Apple fighting the Government on creating a backdoor for phones.

[Maksim 1,504]

As much as I HATE apple, I must say, they earned a lot of respect from me today with this decision.  Essentially telling the government no.

 

I posted it on facebook and got a couple of replies, particularly from the conservative crowd that Apple should comply and create an unlock for the government to use.

 

Apple's stance is that, even though this is bad, it would create a tool for the government to use, and perhaps hackers, to infiltrate and spy on unsuspecting people.

 

here is a pretty good article on this issue.  Link

 

Quite frankly, if the government can't control their own security... how can we trust them to safeguard a backdoor into private devices?

 

Please keep it on topic.

[quickkill730 3]

I completely agree. I don't like the idea of a back door. Just another way for a hacker to get in.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mikeyjones 88]

As much as I HATE apple, I must say, they earned a lot of respect from me today with this decision.  Essentially telling the government no.

 

I posted it on facebook and got a couple of replies, particularly from the conservative crowd that Apple should comply and create an unlock for the government to use.

 

Apple's stance is that, even though this is bad, it would create a tool for the government to use, and perhaps hackers, to infiltrate and spy on unsuspecting people.

 

here is a pretty good article on this issue.  Link

 

Quite frankly, if the government can't control their own security... how can we trust them to safeguard a backdoor into private devices?

 

Please keep it on topic.

 

 

I was having this discussion at work today w/ a fairly conservative crowd and all of us agreed that Apple is doing the right thing.  

 

This is yet another reason why I won't vote for the dipshit that is Donald Trump - but that's slightly OT.

 

When I got home, I talked to a close friend of mine about this who claims to be "libertarian" and he was surprisingly for doing it "this one time".  I began to explain how that becomes a very slippery slope but the concept was lost.....

 

Moral of the story is this decision is going to have lasting effects going forward, one way or another.

[mikeyjones 88]

The mitigating circumstances are that the phones in question are being used by actors that committed mass murder...... apple is wrong in this regard to not assist in bringing those that might be culpable to justice

 

 

The issue is that this is NOT a one-off. Apple can't unmake whatever software they use to break their own encryption. This means that all iPhones are inherently insecure once Apple creates this tool. 

 

Now let's assume that the previous statement is hyperbole, and this is just restricted to LEO use.  What's to stop the DOJ from coming to Apple again, and again, and again, and again....  The government has a terrible history of abusing any new power given to it.

 

Forget about the actors are in this situation, would you want Apple to be able to break the encryption of your or your family's phone? You might say that you have nothing to hide. That's all well and good until you're under investigation for something.

 

This is no different than a safe company being asked to design a tool that makes their safes easier to open by the government.  That is a direct parallel.  Instead what the govt does is hire locksmiths and safe crackers who give their best to try to work within the parameters given without destroying the contents inside.

[Maksim 1,504]

I was having this discussion at work today w/ a fairly conservative crowd and all of us agreed that Apple is doing the right thing.  

 

This is yet another reason why I won't vote for the dipshit that is Donald Trump - but that's slightly OT.

 

When I got home, I talked to a close friend of mine about this who claims to be "libertarian" and he was surprisingly for doing it "this one time".  I began to explain how that becomes a very slippery slope but the concept was lost.....

 

Moral of the story is this decision is going to have lasting effects going forward, one way or another.

 

Actually, I have not see one candidate that says otherwise.  Rubio was out blasting Apple today as well.

 

Perhaps the only candidate that would oppose this is Rand Paul.... MAYBE Cruz.... but let's keep it here.

 

So... let's keep it going.

 

Security vs Liberty.

