Apple vs. the FBI

[FogCityM3]

Isn't the FBI proposing that Apple break into the phone, retrieve the data and give that data to the FBI? The worry that this may open the door to other precedents really doesn't make sense if one sets the standard that you commit a terrorist attack, yes the phone should be broken into by Apple and there could be information on there that could save lives. Just set the standard that the FBI may request this in the future in the event of another committed terrorist attack rather than suspected terrorists.

I don't see Apple winning this.

[OptionlessM]

Unfortunately a lot of people are simply uninformed or incapable of understanding the situation here. It is a very big deal, and it is not about 1 phone.

All I can recommend is reading the press releases from Tim Cook.

This isn't about protecting the rights of a terrorist, it is about protecting the rights of smart phone users across the world.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by OptionlessM

Unfortunately a lot of people are simply uninformed or incapable of understanding the situation here. It is a very big deal, and it is not about 1 phone.

All I can recommend is reading the press releases from Tim Cook.

This isn't about protecting the rights of a terrorist, it is about protecting the rights of smart phone users across the world.

I read it. If Apple is so overwhelmingly concerned about customer security, why has malware been allowed into the App Store, where it has been downloaded onto customer devices and used to extract personal information? If a third party was able to find a way into an iPhone without Apple, circumventing Apple's encryption and other security measures (as McAfee suggests he could do), what would Apple's response be? Would they tell their customers to erase and throw always their phones. Of course not. They would be saying something close to the opposite of what Cook is saying in that letter, assuring customers they are working in a fix.

I don't think you can base an opinion or consider yourself informed because you read a press release or letter from Apple any more than you can by listening to the FBI position. It is one side of the argument and is not without flaws.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Isn't the FBI proposing that Apple break into the phone, retrieve the data and give that data to the FBI? The worry that this may open the door to other precedents really doesn't make sense if one sets the standard that you commit a terrorist attack, yes the phone should be broken into by Apple and there could be information on there that could save lives. Just set the standard that the FBI may request this in the future in the event of another committed terrorist attack rather than suspected terrorists.

I don't see Apple winning this.

No they want Apple to develop software to disable the security feature where the phone wipes itself after 10 consecutive incorrect password attempts so the FBI can unlock the phone by trying every single possible numeric combination. That feature would apply to every iPhone hence the issue.

If they wanted them to simply unlock this specific phone I'm sure this would be a nonissue but that's not what they're asking for.

[OptionlessM]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

I read it. If Apple is so overwhelmingly concerned about customer security, why has malware been allowed into the App Store, where it has been downloaded onto customer devices and used to extract personal information? If a third party was able to find a way into an iPhone without Apple, circumventing Apple's encryption and other security measures (as McAfee suggests he could do), what would Apple's response be? Would they tell their customers to erase and throw always their phones. Of course not. They would be saying something close to the opposite of what Cook is saying in that letter, assuring customers they are working in a fix.

I can't really put my finger on what you are trying to insinuate there.

You are saying they would be trying to fix a hypothetical exposed vulnerability. Makes sense.

How does that contradict them rejecting the FBI's request to make the system more vulnerable? Are you sure you read the letter?

[eluded]

well using a cheap Silicon Valley hourly rate of $150/hr yields a quarter of a million dollar tax bill. #winning.

Originally Posted by csu87

well when the government will foot the bill, of course you are gonna say its gonna cost a lot

[bosstones]

Originally Posted by EL Jeffe 5

Why would you side with Government. All they want to do I take our freedom.

There is a limit to how large of a tin foil hat I wear. This, to me, falls into a gray area...more specifically, an overlap region between the both sides' surmised intent. This is not much different to me than a search warrant having been issued aside from the fact that the owner of the device gave consent. I find it odd that people, not necessarily you or anyone specific here, can be totally against something like this but will willingly/freely post their life on the internet and/or have no issue w/ data mining by phone and internet companies much less a multi-billion dollar one that couldn't care less what you think as long as its sales and stock price go up.

