I worked in law enforcement for 27 years and then terrorism preparedness for nine more years. I always felt that if we didn't follow the law and protect people's' rights we couldn't expect anyone else to. That means that some criminals will escape prosecution. That's just the way it is, should be, and is the price we pay for our freedom. The DOJ and the judge are simply wrong on so many levels. This goes way beyond telling Apple to unlock a single phone.
The DOJ under Obama has been so corrupt. Fast & Furious, no charges from the IRS scandal, Apple ebook case, etc. Their attack on Apple is the icing on the cake. What's ironic is the DOJ can't even keep their own employee information secure.
I worked in law enforcement for 27 years and then terrorism preparedness for nine more years. I always felt that if we didn't follow the law and protect people's' rights we couldn't expect anyone else to. That means that some criminals will escape prosecution. That's just the way it is, should be, and is the price we pay for our freedom. The DOJ and the judge are simply wrong on so many levels. This goes way beyond telling Apple to unlock a single phone.
Are you familiar with the Sherriff's organization called the Oathkeepers? They advocate for sheriffs nationwide to not follow clearly unconstitutional laws.
The DOJ under Obama has been so corrupt. Fast & Furious, no charges from the IRS scandal, Apple ebook case, etc. Their attack on Apple is the icing on the cake. What's ironic is the DOJ can't even keep their own employee information secure.
Not to defend Obama, but Fast & Furious predates Obama. The DOJ, IRS and NSA are not behaving any differently under the current administration than they did under his predecessors. You only need to go back a little bit....like maybe to J. Edgar Hoover.
DOJ is demanding that Apple produce new software to meet this request. Apple shouldn't be doing such work for free, and they are standing up to this precedent. DOJ is in the wrong.
Yeah if there are any attorneys out there I'd like to hear what the legal precedent is for compelling an entity to create something that doesn't exist. I don't have the legal knowledge context to discuss this but it seems fundamentally wrong. Can a government simply compel us to do anything it wants because they need help? I don't believe that's in the Constitution, and if it's not then by what authority can they compel Apple to write new software?
The sooner Apple makes it to where NOONE can crack the encryption, the better. Government is never one to help in the privacy of any citizen, but will do everything they can to spy on absolutely everyone.
The irony here is that this case throws the bu!!sh!t flag in the face of the NSA who's been quietly telling the world that they have everyone's data already. If that were literally the case, the FBI could walk over to the NSA and get everything they wanted without the phone at all. This obviously isn't the case, so the NSA isn't doing what people thought they were.
Apple needs to improve encryption and make it bombproof so that no one, even them, can access anything against some's will.
Unfortunately there is no easy way to make a 4-digit pin bombproof. If the phone didn't wipe out data or block itself after a certain number of failed attempts, you can break into it in less than 2 days, by simply typing all possible 10 000 unique combinations. If you have a piece of software that can try pin codes for you, the process will take mere minutes (assuming a hardware-imposed delay of 80 milliseconds between each attempt).
So the fact that the phone "self-destructs" after 10 unsuccessful attempts is the only thing that makes it secure, and this is the feature Apple is being asked to circumvent by creating a new version of iOS, that does not have this feature and installing it on the San Bernardino iPhone, something Tim Cook calls a piece of "software that doesn't exist today". Apple should do everything they can to keep it that way because they are the only ones in a position to create this software. Without access to the iOS source core, even the smartest hacker/computer scientist, will find it difficult to circumvent this feature.
Also, to all the security experts saying that Apple can create this version of iOS for the specific UUID of the recovered iPhone, can they guarantee that I would not be able to install it on a different iPhone by spoofing the UUID. My point is that if Apple complies with this request, there could potentially be catastrophic and irreparable consequences for the many hundreds of millions of iOS devices (assuming the majority of Apple's 1 billion active devices are iOS devices)
Apologies for going off topic here, I just felt like getting this frustration off my chest.
Not too long ago I would have agreed with you. Since the NSA scandal I've had to shift my opinion. It is analogous to discrimination. It is easy to look the other way when an easily identifiable group is being discriminated against, as long as it isn't us. But if we are willing to look the other way, it is just a short jump until we find ourselves to be the next target.
The same DOJ that declared Apple guilty of a "bad" ebook model before there was even a trial right?
They actual mentioned Apple was guilty in their eyes months before a trial even started. There was no amount of contrary evidence that was going to stop them.
That department is run by fools.
Certainly they arent after justice.
DOA is more like it.
Department Of Agenda.
Are you confusing the Judge in the eBook anti-trust case with DoJ? DoJ isn't the Judicial Branch. rather they investigate and prosecute on behalf of the government of the people, by the people. They should think and make the case that all those they prosecute are guilty of the charges.
DOJ still would have to argue their case before the Supreme Court where I would expect them to lose. I don't think there is a law that can force someone against their will to write software.
