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

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 86
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 1,834member

    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.



    Uh, as citizens of a free democracy it is our duty to question authority when we feel it is wrong and unlawfully over stepping its bounds. Perhaps you shouldn't let your bias of Tim Cook get in the way of rational thinking? I don't know if you live on planet Earth, but a win for the FBI is a loss for innocent, but presumed guilty people all over the world.
    ration alSpamSandwichpalominemagman1979
  • Reply 62 of 86
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,979member
    fallenjt said:

    Sound so wrong AI. Apple didn't refuse unlock...they refused to build the back door.
    It's not a back door. The FBI wants to knock down the front door without losing what's inside. 
  • Reply 63 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.

    Your post only goes to show your complete ignorance of both the issue at hand and mobile device security in general.

    I recommend you read the article in the link below from an experienced computer forensics expert

    http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5645
    hlee1169nolamacguymagman1979
  • Reply 64 of 86
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,979member
    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.


    When the government's request is unconstitutional, that's when. 
    ration aljfc1138nolamacguy
  • Reply 65 of 86
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,684member
    jfc1138 said:

    sog35 said:

    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.
    Why hasn't the FBI ordered the county to drain the lake? :)
    ration al
  • Reply 66 of 86
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    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.

    CONGRESS? That bunch of political hookers that sell out to the highest bidder on a daily basis and "leak" like a sieve?

    Oh and apart from that there's that pesky Constitution whereby law enforcement power is most certainly NOT in the "legislative" branch... for good reason.

    Oh and screw government "intrusion" I don't want some casual crook who steals my phone given unlimited access to my brokerage account, my bank account, my credit card account or my insurance accounts by some software he bought off the dark web that had been "lost" by Congress. You may but I do not.

    Hey and speaking of Law Enforcement: what happened to their screeching demands that Apple provide a mandated "kill switch" precisely so phones out of the control of the user would be totally and completely useless? Phones bricked by that demanded kill switch wouldn't be hackable by anyone, white hat or black. Morons.
    edited February 2016 ration alpalomine
  • Reply 67 of 86
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,219member
    It amazes me that just about everyone here sees this issue in such limited terms--the FBI or Government against Apple. I will admit that I have grave misgivings about the possibility of a terrorist attack in the US and that it may turn into a mass casualty event. If by breaking into a suspect's iPhone the Government could stop the death of friends or family, then most of us would probably be very reluctant to refuse the Government.

    But here is the deal. Knowledge does not respect international borders. Apple is a multinational corporation whose iPhone is used by customers all over the World. The FBI wants to see any relevant information on the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone. The same technique used to gain access that iPhone can also be used to gain access to the iPhones used by Russian dissidents, Colombian drug lords, IRA members, American Neo-Nazis and so forth. Many of these Governments don't share our Constitutional protections.

    This is not a theoretical issue and we don't have to go offshore to see it. As I write this, a neighboring state has four (4) murders that it is trying to solve. Law enforcement believes that there is relevant information in each case on iPhones that they have confiscated. However, they have yet to crack the phones. Are you willing to let murders go free rather than give the police access to a suspect's iPhone. Are you willing to let an innocent man be convicted of a crime when the evidence to exonerate him and convict the perpetrator is just an iPhone crack away?

    Then there is the flip side. Osama bin Laden ran a global terrorist organization without online communication. He knew that if he spoke on the phone, radio, or sent or received an email, then he would signaled his location to the US and our allies. Therefore, cracking an iPhone or any other connected communication could not possibly have helped us to find bin Laden or anyone as smart as he.

    The takeaway message is that this is a complicated issue. Stop pretending that it is simple.
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 68 of 86
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Younger people weren't around much before the age of cell phones and can't realize that when landlines were the only option, the government really didn't spy on people to any large extent, and then not usually without good reason. For the most part cops have there hands, and time, full with enforcement issues. And people had real lives, apart from their friggin' phones!  They had other things to do!  Youngsters are too paranoid in this.  Don't believe me and still too scared?  Just don't run your mouth on the phone and stick to in-person conversations.  You'll be fine.  They're the best kind anyway!
    And yet the precise precedent the FBI is leaning on comes directly from a landline phone case in 1977.

    And a "good reason" was anything J. Edgar Hoover thought it was.
    nolamacguy
  • Reply 69 of 86
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Apple's refusal to unlock an iPhone 5c used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook 
    It is accurate and disingenuous phrasing like this that has caused confusion.

    Apple would have no qualms about complying with a court order to unlock the phone....if it didn't require compromising the security of iOS in its entirety for all users.
    ration alhlee1169palominesacto joe
  • Reply 70 of 86
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    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.
    As, what a marvelous job the media has done on you, to convince you that this is how the world should be. A climate of fear mongering bullshit, where the never ending threat of "terror" scares fuckwits like you into giving up all sense of freedom and privacy...the rights guaranteed to you.

