User security, privacy issues draw sharp contrast between Apple iOS, Google Android in FBI encrypti

13567

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 122
    Everyones looking at me Stop it!!!!!......on the other hand....So What!
  • Reply 42 of 122
    Pichai declared himself with his 'could be a troubling precedent' ... a weasel comment if I ever heard one.
    ration alcornchipsuddenly newtonmr ojony0
  • Reply 43 of 122
    This entire debate is moot & political theater

    http://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf

    "Each Secure Enclave is provisioned during fabrication with its own UID (Unique ID) that is not accessible to other parts of the system and is not known to Apple. When the device starts up, an ephemeral key is created, entangled with its UID, and used to encrypt the Secure Enclave’s portion of the device’s memory space."

    pg 7 is the dummies guide of this, the guide may have an updated version which I'm sure someone can cite much better than I.  If its actually true then no amount of arm twisting/political wrangling is going to help Apple break into that phone.  In short its a forced hoax in a political year to get everyone talking about we need a "magic" to save us from "terrorism".

    I know engineering is an uncomfortable thing to consider but all of technology is actually based on it. Apple designed this phone with failsafes.
  • Reply 44 of 122
    I understand that the family members of the deceased individuals of the massacre in California would not understand that this countries' citizens value their privacy rather than justice. If those privacy supporting citizens are doing nothing that anyone would care about, why worry. What apple has done has provided the rest of us with "their" absolute idea of how things should happen in this country. They have becomes above the law. I value my sense of justice much more than privacy because I am an American. If you do a crime, with time, you will do the time,
  • Reply 45 of 122
    This entire debate is moot & political theater

    http://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf

    "Each Secure Enclave is provisioned during fabrication with its own UID (Unique ID) that is not accessible to other parts of the system and is not known to Apple. When the device starts up, an ephemeral key is created, entangled with its UID, and used to encrypt the Secure Enclave’s portion of the device’s memory space."

    [...]

    I know engineering is an uncomfortable thing to consider but all of technology is actually based on it. Apple designed this phone with failsafes.
    Close, but no cigar.

    What this debate reveals is that Apple already has built in the backdoor (either that, or it's a designed in security hole, take your pick)

    All the FBI is asking for is Apple's help to use this backdoor to allow them to brute-force the passcode.

    What's revealed by this is that Apple can push an update to any phone at any time that will disable the wiping feature that's supposed to prevent brute-forcing a passcode.

    The Secure Enclave is no protection against this type of attack.

    It's quite hypocritical of Apple to position their statement the way they have - they're the ones who built in this "feature", and they could use it against the will of any of their users.

    slimpotato had it right in the previous post - Apple knows that they have designed in the ability for them to do this. If they really had their users' privacy in mind, they would have provided privacy from anyone's snooping, including their own.
  • Reply 46 of 122
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,040member
    glassy2 said:
    I understand that the family members of the deceased individuals of the massacre in California would not understand that this countries' citizens value their privacy rather than justice. If those privacy supporting citizens are doing nothing that anyone would care about, why worry. What apple has done has provided the rest of us with "their" absolute idea of how things should happen in this country. They have becomes above the law. I value my sense of justice much more than privacy because I am an American. If you do a crime, with time, you will do the time,
    What a dumb comment! Encryption had nothing to do with victims in San Bernardino! These dumbfuck terrorists were supposed to be spotted by NSA in the first place. The phone is an aftermath and may contain nothing. People like you deserve to live in country like Iran or China where there's virtually no democracy. Get a life!
    edited February 2016 SpamSandwichhlee1169Anijony0
  • Reply 47 of 122
    jungmark said:
    This article seems far too reductive to me. The argument that one decryption is all descriptions is just wrong. This has proceeded exactly as it should, through open procedure in public courts.

    You don't get to say "I use Apple products so I can ignore subpenas" or even worse,  "the law doesn't apply because tech."

    Despite their high horse, all I see Apple doing is undermining rule of law. We should be applauding this sort of thing coming out of the NSAs shadow world and into the light of regular law and democratic process.
    The government can't force a company to write code. Code is speech. 
    Hi jungmark. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know but it.seems code is legally differen from speech- code can be patented, speech can't, no?

    In any event, the government certainly has the power to compel corporate speech: Enron's emails, nutrition labeling, truth in advertising, etc. Hell, the FBI might have been on firmet legal ground if they'd just asked for all the source code and design documents, since those are in Apple's possession.

    The interesting question is if they have the power to force the company to create something new. Cook may have messed up by conceding they have the ability to do so. The order does say Apple would get paid for their work.
  • Reply 48 of 122
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,933member
    The San Bernardino killings are history. The FBI never had possession of the iPhone until it was too late.
    Case closed.

    Ah, but let's not forget the numbskulls who consciously ignored pro-ISIS Facebook postings made by the Pakistani. Yessir, the U.S. government is fully responsible for this one. "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"
    edited February 2016 anantksundaramSpamSandwichibill
  • Reply 49 of 122
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,040member
    ergosum said:
    This entire debate is moot & political theater

    http://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf

    "Each Secure Enclave is provisioned during fabrication with its own UID (Unique ID) that is not accessible to other parts of the system and is not known to Apple. When the device starts up, an ephemeral key is created, entangled with its UID, and used to encrypt the Secure Enclave’s portion of the device’s memory space."

