Apple's stand against the Feds

[TheVTCGuy]

Interesting comic in my local paper, I have no idea if it is "Pro" or "Con" Apple.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Interesting comic in my local paper, I have no idea if it is "Pro" or "Con" Apple.

I don't think its either. It's just insinuating that the DOJ/FBI will beat Apple.

Interesting article in Bloomberg today from a source at Apple that says part of Apples defense will be code is a 1st Amendment issue. This just might go to the Supreme Court.

On a side note, its a blessing that the FBI chose one of the most valuable tech companies in the world to slap this order on. They can afford to fight this until it's last appeal and hopefully prevail.

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Interesting comic in my local paper, I have no idea if it is "Pro" or "Con" Apple.

It's pro Apple if you are in favor of privacy.

[77T]

Tonight's Tim Cook interview with David Muir on ABC Network news is enlightening. The full interview is on their website.

I do detect a scent of revenge in FBI going public. That's after I learned that Apple had been advising FBI behind the scene. And that FBI made grave error in advising the terrorist's employer to switch the Apple ID and p/w in the days following the attacks.

As all of us who have done RDM know - you can never do an iCloud backup after such a screw-up. And the best way to have downloaded everything on that iPhone was to do a back-up and restore on a new device.

I have a personal belief that the actual phones used to plan and execute the attacks were the "go-phone" types that were also destroyed/ditched. The business phone this terrorist had would also have been destroyed had he put any of his cohorts names/numbers on it. Further, he would have avoided doing that because of fear his own employer might have stumbled upon the messaging/calls/contacts in routine scans of backups.

I am still undecided on the many sides to this situation. IMHO - We are still working in shadowy info and maybe even mis-info.

[HL65]

Saw the interview too and am still 100% in agreement with Apple's stance and this simply reinforced that.

[seand442]

Originally Posted by 77T

I have a personal belief that the actual phones used to plan and execute the attacks were the "go-phone" types that were also destroyed/ditched. The business phone this terrorist had would also have been destroyed had he put any of his cohorts names/numbers on it. Further, he would have avoided doing that because of fear his own employer might have stumbled upon the messaging/calls/contacts in routine scans of backups.

I am still undecided on the many sides to this situation. IMHO - We are still working in shadowy info and maybe even mis-info.

I agree 110%. While I would like to believe that terrorists are stupid, that just isn't the case. I'm on the fence as to what I think the correct decision is but I would venture a guess this will end up at the Supreme Court. And if the phone is unlocked, I would guess they won't find anything they didn't know already.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by seand442

I agree 110%. While I would like to believe that terrorists are stupid, that just isn't the case. I'm on the fence as to what I think the correct decision is but I would venture a guess this will end up at the Supreme Court. And if the phone is unlocked, I would guess they won't find anything they didn't know already.

I actually tend to agree, I doubt there is going to be anything on that phone that will prove to be of tremendous importance. However with the slaughter of 14 innocent people having already occurred, I believe that even with the most remote of a chance that it could assist in preventing a future massacre it needs to be investigated; and Apple should comply.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I actually tend to agree, I doubt there is going to be anything on that phone that will prove to be of tremendous importance. However with the slaughter of 14 innocent people having already occurred, I believe that even with the most remote of a chance that it could assist in preventing a future massacre it needs to be investigated; and Apple should comply.

Paul, My cousin collected your iPad out of the bin and thanks you for writing the password on the back

He did inquire why the sheep in the pictures are looking at you so lovingly
.
.
.

[77T]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I believe that even with the most remote of a chance that it could assist in preventing a future massacre it needs to be investigated; and Apple should comply.

A couple of thoughts on this belief...and I think many millions of people do agree with your POV.

First, In a free society with a constitutional guarantee like the 4th amendment, our people who are expected to thwart any future attacks (LEOs, FBI, CIA, NSA, Military, etc.) often feel handcuffed by that very document meant to keep us free. Believe it or not, the attacks on 9|11 did not launch our most powerful weapon against terrorists. It was the establishment of FISA Courts in 1978. But these powers are two-edged - there are violations of the law (like when VZ was ordered to feed CDRs on ALL phone calls to NSA). So that is why people are vigilant about protecting freedom against misuse of legal processes. I can understand that.

