Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Apple refuses to hack terrorist's phone

Maria D

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 24, 2003
Messages
1,837
The FBI has asked Apple to create technology that would unlock the San Bernardino terrorist's phone. A U.S. District court judge has ordered Apple to comply. Apple CEO Tim Cook has published a letter at apple.com explaining why they will not. http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

Basically, creating this technology opens the door to unlocking any iPhone. Apparently this was possible before 2014, when a physical component could plug into an iPhone for data extraction by law enforcement with a search warrant. But with the new operating software, phone data can only be accessed by a person having the passcode. After 10 unsuccessful attempts, the phone erases its data.

Should the privacy of our phone data be protected? (In my opinion, yes.)

I have to admit that my first thought was that the FBI should try all of Farook's ten dead fingers on the home button in case he set up "Touch ID."
 

smitcompton

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 11, 2006
Messages
2,605
Hi,

Last year I would have agreed with you but upon reflection I think I have decided that all information, bank records, emails, your home ect. has always been available to law enforcement with search warrants or court orders. Phone taps are also used for criminal detection. Why then is an iPhone the sacred cow? I don't see it. If a judge has issued the order then, to me, it falls into the law enforcement rules.

Annette
 

telephone89

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
3,798
IF you have a warrant, then I don't see why not. If it was willy nilly, then obviously I could see the issue.

If there is a warrant involved, isn't it obstructing justice if you won't comply?
 

chrono

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
37,365
telephone89|1455724728|3992056 said:
IF you have a warrant, then I don't see why not. If it was willy nilly, then obviously I could see the issue.
If there is a warrant involved, isn't it obstructing justice if you won't comply?
I was wondering this myself. If it is court ordered, aren't we (and any/all corporations) obligated to comply?
 

Maria D

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 24, 2003
Messages
1,837
Chrono|1455724906|3992059 said:
telephone89|1455724728|3992056 said:
IF you have a warrant, then I don't see why not. If it was willy nilly, then obviously I could see the issue.
If there is a warrant involved, isn't it obstructing justice if you won't comply?
I was wondering this myself. If it is court ordered, aren't we (and any/all corporations) obligated to comply?
Apple's encryption technology protects personal data on their products in such a way that even Apple can't read it. In order to comply with this order, Apple has to create new technology that negates security measures that they have spent years perfecting. If this technology were to get into the wrong hands, the data of tens of millions of US citizens alone would be at risk.

So it isn't as if Apple has the key and is refusing to turn it over, it's that Apple is being asked to invent the key and refusing. But yeah, it is a court order so (to me) this is very interesting...what will happen?

I'm actually conflicted about this, but leaning towards privacy should be protected. A lot of times when I'm trying resolve an internal conflict I try to think of an analogy but can't really think of one here. All I could come up with is this: If technology could be invented to read our minds, should it? It could be used to solve a lot of criminal investigations. (I often joke that Google has replaced my mind and memory - don't have to remember anything anymore, just google it.)
 

telephone89

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
3,798
Maria D|1455726585|3992073 said:
Chrono|1455724906|3992059 said:
telephone89|1455724728|3992056 said:
IF you have a warrant, then I don't see why not. If it was willy nilly, then obviously I could see the issue.
If there is a warrant involved, isn't it obstructing justice if you won't comply?
I was wondering this myself. If it is court ordered, aren't we (and any/all corporations) obligated to comply?
Apple's encryption technology protects personal data on their products in such a way that even Apple can't read it. In order to comply with this order, Apple has to create new technology that negates security measures that they have spent years perfecting. If this technology were to get into the wrong hands, the data of tens of millions of US citizens alone would be at risk.

So it isn't as if Apple has the key and is refusing to turn it over, it's that Apple is being asked to invent the key and refusing. But yeah, it is a court order so (to me) this is very interesting...what will happen?

I'm actually conflicted about this, but leaning towards privacy should be protected. A lot of times when I'm trying resolve an internal conflict I try to think of an analogy but can't really think of one here. All I could come up with is this: If technology could be invented to read our minds, should it? It could be used to solve a lot of criminal investigations. (I often joke that Google has replaced my mind and memory - don't have to remember anything anymore, just google it.)
Have you seen Minority Report? That's exactly what it does. They read your mind, and if they 'see' you committing a crime, they stop you before you can. Maybe less mind reading, more future telling? Because I'm sure people *think* about committing crimes all the time, actually following through is another thing.

