Based on these latest documents, I'm starting to see this a bit differently than before. Each side is attempting to prevent a certain kind of precedent from being set. For Apple, we all know what the precedent is because the media has covered it to death: Apple wants to avoid even implicitly supporting the idea that a governing body can compel it to hack and undermine the security of its own devices.
But for the FBI it's a different precedent they want to avoid, a precedent set in motion by the release of iOS8 in 2014: the FBI wants to avoid supporting the idea that it's okay and legal for any tech company to design devices that thwart all attempts at entry by law enforcement or anyone else. While such devices and the networks they operate on will naturally keep my own legal emails and bank account numbers secure, they will certainly also become the haven for all manner of illegal behavior. And if allowed to be used freely in private and public, as iPhones are now, such devices over time could render many forms of law enforcement perpetually ineffective (perhaps they already are).
Now, I don't work for law enforcement, and I'm not necessarily siding with the FBI here, but I'm starting to the see the bigger picture how they see it, and it does make some sense without being too paranoid. The issue is that so many people use smartphones and cellphones (just like so many people use roads, airspace, and building enclosures), it may not be in the public's best interest that these things be designed to thwart all law enforcement activities always. On that account, it might be worth the government's best legal efforts to basically force Apple to dismantle iOS8 and thus, in the bigger picture, teach all tech companies a basic lesson: so many people use these devices and networks, it is in the public's best interest that they all have some form of backdoor, even if the downside is increased likelihood of opportunistic hacking.
The down side is Apple losing tens of billions and by extension the US losing tens of billions, every country in the world asking the same thing and every single communication being vulnerable to a hack. Considering the massive variety of info those phones could eventually have, including health info that even a warrant can't give away (HIPPAA), this weakening will provide a massive damper on the use of phones for sensitive data for the general public. Things like Apple Pay will become much less secure than they are now.
They would have to not just weakened their software but also their hardware to fully comply with those POS liar at the FBI and the hundreds of existing demands that are in the pipeline and tens of thousands in the future.. Yes, their lying about the implications of this 100%..
Funny how the FBI who just hand waved the briefs of dozens of companies with expertise in this areas as fear mongering didn't prove their point at all; if they say so I guess it must be true hmmmm.
Why are they doing this; for NOTHING (as per the FBI). This phone has nothing at all on it, just the future 99% of future phones will be unlocked routinely, Most of these will likely be non violent minority criminals arrested for drug crimes. Why? Because US fracking prison are full of people there for that reason. You know that good ol' war on drug thing that's been such a "success"; one that's used to put craploads of minorities in jail. So, those millions of people will get their rights trampled on and have no right to privacy.
In the end, every fucking terrorists will run their own encryption, because well, they have the motivation to do so, and less technically agile people living all over the world, especially in countries like China, Russia and even the US, will be thoroughly fucked up.
The terrorist are learning how to beat the system with this foolish public battle.
I am impressed / depressed at the incredible amount of shade being thrown here.
Is this a normal thing? The DOJ is using Appeal to Emotion rather than arguing for the legal correctness of their position
What I'm having a hard time understanding is what the DOJ hopes to gain going the the FUD route in this case. They have a very finite legal argument that seems to be pretty much in Apple's favor at the moment. It would take some extraordinary re-interpertation of the law for the court to side in favor of the DOJ and it would almost certainly be overturned on appeal given the New York ruling. Unless they think that somehow giving Apple some bad press will make them comply I don't see the advantage to all the public statements and poo flinging. Anyone that knows Apple knows they rarely (almost never) give in to public pressure. They also just took a nearly half a billion dollar hit to appeal the ebook case just on principle. From what I see, almost every attempt the DOJ makes to further their case makes them less likable in the publics' eyes. As an American, I'm actually embarrassed that my government partakes in this level of unprofessionalism. Then again the head of the FBI was once known for dressing in drag and stalking celebrities while letting our atomic secrets get passed onto the Soviets right under their noses, so it hasn't exactly been the shining example of professionalism it makes itself out to be.
From the White House to the DOJ, Pentagon to NSA, these are scumbags who start wars based on less than they have in their "case" against Apple. No one should be surprised at lies, duplicity - or how many gullible Americans will nod their bobbleheads in agreement.
FACT 1. The US Government, FBI, CIA and other agencies FAILED to stop THESE Terrorists inside America kill innocent people. FACT 2. Apple, Inc. did nothing wrong in relation to this event - except unknowingly sell a phone to people with troubled minds. FACT 3. Alphabet agencies are INCAPABLE of admitting when they make mistakes, thus rendering themselves UNTRUSTWORTHY.
This case is about INCOMPETENCE on the Federal Level of multiple agencies for failing to capture these Terrorists. Why can't our Senators and Congress-people questions the FBI why they failed the American people?
