FBI director says iOS and Android privacy features put users 'above the law'

1246710

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 188
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by YvesVilleneuve View Post





    I think Apple is claiming law enforcement won't have the ability to do these things and this is what I'm addressing.

    To do what things?  They can tap into the carriers and into the search engines like google.  What would stop them from doing that?

  • Reply 62 of 188
    In fact Apple has stated that they will comply with lawfully executed and constitutionally valid warrants for the data stored on their systems. What they can not do is decrypt the contents of a persons iPhone or iPad. This is perfectly valid for them and for us.

    The government can serve the warrant to the person and the person is well with their right to refuse and take the fifth if they wish. This is what the government fears. And empowered and educated population.
    I think Apple is claiming law enforcement won't have the ability to do these things and this is what I'm addressing.
  • Reply 63 of 188
    muppetry wrote: »
    No, what they are saying is that they (Apple) don't have access to the contents, and so LE will need to serve the warrant on the device owner. Nothing wrong with that.
    LE still need a key from Apple if the suspect refuses to give it up when served with a warrant. Otherwise Apple is complicit in hiding or destroying evidence.
  • Reply 64 of 188
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    LE still need a key from Apple if the suspect refuses to give it up when served with a warrant. Otherwise Apple is complicit in hiding or destroying evidence.
    They can't offer what they don't have. And they don't have the keys.
  • Reply 65 of 188
    gatorguy wrote: »
    They can't offer what they don't have. And they don't have the keys.
    The legal term of what they are doing is "obstruction of justice".
  • Reply 66 of 188
    LE still need a key from Apple if the suspect refuses to give it up when served with a warrant. Otherwise Apple is complicit in hiding or destroying evidence.

    What, do you work for the FBI or the NSA? I believe that the constitution states that citizens have the right to be secure in their papers and possessions. For goodness sake, I have nothing to hide, but I have every right to secure my data if I so wish.
  • Reply 67 of 188
    beltsbear wrote: »
    It's pretty clear a lot of posters have a strong interest in hiding stuff from the police. It's exactly the actions and concerns that criminals spend their time on. They also like to plot and conduct their criminal activities more conveniently in secret.
    So the majority of the public are thought criminals? 

    Yeah, that's the new police mentality along with SWATing a home and shooting the family dog and kids first.
  • Reply 68 of 188
    rorwessels wrote: »
    What, do you work for the FBI or the NSA? I believe that the constitution states that citizens have the right to be secure in their papers and possessions. For goodness sake, I have nothing to hide, but I have every right to secure my data if I so wish.
    Sure, but not when you are served with a warrant.
  • Reply 69 of 188
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    muppetry wrote: »
    No, what they are saying is that they (Apple) don't have access to the contents, and so LE will need to serve the warrant on the device owner. Nothing wrong with that.
    LE still need a key from Apple if the suspect refuses to give it up when served with a warrant. Otherwise Apple is complicit in hiding or destroying evidence.

    No different to the subject refusing to divulge a hidden location, or the key to any encrypted content anywhere. It's not Apple's legal responsibility to ensure access to secure devices that they manufacture, any more than it is the responsibility of the author of a crypto method to provide a backdoor access mechanism.
  • Reply 70 of 188
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by YvesVilleneuve View Post





    The legal term of what they are doing is "obstruction of justice".



    Aren't you phoning in all of this nonsense from Canada, which is a constitutional monarchy? The US is the only country I'm aware of which has a constitution and Bill of Rights which protect individual rights above all else. At least that is the purpose of those founding documents.

  • Reply 71 of 188
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    They can't offer what they don't have. And they don't have the keys.
    The legal term of what they are doing is "obstruction of justice".

    Now you are just spouting legal terms that you do not understand.
  • Reply 72 of 188
    Sure, but not when you are served with a warrant.

    Actually I would have the right to speak to legal council first and I would use my right to remain silent. I would also take the fifth. If this is what LE thinks these days then I do have a reason to distrust the government. And so does everyone else.
  • Reply 73 of 188
    muppetry wrote: »
    No different to the subject refusing to divulge a hidden location, or the key to any encrypted content anywhere. It's not Apple's legal responsibility to ensure access to secure devices that they manufacture, any more than it is the responsibility of the author of a crypto method to provide a backdoor access mechanism.
    When Apple is providing the security tools that are used by criminals they must comply with the instructions of a warrant to unlock private areas.
  • Reply 74 of 188



    Interesting theory about the NSA tampering with the iOS 8.0.1 update.  Wouldn't surprise me.  It's the kind of dirty tactic they would pull.

  • Reply 75 of 188
    rorwessels wrote: »
    Actually I would have the right to speak to legal council first and I would use my right to remain silent. I would also take the fifth. If this is what LE thinks these days then I do have a reason to distrust the government. And so does everyone else.
    That doesn't stop LE from seizing the phone in case the suspect is not compliant while searching with a warrant. LE are allowed to enter the suspect's premises while he speaks to legal council.
  • Reply 76 of 188
    froodfrood Posts: 771member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post

     

    Android also?  


     

    It is built into the next release of Android, Android L.

     

    I think it is largely a feel good measure.  If you've actually used your phone, whatever you have on it can be readily accessed by the government (photo backups, emails, texts, websites visited, searches, etc), the government just can't lift them directly off your phone.

     

    I like it because even though they can still get the information, you at least have to be a serious enough suspect for them to go through the motions and have Apple or Google comply and give them the goods on you.  They can't just snag your phone on a traffic stop and then go digging for dirt on your phone.

  • Reply 77 of 188
    Originally Posted by YvesVilleneuve View Post

    Sure, but not when you are served with a warrant.

     

    Good luck serving me one when I’ve done nothing wrong.

     

    Originally Posted by YvesVilleneuve View Post

    When Apple is providing the security tools that are used by criminals they must comply with the instructions of a warrant...

     

    Good luck with that. No.

  • Reply 78 of 188
    When Apple is providing the security tools that are used by criminals they must comply with the instructions of a warrant to unlock private areas.

    I can not believe I am reading this. Maybe someone else can make sense of this? Why on earth anyone would think that the government should have unfettered access to any of your information, encrypted or otherwise, is just beyond me. They should have to have a LIMITED warrant to sneeze in your direction. Much less anything else. And no one can be compelled to provide evidence against their own person or self incriminate.

    Learn your rights people. I honestly applaud Apple for this. I just wish they would do the same for information in iCloud. Maybe when a user implements two factor authentication it also encrypts the users data using an asymmetrical key. That would be cool with me.
  • Reply 79 of 188
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by YvesVilleneuve View Post





    When Apple is providing the security tools that are used by criminals they must comply with the instructions of a warrant to unlock private areas.



    Are you a Canadian or not?

  • Reply 80 of 188
    We (taxpayers) are paying to government's shit (NSA).
Sign In or Register to comment.