Auditors

[Chief Bakes 6,479]

Apple rejects order to unlock gunman's phone

• 17 February 2016
• From the section Technology

Image copyright AP

Image caption Tim Cook said the FBI's request set "a dangerous precedent"

Apple will contest a court order to help FBI investigators access data on the phone belonging to San Bernardino gunman Syed Rizwan Farook.

The company had been ordered to help the FBI circumvent security software on Farook's iPhone, which the FBI said contained crucial information.

In a statement, Apple chief executive Tim Cook said: "The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers."

"We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand."

Image copyright Getty Images

Image caption Apple says it cannot unlock data on devices running iOS8 or newer

Since September 2014, data on the latest Apple devices - such as text messages and photographs - have been encrypted by default.

If a device is locked, only the user's passcode can be used to access the data. If 10 incorrect attempts at the code are made the device will automatically erase all of its data.

Apple says even its own staff cannot access the data - a move the company made following the Edward Snowden revelations into government surveillance.

Media captionEXPLAINER: What is encryption?

The FBI has asked Apple to do two things.

Firstly, it wants the company to alter Farook's iPhone so that investigators can make unlimited attempts at the passcode without the risk of erasing the data.

Secondly, it wants Apple to help implement a way to rapidly try different passcode combinations, to save tapping in each one manually.

The FBI wants to use what is known as a "brute force" attack, trying out every combination until stumbling across the correct one and unlocking the phone.

Farook is understood to have used a four-digit passcode which means there are 10,000 possible combiations.

Image copyright AP

Image caption Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik called 14 people in California

Apple said the FBI's demands set "a dangerous precedent".

"The FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation," wrote Mr Cook.

"The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers.

"Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the US government."

Farook and his wife killed 14 people in the California city last December before police fatally shot them.

"We have no sympathy for terrorists," said Mr Cook.

"We are challenging the FBI's demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country."

View the full article

[Rocket + 6,403]

Apple's public and strongly worded response to this on their website; http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

[Will 54]

Surely the potential of uncovering important information around national security goes above and beyond the self-righteous beliefs of a tech company? The FBI don't appear to be asking for an OS that will crack any iPhone - just one from a mass murderer. I'm quite surprised that this doesn't already exist for the security services to use.

[Chief Cheetah 6,915]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I promise you I'm not.

The more I read about what it is the FBI are asking for and the more I hear about how loudly Apple are shouting about not doing it, the more I'm thinking the only reason they don't want to is because it will expose the fact that this is something they are already doing, despite the fact they say they aren't.  Apple, like many other companies denied for some time that they were harvesting information from their users just by virtue of them using their products.  Seeing Apple's paranoia about control of their services and products makes me wonder if they have the information already but by admitting to that it exposes them.

Just a thought, not got this from anywhere else, just my own musings.

[Dave SYP + 2,961]

7 hours ago, Cheetah said:

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I promise you I'm not.

The more I read about what it is the FBI are asking for and the more I hear about how loudly Apple are shouting about not doing it, the more I'm thinking the only reason they don't want to is because it will expose the fact that this is something they are already doing, despite the fact they say they aren't.  Apple, like many other companies denied for some time that they were harvesting information from their users just by virtue of them using their products.  Seeing Apple's paranoia about control of their services and products makes me wonder if they have the information already but by admitting to that it exposes them.

Just a thought, not got this from anywhere else, just my own musings.

i think you might have a point there Cheetah.  "Those who shout the loudest".......eh?

[TheFlomeister + 349]

I'm a simple person, but why can't the FBI and Apple work together on this particular device to get the information they need rather than the FBI saying "we want you to do this" and then Apple saying "No".

I get where Apple are coming from about not wanting to build backdoors into their software, but surely there's a way of working together to achieve the end result?

[AA101 626]

Agreed Flo - the FBI have done exactly what you suggested and also got a court order to that effect (undoubtedly necessary in the US legal system); Apple just don't like that for one reason or another. I'm very surprised that Apple are making such a song and dance about this case, it can only end badly for them but sadly the judicial process will take time to complete, especially now that the US Supreme Court is hung.

