Video: John Oliver's 'Last Week Tonight' sides with Apple in encryption debate
On the most recent episode of Last Week Tonight, host John Oliver summarized the ongoing battle between Apple and the FBI over encryption, ultimately backing Apple's position on the matter.
Oliver first explained both the nature of encryption, and why U.S. government agencies would want a backdoor, such as the iOS passcode limit tool demanded by the FBI. Key to this is the idea that strong encryption is causing the Internet to "go dark," putting some communications beyond the reach of law enforcement and spy agencies, even when a legitimate warrant is issued.
The comedian attempted to undermine the government's position in a number of ways, for instance referring to the "Clipper Chip" proposed in the 1990s. That might have theoretically allowed agencies to access a computer's data when needed while otherwise leaving it secure, but a hacker, Matt Blaze, demonstrated how to disable the technology.
Oliver also noted that there are now a wide number of encrypted messaging apps, many of which are by developers outside U.S. jurisdiction, and that Apple's platforms are constantly under attack by hackers in a situation which could be made worse if its security is deliberately weakened.
He also attacked the legal underpinnings of the FBI's case, and noted the possibility of it setting precedent not just in the U.S. but overseas in places like Russia and China, where governments regularly intrude into private data to silence dissent.
The segment concluded with a spoof of Apple's TV ads for the iPhone 6s, arguing that the company has enough trouble keeping up with basic problems -- like battery life -- without bringing security into the picture.
Apple and the Department of Justice are due to attend a court hearing on March 22, when the order asking Apple to help unlock the iPhone of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook will be reviewed.
Oliver first explained both the nature of encryption, and why U.S. government agencies would want a backdoor, such as the iOS passcode limit tool demanded by the FBI. Key to this is the idea that strong encryption is causing the Internet to "go dark," putting some communications beyond the reach of law enforcement and spy agencies, even when a legitimate warrant is issued.
The comedian attempted to undermine the government's position in a number of ways, for instance referring to the "Clipper Chip" proposed in the 1990s. That might have theoretically allowed agencies to access a computer's data when needed while otherwise leaving it secure, but a hacker, Matt Blaze, demonstrated how to disable the technology.
Oliver also noted that there are now a wide number of encrypted messaging apps, many of which are by developers outside U.S. jurisdiction, and that Apple's platforms are constantly under attack by hackers in a situation which could be made worse if its security is deliberately weakened.
He also attacked the legal underpinnings of the FBI's case, and noted the possibility of it setting precedent not just in the U.S. but overseas in places like Russia and China, where governments regularly intrude into private data to silence dissent.
The segment concluded with a spoof of Apple's TV ads for the iPhone 6s, arguing that the company has enough trouble keeping up with basic problems -- like battery life -- without bringing security into the picture.
Apple and the Department of Justice are due to attend a court hearing on March 22, when the order asking Apple to help unlock the iPhone of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook will be reviewed.
Comments
Just sayin'
Let's say the FBI could get into the phone and they find out he spoke with someone who might be a terrorist in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or Iran. So what? What would the FBI do with that information other than possibly putting that person on a "do not fly" list? Besides, if there is someone like that, wouldn't be under the jurisdiction of the CIA and not the FBI?
My bet is that the NSA already knows about any communication this guy already made. But they don't share because anything the FBI does is subject to court review during a lawsuit. If the NSA and FBI work together, then NSA's policy and techniques would also be subject to court review during a lawsuit.
There's one out for Apple, since the FBI insists this is just a "one-off". Apple goes ahead and creates the version of the OS that won't wipe the phone after 10 password attempts, but they build it with a 72-hour self destruct. (Although I don't know how you get that new OS onto the phone without entering a password first anyway). And then Apple destroys all copies of the code.
Of course, it's not a one-off. The FBI has admitted they would use it in other cases and one of the NYC DAs says he's got something like 172 phones he wants cracked. If Apple and other companies did provide these back doors, it would become nothing but a crutch for the police and other agencies that they would use instead of doing real police work. And if this were provided to the FBI and other agencies, criminals and terrorists aren't stupid - they would just start using burner phones if they're not using them already. And all of us would be more subject to hackers and security invasions.
This is just another example of the Government using fear to make us give up our freedoms. And people are so illogical that they buy into it. One death from a terrorist and people are willing to spend $ billions to stop another. Tens of thousands of deaths a year from guns and no one gives a damn. Not to mention deaths from drunk drivers, ladder falls, slips in bathtubs, drug and alcohol abuse and countless other things that each contribute more deaths than terrorism in the U.S.
There is no law that says Apple "do it". Get outta here I can't stand government puppets who can't think for themselves. I bet you have a clean record and you're just a perfect cupcake aren't cha?