Apple's stand against the Feds

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

I don't know what to tell you except that post 9/11, there is a huge amount of cooperation between all the US agencies. If the NSA was able to do this, why would the FBI bother with the court order at this point?

I'm not an expert by any means but if Apples encryption is based off the users passcode and you only get 10 attempts to get it right before the phone erases, it doesn't matter that the NSA can decrypt it if they don't have the passcode to begin with. Also, ios9 has the option to use a 6 digit passcode vs 4 so that even makes it more difficult.

BTW, the article that talks about NSA and iphone is from 2013. Apple introduced ios8 with its encryption in 2014.

The foreign intelligence services cooperate with each other much more readily than with law enforcement. LE just isn't built to protect information very well. There are too many holes in the system.

The real question is why the FBI did this so publically. They could have used an NSL and secretly sought the data.

If I were to speculate, I would say the cheapest and easiest way to defeat IOS encryption is to convince users that it is unsafe. Once it is widely publicized that the FBI can break into your iPhone at will, and perhaps remotely, customers will be less likely to protect information this way. That impacts Apple sales directly, and supports LE indirectly.

I would speculate that NSA used the NSL to obtain whatever they need to hack the phone. This whole thread is predicated on the notion that Apple can give the FBI something that defeats the encryption. The NSA could have requested that capability through an NSL and have an in house capability to defeat the system.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

First, the NSA can already hack any phone.

I very much doubt this. An open source phone, without backdoors software or hardware, with standard encryption is not hackable by anyone on Earth just because of the lack of computing power.

In theory it's so easy, if you can try for a few million years.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Thunderball57

Apple techs should unlock the phone for the FBI with an ironclad agreement not to be forced to disclose how they they did. Simple (?)

The moment they do they can file for Chapter 11. Once they create a firmware made to circumvent the encryption they are screwed: you can sign any non-disclosure agreement you want but that firmware will eventually leak out and then Apple as a company will simply implode.

[greggsiam]

Are you willing to give up your rights because you have "nothing to hide"? I'm not, nor should anyone else. I don't let the police search my car or walk through my house just because I have nothing to hide.

I find it funny that people siding with the government because of the chance of potential terrorism, fail to see that the same encryption protects the people from governments (not just your government, but ALL nations), hackers, bank fraud, etc.... One hole in encryption means the fall of all encryption standards and policies.

As for the guy in question, good police work didn't just die the moment technology came around. If he knows other potential terrorists, they can check phone records, money transactions, and everything else they do. If they want to check his phone records, it's not hard to get all phone calls from the provider. Even if they can crack his phone, a list of contacts means nothing without more work.

[Syed117]

Despite owning some apple products, I do not consider myself an apple fanboy. Probably the opposite because those "geniuses" infuriate me.

That being said, I'm with Tim cook on this issue.

Those in positions of power always want more and somewhere along the line, that power get abused. Giving the government unrestricted access is not the answer.

Like many New Yonkers, I was here on 9/11 and I saw the towers burning with my own eyes. The world changed, and not for the better. Despite that, we aren't afraid to step outside because of what might happen.

The Blue Prince, you really come across like someone who is living their life in a constant state of fear. Terrorism is a real concern in the world we live in, but you're a lot more likely to die from countless other things.

[Star Ferry]

Originally Posted by greggsiam

Are you willing to give up your rights because you have "nothing to hide"? I'm not, nor should anyone else. I don't let the police search my car or walk through my house just because I have nothing to hide.

I find it funny that people siding with the government because of the chance of potential terrorism, fail to see that the same encryption protects the people from governments (not just your government, but ALL nations), hackers, bank fraud, etc.... One hole in encryption means the fall of all encryption standards and policies.

As for the guy in question, good police work didn't just die the moment technology came around. If he knows other potential terrorists, they can check phone records, money transactions, and everything else they do. If they want to check his phone records, it's not hard to get all phone calls from the provider. Even if they can crack his phone, a list of contacts means nothing without more work.

x2

[daveathall]

.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by Syed117

Despite owning some apple products, I do not consider myself an apple fanboy. Probably the opposite because those "geniuses" infuriate me.

That being said, I'm with Tim cook on this issue.

Those in positions of power always want more and somewhere along the line, that power get abused. Giving the government unrestricted access is not the answer.

Like many New Yonkers, I was here on 9/11 and I saw the towers burning with my own eyes. The world changed, and not for the better. Despite that, we aren't afraid to step outside because of what might happen.