[Chief Bakes 6,479]

Donald Trump demands Apple boycott to force it to unlock phone

• 19 February 2016
• From the section US and Canada

Image copyright Reuters

US presidential candidate Donald Trump has called for a boycott of Apple until the tech giant helps unlock the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino killers.

Apple has clashed with the Justice Department (DoJ) over a court order forcing the company to help break the encryption on one of its phones.

On Friday the DoJ called Apple's refusal a "marketing strategy".

Apple said it will not help break into the the phone, citing wider privacy concerns for its users.

The phone belonged to one of the two people who opened fire at an office event in San Bernardino, California, last December, killing 14

Speaking at a campaign rally, Mr Trump said: "Boycott Apple until such time as they give that information."

On Thursday, a court ordered the tech giant to help break the encryption.

The government has called the request narrow and argued it is only focused on this particular iPhone.

The DoJ filed another motion in court on Friday after Apple's chief executive, Tim Cook, said Apple would continue to refuse the order.

A California court has set 22 March for the hearing.

---

Analysis: Dave Lee, BBC North America technology reporter

Before this goes to court, it's being played out with a war of words.

The DoJ motion today is about investigators smashing the ball back into Tim Cook's court. It disputes his claim that the security of its products would be inherently and forever compromised.

It essentially argues that Mr Cook's stance - and indeed the stance of the other technology companies that support him - is motivated by business, not ethics.

Apple has been given an extension to submit its formal response, but the real sparks are likely to fly at the hearing date set for late March.

It will take place in San Bernardino under, you'd imagine, the scrutiny of the families caught up in the tragedy.

---

In a letter to customers published on Apple's website, Mr Cook called the implications of the order "chilling".

"While we believe the FBI's intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect."

View the full article

[Chief Bakes 6,479]

Zuckerberg is 'sympathetic' to Apple in its clash with FBI

• 22 February 2016
• From the section Technology

Image copyright EPA

Image caption Mark Zuckerberg made his comments during an interview at Mobile World Congress

Facebook's chief executive has said he is sympathetic to Apple's position in its clash with the FBI.

The FBI has ordered Apple to disable the security software on a dead murderer's iPhone but the tech giant has refused.

Mark Zuckerberg said he did not believe the authorities should have backdoors to bypass encryption protection.

However, a lawyer representing some of the gunman's victims has backed the federal bureau.

Stephen Larson, a former judge, said he intended to file legal paperwork next month telling Apple to co-operate.

"They were targeted by terrorists, and they need to know why, how this could happen," he added.

He declined to say how many of the victims he was representing, but did add that he would not be charging them a fee.

'Pretty sympathetic'

Mr Zuckerberg made his comments at the Mobile World Congress tech show in Barcelona.

"I don't think that requiring back doors to encryption is either going to be an effective thing to increase security or is really the right thing to do," he said.

"We are pretty sympathetic to Tim [Cook] and Apple."

He added that Facebook was committed to doing all it could to prevent terrorism but his company was in favour of encryption.

The social network had previously issued a statement saying that the court order could create a "chilling precedent".

Leaders at Google and Twitter also voiced support for Apple last week.

'Justice'

Fourteen people were killed and 22 injured when gunman Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik opened fire in California last December.

Image copyright Getty Images

Image caption A lawyer acting for some of the victims has urged Apple to co-operate with the FBI

Apple's chief executive Tim Cook has described the FBI's order as "dangerous" and "unprecedented".

He has said the firm would have to build a new operating system in order to comply.

"We strongly believe the only way to guarantee that such a powerful tool isn't abused and doesn't fall into the wrong hands is to never create it," the firm stated in a Q&A on the Apple website.

'Following a lead'

In a statement published in Sunday, the FBI Director James Comey said the demand was "about the victims and justice".

"We simply want the chance, with a search warrant, to try to guess the terrorist's passcode without the phone essentially self-destructing and without it taking a decade to guess correctly," the FBI director wrote.