I'm quite sure the iPhone isn't unhackable. I'm sure the govt could hire some random hacker off the internet to do it, that's just not as acceptable haha. Apple just doesn't want to do it. They've spent a while trying to change their reputation and obviously don't want to risk that. It's selfish, but 100% understandable. I don't totally buy their altruistic motives, especially considering the chatter with their tax issues, child labor, etc. They are a business, and like any other business, they want to make money.
 

mary poppins

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
2,561
telephone89|1455727048|3992079 said:
Maria D|1455726585|3992073 said:
Chrono|1455724906|3992059 said:
telephone89|1455724728|3992056 said:
IF you have a warrant, then I don't see why not. If it was willy nilly, then obviously I could see the issue.
If there is a warrant involved, isn't it obstructing justice if you won't comply?
I was wondering this myself. If it is court ordered, aren't we (and any/all corporations) obligated to comply?
Apple's encryption technology protects personal data on their products in such a way that even Apple can't read it. In order to comply with this order, Apple has to create new technology that negates security measures that they have spent years perfecting. If this technology were to get into the wrong hands, the data of tens of millions of US citizens alone would be at risk.

So it isn't as if Apple has the key and is refusing to turn it over, it's that Apple is being asked to invent the key and refusing. But yeah, it is a court order so (to me) this is very interesting...what will happen?

I'm actually conflicted about this, but leaning towards privacy should be protected. A lot of times when I'm trying resolve an internal conflict I try to think of an analogy but can't really think of one here. All I could come up with is this: If technology could be invented to read our minds, should it? It could be used to solve a lot of criminal investigations. (I often joke that Google has replaced my mind and memory - don't have to remember anything anymore, just google it.)
Have you seen Minority Report? That's exactly what it does. They read your mind, and if they 'see' you committing a crime, they stop you before you can. Maybe less mind reading, more future telling? Because I'm sure people *think* about committing crimes all the time, actually following through is another thing.

I'm quite sure the iPhone isn't unhackable. I'm sure the govt could hire some random hacker off the internet to do it, that's just not as acceptable haha. Apple just doesn't want to do it. They've spent a while trying to change their reputation and obviously don't want to risk that. It's selfish, but 100% understandable. I don't totally buy their altruistic motives, especially considering the chatter with their tax issues, child labor, etc. They are a business, and like any other business, they want to make money.
Your username makes me feel like you are particularly qualified to discuss this topic. :razz:
 

alexah

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Messages
1,216
This article does a decent job of highlighting issues:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/02/16/heres-why-fbi-forcing-apple-break-into-iphone-big-deal/80481766/

Snippet:
What do digital rights experts have to say? There are two things that make this order very dangerous, Opsahl said. The first is the question it raises about who can make this type of demand. If the U.S. government can force Apple to do this, why can't the Chinese or Russian governments?

The second is that while the government is requesting a program to allow it to break into this one, specific iPhone, once the program is created it will essentially be a master key. It would be possible for the government to take this key, modify it and use it on other phones. That risks a lot, that the government will have this power and it will not be misused, he said.
 

Matata

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
6,841
I'm not a technie therefore realize my statements will reveal my lack of knowledge BUT, if iphone software can erase data after 10 unsuccessful tries to hack it, shouldn't Apple be able to rig the software the govt wants them to create with a fail safe that self destructs it after this one-time use? Surely Apple, which can be argued is bigger than the US govt, can create terms for this endeavor to appease both parties.

As far as preserving the sanctity of private info, I think it's as effective as the war on drugs.
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
33,925
I think the privacy of our phone data should be protected. I don't think the privacy of a terrorist/criminal should be protected however. They give away the right to privacy when they decide to murder innocent people.

Is there a way Apple can open the data of the terrorist's phone without giving the master key so to speak to everyone's phone? In other words open it for law enforcement and then take back that "master key". I am not tech savvy so forgive me if what I am asking is impossible and stupid but I am on the side of Apple doing what they can to help in this case. Terrorists have no rights IMO and if Apple can develop what they need to in order to get the necessary info from this one phone and keep that new technology private and top secret then I am for it.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,078
missy|1455794088|3992491 said:
I think the privacy of our phone data should be protected. I don't think the privacy of a terrorist/criminal should be protected however. They give away the right to privacy when they decide to murder innocent people.

