Apple's stand against the Feds

[CDNWatchNut]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

There could of course be more than one way to skin an iPhone and by not co-operating Apple made sure that at least one has been found out in the wild and shared without it's knowledge.

The reverse of the trust issue is also true though - I lost what trust (not a lot admittedly) and respect I had for Apple when they refused to co-operate with the FBI.

Going back to what you said about the FBI having a duty to advise Apple of the method so that Americans aren't attacked using it; isn't this the same as the duty they had to protect Americans as best they could from terrorism by asking Apple to unlock the phone? I believe it is.

Agreed. I wouldn't expect the FBI to divulge to Apple the details of how they hacked the phone.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

Maybe when they've used it to access any other iPhones they want to access. Just to keep the moral high ground perhaps ;)



Apple have made a big mistake here and now come out in a worse position. If they'd done as the FBI asked they could have controlled the access and how it was used and then managed the situation in collaboration with the FBI.



Instead it's now completely out of their control and suddenly the iPhone is not a secure device anymore.

Complete and utter nonsense. Apple is 100% in control of their software and its future dealings with the FBI and DOJ.

Apple held its ground and now can tell the FBI and DOJ to go blow the next time they want them to create a backdoor. The 3rd party is supposedly Israeli so the FBI can go straight to them.

No phone or computer is completely safe. Consumer confidence won't take a hit because of this. In fact, there is no proof that the FBI or the 3rd party actually extracted information and whether the information was from the actual phone. This could very well be the FBI's attempt to disparage Apples lack of cooperation by telling the world that another (nameless) company did it for them.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

Complete and utter nonsense. Apple is 100% in control of their software and its future dealings with the FBI and DOJ.

Apple held its ground and now can tell the FBI and DOJ to go blow the next time they want them to create a backdoor. The 3rd party is supposedly Israeli so the FBI can go straight to them.

No phone or computer is completely safe. Consumer confidence won't take a hit because of this. In fact, there is no proof that the FBI or the 3rd party actually extracted information and whether the information was from the actual phone. This could very well be the FBI's attempt to disparage Apples lack of cooperation by telling the world that another (nameless) company did it for them.

Apple is not in control of it's dealings with the FBI and DOJ if those agencies now just go the Israeli's (or whoever) instead is it though?

What could have been done in partnership and with trust and co-operation with as much security and protection to the software as Apple and the FBI could agree on has now been farmed out to a third party over which Apple has no control at all.

Although, yes, it could all be a ruse and I know from this topic how some Americans apparently don't trust the Feds!

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

Complete and utter nonsense. Apple is 100% in control of their software and its future dealings with the FBI and DOJ.

Apple held its ground and now can tell the FBI and DOJ to go blow the next time they want them to create a backdoor. The 3rd party is supposedly Israeli so the FBI can go straight to them.

No phone or computer is completely safe. Consumer confidence won't take a hit because of this. In fact, there is no proof that the FBI or the 3rd party actually extracted information and whether the information was from the actual phone. This could very well be the FBI's attempt to disparage Apples lack of cooperation by telling the world that another (nameless) company did it for them.

Prince's point was that since an unnamed third party figured out the back door, Apple lost (some) control of their security measuressince this "third party" now can theoretically unlock any 5c phone out there. And that if they cooperated with the Feds from the beginning it might not have come to the FBI having to find this third party to do it; Apple might have been able to have more control of the security measures and breach. I am not technically qualified to offer an opinion on whether this is correct, but it certainly seems to make sense as plausible.

As for this COULD be a government conspiracy releasing this info... Yeah, it also COULD be that the third party that unlocked the phone were aliens that crashed in New Mexico in 1947 and are held at Area 51....

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

Apple is not in control of it's dealings with the FBI and DOJ if those agencies now just go the Israeli's (or whoever) instead is it though?

What could have been done in partnership and with trust and co-operation with as much security and protection to the software as Apple and the FBI could agree on has now been farmed out to a third party over which Apple has no control at all.

Although, yes, it could all be a ruse and I know from this topic how some Americans apparently don't trust the Feds!