"That's it. We don't want to break anyone's encryption or set a master key loose on the land.

Media captionWATCH; Former US Homeland Security Secretary on the row between Apple and the FBI

"Maybe the phone holds the clue to finding more terrorists. Maybe it doesn't. But we can't look the survivors in the eye, or ourselves in the mirror, if we don't follow this lead."

Last week anti-virus creator John McAfee offered to unlock the iPhone for the FBI.

"It will take us three weeks," he told Business Insider, adding that he would eat his shoe on television if his team failed.

View the full article

[Chief Bakes 6,479]

Apple boss Tim Cook hits back at FBI investigation

Dave Lee North America technology reporter

• 24 February 2016
• From the section Technology

Media captionApple CEO Tim Cook said there should have been more dialogue with the Obama administration

Apple boss Tim Cook has hit back at the FBI over the handling of a court order to help unlock the iPhone of San Bernardino killer Syed Rizwan Farook.

Mr Cook told ABC his company first learned of the controversial request when it was reported in the news media.

"I don't think that's the way the railroad should be run," he said.

"I don't think that something so important to this country should be handled in this way."

However, a source close to the investigation told the BBC Mr Cook's claim was "simply not true", and that Apple's legal team was "the first to know".

A spokeswoman for the FBI said she did not wish to comment on Mr Cook's remarks.

Image copyright EPA

Image caption Public reaction has been mixed, but some Apple users have rallied to the company defence

Mr Cook was defending the company's refusal to comply with the FBI's order that it remove security blocks on Farook's device so data on it could be accessed.

Farook, along with his wife Tashfeen Malik, killed 14 people in the attack in December last year.

"I think safety of the public is incredibly important," Mr Cook told ABC.

"The protection of people's data is incredibly important. And so the trade-off here is we know that doing this could expose people to incredible vulnerabilities."

When asked if he was concerned Apple may hinder investigations that could prevent a future attack, Mr Cook said: "Some things are hard and some things are right. And some things are both. This is one of those things."

Image copyright Reuters

Image caption Apple CEO Tim Cook said the decision to refuse the FBI was 'hard" but "right"

The FBI has argued that Apple is overstating the security risk to its devices. FBI Director James Comey said Apple had the technical know-how to break into Farook's device only in a way that did not create a so-called "backdoor" into every Apple device.

Conflicting polls suggest the American public is divided. One poll, by the Pew Research Center, suggested the majority of those polled sided with the FBI - although the researchers noted support for Apple grew among people who owned smart phones.

A Reuters poll, conducted by Ipsos, said 55% of respondents worried that the FBI would seek to use the backdoor to "spy on iPhone users".

Follow Dave Lee on Twitter @DaveLeeBBC or on Facebook

View the full article

[Chief Bakes 6,479]

Apple asks court to reverse iPhone order

• 25 February 2016
• From the section Business

Image copyright Getty Images

Apple has asked a US court to overturn an earlier ruling ordering the company to help the FBI break into a phone used by one of the San Bernardino killers.

In court papers Apple says law enforcement authorities are seeking "dangerous powers" and the move violates its constitutional rights.

The FBI and White House have said the request is limited to one iPhone.

But Apple says the software needed to comply with the FBI's request "simply does not exist".

Instead says it would have to create a new version on the iPhone operating software, containing a back door to the device's encrypted data.

It argues that the lower court did not have the authority to force Apple to do that.

Apple also says no court had ever forced a company to weaken the security of its products to gain access to personal individual information.

"This case is about the Department of Justice and the FBI seeking through the courts a dangerous power that Congress and the American people have withheld," the filing said.

Apple's attorney, Bruce Sewell will testify before Congress on 1 March about the encryption case.

'Hardest question'

On Thursday FBI director James Comey, said the government's dispute with Apple was, "the hardest" he had faced in government.

Testifying before congress Mr Comey said: "This is the hardest question I have seen in government and it's going to require negotiation and conversation."

