Apple's stand against the Feds

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

But they have abused, and can be expected to continue to do so. If we learned nothing else from Snowden, it's that the intelligence services cannot be trusted to stay within the confines of the law, much less within any sort of agreement with a technology company. If they get this capability they will abuse it.

This notion that there is a treasure trove of information on the phone that unlocks world terrorist networks is a red herring, intended to distract from the governments real purpose. The FBI has provided no public evidence that would lead us to expect that the device provides anymore data than they have already obtained from other investigative techniques.

People have been plotting and planning heinous acts for millennia, and will continue to do so. The framers of the US constitution recognized that protecting the citizens from the government was more important than the minor increment of additional safety giving the government control would provide. Simply stated, "just get the phone hacked" is an extraordinarily subversive attack on personal privacy and is a far greater threat to freedom than any terrorist cell presents.

You should have started with this post and saved us all 8 pages of back and forth

[BNA/LION]

[77T]

Now that John McAfee has offered to hack into a locked iPhone 5c or eat his shoe, the solution seems obvious to me...

FBI should buy 100 iPhone 5c's, lock 'em with a 4 digit passcode and offer $10,000 to first 12-y.o. who opens it via an app without destroying its files.

Much cheaper than a passel of DOJ lawyers and prolly faster, too.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

But they have abused, and can be expected to continue to do so. If we learned nothing else from Snowden, it's that the intelligence services cannot be trusted to stay within the confines of the law, much less within any sort of agreement with a technology company. If they get this capability they will abuse it.

This notion that there is a treasure trove of information on the phone that unlocks world terrorist networks is a red herring, intended to distract from the governments real purpose. The FBI has provided no public evidence that would lead us to expect that the device provides anymore data than they have already obtained from other investigative techniques.

People have been plotting and planning heinous acts for millennia, and will continue to do so. The framers of the US constitution recognized that protecting the citizens from the government was more important than the minor increment of additional safety giving the government control would provide. Simply stated, "just get the phone hacked" is an extraordinarily subversive attack on personal privacy and is a far greater threat to freedom than any terrorist cell presents.

I agree 100% with you,I really couldn't have said it better.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by 77T

Now that John McAfee has offered to hack into a locked iPhone 5c or eat his shoe, the solution seems obvious to me...

FBI should buy 100 iPhone 5c's, lock 'em with a 4 digit passcode and offer $10,000 to first 12-y.o. who opens it via an app without destroying its files.

Much cheaper than a passel of DOJ lawyers and prolly faster, too.

Before answering, is it some kind of a joke I don't understand?

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[JRolex]

I mean this in the most respectful way -- but there's quite a few of you who are far too deprived of judgment by their own opinions to take the few minutes it takes to do a little bit of research of what is happening here.

I beg of you - for all our sake - do your damn research. It takes two seconds on Google and the front page of the NYTimes to know what's going on.

Making claims that Apple is standing along side "terrorists" is as ridiculous as making the claim that the iPhone or iPad your using makes you a terrorist for using an Apple product.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

You should have started with this post and saved us all 8 pages of back and forth

What would be the fun in that

[bayerische]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

But they have abused, and can be expected to continue to do so. If we learned nothing else from Snowden, it's that the intelligence services cannot be trusted to stay within the confines of the law, much less within any sort of agreement with a technology company. If they get this capability they will abuse it.

This notion that there is a treasure trove of information on the phone that unlocks world terrorist networks is a red herring, intended to distract from the governments real purpose. The FBI has provided no public evidence that would lead us to expect that the device provides anymore data than they have already obtained from other investigative techniques.

People have been plotting and planning heinous acts for millennia, and will continue to do so. The framers of the US constitution recognized that protecting the citizens from the government was more important than the minor increment of additional safety giving the government control would provide. Simply stated, "just get the phone hacked" is an extraordinarily subversive attack on personal privacy and is a far greater threat to freedom than any terrorist cell presents.

Completely agree.

[HL65]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

But they have abused, and can be expected to continue to do so. If we learned nothing else from Snowden, it's that the intelligence services cannot be trusted to stay within the confines of the law, much less within any sort of agreement with a technology company. If they get this capability they will abuse it.

This notion that there is a treasure trove of information on the phone that unlocks world terrorist networks is a red herring, intended to distract from the governments real purpose. The FBI has provided no public evidence that would lead us to expect that the device provides anymore data than they have already obtained from other investigative techniques.

People have been plotting and planning heinous acts for millennia, and will continue to do so. The framers of the US constitution recognized that protecting the citizens from the government was more important than the minor increment of additional safety giving the government control would provide. Simply stated, "just get the phone hacked" is an extraordinarily subversive attack on personal privacy and is a far greater threat to freedom than any terrorist cell presents.

