jameskatt2
About
- Username
- jameskatt2
- Joined
- Visits
- 65
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 613
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 722
Reactions
-
Obama's 'tone deaf' comments on encryption draw criticism at SXSW
Darrell Issa should also be informed that:
1. The TSA master key that opens up every TSA lock that protect your luggage can now be printed out by anyone with a 3d printer since the instructions for doing so are in public. So your TSA locks no longer protect you from any thief since any thief can easily make their own copy of the key. No wonder airport employees steal your belongings from your baggage. They have the master key. Now anyone can have the key.
2. As noted on some online articles, the master key to every New York City elevator is for sale on eBay and states outside of New York. It may be illegal to carry with you in New York. But what thief who wants access to every floor in every apartment, hotel, or building in New York wouldn't want to buy one for a few bucks in New Jersey or on eBay? Every building with an elevator in New York is now accessible to thieves and other crooks - including terrorists.
3. The lawmakers and police applauded Apple for locking up the iPhone with security. This stopped many iPhone users from being assaulted or killed by thieves who wanted their iPhones. This reduced the rate of crime significantly in big cities like New York. But now, if Apple is forced to create a back door to iOS, this will immediately be accessible to thieves. And the rate of assaults on iPhone users will once again go up. Obviously, since Android users have no security, they are already the targets of assaults and theft.
So much for keeping the backdoor private. So much for the idea of keeping the public safe.
Backdoors completely blow open any idea of safety or privacy and make you more easily victimized.
-
US Attorney General Loretta Lynch talks iPhone encryption case with Stephen Colbert
AppleInsider said:U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch toed the line in an appearance on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on Thursday, and reiterated that the government is merely requesting Apple for help in unlocking a single iPhone linked to last year's San Bernardino terror attack, not a backdoor into iOS.
While not the main topic of discussion, Colbert touched upon the contentious encryption debate sparked by Apple's resistance of a court order compelling its assistance in the ongoing FBI investigation.
"Well, you know we've disagreed publicly in court, and I've had a number of great discussions with [Apple CEO] Tim Cook on issues of privacy," Lynch said. "What I'll say about this, though, is I understand why this is important to everybody, because privacy is an important issue for everyone. It's important to me as the attorney general, it's important to me as a citizen."
Attempting to provide context, Colbert incorrectly claimed the Department of Justice wants Apple to create a backdoor into iPhone, specifically a device issued to terror suspect Syed Rizwan Farook by his former employer the San Bernardino County Health Department. As stated in legal briefs and a very public campaign for public sentiment, the DOJ is asking Apple to create and sign an intentionally flawed version of iOS to suppress the passcode attempt counter on Farook's phone. FBI agents will brute-force the device to extract actionable data pertaining to the case, if any is present.
Colbert brought up one of Apple's main contentions in its case to resist government pressure, noting that the creation of a new operating system puts undue burden on the company's resources. He also made note of the slippery slope argument presented by Cook and other Apple executives in recent interviews.
Apple has argued that a government win in the San Bernardino court case sets dangerous precedent for future law enforcement requests. The FBI and fellow agencies would be granted a powerful tool that could one day be used to compel technical assistance far beyond software construction. For example, Cook and SVP Eddy Cue said in separate interviews that government agents might leverage precedent to force Apple to remotely turn an iPhone camera or microphone.
"First of all, we're not asking for a backdoor, nor are we asking anyone to turn anything on to spy on anyone," Lynch said. "We're asking them to do is do what their customer wants. The real owner of the phone is the county, the employer of one of the terrorists who's now dead."
Lynch said much the same in an interview earlier this month when she suggested Apple treat the case like a normal customer service call.
Last night's segment comes on the heels of a court filing from federal prosecutors in support of the government's request of Apple, a letter that both addressed and attempted to dismantle each of Apple's assertions.
Apple and the DOJ are set to discuss the issue in court on March 22.
Well, then if this idiot says the government is not asking for a backdoor, then Apple does not have to write a new version of iOS. Case closed. Apple can simply state it has done all it can. -
San Bernardino shooter's iPhone may hold evidence of 'dormant cyber pathogen,' DA says
-
US AG Lynch says FBI not asking Apple to break into iPhone, simply disable 'password blocker'
-
US Attorney General 'hopes' Apple will unlock San Bernardino iPhone