New poll says public sides with Apple over FBI in resisting iPhone unlock order

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 86
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,684member
    holycow said:
    I don't see why Apple couldn't create a "backdoor" and give only Congress to control the "random key".  
    This way the FBI can never abuse it, and mandates that whenever the FBI needs to break in, Congress would have to hold an immediate voting session to allow it or not.
    Serious matters like the San Berdinal case, the gov't has every right to acquire the data in order to protect the citizens. 
    Apple could apply this same principle in other countries where the devices are being sold, and never have worry of its responsibility.

    We all know that if you, as the device owner, don't do anything "stupid" or illegal, then you should never have to worry about gov'ts intrusion.

    Apple is against it now is all about marketing gimmicks!  
    It is only software based, so it can be easily done.

    Trust Congress? Haha haha!

    its been 3 months since the attack and no new alarms have been triggered. The phone numbers called/recd can be found through the cell company. The iPhone apparently wasn't his main phone. 

    It can be easily done so why can't the FBI do it? 

    It it sets a precedent. Today it's terrorism, tomorrow it's political enemies. 
    sandorpalomine
  • Reply 42 of 86
    bbhbbh Posts: 68member
    ezdiv said:
    We have such short memories.  Once again we're one big terror attack in the US away from everyone then complaining about why the government hasn't done enough to protect us.  Well they're (gov) trying to do something but we don't want to unlock a freakin' phone?!  Come on people.  Get over yourselves.  No one cares about your uninteresting personal lives.
    What about the 100s of other iPhones held by various agencies waiting to be broken into? Once this gate is opened, it will NEVER close. Once the government takes something "for our own protection" they never give it back. Chip, chip, chip. Pretty soon you have NO right to privacy...all in your best interests, of course. Sad that you apparently don't mind, but I do. 
    ration alfarmboyhlee1169magman1979
  • Reply 43 of 86
    Why don't I ever get these polls. EVER. Who's answering these freakin polls. I don't know anyone who's ever been asked to answer a poll like this or a political one or a scientific one or anything. Wonder what you have to do or where you have to be.

    I'm on the side of Apple not helping the fbi. They can do their job in other ways. Falling furniture kills more people than terrorism has. I don't want to compromise security for something that kills less people globally than falling furniture. From that perspective, way too much to lose than what is gained. Plus, not guaranteed there will be useful info on the phone. It's just a "maybe". 
  • Reply 44 of 86
    bbhbbh Posts: 68member

    RickD0514 said:
    Since when does a company or person get to say "no" to the government just because they disagree with the request?
    Apparently Apple thinks they are above the law and that their business proposition is more valuable than other people's lives.  Throw Cook in jail for his refusal to comply ... and also for good measure, for being self-absorbed and narcissistic.


    You are sooooo sadly out of touch. With your view, the government is no longer accountable to us, but rather the other way around. 
    ration alhlee1169magman1979palomine
  • Reply 45 of 86
    When you publish statistics like this why don't you include the sample size?  46% of 30 people means something different than 46% of 1000 people. 
  • Reply 46 of 86
    Do you really want to give the FBI a backdoor when they can't even secure their own network ??? 
    Over 25,000 FBI employee names, addresses and phone numbers were hacked and posted on the Internet this month. 
    Was this the work of Chinese gov't hackers? Russian spies?  Nope.............. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/18/scottish-teen-accused-hacking-fbi-computers-report/

    edited February 2016 sandorration almagman1979palomine
  • Reply 47 of 86
    sandorsandor Posts: 507member
    we should just send the US government, monthly, updated reports on all our travels, encounters, purchases & financials.

    they will just hold it & not peek, unless they deem it a national security threat.

    come on.

    trust them.

    it is for safety-sake.

    politicians do not do things for any reason other than the greater good.
  • Reply 48 of 86
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member
    drice4444 said:
    When you publish statistics like this why don't you include the sample size?  46% of 30 people means something different than 46% of 1000 people. 

    The original post in this thread;

    In online interviews run between Feb. 19 and 23, 46 percent of Americans supported Apple's resistance, while 35 percent disagreed, Reuters/Ipsos found. 20 percent of the poll group said they didn't know.

    That link above "46 percent" takes you to the following;

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-poll-idUSKCN0VX159

    at the bottom of the article is another link:

    http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/doc/applefbi.pdf

    the first paragraph of which;

    "These are findings from an Ipsos poll conducted February 19-23, 2016 on behalf Thomson Reuters. For the survey, a sample of roughly 1,576 adults age 18+ from the continental U.S., Alaska and Hawaii was interviewed online in English."





    edited February 2016
  • Reply 49 of 86
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    In the earlier Jun Feng case the judge (Ornstein) objected to the application of the All Writs Act of 1789 to smartphone government directed hacking all on his own and asked Apple to submit a brief. So there may be case farther along than San Bernardino where the company will prevail.
  • Reply 50 of 86
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    RickD0514 said:
    Since when does a company or person get to say "no" to the government just because they disagree with the request?
    Apparently Apple thinks they are above the law and that their business proposition is more valuable than other people's lives.  Throw Cook in jail for his refusal to comply ... and also for good measure, for being self-absorbed and narcissistic.


    The application of law includes appeals up the judicial chain and there are judges that are also skeptical the 200 years old act even applies to this issue of smartphone hacking by private companies at the governments direction.

    Rule of law and due process is what this nation is about, not heavy breathing emotionalism such as what you're displaying.
    ration alfarmboyhlee1169
  • Reply 51 of 86
    GTRownsU said:
    Shut your...
    Flagged.  Take comments like this somewhere else, please.
  • Reply 52 of 86
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member

    sog35 said:

    what do you think cook would say if there were an iPhone that had information on it regarding an armed terrorist attack on their headquarters?
    How would they know the phone had this information if they could not unlock it?