[M_Six]

In this particular situation, I don't particularly agree with the US gov't. But the true test of your convictions on this issue is how you'd feel if your little daughter got kidnapped and one of the kidnappers dropped his phone while kidnapping your daughter. If your daughter's life depended on Apple agreeing to hack the phone, wouldn't you be standing on Tim Cook's chest demanding he do something?

I know, I know, making policy based on the emotional stress of one incident is not wise, but I can envision situations where national security or even "the right thing to do" override concerns of privacy.

What this really comes down to is a (justified) lack of trust in our government. They've simply done the wrong thing too many times.

If you've never read Orwell's 1984, read it now. Or if you have, re-read it now. You'll be stunned at how many of those things we thought impossible 40 or 50 years ago are true today. Flat screen TVs that watch and hear you, double-speak (read: Politically correct language), devaluation of most things we used to cherish, and most importantly, governments run as businesses. Orwell saw it all coming.

[cays]

Originally Posted by M_Six

In this particular situation, I don't particularly agree with the US gov't. But the true test of your convictions on this issue is how you'd feel if your little daughter got kidnapped and one of the kidnappers dropped his phone while kidnapping your daughter. If your daughter's life depended on Apple agreeing to hack the phone, wouldn't you be standing on Tim Cook's chest demanding he do something?

I know where you are coming from, but that thought is a non-starter. If we're at the point of being able to obtain that information from an iPhone w/o a lengthy court process then yours would be only one of hundreds of thousands of such requests a day to Apple.

Originally Posted by M_Six

I know, I know, making policy based on the emotional stress of one incident is not wise, but I can envision situations where national security or even "the right thing to do" override concerns of privacy.

You are talking about a government and multiple three-letter government agencies whose avowed intent and objective is to capture every bit of data that travels fiber optic networks worldwide. They have that capability now. Do you think a) Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 really can't be located, or b) the U.S. is currently able to track every commercial flight worldwide down to the actual second they are in flight but won't divulge that information so as not to make known that capability for strategic reasons? I'm not particularly a conspiracy theorist but personally I'll go with scenario b).

Originally Posted by M_Six

What this really comes down to is a (justified) lack of trust in our government. They've simply done the wrong thing too many times.

Bingo!

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by OptionlessM

I can't really put my finger on what you are trying to insinuate there.

You are saying they would be trying to fix a hypothetical exposed vulnerability. Makes sense.

How does that contradict them rejecting the FBI's request to make the system more vulnerable? Are you sure you read the letter?

I think its pretty self explanatory. If vulnerability is created by a third party and Apple can fix it (as done numerous times in the past), then they should be able to solve this problem too, without it meaning the end of privacy. If the FBI solved the problem themselves without Apple's help, the situation wouldn't be nearly as dire as Tim Cook's letter portrays. Apple would find a new solution to a new problem.

I appreciate the argument over government reach, but I also struggle with the concept of technology companies hiding behind rights to privacy while they create platforms and technologies that better enable people to commit serious crimes (and use the personal information from customers to their own financial benefit, while sometimes failing to protect personal information themselves). I agree with Cook in that there needs to be a legislative solution to address / clarify privacy rights to keep up with evolving technology, but know that won't happen overnight. If a court orders Apple to comply, they must comply.

[miiipilot]

I think Apple should comply on a case-by-case basis.

In this case they should.

They should send the apple engineer to whatever facility. Only the apple engineer is allowed in the room and he/she alone unlocks the phone. erases all traces of how he/she unlocked the phone and gives the unlocked phone to the FBI.

Criminals/terrorists do NOT deserve privacy or protection.

[Sidewinderpb]

Originally Posted by miiipilot

I think Apple should comply on a case-by-case basis.

In this case they should.

They should send the apple engineer to whatever facility. Only the apple engineer is allowed in the room and he/she alone unlocks the phone. erases all traces of how he/she unlocked the phone and gives the unlocked phone to the FBI.

Criminals/terrorists do NOT deserve privacy or protection.

