Not sure what my stance is suppose to be be concerning Apple vs the gov't

[Doc]

and it forcing them to hack the phone but I'm siding with Apple. If the government can decript, fine. but forcing the manufacter to do it, not sure I like the idea.

link

[jazyd]

doc, what if the company opened it in a room by themselves, then allowed the government fbi agents in to see what was on it, they left the room, then apple closes it back. That way no one from the government knows how to get past the code and can't hack any of them easily

[KeithKSR]

The FBI just wants the resulting data. I gotta call BS on Apple's contention they can't access it, anything encrypted also has a way to unencrypt.

[bigsky]

I call BS on the FBI demanding Apple programmers work for free for the govt, er lord of the manor. Are we slaves or serfs? We report, you decide.

[PedroDaGr8]

To quote Apple:

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.

This is how the government erodes our liberties, bring a new technique in to fight terrorism or child abuse. Then it trickles into everyday cases over time, kinda like civil forfeiture. It was designed to target mob bosses and drug lords, now it is used in traffic stops. Quite simply, they are asking Apple to create a custom firmware that bypasses the unlock attempt limits plus a variety of other data safeguards (such as stripping out a bunch of the passcode calculations and checks). Even if it wasn't on Apple's dime, this is a VERY serious problem, while it is not a backdoor in the strictest sense. It is functionally the same thing, the difference between a literal backdoor and what they want is entirely trivial. They are asking Apple to strip out the most important software protections on your data. If someone got a hold of this firmware, unlocking the device would LITERALLY be trivial, you could unlock the phone in a couple minutes at the most.

They make a good point, if the US government can force Apple to make this software then so can every repressive regime in the world. The data would NOT be secure at all.

[StuBleedsBlue2]

This isn't an issue of government having access to secure private data, this is an issue of exposing everyone with an Iphone's security if the new operating system happens to fall in the wrong hands, which it inevitably will. Government systems are always hacked.

This would be an unprecedented security risk, and the people need to stand behind Apple and refuse the FBI's demands. Once that data is encrypted, it will always be encrypted.

Tech companies should work with the government, however, to find other solutions. This one isn't the answer.

[Catonahottinroof]

If Apple gives in to this request, there will be another, and the another, and then another

[Doc]

doc, what if the company opened it in a room by themselves, then allowed the government fbi agents in to see what was on it, they left the room, then apple closes it back. That way no one from the government knows how to get past the code and can't hack any of them easily

I'm for the government staying out of businesses affairs. What right does the govt have to come in and tell a company it has to obtain evidence for them? Let the government do their own dirty work and if they can't figure it out, tough.

[CitizenBBN]

I call BS on the FBI demanding Apple programmers work for free for the govt, er lord of the manor. Are we slaves or serfs? We report, you decide.

The order referenced compensation, Apple can bill for the work.

[CitizenBBN]

This isn't an issue of government having access to secure private data, this is an issue of exposing everyone with an Iphone's security if the new operating system happens to fall in the wrong hands, which it inevitably will. Government systems are always hacked.

This would be an unprecedented security risk, and the people need to stand behind Apple and refuse the FBI's demands. Once that data is encrypted, it will always be encrypted.

Tech companies should work with the government, however, to find other solutions. This one isn't the answer.

There are plenty of ways to make sure that doesn't happen, IF the hack isn't given to the government.

Apple can hack this one phone, turn over the data, and destroy the hack.

yes the people who wrote it could do it again, but the fact that they can do it at all means the potential is already there and it's already a risk that the Chinese or Russians or the NSA infiltrate Apple sufficiently to recruit the people to do it.

What Apple is worried about is showing that it can be hacked at all, by anyone. They sell the phones on the basis that the data is completely secure, but if they can hack it then with enough time and resources others can too, and then they lose a nice marketing feature of their phones.

[CitizenBBN]

If Apple gives in to this request, there will be another, and the another, and then another

No doubt about it, and eventually Congress will probably have to weigh in, but there are already laws on the books about things like exporting encryption technology that are there specifically to help protect law enforcement's ability to access data and prevent foreign governments and our enemies from having technology we can't crack. We're going to have to now address how that technology is implemented and if law enforcement needs mean that there has to be a way for them with proper court orders to access that information.

