User security, privacy issues draw sharp contrast between Apple iOS, Google Android in FBI encrypti

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 122
    For those who think Apple is being unpatriotic you all should read this piece from Guardians.
    Apple encryption case risks influencing Russia and China

    And these sentences are damning.

    The impact of the mutual distrust between Washington and Beijing can be seen in China’s new cybersecurity and counter-terrorism bill, passed last December. The far-reaching law mandates that internet firms and telecos doing business in China provide law enforcement with decryption keys in terrorism cases. Analysts and foreign firms are waiting to see how far China goes in enforcing the controversial measure, particularly in light of Apple’s standoff with the FBI. 
    Last March, Obama personally objected to the Chinese law as a draconian measure that would force US firms to “turn over to the Chinese government mechanisms where they can snoop and keep track of all the users of those services.” Obama said he had personally raised the issue with Xi Jinping, his Chinese counterpart.
    “Imagine how hollow these objections will ring if a US court can order what China was trying to compel by statute,” said Greg Nojeim of the Center for Democracy and Technology.


    edited February 2016 mr oManyMacsAgoibilljony0
  • Reply 82 of 122
    LoopDoGG said:
    Everybody forget that encryption on Android has been possible on Android since Kit Kat and that it will be on by default on 6.0 and beyond? On my Samsung I have extra layer of security, KNOX. Android can be just as secure as Apple. We are reading too much into Google being silent. Though, if they stay silent too long, that can be suspect 
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!
    You so funny!
  • Reply 83 of 122
    This article seems far too reductive to me. The argument that one decryption is all descriptions is just wrong. This has proceeded exactly as it should, through open procedure in public courts.

    You don't get to say "I use Apple products so I can ignore subpenas" or even worse,  "the law doesn't apply because tech."

    Despite their high horse, all I see Apple doing is undermining rule of law. We should be applauding this sort of thing coming out of the NSAs shadow world and into the light of regular law and democratic process.
    I guess you can ignore subpoenas if you are dead (as in the case of the terrorists). But no, you don't use Apple products so you personally can ignore subpoenas -- if you don't unlock your own phone when asked, I guess you risk going to jail -- just as with any other evidence you might be asked to supply. You use Apple so that your phone maker or OS maker doesn't hand over the keys to the first person who asks nicely; and to avoid getting hacked by anyone that decides to be loose with or to profit from its knowledge of the tools and methods used to get into your phone.

    As always, if the FBI ransacked a suspect's property but didn't find what they are looking for because he has memorised it, put it into his own code, or otherwise hidden it, then they have to induce the suspect to reveal it, one way or another (either through a deal or threat of torture or imprisonment, etc.); that's police work. Why should the govt get a shortcut from doing real, traditional police work, when that shortcut compromises everyone's personal freedoms and security?

    We would have a situation like the one Eric Schmidt betrayed: "Well, if you didn't want anyone to know about it, don't put it in an email." Now, it'll be like, "Well, if you didn't want anyone to know about it, don't put it on your own personal phone."
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 84 of 122
    Privacy is nothing but a knee jerk reaction and subsequent paranoia from neurotic people. People who truly need privacy can find better ways to conceal what they may.
    This issue from Tim Cook and all the Privacy advocates are nothing but insecure small people. This iisue is folly. People are not as important as they think they are.
    I guess you are happy with the situation as betrayed by Eric Schmidt (paraphrasing): "Well, if you didn't want anyone to know about it, don't put it in an email." Now, it'll be like, "Well, if you didn't want anyone to know about it, don't put it on your own personal phone." Yes, you can find better ways to conceal your thoughts -- don't save your thoughts anywhere external to your own mind, just memorize everything.
  • Reply 85 of 122
    Maybe Tim will at least tell them how to stop the irritating Gamecenter pop ups on the IPad. Please?
    Settings-->Notifications-->Game Center-->allow notifications off.  Call me Tim. 
  • Reply 86 of 122
    matrix077 said:
    For those who think Apple is being unpatriotic you all should read this piece from Guardians.
    Apple encryption case risks influencing Russia and China

    And these sentences are damning.

