Apple fighting the Government on creating a backdoor for phones.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Well when that big celebrity hack happened last year I think they got a lot negative looks due to "code error" if u call it that.

[Maksim 1,504]

Here is a question, obviously the guy had an older iphone with no biometrics...

 

If it was a new iphone with a fingerprint reader... could they of use the dead guys print to open it?

 

I know the whole fingerprint issue (ie LE can make you swipe your print but cannot make you enter a password).

[mikeyjones 88]

Here is a question, obviously the guy had an older iphone with no biometrics...

 

If it was a new iphone with a fingerprint reader... could they of use the dead guys print to open it?

 

I know the whole fingerprint issue (ie LE can make you swipe your print but cannot make you enter a password).

 

Yes. They can even lift your print from something and create something to scan. 

 

Problem with iOS is that if you don't use fingerprint within 48 hours, it requires password.  Same thing if device reboots.

[Shawnmoore81 623]

Unfortunately our government can't be trusted with that access

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Howard 538]

Finger print does not work from a powered down state either.

[Kevin125 4,772]

Yes. They can even lift your print from something and create something to scan. 

 

Problem with iOS is that if you don't use fingerprint within 48 hours, it requires password.  Same thing if device reboots.

And with biometrics, a discussion in the security industry now is... What happens when your fingerprint data is compromised? Gonna get new fingers?

 

Its not quite as simple as it might seem... But its a problem without a good solution at present.

[mikeyjones 88]

And with biometrics, a discussion in the security industry now is... What happens when your fingerprint data is compromised? Gonna get new fingers?

 

Its not quite as simple as it might seem... But its a problem without a good solution at present.

 

You're right with fingerprint scanners.  But there are better solutions out there such as vein mapping.  The company that Apple acquired to implement TouchID had a working solution for vein mapping. 

 

Even sticking to just fingerprint, you can have multiple layers of security - fingerprint and pin, for instance.

[Kevin125 4,772]

Right, two factor is better than single factor and its becoming more common.

 

People with Amazon or Paypal accounts should enable 2-factor for their accounts by the way.

 

Biometrics are essentially complex mathematic translations of physical biological structures. Just big numbers derived from geometric objects. They can be compromised like any other key that written somewhere. But for a given system, they are numbers you as the user can't alter. In the near term, thats a problem.

 

Longer term... We will have a way to deal with it.

[Kevin125 4,772]

Unfortunately our government can't be trusted with that access

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Correct. It can't.

 

Check out some books by Bruce Schneier. .....Data and Goliath.... Carry On.... You may not agree with everything he says, but he makes a lot of very good points. He's a crypto guy.

[Screwball 483]

Yes. They can even lift your print from something and create something to scan.

 

Problem with iOS is that if you don't use fingerprint within 48 hours, it requires password. Same thing if device reboots.

I could have sworn I read it somewhere, but don't think a dead finger will work on an iPhone scanner. Live finger, like some child who used his father's to rack up a couple thousand in AppStore bills, obviously will.

[Howard 538]

Yup live finger needed so no wax or latex fingers

[Maksim 1,504]

Yup live finger needed so no wax or latex fingers

I mean, after you are dead... can they just use your thumb...

[maintenanceguy 510]

Whatever they are using to verify a finger is live could be spoofed too.  Given time, I'm sure I could build it in my garage.  I'm certain the FBI could figure out a way.

[Rob0115 1,105]

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.

'

Trump commented on CNN that Apple should open the phone. So right now he agrees with the communist Feinstein.

[Rob0115 1,105]

Here is a question, obviously the guy had an older iphone with no biometrics...

 

If it was a new iphone with a fingerprint reader... could they of use the dead guys print to open it?

 

I know the whole fingerprint issue (ie LE can make you swipe your print but cannot make you enter a password).

No the biometric scanner will not work with an detached or dead tissue.

[mikeyjones 88]

Correct a dead fingerprint won't work. But if you left a live fingerprint somewhere, they can create a scanable version of that.

 

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk

[mikeyjones 88]

Nick,

Either you're extremely naive or have a lot more trust in the government than I do. There is no way this will stay as one phone like you insist.

 

Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk

[Howard 538]

This is really a funny turn of events, as it was the government that got after the technology industry to make things more secure.

 

Perhaps if the government really wanted this information they should have thought it out a little more carefully before they gave these two rapid lead poisoning

 

Some claim the government should be able to get this information, but I bet the framers of the Constitution would not agree.  In an earlier day you would just burn the letter you received and nobody could get to it.  How is a text that you received any different?  We already have too much government spying on citizens with cameras all over the place and now license plate trackers and tracking by credit card usage and even worse cellphone usage.  Many don't realize that they can track you via your cellphone without even getting a warrant.  

[Malsua 1,422]

We are talking about ONE phone, ONE firmware upload to allow a brute force attack, *OF* someone that committed mass murder.  This is a not a general system wide update or firmware release.  The FBI has gone through the proper channels, has garnered a proper 'search' warrant etc.