My 2nd thought is that those same people (who feel strongly that Apple should not help) are also voluntarily providing their own protected info every day to corporate and social media sites. Last night in US, there was a PBS documentary called "The Human Face of Big Data". If you missed it, it will replay or be on the web soon. Here is the PBS info: http://www.pbs.org/search/?q=The+human+face+of+big+data

With the IoT and smartphones people will voluntarily provide the same data they would refuse to give law enforcement without a warrant. So I see the other side of Paul's point - why not just comply? Apple has previously admitted they use data from users to sell ads and otherwise market their own offerings. All told, big data is changing your life - hopefully in more helpful ways than harmful ones.

As the filmmakers of the PBS documentary showed, the massive gathering and analyzing of data in real time is allowing us to address some of humanity's biggest challenges. But at same time the release of NSA no-no's are chilling, too.

One little story from the documentary was very insightful. It came from a marketing effort by Target stores. Target hired a data analyst. They wanted to improve their own use of voluntary consumer data - the type you'd willingly give for a freebie. In this case, the purchasing pattern established by expectant mothers who had voluntarily registered on Target's Baby Shower registry. By extrapolating their patterns to the entire list of customers, Target uncovered a teenager's pregnancy before she had even told her parents. (Full story: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-i...egnancy-2012-2)

So wither thou goest...so goes your data...

I suggest many have often voluntarily pierced the veil of the 4th amendment for corporations that give us a chachki, but scream to the high heavens when law enforcement asks for similar data.

Just sharing in the spirit of balance





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by 77T

A couple of thoughts on this belief...and I think many millions of people do agree with your POV.

First, In a free society with a constitutional guarantee like the 4th amendment, our people who are expected to thwart any future attacks (LEOs, FBI, CIA, NSA, Military, etc.) often feel handcuffed by that very document meant to keep us free. Believe it or not, the attacks on 9|11 did not launch our most powerful weapon against terrorists. It was the establishment of FISA Courts in 1978. But these powers are two-edged - there are violations of the law (like when VZ was ordered to feed CDRs on ALL phone calls to NSA). So that is why people are vigilant about protecting freedom against misuse of legal processes. I can understand that.

My 2nd thought is that those same people (who feel strongly that Apple should not help) are also voluntarily providing their own protected info every day to corporate and social media sites. Last night in US, there was a PBS documentary called "The Human Face of Big Data". If you missed it, it will replay or be on the web soon. Here is the PBS info: http://www.pbs.org/search/?q=The+human+face+of+big+data

With the IoT and smartphones people will voluntarily provide the same data they would refuse to give law enforcement without a warrant. So I see the other side of Paul's point - why not just comply? Apple has previously admitted they use data from users to sell ads and otherwise market their own offerings. All told, big data is changing your life - hopefully in more helpful ways than harmful ones.

As the filmmakers of the PBS documentary showed, the massive gathering and analyzing of data in real time is allowing us to address some of humanity's biggest challenges. But at same time the release of NSA no-no's are chilling, too.

One little story from the documentary was very insightful. It came from a marketing effort by Target stores. Target hired a data analyst. They wanted to improve their own use of voluntary consumer data - the type you'd willingly give for a freebie. In this case, the purchasing pattern established by expectant mothers who had voluntarily registered on Target's Baby Shower registry. By extrapolating their patterns to the entire list of customers, Target uncovered a teenager's pregnancy before she had even told her parents. (Full story: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-i...egnancy-2012-2)

So wither thou goest...so goes your data...

I suggest many have often voluntarily pierced the veil of the 4th amendment for corporations that give us a chachki, but scream to the high heavens when law enforcement asks for similar data.

Just sharing in the spirit of balance





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A fair analysis Paul

I think the difference is that Target (Big Data) can't put you in jail, freeze your bank accounts, seize your assets, or put you on a global no fly list. Whereas, the US government can and will.

[rr-nyc]

Apple has filed it's motion to vacate citing 1st and 5th Amendments. IMO, pretty compelling argument but I'm not a lawyer or a judge

https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...exus-IS300.pdf

[Boopie]

Just curious...when the pollsters ask people if they side with Apple disobeying a court order, are the people aware that the phone belongs to THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO? The OWNER of the phone has consented to its being opened up. The terrorist was a County employee who signed a user agreement that I bet is similar to user agreements employees sign when they use their employer's equipment...even more so, as County records are public records. Incoming/outgoing calls, emails, and texts, let alone Internet searches, are being done on a County-owned phone.

I write this on my iPad, by the way. We are a Mac family. I have an iPhone.