[CitizenBBN]

This would be an unprecedented security risk,

How can it be "unprecedented" if every other phone on the market can already be cracked and we know if it being done for law enforcement at least 70 times in the past by Apple alone? That's not "unprecedented", it's actually completely with precedent as we've been apparently doing for years.

Agree or disagree with the situation, but the unprecedented part is the government NOT having access to this information. that's the change here, not having access.

[jazyd]

I'm for the government staying out of businesses affairs. What right does the govt have to come in and tell a company it has to obtain evidence for them? Let the government do their own dirty work and if they can't figure it out, tough.

Did you read what I wrote? FBI doesn't get to see how to open the info, only gets to see the info period. And what evidence, both people are dead, can't convict them
It's a matter of security in a world of terror. If there is information of a ring, or group or person who intends harm, destruction, attack, bomb whatever on that phone I want the FBI to have it it
I did ask for the FBI to have the software, just the information on that phone that might protect my family and possibly even yours

[PedroDaGr8]

Did you read what I wrote? FBI doesn't get to see how to open the info, only gets to see the info period. And what evidence, both people are dead, can't convict them
It's a matter of security in a world of terror. If there is information of a ring, or group or person who intends harm, destruction, attack, bomb whatever on that phone I want the FBI to have it it
I did ask for the FBI to have the software, just the information on that phone that might protect my family and possibly even yours

And this is why we are slowly evolving into a police state, our civil liberties mean nothing because of terrorism. Everyone is almost FALLING over themselves to give more and more of their privacy and rights to the government. Bit by bit, and piece by piece, the government amasses more legal abilities to strip us of our rights, all because it "might" protect you and your family. As always safety is used to strip away liberty.

Mark my words, if this is approved, within five years EVERY single police department in the country will have this ability and thye will use it on EVERY phone in their possession. On top of that, once it is in the hands of the police stations, it WILL make it into the hands of less than honorable individuals for the same purpose. This is NOT analogous to wiretaps, because in a wiretap the hardware and whatnot is the property of the company. This whole thing stinks of the government using "Oh, no terrorism" to push further their ability to reach into our lives at will.

EDIT: I am not singling you alone out Jazy, you were just the last one to make this sentiment.

[Doc]

Did you read what I wrote? FBI doesn't get to see how to open the info, only gets to see the info period. And what evidence, both people are dead, can't convict them
It's a matter of security in a world of terror. If there is information of a ring, or group or person who intends harm, destruction, attack, bomb whatever on that phone I want the FBI to have it it
I did ask for the FBI to have the software, just the information on that phone that might protect my family and possibly even yours

Yes, I read what you wrote. And next time they want a phone hack they pick up the phone and call apple. And the time after that they do it again. Businesses have NO OBLIGATION to the government.

[suncat05]

I agree with Apple, and I also agree with Pedro. Very slippery slope, and once it's done, the US Government will, just like it always does, find "other uses" for its new "toy"..........and most times those uses will not even resemble in any manner what the original intent was.

[dan_bgblue]

Back in the day if law enforcement agencies could show reasonable cause they could get a court order to "tap" the old land line telephones all of us used to use. They could also intercept USPS mail and read it before it got to you. There were probably abuses of those procedures, but I rarely heard people voicing concern about the practice. I am sure there were untold crimes that were avoided because of what they did, or criminals caught after the crime was commuted.

Why is there now such concern, by the average law abiding citizen, about law enforcement being able to access information on the mobile devices we use today?

I do see Apple's side of the issue, and their side is corporate profits which is a legitimate concern and one they could legitimately argue and possibly win that argument in court. But if their recalcitrance to assist law enforcement were to cause great harm to people in this country and that stubbornness is made public after the harm is inflicted on innocent people, how do we think the public will react?

Maybe law enforcement is over stepping their purview by asking for private individual information, and if I were a criminal of some sort, I would surely think they were doing just that. If security cameras, which are everywhere, except for public bathroom facilities, were all encrypted with some unbreakable code, known only to the company that owns and operates the cameras, would we feel that the law enforcement agency was over stepping their authority by asking the camera owner to give them the un encrypted video footage?

Just some thoughts of mine that may or may not be worthy of discussion.

