The single most important event in Tuesday's Judicial Committee hearing was when Comey admitted that this order to weaken iPhone security will not prevent terrorists and criminals from using encrypted communications.
So this means the actions of the FBI and DoJ will gain them nothing in the long run, while vastly increasing the chances of putting the data security and personal safety of tens of millions of americans (and hundreds of millions of others around the world) in jeopardy.
Does this seem stupid to you too?
It is no secret that Comey's sinister agenda does not stop at the iPhone. He is only starting. He wants all unbreakable encryption to be backdoored and if not, it should be illegal because in his view unbreakable encryption is above the law.
TIL: U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch is clueless when it come to technology.
She can step down now.
I don't think she is clueless, nor do I think that Comey, or Vance are. It is obvious to me that they believe that only a Court solution will favor them so they have been waiting for a terrorist incident to spring this plan. In hindsight, it looks like they pushed a bad position, but it could have gone the other way if Apple had not fought as hard as they did, and if the tech community had not provided the rapid build up of support for Apple's position. This was something that Comey likely did not expect.
I would argue that the turning point was the second interview of Bill Gates where he had to roll back some of his statements that appeared to me to be supportive of the FBI; even Bill was unprepared for the backlash. Literally the next Morning there was a vow of support with an Amicus Brief from Microsoft's President Brad Smith.
Now it's going to Congress, where the FBI has not yet found the key to convincing Congress that banning encryption is a good thing.
The headline says that they are simply asking for "1 thing" but then the article elaborates that they are asking for "3 things".
[quote] the FBI is asking the company (for software that)...suppresses the subject phone's passcode attempt counter (AND) passcode attempt timer (AND) touchscreen input module. [/quote]
I know that none of us like it or want it to happen - but *IF* the FBI pursued legal action that requested just the first thing - disabling the counter - I think they would win based on existing laws and existing precedents (re: destroying evidence). But - adding the second 2 demands (and then incorrectly claiming they only want one thing) - destroys their case and their credibility. They will most certainly lose if they move forward with those exact demands.
My son changed his iphone password. He is eight. (No, it does not have a sim card. He uses it more like an ipod touch and it is a hand-me-down when his mom moved up to a 6+). He forgot the code. We are at the point where we can only enter a password every 60 minutes.
When Apple gets done with this phone, could they please unlock his too.
Thank you...
;-) (Just in case it is needed)
My son changed his iphone password. He is eight. (No, it does not have a sim card. He uses it more like an ipod touch and it is a hand-me-down when his mom moved up to a 6+). He forgot the code. We are at the point where we can only enter a password every 60 minutes.
When Apple gets done with this phone, could they please unlock his too.
Thank you...
;-) (Just in case it is needed)
You should tell the authorities that a terrorist might have used it to store information about an attack while your son was at school. That'll do the trick.
Technical question: Does failing the passcode 10 times destroy the actual data, or does it just destroy the encryption key, so the data is still there, but forever encrypted (which would effectively be the same destroying it)?
On to the article. The FBI screwed up when they changed the AppleID password, so that the phone could no longer connect with iCloud. If they hadn't changed the password (why did they??), then the iPhone would have done one of its regular backups, and Apple would have handed over the data.
"I think that there's some very interesting
technical issues here, but this is bigger than a technical issue. In
particular, when a company has been able to respond to government
requests for help until their previous operating system, so they clearly
have the ability to do it," Lynch said.
Yes, it's bigger than a technical issue. Apple complying with the FBI's "request" will have ripple effects around the world. Despotic regimes will be able to spy on dissidents, corporations will be able to spy on employees, researchers' research could be hacked, inventors' designs could be stolen, writers' manuscripts could be copied/stolen, people's identities and financial resources could be accessed and stolen. This is not an issue of "if you're not doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about." Back before the Internet was invented by Al Gore , people's personal mail was sacrosanct; you felt reasonably safe knowing that no one with integrity would be going through your mail, even though your mail box was on a public street, unlocked. It was just something that wasn't done. But that social agreement was pretty much shredded once the Internet came around and people (hackers, government officials, etc.) realized they could get into your stuff without your knowledge or consent. If the FBI/DoJ wins this fight, then that reality will be orders of magnitude worse.
Incidentally, I think it's interesting that Apple is making this a 1st Amendment issue (i.e. writing software amounts to free speech), when in my layperson's mind, it would be a 4th Amendment issue (unlawful search and seizure). By complying with the FBI's order, Apple would effectively be letting the FBI or any other law enforcement agency get access to anyone's personal iPhone at any time, for any reason.
Incidentally, I think it's interesting that Apple is making this a 1st Amendment issue (i.e. writing software amounts to free speech), when in my layperson's mind, it would be a 4th Amendment issue (unlawful search and seizure). By complying with the FBI's order, Apple would effectively be letting the FBI or any other law enforcement agency get access to anyone's personal iPhone at any time, for any reason.
The 4th cannot be used given that the owner of the phone, San Bernardino County (not Farook) has agreed on the search and there is a search warrant served by the court. The 1st has been previously used successfully to defend encryption cases, so there is a precedence there that Apple can use.
My son changed his iphone password. He is eight. (No, it does not have a sim card. He uses it more like an ipod touch and it is a hand-me-down when his mom moved up to a 6+). He forgot the code. We are at the point where we can only enter a password every 60 minutes.
When Apple gets done with this phone, could they please unlock his too.
Thank you...
;-) (Just in case it is needed)
You could always plug the phone in to iTunes factory reset the phone then reinstall his profile from the last back up. He'll soon start remembering his password.
Comments
I would argue that the turning point was the second interview of Bill Gates where he had to roll back some of his statements that appeared to me to be supportive of the FBI; even Bill was unprepared for the backlash. Literally the next Morning there was a vow of support with an Amicus Brief from Microsoft's President Brad Smith.
Now it's going to Congress, where the FBI has not yet found the key to convincing Congress that banning encryption is a good thing.
[quote] the FBI is asking the company (for software that)...suppresses the subject phone's passcode attempt counter (AND) passcode attempt timer (AND) touchscreen input module. [/quote]
I know that none of us like it or want it to happen - but *IF* the FBI pursued legal action that requested just the first thing - disabling the counter - I think they would win based on existing laws and existing precedents (re: destroying evidence). But - adding the second 2 demands (and then incorrectly claiming they only want one thing) - destroys their case and their credibility. They will most certainly lose if they move forward with those exact demands.
On to the article. The FBI screwed up when they changed the AppleID password, so that the phone could no longer connect with iCloud. If they hadn't changed the password (why did they??), then the iPhone would have done one of its regular backups, and Apple would have handed over the data.
Yes, it's bigger than a technical issue. Apple complying with the FBI's "request" will have ripple effects around the world. Despotic regimes will be able to spy on dissidents, corporations will be able to spy on employees, researchers' research could be hacked, inventors' designs could be stolen, writers' manuscripts could be copied/stolen, people's identities and financial resources could be accessed and stolen. This is not an issue of "if you're not doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about."
, people's personal mail was sacrosanct; you felt reasonably safe knowing that no one with integrity would be going through your mail, even though your mail box was on a public street, unlocked. It was just something that wasn't done. But that social agreement was pretty much shredded once the Internet came around and people (hackers, government officials, etc.) realized they could get into your stuff without your knowledge or consent.
Back before the Internet was invented by Al Gore
If the FBI/DoJ wins this fight, then that reality will be orders of magnitude worse.