The Blue Prince, you really come across like someone who is living their life in a constant state of fear. Terrorism is a real concern in the world we live in, but you're a lot more likely to die from countless other things.

Well said.

Since 2001 about 3400 Americans (including 2997 on 9/11) have been killed by terrorism.

Contrast that with 10,000+ per year killed by alcohol impaired drivers. How about we chip people to test for alcohol level and interlock their car so that they can't drive impaired? Seem over the top? No more than breaking into my phone IMO.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by Syed117

Despite owning some apple products, I do not consider myself an apple fanboy. Probably the opposite because those "geniuses" infuriate me.

That being said, I'm with Tim cook on this issue.

Those in positions of power always want more and somewhere along the line, that power get abused. Giving the government unrestricted access is not the answer.

Like many New Yonkers, I was here on 9/11 and I saw the towers burning with my own eyes. The world changed, and not for the better. Despite that, we aren't afraid to step outside because of what might happen.

The Blue Prince, you really come across like someone who is living their life in a constant state of fear. Terrorism is a real concern in the world we live in, but you're a lot more likely to die from countless other things.

I can see how I may come across like that but it's honestly not the case. The UK has been a target for mass terrorism for over 40 years now not just the last 15. To be honest people here were much more worried and scared of the IRA than they are now of ISIL/AQ etc. The IRA had a far greater ability to make successful attacks and indeed did so regularly and so for anyone living here in the last 40 years the threat of terrorism has been constant, it's just something we're used to.

[dalip]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Apple can't even ship a new Macbook to me in downtown LA within 10 days
It has to come from China and that takes 12 days, you can't even buy a fairly standard model in their shops...
Their customer care needs big improvements.....
I had to find out myself, if I got a re-firb it would be delivered next day no one at Apple could suggest that to me.
The guys at Apple hardly know their head from their posterior

OK rant off~

PS> Anyone turns this thread into political and they will be banned forever, just so we are all clear.

Thank you for your co-operation and have a good day (as they say at Apple).

Some of you have clearly failed to heed the advice of Steve above ....You'll know very soon what the outcome is.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by dalip

Some of you have clearly failed to heed the advice of Steve above ....You'll know very soon what the outcome is.

With respect I think we've all tried not to make this overtly political and have remained respectful throughout and on topic without resorting to a slanging match or abuse. This has probably been one of the best topics in Open Chat of late and highly engaging

[dalip]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

With respect I think we've all tried not to make this overtly political and have remained respectful throughout and on topic without resorting to a slanging match or abuse. This has probably been one of the best topics in Open Chat of late and highly engaging

The thread is being kept open for now due to most managing to do exactly that..

However - I quote an example: "Your government has been kicking down doors and persecuting innocent people at least since the American revolution..."

I wouldn't place yourself as spokesperson here...and I wouldn't argue the point with moderation in the open forum.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by dalip

The thread is being kept open for now due to most managing to do exactly that..

However - I quote an example: "Your government has been kicking down doors and persecuting innocent people at least since the American revolution..."

I wouldn't place yourself as spokesperson here...and I wouldn't argue the point with moderation in the open forum.

Point taken, I respect the moderators decisions

[WRwatchATL]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

With respect I think we've all tried not to make this overtly political and have remained respectful throughout and on topic without resorting to a slanging match or abuse. This has probably been one of the best topics in Open Chat of late and highly engaging

This was a thoroughly enjoyable thread to read, and I'm glad to see that everyone has kept a respectful tone throughout.

This is a very tricky situation, and I think that the FBI has every right to pursue all possible avenues. However, I respect the stand that Apple have taken, and the repercussions it may have on worldwide privacy security.

That being said...how long before some hacker figures out how to do this anyway...?

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by dalip

The thread is being kept open for now due to most managing to do exactly that..

However - I quote an example: "Your government has been kicking down doors and persecuting innocent people at least since the American revolution..."

I wouldn't place yourself as spokesperson here...and I wouldn't argue the point with moderation in the open forum.

Apologies to anyone I may have offended. It was not my intention to be political. But, I should have chosen my posts more carefully.

[rr-nyc]

Problem solved...

[Tools]

One point that folks are missing is that this isn't "somebodies phone", or "my phone", it's a phone owned by the SB government. A work phone provided to the now deceased attacker by his employer.

