Apple Reiterates Inability to Unlock iOS Devices Running iOS 8 or Higher in New Court Filing

[macs4nw]

This. But this is not limited to terrorism. Not even close.
We got PLENTY of crap going on right here, from so-called "upstanding" citizens, that needs to be stopped.
Laws are there to keep man's f'ed up desires in check.
Yes, when it comes to humanity, I am a pessimist.

Are you by any chance a psychiatrist? lol..... Those habitually lurking in the deepest, darkest corners of Man's psyche are said to have a propensity to be pessimistic and or permanently depressed, which doesn't speak well of us as a species, does it?

Too be serious for a moment, yes, what I alluded to would of course equally apply to serious domestic crimes as well.

 

[alexmarchuk]

Good Job Apple.
Probably the best feature Apple implemented in iOS ever.
Now put it in OSX.

It exists in OSX, it's called FileVault 2. With newer SSD's and architecture, it makes it even more difficult to find exploits. One I remember existed is if the device was in like a "sleep" mode but not off they could access it somehow but once the device is off, it's a lost cause.

 

[Jason83]

I'm guessing this is related to a specific case where a locked iPhone is being held as evidence and the owner is unwilling to (or maybe is dead and unable to) unlock it. Just my guess, the article doesn't go into a ton of detail, but a judge wouldn't just wake up one morning and decide to have Apple do this for no specific reason.

You'd be surprised... I'm sure you're right in this case, but the government and agents acting on their behalf do tend to go after the most public of targets.

 

[sir1963nz]

If there's a legitimate reason for U.S. Justice Department to access the phone, the U.S. Justice Department should ask the court to order the owner to unlock it. If the owner refuses then they can be held in contempt of court until such time as the comply with the order. It's nothing to do with Apple, they only built the device.

Whats next, being able to compel people to self incriminate, i.e. here is a court order forcing you to confess, failure to do so will see you imprisoned until you do confess.

There is so much information collected/stored on a phone these days (e.g. GPS co-ordinates, passwords, wifi access points, etc) that carte blanche access via court order is not acceptable.

 

[usarioclave]

And how good is the government at protecting keys? The TSA master keys were just broken because they allowed someone to take a picture of them.

Seriously, if there was a backdoor big enough for LEO to use it would be impossible to control, especially if it was known to thousands of LEOs across the country. It's not a secret if thousands of Joe Bobs know it.

 

[peterh988]

I can not get over this quote.

Like mining and storing millions of communication records illegally collected from American citizens.

Like not requiring the use of a court system to subpoena information because it's inconvenient or will never been have accepted.

Like attempting to circumvent software designed for consumer protection by using malware to grant that access.

Like giving authority to government entities for full, free access to devices under a law that was never designed to be interpreted under today's technological conditions or by lying about the situation in which those conditions were not actually met.

Let's see..

Indeed. They don't seem to understand they created this problem themselves, if they'd have used the powers they had responsibly, sparingly and in a targeted way, people may have been more forgiving of a 'backdoor'.

But you wanted to know everything about everyone, got caught doing it, and now you're moaning that people don't trust you anymore and its making your job harder?

You abused your powers so people took your toys away. You made this problem for yourselves, live with it.

 

[calisurfboy]

i thought i read somewhere, that if you use touch id, the law can make you unlocked your phone; whereas if you use 4 digit pin, they cannot.

**edit, here we go. http://gizmodo.com/cops-can-make-you-fingerprint-unlock-your-phone-and-th-1653984192

Yep, its interesting. Right now the court has sided that you cannot give up your passcode to unlock a device but you can your fingerprint. Things are getting muddled in the court system and electronics. Last month there was a pretty interesting case brought up about passcode unlock due to a case from the SEC.

http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/2...one-passcodes-protected-under-fifth-amendment

 

[You are the One]

"Hi, it's the xyz-agency, we need to get into a Surface Pro"
"Sure, here is the key, help yourself"

 

[springsup]

i thought i read somewhere, that if you use touch id, the law can make you unlocked your phone; whereas if you use 4 digit pin, they cannot.

**edit, here we go. http://gizmodo.com/cops-can-make-you-fingerprint-unlock-your-phone-and-th-1653984192

From your article:

In the Virginia case, police were investigating a man accused of trying to strangle his girlfriend. Since the man had a video surveillance system set up, the cops had reason to believe that there might evidence on his phone, and so after obtaining a search warrant, they asked the man to unlock his phone with a passcode so that they could look for it. Citing his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself the man refused, and the police took him to court.