The row between Apple and the FBI blew up last week when the bureau asked the electronics firm for help to unlock the smartphone of Syed Rizwan Farook - who along with his wife killed 14 people in December 2015.

So far, Apple has refused to unlock the phone.

In an interview aired yesterday with US TV network ABC, Apple boss Tim Cook said the FBI was asking it to make "the software equivalent of cancer".

He added: "Some things are hard and some things are right. And some things are both. This is one of those things."

Industry support

Tech leaders, including Google's boss, and Apple customers have praised the company for standing up to the FBI.

Apple supporters rallied in front of the company's stores on Tuesday to show their support.

A Department of Justice court filing from February accused Apple of refusing to help to boost its "marketing strategy".

View the full article

[Fedster + 1,307]

‘That’s horse sh*t!’: FBI can already unlock iPhone without Apple’s help – Snowden

Full Story - RT

[Chief Bakes 6,479]

FBI 'may be able to unlock San Bernardino iPhone'

• 22 March 2016
• From the section US & Canada

Media captionApple's CEO Tim Cook: ''We have a responsibility to help you protect your data''

The FBI says it may have found a way to unlock the San Bernardino attacker's iPhone without Apple's assistance.

A court hearing with Apple scheduled for tomorrow has been postponed at the request of the US Justice Department (DOJ), Apple has confirmed.

The DOJ had ordered Apple to help unlock the phone used by San Bernardino gunman Rizwan Farook.

But Apple has continued to fight the order, saying it would set a "dangerous precedent".

Rizwan Farook and his wife killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California, last December before police fatally shot them.

UN human rights chief backs Apple

Apple boss hits back at FBI conduct

McAfee offers to unlock iPhone for FBI

Analysis: Dave Lee, BBC North America technology reporter

Ever since this issue arose, security experts have been saying "surely the FBI can do this themselves?" Well, maybe now they can.

An "outside party" - you'd assume a security company, but we don't know for sure - has approached the FBI and said it could unlock the phone.

If they can do it, the court case is irrelevant. The FBI gets what they need. But if it doesn't work, we'll find ourselves back here to resume the trial.

Apple's legal team told reporters it wasn't treating it as a legal victory. The issue still looms large over the company. If the FBI has found a way, who's to say it'll always work? Apple will, as any software maker would, frantically try and fix the flaw. After all - if the FBI can do it, so can any other hacker privy to the same information.

If this method works, then what? With each new iteration of iOS, Apple could find itself back in court.

The technology industry, led by Apple, has called for the matter to be debated in Congress. This case may be on the brink of going away, but the debate is just starting.

Prosecutors said "an outside party" had demonstrated a possible way of unlocking the iPhone without the need to seek Apple's help.

"Testing is required to determine whether it is a viable method that will not compromise data on Farook's iPhone," a court filing said.

"If the method is viable, it should eliminate the need for the assistance from Apple."

DOJ spokeswoman Melanie Newman said in a statement that the government was "cautiously optimistic" that the possible method to unlock the phone would work.

The government said it would update the court on 5 April.

Image copyright AP

Image caption Rizwan Farook, right, and his wife Tashfeen Malik, killed 14 people at an office party on 2 December

Attorneys for Apple told reporters that the firm had no idea what method the FBI was exploring to try to unlock the phone.

They said they hoped that the government would share with Apple any vulnerabilities of the iPhone that might come to light.

The FBI says Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik were inspired by so-called Islamic State and that the encrypted iPhone may contain crucial evidence.

It wants to access the data but the device can only be unlocked by entering the correct passcode.

Guessing the code incorrectly too many times could permanently delete all data on the phone, so the FBI had asked Apple to develop a new version of its operating system that circumvents some of its security features.

Last month the DOJ obtained a court order directing Apple to create that software,

But Apple has fought back, stating that creating a compromised version of the operating system would have security implications for millions of iPhone users and would set a precedent.

The company has received support from other tech giants including, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook, as it resisted a court order to unlock the iPhone.

View the full article