FBI whines about not being able to unlock phones

  • It has been a long and eventful year. Lets put a safe close to 2017 and open 2018 with a blast!

SDProf

Vegetarian by proxy
Supporter
Dec 5, 2015
4,445
2,130
113
At the foot of the Black Hills
#1
This issue is similar to every gun restriction - it does nothing to stop the bad guys, only impacts the law abiding.

From SANS Newsbites ( https://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites )

FBI Assails Encryption (Again)
(January 10, 2018)

FBI director Christopher Wray told an audience at the International Conference on Cyber Security earlier this week that unbreakable encryption is "an urgent public safety issue," noting that his agency was unable to access nearly 7,800 devices in the 12-month period ending on September 30, 2017.
Editor's Note

[Brian Honan]
I agree with FBI director Wray unbreakable encryption is "an urgent public safety issue" and we need to keep encryption unbreakable to keep the public safe.
[John Pescatore]
When Director Wray said this in October 2017, we replied: [Pescatore, Murray, Honan and Neely] We would reword that headline "Encryption Prevented Thieves from Exploiting Data on More Than Three Million Stolen Cellphones and the FBI From Investigating Fewer Than Seven Thousand"
[Jake Williams]
The FBI's arguments on "responsible encryption" are disingenuous. They say they need backdoors in encryption to keep us safe from terrorists and organized crime. But encryption backdoors won't be used to access phones used by terrorists and organized crime as the FBI insinuates. Those groups will move to other technologies without known backdoors quickly, leaving the only people impacted by backdoors regular users.
[Lee Neely]
As we've said before, this is encryption done right. Backdoors will corrode the integrity of the companies adding them to devices, nor will they remain in the custody of only law enforcement. Keeping the data on mobile devices secure, given the broad range sensitive activities they are involved with, is more critical to keeping our end users safe than having a mechanism for law enforcement to decrypt that data.
[William Hugh Murray]
The mobile phone is a source of evidence that did not exist a decade ago. Instead of just saying "Thank you," the FBI complains that it is not even better than it is. The mobile is used for our most intimate communications deserving a high level of protection. That said, this is a matter of cost, not capability. If one has a cryptogram, the method, and the key, all of which are in the device, then recovering the clear text is merely expensive or difficult, not impossible. The FBI has already demonstrated this in the San Bernadino case. It makes no sense to weaken the security of millions of users to address these edge cases. While the number may look big to the FBI, it is not significant in the larger scheme of things.

Read more in:
-
news.softpedia.com: FBI Says It Wants To (But Can't) Hack 8,000 Devices
- threatpost.com: FBI Director Calls Smartphone Encryption an 'Urgent Public Safety Issue'
 

MCW Sky

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 14, 2015
6,532
2,059
113
48
The North Coast
#3
They are unable to crack more than 20 devices a day, and presumably some number a day which they are able to access. That’s a heck of a lot of devices. So how many cases are (or are not) solved as a result of accessing the data on a given number of devices?
 

SLICE

WICKED PISSA
Dec 2, 2015
15,023
16,759
113
58
Parrish Florida
#6
the FBI is full of shit, if you ask siri enough questions the phone unlocks, i can unlock my phone and my wife's in about an hour of asking it questions,
what time
flip a coin
what song is playing
how far to nome alaska
ect ect ect ect.
 

JMag

Well-Known Member
Dec 5, 2015
2,563
2,084
113
S.E. USA
#7
the FBI is full of shit, if you ask siri enough questions the phone unlocks, i can unlock my phone and my wife's in about an hour of asking it questions,
what time
flip a coin
what song is playing
how far to nome alaska
ect ect ect ect.
Not when “access when locked” is disabled in Siri settings.
 

JMichna

Grand Poobah, Possum Lodge
Supporter
Dec 2, 2015
5,146
2,324
113
65
Ontonagon MI
www.facebook.com
#8
Grant ANY Federal agency some power, and you can be absolutely certain that power will be abused and misused, to the detriment of us citizens. And this is true no matter how innocuous, beneficial or noble the agency's original intent... e.g., EPA have turned into a politically driven monolithic bully agency, creating rules & regulations driven by politicial advocacy rather than science.
 

r3dbull4dd1kt

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2015
12,371
9,370
113
36
IOWA
#9
the FBI is full of shit, if you ask siri enough questions the phone unlocks, i can unlock my phone and my wife's in about an hour of asking it questions,
what time
flip a coin
what song is playing
how far to nome alaska
ect ect ect ect.
so you can bore it into compliance? I call that The Wife Approach...
 

r3dbull4dd1kt

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2015
12,371
9,370
113
36
IOWA
#10
Grant ANY Federal agency some power, and you can be absolutely certain that power will be abused and misused, to the detriment of us citizens. And this is true no matter how innocuous, beneficial or noble the agency's original intent... e.g., EPA have turned into a politically driven monolithic bully agency, creating rules & regulations driven by politicial advocacy rather than science.
Please refrain from using Libtard Buzzwords...

Its not a bully agency its a legalized terrorist organization ;)

call a spade, a spade :p
 

Flamingsuit

Alight With An Eternal Flame
Dec 4, 2015
8,910
3,421
113
#11
I'm not anti-FBI, they have a legitimate role investigating federal crimes, and they have plenty of honest agents.

It's the politicians who have over the course of almost a century, who have politicized and broadened the power of the agency to become (in some departments) a personal police force for the politicians who feed them. That vibe attracts the power-hungry who like the idea of being the law, and who lord it over their subjects, and those are the ones who fight to the top.
 

r3dbull4dd1kt

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2015
12,371
9,370
113
36
IOWA
#12
I'm not anti-FBI, they have a legitimate role investigating federal crimes, and they have plenty of honest agents.

It's the politicians who have over the course of almost a century, who have politicized and broadened the power of the agency to become (in some departments) a personal police force for the politicians who feed them. That vibe attracts the power-hungry who like the idea of being the law, and who lord it over their subjects, and those are the ones who fight to the top.
I am not anti-FBI

I am anti-power hungry Federal Agency, hellbent on destroying privacy rights
 

JMichna

Grand Poobah, Possum Lodge
Supporter
Dec 2, 2015
5,146
2,324
113
65
Ontonagon MI
www.facebook.com
#14
I'm not anti-FBI, they have a legitimate role investigating federal crimes, and they have plenty of honest agents.

It's the politicians who have over the course of almost a century, who have politicized and broadened the power of the agency to become (in some departments) a personal police force for the politicians who feed them. That vibe attracts the power-hungry who like the idea of being the law, and who lord it over their subjects, and those are the ones who fight to the top.
In the not so distant past, certainly within the lifetime of many members here, the FBI - totally independent of political manipulation - was an agency driven by a power-hungry narrow-minded, cross-dressing narcissist who had his own extra-legal agenda, often in disagreement with whatever Adminstration was in office, and not infrequently acting outside the bounds of Federal law.
 

SDProf

Vegetarian by proxy
Supporter
Dec 5, 2015
4,445
2,130
113
At the foot of the Black Hills
#15
In the not so distant past, certainly within the lifetime of many members here, the FBI - totally independent of political manipulation - was an agency driven by a power-hungry narrow-minded, cross-dressing narcissist who had his own extra-legal agenda, often in disagreement with whatever Adminstration was in office, and not infrequently acting outside the bounds of Federal law.
Take away the cross dressing, and that could describe most federal departments. And who knows how many of the others also had cross dressers.