Your idea of what or who is in control is the complete antithesis of control.

A slave in not in control. Being forced to do something you don't want to do in not being in control. Telling the FBI to go find someone else to do what they want is being in control.

Apple chose not to comply with the court order - Apple is in control.
The FBI supposedly went to a 3rd party to extact the phone's data - Apple is in control
FBI withdraws its demand to force Apple to extract data - Apple is in control
Apple figures out what vulnerabilities allowed a 3rd party to extract data and fixes security vulnerability so it cannot be used again - Apple is in control

So where in your world do you see that Apple lost control? I mean seriously, please share with us

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

Your idea of what or who is in control is the complete antithesis of control.

A slave in not in control. Being forced to do something you don't want to do in not being in control. Telling the FBI to go find someone else to do what they want is being in control.

Apple chose not to comply with the court order - Apple is in control.
The FBI supposedly went to a 3rd party to extact the phone's data - Apple is in control
FBI withdraws its demand to force Apple to extract data - Apple is in control
Apple figures out what vulnerabilities allowed a 3rd party to extract data and fixes security vulnerability so it cannot be used again - Apple is in control

So where in your world do you see that Apple lost control? I mean seriously, please share with us

I said -

"What could have been done in partnership and with trust and co-operation with as much security and protection to the software as Apple and the FBI could agree on..."

This doesn't sound like a master-slave relationship to me. Apple could have had this by helping the FBI but when they refused to help any more the FBI had to get the court order. Apple chose to become a slave as you put it. No-one made them. Apple thought they could beat The Man rather than work with Him but this time The Man has beaten them.

Now the FBI and a third party have access to devices at will, without the knowledge, help, oversight or control of Apple.

Apple may fix the vulnerabilities next week, next month, sometime but the perceptions held by a lot of people and advertised by Apple about how secure the iPhone is are now shattered so Apple have also lost control of the image and reputation of their device.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

I said -

"What could have been done in partnership and with trust and co-operation with as much security and protection to the software as Apple and the FBI could agree on..."

This doesn't sound like a master-slave relationship to me. Apple could have had this by helping the FBI but when they refused to help any more the FBI had to get the court order. Apple chose to become a slave as you put it. No-one made them. Apple thought they could beat The Man rather than work with Him but this time The Man has beaten them.

Now the FBI and a third party have access to devices at will, without the knowledge, help, oversight or control of Apple.

Apple may fix the vulnerabilities next week, next month, sometime but the perceptions held by a lot of people and advertised by Apple about how secure the iPhone is are now shattered so Apple have also lost control of the image and reputation of their device.

With all due respect, you really have no idea what you're talking about nor do you or have you ever understood the much larger implications of creating a backdoor. That kind of shortsightedness is exactly why Apple chose to draw a line and will continue to do so.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

With all due respect, you really have no idea what you're talking about nor do you or have you ever understood the much larger implications of creating a backdoor. That kind of shortsightedness is exactly why Apple chose to draw a line and will continue to do so.

Why? I will admit to being a complete Dorklehead about cell-phone security. I don't know if Prince is an expert on the subject I only know I am not, not even close. I can barely unlock my own phone when I know the code... But.. Explain something to me.

Prince's notion (if I may be so bold as to Paraphrase) is that now, a third-party (company X) has the back door entry to unlock the IPhone; I think it was a 5. And that theoretically, they can publish, sell, give away or use this method to whatever they desire, including supplying it to the FBI, but it is out of Apple's control. And MAYBE, if Apple had cooperated with the Feds from the start, there could have been some measure of security or control put in place to alleviate this, that there would be no company X with this back door capability.

Why is that so far fetched? It certainly seems plausible to me.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

With all due respect, you really have no idea what you're talking about nor do you or have you ever understood the much larger implications of creating a backdoor. That kind of shortsightedness is exactly why Apple chose to draw a line and will continue to do so.

That was your line last time. Your MO seems to be if someone doesn't agree with you and aggressive strongly worded responses by yourself don't then bring them round or make them go away then you just go for the "you're an idiot" response ignoring any points they've made, even those you've specifically asked for.