[bbk 188]

I agree with Apple's stance on the matter. If it was an algorithm software, or something more brute-force that targeted the passcode issue, I would argue otherwise. But creating a backdoor that would undermine the security for the entirety of iOS that powers all of the Apple mobile devices? That is a ridiculously powerful and scary skeleton key, especially in an age where the cyber battlefield is pretty much even across allied and foreign nations and agencies, as well as private security companies, and private citizens (all of whom are engaging in white/grey/black hat). There is an exponentially larger impact here, and as much as I want whatever information is on that phone available for authorities, there is a way to do this without jeopardizing the security of over 700 million+ devices (many of which are in use by major companies, DOD civilians, military, and other users that have access to highly sensitive information).

 

As for Apple having any responsibility or duty to do this-- in fact, just like telecommunication companies eventually pushed back, private companies with this type of influence and power have a responsibility, just as much as any private citizen, to keep our government in check. Nothing good will come out of this if Apple caves and is forced to create this back door.

[mikeyjones 88]

I fully understand your point....however the actions of the actors in this event and the devices in question need to be decrypted and if apple can donit they should. They have a duty too provide material support in any way shape or form to see how wide this Web is.

 

Are there potential pitfalls to doing this? Yes however those pitfalls pale in comparison to what can be gained by doing thia

 

Agree to disagree.  I see no upside for Apple.  They ruin their reputation by breaking their encryption. They ruin their standing w/ the govt if they refuse.  They are one of the biggest companies in the world by market cap. They have weight to throw around and they won't go lightly.

[JohnnyB 4,321]

Besides the question of right or wrong. The technology to do what the government is asking simply does not exist today! Apple would have to develop new technology to

accomplish this feat! Who would bear the cost and who would trust them or their product if they did comply?

 

Software always gets leaked and even this, if created, could wind up on a torrent some day and apple would be ruined. I say for a multitude of common sense reasons, their

no go decision was the right one! 

[AVB-AMG 530]

I agree with Apple's stance on the matter. If it was an algorithm software, or something more brute-force that targeted the passcode issue, I would argue otherwise. But creating a backdoor that would undermine the security for the entirety of iOS that powers all of the Apple mobile devices? That is a ridiculously powerful and scary skeleton key, especially in an age where the cyber battlefield is pretty much even across allied and foreign nations and agencies, as well as private security companies, and private citizens (all of whom are engaging in white/grey/black hat). There is an exponentially larger impact here, and as much as I want whatever information is on that phone available for authorities, there is a way to do this without jeopardizing the security of over 700 million+ devices (many of which are in use by major companies, DOD civilians, military, and other users that have access to highly sensitive information).

 

As for Apple having any responsibility or duty to do this-- in fact, just like telecommunication companies eventually pushed back, private companies with this type of influence and power have a responsibility, just as much as any private citizen, to keep our government in check. Nothing good will come out of this if Apple caves and is forced to create this back door.

 

bbk:

 

I agree completely with your points.

Also, if Apple were to cave into this request/demand, what is to prevent China, Russia or some other country from requesting/demanding that Apple do the same thing for them in their pursuit of some political dissident?

The final decision on this issue will have major ramifications on our diminishing personal freedoms.

 

AVB-AMG

[voyager9 3,433]

Wasn't the phone issued by the government (Santa Barbara county). That changes the discussion somewhat. The killer changed the settings. This could be viewed as Apple helping the legit owner get their property back.

 

The face that SB county didn't already have strict controls on this is a astounding.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mikeyjones 88]

Wasn't the phone issued by the government (Santa Barbara county). That changes the discussion somewhat. The killer changed the settings. This could be viewed as Apple helping the legit owner get their property back.

 

The face that SB county didn't already have strict controls on this is a astounding.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

No one changed settings. I have a company issued iphone as well.  I set a unique password that my company doesn't know.  If I forget my password, I have to reset the phone - the company and apple can't do anything to reset it.

 

 

The owners of the phone gave permission to search it. So I resort to back to the safe analogy.  The owners of the house consented to a search but the safe remains locked and the safemaker can't be implicated to change the design of the safe to accommodate the govt's request. 

[10X 3,296]

Actually this is not a valid arguement. ...

