Deputy AG Rosenstein says companies like Apple are trying to 'defeat legitimate law enforc...

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 52
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,842moderator
    lenn said:
    The government has the legal right to enter your house and search every inch of it with a warrant but Apple's Cook says even with a legal warrant we will do everything in our power to stop the government from searching someone's stupid mobile phone?????? So if someone invents a "new technology house" that includes encrypted locks and a system that will destroy all the contents of said house unless you know the right password to enter it that's ok too??? For some reason people today feel that their phones are some how special and above the laws of this and other countries. I personally would much rather have the police search my phone than my entire house, car, ect. Hell the police can even get a warrant to search someone bank safely deposit box! But someone's iPhone is off limits. People keep saying their phone is personal so it's different. So your home, car, ect isn't personal?
    The police already have the right to search phones.  They don’t have the right to force you to give them the password. Go tell Congress if you don’t agree with the laws as they stand; it’s the very same government that’s complaining who also wrote the laws they’re complaining about.  

    The government also does not have the right to force you to open a safe they want to search.  Nor does it force the manufacturers of safes to provide a backdoor method of opening the safe they produce. And yes, it would be perfectly legal to manufacture and sell safes that destroy the contents after a certain number of failed attempts to open using the combination.  
    edited November 2018 magman1979baconstanguraharastageofhistorybeowulfschmidtbrucemcdysamoriaStrangeDays
  • Reply 22 of 52
    dunksdunks Posts: 1,254member

    AppleInsider said:

    Services like WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram also use end-to-end encryption, which law enforcement and spy agencies have complained are sometimes being used by terrorists and other criminals.
    What if we resolved terror/crime by addressing the social, political and economic forces that give rise to it?
    baconstangDAalsethStrangeDays
  • Reply 23 of 52
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,229member
    lenn said:
    The government has the legal right to enter your house and search every inch of it with a warrant but Apple's Cook says even with a legal warrant we will do everything in our power to stop the government from searching someone's stupid mobile phone?????? So if someone invents a "new technology house" that includes encrypted locks and a system that will destroy all the contents of said house unless you know the right password to enter it that's ok too??? For some reason people today feel that their phones are some how special and above the laws of this and other countries. I personally would much rather have the police search my phone than my entire house, car, ect. Hell the police can even get a warrant to search someone bank safely deposit box! But someone's iPhone is off limits. People keep saying their phone is personal so it's different. So your home, car, ect isn't personal?
    Your complaint is with math and not Tim Cook, Apple, Google or other tech companies. 
  • Reply 24 of 52
    lenn said:
    The government has the legal right to enter your house and search every inch of it with a warrant but Apple's Cook says even with a legal warrant we will do everything in our power to stop the government from searching someone's stupid mobile phone?????? So if someone invents a "new technology house" that includes encrypted locks and a system that will destroy all the contents of said house unless you know the right password to enter it that's ok too??? For some reason people today feel that their phones are some how special and above the laws of this and other countries. I personally would much rather have the police search my phone than my entire house, car, ect. Hell the police can even get a warrant to search someone bank safely deposit box! But someone's iPhone is off limits. People keep saying their phone is personal so it's different. So your home, car, ect isn't personal?
    1. Thats not what Cook has said. Apple will happily hand over everything they have with a warrant. The fact that Apple doesn't have very much dat to hand over is by design, is good from a security perspective.
    2. The reality is that criminals are considerably more skilled than most governments in these kinds of attacks against people. If something is made secure against criminal activity, it will coincidentally be more secure than what most governments can deal with.
    3. You can't pick and choose which governments to share any "back door" with - if you allow one to do it, then they need to allow all of them to do it.
    4. There is nothing stopping you from allowing the police to search your phone any time you feel like sharing with them.
    5. Read the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights (which the US helped write in 1947), it uses absolute language around right to privacy (Article 12 and 30 , IIRC) If you compare it to the language around privacy for companies, there's a clear distinction - lawful access exists as a requirement for a companies communications, but not for individuals.

    The issue is today, the memory of an authoritarian government abusing right to privacy as part of the process of killing millions of innocent people is not longer fresh in everyone's mind, and most people today have been brainwashed into thinking that the mass collection of data on people in exchange for advertising is a healthy thing for society.
    magman1979Deelronbaconstang
  • Reply 25 of 52
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,273member
    Someone call Ripley! We got a man here who can talk out of both sides of his mouth at the same time!
    baconstang
  • Reply 26 of 52
    lenn said:
    The government has the legal right to enter your house and search every inch of it with a warrant but Apple's Cook says even with a legal warrant we will do everything in our power to stop the government from searching someone's stupid mobile phone?????? So if someone invents a "new technology house" that includes encrypted locks and a system that will destroy all the contents of said house unless you know the right password to enter it that's ok too??? For some reason people today feel that their phones are some how special and above the laws of this and other countries. I personally would much rather have the police search my phone than my entire house, car, ect. Hell the police can even get a warrant to search someone bank safely deposit box! But someone's iPhone is off limits. People keep saying their phone is personal so it's different. So your home, car, ect isn't personal?
    The Definers are here spewing paid propaganda. 
    magman1979
  • Reply 27 of 52
    lenn said:
    The government has the legal right to enter your house and search every inch of it with a warrant but Apple's Cook says even with a legal warrant we will do everything in our power to stop the government from searching someone's stupid mobile phone?????? So if someone invents a "new technology house" that includes encrypted locks and a system that will destroy all the contents of said house unless you know the right password to enter it that's ok too??? For some reason people today feel that their phones are some how special and above the laws of this and other countries. I personally would much rather have the police search my phone than my entire house, car, ect. Hell the police can even get a warrant to search someone bank safely deposit box! But someone's iPhone is off limits. People keep saying their phone is personal so it's different. So your home, car, ect isn't personal?
    Good god, you people are like fucking cockroaches, always slithering out from under the kitchen stove when you least want them, spouting your stupidity!

