ration al

The single most important event in Tuesday's Judicial Committee hearing was when Comey admitted that this order to weaken iPhone security will not prevent terrorists and criminals from using encrypted communications.

So this means the actions of the FBI and DoJ will gain them nothing in the long run, while vastly increasing the chances of putting the data security and personal safety of tens of millions of americans (and hundreds of millions of others around the world) in jeopardy.

Does this seem stupid to you too?

volcan said:

I think most people would agree that knowing what information is on that particular iPhone would be a good thing. The allegation that it could not be done securely seems a bit of a stretch if the entire process was controlled by Apple and the unlocked phone was wiped clean with only the stored data given to the FBI. The really big issue for Apple is that China would expect the same service or else no more Apple product would be allowed in China, which would be a bad thing. To be clear I'm totally against cracking this phone or any other phone, but the assertion that it could not be cracked securely is not completely believable. I think the Feds should take up John McAfee's generous offer. I'd like to see him eat his shoe.

The trouble is that it cannot be done "if the entire process was controlled by Apple."

The FBI is asking Apple to create a forensic tool. If the evidence gathered by it is to be used lawfully it must be independently reviewed by computer forensics experts. To be used in court it must be given to defence teams to be reviewed as well.

Zerodium paid a million dollars for a marginally effective iOS9 zero-day exploit. Can you imagine how tempting it would be for someone to keep and sell an illicit copy of a weakened iOS signed by Apple?

GarryGR said:

The challenges of our Homeland Security folks are monumental enough with out these constraints being placed on them. Even with complete access to all personal info, it's an impossible task. But, that doesn't justify not allowing them access to information that is highly likely to be pertinent to the task.

The constraints placed on the government's investigatory powers are enshrined in the constitution and its amendments to protect the innocent from abuses of power. They are supposed to be immutable, even by the judiciary, and it's up to the citizenry to protect them from being usurped under any circumstances. Tim Cook and Apple are being good citizens by questioning the governments rights in this case and make them consider the unintended consequences of their actions. These are the same liberties and freedoms that tens of thousands of Americans have fought and died or been maimed to maintain over the centuries.

I'm not about to surrender those just to make some civil servant's job a little easier. History, both recent and over centuries, has shown that we stand to lose much more than a few lives from the potential abuses by omnipotent security services. 

holycow said:

I don't see why Apple couldn't create a "backdoor" and give only Congress to control the "random key".  
This way the FBI can never abuse it, and mandates that whenever the FBI needs to break in, Congress would have to hold an immediate voting session to allow it or not.
Serious matters like the San Berdinal case, the gov't has every right to acquire the data in order to protect the citizens. 
Apple could apply this same principle in other countries where the devices are being sold, and never have worry of its responsibility.

We all know that if you, as the device owner, don't do anything "stupid" or illegal, then you should never have to worry about gov'ts intrusion.

Apple is against it now is all about marketing gimmicks!  
It is only software based, so it can be easily done.

Your post only goes to show your complete ignorance of both the issue at hand and mobile device security in general.

I recommend you read the article in the link below from an experienced computer forensics expert

http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5645

GTQ said:

Apple is wrong and the people backing Apple are wrong. When a member of their family or someone close to them is murdered, will they take the same position if the name of the killer is on a locked Iphone. The killer walks free if the phone is not unlocked.

Your argument is the perfect example of why these decisions should be made based on principles and not emotions.

There will always be an emotional incident which the police and state will abuse to deny innocent people of their liberties along with those of the crooks.