I get it. I will guess not many people disagree or argue with you because of this behaviour and you're unused to your routine not working. Not many people will continue to disagree or argue (especially without getting offensive or losing their temper) with someone being assertive and a bit aggressive in an otherwise polite environment such as this or irl amongst decent polite people.

I also get that you like Apple and were clearly on their side so it's not nice to see their approach backfire like this. Like I said, this time Apple played and lost but in the grand scheme of things in the last few years I'll concede Apple are well up in their play book. You can't win 'em all.

We seem to have reached the end of this round of discussion so this will be my last post for now as we're clearly not going to find out anything more here but I'm happy to debate this in a continuing positiver manner (time permitting) should any more facts come to light down the line

[77T]

Lots of moving parts due to the FBI's disclosure that they unlocked the phone.

Apple does get to keep their moral victory. Saves face. Not sure we deserve to expect 100% privacy of data when a search warrant is issued though. That's a constitutional question that's been politicized in many arguments.

FBI gets access to encrypted data that could take months to decrypt. And if a really good key was used to encrypt, could be much longer.

I'm guessing Apple is already patching iOS 9.3.1 for the loophole. It's not like they didn't know they had some bugs after ACE Deceptor morphed to iOS.

And it's just possible an insider lent a hand outside proper channels to unlock the phone. BSometimes our own intel folks still keep their best secrets secret.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subtona]

lots of BS from both sides.

Govt is known to have been secretly collecting web traffic and phone data for years, many stories have been written and films made.

Apple early release iphones were reported by numerous sources to be opening up their microphones to random contacts on the phone, (not pocket dialing) part of preinstalled listening software.



both Apple and the FBI (along with google and all the major phone carriers and so many others) are guilty of egregious violations of collection of private, often sensitive data without prior consent or permission or law, and are now pretending to be in an opposing fight for the rights of the people?



ps remember the carrierIQ software that was monitoring your keystrokes (passwords) in your cellphone, it was not removable or disable-able ….. please, this battle is a sham.

http://allthingsd.com/20111201/apple...iq-with-ios-5/


the truth would be so refreshing.

[The Joker]

Maybe they used 1234, it's the most common pin/passcode, apparently.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Why? I will admit to being a complete Dorklehead about cell-phone security. I don't know if Prince is an expert on the subject I only know I am not, not even close. I can barely unlock my own phone when I know the code... But.. Explain something to me.

Prince's notion (if I may be so bold as to Paraphrase) is that now, a third-party (company X) has the back door entry to unlock the IPhone; I think it was a 5. And that theoretically, they can publish, sell, give away or use this method to whatever they desire, including supplying it to the FBI, but it is out of Apple's control. And MAYBE, if Apple had cooperated with the Feds from the start, there could have been some measure of security or control put in place to alleviate this, that there would be no company X with this back door capability.

Why is that so far fetched? It certainly seems plausible to me.

Every single day, there are thousands of people trying to hack into iphones for one reason or another. This 3rd party is no different but that isn't the issue. Apple's point of contention has been to NOT be the one who provides the back door. They haven't so they have nothing to apologize for and contrary to the only person saying it here, they are 100% in control.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

That was your line last time. Your MO seems to be if someone doesn't agree with you and aggressive strongly worded responses by yourself don't then bring them round or make them go away then you just go for the "you're an idiot" response ignoring any points they've made, even those you've specifically asked for.

I get it. I will guess not many people disagree or argue with you because of this behaviour and you're unused to your routine not working. Not many people will continue to disagree or argue (especially without getting offensive or losing their temper) with someone being assertive and a bit aggressive in an otherwise polite environment such as this or irl amongst decent polite people.

I also get that you like Apple and were clearly on their side so it's not nice to see their approach backfire like this. Like I said, this time Apple played and lost but in the grand scheme of things in the last few years I'll concede Apple are well up in their play book. You can't win 'em all.

