See my post above why your assumption is wrong. American justice can force any company to disclose your data, including you.
Yes. But Apple doesn't have to do anything to hand over your data. They say they don't have access to your data....period and hand over entire database, so government can hack/decryp or do whatever to extract your data from the bulk. Apple would not hand over a specific data.
Ah but they'll have to serve me with a warrant meaning they went to a judge and convinced her they had a reasonable basis for the search. Which is tougher than merely cranking out a boilerplate demand from some F.B.I. secretary or N.S.A'ing an online database.
I'd say the phone call that took less than a minute from the Feds to the presiding Judge to remind her of her duties to party and government... is faster.
Your home-brewed backup disks, nor your iPhone will be able to stand up to you facing serious jail time and other unsavory repercussions... unless you give them the password.
Did you even read about Levison and/or Yahoo? Levison can even be found squirming in an interview on YouTube regardless of his brave actions to shut down and make a bold statement after his decision. That guy was seriously scared (his lawyer at his side visibly more so!), for doing nothing other than providing a service that was used be someone in the cross-hairs of the government. I wonder what caused that? And whether it could happen to, well... just any naive and voiceless bloke that doesn't want to accept what his government representatives have allowed to happen with their constituent's freedoms and right to privacy.
NO, THEY DON’T. It is legally impossible to have a reasonable suspicion of EVERY PERSON IN THE COUNTRY.
That's a misreading of the program(s). For any specific analysis of an individual's information they do have to have reasonable suspicion, satisfying a specific set of criteria and they are limited as to how many links "out" they can follow connections. Confusing collection, or retention, with analysis.
Yes. But Apple doesn't have to do anything to hand over your data. They say they don't have access to your data....period and hand over entire database, so government can hack/decryp or do whatever to extract your data from the bulk. Apple would not hand over a specific data.
Oh Really?
All content requests require a search warrant. If we are legally compelled to divulge any information and it is not counterproductive to the facts of the case, we provide notice to the customer when allowed and deliver the narrowest set of information possible in response. National security-related requests are not considered Device Requests or Account Requests and are reported in a separate category altogether.
Re. National security request: A tiny percentage of our millions of accounts is affected by national security-related requests. In the first six months of 2014, we received 250 or fewer of these requests. Though we would like to be more specific, by law this is the most precise information we are currently allowed to disclose.
See my previous posts... and NO I am not beating up on Apple over this. It is the law unfortunately:
iCloud is Apple’s cloud service that allows customers to access music, photos, applications, contacts, calendars, and documents from their iOS devices and Mac or Windows personal computers. It also enables customers to back up their iOS devices to iCloud. With the iCloud service, customers can get an iCloud.com email account. iCloud email domains can be @icloud.com, @me.com3 and @mac.com. The following information is available from iCloud.
i. Subscriber Information
When a customer sets up an iCloud account, basic subscriber information such as name, physical address, email address, and telephone number may be provided to Apple. Additionally, information regarding iCloud feature connections may also be available. iCloud subscriber information and connection logs with IP addresses can be obtained with a subpoena or greater legal process.
ii. Mail Logs
iCloud mail logs are retained for approximately a period of 60 days. Mail logs include records of incoming and outgoing communications such as time, date, sender email addresses, and recipient email addresses. This information is available only through a court order under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) (or a court order with an equivalent legal standard) or a search warrant.
iii. Email Content
iCloud only stores the email a user has elected to maintain in the account while the customer’s account remains active. Apple is unable to produce deleted content. Apple will produce customer content, as it exists in the customer’s mailbox in response to a search warrant.
iv. Other iCloud Content. PhotoStream, Docs, Contacts, Calendars, Bookmarks, iOS Device Backups
iCloud only stores the content for these services that the customer has elected to maintain in the account while the customer’s account remains active. Apple does not retain deleted content once it is cleared from Apple’s servers. Apple will produce customer content in these categories only in response to a valid search warrant.
++++
I wish it was otherwise.... but you were wrong in thinking Apple would never turn over specific data. They simply have no other choice.
Oh, okay, I guess that means that absolutely anything whatsoever, regardless of content, can be a law¡
4th Amendment supersedes this.
No, it defines it.
Unless the unreasonable approach is taken that ALL searches are constitutionally "unreasonable", which is a rather large fallacy of logic.