    Get a clue or STFU!
    mark fearingradarthekatbaconstang
  • Reply 28 of 52
    my bottom line... sadly our government has managed to leak the back doors and hacks it knows about to the worst possible people. remember the massive virus outbreak that took out the NHS in the UK thanks to code traced back to that lost by the NSA ? so frankly i dont trust our government to keep back doors safe from the russians ! and as such i am quite happy for vendors like apple to refuse to give them back doors...
    radarthekatbaconstang
  • Reply 29 of 52
    The problem is, backdoors, intentionally weak security, and all that law enforcement wants, they all enable the criminals access as well. If you want law enforcement to access your phone freely, don’t enable any lock. I’m happy for you, for your secure feeling that law enforcement would never abuse that. These are the same police that routinely examined phones at traffic stops. Company confidential info be damned, nude pictures playfully taken on vacation of your spouse, and more. No chance they won’t short your stock or post copies of the pictures in their locker rooms. However unlikely these things happen. I prefer my privacy.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 30 of 52
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,123member
    lenn said:
    The government has the legal right to enter your house and search every inch of it with a warrant but Apple's Cook says even with a legal warrant we will do everything in our power to stop the government from searching someone's stupid mobile phone?????? So if someone invents a "new technology house" that includes encrypted locks and a system that will destroy all the contents of said house unless you know the right password to enter it that's ok too??? For some reason people today feel that their phones are some how special and above the laws of this and other countries. I personally would much rather have the police search my phone than my entire house, car, ect. Hell the police can even get a warrant to search someone bank safely deposit box! But someone's iPhone is off limits. People keep saying their phone is personal so it's different. So your home, car, ect isn't personal?

    The 4th Amendment grants every person within our borders the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Most countries lack similar protections, so your analogy to other countries is misplaced and not relevant. 

    People lock their phones to prevent thieves from stealing their personal information and other data.  They lock their homes for the same reason.  The fact that a person takes strong security measures to protect either does not make them above the law, nor does it mean they are up to something nefarious.  And yes, a person should be able to build such a high tech home, and if they did it would be perfectly legal. 

    Moreover, the fact that the government can obtain warrants does not mean that it prospectively require every US citizen to keep their phones unlocked in the event it someday needs to search those phones. If this were the case, then there would be nothing stopping the government from collecting everyone's front door key, safety deposit box key, and car keys.  Are you ok with handing those over to your local police department?  I didn't think so.

    Finally, in case you missed the rationale for Apple's position, if it builds a backdoor to allow the FBI in, then that same backdoor could be used by those who are up to no good. 


    edited November 2018 beowulfschmidt
  • Reply 31 of 52
    So....

    1) Law enforcement services can obtain a warrant to perform legal searches on private homes. - But they cannot compel homebuilders to build homes that are easy to break into or provide keys to those homes to law enforcement officials before purchases take possession of their homes.  They also cannot prevent home owners from adding locks or other security features to their homes.  As humans, we have a right to privacy and we have a right to protect our property, including our data.  In order for law enforcement officials, once they have obtained a warrant of this nature to enter the home to obtain whatever material they believe is inside, they must figure out a way to either knock and ask permission to enter or - forcibly break into the dwelling with a battering ram or, in the case of more well secured homes, something like an explosive charge to take down the door.  Again - no homebuilder worldwide can be compelled to give the keys to a dwelling to law enforcement officials prior to the purchaser taking possesion

    2) Think about the consequences for the greatest technology company on the planet.  If the American government compelled Apple to add a back-door to its devices, do we really think that other technology companies worldwide - Hamstrung for example - would do the same.  Compelling Apple to add a backdoor would have the effect of immediately ensuring that other technology companies, not based in North America, would simply own the market worldwide from that day forward.
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 32 of 52
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,324member
    AppleInsider now bravely allowing comments on a politically sensitive hot-button issue like this?  I had to do a double-take in my address bar, thinking I was instead in the MacRumors forum!  :-)

    Bravo, AppleInsider.  Let Freedom Reign!
  • Reply 33 of 52
    Please Apple, listen to him.
    Give the US goverment the access to our information!
    Let's make it also easy for Chinese and Russians goverments (and hackers) to obtain our contacts and credit cards.
    Sharing is caring, isn't it?