[Doc]

Back in the day if law enforcement agencies could show reasonable cause they could get a court order to "tap" the old land line telephones all of us used to use. They could also intercept USPS mail and read it before it got to you. There were probably abuses of those procedures, but I rarely heard people voicing concern about the practice. I am sure there were untold crimes that were avoided because of what they did, or criminals caught after the crime was commuted.

Why is there now such concern, by the average law abiding citizen, about law enforcement being able to access information on the mobile devices we use today?

I do see Apple's side of the issue, and their side is corporate profits which is a legitimate concern and one they could legitimately argue and possibly win that argument in court. But if their recalcitrance to assist law enforcement were to cause great harm to people in this country and that stubbornness is made public after the harm is inflicted on innocent people, how do we think the public will react?

Maybe law enforcement is over stepping their purview by asking for private individual information, and if I were a criminal of some sort, I would surely think they were doing just that. If security cameras, which are everywhere, except for public bathroom facilities, were all encrypted with some unbreakable code, known only to the company that owns and operates the cameras, would we feel that the law enforcement agency was over stepping their authority by asking the camera owner to give them the un encrypted video footage?

Just some thoughts of mine that may or may not be worthy of discussion.

To answer your first question......

1) the public is much more aware of governmental abuses in these times compare to our days.

2) the amount of collateral information. Taping a phone line or reading mail is one thing, cracking a phone is another. A line tap is likely to reveal info limited to the crime at hand. Not so much with a phone. I fear that such technology leak. In a time of identify theft, I can literally imagine the financial consequences if my phone which has my bank and investment accounts encoded on it were to be compromised

HOWEVER, to me that's not the issue. For me its the government requiring a private company to do something. IMO the government has no right to require apple to decrypt their product. Apple did nothing illegal, has not produced an illegal or dangerous product or violated any law.

[kingcat]

I doubt this is a real issue towards security. Only the govt seeking public justification for hacking the info themselves illegally.
Just in case someone spills the beans again.

[Doc]

I doubt this is a real issue towards security. Only the govt seeking public justification for hacking the info themselves illegally.
Just in case someone spills the beans again.

I agree other than I'd not classify the hacking as illegal. Personally I don't have an issue with the government doing it. I wouldn't have a problem with any law enforcement agency doing it either. I have no issue with a police dept breaking into a suspects computer or phone to gather evidence but I would if they REQUIRED Dell or IBM to do it for them.

[kingcat]

Heck, they can just borrow the tech needed off of Rupert Murdoch

[CitizenBBN]

Few thoughts:

1) Doc, the government has the absolute right to require companies to assist in law enforcement efforts via court orders. Companies are required to turn over records and allow physical access to premises all the time, and that is codified in the law.

Apple may be due compensation, but private companies do have an obligation to assist as determined by the courts.

2) If the tech to hack the phones is handed over to the FBI OK I get the concern, but if this one phone is cracked and the code then destroyed then it's not clear my privacy is at risk at all. The fact that there are people at Apple capable of writing that software means they are at risk of being cracked regardless, I'm not sure how much we marginally increase that risk if code is written and then destroyed. Yes someone there or some group will then know for sure how to do it, but they were capable of it all along.

3) It is apparently perfectly legal for the NSA or FBI to hire hackers to break the phone themselves, and then have that ability to use for any phone. IF Apple wins then won't they just hire those people and make it happen? Let me tell you guys, Apple is NOT the only group you could put together to hack these phones. Anything can be hacked with enough time and money and given the number of phones it seems a solid investment for the government.

So it's OK and not a privacy issue for the government to develop this ability on its own, as they have apparently done in the past, but it's a huge deal for Apple to do it? Of course not, it was a privacy concern all along, but this doesn't change the current balance at all to hack the phone b/c we know they've done it and are still doing it.

If this is a privacy concern we'd better start on legislation to ban the government from hacking any of these devices, right? B/c surely them doing it on their own with their own tech is worse than having to get a court order for Apple to do it. Yet that legislation doesn't seem to be out there on the docket, so really in the context of the broader problem this is a risk?

4) I don't want the government to be able to spy on me either, but this has followed the normal procedure for such a move, by going to the courts with valid reasons to invade someone's privacy and obtain the information. Happens every day in criminal investigations. Them having a court order to access ONE phone, with the order properly implemented to be as secure as possible with the tech to do so, isn't any great advancement of government powers of spying. Not compared to the NSA's ability to track literally every phone call and read every text in the country if they chose.


