The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
This is about having a warrant. Nothing more
OK, so it you were shown a warrant to turn yourself inside out you'd try to comply or would you say that it's impossible, just as Apple said that they don't possess a universal key to unlock an encrypted iPhone.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
This is about having a warrant. Nothing more
OK, so it you were shown a warrant to turn yourself inside out you'd try to comply or would you say that it's impossible, just as Apple said that they don't possess a universal key to unlock an encrypted iPhone.
If the law said I needed to comply by turning myself inside out I’d have to. Otherwise i’d Suffer the consequences. Apple has the tools and laws are laws.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
This is about having a warrant. Nothing more
OK, so it you were shown a warrant to turn yourself inside out you'd try to comply or would you say that it's impossible, just as Apple said that they don't possess a universal key to unlock an encrypted iPhone.
If the law said I needed to comply by turning myself inside out I’d have to. Otherwise i’d Suffer the consequences. Apple has the tools and laws are laws.
While we appreciate your conviction, you are starting to scare us.
You’re not a criminal. But when something happens to someone and they have a warrant Apple is helping criminals by not complying with a Warrant. They should be sued..
No. What the DoJ and FBI is asking Apple to do is to build an operating system which is fundamentally vulnerable, so that, with or without a warrant, law enforcement could climb in through the back door of someone's device. This puts EVERYONE at risk. What law enforcement wants is EASY access to people's personal data. That's also known as a surveillance state; one that presumes that if you value privacy, then you must be doing something nefarious that you don't want them to know about. It's a presumption of guilt. One of America's fundamental values, historically, has been a presumption of innocence and right to privacy. Remember when it was considered a federal offense to open someone's mailbox? What it comes down to, is law enforcement can legally compel (though not physically force) someone to unlock their own device, if provided with a warrant. Just like a person must allow police to enter their home, if provided with a warrant. If the individual refuses to comply with the warrant, then law enforcement can charge them with contempt, and hold them until they comply. What the DoJ and FBI want is a Master Key to EVERYONE'S device, so that they can access it anytime they want, for any reason, with or without a warrant. That would be akin to the police being allowed to come into your home at any time, for any reason, without a warrant or probable cause, just in case you might be doing something illegal in your house. Is that the kind of world you want to live in?
Because you’re being ignorant? I want privacy and security, and am not a criminal.
“Gravity is helping criminals!”
“Oxygen is helping criminals!”
You’re not a criminal. But when something happens to someone and they have a warrant Apple is helping criminals by not complying with a Warrant. They should be sued..
Yes, math can sometimes work to the advantage of criminals. So can gravity. And an atmosphere. Should they not exist because criminals sometimes benefit from them? Or, is the rational thing to realize most users are not criminals, and are entitled to privacy and security, so math should continue to be used to protect them, in the same way that we don't get mad at gravity or atmosphere for helping criminals.
Because you’re being ignorant? I want privacy and security, and am not a criminal.
“Gravity is helping criminals!”
“Oxygen is helping criminals!”
You’re not a criminal. But when something happens to someone and they have a warrant Apple is helping criminals by not complying with a Warrant. They should be sued..
Let's face it... Pretty well everyone has broken a law at least once in their life. Go on admit it. Have you jaywalked? Did you once go over a posted speed limit by even 1mph? etc etc etc That means we are all criminals but we just don't realise it ourselves yet.
That's the rule that some law enforcement organisations seem to be working to these days. Everyone has something to hide which can be used against them should the need arise.
If this isn't just an big advertisement for an iPhone, I don't know what is. Does one remotely hear of anything about Android having to go through any of this. No.
Fact is... if you care about security and privacy, get an iPhone. If you don't care at all, Android is right up your alley.
Something always leaks into the internet, always. If security and privacy is valued, don’t use the internet.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
This is about having a warrant. Nothing more
A warrant only requires Apple to turn over all the info requested, that is in Apple's possession and they have access to. And Apple has done that.
The iPhones that the FBI wants the info from, are not in Apple"s possession. Apple are not the owners of those iPhones. Apple do not have the info that are encrypted inside those iPhones. Apple do not have the passcode needed to access the info in those iPhones. A search warrant requesting that the info inside those iPhones be turned over, is served to the owners of the iPhones, not to the maker of the iPhones. How can a search warrant require Apple to turn over information they are not in possession of?
What the FBI have is a court order ordering Apple to unlock the iPhone. This is far from having a warrant. It's something that Apple can't do, without attempting to write new software to try to hack into the iPhone.
It's like if you are a landlord and your tenant changed the lock and never gave you a key. Law enforcement can show you a warrant to search the property but if you don't have the key, all you can do is allow the police to break in, any way they want. The police should hire their own locksmith and not require you to pick the lock. The police should provide their own axe to breakdown the door and not require you to supply them with one.
And since iPhones in question are evidence, the FBI will not allow Apple to have access to the iPhone that needs to be unlocked. So Apple has to show the FBI that any software they might develop to hack into an iPhone, can be use to unlock a similar iPhone first, without destroying the data inside it. The FBI will not allow Apple to use any software that has not been proven, on the iPhones that are evidence.