    [...]

    I know engineering is an uncomfortable thing to consider but all of technology is actually based on it. Apple designed this phone with failsafes.
    Close, but no cigar.

    What this debate reveals is that Apple already has built in the backdoor (either that, or it's a designed in security hole, take your pick)

    All the FBI is asking for is Apple's help to use this backdoor to allow them to brute-force the passcode.

    What's revealed by this is that Apple can push an update to any phone at any time that will disable the wiping feature that's supposed to prevent brute-forcing a passcode.

    The Secure Enclave is no protection against this type of attack.

    It's quite hypocritical of Apple to position their statement the way they have - they're the ones who built in this "feature", and they could use it against the will of any of their users.

    slimpotato had it right in the previous post - Apple knows that they have designed in the ability for them to do this. If they really had their users' privacy in mind, they would have provided privacy from anyone's snooping, including their own.
    FBI want Apple to build iOS version that allows brute force attack, not only in this case but every iPhone in this world. FBI use this reason to gain access to all iPhone from now on. Think a bit: this iPhone was subscribed thru Verizon. That means everything is already tracked with that network. This iphone must either have iCloud or local PC back up and FBI already looked thru these and found nothing. All they have to do is to restore a backup of the phone from iCloud or PC with Apple ID provided by Apple to gain access to every file on that phone...I bet they couldn't find anything. These shooters in San Bernardino used encryped satellite phone to communicate. Do you think they're stupid enough to store their sensitive information on their iphone connected thru Verizon network? 
  • Reply 50 of 122
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    This tells you quite a bit about the safety of "Cloud" services. The FBI and NSA can twist an arm and get that data. So the encryption layer has to be on the device (your device) side.

    Google and such make their money at the expense of it's users privacy. I would never EVER use an Android device for anything but throw-away uses. The Apple devices are far more secure for this purpose, and the iOS devices are far more secure than the MacBook/iMac because the hard drive can be ejected from the notebook/desktop.

    What is going to happen is that Apple is going to start making the SSD's in their laptops and desktops non-removable and encrypted so that the same iOS security then applies to the desktops. 

    As for it being "impossible" for the FBI  or NSA to break into a device... they can obviously emulate the device hardware, or even pull the storage and brute force it that way. Both solutions risk destroying the device. Asking Apple to create a backdoor is not a solution and it puts the entire burden of unlocking the device on Apple instead of the FBI/NSA who have the probably cause.

    Any kind of backdoor is a bad thing. You can never prevent the keys from being leaked, look at how quickly CSS, AACS, BD+ and various other ways of defeating HDCP work in the media. You literately can not mandate that there be a backdoor in one content protection measure and not create backdoors in everything that implements it.

    If law enforcement wants to prevent having to deal with this in the future, they should not kill suspects except as a last resort. 
    anantksundaramSpamSandwichhlee1169jony0
  • Reply 51 of 122
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,298member
    LoopDoGG said:
    Everybody forget that encryption on Android has been possible on Android since Kit Kat and that it will be on by default on 6.0 and beyond? On my Samsung I have extra layer of security, KNOX. Android can be just as secure as Apple. We are reading too much into Google being silent. Though, if they stay silent too long, that can be suspect 
    The problem is they have back doors already and have been poor compromises when tested by security firms. The back doors they leave open for themselves allows others a way in. This is way they have more major breaches of android than Window XP. That is the reason they were able to break into the Andriod phone but not the iPhone. Weak encryption or Google has the keys. The other part is Google literally sifts through all your data on your phone. Email, texts, locations etc. who you are communicating with and about what. They say it doesn't matter because a computer does it, but once they collect and compile the data, they have it on their servers and then have to comply with the request. They were silent because their business model makes them complicit. This is why Google only mentioned Going end to end on encryption 2 years ago. To actually do it would limit their model significantly. 

    hlee1169jony0
  • Reply 52 of 122
    The Constitution is inconvenient for a reason! I am not a lawyer but I think Apple is within its rights to appeal this order. I do not particularly like Apple and I hate the terrorists but the responsibility for managing the access to this particular iPhone belongs to the government. I will explain why: The phone belongs to a government agency. The government agency was supposed to implement MDM (mobile device management) on all the mobile devices handed out to the employees. All the mobile devices (phones, laptops...) that are registered under the MDM have to be audited at least every year The IT department of the government agency will have a separate dedicated Apple ID capable to unlock the phone when presented with the proper judge order. The fact that the government agency does not follow the law either by incompetence or disregard (like in we are the government, the laws do not apply to us) does not have to create a liability on everybody else right to privacy
    jony0
  • Reply 53 of 122
    Security and privacy is what got this country started. The technology we have now didn't exist back in 1776 but the basic premise is the same. Freedom, security and privacy. Apple and Tim Cook need to stand their ground.
    anantksundaramSpamSandwichibilljony0
  • Reply 54 of 122
    misa said:
    This tells you quite a bit about the safety of "Cloud" services. The FBI and NSA can twist an arm and get that data. So the encryption layer has to be on the device (your device) side.