    Stop making up ridiculous scenerios to support your ludicruious opinions. 


    Especially when this WORK PHONE was left intact when the murderers were so careful to crush their two private phones and dispose of their computer hard drive where the FBI hasn't even been able to find it.
    ration al
  • Reply 53 of 86
    sog35 said:
    If the FBI wins this case they will have the ability and legal right to:

    1. track everywhere you visit using location services
    2. record you phone conversations and text messages
    3. Record you real life conversations by using the mic on your phone
    4. take video and pictures of your home using the iPhone camera
    5. Tract all your online purchases, search history, web history, app history, email history
    6. Look at all your photo's and videos on your phone
    7. Listen and Watch you using the iPhone camera/mic during your most intimate moments at home.

    Ridiculous.

    Why fight the terrorist if we give up all our liberty doing so?
    no they can't...you're assuming that this would be a cloud based solution. If the tool is built and requires that the phone be connected to a computer to unlock, how are they going to do all of that unless they have your phone...take the tinfoil hat off, it's obviously having adverse effects on you thinking logically.
  • Reply 54 of 86
    GTQ said:
    Apple is wrong and the people backing Apple are wrong. When a member of their family or someone close to them is murdered, will they take the same position if the name of the killer is on a locked Iphone. The killer walks free if the phone is not unlocked.
    Your argument is the perfect example of why these decisions should be made based on principles and not emotions.

    There will always be an emotional incident which the police and state will abuse to deny innocent people of their liberties along with those of the crooks.
    pmznolamacguymagman1979palomine
  • Reply 55 of 86
    GTQ said:
    Apple is wrong and the people backing Apple are wrong. When a member of their family or someone close to them is murdered, will they take the same position if the name of the killer is on a locked Iphone. The killer walks free if the phone is not unlocked.
    What if someone rapes and murders your daughter because they gained access to her phone and found out where she lived?
    Or ask Jennifer Lawerence how she liked having her private nude photos plastered on the Internet after her iPhone was hacked.

    Backdoor for FBI = Front door for criminals

    ration aljfc1138pmz
  • Reply 56 of 86
    sog35 said:
    GTQ said:
    Apple is wrong and the people backing Apple are wrong. When a member of their family or someone close to them is murdered, will they take the same position if the name of the killer is on a locked Iphone. The killer walks free if the phone is not unlocked.
    The killers have been killed already.  

    The terrorist destroyed their two personal phones. You seriously think there was anything of value in the iPhone they didn't destroy?
    Amen to that!  Also, do you (GTQ)  think it was an accident that the FBI instructed the county to reset the password forcing this standoff?  James Comey (FBI) has been pushing for a permanent back door to be built into the OS for a number of years, and now he's saying he's only interested in this one phone - Looks like some have fallen for the strategy ...   It's all theatrics.
    jfc1138palomine
  • Reply 57 of 86
    mike1mike1 Posts: 1,871member
    Pretty surprised at the political divide. This issue is definitely crossing and blurring traditional political norms... Conservatives generally favor a less intrusive government (Go Apple) but are very often the law and order type (Go FBI). Many conservatives are supporting Apple here. The Republican candidates better make sure they understand this. Liberals generally like big government inserting itself into all aspects of people's lives (Go FBI), but are very distrustful of law enforcement (Go Apple). What you're seeing here folks is the initial thoughts on an important topic before people have been told what to think by their peers, political party or celebrities. We'll see how all this plays out, but it won't be long before the ideological sides are drawn up and people stop thinking for themselves.
    sacto joe
  • Reply 58 of 86
    holycow said:
    I don't see why Apple couldn't create a "backdoor" and give only Congress to control the "random key".  
    This way the FBI can never abuse it, and mandates that whenever the FBI needs to break in, Congress would have to hold an immediate voting session to allow it or not.
    Serious matters like the San Berdinal case, the gov't has every right to acquire the data in order to protect the citizens. 
    Apple could apply this same principle in other countries where the devices are being sold, and never have worry of its responsibility.

    We all know that if you, as the device owner, don't do anything "stupid" or illegal, then you should never have to worry about gov'ts intrusion.

    Apple is against it now is all about marketing gimmicks!  
    It is only software based, so it can be easily done.

    Another 1 post wonder. No one can be trusted and no system can be trusted to protect your information. Only you should bear that final responsibility.

    During the Apple has before their argument reaches the Supreme Court they should be proactively eliminating those weaknesses identified by the FBI since they are now known weaknesses.
    edited February 2016 nolamacguypalominemagman1979
  • Reply 59 of 86
    I think the ultimate question is: Do we want a government with Ultimate Power, over People and/or Corporations. I don't think we should have a government that has absolute dominion over everything, There should be areas that the government is not allow into. For instance the bedroom is one. Another is the mind, and your creations or ideas. 2¢
    ration al
  • Reply 60 of 86
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 1,831member

    On a related note, if Apple loses this one, the iPhone can no longer be considered a secure device for any purpose. We already know Andoid is crap.

    What the FBI wants requires physical access to the device and they are still required to crack the encryption on their own by way of brute force guessing. If you use a true alphanumeric passcode the chances of that happening are extremely slim. The issue here is more about setting a precedent that demonstrates Apple has and is willing to create a modified version of their software to bypass certain security features. Once that cat is out of the bag there is no end in sight for what will or may be asked of them in the future.
    ration alsacto joe
Sign In or Register to comment.