I started off being 100% behind Apple on this issue, but the longer this conversation goes on, the more clearly I'm able to see both sides.
But - if we resign ourselves to the fact that the government can and will legislate a requirement to provide some type of assistance - what kind of system could they create that would protect individuals from hackers and foreign governments while still complying with a legal requirement to help law enforcement agencies?
The issues about whether the government has the "right" to do this or not and the preservation of the constitutional rights is one for the courts. I'm glad that Apple is standing up for our rights, but there is only so much that they, as a corporation can and should do. If actual laws are passed - Apple will be forced to comply with those laws. Let's hope that they find a way to do so that continues to protect our rights and ensures that our data remains secure.
If Apple are compelled to do this, have you considered that if they believe security to be a big selling point that they may decide to remove their own technical ability to comply with such orders in the future and either come up with an A series chip where the OS can't compromise it's security or move their iOS development entirely off-shore, possibly into the hands of an autonomous self entity?
Isn't that what they've already tried to do? I'm not by any means saying that I agree with the government or that I think they have the right to demand these things. I'm trying to keep the conversation/debate grounded in reality.
If the US Government is successful in passing legislation that requires this - companies that refuse to comply will not be allowed to sell their products in the USA - so Apple could develop the device you describe - but they wouldn't be allowed to sell it in the US. Depending how aggressive the govt wanted to be - they could take it one step further and make it illegal to even USE a non-compliant device within the US (by making it illegal for the mobile phone companies to provide service to specific devices).
I'm glad to see Apple challenging the governments rights and attempting to protect our privacy and security - but it's not reasonable to expect them to openly defy the law. If the government creates a law - Apple may challenge the law and appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court - but if they are not successful in having the law declared unconstitutional - they will have 2 choices - either comply with the law - or exit the US. As a corporation, we can not expect them to openly defy the law - they've already done more than most other companies would do.
If the government declares it legal to search someone's cellphone and the Supreme Court upholds the law against a constitutional challenge - what more can be done about it?
i would think that the initial version of the law might contain language in it that prevents the technology from ever being used against an American citizen - in order to help get it passed initially and force Apple to create the mechanism - but as we all know - once the procedure exists, it will be misused - and law enforcement will keep going back asking for "exceptions".
Perhaps I'm too cynical - but I don't think there's any way to stop this from happening. The best we can do is slow it down.
There's one more possibility that someone mentioned early on in this thread.
Behind closed doors, Apple may have already agreed to help out the FBI. The public "fight" that we are watching play out between Apple and the US Government may be a scripted fiction to prevent criminals from knowing their iPhone is no longer secure and more importantly to keep foreign governments from demanding the same capabilities.
When that suggestion was originally floated, I thought it was a whack-job conspiracy theory - but the deeper we get into the discussion, the more I see it as possibly the scenario with the least possible negative impact. A public loss by Apple, would force them to comply - and then the world would know. Criminals would find other solutions for encryption and privacy and foreign governments would line up screaming "Me too!".
One thing that's clear is that this issue is big. How it gets resolved could be a watershed event in the history of the world. How it gets resolved will have drastic, wide-ranging repercussions which will change the world - and most outcomes appear to be quite negative for our individual, inalienable rights.
There's one more possibility that someone mentioned early on in this thread.
Behind closed doors, Apple may have already agreed to help out the FBI. The public "fight" that we are watching play out between Apple and the US Government may be a scripted fiction to prevent criminals from knowing their iPhone is no longer secure and more importantly to keep foreign governments from demanding the same capabilities.
When that suggestion was originally floated, I thought it was a whack-job conspiracy theory - but the deeper we get into the discussion, the more I see it as possibly the scenario with the least possible negative impact. A public loss by Apple, would force them to comply - and then the world would know. Criminals would find other solutions for encryption and privacy and foreign governments would line up screaming "Me too!".
