FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone • Hacker News Board

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#21

Post by Causality1 » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:24 AM UTC

ericlewis wrote: post #2

dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?

Rights are more important than lives. The United States has spent the lives hundreds of thousands of soldiers in defense of those rights. We should no more surrender those rights to fear and alarmism than we would surrender them to a foreign invader.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#22

Post by nickpsecurity » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:26 AM UTC

devoply wrote: post #13

wellyeah wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not alright. I'm sick of giving up freedoms every time some violent psycho/group of psychos decided to commit more violence.

Other than all the other psychos who kill a lot more people but are considered legitimate in their doings... We need more access to their information, drug companies making opiates that kill tens of thousands, various other corporations, various world leaders... etc. If we can tolerate them, then we can tolerate your run of the mill psycho doing things now and then and usually immediately being stopped from doing any…

I'd actually like to see that argument used more often. The ones they tolerate kill in larger numbers.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#23

Post by CalChris » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:29 AM UTC

javert wrote: post #17

ericlewis wrote: post #2

dead people is... the worst... arguing that we should give up freedom is bad... what, do we do here?

Freedom is more important.

Is your definition of freedom not being able to access the phone of a dead gunman?

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#24

Post by docbrown » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:34 AM UTC

I want to know what changed between 2016, when the FBI bought a tool to hack the San Bernardino shooters iPhone[1] for $900,000[2] and now — with presumably an up-to-date iPhone running 2019 iOS — that forced them to come to this conclusion.

1: https://www.engadget.com/2016/04/07/fbi-iphone-third-party-t...

2: https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/08/fbi-paid-900000-to-unloc...

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#25

Post by djsumdog » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:37 AM UTC

SimeVidas wrote: post #20

Why is it important that the FBI can access that person’s phone?

I'm wondering this too. The person already killed a bunch of people. The person is dead. What more to they hope to gain? Some secret cell of others? Unlikely .. and if there is, why not regular warrants, wiretaps, e-mail searches, etc.

They already have sooo many tools they can use, both with a warrant and bypassing it via FISA. They had all this domestic spying stuff and still couldn't prevent the shooting!

They get nothing with phone access, so why even bother brining up compromising everyone else's security just because they failed to use all their current surveillance means to detect and prevent the shooting to being with?! You want more access? Why? That's fucking unbelievable.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#26

Post by ativzzz » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:37 AM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #9

Hate to be that guy but anyone know any reason why articles about Marvin Minsky and Jefferey Epstein would not be showing up today on HN? Seems odd to me.

I would say that this topic is more political and less

> anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity

per the guidelines, hence it got flagged as being off-topic.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#27

Post by djsumdog » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:37 AM UTC

docbrown wrote: post #24

I want to know what changed between 2016, when the FBI bought a tool to hack the San Bernardino shooters iPhone[1] for $900,000[2] and now — with presumably an up-to-date iPhone running 2019 iOS — that forced them to come to this conclusion. 1: https://www.engadget.com/2016/04/07/fbi-iphone-third-party-t... 2: https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/08/fbi-paid-900000-to-unloc...

I didn't see a phone mentioned in the article? Is it an iPhone. Where are modern Android phones at with privacy/encryption?

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#28

Post by joelhoffman » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:38 AM UTC

semicolon_storm wrote: post #11

JKCalhoun wrote: post #9

Hate to be that guy but anyone know any reason why articles about Marvin Minsky and Jefferey Epstein would not be showing up today on HN? Seems odd to me.

Is it an article that's relevant to technology or the general ethos of HN? My guess is no.

Doesn't Marvin Minsky make it relevant?

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#29

Post by artificialLimbs » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:38 AM UTC

bluthru wrote: post #15

willis936 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could argue that it's harder to make an institution that has the power to access secured devices behave than it is to change society to have fewer mass murderers. To quote the onion: ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

It didn't used to regularly happen, despite the high availability of guns.

Correct.

Re: FBI tells lawmakers it can't access Dayton gunman's phone

#30

Post by berndi » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:39 AM UTC

Does that even make sense from a technical perspective? They are talking about a PIN code to unlock the phone to access the data on the phone. Could they not just remove the memory chip and access it directly? Even if the data on it is encrypted using a 6-digit PIN, brute-forcing that should be a trivial task.