuz they both involve
fluids and ways of transporting it". (A better example might be
a CARPENTER undertaking the same task!)

Would you think doubling the range of a vehicle was as simple a matter
as "doubling the size of the gas tank"?
- Does the tank need to be stronger built to contain more fluid?
- Do the mounts for it need to be strengthened to support the added weight?
- Does a larger SPACE need to be found to accommodate it in the vehicle?
- Does fuel economy suffer because of the added load?
- Are there any other safety concerns or regulatory issues?
(minor details? But, important when you find yourself out of gas miles
short of your destination! : )

I can find the on-off switch on a good day.

Congratulations! That appears to be better than most of the commentators,
here! :

On 3/29/2016 8:06 AM, Shade Tree Guy wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2016 at 7:36:24 PM UTC-7, Dean Hoffman wrote:
The Justice Department has successfully gotten into the phone of the
California mass shooter. From the AP Big Story: http://alturl.com/b9ixp
The lawsuit against Apple has been dropped.

So far, the FBI has only extracted some old photos of J Edgar Hoover in drag
and the location of Jimmy Hoffa's body from it

I think they also discovered some (old) PowerBall numbers!