    The impact of the mutual distrust between Washington and Beijing can be seen in China’s new cybersecurity and counter-terrorism bill, passed last December. The far-reaching law mandates that internet firms and telecos doing business in China provide law enforcement with decryption keys in terrorism cases. Analysts and foreign firms are waiting to see how far China goes in enforcing the controversial measure, particularly in light of Apple’s standoff with the FBI. 
    Last March, Obama personally objected to the Chinese law as a draconian measure that would force US firms to “turn over to the Chinese government mechanisms where they can snoop and keep track of all the users of those services.” Obama said he had personally raised the issue with Xi Jinping, his Chinese counterpart.
    “Imagine how hollow these objections will ring if a US court can order what China was trying to compel by statute,” said Greg Nojeim of the Center for Democracy and Technology.



  • Reply 87 of 122
    Tim Cook, and anyone else attempting to chivalrously protect me -- with the best of intentions -- from intrusions upon my privacy: surely it is possible to work out a protocol whereby, upon an Apple Customer having ceased to exist, or in the event of an extremely grave criminal offence (such as mass murder, serial rape, kidnapping for ransom, hijacking or carjacking, arson, or a large-scale fraud or theft such as the one recently where teams of thieves fanned out to cash machines across the globe to receive huge sums of stolen money that began to eject upon the command of a remote hacker), encryption will cease to be impregnable upon presentation of a court order and with the appropriate warrants having been supplied by law enforcement agencies, with safeguards against abuses? As an adult of 58 years, I have lived through many events, including some very dramatic and dangerous ones, including attacks on my person or loved ones'. I am well aware, more so than most, in fact, of the need to zealously guard my personal safety, my family's, my friends'. But as a competent and experienced person of 58, I am also skilled in my own methods and security protocols. The argument that we are at the mercy of an intrusive, malevolent "nanny state" that insists on looking over our shoulder to know all our secret thoughts collapses entirely at the suggestion  that somehow it is a better outcome to be at the mercy of a hovering, patronising "nanny corporation," that will do everything for us (including assisting in experiencing and logging orgasms, apparently) -- including protecting us from the "evil FBI." The example of Russia and China, where people are regularly sent to prison camps to be abused and starved for the crime of wishing to start a political party, or quoting from some foreign blog (these are documented cases that have featured in the news in those Snowden-loving countries over the past few months), is utterly misguided and misplaced here. And if China is such an offender, why has the Apple corporation chosen to make it so rich, by moving so much production there, instead of keeping it here in the USA, where we respect human rights? To compare homophobic, xenophobic, aggressive, sexist and profoundly backward Russia -- where security services routinely sodomize detainees with champagne bottles, a fact you can read about at length from survivors in YouTube, and documented also by mainstream foreign media such as Reuters, BBC, CNN, AFP -- to the political reality in the USA today is an outrageous false analogy. Please, get serious. No, I am not happy to have the NSA snoop around in my life and DNA -- but neither am I thrilled to have the new Private "spook services" (Google, Facebook, Yahoo!, etc.) do essentially the same thing for the benefit of mystery customers who are not even security cleared law enforcement. I trust Apple with my data. I also choose which data you have access to. I am keenly aware of everything I write and say, and the timing of each utterance. So is every intelligent human being. Give other grown up people some credit, Tim Cook, and please don't imagine we are all so helpless and incapable of dealing with Big Government when it surrounds us. Come up with a fair and reasonable one-off protocol to address Serious Crimes, because anything else -- no matter how many young activists blog supportively -- is going to cost you customers. Good corporate governance, the kind Steve Jobs understood so much about, requires also understanding how much profitability each type of customer and demographic brings you. You cannot afford to alienate the very customers who made you great in the first place -- the older, long-standing ones who can afford to spend lots of money on your new products, and take the time to help promote your brand, because they have had a good relationship with you for many decades. Up until now. Siding with the anarchist, paranoid left is not going to help you. We need to know who is involved in plotting terror attacks and supplying terrorists, including with advice. We need to know who is raping and prostituting young children. Those are not subject areas where civilised, leading corporate officers choose to shield the criminal.
  • Reply 88 of 122
    brakken said:
    Troll be trolling.
    Yes, and both posts have been deleted... yet they live on in your full-quote/comment. 
    Why'd you have to do that?
  • Reply 89 of 122
    Thank you DED and Tim Cook!  Everyone is being put at risk (especially activists operating in repressive regimens) by the short-sightedness of the FBI and politicians.