One thing that's clear is that this issue is big. How it gets resolved could be a watershed event in the history of the world. How it gets resolved will have drastic, wide-ranging repercussions which will change the world - and most outcomes appear to be quite negative for our individual, inalienable rights.
Nah, Tim Cook isn't going to play games like that. Principles, you know. He's old school. Not to mention that it would make him blackmailable.
If the government passes a law preventing this level of encryption, jury nullification will be the best response. Jurries can fail to convict anyone accused of breaking that law.
Wow. Your reply is all over the place and full of inaccuracies. Have you ever used Remote Wipe? Or find my iPhone at all? It sure doesn't sound like it.
First of all - the target phone does not require a "secure Wi-Fi connection". Any connection to the Internet is sufficient - 3G, LTE, WiFi, even Bluetooth. Where did you get the idea it has to be Wi-Fi?
As for the accomplice's Internet connection - how are they going to track him when he connects via an Internet Café for 2 minutes from somewhere overseas?
If the former owner had set up his Wi-Fi to "automatically connect" to unlocked access points or even just remembered connections, simply driving past a Mcdonalds or Starbucks could have supplied the phone with an Internet connection for long enough to receive the remote wipe command. Changing the phone number of the device does not prevent the decide from being contacted over the Internet, nor does it make the device unfindable.
I fail to see the relevance of the 175 phones you mention. Are you trying to say that since nobody wiped them, nobody would ever wipe a phone in police custody? LOL. They are completely irrelevant.
Your alternative suggestions all rely on a great deal of chance for them to work. There are so many things that *could* go wrong. The fact that they're "not likely" to go wrong doesn't really matter. Changing passwords is probably standard practice for employees that leave the company.
if you want to play Monday morning quarterback and blast them for changing the password, go ahead - but the actions they took at the time they took them were reasonable things to do from their perspective. It's not like someone made a stupid mistake that had disastrous repercussions!
No, I have never wiped an iPhone, but a secure location like a Law Enforcement facility would not routinely allow insecure devices onto a network, but maybe I'm wrong about that. It would be possible that an iPhone could connect to an open network, but most networks would require a password. BT has security provisions as well as limited range, so a wipe through that would be extremely unlikely. As I noted, the County could have easily and quickly disconnected the iPhone from the cellular network, your 3G, LTE connection would have absolutely failed in that case.
In truth, your scenario didn't occur. The FBI made a decision in haste without contacting Apple to have the County change the password. That created the impasse that we have today.
My point about the 175 iPhones waiting to be cracked;
Was the FBI using something like this? I hope so, and your scenario collapses entirely in that case.
You just need a faraday cage, something extremely easy to do, you can make a whole room impervious to radio waves and just dump all your cell phones in there. Any major FBI bureau would have such a thing I gather. While in transport to this room they'd using shielded pouches which are basically just miniature versions of this. Anything fulling conductive that you can wrap over the phone works.
The dumbass thing is that first, phones that people will just buy phones abroad, maybe a special model made by Apple, and criminals will just import that in the US and use that. The FBI is just pulling a fast one; loose with facts and pushing buttons.
No, I have never wiped an iPhone, but a secure location like a Law Enforcement facility would not routinely allow insecure devices onto a network, but maybe I'm wrong about that. It would be possible that an iPhone could connect to an open network, but most networks would require a password. BT has security provisions as well as limited range, so a wipe through that would be extremely unlikely. As I noted, the County could have easily and quickly disconnected the iPhone from the cellular network, your 3G, LTE connection would have absolutely failed in that case.
In truth, your scenario didn't occur. The FBI made a decision in haste without contacting Apple to have the County change the password. That created the impasse that we have today.
My point about the 175 iPhones waiting to be cracked;
Was the FBI using something like this? I hope so, and your scenario collapses entirely in that case.
You just need a faraday cage, something extremely easy to do, you can make a whole room impervious to radio waves and just dump all your cell phones in there. Any major FBI bureau would have such a thing I gather. While in transport to this room they'd using shielded pouches which are basically just miniature versions of this. Anything fulling conductive that you can wrap over the phone works.
