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

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

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 129 posts

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

#101

Post by leecarraher »

bigB wrote: post #92

This whole article is hilarious. At no stage whatsoever has Apple actually made a statement that confirms they haven even requested the method used. All this laughable article could provide is "quotes" from an antivirus company. Apple don't really care how they did it, or even if they really did crack it, just as long as they didn't have to be seen doing it for the government.

i'm sure they care how it was done so they can fix the security flaw in future ios devices. but they also have very little legal recourse to get them to do so (maybe dmca reverse engineering provisions, but thats never been very viable in court). Furthermore, it's fairly likely they've circumvented the issue via the secure enclave enhancements in newer ios devices. so why would they waste a bunch of money on litigation, to argue a position that if they win only results in exposing their security team of some minor incompetence that may not even be an issue in current generation devices.

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

#102

Post by ta_donk_gt »

dogma1138 wrote: post #22
tajen wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...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?

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…

> I don't understand why people are going apeshit about this no one would bat an eye when the FBI picks a lock or breaks into a safe how is an iPhone different?

I have no problem with the FBI breaking into one phone that they have both a warrant for and have in their physical possession. That is how it's supposed to work.

I did, however, have problems with several other issues around this case (none of these have really gone away, only been postponed for now):

1. The FBI potentially being able to force a company to assist and do work for an investigation, as well as betray the privacy of its users

2. The government moving, partially based on this case, to force vendors to create back doors for everything, weakening security and privacy for everyone

3. The slippery slope that all of this would create

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

#103

Post by mikeash »

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 amount of support Apple got in this whole affair would seem to indicate that security is a feature many people care about.

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

#104

Post by freyr »

joelrunyon wrote: post #63
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…

I think you're reading this completely wrong. The FBI asked for access, Apple said no (because they knew the case was about precedent rather than capabilities). Apple knows the older phones had vulnerabilities (see this faux-apple computer - https://youtu.be/zsjZ2r9Ygzw?t=15m50s commercial). This is the follow-up from Apple saying "oh, you needed our help to crack it huh? How did you suddenly find a way to do it on y…

> I think you're reading this completely wrong.

It may be the wrong opinion, but it's the popular opinion among many people I've spoken to. Namely, they think Apple has egg on its face and isn't as good at security as they claimed to be. Right and wrong don't always matter in the court of public opinion.

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

#107

Post by mc32 »

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…

It's not working as intended for either party. They both come out looking bad.

Apple looks bad because they claimed that if they produced this software for the FBI it would eventually get in the hands of international criminals and put their users at risk (this before the FBI tried compelling them so it would not have set court precedent). So the FBI did an about run and got someone to come up with a method to achieve the same aim, and so the end result to Apple users is the same, except Apple are in the dark as to what the vuln is. That's a position they'd like to not be in.

On the other hand, the FBI coming in and trying to compel Apple, after an initial rebuff, looks like it was unnecessary and makes them look less competent.

Now, given it took a third party to do this, the FBI can't very well disclose the third party's trade secret.

Lose-lose for both.

This should be titled "The iPhone was never as secure as we wanted to think it was"

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

#108

Post by sdgsfsfgfg »

visarga wrote: post #98
mikeash wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This certainly isn't how it looks to me. The FBI comes off looking like complete fools to me. They said that they needed Apple's help to get into this phone, that there was no other way, and that Apple's refusal to help endangered national security, humanity, and the universe. Then they got called in front of Congress and schooled by a Congressman, one of the last places you'd expect to find anyone remotely technical…

> Meanwhile Apple comes off as fully committed to their customers' privacy even when it means standing up to the US government. My conspiracy theory instincts tell me that this is a play to fool us into thinking that Apple is fighting for our privacy, in order to make us trust Apple unconditionally and in the meantime not develop new ways of hiding our communications. In reality I think the government always gets wha…

Totally agree - this is all pantomime.

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

#109

Post by giaour »

Mtinie wrote: post #82
coldcode wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An interesting twist would be for Apple to encourage someone to sue Apple for having a hackable phone and then having Apple supply a legal request to require the FBI to disclose the hack in order to "defend" the lawsuit. Not sure this would work but you need a legal reason to force disclosure.

Let's find out. As an iPhone user, I presume I have standing and could argue some form of damages. Now, is there a lawyer out there interested in discussing whether there is really any merit to bringing a suit forward? Would / could this be a class action, or in this case, is it better to seek an individual out come? Hypothetically speaking, of course, until there are proven grounds to stand on.

IANAL, but you would probably need to show that you were materially harmed by your iPhone's now-weakened security. Maybe someone could step forward and show that their new iPhone got hacked and that they lost money because of said hack.

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

#110

Post by ethbro »

Mtinie wrote: post #82
coldcode wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An interesting twist would be for Apple to encourage someone to sue Apple for having a hackable phone and then having Apple supply a legal request to require the FBI to disclose the hack in order to "defend" the lawsuit. Not sure this would work but you need a legal reason to force disclosure.

Let's find out. As an iPhone user, I presume I have standing and could argue some form of damages. Now, is there a lawyer out there interested in discussing whether there is really any merit to bringing a suit forward? Would / could this be a class action, or in this case, is it better to seek an individual out come? Hypothetically speaking, of course, until there are proven grounds to stand on.

Legally, why couldn't you sue the government directly?

Ianal, but isn't the US government (via the FBI's court proceedings) publicly stating they have access to / have used a vulnerability actionable in some way?

If this were done in private that would be one thing, but they've now gone on the record as saying a usable vulnerability exists.

Post reply on HN