We seem to have reached the end of this round of discussion so this will be my last post for now as we're clearly not going to find out anything more here but I'm happy to debate this in a continuing positiver manner (time permitting) should any more facts come to light down the line

I don't have an issue with a varying opinion. I have issue with your argument. You say Apple lost control and I say you're wrong. They stood behind their decision, which is supported by every single software manufacturer, everyone who believes in civil liberties, and everyone that believes in their right to privacy. Now Apple has the precedent on their side, which is when the FBI comes back with another court order, Apple can simply turn them away and tell them to find another vendor who specializes in breaking security-not making it. Thats all Apple wanted in the first place

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

Every single day, there are thousands of people trying to hack into iphones for one reason or another. This 3rd party is no different but that isn't the issue. Apple's point of contention has been to NOT be the one who provides the back door. They haven't so they have nothing to apologize for and contrary to the only person saying it here, they are 100% in control.

We disagree on Apple's stance, "Apple has nothing to apologize for..." But have been over that 100 times on this thread so we will agree to disagree on that but your statement: "Apple is 100% in control" ? How? When this "Company X" has a back door to bypass the security code-lock on one of their phones, (I think it was a 5)... how can you say Apple is 100% in control? This very second, Company X could be publishing the procedure on the Internet, and people all over the world could be using it for malicious intent. I do not believe that is happening or will happen, but it's possible. Granted, Apple could come out with a fix, or some kind of download, or someway to stop Company X's procedure but as it stands (with all the information we know anyway) at this very minute, there is a procedure that exists to bypass their security. So, once again, how can Apple be in 100% control?

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by CDNWatchNut

Agreed. I wouldn't expect the FBI to divulge to Apple the details of how they hacked the phone.

The FBI is not a foreign intelligence service and is required to notify entities found to be at risk. If they have information that can be used to prevent a crime (theft, murder, fraud, etc.) they are required intervene to prevent the crime. If it is believed that this hack could lead to numerous crimes against Americans, the FBI would be obligated to tell Apple what the vulnerability is.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

We disagree on Apple's stance, "Apple has nothing to apologize for..." But have been over that 100 times on this thread so we will agree to disagree on that but your statement: "Apple is 100% in control" ? How? When this "Company X" has a back door to bypass the security code-lock on one of their phones, (I think it was a 5)... how can you say Apple is 100% in control? This very second, Company X could be publishing the procedure on the Internet, and people all over the world could be using it for malicious intent. I do not believe that is happening or will happen, but it's possible. Granted, Apple could come out with a fix, or some kind of download, or someway to stop Company X's procedure but as it stands (with all the information we know anyway) at this very minute, there is a procedure that exists to bypass their security. So, once again, how can Apple be in 100% control?

It looks like Company X is Israel. A country with the ability to invest millions into a hack is a completely different animal than a company trying to turn a dime. Israel doesn't hack iPhones for the FBI, Israel hacks phones for its own security. No amount of cooperation between Apple and the FBI would have impacted the Israeli decision to find and exploit this vulnerability. We don't know how long Israel has been compromising iPhone security, but I would speculate they had this iPhone 5C capability long before this California event occurred.

The fact that Israel was willing to give up the capability to an organization (FBI) that will blab it to the media is the curious part. They must want people to know they are listening.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

We disagree on Apple's stance, "Apple has nothing to apologize for..." But have been over that 100 times on this thread so we will agree to disagree on that but your statement: "Apple is 100% in control" ? How? When this "Company X" has a back door to bypass the security code-lock on one of their phones, (I think it was a 5)... how can you say Apple is 100% in control? This very second, Company X could be publishing the procedure on the Internet, and people all over the world could be using it for malicious intent. I do not believe that is happening or will happen, but it's possible. Granted, Apple could come out with a fix, or some kind of download, or someway to stop Company X's procedure but as it stands (with all the information we know anyway) at this very minute, there is a procedure that exists to bypass their security. So, once again, how can Apple be in 100% control?

Apple issued a statement on February 16th. You should read that statement because their position is crystal clear: "We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand"

Apple wanted no part in creating or providing a back door, period... and they didn't. So, I'm curious how you and TheBluePrince could, in your wildest imagination, think that they are not in control but would have been had they provided it for the FBI?