I mean really, "supersedes"? When the Bill of Rights were drafted AT THE SAME TIME as the body of the Constitution? Now the 14th DID supersede the Enumeration in Article 1 Section 2
On that anything can be a law? Legislatures pass some weird bait stuff: that's why the Founders put in a Supreme Court, Article III of the very same Constitution. With perhaps a bit of help from Marbury v. Madison.
You are overstating your case rather dramatically. It's simply ridiculous to claim the Apple Platform is "more secure than any other platform" without being more specific about what the hell you are talking about. Seems that security is not your home turf.
Uh, chill the hell out. I'm sure he was implying "consumer" platform, ie. a platform a normal person would conceivably use. You know, compared to Android/Windows phone devices? If you disagree with his statement, then please, enlighten us as to more secure platforms, instead of mocking him. The point is, if you care about security/privacy, choosing an iPhone as a smartphone is probably a better bet than anything else.
Two things amuse me about your post.
The first is that you tell someone to chill out; you, of all people!
The second is that you condition it with 'the hell' - only you, Slurpy!
Unless the unreasonable approach is taken that ALL searches are constitutionally "unreasonable", which is a rather large fallacy of logic.
No, it’s not ‘all or nothing’. Try again.
I mean really, "supersedes"? When the Bill of Rights were drafted AT THE SAME TIME as the body of the Constitution?
Afterward, but sure. And yes, the bill of rights defines quite clear restrictions on the laws passable by Congress, superseding the prior statement in the Constitution regarding them.
I feel obliged to write at this late hour here, that I am NOT bashing Apple nor it's Privacy Statement with my recent posts to this thread. Not in the least.
Fact is that Apple has stated their intentions and what they do with your data as a company and business objective... all of which I sincerely believe to by honest and true just as much as the sincere statement from Tim Cook.
As always... there must be a HOWEVER though.
While your data is becoming safer every day against hackers and unauthorized breaches while using Apple's devices or services like iCloud... it is the AUTHORIZED requests that give me the most concern. Yet once understood and the legalities involved... Apple very well may offer a safer haven than you could ever afford yourself.
First though, the misconceptions must be put to rest. Specifically that some posters here think their data will be safer at home or on any other storage device within US jurisdiction, and that they should seek out these other "safer" alternatives and use them as opposed to Apple services. And that Apple will not and can not turn over data if subpoenaed to do so.
Bullshit... and you can stop searching for such a service and/or waiting for Apple to say "never", because the service does not and can not exist according to the laws passed by your Congress over the last decade after 9/ll. Many of those laws have never been tested in a court... yet have been unlawfully usurped and expanded upon by loop-holes within the original law itself, giving privileges never granted over your freedoms, privacy and constitutional rights to justice.
Apple is doing all it LEGALLY can to help safeguard your data, and besides security experts also has legal experts to protect your data... and in the end... their name and company. So when "those guys" come knocking, not only does Apple need to comply with their wishes when they knock on their door... but so do you. Who do YOU think has the better weapons to at least put up the semblance of a fight, both financially and legally? Fact: Apple's lawyers and legal team are always going to be far more competent at protecting your privacy, than any lawyer most people here would ever be able to afford.
It may appear I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth... which I am.
One the one side, I feel that only when a person is fully informed about what Apple (and they) MUST turn over to authorities when required, they are more likely to trust the services and security that Apple provides if they truly have nothing to hide. Out of the other side, if they are concerned over the LAWS that Apple and they themselves must comply with, they will support and work alongside Apple and support other organizations like the EFF... to bloody fucking work towards changing those laws and tighten up privacy for everyone... including themselves!
The End. (Not by a long shot... y'all have work to do.... but I'm outa here.)
FWIW on-device encryption will be on by default on all newer Google Android smartphones/tablets beginning with Android L rolling out in the next few weeks. Encryption has been optional for years. So like iPhones running iOS8 police will not be able to access your photos, data or communications stored on your Android smartphone without your password.
“For over three years Android has offered encryption, and keys are not stored off of the device, so they cannot be shared with law enforcement,” said company spokeswoman Niki Christoff.
FWIW on-device encryption will be on by default on all newer Google Android smartphones/tablets beginning with Android L rolling out in the next few weeks. Encryption has been optional for years. So like iPhones running iOS8 police will not be able to access your photos, data or communications stored on your Android smartphone without your password.