I was thinking of a Faraday Cage, but thought it might be overkill for passive storage of cellphones. I was aware of the pouches in a vague sort of way, but a search for one was straightforward. I expect that the FBI has RF Engineers on staff for a variety of missions.
And not one major news outlet has seriously or prominently reported this.
The person at the FBI who ordered the password reset needs to be investigated for their motive. If they have prior experience with resetting iCloud passwords then they can't claim to have been unaware of the consequences in which case the order was given on purpose to push Apple into a bad situation. If this is found to be the case, they should charge the officials involved with obstructing an investigation and tampering with evidence as well as constructing the whole scenario to harm Apple's business and reputation. This could happen with any device. If for example there was an external hard drive with FileVault encryption and the investigators managed to damage critical files to prevent the original key being used, they couldn't ask Apple to build a cracking tool for external hard drives that rebuilt those files. Apple shouldn't be held responsible for the incompetence or malicious actions of law enforcement.
It looks to me like they've constructed this whole scenario to try and force Apple's hand in building a cracking tool. If it was a work phone, why would the employees be allowed to set their own codes? If they were fired, the employer couldn't access the phone either. It would be far more likely they'd have basic pin codes or codes set by the employer, possibly even noted down in their offices. The FBI is hiding something and they need investigated by the... CIA, NSA?
I assume that Apple must also keep more backups of iCloud data than the current versions including the password tables. They should have an archived record of the iCloud password before it was reset and could restore it onto iCloud, which might then allow the phone to do a backup once it sees the matching details. Another thing they can check is CCTV footage from the building. If the terrorist ever unlocked the phone in or around the building, the CCTV cameras might have seen the display as it was being unlocked. All of this evidence will be concealed by the FBI though so they could deny any unlocking alternatives exist.
Only those with something to hide would be concerned about this. If Cook was smart (as Jobs) he would open that ONE phone which belongs to a Government Agency and was being used by a confirmed TERRORIST to KILL many many innocent people. McAfee has volunteered to get it done, why won't Apple??? If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem!! Perhaps if Cook's family was in that event hall he would see things differently. We ALL need to do EVERYTHING we can to combat terrorism. It is NOT someone else's job!!! Unless he gets his head right on this, I and many of my friends and relatives will be dumping Apple products at the next contract period. Perhaps he should move all his operations and HQ to China with the rest of his jobs.
Only those with something to hide would be concerned about this. If Cook was smart (as Jobs) he would open that ONE phone which belongs to a Government Agency and was being used by a confirmed TERRORIST to KILL many many innocent people. McAfee has volunteered to get it done, why won't Apple??? If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem!! Perhaps if Cook's family was in that event hall he would see things differently. We ALL need to do EVERYTHING we can to combat terrorism. It is NOT someone else's job!!! Unless he gets his head right on this, I and many of my friends and relatives will be dumping Apple products at the next contract period. Perhaps he should move all his operations and HQ to China with the rest of his jobs.
You're really late to the game.
Why not take some time and read through the hundreds of comments on the four or five major posts on this, follow some of the links given so that you have a clue.
And not one major news outlet has seriously or prominently reported this.
The person at the FBI who ordered the password reset needs to be investigated for their motive. If they have prior experience with resetting iCloud passwords then they can't claim to have been unaware of the consequences in which case the order was given on purpose to push Apple into a bad situation. If this is found to be the case, they should charge the officials involved with obstructing an investigation and tampering with evidence as well as constructing the whole scenario to harm Apple's business and reputation. This could happen with any device. If for example there was an external hard drive with FileVault encryption and the investigators managed to damage critical files to prevent the original key being used, they couldn't ask Apple to build a cracking tool for external hard drives that rebuilt those files. Apple shouldn't be held responsible for the incompetence or malicious actions of law enforcement.