Well said Abdullah!

[Hamish]

Agreed

[77T]

Originally Posted by fmc000

Before answering, is it some kind of a joke I don't understand?

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

The first part - regarding John McAfee is my restatement of his challenge to the FBI. I think he's being ridiculous.

The second part is more light-hearted. Giving 5c's is not a bad idea to let true crypto experts design a method of their own. My reference to 12 y.o.'s is the light hearted part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

But they have abused, and can be expected to continue to do so. If we learned nothing else from Snowden, it's that the intelligence services cannot be trusted to stay within the confines of the law, much less within any sort of agreement with a technology company. If they get this capability they will abuse it.

This notion that there is a treasure trove of information on the phone that unlocks world terrorist networks is a red herring, intended to distract from the governments real purpose. The FBI has provided no public evidence that would lead us to expect that the device provides anymore data than they have already obtained from other investigative techniques.

People have been plotting and planning heinous acts for millennia, and will continue to do so. The framers of the US constitution recognized that protecting the citizens from the government was more important than the minor increment of additional safety giving the government control would provide. Simply stated, "just get the phone hacked" is an extraordinarily subversive attack on personal privacy and is a far greater threat to freedom than any terrorist cell presents.

Yes succinctly put but your theory that the phone will hold nothing of use is still just that, a theory. Has Apple or anyone else provided any evidence that the phone won't provide any more data that the FBI already has from other investigative techniques?

If you and others want to believe that preventing LEA's from obtaining as much data and evidence as they can in the pursuit of preventing terrorism is a greater threat to freedom than the acts of terrorists themselves then that is of course your choice to feel that way. It seems to me that a lot of people are scared of the US Govt and their agencies here to the extent that the actions or attempted actions of said agencies actually seem to worry folks more than the terrorists themselves. This is actually quite worrying in itself and does not bode well for the future of cohesive law abiding society imo.

BUT....at least we all do have the freedom to express these opinions as like I said there are plenty of places I go to where we'd all be thrown in jail for having these discussions in public!

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

Yes succinctly put but your theory that the phone will hold nothing of use is still just that, a theory. Has Apple or anyone else provided any evidence that the phone won't provide any more data that the FBI already has from other investigative techniques?

If you and others want to believe that preventing LEA's from obtaining as much data and evidence as they can in the pursuit of preventing terrorism is a greater threat to freedom than the acts of terrorists themselves then that is of course your choice to feel that way. It seems to me that a lot of people are scared of the US Govt and their agencies here to the extent that the actions or attempted actions of said agencies actually seem to worry folks more than the terrorists themselves. This is actually quite worrying in itself and does not bode well for the future of cohesive law abiding society imo.

BUT....at least we all do have the freedom to express these opinions as like I said there are plenty of places I go to where we'd all be thrown in jail for having these discussions in public!

We have the freedom to discuss now because our predecessors stood their ground against tyranny.

There was a time not that long ago in America where your life could be destroyed if someone accused you of being a communist. You didn't actually have to be one, you just needed to travel in the wrong social circles. The way intelligence agencies use mass collections of meta data is to associate people to risk groups. Being in the wrong risk group is not unlike travelling in the wrong circles during the communist witch hunts. Guilt by association defines your position in the risk matrix, and you are not permitted the opportunity to defend yourself.

Think you have nothing to hide? Play the terror version of 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon on all the contacts in your phone, as that is what the intelligence agencies will do with the data gathered from you. How many contacts link to people with foreign sounding names? Or names similar to known terrorists? Or people with too many contacts in terror countries? How many do a lot of international wire transfers? What risk group are you in?

My concern is the same concern that James Madison, George Mason, and the early Americans had. People being people will find a way to oppress other people. The government cannot be allowed to be in a position to be the oppressor. Individual liberty must be protected to secure society from tyranny.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

Has Apple or anyone else provided any evidence that the phone won't provide any more data that the FBI already has from other investigative techniques?

Apple has no duty or obligation to do so.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

Apple has no duty or obligation to do so.

My point was no-one knows what is or isn't on the phone, hence the FBI want to have a look-see.

[bayerische]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

My point was no-one knows what is or isn't on the phone, hence the FBI want to have a look-see.

But the problem is, one phone will lead to all phones. If we can do one iPhone, we can do them all. It will be an avalanche.

I have nothing to hide, but do I want my government (or anyone else's) snooping around in my phone, computer etc? Hell no!