I'd rather the government not look into our business, but there is a clear need for government to investigate crimes and to secure the information they need for that investigation, and IMO that has nothing to do with terrorism per se. the system we have used for that for more than 200 years is that the law enforcement agency must go to the courts and prove enough cause to invade someone's privacy to get the information.

But now we're going to say no there's a firewall where if you can afford a $600 phone then you are insulated from that possibility and tough if there is a crime? Well it sure is going to make these things popular with drug dealers and pimps.

[CitizenBBN]

One other thought, isn't it interesting that once again it's the left leaning President who is all for the government having this ability? I find it interesting how privacy and libertarian rights issues cuts across the traditional left/right of politics.

I am FAR more concerned about government information gathering and even private corporate info gathering that does NOT go through any kind of judicial review than I am an isolated case where proper court orders were obtained. Those are the real issues, not the physical hacking of one phone that clearly has just cause to be investigated.

[bigsky]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...backdoor.shtml

Update is "yes the judge did".

[bigsky]

http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ampaign=buffer

CATO weighs in

[CitizenBBN]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...backdoor.shtml

Update is "yes the judge did".

yes and no, which is the same answer as before. The order is specific that the code only work to open this one phone re the link you gave, and what they want is to turn off the deletion routine if you put in 10 wrong passwords so the FBI can put it on a machine and brute force attack it.

still the same issue, same concerns. if the code gets out others can use it, but others can work to develop that code anyway, and probably were already. the order in that link says it is for that one phone and we're right back to the same point, with the fear being it will be used more than this one time versus the need to investigate these people.

it doesn't require that the feature be disabled on all Apple phones or that the ability to do it even be turned over to the FBI. It just orders Apple to deal with this one phone. Then we have to balance the risk of it getting out and the damage of that versus law enforcement needs.

[CitizenBBN]

http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ampaign=buffer

CATO weighs in

A good case, but clearly the fear there is that this creates enough precedent that the NSA et al can force companies to put spyware on phones, etc. NO doubt that is a scary situation, and I'm as anti-government as anyone, but it doesn't follow to me that legally that precedent is created. I do think 100% the government wants that ability, I have zero doubt, but I'm not sure this opens that door.

I'd like to offer a second scenario that is just as scary IMO: a world of completely secure communications across the globe that allows any criminal or terrorist to be insulated from any kind of technological tracking or investigation if caught. A secure phone on each end using a VPN tunnel with proper security, operating peer to peer or to an untouchable foreign server, and they are completely protected in the world where companies can produce rock hard security and government has no access.

That's great if we're the Founding Fathers fighting tyranny or Chinese dissidents, not so great if it's Sinaloa drug lords or Al Queda terrorists coordinating attacks in the US.

[Doc]

Few thoughts:

1) Doc, the government has the absolute right to require companies to assist in law enforcement efforts via court orders. Companies are required to turn over records and allow physical access to premises all the time, and that is codified in the law.

Apple may be due compensation, but private companies do have an obligation to assist as determined by the courts.

The government is not asking them to turn over records or allow access to premises. I see these as two different things. Encryption is there to insure security. If the law enforcement wants access then let them do it themselves. If they can't, so be it.

2) If the tech to hack the phones is handed over to the FBI OK I get the concern, but if this one phone is cracked and the code then destroyed then it's not clear my privacy is at risk at all. The fact that there are people at Apple capable of writing that software means they are at risk of being cracked regardless, I'm not sure how much we marginally increase that risk if code is written and then destroyed. Yes someone there or some group will then know for sure how to do it, but they were capable of it all along.

3) It is apparently perfectly legal for the NSA or FBI to hire hackers to break the phone themselves, and then have that ability to use for any phone. IF Apple wins then won't they just hire those people and make it happen? Let me tell you guys, Apple is NOT the only group you could put together to hack these phones. Anything can be hacked with enough time and money and given the number of phones it seems a solid investment for the government.

I agree so why is the gov't asking a private company to do their dirty work? This is not Apple's job. They are not in the law enforcement or terrorism prevention business. They make phones, computers and software. They don't solve crimes.