While that would be nice, and I agree that terrorists do not deserve protection of privacy, I believe you're missing the point of precedent setting. A court decision allowing this to happen would make such requests increasingly acceptable going forward. Eventually, it may become commonplace to invade the privacy of even minor offenders - and require only ambiguous reasoning on behalf of the gov't.

[UncleWede]

The FBI is using a Writ of law precedence from 1780s!

Once someone finds out who that Apple engineer is that can hack phones, he is the most wanted man on the planet. That is part of Apple
s claim, that they would have to build a special room to hack.

NJ has 178 phones waiting on this requested precedent to force Apple to hack them too.

There is NOTHING of value on that phone 3 months after the fact.

My daughter would just have to be found some other way. The good of the many outweigh the good of the few, or the one.

[stvding]

Doesn't NSA already have the ability to monitor/crack everything according to ed snowdon?

[miiipilot]

Originally Posted by Sidewinderpb

While that would be nice, and I agree that terrorists do not deserve protection of privacy, I believe you're missing the point of precedent setting. A court decision allowing this to happen would make such requests increasingly acceptable going forward. Eventually, it may become commonplace to invade the privacy of even minor offenders - and require only ambiguous reasoning on behalf of the gov't.

I read ya! I seriously do!
What's the answer? There needs to be controls and specific stipulations. Supreme Courts/Superior Courts. Not just all willy-nilly. I think by ultimately refusing, Apple will infact help create the situation to legislate this mandate. Case by case. This was murder. This was terrorism. How would you feel if the people on 9/11 could be saved by unlocking a phone owned by one of the people responsible? I'm sorry to the families and the 3000+ killed, but cat vids are so much more important.

it is not simple, but this person is dead and responsible for murder/terrorism on US SOIL. In this case, screw his privacy. My original assessment stands. This way it doesn't give the Gov'ment the code to unlock everyone's iPhone. I'm sure the NSA already can monitor every single communication imaginable if they are monitoring it.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

I think its pretty self explanatory. If vulnerability is created by a third party and Apple can fix it (as done numerous times in the past), then they should be able to solve this problem too, without it meaning the end of privacy. If the FBI solved the problem themselves without Apple's help, the situation wouldn't be nearly as dire as Tim Cook's letter portrays. Apple would find a new solution to a new problem.

I appreciate the argument over government reach, but I also struggle with the concept of technology companies hiding behind rights to privacy while they create platforms and technologies that better enable people to commit serious crimes (and use the personal information from customers to their own financial benefit, while sometimes failing to protect personal information themselves). I agree with Cook in that there needs to be a legislative solution to address / clarify privacy rights to keep up with evolving technology, but know that won't happen overnight. If a court orders Apple to comply, they must comply.

I'm by no means a tech guru, but from my understanding by writing the code into the IOS, there will be forever a back door through security protocol. The current encryption is impossible to beat by brute force. Once that code exists, there's no fool proof way of protecting it or stopping someone from relocating it.

I'm not sure the Court can order any entity/person to do something that infringes on constitutional rights.

Originally Posted by miiipilot

I think Apple should comply on a case-by-case basis.

In this case they should.

They should send the apple engineer to whatever facility. Only the apple engineer is allowed in the room and he/she alone unlocks the phone. erases all traces of how he/she unlocked the phone and gives the unlocked phone to the FBI.

Criminals/terrorists do NOT deserve privacy or protection.

As i understand it, they can't crack the phone without writing the proposed new code into the iOS. The code currently doesn't exist and as far as i know, Apple is the only entity that could create it. But once created, there is no 100% positive way to protect it. Once out in the open. May as well go back to a flip phone because nothing on your smartphone could be guaranteed secure.

It's HIGHLY unlikely that one person at Apple as the ability to write and implement this code, on a stand alone machine, whiteout connection to the internet or any apple network. This would likely be a project requiring some time and much effort from many to complete.

Originally Posted by stvding

Doesn't NSA already have the ability to monitor/crack everything according to ed snowdon?