There's a million ways to fight terror. Making the general public scared isn't one. Scared people usually sacrifice their freedom for "protection and safety". Governments are funny, once they get to take something, they usually don't give it back.

I've read this thread, and boy is it a merry-go-round. We're not getting forward... I just hope Apple won't be ordered to change the software.

[TheBluePrince]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

We have the freedom to discuss now because our predecessors stood their ground against tyranny.

There was a time not that long ago in America where your life could be destroyed if someone accused you of being a communist. You didn't actually have to be one, you just needed to travel in the wrong social circles. The way intelligence agencies use mass collections of meta data is to associate people to risk groups. Being in the wrong risk group is not unlike travelling in the wrong circles during the communist witch hunts. Guilt by association defines your position in the risk matrix, and you are not permitted the opportunity to defend yourself.

Think you have nothing to hide? Play the terror version of 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon on all the contacts in your phone, as that is what the intelligence agencies will do with the data gathered from you. How many contacts link to people with foreign sounding names? Or names similar to known terrorists? Or people with too many contacts in terror countries? How many do a lot of international wire transfers? What risk group are you in?

My concern is the same concern that James Madison, George Mason, and the early Americans had. People being people will find a way to oppress other people. The government cannot be allowed to be in a position to be the oppressor. Individual liberty must be protected to secure society from tyranny.

I do see what you're saying but there is a giant leap from the oppression of free speech and of the populous as a whole and what the FBI want to achieve here. There has to be a balance and in this case all things considered I believe the Govt/FBI is still on the right side of that in their demands.

[77T]

One thing about which we should be clearer - this isn't a freedom of speech matter. That's the 1st Amendment.

This is about the 4th Amendment right against unreasonable search & seizure. And the suspect's iPhone has been the subject of a lawful investigation complete with properly approved search warrants.

The question revolves around the governments ability to compel a 3rd party, namely Apple, to render assistance against its will. In America, a corporation has the same responsibilities and rights as an individual.

Again, not taking sides, just clarifying.

As for privacy, just using Tapatalk and sharing opinions on a privately hosted forum can abridge many of our rights - just read the end user agreements to which you click "I agree".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

But they have abused, and can be expected to continue to do so. If we learned nothing else from Snowden, it's that the intelligence services cannot be trusted to stay within the confines of the law, much less within any sort of agreement with a technology company. If they get this capability they will abuse it.

This notion that there is a treasure trove of information on the phone that unlocks world terrorist networks is a red herring, intended to distract from the governments real purpose. The FBI has provided no public evidence that would lead us to expect that the device provides anymore data than they have already obtained from other investigative techniques.

People have been plotting and planning heinous acts for millennia, and will continue to do so. The framers of the US constitution recognized that protecting the citizens from the government was more important than the minor increment of additional safety giving the government control would provide. Simply stated, "just get the phone hacked" is an extraordinarily subversive attack on personal privacy and is a far greater threat to freedom than any terrorist cell presents.

Nope, completely disagree. I will write why as soon as I get home to my computer... I am still trying to figure out this Android phone since I threw my IPhone in the trash yesterday.

[Marrk]

Hope Tim Cook wins this fight. It's a fight for privacy and against using words like "terror" and "terrorist" as an excuse to abrogate American civil liberties. It's also good business since Apple will lose a considerable marketplace advantage if they can't sell security as a feature of their products.

In addition, the FBI's request seems rather disingenuous. Since the NSA is recording and logging all cell phone calls, the FBI could get what they say they want from the NSA. But what the FBI is really after is legal precedent.

Originally Posted by Lol-x

I got Retina Mbook Pro 3.1/i7/512gb/16gb

My business contract says I'm due a new one every year, but this is my first in 4 years so everyone is happy!!!

Steve, I'm in the market for one of these in 13".

[daveathall]

I can't help thinking that this whole thing would have been better served behind closed doors. If, by some chance Apple win this, then the most secure computer for any global terrorist to store names, addresses, income, expenditure etc is an iPhone. Why would a terrorist use anything else? It is FBI/CIA/NSA proof.

I wonder if there is some bluff, double bluff, smoke and mirrors going on here.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

But they have abused, and can be expected to continue to do so. If we learned nothing else from Snowden, it's that the intelligence services cannot be trusted to stay within the confines of the law, much less within any sort of agreement with a technology company. If they get this capability they will abuse it.

This notion that there is a treasure trove of information on the phone that unlocks world terrorist networks is a red herring, intended to distract from the governments real purpose. The FBI has provided no public evidence that would lead us to expect that the device provides anymore data than they have already obtained from other investigative techniques.