 

We are not discussing "suspects"......we are not discussing those that by the very nature of our judicial system that are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty

 

We ARE discussing those that actually committed mass murder. We have a duty to those that were murdered to see how far down the rabbit hole this all goes.

 

No one here is arguing they were innocent...but technically we are discussing 'suspects'.   There was no trial, no jury, no conviction.    'Dead' and 'Guilty' aren't necessarily the same thing.

 

I have a few reservations, but I tend to side with Apple on this.    If the Government is given the keys, they won't bother getting warrants for any future searching they want to do.   Snowden's revelations convinced me of that.

[PeteF 1,044]

Actually this is not a valid arguement. ...

 

We are not discussing "suspects"......we are not discussing those that by the very nature of our judicial system that are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty

 

We ARE discussing those that actually committed mass murder. We have a duty to those that were murdered to see how far down the rabbit hole this all goes.

Okay, so what exactly is Apple suspect of? Oh so someone using one of their products makes them liable to BILLIONS of dollars in losses? No. FBI wants to get into the phone, go for it. Trying to use a court order to force a bystander with zero to do with the crime, is beyond ludicris.

[voyager9 3,433]

No one changed settings. I have a company issued iphone as well. I set a unique password that my company doesn't know. If I forget my password, I have to reset the phone - the company and apple can't do anything to reset it.

 

Hmm. I'm not familiar with all cases but maybe you're the exception. I know in some cases the company says "use for personal use at you're peril. We reserve the right to access anything on the phone". I know the company I work for can access all data, anytime. Including the GPS. Which is why I declined one.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mikeyjones 88]

Hmm. I'm not familiar with all cases but maybe you're the exception. I know in some cases the company says "use for personal use at you're peril. We reserve the right to access anything on the phone". I know the company I work for can access all data, anytime. Including the GPS. Which is why I declined one.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

You are correct about them "owning and monitoring all data". So if the co's IT dept was set up to do so, this wouldn't be an argument now. The FBI would just contact their employer.  But there's a difference between the employer monitoring all activity on the phone and the gov't having blanket access to every iOS device out there.

 

The actual request from the FBI is for Apple to build a new version of the iOS which would disable the automatic wiping of data after 10 incorrect attempts and would allow faster attempts at brute forcing the password.  Essentially a skeleton key to all iOS devices.

[carl_g 568]

I find it funny that all the conservatives who preach for a smaller government are the ones screaming the loudest about apples' refusal to help.

I think Tim cook is absolutely correct when he says to think that a tool to hack the iPhone could only be used once was “simply not true.”

[Maksim 1,504]

Okay, so what exactly is Apple suspect of? Oh so someone using one of their products makes them liable to BILLIONS of dollars in losses? No. FBI wants to get into the phone, go for it. Trying to use a court order to force a bystander with zero to do with the crime, is beyond ludicris.

 

+1

 

No one changed settings. I have a company issued iphone as well.  I set a unique password that my company doesn't know.  If I forget my password, I have to reset the phone - the company and apple can't do anything to reset it.

 

 

The owners of the phone gave permission to search it. So I resort to back to the safe analogy.  The owners of the house consented to a search but the safe remains locked and the safemaker can't be implicated to change the design of the safe to accommodate the govt's request. 

 

 

Wasn't the phone issued by the government (Santa Barbara county). That changes the discussion somewhat. The killer changed the settings. This could be viewed as Apple helping the legit owner get their property back.

 

The face that SB county didn't already have strict controls on this is a astounding.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

So we use BlackBerry Enterprise Server here. (BES 12 Cloud), which basically creates a separate partition on the device for only work stuff and we have full control over the device as a whole, so if employee leaves, we can just nuke it, or lock it remotely.

 

I am amazed that companies still give out devices without control, especially with sensitive data.

 

This is a huge and growing area in the telecom industry and something I try to follow closely.

 

bbk:

 

I agree completely with your points.