And the FBI must make sure that the data in the iPhone is not altered in any way, in case the info in the iPhone has to be used as evidence in court. This means that the FBI forensic team must know exactly how Apple software was used to gain access to the iPhone, so they can testify in court that there's no possibility that the data has been altered in the process. Otherwise, any info gotten using the software, might be considered tainted and not admissible in court.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
This is about having a warrant. Nothing more
A warrant only requires Apple to turn over all the info requested, that is in Apple's possession and they have access to. And Apple has done that.
The iPhones that the FBI wants the info from, are not in Apple"s possession. Apple are not the owners of those iPhones. Apple do not have the info that are encrypted inside those iPhones. Apple do not have the passcode needed to access the info in those iPhones. A search warrant requesting that the info inside those iPhones be turned over, is served to the owners of the iPhones, not to the maker of the iPhones. How can a search warrant require Apple to turn over information they are not in possession of?
Fun Fact: Prior to iOS8 a law enforcement agency could send an iPhone to Apple and it could be unlocked by them and all data it held extracted. Then the iPhone along with a disc containing that users iPhone data (subject to the legal warrant) would be sent back to that agency.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
This is about having a warrant. Nothing more
A warrant only requires Apple to turn over all the info requested, that is in Apple's possession and they have access to. And Apple has done that.
The iPhones that the FBI wants the info from, are not in Apple"s possession. Apple are not the owners of those iPhones. Apple do not have the info that are encrypted inside those iPhones. Apple do not have the passcode needed to access the info in those iPhones. A search warrant requesting that the info inside those iPhones be turned over, is served to the owners of the iPhones, not to the maker of the iPhones. How can a search warrant require Apple to turn over information they are not in possession of?
Fun Fact: Prior to iOS8 a law enforcement agency could send an iPhone to Apple and it could be unlocked by them and all data it held extracted. Then the iPhone along with a disc containing that users iPhone data (subject to the legal warrant) would be sent back to that agency.
Irrelevant fact as well. There is no such ability to do so with a modern OS, so they are still offering the same level of compliance -- that which they can do.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
This is about having a warrant. Nothing more
A warrant only requires Apple to turn over all the info requested, that is in Apple's possession and they have access to. And Apple has done that.
The iPhones that the FBI wants the info from, are not in Apple"s possession. Apple are not the owners of those iPhones. Apple do not have the info that are encrypted inside those iPhones. Apple do not have the passcode needed to access the info in those iPhones. A search warrant requesting that the info inside those iPhones be turned over, is served to the owners of the iPhones, not to the maker of the iPhones. How can a search warrant require Apple to turn over information they are not in possession of?
What the FBI have is a court order ordering Apple to unlock the iPhone. This is far from having a warrant. It's something that Apple can't do, without attempting to write new software to try to hack into the iPhone.
It's like if you are a landlord and your tenant changed the lock and never gave you a key. Law enforcement can show you a warrant to search the property but if you don't have the key, all you can do is allow the police to break in, any way they want. The police should hire their own locksmith and not require you to pick the lock. The police should provide their own axe to breakdown the door and not require you to supply them with one.
And since iPhones in question are evidence, the FBI will not allow Apple to have access to the iPhone that needs to be unlocked. So Apple has to show the FBI that any software they might develop to hack into an iPhone, can be use to unlock a similar iPhone first, without destroying the data inside it. The FBI will not allow Apple to use any software that has not been proven, on the iPhones that are evidence.
And the FBI must make sure that the data in the iPhone is not altered in any way, in case the info in the iPhone has to be used as evidence in court. This means that the FBI forensic team must know exactly how Apple software was used to gain access to the iPhone, so they can testify in court that there's no possibility that the data has been altered in the process. Otherwise, any info gotten using the software, might be considered tainted and not admissible in court.
That would be like if I made a safe for children to be safe. Then, when they are locked in the safe saying that only they have the code to unlock the safe and that the warrant doesn’t apply.
The same can be said about the US Constitution. Criminals also has protection under the US Constitution, that prevents the government from abusing its powers. It's the price paid, to ensure that everyone is protected from a government that is capable of abusing its powers.
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
This is about having a warrant. Nothing more
A warrant only requires Apple to turn over all the info requested, that is in Apple's possession and they have access to. And Apple has done that.
The iPhones that the FBI wants the info from, are not in Apple"s possession. Apple are not the owners of those iPhones. Apple do not have the info that are encrypted inside those iPhones. Apple do not have the passcode needed to access the info in those iPhones. A search warrant requesting that the info inside those iPhones be turned over, is served to the owners of the iPhones, not to the maker of the iPhones. How can a search warrant require Apple to turn over information they are not in possession of?
Fun Fact: Prior to iOS8 a law enforcement agency could send an iPhone to Apple and it could be unlocked by them and all data it held extracted. Then the iPhone along with a disc containing that users iPhone data (subject to the legal warrant) would be sent back to that agency.