Fuck yeah!! Amazing how vehemently the doj/fbi are pointing fingers. Htf did any of them get their jobs?
Based on these latest documents, I'm starting to see this a bit differently than before. Each side is attempting to prevent a certain kind of precedent from being set. For Apple, we all know what the precedent is because the media has covered it to death: Apple wants to avoid even implicitly supporting the idea that a governing body can compel it to hack and undermine the security of its own devices.
But for the FBI it's a different precedent they want to avoid, a precedent set in motion by the release of iOS8 in 2014: the FBI wants to avoid supporting the idea that it's okay and legal for any tech company to design devices that thwart all attempts at entry by law enforcement or anyone else. While such devices and the networks they operate on will naturally keep my own legal emails and bank account numbers secure, they will certainly also become the haven for all manner of illegal behavior. And if allowed to be used freely in private and public, as iPhones are now, such devices over time could render many forms of law enforcement perpetually ineffective (perhaps they already are).
Now, I don't work for law enforcement, and I'm not necessarily siding with the FBI here, but I'm starting to the see the bigger picture how they see it, and it does make some sense without being too paranoid. The issue is that so many people use smartphones and cellphones (just like so many people use roads, airspace, and building enclosures), it may not be in the public's best interest that these things be designed to thwart all law enforcement activities always. On that account, it might be worth the government's best legal efforts to basically force Apple to dismantle iOS8 and thus, in the bigger picture, teach all tech companies a basic lesson: so many people use these devices and networks, it is in the public's best interest that they all have some form of backdoor, even if the downside is increased likelihood of opportunistic hacking.
I vehemently disagree. Unbreakable encryption is not yet illegal. The decision as to whether or not your phone can be accessed by LEO's can be made individually by your not creating a PIN or password.
History has proven that it is never in the public's best interest to give government and law enforcement unlimited powers, that's why we have the Bill of Rights. I for one would like the right to disagree with the government on issues without them being able to plant evidence on my phone to strong-arm me into compliance.
Power corrupts. mygov is aiming for powers only goog has had with Android. Will the public rejection of this power grab be dealt with like other legal demonstrations conducted throughout US history - tear gas, rubber bullets, and pepper spray?
Based on these latest documents, I'm starting to see this a bit differently than before. Each side is attempting to prevent a certain kind of precedent from being set. For Apple, we all know what the precedent is because the media has covered it to death: Apple wants to avoid even implicitly supporting the idea that a governing body can compel it to hack and undermine the security of its own devices.
But for the FBI it's a different precedent they want to avoid, a precedent set in motion by the release of iOS8 in 2014: the FBI wants to avoid supporting the idea that it's okay and legal for any tech company to design devices that thwart all attempts at entry by law enforcement or anyone else. While such devices and the networks they operate on will naturally keep my own legal emails and bank account numbers secure, they will certainly also become the haven for all manner of illegal behavior. And if allowed to be used freely in private and public, as iPhones are now, such devices over time could render many forms of law enforcement perpetually ineffective (perhaps they already are).
Now, I don't work for law enforcement, and I'm not necessarily siding with the FBI here, but I'm starting to the see the bigger picture how they see it, and it does make some sense without being too paranoid. The issue is that so many people use smartphones and cellphones (just like so many people use roads, airspace, and building enclosures), it may not be in the public's best interest that these things be designed to thwart all law enforcement activities always. On that account, it might be worth the government's best legal efforts to basically force Apple to dismantle iOS8 and thus, in the bigger picture, teach all tech companies a basic lesson: so many people use these devices and networks, it is in the public's best interest that they all have some form of backdoor, even if the downside is increased likelihood of opportunistic hacking.
Personally I think you are right. But I think Apple probably should unlock phones on a case by case basis. I am not quite sure where I stand on this whole issue. But as this unravels the one thing I do not want is the government agencies holding the key.
Apple can unlock this phone only by destroying rhe locking mechanism. This mechanism is not unique to each phone - only the password is. This is the whole point that most people miss - Apple must write unique software to break its own encryption which it must not do.
Apple's encryption is exactly what fbi demanded two years ago when it was managed by more intelligent people. The fear-laden T-word statements being made have no bearing on the architectural design of iOS. There is more at stake here than unlocking a phone.
Everything Apple is doing here is what they do to anyone that sues them. They make up stories, fabricate facts and try to put the blame on to others. . When it is time to produce documents, they don't comply by giving documents that are not relevant to the documents requested.
Then they tell the court they have produce everything.
The FBI should request Apple to provide there internal documents regarding the Apple Store and other division on their SOP when needing to contact the authorities. With these docs, the courts would see how Apple continuously tries to obfuscate what is being requested of them.
The terrorist are learning how to beat the system with this foolish public battle.
They already know how to, and it's not on this dude's work phone that he neglected to destroy after destroying his actual personal phone. You think he left it intact by accident?