Is there a way Apple can open the data of the terrorist's phone without giving the master key so to speak to everyone's phone? In other words open it for law enforcement and then take back that "master key". I am not tech savvy so forgive me if what I am asking is impossible and stupid but I am on the side of Apple doing what they can to help in this case. Terrorists have no rights IMO and if Apple can develop what they need to in order to get the necessary info from this one phone and keep that new technology private and top secret then I am for it.
Missy, Apple hasn't developed the backdoor because they deem it too risky even for THEM to have it. What is new about this case is that instead of withholding something they already have, they are being ordered to provide it. And no, once it is developed and out, there can be no going back. Can you un-invent the A-bomb? Same thing.

Honestly, someone in the government (NSA?) can hack that phone. Hubs just told me that a federal judge revealed that Homeland Security already has this capability. (will check this factoid, but gotta run here in a sec) If it's such a big deal that all our info be public, then the feds should take the PR hit and do it. It won't look good for them, but then the NSA seemed to weather exploiting the Heartbleed bug OK.
 

ame

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
10,718
Let's pretend for a moment they can't hack this one phone. They absolutely f'ing can. But they are choosing not to, acting like they can't, because they are wanting Apple to invent the back door for them. Why? Because if they act like they can't and Apple caves in to that demand, they have full access to the world's phones, and can get in at will. They don't need your permission, they don't even really need a court order or warrant. Because they never bothered in the past with getting either. So back to the reality that they can hack that phone. I totally agree with Apple on not doing so. I'd agree with Google doing the same. Samsung. Whoever. The issue here is the master key being granted and the total open access to violate the privacy in the "interest of national security." And that's a bogus reason.

If they invent the master key backdoor, they are getting into ALL of the phones. Not just the one. There's no way to open just one phone. If they "invent" the master key, that opens the door to EVERYONE'S phones, everyone's lives, and everyone's privacy is violated, and basically there's no way to prevent the government--any government--from exploiting it later. And really, if you followed anything to do with Edward Snowden, you know that the government already has full access to everything you're doing and the full access they have is illegal as all get out. They've already proven they cannot be trusted not to violate the rights of every citizen just to "have" the information on our comings and goings. Information they don't need. They don't and didn't worry about getting warrants. They just do it at will and worry about what happens later, like "woopsie we should've but we didn't. But it was for national security so get over it." No, no it wasn't. It was you just collecting data because you said you are the government and you've proven you can do whatever you want, and you strongarmed companies to do it. You've just met a company that's not willing to let you strongarm them because they see the bigger picture. And that bigger picture is that Apple figured out a way to encrypt your data on your device to try to keep their prying eyes out of things that is not a "national security risk." Not just of "terrorists" phones, but of everyday citizens phones. The government doesn't need to see your dick pics. (If you don't watch things like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver--you should. Esp the one where he went to Russia to meet with Snowden. That one was one of the best ones to date. As was the CitizenFour documentary.)

So their denial is something I actually applaud. It's not a matter of hypotheticals as to what they might find on that one phone. It's a matter of hypotheticals of what will happen if Apple goes ahead and complies with that order and everyone's rights are violated because the master key was created and the government can't help itself. Because I 1000% guarantee you, they will not use it that one time on that one phone.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,078
ame|1455812439|3992577 said:
Let's pretend for a moment they can't hack this one phone. They absolutely f'ing can. But they are choosing not to, acting like they can't, because they are wanting Apple to invent the back door for them. Why? Because if they act like they can't and Apple caves in to that demand, they have full access to the world's phones, and can get in at will. They don't need your permission, they don't even really need a court order or warrant. Because they never bothered in the past with getting either. So back to the reality that they can hack that phone. I totally agree with Apple on not doing so. I'd agree with Google doing the same. Samsung. Whoever. The issue here is the master key being granted and the total open access to violate the privacy in the "interest of national security." And that's a bogus reason.