In regards to that WaPo article... I really can't take what they're stating seriously:
"But that standard is quickly being rendered moot; eventually no form of legal compulsion will suffice to force the unlocking of most smartphones."
...and...
Much data is likely to remain on iCloud accounts, which back up pictures and other data by default for many iPhones and iPads; police with search warrants will still be able to access this information. Users who want to prevent all forms of police access to their information can adjust their phone settings in a way that blocks data from flowing to iCloud.
I've been led to believe that anyone that is under investigation can be ordered by the court to cooperate and comply with a court's order... or be faced with contempt of court and/or disrupting an ongoing investigation charges. If I'm not mistaken, either or can often result in jail time.
WaPo is stating that there's some law in place already that you and your lawyer can disregard a court order and get away with it unscathed? Really?
If what WaPo states is the truth and nothing but the truth in a lawful defense of your privacy with no repercussions, then OK.... I'll just delete all of my above posts because I was wrong to think that there are consequences, situations, and games that law enforcement and prosecuting attorneys play that may "gently coerce" just about anyone into giving up their passwords freely.
BTW: When did this new transparent, upstanding and letter-of-the-law abiding trend start... and when did all of the little town "Okey-Dokey" cowboy jurisdictions get the memo?
Edited to add: or could it be WaPo is extrapolating the unlawful search and seizure without a warrant or "strong suspicion of a criminal activity" that has been going on of late in the US, where nobody seems to even know what the laws are, more so those in law enforcement (because of Obama, like in NY)?
“For over three years Android has offered encryption, and keys are not stored off of the device, so they cannot be shared with law enforcement,” said company spokeswoman Niki Christoff.
Who's lol now?
You seem like you would be one of the first to hand over your password, when the officer(s) says, "your under investigation for the storage and distribution of child porn".
Meaning: I don't think you're as bright as you think you are.
“For over three years Android has offered encryption, and keys are not stored off of the device, so they cannot be shared with law enforcement,” said company spokeswoman Niki Christoff.
Comments
See my post above why your assumption is wrong. American justice can force any company to disclose your data, including you.
Yes. But Apple doesn't have to do anything to hand over your data. They say they don't have access to your data....period and hand over entire database, so government can hack/decryp or do whatever to extract your data from the bulk. Apple would not hand over a specific data.
I'd say the phone call that took less than a minute from the Feds to the presiding Judge to remind her of her duties to party and government... is faster.
Your home-brewed backup disks, nor your iPhone will be able to stand up to you facing serious jail time and other unsavory repercussions... unless you give them the password.
Did you even read about Levison and/or Yahoo? Levison can even be found squirming in an interview on YouTube regardless of his brave actions to shut down and make a bold statement after his decision. That guy was seriously scared (his lawyer at his side visibly more so!), for doing nothing other than providing a service that was used be someone in the cross-hairs of the government. I wonder what caused that? And whether it could happen to, well... just any naive and voiceless bloke that doesn't want to accept what his government representatives have allowed to happen with their constituent's freedoms and right to privacy.
NO, THEY DON’T. It is legally impossible to have a reasonable suspicion of EVERY PERSON IN THE COUNTRY.
That's a misreading of the program(s). For any specific analysis of an individual's information they do have to have reasonable suspicion, satisfying a specific set of criteria and they are limited as to how many links "out" they can follow connections. Confusing collection, or retention, with analysis.
They have no right to collect or analyze.
They have no right to collect or analyze.
Congress has the "right" to draft, vote on and pass laws: Article I, Section 8, such laws have established procedures for collection and analysis.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
ETA: Subject, of course to the constraints of the Fifth and Fourteenth due process constraints.
Oh, okay, I guess that means that absolutely anything whatsoever, regardless of content, can be a law¡
4th Amendment supersedes this.
Oh Really?
All content requests require a search warrant. If we are legally compelled to divulge any information and it is not counterproductive to the facts of the case, we provide notice to the customer when allowed and deliver the narrowest set of information possible in response. National security-related requests are not considered Device Requests or Account Requests and are reported in a separate category altogether.
Re. National security request:
A tiny percentage of our millions of accounts is affected by national security-related requests. In the first six months of 2014, we received 250 or fewer of these requests. Though we would like to be more specific, by law this is the most precise information we are currently allowed to disclose.