Everything Apple is doing here is what they do to anyone that sues them. They make up stories, fabricate facts and try to put the blame on to others. . When it is time to produce documents, they don't comply by giving documents that are not relevant to the documents requested.
Then they tell the court they have produce everything.
The FBI should request Apple to provide there internal documents regarding the Apple Store and other division on their SOP when needing to contact the authorities. With these docs, the courts would see how Apple continuously tries to obfuscate what is being requested of them.
Hey, Agent Rockabilly. Why not go back to doing your actual job rather than this pathetic psyop on an Apple fan site? Maybe actually fight terrorism or something. Better yet, go arrest Hillary.
Well if the DOJ looses the case they can just create a hidden court, rubber stamping their requests, and prevent Apple from telling anyone that they were forced to break security. But the bad guys will know this pretty fast, it will just take a while until the law abiding citizens will know.
Everything Apple is doing here is what they do to anyone that sues them. They make up stories, fabricate facts and try to put the blame on to others. . When it is time to produce documents, they don't comply by giving documents that are not relevant to the documents requested.
Then they tell the court they have produce everything.
The FBI should request Apple to provide there internal documents regarding the Apple Store and other division on their SOP when needing to contact the authorities. With these docs, the courts would see how Apple continuously tries to obfuscate what is being requested of them.
I'd argue that the DOJ is practically a state terrorist organization, getting done what terrorists or unfriendly foreign governments could not pull off.
Don't think this just started with Obama. It's not a left/right argument, it's an authoritarianism/libertarianism (lets call it up/down) issue. Since the terror attacks (and before, really), we collectively have become more afraid, and more likely to cede to these fears, leading to a rise in authoritarians in control.
This is what you get when you let them pass the PATRIOT Act over and over again. "I'm doing this to you for you."
Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
The framers of the Constitution rightly feared the power of unrestrained government, hence all the explicit limits to executive power in the body of the Constitution and the addition of the Bill Of Rights to further, and forever, delineate our rights vis-a-vis government. These "talking points" from the Feds are designed to prey on people's fears and desire for security, so they may take away a portion of our rights. The idea that Apple should be compelled to do these things because "Apple grosses hundreds of billions of dollars each year. It would take as few as six employees plucked from Apple's workforce of approximately 100,000 people as little as two weeks to create a workable solution to the FBI's problem" is a problem since it appears the government would like the company (and by extension anyone) to work for them for free.
I hope the American public and the courts don't fall for the Feds' fear mongering and misdirection. This grasp for power is very chilling, and for me personally very disheartening.
Don't think this just started with Obama. It's not a left/right argument, it's an authoritarianism/libertarianism (lets call it up/down) issue. Since the terror attacks (and before, really), we collectively have become more afraid, and more likely to cede to these fears, leading to a rise in authoritarians in control.
This is what you get when you let them pass the PATRIOT Act over and over again. "I'm doing this to you for you."
No thanks.
Agree with your general point, but this goes back before the Patriot Act, as you probably know. Hoover and the CIA's anti-communist paranoia has morphed into the so-called war on terror.
The main point is that neither AG Lynch nor Pres. Obama has any real control over the abiding geopolitical shadow power of the intel agencies.
The brazen disregard for legal decorum in this new brief has the spirit of the neocons all over it.
I'd argue that the DOJ is practically a state terrorist organization, getting done what terrorists or unfriendly foreign governments could not pull off.
Yup. The DOJ is the 'Tock' to the terrorist's 'Tick".
Here is a link to a blog of a forensic scientist and what is involved if Apple were to do what the FBI wants. It certainly sounds like an undue burden to me
Comments
Is this a normal thing? The DOJ is using Appeal to Emotion rather than arguing for the legal correctness of their posiiton
Just gonna leave that right there.........
Amazing how vehemently the doj/fbi are pointing fingers. Htf did any of them get their jobs?
Apple can unlock this phone only by destroying rhe locking mechanism. This mechanism is not unique to each phone - only the password is. This is the whole point that most people miss - Apple must write unique software to break its own encryption which it must not do.
Apple's encryption is exactly what fbi demanded two years ago when it was managed by more intelligent people. The fear-laden T-word statements being made have no bearing on the architectural design of iOS. There is more at stake here than unlocking a phone.
But the bad guys will know this pretty fast, it will just take a while until the law abiding citizens will know.
Since the terror attacks (and before, really), we collectively have become more afraid, and more likely to cede to these fears, leading to a rise in authoritarians in control.
This is what you get when you let them pass the PATRIOT Act over and over again.
"I'm doing this to you for you."
No thanks.
The main point is that neither AG Lynch nor Pres. Obama has any real control over the abiding geopolitical shadow power of the intel agencies.
The brazen disregard for legal decorum in this new brief has the spirit of the neocons all over it.
http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5645