So it's OK and not a privacy issue for the government to develop this ability on its own, as they have apparently done in the past, but it's a huge deal for Apple to do it? Of course not, it was a privacy concern all along, but this doesn't change the current balance at all to hack the phone b/c we know they've done it and are still doing it.

Not for me. While the privacy is at part of the issue, most is that I don't want the gov't telling business to do the gov't or law enforcement job. To me its too slippery of a slope to go down.

If this is a privacy concern we'd better start on legislation to ban the government from hacking any of these devices, right? B/c surely them doing it on their own with their own tech is worse than having to get a court order for Apple to do it. Yet that legislation doesn't seem to be out there on the docket, so really in the context of the broader problem this is a risk?

4) I don't want the government to be able to spy on me either, but this has followed the normal procedure for such a move, by going to the courts with valid reasons to invade someone's privacy and obtain the information. Happens every day in criminal investigations. Them having a court order to access ONE phone, with the order properly implemented to be as secure as possible with the tech to do so, isn't any great advancement of government powers of spying. Not compared to the NSA's ability to track literally every phone call and read every text in the country if they chose.


I'd rather the government not look into our business, but there is a clear need for government to investigate crimes and to secure the information they need for that investigation, and IMO that has nothing to do with terrorism per se. the system we have used for that for more than 200 years is that the law enforcement agency must go to the courts and prove enough cause to invade someone's privacy to get the information.

But now we're going to say no there's a firewall where if you can afford a $600 phone then you are insulated from that possibility and tough if there is a crime? Well it sure is going to make these things popular with drug dealers and pimps.

,

[CitizenBBN]

Doc, when a private company provides premises access, they use their key and open the door, they don't tell the government they have to break it down.

Tech companies are compelled every day to search for records and turn over phone records, GPS data, financial transactions, etc. In fact per the 1992 law internet and phone companies are obliged to keep certain things and make them available to government, which is very similar to this situation.

So it's preferable and even OK for the NSA to hire hackers and hack the Apple secure key so they can upload anything they want to phones to break them or disable them or spy on them, but compelling Apple to use their code to upload something on one phone is a big deal? I don't get that at all.

As for your slippery slope, I get your concern, but we got down that hill a long time ago. Via court order the government can compel a car company to turn on tracking and report the location of a car, or compel access to about anything. This is just compelling access to a device.

I'm more worried about the privacy question, and if this were to be an order to put a permanent backdoor on a phone I'd be deeply worried, but if the government has to go to a court and get an order to access the phone then the same protection is in place that we have used for centuries and use every day currently.

[Doc]

Doc, when a private company provides premises access, they use their key and open the door, they don't tell the government they have to break it down.

Tech companies are compelled every day to search for records and turn over phone records, GPS data, financial transactions, etc. In fact per the 1992 law internet and phone companies are obliged to keep certain things and make them available to government, which is very similar to this situation. They are asking the company to by pass something the company has put in. Its totally different. The gov't is perfectly able to come into Apple and search their premises. I've no problem with that.

So it's preferable and even OK for the NSA to hire hackers and hack the Apple secure key so they can upload anything they want to phones to break them or disable them or spy on them, but compelling Apple to use their code to upload something on one phone is a big deal? I don't get that at all.
Sorry that you don't get it. Not sure why. I'm against the government compelling a private company what to do when the company has done nothing illegal. I'm against the government telling a private company they MUST assist them in overriding a product that the company legally designed and produced, a product that is 100% legal to own and use. Maybe next week the gov't will compel me to do something I have no interest in doing. Who knows, maybe they are looking for a gun seller looking to sell guns to the Mexican Cartel as part of Fast and Furious part deux. You interested? Perhaps the government forcing you to would change your attitude on them overstepping their bounds.

Also, its not OK for the gov't to upload anything they want, but then I didn't realize that was the topic at hand. I stand with Rand on that.

As for your slippery slope, I get your concern, but we got down that hill a long time ago. Via court order the government can compel a car company to turn on tracking and report the location of a car, or compel access to about anything. This is just compelling access to a device.

I'm more worried about the privacy question, and if this were to be an order to put a permanent backdoor on a phone I'd be deeply worried, but if the government has to go to a court and get an order to access the phone then the same protection is in place that we have used for centuries and use every day currently.

I too am worried about the privacy issue. Its a valid concern.

.