It looks to me like they've constructed this whole scenario to try and force Apple's hand in building a cracking tool. If it was a work phone, why would the employees be allowed to set their own codes? If they were fired, the employer couldn't access the phone either. It would be far more likely they'd have basic pin codes or codes set by the employer, possibly even noted down in their offices. The FBI is hiding something and they need investigated by the... CIA, NSA?
I assume that Apple must also keep more backups of iCloud data than the current versions including the password tables. They should have an archived record of the iCloud password before it was reset and could restore it onto iCloud, which might then allow the phone to do a backup once it sees the matching details. Another thing they can check is CCTV footage from the building. If the terrorist ever unlocked the phone in or around the building, the CCTV cameras might have seen the display as it was being unlocked. All of this evidence will be concealed by the FBI though so they could deny any unlocking alternatives exist.
I agree (mostly) with your first and third paragraph's, but your second paragraph is nowhere close to reality. Employees are required to have their own unique passwords for the mobile devices that are assigned to them. In the case of shared devices, the employer might have a common, shared passcode - but not in the case of a mobile phone. Employers also don't give a shit about getting in to the phone after an employee leaves. They wipe them and then reassign them. Employers utilize an MDM solution (AirWatch, Radia, etc) to configure and manage the devices - but the user is not expected/required to save anything to the device that the employer would care about retrieving after they leave the company. E-mail is already stored on the sever - and the business critical apps are usually no more than front ends to a back end system. Critical data is not stored locally. Employers may enforce black lists or white lists restriction what apps can be installed - even geofencing and time fencing rules which can specify when and where the device can be operated - they can disable the camera, Bluetooth and the ability to connect to "new" wifi access points. They can (and do) enforce password complexity rules - but for a personal device issued to an individual - they would NOT assign a simple passcode or force you to use a password that they know. Your suggestion that this is "likely" is completely ludicrous. With an MDM solution like Radia or AirWatch, there is no reason an employer would ever require the ability to directly log into an employees phone.
And not one major news outlet has seriously or prominently reported this.
The person at the FBI who ordered the password reset needs to be investigated for their motive. If they have prior experience with resetting iCloud passwords then they can't claim to have been unaware of the consequences in which case the order was given on purpose to push Apple into a bad situation. If this is found to be the case, they should charge the officials involved with obstructing an investigation and tampering with evidence as well as constructing the whole scenario to harm Apple's business and reputation. This could happen with any device. If for example there was an external hard drive with FileVault encryption and the investigators managed to damage critical files to prevent the original key being used, they couldn't ask Apple to build a cracking tool for external hard drives that rebuilt those files. Apple shouldn't be held responsible for the incompetence or malicious actions of law enforcement.
It looks to me like they've constructed this whole scenario to try and force Apple's hand in building a cracking tool. If it was a work phone, why would the employees be allowed to set their own codes? If they were fired, the employer couldn't access the phone either. It would be far more likely they'd have basic pin codes or codes set by the employer, possibly even noted down in their offices. The FBI is hiding something and they need investigated by the... CIA, NSA?
I assume that Apple must also keep more backups of iCloud data than the current versions including the password tables. They should have an archived record of the iCloud password before it was reset and could restore it onto iCloud, which might then allow the phone to do a backup once it sees the matching details. Another thing they can check is CCTV footage from the building. If the terrorist ever unlocked the phone in or around the building, the CCTV cameras might have seen the display as it was being unlocked. All of this evidence will be concealed by the FBI though so they could deny any unlocking alternatives exist.
Simply restoring the previous password seemingly doesn't trigger a backup or Apple would have done that easy fix by putting a special Apple server that emulates Icloud on his work WIFI that accepts any password.
Another option would be to make it harder for these people to get their hands on automatic weapons. Increase checks or even ban auto's from anywhere but the locked facilities of the firing range. As for the debate at hand, it starts with access to one phone, then 2, then every police dept, gov dept, etc using this case as a test bed for access to all the phones they wish in the future.
