Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#51

Post by TheSpiceIsLife » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:30 AM UTC

gilgongo wrote: post #37

The only people who don't notify software developers of exploits they find in their systems are criminals. That the FBI are happy to act like black hat hackers in this is pretty amazing.

I'd be pretty amazed too if I wasn't jaded by knowledge of the history of TLAs (Three Letter Agencies, or more broadly Three Letter Acronym). I bet TLAs have quite the collection of exploits and vulnerabilities they don't tell you about. I'm quite sure some TLAs even acquire exploits on the black market. As if they don't.

I mean, for heaven's sake, "in Syria, militias armed by the Pentagon fight those armed by the CIA"[1]. And that's just the latest incarnation of this tired old worn out story.

Governments are nothing but the criminals we've decided we'd be better paying off than let run loose, whatever good it's done us. That's why governments are, ostensibly, so against 'organised crime', just a turf war really.

The only question left, then, is: What major bit of dumbshittery will government agency XZY slap itself in the face with next and get away with it.

1. http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-i...

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#52

Post by dogma1138 » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:30 AM UTC

okonomiyaki3000 wrote: post #49

dogma1138 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't consider lock makers as a good example on one hand they ask for feedback from locksmiths to improve their designs and on the other actually train licensed locksmiths how to break locks. The vast majority of safes also have a backup lock or code.

Then why did you use locks and safes as an example in the first place?

Locks and safes are a good example for me, lock makers are a bad example for your argument because they do cooperate openly with law enforcement.

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#53

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:31 AM UTC

incepted wrote: post #9

I really find this whole thing hilarious. First, it's Apple sticking it to the FBI by making a stand for privacy and receiving public accolades doing so as a champion of privacy. The FBI is the bad guy trying to invade our privacy. Now, it's the FBI sending a giant "screw you" to Apple by not only letting them know they were able to hack into the phone without Apple's help but at the same time, making a mockery of Ap…

[deleted]

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#54

Post by okonomiyaki3000 » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:31 AM UTC

tarpherder wrote: post #36

okonomiyaki3000 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were a lock or safe maker, wouldn't you want to know how people were able to crack your product so you could improve it in the next version? Or would you just keep trying to sell a version of the thing that people buy to keep their stuff safe with a known exploit? Good luck.

What lock do you have on your door? Something standard like this: http://goo.gl/cuIenh (Image of lock)? That can be opened easily in a number of seconds without damaging the lock with at least 2 well known techniques. Yet that is the lock installed on new doors on peoples homes. They don't care, people don't want/need actual security they just want to keep the idiot burglars out and be able to claim the value of thei…

The whole analogy is flawed anyway. If you can't unlock the door, just break a window. The stuff inside the house is the same in either case. We accept that there's a limit to the utility of a lock.

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#55

Post by okonomiyaki3000 » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:36 AM UTC

dogma1138 wrote: post #52

okonomiyaki3000 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why did you use locks and safes as an example in the first place?

Locks and safes are a good example for me, lock makers are a bad example for your argument because they do cooperate openly with law enforcement.

Gosh...

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#56

Post by AkodoRyu » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:41 AM UTC

tarpherder wrote: post #36

okonomiyaki3000 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were a lock or safe maker, wouldn't you want to know how people were able to crack your product so you could improve it in the next version? Or would you just keep trying to sell a version of the thing that people buy to keep their stuff safe with a known exploit? Good luck.

What lock do you have on your door? Something standard like this: http://goo.gl/cuIenh (Image of lock)? That can be opened easily in a number of seconds without damaging the lock with at least 2 well known techniques. Yet that is the lock installed on new doors on peoples homes. They don't care, people don't want/need actual security they just want to keep the idiot burglars out and be able to claim the value of thei…

Where do you live, that new homes have locks like those? Because here new houses pretty much require class C anti-burglar doors (which roughly means, they should be impenetrable in less than 10 minutes) - they have non-standard keys and complicated locking mechanisms, door-frame is locked into concrete etc. etc. Otherwise cost of your insurance will go through the roof.

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#57

Post by belorn » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:47 AM UTC

rtpg wrote: post #46

belorn wrote: post #45

Is it legally acceptable that FBI knows about a criminal activity and do not act to stop it? A security vulnerability like this will sooner or later be used by criminals, and the FBI are in the authoritative position to prevent it. Could future victims sue the government for allowing the crime to occur? There have been many lawsuits where an ISP has been found guilty for knowingly host a copyright infringer on their…

That's a strange standard to hold the FBI up to. Should police, upon seeing an unlocked car, promptly find the owner and inform them? Of course that's a nice thing to do as people, but it's not really a legal obligation.

If the police has reason to expect that the car will be the subject of a crime, then I think they should be legally required to act.

I know that in some places, the courts has ruled a police officer do not have a legal duty to protect citizens from harm or prevent crimes. Strangely, in places where citizens that witness a crime has a legal duty to report it, its unclear if the police has the same requirement.

But this is the FBI, so shouldn't they be held to a higher standard?

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#58

Post by daxfohl » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:51 AM UTC

bitJericho wrote: post #13

incepted wrote: post #9

I really find this whole thing hilarious. First, it's Apple sticking it to the FBI by making a stand for privacy and receiving public accolades doing so as a champion of privacy. The FBI is the bad guy trying to invade our privacy. Now, it's the FBI sending a giant "screw you" to Apple by not only letting them know they were able to hack into the phone without Apple's help but at the same time, making a mockery of Ap…

You think Apple should have lied to the public?

I assume he means this would be the best strategy (if kept under wraps) for Apple's reputation; the public's interests notwithstanding. Regardless, grandstanding twice just looks foolish for everyone except the FBI.

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#59

Post by daxfohl » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:56 AM UTC

tajen wrote: post #17

incepted wrote: post #9

I really find this whole thing hilarious. First, it's Apple sticking it to the FBI by making a stand for privacy and receiving public accolades doing so as a champion of privacy. The FBI is the bad guy trying to invade our privacy. Now, it's the FBI sending a giant "screw you" to Apple by not only letting them know they were able to hack into the phone without Apple's help but at the same time, making a mockery of Ap…

...or the FBI didn't succeed to hack the phone, and just tries to justifies why it won't proceed to trial. By the way, since the FBI said this phone will allow arresting other terrorists... did we find anything relevant on the phone?

There's a reasonable chance either way, but I'd assume you'll not hear about it for quite a while unless you happen to be an agent.

Re: Apple wants the FBI to reveal how it hacked the San Bernardino killer's iPhone

#60

Post by daxfohl » Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 9:59 AM UTC

okonomiyaki3000 wrote: post #27

dogma1138 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely that they did manage to find a 3rd party that could unlock it and found nothing, this wasn't the suspects personal phone (those were also recovered) but it was his work phone, the 6 week old backups had no information on it, the attack was planned more than 6 weeks in advance and it is highly unlikely that he used his work phone to contact any one involved in this. They've probably spent six to seven figu…

If you were a lock or safe maker, wouldn't you want to know how people were able to crack your product so you could improve it in the next version? Or would you just keep trying to sell a version of the thing that people buy to keep their stuff safe with a known exploit? Good luck.

Sure, but you'd tuck your tail between your legs a bit after all the grandstanding.