Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 246 posts

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#181

Post by chaostree »

studentrob wrote: post #132
oldmanjay wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely expect Apple to comply with valid warrants to the extent possible. Is there a serious belief that Apple should flout the law? Is there a company in the world that obstructs justice in their home country?

Some technologists hold an anarchist view that the government is evil and should be displaced. There are extremists within any group. These folks do not want to bother fighting the government for rights because they think the public is too dumb and the government will win that fight. In thinking this way, they become apathetic themselves. They're not all bad. Some of them contributed a lot to free software. But some…

Well, the USG considers Linux users to be extremists also. I think the phrase "One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter" applies. There should be no moderation in freedom (outside of the absolutes of killing another or dispossessing them of their property).

My response to these types of comments is precisely - when it is demonstrated that people make laws rather than governments in collusion with corporations - then I will pay attention.

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#182

Post by xxs »

rtpg wrote: post #110
KMag wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GP isn't talking about flashing an unsigned image. They're talking about physically connecting to the NAND flash chip, making a disk image, and then every 9 attempts, resetting the state of the flash back to its initial state. The image as the phone currently exists is already signed by Apple, so no cooperation from Apple is necessary. The major weakness with this model of iPhone is that it keeps the number of fa…

Isn't it pretty possible to mess up this and brick the device though?

Bricking is on the 'flash', so if you have a copy and/or install an FPGA to replace the flash. There is nothing to 'brick'

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#183

Post by RichieAHB »

Bluestrike2 wrote: post #92
RichieAHB wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4. They don't want to allow precedents to be set that aren't the precedents they were looking for.

The issue was never that the magistrate judge would be setting the precedent. No matter who prevailed, there is going to be an appeal and that's when precedent would be set. Even at that point, a negative ruling wouldn't necessarily be an insurmountable problem for the FBI as it wouldn't be binding until the issue has been decided by higher authority. It could still be cited as an example of persuasive authority (i.e…

That may all be true and I don't dispute the duration and the fact that it wouldn't be binding at this level. However, what the FBI need is something to get the ball rolling, the golden case that would set a precedent; that would almost definitely become binding in the higher court. They want a good foundation from which to proceed and I believe this case is now not it for them. They will wait for something that galvanises the general public and the courts more so than the current case, which will ultimately have a higher likelihood of setting the ball rolling towards a precedent. There's no other reason for this misappropriation of the All Writs Act other than to try and ultimately set a precedent.

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#184

Post by xxs »

mikeash wrote: post #35
georgespencer wrote: post #3

One of three things is true: 1. The FBI is lying to save face, 2. Someone -- but probably needs to be some people -- from Apple is willing to help them, 3. There is an undisclosed vulnerability in iOS which Apple is unaware of. I find it really hard to believe that someone would disclose a zero day exploit to the FBI without charging significant $ for it. Am I missing something obvious?

Maybe they're willing to consider attacking the hardware now. If you desolder the flash memory then you can bypass the brute force limitations. Just block writes, or equivalently back up the contents and reload them, and the device has no way of knowing that you previously tried any passcodes. This will allow you to make perhaps 2-5 attempts per minute, which worst case will take three or four days to brute force a f…

replacing the flash w/ an FPGA would remove the need to solder/replace (or even restore).

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#185

Post by rmc »

ysv2 wrote: post #112
DanBC wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This one time, this specific case, Apple pushed back. They need to be commended for that, but let's not forget all the other times (and there are very many) when they (and all tech companies) just handed over the data when given a valid warrant.

Companies will always comply with valid warrants for data in their possession, and it would be ridiculous to expect them to do otherwise. What made this case different was that it was not about a simple warrant for data held by Apple.

> Companies will always comply with valid warrants for data in their possession, and it would be ridiculous to expect them to do otherwise.

Remember, the requirement for a warrent doesn't apply to non-US persons outside the USA. Us europeans have no protection from the 4th amendment for data held in US servers. And in fact, the US gov is trying to claim we don't have protection if it's held in a non-US server run by a US company!

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#186

Post by wodenokoto »

nostromo wrote: post #27

I suspect that the intelligence and law enforcement communities are afraid that if this case goes to the Supreme Court the All Writs Act may be scaled back or ruled unconstitutional. The All Writs Act goes back to 1789 and is used for all sorts of things, like wire tapping, obtaining call and ISP records, etc., and now trying to force Apple to make malware for their own phone. It's definitely a risk for the FBI to fi…

People love to bring up the fact that this act is rather old, but so are the amendments. I assume it is to say that the writs act is outdated, but what was its original rationale and why is it considered to no longer be constitutional?

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#187

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

hellbanner wrote: post #129

I just want to point out that lots of HN recently has been saying "Apple would NEVER deal with the FBI, there's too much risk of a leak!".. and yet, with the example of what happened to Manning, Snowden (ETC) -- would you, with a 6 figure salary, want to tell the world of misdeeds when you could toil away comfortably? "So obvious no one will ever notice" Apple removed their warrant canary about a year ago timed with…

What? Apple are quite good with privacy. Unlike Microsoft, for example, Apple's operating systems have encryption on by default.

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#188

Post by lolidaisuki »

Johnny555 wrote: post #26
valine wrote: post #18

So basically they're saying, "This isn't going according to plan. Let's wait for another opportunity and try again."

And lets screw over Apple by claiming that we can crack the phone after Apple claims that no one can. We'll never have to prove it, so we win, Apple loses.

It's either fucking over Apple's advertising that is based on blatant lies or fucking over the public by making them think that they are secure when they are not.

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#189

Post by victorhooi »

donarb wrote: post #158
r00fus wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not foolish, but would Apple really agree to the "we found another way to backdoor the phone" messaging?

What agreement? Apple doesn't nor should they care what the government does with the phone. If the government drops their suit, Apple has prevailed in their argument.

As in - the government is trying to push "Stuff you Apple, we found another way in" argument.

That isn't good PR for Apple.

Whether the government is just lying, in order to save face, remains to be seen - somebody with more knowledge of the technology at hand may be able to comment.

Re: U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

#190

Post by trill1 »

studentrob wrote: post #179
trill1 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm only suggesting that Apple and others could have taken a stand in favor of privacy much earlier, and that their decision to do so now likely has more to do with their bottom line than any genuine concern for public welfare. BTW, hi Rob! You know me from the PPUA :)

Hi! =). Apple is free to design products as they wish, right? If their products still have security issues, the tech community will call them out on that. I bet the public will pay more attention to such critiques on Apple's security now too. My understanding is people who are serious about security do not currently depend on Apple. Those folks use open source software and build it themselves. That said, I'm still in…

Definitely, the US government can ban or backdoor every commercial encryption product on the planet, and those that are serious about security will still be using GPG, Tor, Linux/BSD, etc.
Post reply on HN