That's not possible. If anyone is more motivated than a religiously motivated extremist to commit mayhem and murder, I'd like to see them. It's trivial for such people to acquire munitions or make their own volatile substances. The general populace should learn to think in terms of self-protection, ideally taking training courses or (like approximately 30% of the population) actually buying and regularly training with a weapon. Not a perfect solution, but a serious one for people interested in exercising their rights and taking a more defensive posture for protection.
If Apple are compelled to do this, have you considered that if they believe security to be a big selling point that they may decide to remove their own technical ability to comply with such orders in the future and either come up with an A series chip where the OS can't compromise it's security or move their iOS development entirely off-shore, possibly into the hands of an autonomous self entity?
Isn't that what they've already tried to do? I'm not by any means saying that I agree with the government or that I think they have the right to demand these things. I'm trying to keep the conversation/debate grounded in reality.
If the US Government is successful in passing legislation that requires this - companies that refuse to comply will not be allowed to sell their products in the USA - so Apple could develop the device you describe - but they wouldn't be allowed to sell it in the US. Depending how aggressive the govt wanted to be - they could take it one step further and make it illegal to even USE a non-compliant device within the US (by making it illegal for the mobile phone companies to provide service to specific devices).
I'm glad to see Apple challenging the governments rights and attempting to protect our privacy and security - but it's not reasonable to expect them to openly defy the law. If the government creates a law - Apple may challenge the law and appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court - but if they are not successful in having the law declared unconstitutional - they will have 2 choices - either comply with the law - or exit the US. As a corporation, we can not expect them to openly defy the law - they've already done more than most other companies would do.
If the government declares it legal to search someone's cellphone and the Supreme Court upholds the law against a constitutional challenge - what more can be done about it?
i would think that the initial version of the law might contain language in it that prevents the technology from ever being used against an American citizen - in order to help get it passed initially and force Apple to create the mechanism - but as we all know - once the procedure exists, it will be misused - and law enforcement will keep going back asking for "exceptions".
Perhaps I'm too cynical - but I don't think there's any way to stop this from happening. The best we can do is slow it down.
The guy in question WAS an American citizen. The only way forward on this issue is into the abyss. The next president will be Clinton or Trump and BOTH have demonstrated a terrible lack of knowledge or concern regarding privacy and encryption. It's the final curtain for our country because a little temporary safety has proven more desirable than our fragile freedoms.
This isn't as simple an issue as those who are standing on principle or those that are fearing the end of the world as we know it if a few Apple engineers succeed in complying with the FBI.
Our privacy rights are going to be tested again and again as new, tiny technologies come to fruition. Imagine tiny cameras that can't even been seen by the naked eye, embedded god knows where, recording our lives. Everything would be recorded. Forget dash cams, this would be that on steroids. Imagine how helpful this would be to reduce crime.
Now imagine how great it would be for porn or other salacious activities. All of us would be on record, at all times, somewhere.
We're going to see fights for general privacy more and more as these types of devices come to dominate our lives. I might just stream my entire life, for anyone to watch, at any time. Reality TV, for billions of people.
There's always going to be an issue with security vs. privacy given the times we live in. Doesn't matter what Apple does or doesn't do. Right have been stripped and re-given over and over in our past. Will happen again in the future. It's a difficult issue because you cannot take a pure stand on principal. Sometimes the right thing to do will be to dig into that iPhone. Other times, it will be to stand firm.
I am sure Tim cook will be having a plan which will help apple organization in the future. but for that we need to wait to see how things will start moving in the future.
Comments
If the US Government is successful in passing legislation that requires this - companies that refuse to comply will not be allowed to sell their products in the USA - so Apple could develop the device you describe - but they wouldn't be allowed to sell it in the US. Depending how aggressive the govt wanted to be - they could take it one step further and make it illegal to even USE a non-compliant device within the US (by making it illegal for the mobile phone companies to provide service to specific devices).