No, it's uncrackable. Even Apple can't get into your phone without writing new code that doesn't exist which will in effect, create a back door through iOS security.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by miiipilot

I read ya! I seriously do!
What's the answer? There needs to be controls and specific stipulations. Supreme Courts/Superior Courts. Not just all willy-nilly. I think by ultimately refusing, Apple will infact help create the situation to legislate this mandate. Case by case. This was murder. This was terrorism. How would you feel if the people on 9/11 could be saved by unlocking a phone owned by one of the people responsible? I'm sorry to the families and the 3000+ killed, but cat vids are so much more important.

it is not simple, but this person is dead and responsible for murder/terrorism on US SOIL. In this case, screw his privacy. My original assessment stands. This way it doesn't give the Gov'ment the code to unlock everyone's iPhone. I'm sure the NSA already can monitor every single communication imaginable if they are monitoring it.

No one gives a crap about the dead dudes privacy. But as far as i know, it can't be done case by case. Once created, it's a key to the security of all iPhones. Should i know how to write code and come by that piece of code by some way or another, i can effetely access everything in any iPhone (potentially any smart phone since almost all of them use the same type of encryption) that i can get my hands on.

Feel free to give up your privacy willingly. Many millions of Americans will disagree with you.

Don't you think that if it were as simple as you proposed that it would have been done already and this issue wouldn't exist?

[Sephiroth]

Don't forget that agencies other than the FBI are licking their chops to get at this software to break into hundreds of iphones already in their possession.

When the FBI says 'we are not trying to set a precedent', they are blatantly lying.

[miiipilot]

I think publicly Apple will continue say no. privately I think they will do it. I'm sure there is money to be made and contracts/favours to secure.

I don't own an Apple. but is there any way (cloud) to see what apps are loaded on that phone and then exploit those 3rd party apps?

I get notifications all the time on my GS5 about vulnerabilities on 3rd party apps?

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

I'm by no means a tech guru, but from my understanding by writing the code into the IOS, there will be forever a back door through security protocol. The current encryption is impossible to beat by brute force. Once that code exists, there's no fool proof way of protecting it or stopping someone from relocating it.

I'm not sure the Court can order any entity/person to do something that infringes on constitutional rights.

I am also not a tech guru but don't think there is any code that is 100% fool-proof / uncrackable given time and resources.

As far as court orders / constitutional rights go, banks receive court orders every day to turn over customer bank records even though doing so would ordinarily be considered a violation of privacy.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

I am also not a tech guru but don't think there is any code that is 100% fool-proof / uncrackable given time and resources.

As far as court orders / constitutional rights go, banks receive court orders every day to turn over customer bank records even though doing so would ordinarily be considered a violation of privacy.

They why does the FBI/NSA/CIA/etc... need Apple to unlock a phone for them? They have nearly unlimited resources.

The current encryption method used by apple can not be cracked. Once you get to the X attempt that will wipe your phone, you're done. If there is a back door that will allow brute force to be used, (bypassing the wipe your phone once X attempts have happened) a computer can run every combination of codes until it hits the right one.

If you're under indictment that makes sense. But the government can't issue a court order for me to get a job building home furniture if i don't want to, even if i currently build office furniture. Unless it's war time and needs are similar to WWII i suppose.

[jtodd_fl]

Currently, there is no tool to allow what the government is asking for. It is, as you would say, a genie still in the bottle. It is unprecedented for the government to mandate a company build a tool in order to get into the private information. Granted, they have always had other means, but that does not change the fact that it is unprecedented. Today, the government has the ability to subpoena your personal information under seal and the tech companies cannot tell you. Recently, they had the ability to tap your phone without warrants. I am not a huge slippery slope argument guy, but the reality is that once this tool is built, the debate turns to HOW and WHEN it can be used. It won't take long before oppressive governments use it to lawfully require that apple turn over data form dissidents - their definition of terrorists. China? Syria? Right now, they cannot because no one has a tool to do it. When stop arguing IF and start arguing WHEN, we have already lost. The odds will always favor the house.