People have been plotting and planning heinous acts for millennia, and will continue to do so. The framers of the US constitution recognized that protecting the citizens from the government was more important than the minor increment of additional safety giving the government control would provide. Simply stated, "just get the phone hacked" is an extraordinarily subversive attack on personal privacy and is a far greater threat to freedom than any terrorist cell presents.

Completely disagree.

First, the Snowden case is different. That involves spying on US citizens WITHOUT following established checks and balances; I.e A court order, probably cause etc. We can devote 200 threads and about 1,000 pages to that topic, but I will stick to Apple. The government HAS followed proper procedures and obtained a court order, they are not trying to "bypass" any established legal proceedings.

You say, that the government is not trustworthy with this information, as proven by Snowden. I say that our checks and balances are the best form of government out there. I am not Naieve and will say it is perfect, and that abuses are not possible, but I still support and believe this is the right cause of action. They went through our procedures, showed just cause, so comply with it Apple. If you believe that these procedures are not adequate, and/or are run by untrustworthy authorities, then run for office, get elected or vote for the candidates you feel would do a better job. These authorities are the ones we (the people) put in place, to protect us from things like terrorism. There are checks and balances in place and they have followed to try and give us this protection; Apple has no right to block them. I don't remember electing any Apple executive to protect me from terrorism or giving them the authority to pick and choose which court orders and laws they decide to comply with. And pray tell, what crime could possibly be worse then the brutal slaughter of innocent human beings, PERHAPS (GOD forbid) a member of your family or mine, to abide by our government rules and provide the requested information. If we were talking about a traffic ticket, I would probably agree with you.

I understand what you are saying, that this is the "nose of the camel under the tent....Give them a little and they will take a lot" etc. That allowing them anything will result in a growing abuse of power, more invasion of privacy until we end up in a Facisist or Anarchy. I totally disagree there too. I firmly believe that with our current system of checks and balances, that will never happen. And now, with innocent people slaughtered, is the time to put faith in our authorities and give them the tools they need to protect us.

Does the chance for abuse exist? Yes, I agree it does. However to thwart the murder of innocents, as a citizen, I am willing to take that chance; and even if present, would not lead to the totalirian society you describe. I flew 67 combat missions and lost friends over a country in the Middle East because I believe in my government. If Apple doesn't and won't abide by their laws meant to protect us from incidents like this, then leave the country. I feel as a Vet, I am entitled to this opinion.

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

You say, that the government is not trustworthy with this information, as proven by Snowden. I say that our checks and balances are the best form of government out there. I am not Naieve and will say it is perfect, and that abuses are not possible, but I still support and believe this is the right cause of action. They went through our procedures, showed just cause, so comply with it Apple.

You are omitting a step here. You allude to due process and "checks and balances." Apple has the right to adjudicate this demand in the courts. That appears to be what they will do.

You would agree, I trust, that there is nothing un-American about dissent.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by TheBluePrince

My point was no-one knows what is or isn't on the phone, hence the FBI want to have a look-see.

They mostly know what is on the device. Apparently, the device was routinely backing itself up to the iCloud. Apple gave the government the iCloud data. Now, the government is saying it also must have what was added to the device since the last back up. A backup that was apparently disrupted AFTER the phone was in government possession.

The government has developed its case and made arrests. There is not any compelling evidence that there is anything useful to be had on the phone that wasn't already obtained through other means. This is clearly a power grab.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Completely disagree.

First, the Snowden case is different. That involves spying on US citizens WITHOUT following established checks and balances; I.e A court order, probably cause etc. We can devote 200 threads and about 1,000 pages to that topic, but I will stick to Apple. The government HAS followed proper procedures and obtained a court order, they are not trying to "bypass" any established legal proceedings.

You say, that the government is not trustworthy with this information, as proven by Snowden. I say that our checks and balances are the best form of government out there. I am not Naieve and will say it is perfect, and that abuses are not possible, but I still support and believe this is the right cause of action. They went through our procedures, showed just cause, so comply with it Apple. If you believe that these procedures are not adequate, and/or are run by untrustworthy authorities, then run for office, get elected or vote for the candidates you feel would do a better job. These authorities are the ones we (the people) put in place, to protect us from things like terrorism. There are checks and balances in place and they have followed to try and give us this protection; Apple has no right to block them. I don't remember electing any Apple executive to protect me from terrorism or giving them the authority to pick and choose which court orders and laws they decide to comply with. And pray tell, what crime could possibly be worse then the brutal slaughter of innocent human beings, PERHAPS (GOD forbid) a member of your family or mine, to abide by our government rules and provide the requested information. If we were talking about a traffic ticket, I would probably agree with you.