 

How can they have a right to privacy when they are dead after murdering people?    Moreover should they have a right to privacy........?  Absolutely not......  that right was long gone the moment they pulled the first trigger.

 

No we aren't talking about one phone.  The FBI is asking for a firmware update that will allow them to break into ANY and ALL apple phones.  They are asking for the keys to the kingdom.   

 

I am not talking about the rights to privacy of those terrorists.  They have none and deserve none.    This is about everyone else and if we have to preserve the privacy of a dead terrorist to preserve the privacy of MILLIONS then the price is worth it.

[Zeke 5,504]

No we aren't talking about one phone. The FBI is asking for a firmware update that will allow them to break into ANY and ALL apple phones. They are asking for the keys to the kingdom.

 

I am not talking about the rights to privacy of those terrorists. They have none and deserve none. This is about everyone else and if we have to preserve the privacy of a dead terrorist to preserve the privacy of MILLIONS then the price is worth it.

I'll echo this.

 

Can't Apple break this phone, data dump. Then un- break the phone?

Her you go FBI, here's the data. I'm keeping my software.

[Zeke 5,504]

This is more akin to a crime was committed in my nieghborhood. I give the police my cam footage pertaining. I do not give them open access to my cams. I did to help

[45Doll 5,877]

Just out of curiosity, what do you suppose they might find on that phone that they don't have already?

 

They already have all their computers, the content of the house and vehicles, the first-level witness who bought them firearms, names of family and friends, and through the Verizon records the numbers and names of every voice, text and email message they sent from that phone. Not to mention whatever is archived in Utah that we don't know about.

 

And by the way, the crime is over and done and they're both dead. I don't think it's at all clear that what they might expect to find would rise to the level of national security necessary to warrant defeating iPhone encryption. If we're talking about potential threats, the U.S. government has more potential to be threatening to more U.S. citizens than home grown terrorists will ever have.

 

Although I would like to know why Apple is holding the line on this phone. Apparently they have arranged access to some 70 other iPhones in previous criminal incidents.

 

One thing I have reaffirmed: why I don't have a smart phone!

[Howard 538]

...

One thing I have reaffirmed: why I don't have a smart phone!

Wow, I didn't even know "dumb" phones even existed anymore.  

[45Doll 5,877]

Wow, I didn't even know "dumb" phones even existed anymore.  

As long as there are 'dumb' customers, there will be 'dumb' phones.   LG Tracfone does voice, text, email, pix etc. but no apps. Average $6/month cost. The price of ignorance.

 

Of course the government is not the main reason I don't load my life into a smart phone or run all the apps. It's just that today's smart phone is the hackers' target of choice, and harder to protect. And I don't like being reachable all the time anyway. Or need to be.

[Malsua 1,422]

Just out of curiosity, what do you suppose they might find on that phone that they don't have already?

 

 

The keys to defeating the encryption on all Apple phones.

 

This is not about tiny bits of stale information that may be gleaned from a phone.  They likely have all of that.  This is about setting a precedent that the FBI has the rights to any data it wants, on command.

[45Doll 5,877]

The keys to defeating the encryption on all Apple phones.

 

This is not about tiny bits of stale information that may be gleaned from a phone.  They likely have all of that.  This is about setting a precedent that the FBI has the rights to any data it wants, on command.

Ah Ha! A horse of a different color! I tend to agree with you. That's why I asked my question about crime.

 

By the way, if the government says 'you need to give up your privacy so we can protect you', does that in any way resemble 'you need to give up your firearms so we can protect you'?

[siderman 1,138]

[Zeke 5,504]

Oh my, that's rilly bad.

Lmfao

[fumanchu182 23]

 

 

Sen. Richard Burr (R-North Carolina), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, reportedly will introduce legislation soon to criminalize a company’s refusal to aid decryption efforts as part of a governmental investigation. The news was first reported Thursday afternoon by the Wall Street Journal.

 

You have to be fucking kidding me... This is not the attention the "R" party needs right now.  Then I read.

 

 

 

WASHINGTON—Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R., N.C.) has decided against a proposal circulating quietly on Capitol Hill to create criminal penalties for companies that decline to comply with court orders to decipher encrypted communications, a spokeswoman said Thursday night.

[Kevin125 4,772]

The keys to defeating the encryption on all Apple phones.

 

This is not about tiny bits of stale information that may be gleaned from a phone.  They likely have all of that.  This is about setting a precedent that the FBI has the rights to any data it wants, on command.

 

I agree.  It's not about the privacy of the dead scum bags.  It wasn't their phone.  It's about ordering a private company to alter their produce at the behest of the gov't and about the abuse that will follow and risk that will follow that.  In my opinion.

 

I was thinking about this last night and how it could be related to the 5th Ammnd't.

 

Encryption products need to be created so they could be under the sole control of the owner of the data that is encrypted.  And only through the actions of the owner could that information be revealed.  Therefore, LE would be attempting to force an individual to incriminate themselves.  Which is clearly a violation of a US Citizen's Constitutional rights.

 

I'm not sure how that would work exactly, but I think it's possible. At least for people willing to go to the trouble to secure their devices/data with added effort.