You two are stuck on who done it??? Did Apple say it was impossible and they were the only one's who could do it? Did Apple ever claim it was impenetrable? No. They simply didn't want to be the ones that did it against their own customers.

So lets make this as simple as can be. Which of these two statements puts you more in control over the situation?
1) You are ordered to give me a key to your home and you refuse so I find someone else to make a key for me.
2) You are ordered to give me a key to your home so you give me a key.

Once you two can admit finally admit to yourselves that this actually had nothing to do with the San Bernardino attacks and more to do with unlimited access to privacy, the sooner you will be able to have more meaningful points to make about this. Instead, you two are bringing up these obscure nonsensical points that neither Apple nor the FBI, or anyone else following this issue care about.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

It looks like Company X is Israel. A country with the ability to invest millions into a hack is a completely different animal than a company trying to turn a dime. Israel doesn't hack iPhones for the FBI, Israel hacks phones for its own security. No amount of cooperation between Apple and the FBI would have impacted the Israeli decision to find and exploit this vulnerability. We don't know how long Israel has been compromising iPhone security, but I would speculate they had this iPhone 5C capability long before this California event occurred.

The fact that Israel was willing to give up the capability to an organization (FBI) that will blab it to the media is the curious part. They must want people to know they are listening.

No argument on any of this, you are probably right. The only thing I say is that since Company X has this hack, Apple is NOT in "100% control" of any of the phones that are vulnerable, as some have stated. Oh, I am sure they will come up with a fix or download or block or something (probably already have) but if there is an available hack, then Apple can not guarantee the targeted phones are 100% safe.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

Apple issued a statement on February 16th. You should read that statement because their position is crystal clear: "We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand"

Apple wanted no part in creating or providing a back door, period... and they didn't. So, I'm curious how you and TheBluePrince could, in your wildest imagination, think that they are not in control but would have been had they provided it for the FBI?

You two are stuck on who done it??? Did Apple say it was impossible and they were the only one's who could do it? Did Apple ever claim it was impenetrable? No. They simply didn't want to be the ones that did it against their own customers.

So lets make this as simple as can be. Which of these two statements puts you more in control over the situation?
1) You are ordered to give me a key to your home and you refuse so I find someone else to make a key for me.
2) You are ordered to give me a key to your home so you give me a key.

Once you two can admit finally admit to yourselves that this actually had nothing to do with the San Bernardino attacks and more to do with unlimited access to privacy, the sooner you will be able to have more meaningful points to make about this. Instead, you two are bringing up these obscure nonsensical points that neither Apple nor the FBI, or anyone else following this issue care about.

Yeah... Uh... Thanks for making it so simple for me.... Stuck on who done it? Do me a favor, if you are going to paraphrase my posts actually READ them. When did I bring up the point of WHO company X was? I don't know or care.... And if you find my points so un-interesting, here's an idea, don't argue them. But it's good you can speak for Apple, the FBI, and quote: "Anyone else" Wow...

But thanks again for making it so simple even I could understand...

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

No argument on any of this, you are probably right. The only thing I say is that since Company X has this hack, Apple is NOT in "100% control" of any of the phones that are vulnerable, as some have stated. Oh, I am sure they will come up with a fix or download or block or something (probably already have) but if there is an available hack, then Apple can not guarantee the targeted phones are 100% safe.

No electronic device is 100% safe, especially a device with a built in transmitter that can be controlled remotely through onboard software. All the technology companies know this to be true. They choose not to publicize it so that people can be comfortable becoming addicted to the device.

Think about the amount of your life that resides on your smart phone. People do banking and other sensitive transactions on their phone. Years ago you would never have carried that much sensitive information on your person, everywhere you went. But now, it's "safely" stored on your phone. The tech companies want you to feel safe living your life through their device. And the Government wants the capability to access your device (and life) remotely, at will.