I'm glad to see Apple challenging the governments rights and attempting to protect our privacy and security - but it's not reasonable to expect them to openly defy the law. If the government creates a law - Apple may challenge the law and appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court - but if they are not successful in having the law declared unconstitutional - they will have 2 choices - either comply with the law - or exit the US. As a corporation, we can not expect them to openly defy the law - they've already done more than most other companies would do.
If the government declares it legal to search someone's cellphone and the Supreme Court upholds the law against a constitutional challenge - what more can be done about it?
i would think that the initial version of the law might contain language in it that prevents the technology from ever being used against an American citizen - in order to help get it passed initially and force Apple to create the mechanism - but as we all know - once the procedure exists, it will be misused - and law enforcement will keep going back asking for "exceptions".
Perhaps I'm too cynical - but I don't think there's any way to stop this from happening. The best we can do is slow it down.
Behind closed doors, Apple may have already agreed to help out the FBI. The public "fight" that we are watching play out between Apple and the US Government may be a scripted fiction to prevent criminals from knowing their iPhone is no longer secure and more importantly to keep foreign governments from demanding the same capabilities.
When that suggestion was originally floated, I thought it was a whack-job conspiracy theory - but the deeper we get into the discussion, the more I see it as possibly the scenario with the least possible negative impact. A public loss by Apple, would force them to comply - and then the world would know. Criminals would find other solutions for encryption and privacy and foreign governments would line up screaming "Me too!".
One thing that's clear is that this issue is big. How it gets resolved could be a watershed event in the history of the world. How it gets resolved will have drastic, wide-ranging repercussions which will change the world - and most outcomes appear to be quite negative for our individual, inalienable rights.
Any major FBI bureau would have such a thing I gather.
While in transport to this room they'd using shielded pouches which are basically just miniature versions of this. Anything fulling conductive that you can wrap over the phone works.
The FBI is just pulling a fast one; loose with facts and pushing buttons.
http://daringfireball.net/2016/02/san_bernardino_password_reset
And not one major news outlet has seriously or prominently reported this.
It looks to me like they've constructed this whole scenario to try and force Apple's hand in building a cracking tool. If it was a work phone, why would the employees be allowed to set their own codes? If they were fired, the employer couldn't access the phone either. It would be far more likely they'd have basic pin codes or codes set by the employer, possibly even noted down in their offices. The FBI is hiding something and they need investigated by the... CIA, NSA?
I assume that Apple must also keep more backups of iCloud data than the current versions including the password tables. They should have an archived record of the iCloud password before it was reset and could restore it onto iCloud, which might then allow the phone to do a backup once it sees the matching details. Another thing they can check is CCTV footage from the building. If the terrorist ever unlocked the phone in or around the building, the CCTV cameras might have seen the display as it was being unlocked. All of this evidence will be concealed by the FBI though so they could deny any unlocking alternatives exist.
Why not take some time and read through the hundreds of comments on the four or five major posts on this, follow some of the links given so that you have a clue.
Have a nice day.
Simply restoring the previous password seemingly doesn't trigger a backup or Apple would have done that easy fix by putting a special Apple server that emulates Icloud on his work WIFI that accepts any password.
Our privacy rights are going to be tested again and again as new, tiny technologies come to fruition. Imagine tiny cameras that can't even been seen by the naked eye, embedded god knows where, recording our lives. Everything would be recorded. Forget dash cams, this would be that on steroids. Imagine how helpful this would be to reduce crime.
Now imagine how great it would be for porn or other salacious activities. All of us would be on record, at all times, somewhere.
We're going to see fights for general privacy more and more as these types of devices come to dominate our lives. I might just stream my entire life, for anyone to watch, at any time. Reality TV, for billions of people.
There's always going to be an issue with security vs. privacy given the times we live in. Doesn't matter what Apple does or doesn't do. Right have been stripped and re-given over and over in our past. Will happen again in the future. It's a difficult issue because you cannot take a pure stand on principal. Sometimes the right thing to do will be to dig into that iPhone. Other times, it will be to stand firm.