    We need to stand firm on this issue.  The government can always look elsewhere for data.  Our iPhones are more important than our homes.  No unreasonable search and seizure.
  • Reply 90 of 122
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,465member
    Tim Cook, and anyone else attempting to chivalrously protect me -- with the best of intentions -- from intrusions upon my privacy: surely it is possible to work out a protocol whereby, upon an Apple Customer having ceased to exist, or in the event of an extremely grave criminal offence (such as mass murder, serial rape, kidnapping for ransom, hijacking or carjacking, arson, or a large-scale fraud or theft such as the one recently where teams of thieves fanned out to cash machines across the globe to receive huge sums of stolen money that began to eject upon the command of a remote hacker), encryption will cease to be impregnable upon presentation of a court order and with the appropriate warrants having been supplied by law enforcement agencies, with safeguards against abuses? As an adult of 58 years, I have lived through many events, including some very dramatic and dangerous ones, including attacks on my person or loved ones'. I am well aware, more so than most, in fact, of the need to zealously guard my personal safety, my family's, my friends'. But as a competent and experienced person of 58, I am also skilled in my own methods and security protocols. The argument that we are at the mercy of an intrusive, malevolent "nanny state" that insists on looking over our shoulder to know all our secret thoughts collapses entirely at the suggestion  that somehow it is a better outcome to be at the mercy of a hovering, patronising "nanny corporation," that will do everything for us (including assisting in experiencing and logging orgasms, apparently) -- including protecting us from the "evil FBI." The example of Russia and China, where people are regularly sent to prison camps to be abused and starved for the crime of wishing to start a political party, or quoting from some foreign blog (these are documented cases that have featured in the news in those Snowden-loving countries over the past few months), is utterly misguided and misplaced here. And if China is such an offender, why has the Apple corporation chosen to make it so rich, by moving so much production there, instead of keeping it here in the USA, where we respect human rights? To compare homophobic, xenophobic, aggressive, sexist and profoundly backward Russia -- where security services routinely sodomize detainees with champagne bottles, a fact you can read about at length from survivors in YouTube, and documented also by mainstream foreign media such as Reuters, BBC, CNN, AFP -- to the political reality in the USA today is an outrageous false analogy. Please, get serious. No, I am not happy to have the NSA snoop around in my life and DNA -- but neither am I thrilled to have the new Private "spook services" (Google, Facebook, Yahoo!, etc.) do essentially the same thing for the benefit of mystery customers who are not even security cleared law enforcement. I trust Apple with my data. I also choose which data you have access to. I am keenly aware of everything I write and say, and the timing of each utterance. So is every intelligent human being. Give other grown up people some credit, Tim Cook, and please don't imagine we are all so helpless and incapable of dealing with Big Government when it surrounds us. Come up with a fair and reasonable one-off protocol to address Serious Crimes, because anything else -- no matter how many young activists blog supportively -- is going to cost you customers. Good corporate governance, the kind Steve Jobs understood so much about, requires also understanding how much profitability each type of customer and demographic brings you. You cannot afford to alienate the very customers who made you great in the first place -- the older, long-standing ones who can afford to spend lots of money on your new products, and take the time to help promote your brand, because they have had a good relationship with you for many decades. Up until now. Siding with the anarchist, paranoid left is not going to help you. We need to know who is involved in plotting terror attacks and supplying terrorists, including with advice. We need to know who is raping and prostituting young children. Those are not subject areas where civilised, leading corporate officers choose to shield the criminal.
    "encryption will cease to be impregnable upon presentation of a court order and with the appropriate warrants having been supplied by law enforcement agencies, with safeguards against abuses?"