If the Israeli's can hack your iPhone, the Russians, Chinese, and others probably can too. There are far more sinister actors in this play than the FBI.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

No electronic device is 100% safe, especially a device with a built in transmitter that can be controlled remotely through onboard software. All the technology companies know this to be true. They choose not to publicize it so that people can be comfortable becoming addicted to the device.

Think about the amount of your life that resides on your smart phone. People do banking and other sensitive transactions on their phone. Years ago you would never have carried that much sensitive information on your person, everywhere you went. But now, it's "safely" stored on your phone. The tech companies want you to feel safe living your life through their device. And the Government wants the capability to access your device (and life) remotely, at will.

If the Israeli's can hack your iPhone, the Russians, Chinese, and others probably can too. There are far more sinister actors in this play than the FBI.

Can't argue with this, you make complete sense. This particular incident I feel had a lot of extreme circumstances, but I am sure not Naieve enough to believe if someone wants to get in my phone, nothing is 100% secure.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Yeah... Uh... Thanks for making it so simple for me.... Stuck on who done it? Do me a favor, if you are going to paraphrase my posts actually READ them. When did I bring up the point of WHO company X was? I don't know or care.... And if you find my points so un-interesting, here's an idea, don't argue them. But it's good you can speak for Apple, the FBI, and quote: "Anyone else" Wow...

But thanks again for making it so simple even I could understand...

My response is not a personal attack on you; its countering your point(s).

And yes, I read you post to which I responded so I'll try it again but this time point by point:

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

We disagree on Apple's stance, "Apple has nothing to apologize for..."

Apple issued a statement on February 16th. You should read that statement because their position is crystal clear: "We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand"

Apple wanted no part in creating or providing a back door, period... and they didn't. So, I'm curious how you and TheBluePrince could, in your wildest imagination, think that they are not in control but would have been had they provided it for the FBI?

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

"Apple is 100% in control" ? How? When this "Company X" has a back door to bypass the security code-lock on one of their phones, (I think it was a 5)... how can you say Apple is 100% in control?

Apple wanted no part in creating or providing a back door, period... and they didn't. So, I'm curious how you and TheBluePrince could, in your wildest imagination, think that they are not in control but would have been had they provided it for the FBI? If someone else came up with it, good for them .I'm sure the people at Apple can sleep at night knowing they didn't create the monster

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

This very second, Company X could be publishing the procedure on the Internet, and people all over the world could be using it for malicious intent.

Did Apple say it was impossible and they were the only one's who could do it? Did Apple ever claim it was impenetrable? No. They simply didn't want to be the ones that did it against their own customers.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

at this very minute, there is a procedure that exists to bypass their security. So, once again, how can Apple be in 100% control?

Apple is in control of what they make. They make a fantastic, secure software that isn't impenetrable. So someone finally hacked it...Whoopie... There are security vulnerabilities found in Microsoft and Apple software on a regular basis. They create a software fix and life goes on. You make it sound like someone discovered the fountain of youth.

Now if Apple created the backdoor and it leaked, not if but when... Apple would not be in control. Not even in the slightest because they would be guilty of creating it.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Can't argue with this, you make complete sense. This particular incident I feel had a lot of extreme circumstances, but I am sure not Naieve enough to believe if someone wants to get in my phone, nothing is 100% secure.

I get the extreme nature of the incident. But the risk presented by requiring Apple to create a vulnerability goes beyond this one case. If the devices themselves can't be protected, what do we think the chances are that Apple could protect a universal hack that could unlock any iPhone?

Not only would the FBI have it, but every Podunk law enforcement agency would have it, as well as the Chinese, the North Koreans, and the mafia. Requiring a company to create conditions that harm its customers is inherently dangerous and is a fundamental problem with the FBI approach to Apple.

[CDNWatchNut]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

The FBI is not a foreign intelligence service and is required to notify entities found to be at risk. If they have information that can be used to prevent a crime (theft, murder, fraud, etc.) they are required intervene to prevent the crime. If it is believed that this hack could lead to numerous crimes against Americans, the FBI would be obligated to tell Apple what the vulnerability is.




