FBI Hacker Says Apple Are “Jerks” and “Evil Geniuses” for Encrypting iPhones

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
At a cyber security conference in Manhattan this week, FBI forensic expert Stephen Flatley reiterated his agency’s dislike of cryptography and how it makes investigations much more difficult. Flatley is particularly annoyed at Apple because the company made it even harder to crack passwords by brute force: “password attempts speed went from 45 passwords a second to one every 18 seconds.”

“At what point is it just trying to one up things and at what point is it to thwart law enforcement?" he added. "Apple is pretty good at evil genius stuff." On the other hand, Flatley repeatedly praised the Israeli company Cellebrite, which sells hacking devices and technologies to law enforcement agencies around the world. Flatley said that they are the ones who can counter Apple’s security technology.
 
Cameras in every room monitored by the FBI. They'd be all too happy with that.
 
At what point is it just trying to one up things and at what point is it to thwart law enforcement?
Click to expand...

Typical cop train of thought, everyone who wants privacy has something to hide.

Or maybe it's just because they want privacy and due process. Police used to have to do real detective work and didn't have digital tools to do the work for them, so stop whining.
 
First, fuck them. Second, if Cellebrite is so h4x0r l33t, then what's the issue? Which is it, annoyingly uncrackable or successfully crackable?
 
What is that sound I hear? Oh, it's the waaaaambulance!

Waambulance 001.jpg
 
Our right to privacy is more important than any law enforcement or government entity entitlement to know anything whether they like it or not. And to that FBI "hacker" I say this:

!L(N12i9aN8*7@n#9(&!

And don't you ever fucking forget it. :D
 
Good

I do sympathize with someone who is a victim of a crime and the investigation is hampered by this. Some bad guys may get away. Unfortunate.

Privacy >
 
I have nothing criminal to hide.
I just don't want people to see my dick.
 
Ugh, seems like they have full access now.
 
Ideology against ideology. What if I told you that we're all wrong, it's just the side that we stand.

-Me
 
The whole country is moving towards nationalism and military/police state anyways. I won't be surprised that once the Russian investigation is put to a stop, we'll start seeing bills to help the law enforcement agencies. Papers please.
 
Tiberian said:
Our right to privacy is more important than any law enforcement or government entity entitlement to know anything whether they like it or not. And to that FBI "hacker" I say this:

!L(N12i9aN8*7@n#9(&!

And don't you ever fucking forget it. :D
Click to expand...
How DARE you say that about his mother!
 
Megalith said:
FBI forensic expert Stephen Flatley reiterated his agency’s dislike of cryptography and how it makes investigations much more difficult.
Click to expand...

Spidey329 said:
Typical cop train of thought, everyone who wants privacy has something to hide.
Click to expand...

BloodyIron said:
Hey FBI, remember those citizens your job is to protect? Yeah, th
Click to expand...

Many folks have a way of only looking at things from an internal perspective. This makes my job really hard....forgetting that they may have 10 situations on the table concerning a difficult to hack phone. Forgetting that cryptography protects the other many billions of phones in the wild and the many thousands of phones that are lost yearly.

Short sighted :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this
My stuffs on lock down. If someone steals my tech I don't want to have to reset my life.

Laptop with smart card, biometrics, tpm, bitlocker, and Intel tracking.

Phone is on lock down.

Steal them... At least you can't access my data.

They want to complain about national security, how about some damn transparency in their domestic monitoring.

At least in the UK you know your on cctv
 
I'd argue the "jerks" and "evil geniuses" are the FBI, NSA and CIA, for creating the surveillance society.

Seriously. Fuck big brother.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rahh
like this
FBI, 666, NSA, 666, DEA, 666, CIA, 666, FCC, decent credit score for being poor 666.

I feel like there is a pattern. Oh, nevermind, I am just being silly.
 
Whats more ironic in this is the dual edged sword of incompetence. First their inability to have in-house experts to succeed at their own jobs, and secondly the amount of government stolen/released data that's surfaced over the last 5 years(even without wiki).
 
