Apple vs FBI

Anything and Everything political, express your view, but play nice
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by madhatter »

JOHN MCAFEE: I'll decrypt the San Bernardino phone free of charge so Apple doesn't need to place a back door on its product

http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mca ... ree-2016-2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
brownman
Postinator
Posts: 7351
Joined: Dec 6th, '07, 17:59
Location: Stockbridge Boulevard

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by brownman »

I suppose that's one way to juice up his candidacy.

Is McAfee's hit-man hack team in Belize or Guatemala now ? :lol:
Forever .. Goat Path
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19564
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

San Bernardino Shooter's iCloud Password Changed While iPhone was in Government Possession
By JACK DATE Feb 19, 2016, 8:30 PM ET

The password for the San Bernardino shooter's iCloud account associated with his iPhone was reset hours after authorities took possession of the device.

The Justice Department acknowledged in its court filing that the password of Syed Farook's iCloud account had been reset. The filing states, "the owner [San Bernardino County Department of Public Health], in an attempt to gain access to some information in the hours after the attack, was able to reset the password remotely, but that had the effect of eliminating the possibility of an auto-backup."

Apple could have recovered information from the iPhone had the iCloud password not been reset, the company said. If the phone was taken to a location where it recognized the Wi-Fi network, such as the San Bernardino shooters' home, it could have been backed up to the cloud, Apple suggested.

The auto reset was executed by a county information technology employee, according to a federal official. Federal investigators only found out about the reset after it had occurred and that the county employee acted on his own, not on the orders of federal authorities, the source said.

Apple executives say the iPhone was in the possession of the government when iCloud password was reset. A federal official familiar with the investigation confirmed that federal investigators were indeed in possession of the phone when the reset occurred.

Missing the opportunity for a backup was crucial because some of the information stored on the phone would have been backed up to the iCloud and could have potentially been retrieved. According to court records, the iPhone had not been backed up since Oct. 19, 2015, one-and-a-half months before the attack and that this “indicates to the FBI that Farook may have disabled the automatic iCloud backup function to hide evidence.”

The development comes as the Justice Department is pushing forward with its legal fight against Apple, urging a federal judge to compel the tech giant to help the FBI crack open an iPhone left behind by Farook.

Farook, who along with his wife, Tashfeen Malik, launched a deadly assault on Dec. 2, 2015, killing 14 of Farook's coworkers at a holiday party.

The Justice Department has asked Apple to turn off the feature that erases an iPhone's data after 10 failed attempts to unlock the device so that investigators can run all possible combinations to break the four-digit passcode on Farook's phone. A federal judge ordered Apple to help the FBI but the company has said it plans to fight the order.

Prosecutors said Farook's device could be encrypted to the point that its content would be "permanently inaccessible," and, "Apple has the exclusive technical means which would assist the government in completing its search."

After the court order, Apple quickly vowed to challenge the decision.

"The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers," Apple CEO Tim Cook said in a statement to customers Tuesday night. "[T]his order ... has implications far beyond the legal case at hand."

"The FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on [the shooter's] iPhone," Cook added. "In the wrong hands, this software -- which does not exist today -- would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession."

In addition, all of the personal and sensitive information on customers' phones "needs to be protected from hackers and criminals who want to access it, steal it, and use it without our knowledge or permission," Cook wrote.

If the battle between the FBI and Apple continues, it's a matter that could work its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by madhatter »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
San Bernardino Shooter's iCloud Password Changed While iPhone was in Government Possession
By JACK DATE Feb 19, 2016, 8:30 PM ET

The password for the San Bernardino shooter's iCloud account associated with his iPhone was reset hours after authorities took possession of the device.

The Justice Department acknowledged in its court filing that the password of Syed Farook's iCloud account had been reset. The filing states, "the owner [San Bernardino County Department of Public Health], in an attempt to gain access to some information in the hours after the attack, was able to reset the password remotely, but that had the effect of eliminating the possibility of an auto-backup."

Apple could have recovered information from the iPhone had the iCloud password not been reset, the company said. If the phone was taken to a location where it recognized the Wi-Fi network, such as the San Bernardino shooters' home, it could have been backed up to the cloud, Apple suggested.

The auto reset was executed by a county information technology employee, according to a federal official. Federal investigators only found out about the reset after it had occurred and that the county employee acted on his own, not on the orders of federal authorities, the source said.

Apple executives say the iPhone was in the possession of the government when iCloud password was reset. A federal official familiar with the investigation confirmed that federal investigators were indeed in possession of the phone when the reset occurred.

Missing the opportunity for a backup was crucial because some of the information stored on the phone would have been backed up to the iCloud and could have potentially been retrieved. According to court records, the iPhone had not been backed up since Oct. 19, 2015, one-and-a-half months before the attack and that this “indicates to the FBI that Farook may have disabled the automatic iCloud backup function to hide evidence.”

The development comes as the Justice Department is pushing forward with its legal fight against Apple, urging a federal judge to compel the tech giant to help the FBI crack open an iPhone left behind by Farook.

Farook, who along with his wife, Tashfeen Malik, launched a deadly assault on Dec. 2, 2015, killing 14 of Farook's coworkers at a holiday party.

The Justice Department has asked Apple to turn off the feature that erases an iPhone's data after 10 failed attempts to unlock the device so that investigators can run all possible combinations to break the four-digit passcode on Farook's phone. A federal judge ordered Apple to help the FBI but the company has said it plans to fight the order.

Prosecutors said Farook's device could be encrypted to the point that its content would be "permanently inaccessible," and, "Apple has the exclusive technical means which would assist the government in completing its search."