Not just before iOS8 but also before the A7 chip. The A7 and any newer chip, comes with the secure enclave where the encryption key is stored. With the A7 or newer and iOS8 or newer, Apple on longer has access to the key. The key is now stored in the hardware of the iPhone, that Apple can not get to, without creating some sort of backdoor in iOS. I believe an iPhone 5s with iOS8 is the minimum requirement for this feature. An iPhone 5 with iOS8 can still be unlocked by Apple as the 5 only has the A6 chip without the secure enclave.
Before iOS8, Apple would be like a landlord with the key to his rental unit. He can open the door for the police if they have a search warrant. But after iOS8 and above, along with the A7 chip and above, Apple no longer has access to the key in the iPhone. So a warrant would be useless for this purpose. The police needs to get a court order forcing Apple to write software that will somehow hack their own iOS and that might not be Constitutional.
Most likely, one of the reason for designing a chip with the secure enclave, was that Apple got tire of spending all the time and money to unlock all the iPhones that law enforcement was presenting them with. So they designed the iPhone so that they no longer have access to the key to unlock it, even with a warrant.
Any of the third party hackers available to law enforcement could have unlocked those older iPhones but why pay a third party to do it, when Apple has to do it for free, with just a warrant.
Comments
With Apple, the only way they can help protect the private data of all their iPhone (and iPad) customers, is to not create a backdoor that the government can use to get into criminals locked iPhones. After all, if we never have to worry about the government abusing its powers, we would not need the US Constitution.
As sflocal said, you're trolling.
No. What the DoJ and FBI is asking Apple to do is to build an operating system which is fundamentally vulnerable, so that, with or without a warrant, law enforcement could climb in through the back door of someone's device. This puts EVERYONE at risk.
What law enforcement wants is EASY access to people's personal data. That's also known as a surveillance state; one that presumes that if you value privacy, then you must be doing something nefarious that you don't want them to know about. It's a presumption of guilt. One of America's fundamental values, historically, has been a presumption of innocence and right to privacy. Remember when it was considered a federal offense to open someone's mailbox?
What it comes down to, is law enforcement can legally compel (though not physically force) someone to unlock their own device, if provided with a warrant. Just like a person must allow police to enter their home, if provided with a warrant. If the individual refuses to comply with the warrant, then law enforcement can charge them with contempt, and hold them until they comply.
What the DoJ and FBI want is a Master Key to EVERYONE'S device, so that they can access it anytime they want, for any reason, with or without a warrant. That would be akin to the police being allowed to come into your home at any time, for any reason, without a warrant or probable cause, just in case you might be doing something illegal in your house. Is that the kind of world you want to live in?
The iPhones that the FBI wants the info from, are not in Apple"s possession. Apple are not the owners of those iPhones. Apple do not have the info that are encrypted inside those iPhones. Apple do not have the passcode needed to access the info in those iPhones. A search warrant requesting that the info inside those iPhones be turned over, is served to the owners of the iPhones, not to the maker of the iPhones. How can a search warrant require Apple to turn over information they are not in possession of?
What the FBI have is a court order ordering Apple to unlock the iPhone. This is far from having a warrant. It's something that Apple can't do, without attempting to write new software to try to hack into the iPhone.
It's like if you are a landlord and your tenant changed the lock and never gave you a key. Law enforcement can show you a warrant to search the property but if you don't have the key, all you can do is allow the police to break in, any way they want. The police should hire their own locksmith and not require you to pick the lock. The police should provide their own axe to breakdown the door and not require you to supply them with one.
And since iPhones in question are evidence, the FBI will not allow Apple to have access to the iPhone that needs to be unlocked. So Apple has to show the FBI that any software they might develop to hack into an iPhone, can be use to unlock a similar iPhone first, without destroying the data inside it. The FBI will not allow Apple to use any software that has not been proven, on the iPhones that are evidence.
And the FBI must make sure that the data in the iPhone is not altered in any way, in case the info in the iPhone has to be used as evidence in court. This means that the FBI forensic team must know exactly how Apple software was used to gain access to the iPhone, so they can testify in court that there's no possibility that the data has been altered in the process. Otherwise, any info gotten using the software, might be considered tainted and not admissible in court.
Prior to iOS8 a law enforcement agency could send an iPhone to Apple and it could be unlocked by them and all data it held extracted. Then the iPhone along with a disc containing that users iPhone data (subject to the legal warrant) would be sent back to that agency.
Before iOS8, Apple would be like a landlord with the key to his rental unit. He can open the door for the police if they have a search warrant. But after iOS8 and above, along with the A7 chip and above, Apple no longer has access to the key in the iPhone. So a warrant would be useless for this purpose. The police needs to get a court order forcing Apple to write software that will somehow hack their own iOS and that might not be Constitutional.
Most likely, one of the reason for designing a chip with the secure enclave, was that Apple got tire of spending all the time and money to unlock all the iPhones that law enforcement was presenting them with. So they designed the iPhone so that they no longer have access to the key to unlock it, even with a warrant.
Any of the third party hackers available to law enforcement could have unlocked those older iPhones but why pay a third party to do it, when Apple has to do it for free, with just a warrant.