[k4fap]

Originally Posted by mtrunner

What I can't believe is the FBI doesn't have the technical skills to get into these phones?

I suspect they do, but need political cover.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[k4fap]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

This was almost too stupid of a comment to dignify a response but I just cant help myself.

In your wildest imagination, how are you able to call Apple a supporter a terrorist when they are choosing to protect the privacy of MILLIONS OF PEOPLE worldwide over a terrorist who's been dead for 2 1/2 months?

We have civil liberties in the country. Once you give the Government a master key to all the locks, you have no privacy and will never get it back.

Well said!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[rr-nyc]

Well, the FBI was supposedly able to gain access to the iPhone through a 3rd party.

Hopefully The FBI will continue to use 3rd parties to hack into phones instead of having the court order Apple or any other software maker to do it for them.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bed1c...legal-action-0


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Marrk]

^^Or the FBI could be legally prevented from hacking into anything by a SCOTUS ruling in defense if the Fourth Amendment.

Just sayin'.

[Abdullah71601]

We'll see if the FBI informs Apple of the vulnerability.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

We'll see if the FBI informs Apple of the vulnerability.

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.

[Abdullah71601]

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.

A third party hacked it, not the FBI, according to FBI statements. So Apple never had control. Cooperating would have obscured the fact that this vulnerability exists, as the hack would not have been revealed. I don't see this as a loss for Apple. It does infer a few things about the vaunted IOS 9 encryption technology that the fan boys have been fawning over.

The FBI has a duty to consider advising Apple so that Americans aren't attacked using the vulnerability. It's also a national security question, which probably requires POTUS review to resolve.

Reports say all 5Cs are vulnerable. That could be a lot of Americans at risk. Election year politics may intervene.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

A third party hacked it, not the FBI, according to FBI statements. So Apple never had control. Cooperating would have obscured the fact that this vulnerability exists, as the hack would not have been revealed. I don't see this as a loss for Apple. It does infer a few things about the vaunted IOS 9 encryption technology that the fan boys have been fawning over.

The FBI has a duty to consider advising Apple so that Americans aren't attacked using the vulnerability. It's also a national security question, which probably requires POTUS review to resolve.

Reports say all 5Cs are vulnerable. That could be a lot of Americans at risk. Election year politics may intervene.

I mean if Apple had done as the FBI asked and done it themselves then they would have had control as the FBI would not have used the third party. Apple lost control of the situation by not complying.

Definitely more to come out of this situation....

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

I mean if Apple had done as the FBI asked and done it themselves then they would have had control as the FBI would not have used the third party. Apple lost control of the situation by not complying.

Definitely more to come out of this situation....

One report suggested the third party approached the FBI to offer assistance. The FBI isn't naming the third party. It could be another agency (such as the NSA), or a contractor under US Government control.

And, you can't possibly know whether this hack is the same approach Apple would have used. You are assuming there is only one solution. We now know there is at least one solution. Perhaps, there could be more.

Knowing that third parties can hack the iPhone does damage Apple. But not nearly as much as knowing that Apple colludes with governments to attack its customers would have. Technology fixes are fast and easy. Loss of trust can never be regained.

[BLACKHORSE 6]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

One report suggested the third party approached the FBI to offer assistance. The FBI isn't naming the third party. It could be another agency (such as the NSA), or a contractor under US Government control.

And, you can't possibly know whether this hack is the same approach Apple would have used. You are assuming there is only one solution. We now know there is at least one solution. Perhaps, there could be more.

Knowing that third parties can hack the iPhone does damage Apple. But not nearly as much as knowing that Apple colludes with governments to attack its customers would have. Technology fixes are fast and easy. Loss of trust can never be regained.

It's sort of like an arms race between two countries. Apple will investigate and "war game" how the security features were hacked and adjust, making improvements and changes. The hackers will attack the new security features as soon as Apple introduced them, but it will (hopefully) take them some time. The cycle will repeat itself until some sort of game changer comes along, but I don't know what that would look like.

The fact that we are having this debate in our country gives me great hope. I understand and sympathize with the FBI's point of view. They are charged with preventing these types of attacks and dismantling the terrorist networks in the US that want to sow seeds of destruction. This is a heavy burden, and I hope that they are good at their job.