    There are no safeguards against abuses. There never will be safeguards against abuses. I don't believe in fairy tales.

    "We need to know who is involved in plotting terror attacks and supplying terrorists, including with advice."

    You are aware that the U.S has and will continue to support terrorism and nations that support terrorism when it suits our national, usually corporate interests. We usually call it something else, but it is terrorism all that same. The terrorism that you want prevented here in the U.S. is likely blowback from some operation to support some authoritarian nation, or just a strategy to remove some regime that we don't like. I'm guessing that the Middle East is rife with opportunities.

    I'm seeing smartphones as a real accelerant to democratization; you have more of an authoritarian bent and don't. Your mileage varied.
  • Reply 91 of 122
    Are you going to update the story now that Google has supported Apple on this? I guess not, because it's more convenient for you to pretend that Google doesn't care.


  • Reply 92 of 122

    Boats40 said:
    Google needs to think hard about the "Do no harm" mantra. While they can justify themselves by saying they are doing good in one case, will they also consider the collective harm that arises from no privacy? And will they also realize that their own personal lives will be opened up if the capability to unlock anyone's devices is made available.
    And Google has come out in support of Apple, so I guess they're living up to their mantra. 
  • Reply 93 of 122
    LoopDoGG said:
    Everybody forget that encryption on Android has been possible on Android since Kit Kat and that it will be on by default on 6.0 and beyond? On my Samsung I have extra layer of security, KNOX. Android can be just as secure as Apple. We are reading too much into Google being silent. Though, if they stay silent too long, that can be suspect 

    First, KNOX is a joke.

    Second, encryption is only turned on by default in higher end Android phones with enough processing power to meet minimum data transfer rates specified by Google. Your budget Android phone (and let's face it - that's the largest percentage of devices sold) won't have encryption enabled by default. 

    Third, the reason for #2 is because Android uses software based encryption. That means the processor is doing all the work of encryption/decryption whenever you need data stored to or read from storage. It also means hackers can look at the source code for Android to try and find ways to get access. Plus the fact that data being processed is done in RAM (where there's a possibility hackers might be able to access it). The iPhone has had dedicated hardware encryption since way, way, way back in the 3GS.


    You can't put Android encryption and iOS encryption on the same playing field. One is clearly superior, and it's not the little green robot. 
    The point isn't which phone runs better with encryption turned on, it's the fact that data is secure on both. When we bring in performance, iOS definitely easily wins that one because it's hardware based encryption.
    gatorguysingularityjony0
  • Reply 94 of 122
    This article seems far too reductive to me. The argument that one decryption is all descriptions is just wrong. This has proceeded exactly as it should, through open procedure in public courts.

    You don't get to say "I use Apple products so I can ignore subpenas" or even worse,  "the law doesn't apply because tech."

    Despite their high horse, all I see Apple doing is undermining rule of law. We should be applauding this sort of thing coming out of the NSAs shadow world and into the light of regular law and democratic process.
    total nonsense. code = speech. the government cannot compel you to speak for it or to write code for it. 
  • Reply 95 of 122
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,465member

    Boats40 said:
    Google needs to think hard about the "Do no harm" mantra. While they can justify themselves by saying they are doing good in one case, will they also consider the collective harm that arises from no privacy? And will they also realize that their own personal lives will be opened up if the capability to unlock anyone's devices is made available.
    And Google has come out in support of Apple, so I guess they're living up to their mantra. 
    I'll chalk up Google in the support column, but it appeared to be a statement initiated by events, not an endorsement of Apple's action.
  • Reply 96 of 122
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,465member
    This article seems far too reductive to me. The argument that one decryption is all descriptions is just wrong. This has proceeded exactly as it should, through open procedure in public courts.