It looks like Company X is Israel. A country with the ability to invest millions into a hack is a completely different animal than a company trying to turn a dime. Israel doesn't hack iPhones for the FBI, Israel hacks phones for its own security. No amount of cooperation between Apple and the FBI would have impacted the Israeli decision to find and exploit this vulnerability. We don't know how long Israel has been compromising iPhone security, but I would speculate they had this iPhone 5C capability long before this California event occurred.

The fact that Israel was willing to give up the capability to an organization (FBI) that will blab it to the media is the curious part. They must want people to know they are listening.

It seems absurd to me that Apple would not have been held to the same standard, to assist the FBI in preventing crimes against Americans, but if the FBI is required by law to disclose how they hacked the phone, then OK. Let's see if that's how it plays out...I don't know if the law is that clear as this seems like it might be a precedent setting issue.

[WhatTheDeuce]

Seems like the definition of control is the point of contention. My take is once someone (person or corporation) is forced to do something against their will, they cease to have control. In this case, Apple refusing to adhere to government force, they maintained control over the situation.

The act of breaking into their software still doesn't mean they lose control as they can simply fix the issue.

Just my $0.02.


Sent from half way through the Kessel Run using Tapatalk

[TheVTCGuy]

Apple issued a statement on February 16th. You should read that statement because their position is crystal clear: "We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand"


Yeah... We have been over this a million times in this thread. I feel the slaughter of innocent humans and following the procedures of our government constitutes Apple SHOULD have complied with this order, you feel it is opening up a Pandora's box of invasion of privacy and they were right to refuse (forgive me for paraphrasing, but something along those lines). We'll leave this point out as we could continue to argue it for another million posts.



Apple wanted no part in creating or providing a back door, period... and they didn't. So, I'm curious how you and TheBluePrince could, in your wildest imagination, think that they are not in control but would have been had they provided it for the FBI?

Answer: It's a theory, I grant you, and I am not even sure I should be speaking on behalf of Prince, but here is what I gained out of his posts. My reasoning is that IF Apple had supplied it to the FBI, then company X MIGHT not have come up with it; therefore the hack would be in Apple and Apple only. I grant, I know nothing about hacking and company X (or 100 other organizations) could have come up with or already had the hack, but the possibility that it was not out there already does exist, and that company X created it after Apple refused. If that is true (it is possible) then Apple would have precluded another entity creating the hack. A long shot? Maybe, but a possibility none the less.

Apple wanted no part in creating or providing a back door, period... and they didn't. So, I'm curious how you and TheBluePrince could, in your wildest imagination, think that they are not in control but would have been had they provided it for the FBI? If someone else came up with it, good for them .I'm sure the people at Apple can sleep at night knowing they didn't create the monster

Asking the same question again aren't you?

Did Apple say it was impossible and they were the only one's who could do it? Did Apple ever claim it was impenetrable? No. They simply didn't want to be the ones that did it against their own customers.

I never said they claimed they were the only ones that could make it.... Not once in any of my posts did I even bring up the possibility of ONLY Apple being capable of creating the hack. You said you read my posts right?


Apple is in control of what they make. They make a fantastic, secure software that isn't impenetrable. So someone finally hacked it...Whoopie... There are security vulnerabilities found in Microsoft and Apple software on a regular basis. They create a software fix and life goes on. You make it sound like someone discovered the fountain of youth.

I do huh? The fountain of youth huh? Please, explain, how exactly do I "make it sound like someone discovered the fountain of youth?" I stated I have no knowledge of hacks, I don't know or care, if this was some monumental accomplishment, or some teenager doing it on his tablet while sitting on the toilet. The reason I never commented on the magnitude of this hack was because it has absolutely no bearing on the situation.