    DAalsethbaconstang
  • Reply 34 of 52
    A person has the right, and in real life the power,  to hide information from the government to me that should extend to technology.
    If i don't want to talk to the police , thats OK.
    In real life the government has to persuade a person to pass on knowledge he has, or do you want torture to become part of our daily life.
    If i want to not give the password to my phone, that is my right and i don't want a company that sells me a product to make that choice for me.
    And i certainly don't want the government to make that choice for me.
    It's all about choice and i want that choice, do you?
    baconstang
  • Reply 35 of 52
    "we cannot accept a culture in which technology companies considers it part of their responsibility to defeat legitimate law enforcement"
    Rosenstein lying again. Apple is not trying to defeat law enforcement, but rather is trying to protect client's info via means of encryption.
    The fact that it will make law enforcement harder is secondary, just like walls and locks in doors makes it harder for the law enforcement to enforce the law.
    By that same logic, he would need to advocate the removal of those as well, or at least its regulation. The reality is - Rosenstein is a person who rubber-stamped FISA court order on illegal wire-tapping of the presidential candidate without using any facts to back up that FISA warrant. Rosenstein is the enemy of privacy, clearly, as he cared very little about violating the concept of individual freedoms (especially when a person is innocent). Of course, knowing that, it is no surprise that he is advocating for the "regulation" of the technology that would prevent people like him from collecting any info they want. He does not care at all that by "regulating" it, the encryption will be maid weaker and the keys will be made available to the bad players in no time.. Very dangerous person, but sadly not that many average voters care about that.


    Donald Trump is not innocent and while Rosenstein thoughts on Apple and thier hardened stance opposing the Justice Department are certainly confrontation - Rosenstein was 1000% correct in allowing the FISA court warrant to begin the Russia investigation. He will die in Jail 
  • Reply 36 of 52
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,858administrator
    jdw said:
    AppleInsider now bravely allowing comments on a politically sensitive hot-button issue like this?  I had to do a double-take in my address bar, thinking I was instead in the MacRumors forum!  :-)

    Bravo, AppleInsider.  Let Freedom Reign!
    We are watching, and we do keep track. There have been removals for behavior, and bans associated with this thread already.

    The general prohibition isn't about "freedom." If you folk self-policed, didn't escalate, and didn't rise to bait as much as you do, it wouldn't be a problem. In short, if a thread becomes to cost-ineffective to moderate in accordance with the rules, it gets closed. If we think that it's going to escalate, we just skip the middle man and shut it from the start.

    I am trying to push that auto-shut line back a bit. However, as a general rule, Forum-goer behavior isn't helping me do this.
    edited November 2018
  • Reply 37 of 52
    lenn said:
    The government has the legal right to enter your house and search every inch of it with a warrant but Apple's Cook says even with a legal warrant we will do everything in our power to stop the government from searching someone's stupid mobile phone??????
    No, Apple cooperates with warrants every day, within the limits of what their systems allow (warrant delivered within the right amount of time, device not attempted to be unlocked by law enforcement exceeding number of attempts, etc.)

    What Apple refuses to do is create a special version of iOS that breaks security systems in place to let law enforcement in, because that version puts every iOS user at risk, not just the ones law enforcement wants to target. Additionally, it asks Apple to work for free to create this special version. Why should they work against their own interests for free is the question. In a free country, companies don't work at the demand of governments for free.

    edited November 2018
  • Reply 38 of 52
    The police already have the right to search phones.  They don’t have the right to force you to give them the password. Go tell Congress if you don’t agree with the laws as they stand; it’s the very same government that’s complaining who also wrote the laws they’re complaining about.   
    Well, technically, that would be the U.S. Supreme Court interpreting the U.S. Constitution.
  • Reply 39 of 52
    Keynoting a cybercrime conference on Thursday, U.S. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein attacked the encryption stances of companies like Apple while simultaneously arguing for the importance of security.
    Well, given our government's law enforcement agencies' history of trying to circumvent Constitutional restrictions on their power, I applaud anyone who makes it more difficult for them to do so.
    baconstang
  • Reply 40 of 52
    Technology has enabled the government to monitor and store massive amounts of personal data “just in case it’s needed” in the future- all in the name of security.
    Remember the brouhaha about the NSA and it's data collection practices in the United States? As it turned out, the only thing they were storing on government servers in mass quantities was landline metadata. The claims that they were storing mass amounts of U.S. origin cell phone and internet data turned out to be false. And it was then ruled in court that the government couldn't legally store the mass collected landline metadata on it's own servers anyway. All of this was confirmed in Congressional testimony by both the NSA and the private internet/phone companies that had to comply with warrants for data. That doesn't mean that there is no concern when it comes to data privacy, but the whole "massive" amounts of data storage thing is misleading when it comes to U.S. communications. They have to use warrants and they have to get the data from the internet and phone company provider servers.
    edited November 2018
Sign In or Register to comment.