If they invent the master key backdoor, they are getting into ALL of the phones. Not just the one. There's no way to open just one phone. If they "invent" the master key, that opens the door to EVERYONE'S phones, everyone's lives, and everyone's privacy is violated, and basically there's no way to prevent the government--any government--from exploiting it later. And really, if you followed anything to do with Edward Snowden, you know that the government already has full access to everything you're doing and the full access they have is illegal as all get out. They've already proven they cannot be trusted not to violate the rights of every citizen just to "have" the information on our comings and goings. Information they don't need. They don't and didn't worry about getting warrants. They just do it at will and worry about what happens later, like "woopsie we should've but we didn't. But it was for national security so get over it." No, no it wasn't. It was you just collecting data because you said you are the government and you've proven you can do whatever you want, and you strongarmed companies to do it. You've just met a company that's not willing to let you strongarm them because they see the bigger picture. And that bigger picture is that Apple figured out a way to encrypt your data on your device to try to keep their prying eyes out of things that is not a "national security risk." Not just of "terrorists" phones, but of everyday citizens phones. The government doesn't need to see your dick pics. (If you don't watch things like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver--you should. Esp the one where he went to Russia to meet with Snowden. That one was one of the best ones to date. As was the CitizenFour documentary.)

So their denial is something I actually applaud. It's not a matter of hypotheticals as to what they might find on that one phone. It's a matter of hypotheticals of what will happen if Apple goes ahead and complies with that order and everyone's rights are violated because the master key was created and the government can't help itself. Because I 1000% guarantee you, they will not use it that one time on that one phone.
This.

AND read "National Security and Double Government" by Glennon, for a good explanation of why things never change in this regard, and just keep marching forward into more invasion of privacy, regardless of Republican or Democrat, and for explanations of the real limits on presidential power in this area, limits that virtually no candidate is fully away of prior to office. Let's just say that presidents are very very rarely calling the shots on national security. I quit being quite so pissed at Obama's seeming failures to change things, after I saw how the national security sausage is actually made.
 

msop04

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
9,776
ame|1455812439|3992577 said:
Let's pretend for a moment they can't hack this one phone. They absolutely f'ing can. But they are choosing not to, acting like they can't, because they are wanting Apple to invent the back door for them. Why? Because if they act like they can't and Apple caves in to that demand, they have full access to the world's phones, and can get in at will. They don't need your permission, they don't even really need a court order or warrant. Because they never bothered in the past with getting either. So back to the reality that they can hack that phone. I totally agree with Apple on not doing so. I'd agree with Google doing the same. Samsung. Whoever. The issue here is the master key being granted and the total open access to violate the privacy in the "interest of national security." And that's a bogus reason.

If they invent the master key backdoor, they are getting into ALL of the phones. Not just the one. There's no way to open just one phone. If they "invent" the master key, that opens the door to EVERYONE'S phones, everyone's lives, and everyone's privacy is violated, and basically there's no way to prevent the government--any government--from exploiting it later. And really, if you followed anything to do with Edward Snowden, you know that the government already has full access to everything you're doing and the full access they have is illegal as all get out. They've already proven they cannot be trusted not to violate the rights of every citizen just to "have" the information on our comings and goings. Information they don't need. They don't and didn't worry about getting warrants. They just do it at will and worry about what happens later, like "woopsie we should've but we didn't. But it was for national security so get over it." No, no it wasn't. It was you just collecting data because you said you are the government and you've proven you can do whatever you want, and you strongarmed companies to do it. You've just met a company that's not willing to let you strongarm them because they see the bigger picture. And that bigger picture is that Apple figured out a way to encrypt your data on your device to try to keep their prying eyes out of things that is not a "national security risk." Not just of "terrorists" phones, but of everyday citizens phones. The government doesn't need to see your dick pics. (If you don't watch things like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver--you should. Esp the one where he went to Russia to meet with Snowden. That one was one of the best ones to date. As was the CitizenFour documentary.)

So their denial is something I actually applaud. It's not a matter of hypotheticals as to what they might find on that one phone. It's a matter of hypotheticals of what will happen if Apple goes ahead and complies with that order and everyone's rights are violated because the master key was created and the government can't help itself. Because I 1000% guarantee you, they will not use it that one time on that one phone.
You're 100% correct, ame!
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
28,173
telephone89|1455727048|3992079 said:
Maria D|1455726585|3992073 said:
Chrono|1455724906|3992059 said:
telephone89|1455724728|3992056 said:
IF you have a warrant, then I don't see why not. If it was willy nilly, then obviously I could see the issue.
If there is a warrant involved, isn't it obstructing justice if you won't comply?
I was wondering this myself. If it is court ordered, aren't we (and any/all corporations) obligated to comply?
Apple's encryption technology protects personal data on their products in such a way that even Apple can't read it. In order to comply with this order, Apple has to create new technology that negates security measures that they have spent years perfecting. If this technology were to get into the wrong hands, the data of tens of millions of US citizens alone would be at risk.