Maybe a little off topic, but related. So, the TSA luggage locks. We had to use these on our luggage if you wanted to lock it. It had a combination lock you kept, but only the TSA had a key. It was not supposed to be used except when the TSA had to search your baggage. Well, the master key was found online and luggage was accessed without proper authorization.
If encryption gets this back door added, the same situation is going to happen. Unauthorized access and eventually the "secure" key will be leaked making encryption pointless.
 
Maybe if we had any assurance that our own gov't agencies weren't already illegally spying on us encryption wouldn't be so necessary. They should need a warrant to access anything encrypted anyhow. US Constitution anyone???
 
Raffin said:
Maybe if we had any assurance that our own gov't agencies weren't already illegally spying on us encryption wouldn't be so necessary. They should need a warrant to access anything encrypted anyhow. US Constitution anyone???
Click to expand...
Nah, still need encryption to keep your data from being stolen by non-government thieves.
 
True. My point is they already are not abiding by the Constitution so how can we trust them (at all).
 
steakman1971 said:
Maybe a little off topic, but related. So, the TSA luggage locks. We had to use these on our luggage if you wanted to lock it. It had a combination lock you kept, but only the TSA had a key. It was not supposed to be used except when the TSA had to search your baggage. Well, the master key was found online and luggage was accessed without proper authorization.
If encryption gets this back door added, the same situation is going to happen. Unauthorized access and eventually the "secure" key will be leaked making encryption pointless.
Click to expand...
All 7 TSA master keys have been released to the public in 2016. But the TSA says it doesn't care because the locks are "peace of mind" for consumers and not actual security. If they really cared they would change the locks.
 
This is an extremely myopic point-of-view. When your job is to catch criminals, everyone is a criminal and anyone that makes it harder to catch criminals is helping them. They are also, consequently, criminals.

Here's what's in your blindspot Mr. Flatley: anything that is harder for you to crack is also harder for a criminal to hack. While "intent" may be what determines a criminal, most of the rest of us would rather stop them before they start than catch them in the act.
 
Raffin said:
Maybe if we had any assurance that our own gov't agencies weren't already illegally spying on us encryption wouldn't be so necessary. They should need a warrant to access anything encrypted anyhow. US Constitution anyone???
Click to expand...

It would be impossible to say they weren't doing anything illegal:

United States of Secrets (Part One): The Program
PRODUCED BY
Michael Kirk
Jim Gilmore
Mike Wiser

REPORTED BY
Jim Gilmore

WRITTEN BY
Michael Kirk & Mike Wiser

DIRECTED BY
Michael Kirk

NEWSCASTER:That looks like a second plane.

NEWSCASTER:That just exploded—

ANNOUNCER:At the National Security Agency, they called it “the program.”

THOMAS DRAKE, NSA Senior Executive, 2001-08:We are under emergency conditions.

ANNOUNCER:Created after 9/11—

THOMAS DRAKE:Extraordinary means are required to deal with the threat.

ANNOUNCER:—collecting data on American citizens—

BARTON GELLMAN, The Washington Post/FRONTLINE:You’re looking for unknown conspirators, and the way they devised to do that was to look at everybody.

ANNOUNCER:—secrets at the highest levels of government—

PETER BAKER, The New York Times:A whole new surveillance program without warrants—

MARK KLEIN, Former AT&T Technician, whistleblower designed for domestic surveillance.

MICHAEL HAYDEN, NSA Director, 1999-05:What we’re doing is lawful and I think is effective.

ANNOUNCER:—through two presidencies.

Pres. GEORGE W. BUSH:This is a highly classified program.

MARK KLEIN:He was collecting the entire Internet stream.

PETER BAKER:He chose to keep the programs largely intact.

Sen. RON WYDEN (D), Oregon:That’s not just data collection, that’s digital surveillance.

DIANE ROARK, Staff, House Intel. Cmte., 1985-02:I argued it was unethical, illegal and unconstitutional, and when this comes out, all hell is going to break loose.

ANNOUNCER:Tonight on FRONTLINE, United States of Secrets Part One: The Program.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top