flatrock

horvatic said:

You can't limit anything after you open the door. Once the door is open that's it. And it would also set a precedent that they could ask any company at anytime to do the same which means all privacy would be GONE! It's not just about 1 phone or one company. It's about all companies and all products would no longer have any privacy period. It would also mean that communist countries would have free rain of our information as well.

If that were the case, the FBI could just hack the OS binary and disable the password attempt lockout themselves. When the FBI says it is just for that phone, they literally mean it will only run on that phone. They want Apple to not only disable to password attempt lockout, but to make it so that OS version will only load on the iPhone with the specific hardware ID. The iPhone hardware prevents it from executing the OS if it isn't signed using Apple's key. If you modify the binary, the signature is no longer valid. The exact same security protection that prevent the FBI or anyone else loading a hacked version of iOS on the phone, would prevent Apple's modified version from being able to be used on any other phone. Either that security feature works, or it doesn't, Cook can't have it both ways. If it doesn't work, then there is a huge, gaping security hole in iOS if you have the physical phone. If it does work, then the risk is limited to Apple not making sure the OS can only load on a phone with a specific hardware id. Apple is also permitted to do this all at their site and can load the old OS back on the phone before allowing it out of their hands, which means that it will only get out in the wild if Apple screws up. There is never zero risk, but the risks are no more significant that any other change to Apple's security software, and Apple maintains control over them.

maestro64 said:

jungmark said:

Bullshit. The scope isn't limited. It sets a precedent. If Apple complies, the FBI and other countries will demand to use it as well. Apple should not be in the business of hacking its customers. 

That is the point Apple is making it they do it one they will be required to do it every time and for any police agency in the world or government agency otherwise they run the risk of being shut out of the market place. Also it just mean if people know they can not trust apple they will go to some other source outside the US government control. But they could do like they did for year not allow certain technology to be exported, they will just no allow certain technologies to be imported to the US.

The other nations of the world really aren't all that concerned about if the US courts will allow this or not. What they are concerned about is if it is possible to do, which it obviously is. If would set a precedent in our court system, though there are lots of precedents of the courts compelling the cooperation of third parties in executing a warrant. Apple is actually being unprecedented in how uncooperative it is being in regards to data on a phone. In previous versions of iOS Apple had and maintained tools to do such things. Once a warrant was issued, the phone was delivered to Apple, and they would use their software tools to retreive the data from the phone and provide law enforcement with that data. The biggest difference here is that Apple intentionally didn't create the tools to easily copy the data from the phone. Not that they can't create such tools, but that they now think that having such tool poses an unacceptable risk to their customer's privacy. I'm also not sure how this puts Apple at a competitive disadvantage. Any company operating in the United States is subject to US law and will be equally requires to comply with valid US warrants. People who are really, really concerned about their privacy will likely use third party encryption developed by people without a business presence in the US, so this doesn't solve the FBI's inability to access encrypted data when they have a warrant (I doubt there is a solution). Apple shouldn't be helping law enforcement access phones? Apple should make an effort to prevent the government from accessing people's data without a valid warrant. However, we don't have a right to be free from reasonable searches that are supported by probable cause, and Apple does have an obligation to comply with a valid warrant. There is a question of if what is required of Apple places an undue burden on them. Not wanting to comply, or the fact that complying contradicts previously made statements isn't legally an undue burden. The fact that the OS image needs to be signed and unmodified for the iPhone to load it will keep the custom version of iOS locked to a specific phone.