So it isn't as if Apple has the key and is refusing to turn it over, it's that Apple is being asked to invent the key and refusing. But yeah, it is a court order so (to me) this is very interesting...what will happen?

I'm actually conflicted about this, but leaning towards privacy should be protected. A lot of times when I'm trying resolve an internal conflict I try to think of an analogy but can't really think of one here. All I could come up with is this: If technology could be invented to read our minds, should it? It could be used to solve a lot of criminal investigations. (I often joke that Google has replaced my mind and memory - don't have to remember anything anymore, just google it.)
Have you seen Minority Report? That's exactly what it does. They read your mind, and if they 'see' you committing a crime, they stop you before you can. Maybe less mind reading, more future telling? Because I'm sure people *think* about committing crimes all the time, actually following through is another thing.

I'm quite sure the iPhone isn't unhackable. I'm sure the govt could hire some random hacker off the internet to do it, that's just not as acceptable haha. Apple just doesn't want to do it. They've spent a while trying to change their reputation and obviously don't want to risk that. It's selfish, but 100% understandable. I don't totally buy their altruistic motives, especially considering the chatter with their tax issues, child labor, etc. They are a business, and like any other business, they want to make money.
Yes, apple is a business and all businesses exist to make money.
But ... a zillion customers need a phone that's as secure and private as possible because they put EVERYTHING on their smartphone these days.

You might argue it's less about money, and more about perception of iPhone security, which translates into sales, which translates into money, but also translates into consumers getting what makes their lives better. Win Win.
Money is not always evil.

I totally get that the back door the FBI is demanding is for prosecuting criminals.
But overall, I support apple's stand on this.

Yes, it will harm the ability of government to bring a few to justice.
But since identity thieves WILL eventually gain access to this back door the security of millions outranks what the FBI wants.
 

ame

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
10,718
kenny|1455816731|3992598 said:
telephone89|1455727048|3992079 said:
Maria D|1455726585|3992073 said:
Chrono|1455724906|3992059 said:
telephone89|1455724728|3992056 said:
IF you have a warrant, then I don't see why not. If it was willy nilly, then obviously I could see the issue.
If there is a warrant involved, isn't it obstructing justice if you won't comply?
I was wondering this myself. If it is court ordered, aren't we (and any/all corporations) obligated to comply?
Apple's encryption technology protects personal data on their products in such a way that even Apple can't read it. In order to comply with this order, Apple has to create new technology that negates security measures that they have spent years perfecting. If this technology were to get into the wrong hands, the data of tens of millions of US citizens alone would be at risk.

So it isn't as if Apple has the key and is refusing to turn it over, it's that Apple is being asked to invent the key and refusing. But yeah, it is a court order so (to me) this is very interesting...what will happen?

I'm actually conflicted about this, but leaning towards privacy should be protected. A lot of times when I'm trying resolve an internal conflict I try to think of an analogy but can't really think of one here. All I could come up with is this: If technology could be invented to read our minds, should it? It could be used to solve a lot of criminal investigations. (I often joke that Google has replaced my mind and memory - don't have to remember anything anymore, just google it.)
Have you seen Minority Report? That's exactly what it does. They read your mind, and if they 'see' you committing a crime, they stop you before you can. Maybe less mind reading, more future telling? Because I'm sure people *think* about committing crimes all the time, actually following through is another thing.

I'm quite sure the iPhone isn't unhackable. I'm sure the govt could hire some random hacker off the internet to do it, that's just not as acceptable haha. Apple just doesn't want to do it. They've spent a while trying to change their reputation and obviously don't want to risk that. It's selfish, but 100% understandable. I don't totally buy their altruistic motives, especially considering the chatter with their tax issues, child labor, etc. They are a business, and like any other business, they want to make money.
Yes, apple is a business and all businesses exist to make money.
But ... a zillion customers want a phone that's as secure and private as possible.

You might argue it's less about money, and more about perception of iPhone security, which translates into sales, which translates into money, but also translates into consumers getting what makes their lives better. Win Win.

I totally get that the back door the FBI is demanding is for prosecuting criminals.
But overall, I support apple's stand on this.

