Posted on 02/20/2016 10:09:42 PM PST by Swordmaker
Don't need a password since you get infinite attempts at high speed.
That is why the govt, in the filing, is demanding that Apple create a back channel around the self destruct and attempt delay on the phone. i.e. infiite attempts at high speed
The govt evidence tampering (that prevented getting the data onto the Cloud) was discovered when Apple was in the process of providing the data voluntarily from the Cloud.
It's not too difficult to read the filing despite the legalese.
Even better, the federales could brute force crack the iCloud data, and I bet that laboriously discovered password would unlock the phone.
The less damaging set of terrorists, anyway...
The government bringing in millions of persons who hate American freedoms is also the government demanding access to everyone’s personal data. F that.
Data collection without a warrant has no bearing whatsoever on the legitimate need for the information on this one particular device. Data collection without a warrant can not be tolerated, however it is not the issue here.
This is not a case of indiscriminate data collection, which is an issue separate and distinct from this issue and which has no bearing in this case. The issue in this case is the legitimate need to information on a particular device. There is no legitimate reason for Apple to not render all assistance necessary to retrieval of the data on this device.
Injecting objections to indiscriminate data collection without a warrant is a diversion. It is a strawman.
The data "destruction" is erasing the AES key. No data is actually destroyed. The AES key is not initialized (your word was salt) by the passcode that would be impossible, too short. Nor is it initialized by the passcode hash even though that is possible. I assume that's what you mean by salt. Salt is used with a hash, not encryption and decryption. Those use an IV.
What actually happens is this: the passcode is salted and hashed and expanded using UID (expansion being a complex hashing process to create a KEK) If it successfully decrypts the AES key you are in. It is certainly plausible to bypass key erasure unless there is a match, that should all be programmed in the firmware and modifiable. But the FBI wants an entirely new channel to do their passcode testing. They suggest bluetooth, wifi and I forgot their other suggestion. IOW, they have no robot finger to type passcodes.
The Constitution helps terrorists but we still need it. You are of the opinion that we don’’t need Apple and their strong data protection. That is false in the long run. Someone else will do it, it is inevitable. It won’t be bypassed by a new OS load. The new OS load will require a passcode, end of story. It is false in the short run too. You are ignoring that a stolen iPhone can’t be cracked by hostile governments.
It is safe to assume that the FBI will want this over and over. Then the question is if or when they will demand the SW to run it themselves.
> You are of the opinion that we don’t need Apple and their strong data protection.
You are mistaken.
Apple refuses to comply with a court order. THAT is the problem.
I wonder if he knows Jim Thompson?
Sure sure, stick it to the man. In reality you’re sticking it to your fellow Americans. We have laws, obey them. That includes obeying court orders.
The court order is asking for a SW load that will remove the protection on every phone, a universal upgrade. The court order then jabbers about tying the upgrade to the serial number or the IMEI on the SIM. But the SIM can be put in any other phone so that suggestion is ridiculous. The serial number is not available by SW.
We have a simple choice, go with state-mandated luddite SW and watch some other country create it, or let it happen here and deal with it. We can deal with it with better intel and policing but keeping new Muslims out would help as well.
> The court order is asking for a SW load that will remove the protection on every phone, a universal upgrade.
No they’re not. They hardware and software can remain in Apple’s possession. The FBI wants access to the data.
Court order says Apple “may” deliver the SW to the FBI for them to use. The problem with letting Apple do forensics will crop up in the first child porn case where the only evidence that the perp did child porn is on the phone. That will make the conviction harder to get. Therefore FBI will ask for the SW in that case to run themselves.
Does it being perfectly legal make it right?
How did that go over in Nuremberg?
The Nazis were able to pull it off because no one said NEIN!.
Apple, right or wrong, is saying NO!
The hardware and software can remain in Apple’s possession. The FBI wants access to the data. The FBI does not want Apple to conduct the search.
There is no legitimate reason to not comply with the court order.
Your analogy portraying Apple’s actions as standing up to Nazis is moronic and offensive.
Apple will taint the data by loading a brand new black box OS on the phone. No defense lawyer is going to draw a line between Apple loading code and FBI doing the search. They will use the Apple manipulation to discredit the data.
Also there are plenty of other reasons FBI will eventually ask for this SW. One is the nuclear bomb going off if we don't break into a phone in time. Assuming there are no other phones is silly, there are much more valuable uncracked phones than this one. Assuming the SW load can be tied to a phone is a stretch. FBI did not make that case in the order, just hand waved it.
Bottom line: FBI gets SW to load on any phone. Like I said before, all that means is that eventually terrorists will use the unbreakable (except by PLA) China-OS phone. That will be to the great detriment of the US.
Only the reasons I have given. You might not like the fact that technology will leave the FBI in the dust but it essentially has and really will.
Which is why the court order must be complied with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.