03-28-16 08:30 PM
63 123
tools
  1. brookie229's Avatar
    If I was being cynical, Apple told a third party how to do it and referred them to the FBI. The FBI gets what it wants, Apple saves face.
    There is a RUMOUR going around that the "3rd Party" involved is a Canadian company called Chipworks. If the rumour is true then your cynicism is probably stifled.
    03-23-16 09:12 AM
  2. Litigator08's Avatar
    Not sure where this concerns evidence in court. The owner of the phone is the county/state, they are allowing access to it, just don't know the password. Supposing the phone has GPS data on it showing where the couple was between the time the couple committed the crimes and were later captured/killed and that GPS data leads to a third part being charged. What is the argument the third party has, the GPS data is not reliable because it was not produced through Apple's efforts?

    If the GPS data on the phone leads a trail of bread crumbs from the incident to where they were later captured and killed and this trail is accurate at the beginning and end points, with a stop over at a third party, what is the argument? I suppose they could argue that the data was tainted and the stop over was fabricated, but that would really be getting into conspiracy theories.
    There's more to evidence admissibility than who the device owner is. Credibility is also important, as any attorney can argue that evidence of dubious credibility should not be admitted, regardless of who owns the device. In this case a defense attorney would argue that the evidence can't be trusted, seeing as how it was the result of third-party extraction. "How do we know that what's retrieved is legitimate?" they'd ask. "How do we know the third party did not conspire with the gov't to create false evidence?" they'd ask. There are a whole list of questions here about whether information extracted by a third party could be trusted, which is why the FBI would prefer that the device manufacturer do the extracting. After all, it would be harder for a defendant to argue that the manufacturer conspired with the gov't against the device owner, and as the creator of the device it's difficult to argue that the manufacturer couldn't get into it without compromising it. Remember, this is not just about getting the information, but getting it in a way that it can be used to effectively prosecute.

    So, what you're talking about (phone ownership) is not an issue that either side is arguing. Apple isn't claiming that they don't have to comply with the order because the phone's owner is against the hack, because clearly the phone's owner (the County of San Bernardino) is in favor of the information being disclosed. Nor is Apple claiming that the information retrieved would be inadmissible.

    As for the GPS thing you're talking about, are you suggesting that "conspiracy theories" don't work in court? Ever hear of O.J. Simpson?
    03-23-16 09:33 AM
  3. TGR1's Avatar
    There is a RUMOUR going around that the "3rd Party" involved is a Canadian company called Chipworks. If the rumour is true then your cynicism is probably stifled.
    Another rumor involves an Israeli company called Cellebrite, which is apparently top notch in computer forensics.

    Interesting. Chipworks I believe has the experience physically accessing the layers on the chips whereas Cellebrite I believe is more into breaking into the hardware/software. So it is possible the FBI is working with both on complementary methods.
    03-23-16 09:50 AM
  4. RichardHBB's Avatar
    John McAfee offered to unlock the phone for them in the beginning of this whole mess. Fbi had no reason to ask apple to put in a backdoor except they wanted one for everyone.

    Posted with my shiny new Priv
    He also later admitted that he did it just to get attention (big surprise there, after all this is John McAfee we're discussing) and that he had no means to do what he claimed.

    John McAfee is high on bath salts.

    Posted via CB10
    He's got far better (worse) stuff than bath salts, guaranteed.

    Richard
    03-23-16 11:15 AM
  5. Dunt Dunt Dunt's Avatar
    Another rumor involves an Israeli company called Cellebrite, which is apparently top notch in computer forensics.

    Interesting. Chipworks I believe has the experience physically accessing the layers on the chips whereas Cellebrite I believe is more into breaking into the hardware/software. So it is possible the FBI is working with both on complementary methods.
    I saw the story on Cellebrite being the one working with the FBI....

    But seems they have also cracked many BBOS BlackBerry's pretty quickly. Just shows the importance of having an up to date and patched OS on your phone.
    03-23-16 03:26 PM
  6. medic_28's Avatar
    Good thing they had an apple and not a BB


    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...-method-looms/



    8700,8800,8900, 8520,9000,9300,9900,Q5,Q10,Z10,Passport,Playbook
    03-28-16 04:58 PM
  7. StoicEngineer's Avatar
    NYT just reported that the iPhone has been hacked!

    http://nyti.ms/1SrUyR2


    Posted via CB10
    03-28-16 05:31 PM
  8. conbrio29's Avatar
    Interesting thread i've always wondered just how hackproof BB10 actually is. Think about the headlines though, if it was a BB10 phone that the FBI were to have successfully hacked into then that would be a tremendous blow against BlackBerry's claims of superior security.
    03-28-16 05:34 PM
  9. Elephant_Canyon's Avatar
    NYT just reported that the iPhone has been hacked!
    No, the New York Times just reported that the FBI says it hacked the phone. Whether or not this is true remains to be seen.
    03-28-16 06:35 PM
  10. StoicEngineer's Avatar
    No, the New York Times just reported that the FBI says it hacked the phone. Whether or not this is true remains to be seen.
    Well, there's the matter of withdrawal of the lawsuit against Apple. [There would be a lot of people involved in a game to deceive. To what end?]
    03-28-16 07:45 PM
  11. Elephant_Canyon's Avatar
    Well, there's the matter of withdrawal of the lawsuit against Apple. [There would be a lot of people involved in a game to deceive. To what end?]
    Because the FBI knew they were going to lose, and didn't want to set the wrong precedent. It's really not that complicated.
    03-28-16 08:00 PM
  12. Crapshoot2010's Avatar
    "This case was never about just one phone," said Alex Abdo, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. "Unfortunately, today's news appears to be just a delay of an inevitable fight over whether the FBI can force Apple to undermine the security of its own products."

    The FBI obviously doesn't have to force Apple to do anything now.

    Posted via CB10
    03-28-16 08:14 PM
  13. sorinv's Avatar
    Another rumor involves an Israeli company called Cellebrite, which is apparently top notch in computer forensics.

    Interesting. Chipworks I believe has the experience physically accessing the layers on the chips whereas Cellebrite I believe is more into breaking into the hardware/software. So it is possible the FBI is working with both on complementary methods.
    It would be far too much work for Chipworks to be able to read the memory bits one by one by peeling off the CMOS process layers. It's much more likely that Cellebrite did it. They advertise the capability on their webpages.
    http://www.cellebrite.com/Pages/ios-...om-ios-devices
    03-28-16 08:30 PM
63 123

Similar Threads

  1. Traveling to the US
    By JerBru in forum BlackBerry Z30
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-20-16, 04:50 PM
  2. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-11-16, 04:44 AM
  3. I think Blackberry should just cancel the Vienna...
    By johnnydoesai in forum BlackBerry KEYone
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 03-28-16, 11:15 AM
  4. Why does Priv virtual keyboard only offer £ (no US dollar) ?
    By CrackBerry Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-15-16, 03:41 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-10-16, 11:48 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD