Texas Rangers serve Apple with warrants for access to Sutherland Springs shooter's iPhone

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 88
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,858member
    Soli Wrote:
    "The warrant makes no sense. It has been well documented and I’m sure Apple told them they can’t access the phone, so why even make such a legal request when it is moot. The only possible reason is deflection."


    ....And the iCloud Data
    No, no I didn't.
    gatorguy
  • Reply 42 of 88
    frugality said:
    The digital domain should be no different than the physical domain.  The authorities should have access to any personal information for the purposes of a criminal investigation, when authorized by a judge for special circumstances, like this warrant.  They should be able to go through your closets and crawl spaces.  They should be able to go through any digital space for files and digital fingerprints and tracks and trails of digital conversations.  Those who have nothing to be ashamed of have nothing to fear.
    The authorities are welcome (and encouraged!) to develop their own tools to access personal information in the digital domain. The real issue is that they want a ‘free ride’, access to personal information without any work on their part, and that would come at a severe cost to everyone. You say ‘those who have nothing to be ashamed of...’ inherently implies good will on the part of whoever accesses your data. That’s naive.
    spinnydcgWerkswatto_cobra
  • Reply 43 of 88
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,054moderator
    Soli Wrote:
    "The warrant makes no sense. It has been well documented and I’m sure Apple told them they can’t access the phone, so why even make such a legal request when it is moot. The only possible reason is deflection."


    ....And the iCloud Data
    No, Soli did not write that.  Genovelle wrote that. 
    Soli
  • Reply 44 of 88
    frugality said:
    The digital domain should be no different than the physical domain.  The authorities should have access to any personal information for the purposes of a criminal investigation, when authorized by a judge for special circumstances, like this warrant.  They should be able to go through your closets and crawl spaces.  They should be able to go through any digital space for files and digital fingerprints and tracks and trails of digital conversations.  Those who have nothing to be ashamed of have nothing to fear.
    In the physical domain a search warrant has limits. If they’re looking for papers they can’t open your prescription medicines, etc. 

    As for having nothing to fear — the classic nonsense. Privacy is a right that innocent citizens are born with. We don’t need to have something to hide to expect it and enjoy it. If privacy means so little to you, please, remove your mask and begin revealing your private data to us here on this forum. Name and address is a good place to start, yes?
    SolispinnydcgWerksnetmageradarthekatjbdragonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 45 of 88
    frugality said:
    The digital domain should be no different than the physical domain.  The authorities should have access to any personal information for the purposes of a criminal investigation, when authorized by a judge for special circumstances, like this warrant.  They should be able to go through your closets and crawl spaces.  They should be able to go through any digital space for files and digital fingerprints and tracks and trails of digital conversations.  Those who have nothing to be ashamed of have nothing to fear.
    1. You are confusing shame with legality. That is not good.
    2. They SHOULD be able? Okay, remove doors and walls at the place where you live. If you do nothing “shameful”, there is nothing for you to fear. For some reason, I am pretty sure, you will not walk the walk.
    edited November 2017 spinnydcgWerksnetmagejbdragonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 46 of 88
    They need to outlaw encryption ASAP. And any company that refuses to comply should be put out of business and their top management arrested and jailed.
  • Reply 47 of 88
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    frugality said:
    The digital domain should be no different than the physical domain.  The authorities should have access to any personal information for the purposes of a criminal investigation, when authorized by a judge for special circumstances, like this warrant.  They should be able to go through your closets and crawl spaces.  They should be able to go through any digital space for files and digital fingerprints and tracks and trails of digital conversations.  Those who have nothing to be ashamed of have nothing to fear.
    Yeah? What about physical domain is a 10-foot titanium thick safe container with the lock that manufacturer couldn’t even open because they never made a master key or backup key for it? 
    StrangeDaysnetmageradarthekatrandominternetperson
  • Reply 48 of 88
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,118member
    genovelle said:

    Soli said:
    alandail said:
    Soli said:
    vukasika said:
    Q: Is encryption legal?
    A: Yes.
    End of discussion.
    True, but this isn't that discussion. Apple has been served a warrant so they'll hand over all data they can access, in accordance with the warrant.
    if it's encrypted, Apple can't provide without the keys, which they can't access by design.  Making the keys accessible defeats the purpose of encrypting the files in the first place.
    That's the device encryption. If they can't can't access it then they just have to make that an official statement to them, but this is also about his iCloud account, which may not have unbreakable account encryption on their servers as this is inherently different from iDevice HW encryption. Even if it is unbreakable, they just need to state that and explain why. It's a warrant, so I'm not sure why you're focused on the legality of encryption but ignoring the legally of warrants.

    Also note that Apple tried to assist them right away, so there's no reason to suspect that Apple will not try to assist them now. If his iCloud account was accessible I'm sure they already have the data waiting for them.
    Soli said:
    alandail said:
    Soli said:
    vukasika said:
    Q: Is encryption legal?
    A: Yes.
    End of discussion.
    True, but this isn't that discussion. Apple has been served a warrant so they'll hand over all data they can access, in accordance with the warrant.
    if it's encrypted, Apple can't provide without the keys, which they can't access by design.  Making the keys accessible defeats the purpose of encrypting the files in the first place.
    That's the device encryption. If they can't can't access it then they just have to make that an official statement to them, but this is also about his iCloud account, which may not have unbreakable account encryption on their servers as this is inherently different from iDevice HW encryption. Even if it is unbreakable, they just need to state that and explain why. It's a warrant, so I'm not sure why you're focused on the legality of encryption but ignoring the legally of warrants.

    Also note that Apple tried to assist them right away, so there's no reason to suspect that Apple will not try to assist them now. If his iCloud account was accessible I'm sure they already have the data waiting for them.
    Soli said:
    alandail said:
    Soli said:
    vukasika said:
    Q: Is encryption legal?
    A: Yes.
    End of discussion.
    True, but this isn't that discussion. Apple has been served a warrant so they'll hand over all data they can access, in accordance with the warrant.
    if it's encrypted, Apple can't provide without the keys, which they can't access by design.  Making the keys accessible defeats the purpose of encrypting the files in the first place.
    That's the device encryption. If they can't can't access it then they just have to make that an official statement to them, but this is also about his iCloud account, which may not have unbreakable account encryption on their servers as this is inherently different from iDevice HW encryption. Even if it is unbreakable, they just need to state that and explain why. It's a warrant, so I'm not sure why you're focused on the legality of encryption but ignoring the legally of warrants.

    Also note that Apple tried to assist them right away, so there's no reason to suspect that Apple will not try to assist them now. If his iCloud account was accessible I'm sure they already have the data waiting for them.
    The warrant makes no sense. It has been well documented and I’m sure Apple told them they can’t access the phone, so why even make such a legal request when it is moot. The only possible reason is deflection. 

    Apple has some level of information with meta dat for example. While the content of an iMessage is encrypted, the source and destination needs to be known by Apple since iMessage (as I understand it) is not peer to peer but goes through the iCloud servers for delivery. So Apple should know things like “on Oct 24 at 12:34:23, an iMessage of length 2308 bytes was delivered to account B”. The LEOs/FBI could (potentially) then get the content from Account B.
    gatorguy
  • Reply 49 of 88
    "Day late and a dollar short" - surely no one expects the 18th Century bureaucrats running the so-called Rangers to be up-to-date on modern technology. They haven't yet figured out electricity.
  • Reply 50 of 88
    They need to outlaw encryption ASAP. And any company that refuses to comply should be put out of business and their top management arrested and jailed.
    That is a nice cozy tyrany based state you have drawn here...
    SoliStrangeDayscgWerksnetmageiqatedowatto_cobra
  • Reply 51 of 88
    They need to outlaw encryption ASAP. And any company that refuses to comply should be put out of business and their top management arrested and jailed.
    They need to outlaw assault rifles ASAP.  And any company that refuses to comply [....]
    cgWerksnetmageiqatedosingularity
  • Reply 52 of 88
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,975member
    The media use the word critical to fool readers. The US legal system wastes enormous of taxpayer money on this almost useless pursuit.  Because the media is so willing to help.  How much do you expect the unlocking of the iPhone will reveal? Twenty six innocent people have already died. This killer has big confrontation with his wife's grandmother. The motive is very clear. Did he get any help?  Just by reading the news I can say no. 
  • Reply 53 of 88
    Interesting that this warrant is from Texas Rangers and not from FBI.
  • Reply 54 of 88
    steven n. said:
    Apple has some level of information with meta dat for example. While the content of an iMessage is encrypted, the source and destination needs to be known by Apple since iMessage (as I understand it) is not peer to peer but goes through the iCloud servers for delivery. So Apple should know things like “on Oct 24 at 12:34:23, an iMessage of length 2308 bytes was delivered to account B”. The LEOs/FBI could (potentially) then get the content from Account B.
    Excellent point. And if the receiving end doesn't have an iPhone it's sent as a SMS. That's only useful if the recipient kept the message, since SMS isn't stored on a telco's server after it's been delivered successfully.
  • Reply 55 of 88
    My firs thought was"Why is a baseball team serving a warrant on Apple?"
    loquiturStrangeDaysrandominternetpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 56 of 88
    I am somewhat puzzled by all the angst and the strong reactions from some here. If the warrant is legit and Apple had the ability or technology to help with any or all of it, they should. If Apple's abilities or the technology does not permit them to help, they can't. End of story. 
    Soligatorguymuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 57 of 88
    wizard69 said:

    dipdog3 said:
    Apple should legally hand over the unencrypted contents of the phone, but unfortunately, there is no way to do that without compromising the security of everyone. 

    A fact of life in the digital age, a key that opens one lock will open all locks.
    And yet we have seen again and again that no useful information comes up in these searches.    This is just liberal government trying to create a situation where they can drive lawmakers to make encryption illegal.    Just watch the media if we start to see a concerted effort to smug Apple in the media you will know that the next move will be to get people to believe encryption should be illegal.

    This isn't unlike the so called gun control initiatives of the liberal media.    They try to bias the public with a bunch of lies and half truths in the hopes that they can get a block of voters that don't know any better.    What is even worse here is that they wrap the debate around things like public safety to hide a deeper agenda to dominate the political arena.
    “liberal government”? lol it’s the Republicans who would make encryption illegal, and I don’t think they’d appreciate being called liberal.

    The conservative media and politicians have mostly succeeded in demonizing that word, liberal. And you’ve fallen for it—you use it as a derogatory word, full of hate. 
    Yeah, what liberal government? Really? Regardless of one’s political views, surely that trope can be retired ... at least for now? 

    -MAS 
  • Reply 58 of 88
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,602administrator
    They need to outlaw encryption ASAP. And any company that refuses to comply should be put out of business and their top management arrested and jailed.
    Then, there would be no digital commerce at all. No email, no Amazon, no password security, nothing.

    It is the tech companies' jobs to keep its customers data as safe as possible -- and the US Government attests to this.

    It is law enforcement's job to develop the tools to penetrate that security if it needs to. It is not the tech industry's responsibility to provide data that it does not have, nor is it required to loosen security to make the government's job easier.

    It is literally this simple.
    edited November 2017 SolicgWerksanton zuykovnetmageradarthekatwatto_cobra
  • Reply 59 of 88
    I am somewhat puzzled by all the angst and the strong reactions from some here. If the warrant is legit and Apple had the ability or technology to help with any or all of it, they should. If Apple's abilities or the technology does not permit them to help, they can't. End of story. 
    I'll tell you why. It was very clear from the start that Apple's abilities and technology do not permit them to hand over the information the government is asking for. The government might as well have gotten a warrant for information stored in the shooter's brain. The only way Apple can comply with the warrant is to spend time developing a tool that doesn't exist now. That was obvious from the very beginning. 

    The reason for the strong reactions here is that people are seeing right through the government's rhetoric for what this really is-a clear cut attempt to exploit this incident to further the government's agenda to erode our privacy. 
    netmagewatto_cobra
  • Reply 60 of 88
    greg uvan said:
    All I can think about right now is Chuck Norris. Hehe. 
    Yep that was my first thought too.  If he gets a "no" then Apple Park will be laid to waste :smiley: 
Sign In or Register to comment.