The Guardian is reporting that...
On Wednesday, the FBI confirmed it wouldn't tell Apple about the security flaw it exploited to break inside the iPhone 5C of San Bernardino gunman Syed Farook in part, because the bureau says it didn't buy the rights to the technical details of the hacking tool.
"Currently we do not have enough technical information about any vulnerability that would permit any meaningful review," said Amy Hess, the FBI's executive assistant director for science and technology.
$1.3m and no source code?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 29 2016, @01:58PM
Does the FBI care about public relations or are they just above that? This story is so weird.
1) they failed to detect the attack despite conspiracy theory level surveillance.
2) they reset the password on the attackers phone, thus locking themselves out.
3) They paid money to some group to get access to the phone, but without figuring out how it was done.
This paints a picture of institutionalized incompetence and/or corruption. I am NOT saying that is what is going on, just that I do not understand what is pressuring the people at the FBI to behave in this way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 29 2016, @02:05PM
Local and state police forces have some colorful nicknames for the FBI. On the more polite end of the scale, Fan Belt Inspectors or Feebes. On the less polite end of the scale, Fucking Big Idiots.
This isn't solely due to jurisdictional rivalries...
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Friday April 29 2016, @03:48PM
Don't forget the bit where they spent a bunch of lawyer (and maybe judge) buying money in court to try and compel Apple to do something that they claimed only Apple could do.
And then they did it anyway without Apple.
Not just incompetence but potentially perjury, at best deliberately misleading the court for whatever (probably political) their reasons were...
(Score: 2) by Nollij on Friday April 29 2016, @09:45PM
That actually could be significant - Next time the feds make that claim (and there will be many next times), that could become a noteworthy counter-argument.