He's talking about cybercrime, and he wants to open a backdoor into the world's smartphone's, because that is what is going to propagate around the world. Every so-called democracy and dictator is going to follow the U.S. lead and demand backdoors. Vladimir is laughing his ass off.
I am wondering what would Jack Bauer and Chloe do under this kind of situation. The whole 24 series would fall apart. Would JB point his gun at someone and yell "there is no enough time" and "now tell me..." etc.
Funny I was just thinking about this scenario. And yes, Jack Bauer would be pointing a gun at Tim Cook's head after abducting from his home and driving him to his office at 3AM at Apple. If Cook didn't comply, Bauer would brutally assault him while the engineering team looked on. Threatening each one of them one-by-one. And they would have less than 24 hours to comply in order for Bauer to unlock the phone and thwart the next terrorist attack.
Which brings me to the next thing ... if the government is filing against Apple, and corporations are people in the eyes of the law, what happens if "Apple" doesn't comply? Does the company go to jail? Or do its officers go to jail? Or all of its employees? Or do they just take the company away from everyone and not let anyone in to go to work?
The company simply points to The Cult of Apple and like Hobby Lobby, cults can't be forced to do stuff against their faith. Apple get's off.
DOJ: "....based on its concern for its business model and public brand marketing strategy...."
That is so cynical, and so many people believe this, and refuse to believe a large public company can act on principle. But Apple is not most companies and Tim Cook is not most CEOs. It's hard to imagine Steve Jobs doing anything more daring and risky than Cook is doing right now. The muted comments by other companies or CEOs, even those sort-of supporting Apple, help prove how exceptionally serious about this Cook is.
There are a billion active Apple devices, many not in the U.S., and it's clear Tim Cook feels personally responsible for making the privacy features of those phones work. Privacy is a lfe and death issue in many situations.
The DOJ under Obama has been so corrupt. Fast & Furious, no charges from the IRS scandal, Apple ebook case, etc. Their attack on Apple is the icing on the cake. What's ironic is the DOJ can't even keep their own employee information secure.
I agree completely with your last sentence. Even if the DOJ's/FBI's intent is all sweetness and light, they can't guarantee that they will be able to keep a new/modified iOS provided by Apple from getting into the wrong hands. Their track record hasn't been perfect in that area. What will they tell us if Apple complies, the Feds screw up, the new code gets out and our data is open to the world? We're sorry?
I see this going to the Supreme Court. But if it's a 4-4 ruling then we're nowhere. Perhaps congress needs to get involved.
Depends on how fast it makes it there. Just needs to hold out until Feb 2017, really, as the vacancy will likely be filled by then (and hopefully by a constitutionalist).
The first case too get there would probably be the Feng case from Brooklyn and with Judge Orenstein looking skeptically at the All Writs Act of 1789 a tie would be helpful, though as a tie wouldn't be binding across all distracts as a majority ruling affirming would, still limited. That's the case (and the court) where APPLE decided to draw the line.
Comments
So the fact that the phone "self-destructs" after 10 unsuccessful attempts is the only thing that makes it secure, and this is the feature Apple is being asked to circumvent by creating a new version of iOS, that does not have this feature and installing it on the San Bernardino iPhone, something Tim Cook calls a piece of "software that doesn't exist today". Apple should do everything they can to keep it that way because they are the only ones in a position to create this software. Without access to the iOS source core, even the smartest hacker/computer scientist, will find it difficult to circumvent this feature.
Also, to all the security experts saying that Apple can create this version of iOS for the specific UUID of the recovered iPhone, can they guarantee that I would not be able to install it on a different iPhone by spoofing the UUID. My point is that if Apple complies with this request, there could potentially be catastrophic and irreparable consequences for the many hundreds of millions of iOS devices (assuming the majority of Apple's 1 billion active devices are iOS devices)
Apologies for going off topic here, I just felt like getting this frustration off my chest.
Moment of Silence.
That is so cynical, and so many people believe this, and refuse to believe a large public company can act on principle. But Apple is not most companies and Tim Cook is not most CEOs. It's hard to imagine Steve Jobs doing anything more daring and risky than Cook is doing right now. The muted comments by other companies or CEOs, even those sort-of supporting Apple, help prove how exceptionally serious about this Cook is.
There are a billion active Apple devices, many not in the U.S., and it's clear Tim Cook feels personally responsible for making the privacy features of those phones work. Privacy is a lfe and death issue in many situations.
Well I mean that IS the issue right?
"Let's have pizza at 3 next Thursday"? How do you decrypt that as a suicide attack next Sunday at 6? Adding three to both...
The first case too get there would probably be the Feng case from Brooklyn and with Judge Orenstein looking skeptically at the All Writs Act of 1789 a tie would be helpful, though as a tie wouldn't be binding across all distracts as a majority ruling affirming would, still limited. That's the case (and the court) where APPLE decided to draw the line.