Also, if Apple were to cave into this request/demand, what is to prevent China, Russia or some other country from requesting/demanding that Apple do the same thing for them in their pursuit of some political dissident?

The final decision on this issue will have major ramifications on our diminishing personal freedoms.

 

AVB-AMG

 

So this specific issue was at the backbone of BlackBerry pulling out of Pakistan, after Pakistan wanted a backdoor into all communications on the phones, that still went through BlackBerry servers.

 

BlackBerry's position is that they would comply with governments with official court orders... however would not give the government blanket access.

 

In Apple's case, considering there is no data going through their servers and we are talking about creating a master key that can unlock any apple device, forget just iPhones.... it is ripe for abuse.

 

 

This is a great discussion, thanks for all the contributions!

[n4p226r 105]

im kinda shocked the government doesn't already have all this data in Utah anyway

[Maksim 1,504]

I find it funny that all the conservatives who preach for a smaller government are the ones screaming the loudest about apples' refusal to help.

I think Tim cook is absolutely correct when he says to think that a tool to hack the iPhone could only be used once was “simply not true.”

 

Well, didn't you know?  That is the "GOP" thing...

 

Democrats talk about fairness and economic success, without talking about the wealth redistribution.

 

Republicans talk about "security" but don't want people to focus on how that security comes... at the expense of privacy.

 

 

Power corrupts, ... absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[mikeyjones 88]

+1

 

 

 

 

So we use BlackBerry Enterprise Server here. (BES 12 Cloud), which basically creates a separate partition on the device for only work stuff and we have full control over the device as a whole, so if employee leaves, we can just nuke it, or lock it remotely.

 

I am amazed that companies still give out devices without control, especially with sensitive data.

 

This is a huge and growing area in the telecom industry and something I try to follow closely.

 

 

 

Let me clarify by saying that my company has full control of my device. They can nuke it remotely as well.  It's locked down to the hilt (I can't even download "R" rated apps in the appstore) - this is actually a good thing because my battery will last 3 or more days.  I was talking specifically about the password reset. My company doesn't know my password for my phone or my desktop.  

[voyager9 3,433]

+1

In Apple's case, considering there is no data going through their servers and we are talking about creating a master key that can unlock any apple device, forget just iPhones.... it is ripe for abuse.

 

 

This is a great discussion, thanks for all the contributions!

Not exactly a master key. It's just that the lock won't self destruct when 4 bad keys are inserted. Doesn't change the discussion tho.

 

Going back a few posts. I thought it was reported that the killer changed the settings. Disabled iCloud backup a month before the event.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Maksim 1,504]

Let me clarify by saying that my company has full control of my device. They can nuke it remotely as well.  It's locked down to the hilt (I can't even download "R" rated apps in the appstore) - this is actually a good thing because my battery will last 3 or more days.  I was talking specifically about the password reset. My company doesn't know my password for my phone or my desktop.  

 

Mikey, was not correcting you... just piggybacking off of what you said. =) 

[Howard 538]

This was a terrible demand, not well thought out, by our stupid government.  Think about the international repercussions to this.  If our government demands this then how could we stop China, or Iran or Russia from demanding the same?  Then there is the issue that even if they get away with this, there are other software products that currently can work as an overlay and do the exact same thing.  There will be new software products developed to do the same.  The government can't stop this stuff. 

[Maksim 1,504]

This was a terrible demand, not well thought out, by our stupid government.  Think about the international repercussions to this.  If our government demands this then how could we stop China, or Iran or Russia from demanding the same?  Then there is the issue that even if they get away with this, there are other software products that currently can work as an overlay and do the exact same thing.  There will be new software products developed to do the same.  The government can't stop this stuff. 

 

So here is a hypothetical...

 

How many people would willingly buy a phone, at a discounted price, knowing that the government can have access to your phone, data, including ability to track you via GPS, access your camera and microphone?  (or a hacker for that matter). 

