Posted on 11/09/2017 3:47:04 AM PST by Swordmaker
Apple is refuting the FBIs official account
Apple is refuting the Federal Bureau of Investigations account of the aftermath of the Texas gunmans attack this past Sunday, saying it reached out to the bureau immediately to offer assistance in getting into the gunmans iPhone and expedite its response to any legal process. The attack, which left 26 dead and many more injured, was committed by now-deceased Devin P. Kelley, who is confirmed to have been carrying an iPhone that may have crucial information about his activities in the lead up to the shooting.
The FBI originally cast blame on Apple yesterday without mentioning the company by name, with FBI special agent Christopher Combs blaming industry standard encryption from preventing law enforcement from accessing the contents of devices owned by mass shooters. Law enforcement is increasingly not able to get into these phones, Combs said at a press conference. I can assure you that we are working very hard to get into the phone.
However, a Reuters report earlier today revealed that the FBI did not ask Apple for assistance during a critical 48-hour window, in which Kelleys fingerprint could have still unlocked an iPhone equipped with Touch ID. (The model of Kelleys iPhone remains unknown, as does whether he enabled Touch ID.) An Apple spokesperson, in a statement obtained by BuzzFeed, now says it did in fact contact the FBI right away:
(Excerpt) Read more at theverge.com ...
Well, this doesn’t look good...for the Feebies.
Why the change of heart?
The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me
FBI....Stuck on stupid.
Apples Legal Process GuidelinesGovernment & Law Enforcement within the United States
How come Apple doesn’t do this when the shooter is a Muslim?
The FBI lies again.
This is my shocked face.
___
How very transparent of him!
I am getting so tired of the FBLie!
Apple did cooperate in that case.
They just said “no” when the FBI said “give us a way to open everyone’s phone whenever we want”.
Well, Timmy after all did give a million or more to that fine upstanding unbiased Patriotic splc
The FBI lies.
The San Bernadino couple (with a suspected third member) were considered to be a ticking timebomb with a time priority in obtaining their contacts.
This has more of the signs of a lone nut (issue is still not settled with the Vegas shooter). If the Texas killer was in phone contact with Antifa(TM) leading up to the attack, it’s unlikely we will ever learn of it.
Why not just subpoena his phone call records from his carrier?
Apple WAS cooperating in the San Bernardino terrorist case. They complied with every legitimate, legal search warrant that was issued. . . and in fact handed over to the authorities complete copies of the terrorists Backups of the iPhone 5c in question up to October 26th, when he turned off his iCloud backup capability.
Apple was even willing to unlock the iPhone 5c using the terrorists AppleID which was perfectly possible on that model iPhone, BUT the idiots at the FBI told the San Bernardino County IT guy that in their opinion, since they didnt have the password that went with the terrorists AppleID, he should use his administrator access and CHANGE the AppleID. . . so he did. THAT ACT, prevented even Apple from unlocking the iPhone without the original users AppleID AND password! STUPID! Apple, had they bothered to ask would have told the to NOT DO THAT! Dont touch it.
Lots of people have a canned response to mass shooting incidents.
The Gun Grabbers propose Universal Background Checks and Closing the Gun Show Loophole
The FBI complains about cellphone security
Local Police demand better equipment
etc...
The circumstances don’t matter. These things are triggered automatically.
Fumbling Bumbling Idiots
All part of a PR campaign by the Federales for a law forcing all tech firms to hand over their encryption keys.
Can’t help but wonder if the fbi is even capable of telling the truth.
What reason is there to suppose that anyone was conspiring with that utterly heartless madman? AFAIK, less than none.What reason is there to suppose that the government does not want the ability to read your phone at will? My answer, sadly, is no different.
And you are only too correct when you assert that such capability, once created, cannot be kept from those who would abuse it. Even if you thought, contrary to all experience, that the government itself would not abuse it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.