The owner of the phone is asking/letting law enforcement find out what their phone was being used for and has given the FBI permission to use whatever means necessary.

Apple is refusing to allow or help the owner of the phone gain access and, perhaps, obstructing the investigation of a known capital crime. They are also refusing to act upon a lawfully executed Court Order (warrant), provided for in the Constitution. Don't you think that this is far different than accessing someones personal phone just because?

[Knappo 1307]

Originally Posted by Tools

One point that folks are missing is that this isn't "somebodies phone", or "my phone", it's a phone owned by the SB government. A work phone provided to the now deceased attacker by his employer.

The owner of the phone is asking/letting law enforcement find out what their phone was being used for and has given the FBI permission to use whatever means necessary.

Apple is refusing to allow or help the owner of the phone gain access and, perhaps, obstructing the investigation of a known capital crime. They are also refusing to act upon a lawfully executed Court Order (warrant), provided for in the Constitution. Don't you think that this is far different than accessing someones personal phone just because?

I don't think people are missing the point. I think the point by many is, if you let this happen, then where is the line drawn in the future? I for one am all for getting the information from the phone, but I think there has to be some guidelines set for future dealings. Maybe a disclaimer signed when you agree to a contract with any phone provider, fully stating what can and will happen in these situations.

[Thatguy]

Originally Posted by Tools

One point that folks are missing is that this isn't "somebodies phone", or "my phone", it's a phone owned by the SB government. A work phone provided to the now deceased attacker by his employer.

The owner of the phone is asking/letting law enforcement find out what their phone was being used for and has given the FBI permission to use whatever means necessary.

Apple is refusing to allow or help the owner of the phone gain access and, perhaps, obstructing the investigation of a known capital crime. They are also refusing to act upon a lawfully executed Court Order (warrant), provided for in the Constitution. Don't you think that this is far different than accessing someones personal phone just because?

Yes it is different in that instance. I am not an IT expert but from what I have read it seems Apple has unlocked phones in the past when it was a previous operating system.
The issue now is that they would have to develop a back door for the new system which could put all phones at risk to hacking from anyone. Seems to me it could have consequences beyond this one phone.
If it only involved this one phone this wouldn't be an issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by Tools

One point that folks are missing is that this isn't "somebodies phone", or "my phone", it's a phone owned by the SB government. A work phone provided to the now deceased attacker by his employer.

The owner of the phone is asking/letting law enforcement find out what their phone was being used for and has given the FBI permission to use whatever means necessary.

Apple is refusing to allow or help the owner of the phone gain access and, perhaps, obstructing the investigation of a known capital crime. They are also refusing to act upon a lawfully executed Court Order (warrant), provided for in the Constitution. Don't you think that this is far different than accessing someones personal phone just because?

Apple has helped law enforcement in the past to gain access and/or extract data from older iphones but that process is no possible with the most recent ios encryption

In this particular case, Apple has provided the FBI, among other things, access to this phone's iCloud account. If you are familiar with the iPhone and iCloud, the FBI now has all the phone's stored contacts, calendar, email, to-do's, notes, and everything that is stored on the iCloud drive. Couple that with call records and text messages from Verizon, that only leaves iMessage messages unaccounted for. While a thorough investigation is necessary, does anyone honestly believe that that the FBI is putting this much effort and resources into it for this one event? The more likely scenario is they (the FBI, DOJ, et al) want the precedent established for use and inevitably, abuse.

I understand that San Bernadino is the owner and has given consent but it doesn't really matter who owns the phone and who's giving consent. If I forgot my passcode on my encrypted iPhone, I'm SOL. That's the way it should be and I see no reason why anyone or anything should have an exception.

[Etschell]

apple may stand up to the fbi publicly. make no mistake about it they cooperate behind closed doors.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Tools

Apple is refusing to allow or help the owner of the phone gain access

Owner of the phone doesn't mean owner of the data.

[Lordofrolex]

i saw this, pretty interesting.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

With respect I think we've all tried not to make this overtly political and have remained respectful throughout and on topic without resorting to a slanging match or abuse. This has probably been one of the best topics in Open Chat of late and highly engaging

I STRONGLY disagree with what BluePrince's opinions have been, however, he is entitled to them and I Do agree with him that while coming oh-so-close to the line of this thread, over all people have conducted themselves in a respectful manner and it's a pleasant surprise we have not taken it over the edge. Prince (and other people, including myself) obviously have strong feelings about this, but I am glad we have been able present our opinions with respect to each other. Thanks to Prince and everyone else.