After the court order, Apple quickly vowed to challenge the decision.

"The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers," Apple CEO Tim Cook said in a statement to customers Tuesday night. "[T]his order ... has implications far beyond the legal case at hand."

"The FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on [the shooter's] iPhone," Cook added. "In the wrong hands, this software -- which does not exist today -- would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession."

In addition, all of the personal and sensitive information on customers' phones "needs to be protected from hackers and criminals who want to access it, steal it, and use it without our knowledge or permission," Cook wrote.

If the battle between the FBI and Apple continues, it's a matter that could work its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
hard to believe the fed could be this inept by accident....
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
brownman
Postinator
Posts: 7351
Joined: Dec 6th, '07, 17:59
Location: Stockbridge Boulevard

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by brownman »

Yeah ... "Let's call the help desk guy at the public health facility to hack the phone and see what we get" :shock: :lol:
Forever .. Goat Path
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19564
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

madhatter wrote:hard to believe the fed could be this inept by accident....
Believe it. You know Snowden didn't work for the Fed, but Booz right? Most projects requiring specialized/niche skills are sub contracted to the big boys and then the small project pieces are subbed out to very specialized consultancies. If you talk to consultants in this space they will tell you about the Fed's ineptitude.
brownman
Postinator
Posts: 7351
Joined: Dec 6th, '07, 17:59
Location: Stockbridge Boulevard

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by brownman »

...me thinks Hatter is being facetious.

We all acknowledge that the Government is sub-standard in a number of areas.
Pols reaching out for an alliance with private sector IT is a plea more than a request.
Even with such an alliance, the scale of cybersecurity challenges are beyond scope.

Have to leave now ... some drive-by Wi-Fi hack just started my Jeep :wink:

:Toast
Forever .. Goat Path
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19564
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

Oops
Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote:FBI Admits It Inflated Number of Supposedly Unhackable Devices
BY ANDREW CROCKERMAY 22, 2018

We’ve learned that the FBI has been misinforming Congress and the public as part of its call for backdoor access to encrypted devices. For months, the Bureau has claimed that encryption prevented it from legally searching the contents of nearly 7,800 devices in 2017, but today the Washington Post reports that the actual number is far lower due to "programming errors" by the FBI.

Frankly, we’re not surprised. FBI Director Christopher Wray and others argue that law enforcement needs some sort of backdoor “exceptional access” in order to deal with the increased adoption of encryption, particularly on mobile devices. And the 7,775 supposedly unhackable phones encountered by the FBI in 2017 have been central to Wray’s claim that their investigations are “Going Dark.” But the scope of this problem is called into doubt by services offered by third-party vendors like Cellebrite and Grayshift, which can reportedly bypass encryption on even the newest phones. The Bureau’s credibility on this issue was also undercut by a recent DOJ Office of the Inspector General report, which found that internal failures of communication caused the government to make false statements about its need for Apple to assist in unlocking a seized iPhone as part of the San Bernardino case.

Given the availability of these third-party solutions, we’ve questioned how and why the FBI finds itself thwarted by so many locked phones. That’s why last week, EFF submitted a FOIA request for records related to Wray’s talking points about the 7,800 unhackable phones and the FBI’s use of outside vendors to bypass encryption.

The stakes here are high. Imposing an exceptional access mandate on encryption providers would be extraordinarily dangerous from a security perspective, but the government has never provided details about the scope of the supposed Going Dark problem. The latest revision to Director Wray’s favorite talking point demonstrates that the case for legislation is even weaker than we thought. We hope that the government is suitably forthcoming to our FOIA request so that we can get to the bottom of this issue.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by madhatter »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:Oops
Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote:FBI Admits It Inflated Number of Supposedly Unhackable Devices
BY ANDREW CROCKERMAY 22, 2018

We’ve learned that the FBI has been misinforming Congress and the public as part of its call for backdoor access to encrypted devices. For months, the Bureau has claimed that encryption prevented it from legally searching the contents of nearly 7,800 devices in 2017, but today the Washington Post reports that the actual number is far lower due to "programming errors" by the FBI.

Frankly, we’re not surprised. FBI Director Christopher Wray and others argue that law enforcement needs some sort of backdoor “exceptional access” in order to deal with the increased adoption of encryption, particularly on mobile devices. And the 7,775 supposedly unhackable phones encountered by the FBI in 2017 have been central to Wray’s claim that their investigations are “Going Dark.” But the scope of this problem is called into doubt by services offered by third-party vendors like Cellebrite and Grayshift, which can reportedly bypass encryption on even the newest phones. The Bureau’s credibility on this issue was also undercut by a recent DOJ Office of the Inspector General report, which found that internal failures of communication caused the government to make false statements about its need for Apple to assist in unlocking a seized iPhone as part of the San Bernardino case.

Given the availability of these third-party solutions, we’ve questioned how and why the FBI finds itself thwarted by so many locked phones. That’s why last week, EFF submitted a FOIA request for records related to Wray’s talking points about the 7,800 unhackable phones and the FBI’s use of outside vendors to bypass encryption.

The stakes here are high. Imposing an exceptional access mandate on encryption providers would be extraordinarily dangerous from a security perspective, but the government has never provided details about the scope of the supposed Going Dark problem. The latest revision to Director Wray’s favorite talking point demonstrates that the case for legislation is even weaker than we thought. We hope that the government is suitably forthcoming to our FOIA request so that we can get to the bottom of this issue.
so the FBI lied? no way, unpossible...
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
Post Reply