    You don't get to say "I use Apple products so I can ignore subpenas" or even worse,  "the law doesn't apply because tech."

    Despite their high horse, all I see Apple doing is undermining rule of law. We should be applauding this sort of thing coming out of the NSAs shadow world and into the light of regular law and democratic process.
    total nonsense. code = speech. the government cannot compel you to speak for it or to write code for it. 
    https://lieu.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-lieu-statement-apple-court-order


    "
    February 17, 2016  
    Press Release 

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    Los Angeles- Today, Congressman Ted Lieu (D-Los Angeles County) issued the following statement regarding the APPLE court order. Congressman Lieu is one of only four computer science majors in Congress.  Congressman Lieu is also the author of the ENCRYPT ACT of 2016.  

    "The terrorist attack in San Bernardino was horrific and the tragic loss of innocent lives demands a strong response.  I have several deep concerns, however, about the unprecedented court order that forces Apple to create software it does not have in order to provide a “back door” way to weaken its smartphone encryption system.

    This FBI court order, by compelling a private sector company to write new software, is essentially making that company an arm of law-enforcement.   Private sector companies are not—and should not be—an arm of government or law enforcement.

    This court order also begs the question: Where does this kind of coercion stop?  Can the government force Facebook to create software that provides analytic data on who is likely to be a criminal?  Can the government force Google to provide the names of all people who searched for the term ISIL?  Can the government force Amazon to write software that identifies who might be suspicious based on the books they ordered?

    Forcing Apple to weaken its encryption system in this one case means the government can force Apple—or any other private sector company—to weaken encryption systems in all future cases.  This precedent-setting action will both weaken the privacy of Americans and hurt American businesses.  And how can the FBI ensure the software that it is forcing Apple to create won’t fall into the wrong hands?  Given the number of cyberbreaches in the federal government—including at the Department of Justice—the FBI cannot guarantee this back door software will not end up in the hands of hackers or other criminals.

    The San Bernardino massacre was tragic but weakening our cyber security is not the answer – terrorism succeeds when it gets us to give up our liberties and change our way of life.  We can take common sense security measures without trampling on privacy rights."

    pscooter63jony0ibill
  • Reply 97 of 122
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,245member
    tmay said:

    Boats40 said:
    Google needs to think hard about the "Do no harm" mantra. While they can justify themselves by saying they are doing good in one case, will they also consider the collective harm that arises from no privacy? And will they also realize that their own personal lives will be opened up if the capability to unlock anyone's devices is made available.
    And Google has come out in support of Apple, so I guess they're living up to their mantra. 
    I'll chalk up Google in the support column, but it appeared to be a statement initiated by events, not an endorsement of Apple's action.
    ...and still much more in support than it's other tech brethren like Microsoft and Facebook. 
  • Reply 98 of 122
    mdb617 said:
    I have been trying to decide on a replacement for my nexus. Google's quality has declined of late, but I like an unlocked phone and the iPhone is not unlocked on ATT. I will watch this over the next couple weeks, if Apple continues to stand its ground - I will gladly buy an iPhone. This is great, don't walk it back.
    I bought an unlocked 6s from the Apple Store a few months ago using Apple's no interest loan and added it to my AT&T account. Easy-peasy.
  • Reply 99 of 122

    Maybe Tim will at least tell them how to stop the irritating Gamecenter pop ups on the IPad. Please?
    Seriously? Have you never looked in Notification preferences?
  • Reply 100 of 122
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,246member
    MarionE said:
    Did you even read it? She doesn't seem to know what she's talking about. It's political talk and meaningless. Trying to be on everyone's side. There doesn't need to be a Manhattan type project, Apple is already doing it on it's own and it's working.
Sign In or Register to comment.