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

Apologies to anyone I may have offended. It was not my intention to be political. But, I should have chosen my posts more carefully.

Same to you as I said Abdullah, you are entitled to your opinions but have presented them respectfully and I as one reader respect it.

Originally Posted by fmc000

Owner of the phone doesn't mean owner of the data.

OK, now on to a point. I too, use a phone that is not officially my property; it belongs to my employer. In my contract, it stated they have the right to all the information within the phone, it was part of my employment. I don't know, but would imagine the same thing applied to this guy. If so, Apple has no right whatsoever to withold the government (or employer) getting that information. And as for the rule itself, if my company really wants to spend the time and energy to read all my sexting, hell, I don't really care; I hope they enjoy them. The reason the stipulation exists is exactly for this kind of situation. Let the government have the info, IT COULD SAVE INNOCENT LIVES. If they don't, and GOD please no, another attack occurred that could have been haulted by info in this phone, then that is blood on Apples hands. In my mind, no two ways about it.

Lastly, here is my opinion. People of our government (speaking in the US of course) are elected for our protection, services, etc. WE, elected them and there are checks and balances in place to impede if not outright stop abuse of power. I am not naive enough to to say it never happens, but it is there. For example, if the Government shows a judge probable cause, he/she can order your home phone bugged and hidden microphones etc. The point is this does not happen at the whim of some dictator, but a judge or panel usually elected by the populous to make this decision. Sometimes, it takes several people or even panels to allow this kind of decision to be made. And personally, as one with nothing to hide, if the government wants to listen in to my 1-900 calls in the middle of the night and living through my fantasies with Beatrice from Buligeria I hope the get a kick out of it. Apple has been ordered by our courts to comply, within our system, just do it. If any of them (or you) are convinced this will lead to a facials or anarchy take over of our country I say ..... Hogwash, there are too many checks and balances in place. That's just my HO.

[TheBluePrince]

It's OK guys, problem solved, John "crackers" Mcafee will crack it -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35611763

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

If so, Apple has no right whatsoever to withhold the government (or employer) getting that information

This was taken directly from the Apple website:

On devices running iOS 8 and later versions, your personal data is placed under the protection of your passcode. For all devices running iOS 8 and later versions, Apple will not perform iOS data extractions in response to government search warrants because the files to be extracted are protected by an encryption key that is tied to the user’s passcode, which Apple does not possess.

So, simply, Apple cannot comply. In fact, actually, FBI never asked for the user's data: they asked for a custom firmware with a backdoor, something that has the potential to unlock every iPhone in the world. Quoting Mr. Cook:

Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.

The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.

I am not an Apple user, I never owned one of their devices and I don't see myself buying one in the foreseeable future, my phone is not encrypted and, as you, I couldn't care less if anyone is interested in my phone calls and textes.

But in this case I'm on their side 100%. It would be a precedent, a disruptive one.

I suggest anyone to have a read on Mr. Cook customer letter.

Of course, all of this IMHO (and please forgive my English mistakes, I'm an Italian native speaker who took his latest English lesson about thirty years ago :-) ).

[Ferdelious]

http://nymag.com/following/2016/02/a...back-door.html

This article states that because the phone is 5C it doesn't have the Secure Enclave and software file could be created to work on only a single device. If it's true would this change any of the opinions about Apple current stance.

Correction: Apple would still have to create a backdoor that could be used again.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Ferdelious

http://nymag.com/following/2016/02/a...back-door.html

This article states that because the phone is 5C it doesn't have the Secure Enclave and software file could be created to work on only a single device. If it's true would this change any of the opinions about Apple current stance.

I don't know, Mr. Cook talks about the iOS version, not about the iPhone hardware. That said, I suspect that he knows what he's talking about.

[123Blueface]

Maybe I am over simplifying it but why can't there be a compromise that Apple does whatever is necessary to provide the information on THIS phone ONLY, specially given the circumstances of how it was used.

If a method has to be created to accomplish it, do so but not for distribution to the government authorities or anyone outside of Apple. Just to be used for these instances that clearly involve national/public safety.

I really think Apple has cooperated in the past but perhaps the Snowden situation has created a new awareness/concern.

[123Blueface]

DOJ just filed a motion to compel.