I understand what you are saying, that this is the "nose of the camel under the tent....Give them a little and they will take a lot" etc. That allowing them anything will result in a growing abuse of power, more invasion of privacy until we end up in a Facisist or Anarchy. I totally disagree there too. I firmly believe that with our current system of checks and balances, that will never happen. And now, with innocent people slaughtered, is the time to put faith in our authorities and give them the tools they need to protect us.

Does the chance for abuse exist? Yes, I agree it does. However to thwart the murder of innocents, as a citizen, I am willing to take that chance; and even if present, would not lead to the totalirian society you describe. I flew 67 combat missions and lost friends over a country in the Middle East because I believe in my government. If Apple doesn't and won't abide by their laws meant to protect us from incidents like this, then leave the country. I feel as a Vet, I am entitled to this opinion.

Apple is abiding by the law. They cannot be compelled by the government to create something. The executive branch is seeking to create new powers exploiting this terrorism case as a justification. It's Congress job to make law, not the FBI's. Now, the courts will sort out whether the FBI over stepped. The fact that the FBI is publically seeking compromise tells me that they do not feel they will win the day.

I too am a veteran, but I do not believe that my service gives me the right to tell people to leave the country if they feel they are doing the right thing. I didn't serve to tell people to leave. I served because I felt that freedom isn't free and I was willing to pay the price.

[VICI]

Why couldn't this have been done quietly in the interest of national security - like other things??

This could have been handled much better.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Marrk

You are omitting a step here. You allude to due process and "checks and balances." Apple has the right to adjudicate this demand in the courts. That appears to be what they will do.

You would agree, I trust, that there is nothing un-American about dissent.

Absolutely Mark, Apple has the right to appeal, or fight it in court, I don't deny them this right. I just don't think they should on this particular case, Or some kind of compromise could be reached. Because of their stance, I have the right to no longer be a customer and express my opinions.

BTW, I have nothing bad to say about their products, I actually think they were fantastic. I am having a HECK of a time trying to figure out this Android phone. Anybody an expert?

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Absolutely Mark, Apple has the right to appeal, or fight it in court, I don't deny them this right. I just don't think they should on this particular case, Or some kind of compromise could be reached. Because of their stance, I have the right to no longer be a customer and express my opinions.

BTW, I have nothing bad to say about their products, I actually think they were fantastic. I am having a HECK of a time trying to figure out this Android phone. Anybody an expert?

Paul, with all due respect, your statement here sounds quite a bit different from "If Apple doesn't and won't abide by their laws meant to protect us from incidents like this, then leave the country." I attribute the change to the fact that you are a reasonable man, a man of good intentions, and that we are speaking to each other in good faith.

We all want to be careful about making decisions out a fear (fear of "terrorism," fear of attacks that haven't happened yet, fear of the "murder of innocents," etc.). I think my colleague Abdullah71601 has made the best argument for the moment.

[seand442]

I read that both of the terrorists had personal phones and other electronic media they destroyed at some point prior to getting killed. It would seem to me, that while the work phone might have something on it, if he thought to destroy the other phones, why would he leave this one alone? I don't know about you, but I have had personal and work phones and made sure that I don't do anything personal on my work phone. Maybe that's just me.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/san-bernard...ry?id=35570286

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Marrk

Paul, with all due respect, your statement here sounds quite a bit different from "If Apple doesn't and won't abide by their laws meant to protect us from incidents like this, then leave the country." I attribute the change to the fact that you are a reasonable man, a man of good intentions, and that we are speaking to each other in good faith.

We all want to be careful about making decisions out a fear (fear of "terrorism," fear of attacks that haven't happened yet, fear of the "murder of innocents," etc.). I think my colleague Abdullah71601 has made the best argument for the moment.

You're entitled to your opinion. I will pray tonight that you or your family are never a victim of a terrorist attack. And I will pray that our government has the tools they need to protect all of us.

It would be wonderful to live in a world where we don't even have to think about things like this.... What's that John Lennon song? "You may say I'm a dreamer.."

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by seand442

I read that both of the terrorists had personal phones and other electronic media they destroyed at some point prior to getting killed. It would seem to me, that while the work phone might have something on it, if he thought to destroy the other phones, why would he leave this one alone? I don't know about you, but I have had personal and work phones and made sure that I don't do anything personal on my work phone. Maybe that's just me.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/san-bernard...ry?id=35570286

Very good point and I completely agree. I have a work phone and a personal phone. I don't use work phone for personal use, period