Now if Apple created the backdoor and it leaked, not if but when... Apple would not be in control. Not even in the slightest because they would be guilty of creating it.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely true, if Apple created it and the hack was leaked (glad you have so much confidence in the security measures of the company you so vigorously defend) then the hack would be in the hands of some third party organization.... Kind of like it is right now with company X

Have your opinions on Apple (they do make great products by the way) and defend their refusal, but do hold off from explaining my thoughts and position; you're not even close.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

I get the extreme nature of the incident. But the risk presented by requiring Apple to create a vulnerability goes beyond this one case. If the devices themselves can't be protected, what do we think the chances are that Apple could protect a universal hack that could unlock any iPhone?

Not only would the FBI have it, but every Podunk law enforcement agency would have it, as well as the Chinese, the North Koreans, and the mafia. Requiring a company to create conditions that harm its customers is inherently dangerous and is a fundamental problem with the FBI approach to Apple.

Boy let's just hope that the Chinese and everyone else doesn't get it from company X!

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Apple issued a statement on February 16th. You should read that statement because their position is crystal clear: "We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand"


Yeah... We have been over this a million times in this thread. I feel the slaughter of innocent humans and following the procedures of our government constitutes Apple SHOULD have complied with this order, you feel it is opening up a Pandora's box of invasion of privacy and they were right to refuse (forgive me for paraphrasing, but something along those lines). We'll leave this point out as we could continue to argue it for another million posts.



Apple wanted no part in creating or providing a back door, period... and they didn't. So, I'm curious how you and TheBluePrince could, in your wildest imagination, think that they are not in control but would have been had they provided it for the FBI?

Answer: It's a theory, I grant you, and I am not even sure I should be speaking on behalf of Prince, but here is what I gained out of his posts. My reasoning is that IF Apple had supplied it to the FBI, then company X MIGHT not have come up with it; therefore the hack would be in Apple and Apple only. I grant, I know nothing about hacking and company X (or 100 other organizations) could have come up with or already had the hack, but the possibility that it was not out there already does exist, and that company X created it after Apple refused. If that is true (it is possible) then Apple would have precluded another entity creating the hack. A long shot? Maybe, but a possibility none the less.

Apple wanted no part in creating or providing a back door, period... and they didn't. So, I'm curious how you and TheBluePrince could, in your wildest imagination, think that they are not in control but would have been had they provided it for the FBI? If someone else came up with it, good for them .I'm sure the people at Apple can sleep at night knowing they didn't create the monster

Asking the same question again aren't you?

Did Apple say it was impossible and they were the only one's who could do it? Did Apple ever claim it was impenetrable? No. They simply didn't want to be the ones that did it against their own customers.

I never said they claimed they were the only ones that could make it.... Not once in any of my posts did I even bring up the possibility of ONLY Apple being capable of creating the hack. You said you read my posts right?


Apple is in control of what they make. They make a fantastic, secure software that isn't impenetrable. So someone finally hacked it...Whoopie... There are security vulnerabilities found in Microsoft and Apple software on a regular basis. They create a software fix and life goes on. You make it sound like someone discovered the fountain of youth.

I do huh? The fountain of youth huh? Please, explain, how exactly do I "make it sound like someone discovered the fountain of youth?" I stated I have no knowledge of hacks, I don't know or care, if this was some monumental accomplishment, or some teenager doing it on his tablet while sitting on the toilet. The reason I never commented on the magnitude of this hack was because it has absolutely no bearing on the situation.

Now if Apple created the backdoor and it leaked, not if but when... Apple would not be in control. Not even in the slightest because they would be guilty of creating it.

You realize all I did was sectioned up your post you accused me of not reading and pasted my previous answers, right?

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

You realize all I did was sectioned up your post you accused me of not reading and pasted my previous answers, right?

Yeah, and your answers are as wrong as they were the first time.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Yeah, and your answers are as wrong as they were the first time.

Wrong, really? That's an interesting perspective coming from someone who has admitted on several occasions not to know much about the topic.

We are all lucky that people like you are not in charge of our privacy and civli liberties. You actually think it made sense for the FBI to go this far over a work issued phone that belonged to a person who destroyed his personal phone before the attacks.

Common sense would clearly side with those saying that the important stuff was on the phone he destroyed.

Any no, you didn't know that my post was entirely pasted in order to help you along. That was clear based on your answers.