 

My issue with this is this.  I have a client who worked for the government, post office, over the last 3 years, we have gotten no less than 3 notifications saying their personal information was breached, including social security numbers, direct deposit data, etc.

 

If the government cannot protect THAT info... how can anyone in their right mind not think that this ability is not ripe for abuse?

 

Remember in 2008 when cell phone companies were in trouble for accessing presidential candidate phone data? lol.  

 

Since the Patriot Act.... the government has created a ton of data about their citizens.... but has it actually kept anyone safe?  Or merely created so much data that it is not really possible to sift through it to get tangible results?

[mikeyjones 88]

Mikey, was not correcting you... just piggybacking off of what you said. =) 

 

понял, moving along....

 

 

This article highlights some of the main points. I don't like how heavy they get against Google (Alphabet or whatever they call themselves) but this site is obviously pro Apple.

 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/02/17/user-security-privacy-issues-draw-sharp-contrast-between-apple-ios-google-android-in-fbi-encryption-case

[Maksim 1,504]

понял, moving along....

 

 

This article highlights some of the main points. I don't like how heavy they get against Google (Alphabet or whatever they call themselves) but this site is obviously pro Apple.

 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/02/17/user-security-privacy-issues-draw-sharp-contrast-between-apple-ios-google-android-in-fbi-encryption-case

 

Good article.  I am glad My BB OS 10.3 phones are not supported by FinSpy. lol.

[Oleg 8]

Just some phone metadata, what can go wrong - http://arstechnica.co.uk/security/2016/02/the-nsas-skynet-program-may-be-killing-thousands-of-innocent-people/

[Maksim 1,504]

Just some phone metadata, what can go wrong - http://arstechnica.co.uk/security/2016/02/the-nsas-skynet-program-may-be-killing-thousands-of-innocent-people/

 

Jeez, totally nuts.

 

Anything called "SkyNet" is bad though. lol. 

[Barms 98]

Here are the FACTS of this situation to just keep this from getting out of hand. DOJ never used the term "backdoor". Also fact when DOJ saw the media calling it an unlimited backdoor they publicly said "we only asked Apple to help us get into this ONE phone". The hysteria of the authoriites demanding a device to remotely be able to get into any phone on command was created in social media

 

So here is the DOJ requesting the safe crackers (Apple) can you open this safe without damaging the contents.

If you guys still want to use your brain power discussing an unlimited back door then go ahead but you're discussing something Tim cook and media extrapolated.

 

The DOJ statement stands on its own (of course if you think their statenents are bullshit that's anoyher topic altogether but the topic of the thread was backdoor and that's not what they demanded)

 

If your daughter was raped by a scumbag and he videotaped taped it. And the only way to prove him guilty was to get that video and the judge said "do you want us to ask Apple to unlock the phone?" You would say yes right? You wouldn't tell tell them "please tell them to create a tool so that all phones can be unlocked". You would say "please just unlock this one phone". According to the DOJ request this is what they asked Apple to do.

[njpilot 671]

I agree with Apple's stance on the matter. If it was an algorithm software, or something more brute-force that targeted the passcode issue, I would argue otherwise. But creating a backdoor that would undermine the security for the entirety of iOS that powers all of the Apple mobile devices? That is a ridiculously powerful and scary skeleton key, especially in an age where the cyber battlefield is pretty much even across allied and foreign nations and agencies, as well as private security companies, and private citizens (all of whom are engaging in white/grey/black hat). There is an exponentially larger impact here, and as much as I want whatever information is on that phone available for authorities, there is a way to do this without jeopardizing the security of over 700 million+ devices (many of which are in use by major companies, DOD civilians, military, and other users that have access to highly sensitive information).

 

As for Apple having any responsibility or duty to do this-- in fact, just like telecommunication companies eventually pushed back, private companies with this type of influence and power have a responsibility, just as much as any private citizen, to keep our government in check. Nothing good will come out of this if Apple caves and is forced to create this back door.

A blast from the past. Welcome back Ben.