Indeed, they just want to persuade people, that iPhone's protection is so good, even government can not access it. Obviously most people do not know their own laws like PATRIOT Act, which is mandatory for companies, no questions asked. All you need to mark someone as a terrorist is to say, that you think he is, even he has done nothing at all, it is a probable cause.
EFF Opposes McCaul-Warner Encryption Commission https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/03/eff-opposes-mccaul-warner-encryption-commission
Three of the elephants in the room: The hubris of a phone maker that thinks its product, priorities, and customers are beyond the reach of the legal system. The idea that it is OK for someone to build a secure fortress in your neighborhood where he can operate with impunity. Cook's letter suggests that apple might not be able to keep this "newly created" phone hack secure. That has interesting implications, since apple can push its software onto your phone any time, without your cooperation.
A few more elephants: The hubris of an executive that thinks its policies, orders and officials are beyond the reach of the legal system. The idea that it is OK for TLAs to build a secure fortress in your neighborhood where they DO operate with impunity and with legal sanctions & national security "defence" against anyone who challenges them. Many people suggest that the government might not be able to keep this "newly created" phone hack secure. Their track record is hardly trust inspiring, even at a venial individual level, an FBI agent involved in Silk Road was caught trousering some of the Bitcoins seized in the investigation. The reality is that the powerful - whether government or corporations - are lording it over citizens and their privacy, and you therefore have to look after yourself - hence the interest in this forum.
For sure, a room full of elephants is a dangerous place. In the youtube video referenced above, at about 2:21:19, Comey suggests that the device and the code could remain in apples possession while the FBI accesses it remotely. Neither the phone nor the code would be in the FBI's possession while this is done. Does that seem reasonable?
Ho ho! There's also a big legal minefield around the chain of custody if you hand it over to anyone else, which is important if any of this is evidential (it won't be).
That was also mentioned in the video. Comey seems to have said he was willing to settle for the intel from the phone, recognizing that it's evidentiary value might be compromised. He may think it is already compromised. In any case, (no pun intended) evidence from the phone can't be used against the perpetrator as he is dead. Might be used against other conspirators if the chain of custody can be maintained, and it might be if FBI representatives were present during the data extraction. Maybe there is a compromise solution. Have apple get into any iphones that are suspect, acting as agents of the FBI, with all the concomitant restrictions, and charge the FBI a reasonable fee. Apple knows how to do both.
The problem though is the slippery slope. If you believe that the NSA/FBI does not have an existing backdoor (I believe they have a way in regardless). A closed FISA court would have great trouble compelling Apple to CREATE something that they do not have. However, if the Supreme Court forces Apple to CREATE the backdoor then it is quite possible the FISA court could force them to DISCLOSE the software in an arena not subject to public debate. I have bolded CREATE and DISCLOSE because there is an important distinction in this case. Once the backdoor has been created then it is much simpler to force them to disclose it in the future.
For me all this talk that *** doesn't have to .... is useless. It's Ostrich head in the sand behavior.
You give an each and they will take a mile. Though they've already taken thousands of miles, allowing them to add more is a defeatist's attitude. Is what I would like to say in a more ideal world. Honestly, I've no real opinion on this except they're quite fat and wealthy elephants...
Senators close to finishing encryption penalties legislation: sources http://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-legislation-idUSKCN0WB2QC
Not sure what that means, but I agree. These phones probably won't remain secure even if the government is constrained, even if they are secure now. I don't really believe that repressive governments right now tolerate the use of millions of secure iphones. Also, now that the issue has gained such wide attention, every 14 year old kid on the planet will set about the task of phone hacking. Now THAT'S dangerous.
Don't fear ---- even if that bill gets "constructed" its totally DOA in the house of representatives.
And the shoe drops http://coloradosprings.com/apple-planning-product-launch-on-march-21/article/feed/324898 I am guessing they will introduce the feature that software updates will require password entry.
Feds tell court: Apple 'deliberately raised technological barriers' to thwart iPhone warrant http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/11/doj_says_apple_deliberately_thwarted_warrant/ https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/03/11/doj-apple-20160310.pdf
According to Richard A. Clarke (on NPR radio this AM), National Security Advisor for both Clinton and Bush Administrations, the FBI and Justice Department are not so serious about "solving the problem" as it is in getting a legal precedent set in its favor. In other words, according to Clarke, if they were serious about solving the problem, they could have just called Fort Meade, i.e. the HQ of the NSA and had them solve it. According to Clarke, every security expert he knows thinks the NSA have the experts and tools that could solve this problem. -- Tom
This whole thing is becoming borderline humorous. 1. If the government gots too intrusive, it might motivate companies to go overseas. Bye bye jobs. 2. Since the Apple password is numbers only, anyone that thinks there is much security is being foolish
Apple's Response To DOJ: Your Filing Is Full Of Blatantly Misleading Claims And Outright Falsehoods https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...y-misleading-claims-outright-falsehoods.shtml Includes these links to filing: https://assets.documentcloud.org/do...al-16-Cm-00010-Dckt-000177-000-Filed-2016.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/do...al-16-Cm-00010-Dckt-000177-000-Filed-2016.txt
Anyone here really thinks that there is no backdoor in iPhone/iOS? Come on now, this whole FBI vs. Apple drama is just a staged show that Apple and the big money wants. And the FBI just is a supporting character here. Apple just demonstrated to the iSheep how "secure" an iPhone is. LOL.
