re: Apple already unlocked 70 other iPhones for feds

quote:

---

does anyone REALLLLLY believe there is a truly uncrackable/perfect product?

---

The FBI does- or else they wouldn't have filed for this court order.

quote:

---

Curious what exactly Apple did the other 80 times they broke into iPhones for the feds.



yeah i'm curious too what exactly Apple did the other 90 times the broke into iPhones for the feds.

---

jewish kid asks his dad for $100

dad exclaims: $75!? $50?? What do you mean you want to borrow twenty-five dollars!?!?

This is true but remember there is also no guarantee the passcode used only 4 digits.

quote:

---

yeah i'm curious too what exactly Apple did the other 90 times the broke into iPhones for the feds.

---

We address this in this very thread.

quote:

---

Isn't the FBI basically asking for Apple to give them the key so they do not have to ask Apple every time they want to get into a phone. Which means they could then get into every iPhone?

---

No they don't, and they did not ask for that from Apple.

What they need is apple's signature on a modified OS version so that the iPhone 5c can accept the modified version. This is the same signature that every iPhone checks for when it updates to a different version. The iPhone 5c and earlier phones are the only phones this works for bc it lacks the security enclave. Later phones are impossible to get into as of right now.

What's modified in this version? The FBI only wants apple to set the wipe on the 10 wrong pw entries to false and also set the time out btw wrong entries to false. This is done so that the FBI can try as many passwords as they want so they can gain user access. This has nothing to do with encryption bc they are getting user access to the phone. Trying to view and files from outside user access will still be encrypted.

So what you can see on your phone today, they will be able to see on this phone.

The thing is, this exact method has been used many times before by Apple to help the FBI. Just bc it is running ios9 with better encryption does not matter bc of the security enclave loophole. The better encryption does not matter here bc the phone will accept the update with apples signature on the package.

This will not wipe the encryption, remove it, or alter it. This does not give the FBI a God key for apples encryption methods. This will allow the FBI Unlimited password entries. That's it

quote:

---

but do you? were they really all iPhone 3s from 2009?

---

Obviously not. But they weren't iOS9

quote:

---

This will allow the FBI Unlimited password entries.

---

So if they get your phone, all they need is time before they get in?

quote:

---

If Apple plays along they have an inherently less secure phone.

---

I think you're missing the point of the article.

Either Apple can or cannot remove the auto-erase function on the phone. If they can, then the "backdoor" already exists and the FBI is asking Apple to help them find it. If they cannot, then there is nothing that can be done and Apple should come out and say so.

quote:

---

This case is not about a backdoor, however. Instead it is about access to data on an existing phone, which like many recent cellphones, encrypts the data on the phone itself in a way that, as Tim Cook described back in September of 2014, prevents even Apple from retrieving the data.

---

quote:

---

We do not know whether it is possible to bypass these mechanisms. Apple has responded that it is being asked to "create something too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone." That response is not technically correct. For it to be a backdoor, Apple would have to add it to phones that are shipped, and as I discussed earlier, I agree that we should not be adding a backdoor to our devices.

---

quote:

---

If such a flaw exists, then the flaw will inevitably be discovered by the hacker community, or foreign governments down the road. Hiding the flaw does not necessarily improve the security of their customers, but creating the "exploit kit" does expose customers to a greater risk of attack in the short term.

---

This guy is basically saying that if it can be done, Apple should do it now while simultaneously fixing it so it cannot be done going forward. If it cannot be done, then Apple has nothing to worry about.