The FBI reportedly asked San Bernardino County officials to tamper with the iCloud account of one of the suspected shooters in last December's attack, in an effort that ultimately failed—making it impossible to know if there were other ways of recovering encrypted information without taking Apple to court.
Just perfect; the government is blaming the government for losing access to the data.
This is great in support of the government demanding Apple building a backdoor for the government as a precedent. More bungling failure by our intelligence; maybe we should shovel some more money at them in hope they someday expose criminals as effectively as effectively as 4chan / reddit / anon hackers do for free.? http://www.phibetaiota.net
"The single most salient feature of the government we have evolved, is not that it discriminates in favor of one side and against the other; but that it discriminates against all sides in favor of itself " - Lessig
"Wert added, "[t]he county said we could get to the information on the
cloud if we changed the password or had Apple change the password."
"The FBI asked us to do that, and we did," he said."
This is very confusing because if the county said they could get to the information if they changed the password, and I don't know why that was not true, then that would make it seem like the county decided to do it and that they were told to do it by the FBI.
Also, "Also, "The Washington Post reports:
In the chaotic aftermath of the shootings in San
Bernardino, Calif., in December, FBI investigators seeking to recover
data from the iPhone of one of the shooters ""
I think the Wapo meant 'alleged' shooters but somehow forgot that there hasn't been a trial or any actual determination of legal guilt that quaint custom that used to be fairly common in the USA.
it was a false flag. the chaos and confusion bodes well for false flags.
That quote from Lessig absolutely says nothing in regard to the status quo of power and money in relation to government.
The word "government" itself, doesn't make an argument that is so often asserted by those seeking to keep the veil of distraction in place that hides the truth of power relationships relative to government which includes names, addresses, corporate alliances, global corporate alliances, and the rest.
Simplistic arguments have been made against "government" by neoconservatives and neoliberals now for over 40 years, and all to the detriment to the public good that a truly open and accountable government could serve.
All arguments decrying the "government" should thus make distinctions –– presuming distinctions embedded with the truth of these matters. Otherwise, the dominant anti-government arguments win by default.
I would say the status quo of power and money have become the government. In 1886's Santa Clara County vs Southern Pacific, the SCOTUS erroneously applied the 14th amendment to corporations, bankers funded the Bull Moose party to split votes from Taft that Wilson would win to pass the Federal Reserve Act, Clinton revoked Glass Stegal enabling banks to gamble with our deposits and now we have open legal bribery with Citizens United.
I would love a truly open and accountable government as I spent a semester studying the constitution, but government now supplicates itself to Wall Street, bankers and the Military, so I feel the quote is relevant
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Yeah, same guys that were on the grassy knoll in '63 did it.
Gotta love government competence and foresight. Maybe we should nationalize a whole bunch of stuff and let these guys run it.
This is what a 1.4 billion FBI budget get us.
Of course not. As i replied to Diana. Someone from the grassy knoll shot the President. Same organization then framed two the San Bernardino duo for the shooting rampage in Dec. Pretty obvious to everyone.
Many Americans have been hoodwinked into believing the primary job of government to "keep us safe." That's not the case. The primary job of government is to serve and protect the U.S. Constitution. That's why the oath of office taken by officials says "protect and defend the Constitution." That's why the oath I took when I was drafted into the U.S. Army back in the day said the same, "protect and defend the Constitution," and "obey the lawful orders" of the chain of command.
I wasn't required to swear that I would protect the folks at home and keep them safe. Doesn't that sound weird? It's true. Of course it's taken for granted that the orders issued by commanding officers will result in protecting Americans.
Electronic surveillance isn't the easiest issue to cope with in a constitutional republic that guarantees certain rights of privacy. There's an inherent danger to freedom and liberty when that government violates those principles.
Personally, I much prefer the idea of doing away with the national security state and to focus our attention on doing away with the root causes of terrorism, instead of mounting and maintaining a ridiculous "war on terror." Of course, the national security apparatus prefers the flow of cash it receives. There is so much good that could be done in the U.S. and around the world if the wasted cash were spent to promote human dignity and health, and creating a sustainable environment.
Of course the quote is relevant within the context that I was arguing is necessary. Otherwise just railing against the "government", at least on the surface, comports with arguments against "government" made by those who have asserted their wealth, power, and propaganda to take over such governance.
It's just like Mom told me 50+ years ago, FBI= Fools, Bums, Idiots.
Since when does law enforcement not seal a crime scene, and allow media and neighbors onto that scene?
Dumb and dumber
As I saw it come across the FBI had access to cloud data dated all but last couple of weeks in backups.
They mistakenly thought they could reset paswd and get to recent data.
Instead they should have started a regular backup and captured the uplink.
In the end the reset paswd put the phone data into a state no one could access.
But what the heck lets obfuscate the story, make Apple the villain protecting terrorists and demand a back door big enough everyone can drive a Mac truck through.
Thanks for protecting our rights Mr Comey.