Yes, it will harm the ability of government to bring a few to justice.
But since identity thieves WILL eventually gain access to this back door the security of millions outranks what the FBI wants.
The FBI can get access to literally anything if they really want it. The carriers gave them carte blanche, basically, to anything and everything you do on your internet connection and cellphone service. (Don't believe me? Go watch Citizen Four, like I said, and basically anything else about what Snowden leaked, it's not only covered in that, but widely covered in many other docs and news shows. It's fact.) They just had get into it in a way that was "too much work" and they want the master key, which is why it's becoming a "thing." Like, why should we not have the easy button? And since they know that the majority of Americans can be so easily manipulated by fear and scare tactics, why not spin this into another matter of national security, like "OH MY GOD THEY WERE LIKELY PLANNING SOMETHING BIGGER!!! But Apple won't let us in to prove it! It's all Apple's fault if more people die!" And chaos ensues. It's the angle that works.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
28,173
ame|1455817599|3992602 said:
The FBI can get access to literally anything if they really want it. The carriers gave them carte blanche, basically, to anything and everything you do on your internet connection and cellphone service. (Don't believe me? Go watch Citizen Four, like I said, and basically anything else about what Snowden leaked, it's not only covered in that, but widely covered in many other docs and news shows. It's fact.) They just had get into it in a way that was "too much work" and they want the master key, which is why it's becoming a "thing." Like, why should we not have the easy button? And since they know that the majority of Americans can be so easily manipulated by fear and scare tactics, why not spin this into another matter of national security, like "OH MY GOD THEY WERE LIKELY PLANNING SOMETHING BIGGER!!! But Apple won't let us in to prove it! It's all Apple's fault if more people die!" And chaos ensues. It's the angle that works.
Fear is the most powerful human emotion, and the easiest one to use to manipulate people.

Politicians and religions (ever heard of hell?) use it all the time.
So did Hitler.

We are stupid.
We are doomed. :knockout:
 

Loves Vintage

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
4,563
Was there a way to open iphones prior to this version? To Annette's point above, why is the iphone the sacred cow? Sorry, but I still don't buy it. Oh, and Apple seems pretty good at protecting secrets. They don't trust themselves with the technology. Laughable!
 

Karl_K

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
9,463
Loves Vintage|1455820417|3992616 said:
Was there a way to open iphones prior to this version? To Annette's point above, why is the iphone the sacred cow? Sorry, but I still don't buy it. Oh, and Apple seems pretty good at protecting secrets. They don't trust themselves with the technology. Laughable!
Yes, and it was badly abused by customs, tsa and some police departments.
Every person they came in contact with they took a phone dump and the courts let them.
That was just in the US. People were killed by other governments and terrorists for what was on their phones.
There are similar encryption levels available on android and it will be enabled by default the next version unless Apple gets smacked down to hard.
Apple did this to get a jump on android and having control of the hardware created a pretty nice system.
If they give in it will lead to continued abuse by governments.
 

Loves Vintage

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
4,563
Karl_K|1455825868|3992660 said:
Loves Vintage|1455820417|3992616 said:
Was there a way to open iphones prior to this version? To Annette's point above, why is the iphone the sacred cow? Sorry, but I still don't buy it. Oh, and Apple seems pretty good at protecting secrets. They don't trust themselves with the technology. Laughable!
Yes, and it was badly abused by customs, tsa and some police departments.
Every person they came in contact with they took a phone dump and the courts let them.
That was just in the US. People were killed by other governments and terrorists for what was on their phones.
There are similar encryption levels available on android and it will be enabled by default the next version unless Apple gets smacked down to hard.
Apple did this to get a jump on android and having control of the hardware created a pretty nice system.
If they give in it will lead to continued abuse by governments.
Laptops too?
 

Karl_K

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
9,463
Loves Vintage|1455825951|3992661 said:
Karl_K|1455825868|3992660 said:
Loves Vintage|1455820417|3992616 said:
Was there a way to open iphones prior to this version? To Annette's point above, why is the iphone the sacred cow? Sorry, but I still don't buy it. Oh, and Apple seems pretty good at protecting secrets. They don't trust themselves with the technology. Laughable!
Yes, and it was badly abused by customs, tsa and some police departments.
Every person they came in contact with they took a phone dump and the courts let them.
That was just in the US. People were killed by other governments and terrorists for what was on their phones.
There are similar encryption levels available on android and it will be enabled by default the next version unless Apple gets smacked down to hard.
Apple did this to get a jump on android and having control of the hardware created a pretty nice system.
If they give in it will lead to continued abuse by governments.
Laptops too?
yep
external drives and thumb drives also.
 