See my previous posts... and NO I am not beating up on Apple over this. It is the law unfortunately:
U.S. Code › Title 47 › Chapter 5 › Subchapter II › Part I › § 229
47 U.S. Code § 229 - Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act compliance
Also portions of the Patriot Act, which is being abused to spy on US Citizens as well as those in other countries:
Access to Records and Other Items Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
..and last but not least, Apple Legal provides us with some insight into the laws they are required to obey:
Apple Legal Process Guidelines - Entire document
III. Information Available From Apple
G. iCloud
iCloud is Apple’s cloud service that allows customers to access music, photos, applications, contacts, calendars, and documents from their iOS devices and Mac or Windows personal computers. It also enables customers to back up their iOS devices to iCloud. With the iCloud service, customers can get an iCloud.com email account. iCloud email domains can be @icloud.com, @me.com3 and @mac.com. The following information is available from iCloud.
i. Subscriber Information
When a customer sets up an iCloud account, basic subscriber information such as name, physical address, email address, and telephone number may be provided to Apple. Additionally, information regarding iCloud feature connections may also be available. iCloud subscriber information and connection logs with IP addresses can be obtained with a subpoena or greater legal process.
ii. Mail Logs
iCloud mail logs are retained for approximately a period of 60 days. Mail logs include records of incoming and outgoing communications such as time, date, sender email addresses, and recipient email addresses. This information is available only through a court order under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) (or a court order with an equivalent legal standard) or a search warrant.
iii. Email Content
iCloud only stores the email a user has elected to maintain in the account while the customer’s account remains active. Apple is unable to produce deleted content. Apple will produce customer content, as it exists in the customer’s mailbox in response to a search warrant.
iv. Other iCloud Content. PhotoStream, Docs, Contacts, Calendars, Bookmarks, iOS Device Backups
iCloud only stores the content for these services that the customer has elected to maintain in the account while the customer’s account remains active. Apple does not retain deleted content once it is cleared from Apple’s servers. Apple will produce customer content in these categories only in response to a valid search warrant.
++++
I wish it was otherwise.... but you were wrong in thinking Apple would never turn over specific data. They simply have no other choice.
A little disingenuous of Cook since almost all of this data is duplicated in iCloud, that is within the government's reach.
You too... Read the story.
U2? The story about Apple forcing their taste in music upon us?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Oh, okay, I guess that means that absolutely anything whatsoever, regardless of content, can be a law¡
4th Amendment supersedes this.
No, it defines it.
Unless the unreasonable approach is taken that ALL searches are constitutionally "unreasonable", which is a rather large fallacy of logic.
I mean really, "supersedes"? When the Bill of Rights were drafted AT THE SAME TIME as the body of the Constitution? Now the 14th DID supersede the Enumeration in Article 1 Section 2
On that anything can be a law? Legislatures pass some weird bait stuff: that's why the Founders put in a Supreme Court, Article III of the very same Constitution. With perhaps a bit of help from Marbury v. Madison.
A little disingenuous of Cook since almost all of this data is duplicated in iCloud, that is within the government's reach.
not at all. that decision is entirely up to you. and call history is never on icloud. imessages theyve stated they cant decrypt, i believe.
You are overstating your case rather dramatically. It's simply ridiculous to claim the Apple Platform is "more secure than any other platform" without being more specific about what the hell you are talking about. Seems that security is not your home turf.
Uh, chill the hell out. I'm sure he was implying "consumer" platform, ie. a platform a normal person would conceivably use. You know, compared to Android/Windows phone devices? If you disagree with his statement, then please, enlighten us as to more secure platforms, instead of mocking him. The point is, if you care about security/privacy, choosing an iPhone as a smartphone is probably a better bet than anything else.
Two things amuse me about your post.
The first is that you tell someone to chill out; you, of all people!
The second is that you condition it with 'the hell' - only you, Slurpy!
Unless the unreasonable approach is taken that ALL searches are constitutionally "unreasonable", which is a rather large fallacy of logic.
No, it’s not ‘all or nothing’. Try again.
Afterward, but sure. And yes, the bill of rights defines quite clear restrictions on the laws passable by Congress, superseding the prior statement in the Constitution regarding them.