But then there's a large part of me that doesn't want to trade civil liberties for security. To do so would be handing a victory to the terrorists, which is the last thing I want to do. It's sort of a "f@ck you" to terrorism when we hold fast to our ideals.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by BLACKHORSE 6

It's sort of like an arms race between two countries. Apple will investigate and "war game" how the security features were hacked and adjust, making improvements and changes. The hackers will attack the new security features as soon as Apple introduced them, but it will (hopefully) take them some time. The cycle will repeat itself until some sort of game changer comes along, but I don't know what that would look like.

The fact that we are having this debate in our country gives me great hope. I understand and sympathize with the FBI's point of view. They are charged with preventing these types of attacks and dismantling the terrorist networks in the US that want to sow seeds of destruction. This is a heavy burden, and I hope that are good at their job.

But then there's a large part of me that doesn't want to trade civil liberties for security. To do so would be handing a victory to the terrorists, which is the last thing I want to do. It's sort of a "f@ck you" to terrorism when we hold fast to our ideals.

Agree. There have been a number of cases in the past where law enforcement was hindered by the constitution, and we've managed to survive and flourish without those LE powers.

As others have noted elsewhere, some people just like to see the world burn. But for terrorists with a plan to change the world, there is no greater defeat than an absence of change in response to their attacks. We may not be able to prevent all terrorist attacks, but we can prevent the loss of our way of life by not conceding to their tactics and abandoning our civil liberties.

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

A third party hacked it, not the FBI, according to FBI statements. So Apple never had control.

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

One report suggested the third party approached the FBI to offer assistance. The FBI isn't naming the third party. It could be another agency (such as the NSA), or a contractor under US Government control.

Latest report is that the Israelis hacked it.

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

Technology fixes are fast and easy. Loss of trust can never be regained.

Technology is a moving target. Always new encryption, always new hacks. Apple is not trying to control the technology. Apple was and is trying to control the legal precedent. But, it seems to me, Apple is on pretty mushy ground if Tim Cook has said that they would not hack a phone, but they would hack the cloud and turn over a customer's cloud data.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by Marrk

Technology is a moving target. Always new encryption, always new hacks. Apple is not trying to control the technology. Apple was and is trying to control the legal precedent. But, it seems to me, Apple is on pretty mushy ground if Tim Cook has said that they would not hack a phone, but they would hack the cloud and turn over a customer's cloud data.

Agree. It's my understanding that the cloud technology was already a capability. The legal precedent that would allow LE to order a company to create a capability, or a vulnerability, would be truly dangerous.

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

The legal precedent that would allow LE to order a company to create a capability, or a vulnerability, would be truly dangerous.

That would be truly unprecedented and is one of the real terra incognita issues of this case. With regard to the cloud, Apple has apparently been giving the government cloud data in other cases, cases that have been handled out of the public view. This is troubling.

[jban5]

I wonder how this would have played out if Apple had not been a US company headquartered here?

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

I mean if Apple had done as the FBI asked and done it themselves then they would have had control as the FBI would not have used the third party. Apple lost control of the situation by not complying...

Excellent and accurate point. I don't blame Apple for resisting, up to a point, but if they had complied the second or third request, a lot of time, money, and difficulty would have been saved.

Personally, I believe the slaughter of innocent human beings justified this action, and I lost all respect for Apple continuing to fight. I am glad the FBI got what they needed. Will it result in stopping any future attacks? Probably not, I honestly have no idea, but when innocent people are slaughtered like insects we shouldn't take the chance.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

One report suggested the third party approached the FBI to offer assistance. The FBI isn't naming the third party. It could be another agency (such as the NSA), or a contractor under US Government control.

And, you can't possibly know whether this hack is the same approach Apple would have used. You are assuming there is only one solution. We now know there is at least one solution. Perhaps, there could be more.

Knowing that third parties can hack the iPhone does damage Apple. But not nearly as much as knowing that Apple colludes with governments to attack its customers would have. Technology fixes are fast and easy. Loss of trust can never be regained.

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.

[CDNWatchNut]

Originally Posted by thevtcguy

excellent and accurate point. I don't blame apple for resisting, up to a point, but if they had complied the second or third request, a lot of time, money, and difficulty would have been saved.

Personally, i believe the slaughter of innocent human beings justified this action, and i lost all respect for apple continuing to fight. I am glad the fbi got what they needed. Will it result in stopping any future attacks? Probably not, i honestly have no idea, but when innocent people are slaughtered like insects we shouldn't take the chance.

+1