    And why am I not surprised this comes from a generic user name 1-off poster? Can someone say government-sponsored shill?
    nolamacguyhlee1169palomine
  • Reply 71 of 86
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member

    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.


    Clearly you understand the situation very well. BOW TO YOUR OVERLORDS, the government. They always have your best interest at heart.
  • Reply 72 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.

    I see you've at least mastered 3rd grade history.  But, you seem to forget the Patriot Act, NSA wire taps, Edgar Hoover with his paranoia induced wire taps, Nixon wire taps and many many many more wonderful illegal invasions of privacy.  

    And giving the congress power like this is just moronic, as we've seen Congress has no interest in representing the concerns and needs of their constituents at all.  Your very disingenuous statement is not only dangerous, it's also very fucking dumb. 
  • Reply 73 of 86
    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.


    Since just about the beginning of the country, when the right to appeal court verdicts, unreasonable searches, etc. was established.
    nolamacguy
  • Reply 74 of 86
    jtssrx said:
    Oh and to all you people in this poll who call yourself republicans and side with the governments stance you don't understand the meaning of what it is to be a republican.
    If the current crop of Republican candidates are any measure, they don't understand the meaning of most things, and apparently it doesn't faze them.

    Oh well...you hung the curve and I had to swing. Sorry.
    palomine
  • Reply 75 of 86
    when did Republicans go from being about small business and small government, to promoting big government -- government control inside the bedroom, inside the uterus, foreign wars, and now spying on citizens. total madness.
    palominehlee1169
  • Reply 76 of 86
    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.
    since living in a free nation w/ a bill of rights. the government can't compel you to do anything it wants.
  • Reply 77 of 86
    michael_c said:
    sog35 said:
    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.
    To be honest, that single incident of directing the SB county administrators to change the passcode before anyone in federal law enforcement or the intelligence community (pick your alphabet) had a chance to look at the phone, strikes me as either one of the most incompetent FBI actions ever or something that is incredibly suspicious for a variety of reasons. Your turn in the box Mr. Comey.
  • Reply 78 of 86
    cali said:
    adm1 said:
    1st question gives no back-story information to those who don't know the full facts.
    2nd question again does not detail the implications of the government having full unfettered access to all of your data at any time.

    Were the same people polled with the full facts and potential outcomes thereof I'm pretty sure things would swing apple's way.
    It doesn't help that the anti-Apple AMERICAN media is spinning facts as a negative. Some are even accusing Apple of sharing info with the Chinese governement based on %100 made up sh*t. I've never seen America hate one of it's own homegrown companies as much as they hate Apple. Donald Duck on the other hand is demanding we stop buying Apple products and use cheap Korean knockoffs instead. Sad.

    It seems the media would give up our rights forever just for a chance to sh*t on Apple.
    The Media is stuck in a "Follow the Gun" mode. That is the media fashion of the day, whatever the facts are they dwell on the sensational, the shocking, the sad. Will they ever return to the old ways where emotion is only one of the factors in a news story? Nope. All emotional every day.  I need to find better news sources.

    After the Justice Dept e-books case and all the other hassles, I can't help but think the govt is furious at Apple for designing encryption into their phones and they are in fact doing everything they can to pressure and punish Apple.  Last JULY there were stories about "terrorists going dark", more in October, and now this case. Really it's been a couple years. I think govt is really angry that these devices exist and they are going after Apple hooks, claws and tongs. ( what about Telegraph and other conversation encrypted apps.??)
    Part of me wonders when the US will have some damn "event" as a further pressure for people to give in on this issue. Naw they wouldn't do that really.

     I have to wonder if the govt has any connections on Wall Street. The explanations for AAPL stock prices are really unsatisfying, even after you figure the market is swayed by crazy things all the time.

    it sure makes Tim Cook's job look a lot harder than we thought.
  • Reply 79 of 86
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    mike1 said:
    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.
    Liberals (pre 1990) are never for more government when it comes to law enforcement or the military (except in times of war);
     modern democrats are much more to the right than they were in the 1970s and before and yes,
     those are more inclined to trust police (their position is a lot close to traditional pre 1980 GOP positions)
    but they're not to keen to give them carte blanche.


  • Reply 80 of 86
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    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

    The Iphone wasn't hacked,  they social engineered her password, questions and got into her cloud account. Got that bozo.
    They came through the front door.
    Most of the photos from the other actresses (which were also obtained with social engineering and web searches of their info) weren't even from Icloud accounts.
    In fact, people giving their security away is the main issue with security anywhere.
    edited February 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.