Originally Posted By Hollywood_Shooter:
So -- since OP doesn't know anything about encryption (established) -- can someone who does please explain if this is correct, and if not, why not :

1) .gov assumed Apple had a backdoor, Apple claimed otherwise Correct.

2) lacking Apple's assistance, .gov spent a year and eventually hacked the phone. Correct, though technically it was a third party that actually cracked it.

3) did .gov crack Apple's encryption -or- did they just crack the one phone in question? It isn't clear since we don't know how it was cracked.  It could be limited to that phone, that model, or iPhones in general.

4) if we assume the former, now .gov has built themselves a tool that works on potentially any iPhone --  a tool they most likely would not have had otherwise -- If it works on all iPhones or at least phones of a specific model, then yes, they have a tool they would not have had otherwise.  Since "otherwise" implies they would have already had access, it's not like we would have been better off had Apple just given them a back door to start with.  Welcome to the cat & mouse game of cybersecurity.

Quoted:
So -- since OP doesn't know anything about encryption (established) -- can someone who does please explain if this is correct, and if not, why not :

1) .gov assumed Apple had a backdoor, Apple claimed otherwise

2) lacking Apple's assistance, .gov spent a year and eventually hacked the phone.

3) did .gov crack Apple's encryption -or- did they just crack the one phone in question?

4) if we assume the former, now .gov has built themselves a tool that works on potentially any iPhone --  a tool they most likely would not have had otherwise --

Originally Posted By Hollywood_Shooter:
So -- since OP doesn't know anything about encryption (established) -- can someone who does please explain if this is correct, and if not, why not :

1) .gov assumed Apple had a backdoor, Apple claimed otherwise
.gov never assumed Apple had a backdoor.  They told Apple to create tools to bypass the phone's security features and break the phone's encryption.  What they really told Apple was stop using strong encryption in their consumer devices, which makes all of us more vulnerable to everyday criminals.

2) lacking Apple's assistance, .gov spent a year and eventually hacked the phone.
That's the story from the FBI and DOJ.

3) did .gov crack Apple's encryption -or- did they just crack the one phone in question?
They hacked the phone in question.  Apple devices use AES, which is a NIST encryption standard.  There are published attacks against this encryption standard, but none that are currently workable without knowledge of the key.  The US government requires data that has a classification of Sensitive but Unclassified (SBU) or above to be secured with modules in compliance with FIPS 140-2 .  Modules using AES can be validated for compliance with FIPS 140-2, so we can draw the conclusion that even the US government believes AES is secure.

4) if we assume the former, now .gov has built themselves a tool that works on potentially any iPhone --  a tool they most likely would not have had otherwise -- 
Not sure what you're implying here.  The US government has trillions of dollars to build data centers and hire employees to throw at cracking encryption.  Documents released by Edward Snowden say that the NSA was working on cracking AES back in 2013, so we can assume the US government was developing those tools long before this particular phone.

Originally Posted By Hollywood_Shooter:

Rented a "smart house" last year....the TV talked to the fridge, the fridge talked to the lights, and the lights talked to the security system.  My wife told a joke, I laughed, the wife laughed, the fridge laughed, I drew my CCW and shot the fridge.

Quoted:
Not sure what you're implying here.  The US government has trillions of dollars to build data centers and hire employees to throw at cracking encryption.  Documents released by Edward Snowden say that the NSA was working on cracking AES back in 2013, so we can assume the US government was developing those tools long before this particular phone.

Originally Posted By Gspointer:

BS. There is nobody in the FBI that would ever abuse their power.

Originally Posted By CincoBoy:
I might be wrong but I believe the FBI can already break into iPhones without Apple’s help.

Quoted:



I'm implying that if .gov would have gotten it sooner or later as you suggest, and 'assuming' Apple already had a key, then Apple wasted a year of tax payer's time.  

Quoted:


You should stop implying things that you have already admitted to knowing little about.  

Apple did not have "a key" and the government was working on cracking encryption long before Apple said "we won't make a key for you" and they would have continued to work on cracking encryption even if Apple did say "fine, we will make a key for you" because Apple isn't the only player in the encryption game.  The only thing Apple wasted was the FBI's attempt to use a single case of terrorism to circumvent the 4th amendment across the board.

ETA Apple did not waste a year of taxpayers' time.  They ultimately have no control over what the FBI does or does not do.  The FBI is solely responsible for their actions.  The FBI wasted a year of taxpayers' time.  You could make the same argument about all the taxpayer time gun owners waste by fighting gun registration.  Imagine all of the taxpayer time wasted dealing with those pesky 4473s.

Quoted:



You keep assuming Apple had a key.  They didn't then, and they don't now.

Quoted:
For me it's easier to use cloud storage and just avoid the whole murdering an office full of people thing.

Quoted:


That's beyond obvious.

This thread makes you sound like one of the JBTs that would be excited to arrest someone for not standing 6 feet apart from someone.

Originally Posted By Hollywood_Shooter:

So now the world's most experienced iPhone hacker works at the DOJ?

Quoted:

Fail.

You & everyone else that didn't actually process what I wrote.   Never once did I say that the .gov should tell Apple anything.

What I did say is that it would have been nice if Apple had provided the data of their own volition .

Quoted:
So -- since OP doesn't know anything about encryption (established) -- can someone who does please explain if this is correct, and if not, why not :

1) .gov assumed Apple had a backdoor, Apple claimed otherwise

2) lacking Apple's assistance, .gov spent a year and eventually hacked the phone.

3) did .gov crack Apple's encryption -or- did they just crack the one phone in question?

4) if we assume the former, now .gov has built themselves a tool that works on potentially any iPhone --  a tool they most likely would not have had otherwise --

Originally Posted By captainpooby:
The NSA collects everything, every email, text message and phone call. We are told this helps us catch terrorists. The FBI could have asked the NSA for this information yet they didn’t. Because this was not a US person, they didn’t even need a FISA warrant to do it. Why did they have to ask apple for help?

Quoted:
Apple didn't have the data to give them
The gov did not crack the encrypted data.

don't believe everything you read, a narrative is being started to get the public support to end encryption.
part of this narrative is "well, we already can break it anyway".

can say more then that but if you want proof - ask yourself: how does the general public feel about all their emails being stored?

Originally Posted By Hollywood_Shooter:

I've never assumed that any electronic data was safe.     I've always figured if one man can build it, another man with a big enough purse can fuck that shit up.

Quoted:
normally I'm all about protecting the civil rights of US Citizens, but this POS wasn't American - so fuck him.

Quoted:
But they cant have a backdoor just for people who arent americans, thats not how encryption works