Fact is that Apple has stated their intentions and what they do with your data as a company and business objective... all of which I sincerely believe to by honest and true just as much as the sincere statement from Tim Cook.
As always... there must be a HOWEVER though.
While your data is becoming safer every day against hackers and unauthorized breaches while using Apple's devices or services like iCloud... it is the AUTHORIZED requests that give me the most concern. Yet once understood and the legalities involved... Apple very well may offer a safer haven than you could ever afford yourself.
First though, the misconceptions must be put to rest. Specifically that some posters here think their data will be safer at home or on any other storage device within US jurisdiction, and that they should seek out these other "safer" alternatives and use them as opposed to Apple services. And that Apple will not and can not turn over data if subpoenaed to do so.
Bullshit... and you can stop searching for such a service and/or waiting for Apple to say "never", because the service does not and can not exist according to the laws passed by your Congress over the last decade after 9/ll. Many of those laws have never been tested in a court... yet have been unlawfully usurped and expanded upon by loop-holes within the original law itself, giving privileges never granted over your freedoms, privacy and constitutional rights to justice.
Apple is doing all it LEGALLY can to help safeguard your data, and besides security experts also has legal experts to protect your data... and in the end... their name and company. So when "those guys" come knocking, not only does Apple need to comply with their wishes when they knock on their door... but so do you. Who do YOU think has the better weapons to at least put up the semblance of a fight, both financially and legally? Fact: Apple's lawyers and legal team are always going to be far more competent at protecting your privacy, than any lawyer most people here would ever be able to afford.
It may appear I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth... which I am.
One the one side, I feel that only when a person is fully informed about what Apple (and they) MUST turn over to authorities when required, they are more likely to trust the services and security that Apple provides if they truly have nothing to hide. Out of the other side, if they are concerned over the LAWS that Apple and they themselves must comply with, they will support and work alongside Apple and support other organizations like the EFF... to bloody fucking work towards changing those laws and tighten up privacy for everyone... including themselves!
The End. (Not by a long shot... y'all have work to do.... but I'm outa here.)
No matter whether you use one OS or the other the recent attention paid to privacy issues is good news.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/09/18/newest-androids-will-join-iphones-in-offering-default-encryption-blocking-police/
THis is an awesome claim Android will never be able to make.
Take your foot out of your mouth. Apple is copying Android.
Encrypting has been a part of the Android OS for years.
lol.
lol.
“For over three years Android has offered encryption, and keys are not stored off of the device, so they cannot be shared with law enforcement,” said company spokeswoman Niki Christoff.
Who's lol now?
In regards to that WaPo article... I really can't take what they're stating seriously:
"But that standard is quickly being rendered moot; eventually no form of legal compulsion will suffice to force the unlocking of most smartphones."
...and...
Much data is likely to remain on iCloud accounts, which back up pictures and other data by default for many iPhones and iPads; police with search warrants will still be able to access this information. Users who want to prevent all forms of police access to their information can adjust their phone settings in a way that blocks data from flowing to iCloud.
I've been led to believe that anyone that is under investigation can be ordered by the court to cooperate and comply with a court's order... or be faced with contempt of court and/or disrupting an ongoing investigation charges. If I'm not mistaken, either or can often result in jail time.
WaPo is stating that there's some law in place already that you and your lawyer can disregard a court order and get away with it unscathed? Really?
If what WaPo states is the truth and nothing but the truth in a lawful defense of your privacy with no repercussions, then OK.... I'll just delete all of my above posts because I was wrong to think that there are consequences, situations, and games that law enforcement and prosecuting attorneys play that may "gently coerce" just about anyone into giving up their passwords freely.
BTW: When did this new transparent, upstanding and letter-of-the-law abiding trend start... and when did all of the little town "Okey-Dokey" cowboy jurisdictions get the memo?
Edited to add: or could it be WaPo is extrapolating the unlawful search and seizure without a warrant or "strong suspicion of a criminal activity" that has been going on of late in the US, where nobody seems to even know what the laws are, more so those in law enforcement (because of Obama, like in NY)?
You seem like you would be one of the first to hand over your password, when the officer(s) says, "your under investigation for the storage and distribution of child porn".
Meaning: I don't think you're as bright as you think you are.
As Snowden revealed, Android is a security sieve.