    Google and such make their money at the expense of it's users privacy. I would never EVER use an Android device for anything but throw-away uses. The Apple devices are far more secure for this purpose, and the iOS devices are far more secure than the MacBook/iMac because the hard drive can be ejected from the notebook/desktop.

    What is going to happen is that Apple is going to start making the SSD's in their laptops and desktops non-removable and encrypted so that the same iOS security then applies to the desktops. 

    As for it being "impossible" for the FBI  or NSA to break into a device... they can obviously emulate the device hardware, or even pull the storage and brute force it that way. Both solutions risk destroying the device. Asking Apple to create a backdoor is not a solution and it puts the entire burden of unlocking the device on Apple instead of the FBI/NSA who have the probably cause.

    Any kind of backdoor is a bad thing. You can never prevent the keys from being leaked, look at how quickly CSS, AACS, BD+ and various other ways of defeating HDCP work in the media. You literately can not mandate that there be a backdoor in one content protection measure and not create backdoors in everything that implements it.

    If law enforcement wants to prevent having to deal with this in the future, they should not kill suspects except as a last resort. 
    Brilliant post.
  • Reply 55 of 122
    xixoxixo Posts: 430member
    The Constitution is inconvenient for a reason! I am not a lawyer but I think Apple is within its rights to appeal this order. I do not particularly like Apple and I hate the terrorists but the responsibility for managing the access to this particular iPhone belongs to the government. I will explain why: The phone belongs to a government agency. The government agency was supposed to implement MDM (mobile device management) on all the mobile devices handed out to the employees. All the mobile devices (phones, laptops...) that are registered under the MDM have to be audited at least every year The IT department of the government agency will have a separate dedicated Apple ID capable to unlock the phone when presented with the proper judge order. The fact that the government agency does not follow the law either by incompetence or disregard (like in we are the government, the laws do not apply to us) does not have to create a liability on everybody else right to privacy
    excellent point!
    latifbpjony0
  • Reply 56 of 122
    I like the fact that Apple is standing up for their security. It is not good that this is preventing access to a dead terrorist's data, but I would now consider buying an apple product since they stand up against the government for protection of their customer's data from searches. What I see here is the US government using terrorism as an "excuse" to compromise the security of an encrypted device. I suspect that the US government will then abuse this to conduct searches in any other non-terrorist case, just like they did with the Patriot Act after September 11th. Abuse the tools to fight terrorism, and you loose them! Go Apple! I don't in any way support terrorism, but I don't want government searching mobile devices, nor anything else. The US Government has super computing. All they would have to do would be to read the phone's entire chip as a disc image. That would be what Apple should allow. Thus, it would cost the US government some money to do this search - a deterrent in the abuse of searches of such devices. If this is for terrorism, we should be able to use super computing to easily decrypt a phone image. This means that regular law enforcement wouldn't be able to decrypt such devices without going to the federal government and spending the money to load it into super computers. The story I heard is that the government is telling apple to make software that will allow access to the phone, which I suspect is just another way to trick apple into giving the government tools to bypass security on phones and conduct warrant less searches.
  • Reply 57 of 122
    Android user, seriously considering going to Apple because of their values alone. Nice job Cook and Apple--being a patriot does not mean being obedient.
    jony0
  • Reply 58 of 122
    ibillibill Posts: 400member
    Privacy is nothing but a knee jerk reaction and subsequent paranoia from neurotic people. People who truly need privacy can find better ways to conceal what they may.
    This issue from Tim Cook and all the Privacy advocates are nothing but insecure small people. This iisue is folly. People are not as important as they think they are.
    Neither are you.
    jony0
  • Reply 59 of 122
    We were all told by the FBI that such access would be appropriate in the case of a ticking time bomb or the kidnapping and impending murder of a child. Now the FBI wants in to the phone of someone they already know about, "just to see if there is anything more." Please, Mr. Cook, fight them all the way to the Supreme Court.
    matrix077
  • Reply 60 of 122
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    This whole thing has been a great ad for Apple, it's pure gold!

    For starters, iPhones are so damn secure, that even the US govt and whatever experts they have at the FBI and other agencies can't get into them, and they have publicly come out admitting to that.

    And secondly, Apple is willing to take a stand in order to protect the security and privacy of their users, something which few other companies are willing to do.

    Meanwhile, other companies are colluding with evil foreign governments to censor their users in the most draconian and anti-democratic ways. A good example is Facebook teaming up with the evil regime of Angela Merkel to censor posts and delete the truth from Facebook postings that the Gestapo doesn't approve of. They're about two steps away from turning into North Korea with lederhosen.

    I've said it many times before, but I'll say it again. I am so damn glad that I am not on Facebook, what a disgusting, joke of a company. And I am also damn glad that I am using an iPhone and not something else. I may not agree with Apple on everything politically, but I am glad that they take security seriously.


    edited February 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.