MollyMalone

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
3,083
Woohoo :dance: GWU Law School Professor Orin Kerr
http://www.law.gwu.edu/orin-s-kerr
has just posted the first of two articles on this topic that he is writing for The Volokh Conspiracy, a blog of primarily libertarian and conservative law professors. Although I don't always agree with him, he is my favorite Conspirator because of his thoughtful, fair-minded, and measured approach; clear writing style; keen intellect. And because of his expertise on the Fourth Amendment and legal issues concerning digital evidence, his two articles should be a great help to anyone who wants to know more about what all is, and is not, involved here
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/02/18/preliminary-thoughts-on-the-apple-iphone-order-in-the-san-bernardino-case-part-1/

P.S. The quality of the comments seen in response to VC posts has fallen off since VC abandoned its own web site & migrated to the Opinion section of The Washington Post. Still, it could be worth your while to skim through the Comments; there can be good questions & kernels of informed comments amid the kind of stupid yahoo from readers found on any newspape site.

ETA: Link to an article posted yesterday on The Verge that provides a very brief but decent overview you might like to read before hopping over to Prof. Kerr's piece:
http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/17/11037838/us-congress-awa-encryption-debate-apple-fbi-battle
 

House Cat

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
4,004
I believe with all of this publicity, any incriminating information on this particular iphone is obsolete. Just sayin.....
 

AprilBaby

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
10,616
I stand with Apple. Protect my privacy. And use the dead guys fingers on his home button to unlock his phone.
 

amc80

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 18, 2010
Messages
5,765
AprilBaby said:
I stand with Apple. Protect my privacy. And use the dead guys fingers on his home button to unlock his phone.
That brings up an interesting point. Why can't they use his fingerprints to unlock? I'm sure they are on file...maybe he didn't have fingerprint unlock activated?
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,078
MollyMalone|1455833433|3992710 said:
Woohoo :dance: GWU Law School Professor Orin Kerr
http://www.law.gwu.edu/orin-s-kerr
has just posted the first of two articles on this topic that he is writing for The Volokh Conspiracy, a blog of primarily libertarian and conservative law professors. Although I don't always agree with him, he is my favorite Conspirator because of his thoughtful, fair-minded, and measured approach; clear writing style; keen intellect. And because of his expertise on the Fourth Amendment and legal issues concerning digital evidence, his two articles should be a great help to anyone who wants to know more about what all is, and is not, involved here
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/02/18/preliminary-thoughts-on-the-apple-iphone-order-in-the-san-bernardino-case-part-1/

P.S. The quality of the comments seen in response to VC posts has fallen off since VC abandoned its own web site & migrated to the Opinion section of The Washington Post. Still, it could be worth your while to skim through the Comments; there can be good questions & kernels of informed comments amid the kind of stupid yahoo from readers found on any newspape site.

ETA: Link to an article posted yesterday on The Verge that provides a very brief but decent overview you might like to read before hopping over to Prof. Kerr's piece:
http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/17/11037838/us-congress-awa-encryption-debate-apple-fbi-battle
Again, thank you! Quality posts - I adore them. I haven't been to The Verge site yet, but will read there soon.

Very interesting stuff. I know how I FEEL about the issue, but that doesn't really matter when discussing the legalities.
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
33,925
Thank you all for posting such great information. I have changed my position on this and agree with those of you who say Apple shouldn't be made to hack the terrorist's phone. See views can be changed and I see the reality of the situation much more clearly now. Thank you!
 

CJ2008

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
4,750
missy|1455885000|3992853 said:
Thank you all for posting such great information. I have changed my position on this and agree with those of you who say Apple shouldn't be made to hack the terrorist's phone. See views can be changed and I see the reality of the situation much more clearly now. Thank you!
+1

(I was originally leaning more towards questioning "but why would't Apple help if it's a terrorist? Now I understand.)
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Three-stone engagement ring upgrade
    Three-stone engagement ring upgrade
    Vintage OEC Bracelet
    Vintage OEC Bracelet
    June’s Birthstone Trinity
    June’s Birthstone Trinity

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top