I'm not in favour of government spying in general, but it's scary that the police in this case couldn't access his phone with a warrant. I'll admit I never really considered it's impact on local, 'traditional' policing.

I mean, this guy could have this phone loaded with photos and videos of him abusing his girlfriend -- even make it his wallpaper -- and it's totally sealed from the rest society unless he approves its release.

There is a legitimate need in society to investigate people who are suspected of committing serious crimes. Why would it be okay for them to requisition all of his other personal data from service providers, search his house, car, place of work, etc, but suddenly it crosses a moral line once they search his smartphone?

I mean, read that snippet again. If the cops didn't search the suspect's phone, you'd think they weren't doing their jobs - especially if you were the victim! Smartphones are just such a fundamental part of life today that cutting the police out of them really does risk making them toothless in lots of domestic situations.

It's tragic that the NSA has reduced us to this: In order to protect ourselves from our protectors, we are willing to sacrifice our ability to quickly determine the innocence of these people who are within our borders. The internet is global, and its technology scales right the way through the chain, so that technology in the fight against international terrorism ends up affecting the police's ability to collect evidence in a domestic abuse situation.

Right now we're suffering a kind of breakdown between government and society. The police aren't trusted on any level - whether it's the local police busting drug dealers or the NSA trying to bust global terrorist cells. The thing is that the police, especially at the local level, are there to protect us from ourselves (or more accurately, other members of society). I wouldn't want the police to abandon my neighbourhood! I don't want them to be toothless! None of us want to live in a lawless society, so at the end of the day we still need an effective police force. Eventually we will be willing to openly admit that the government, in certain circumstances, needs a key to access your data. With a warrant, but without your consent.

 

[fitshaced]

Local storage.

Like, say, a man who works at your young daughter's hospital that took pictures of her privates while she slept.

I doubt he'd be stupid enough to use iCloud syncing.

Welcome to the real world, where man is an evil, evil creature.

You could keep photos on a standard camera and lock it away in your house which law enforcement would need a warrant to search. Allowing access to a device without a warrant is lazy. And this isn't about protecting a child from this type of behaviour. It's about ego because knowledge is power. If it was put to a vote, would you think people would vote for the federal government to be able to monitor everything we do and access everything we have without permission for the sake of protecting us from bad people? If the answer is yes, it's because of how people have been slow fed enough fear speeches for them to feel like they are walking around the street with a sniper scoping them out at all times whilst also having to walk around mines they can't see.

 

[mariusignorello]

The problem with these backdoors that people like that FBI-bloke (and the other sock puppets advocating them) don't seem to understand is: if Uncle Sam get's a backdoor, everybody else will want to have one, too.
The same backdoor that unlocks an iPhone of a suspect child-molester will also unlock a phone of a suspected dissident in China or Kazakhstan. Or Iran. And the Mexican government (and thus the cartels...) will also have it.
Of course, there's always the 5-dollar wrench (https://xkcd.com/538/) - but people quickly realize it doesn't scale and is really bad for morale.

For some reason I like the $5 wrench approach.

 

[koulmj]

It's nothing to do with Apple, they only built the device.

well said. To me this is the same as if I hide a dead body in the basement, and you go back and ask the company that laid the foundation for my subdivision to help pull up the concrete...

 

[blackcrayon]

Correct. So make sure you have an alphanumeric passcode and you turn your device OFF/RESTART before you have to hand it over. Odds of most people needing to do that are slim but keep it in mind TouchID will not work if the phone is restarted or turned off/on.

Also, good for Apple! No government agency needs access to what I have on my phone. I don't care what excuse they come up with or try to pedal for the sake of "homeland security".

The other option of course is to use the "wrong finger" 5 times but much harder to do in a pinch. And of course 99% of people probably use their thumb or forefinger. Hmm, i guess we should all set up our off hand ring finger for touch ID, they'd never suspect that one

 

[sir1963nz]

It's a false sense of security, much like the TSA. Realistically, the phone spying program only helped stop one terrorism plot in the decade or so they were collecting records. TSA is worthless. They conducted tests and sent people through check points with contraband. None were stopped. Not a single one. TSA hasn't even stopped any real terrorist plots. The police/government only way to be able to access your phone to find more incriminating evidence.

I'm glad to see the stand Apple has taken on encryption, and I believe every tech company should do the same. I'm not going to sit here and start a conspiracy theory thay the gov is spying on everyone, because frankly I think they could care less that I got directions to some restaurant, but they shouldn't have the ability to know that either without my consent.

Its a very simply psychology trick.
People when frightened, panicked are far easier to manipulate.
The USA has been doing this since the McCarthy days and "Reds under the beds" scare mongering.

By keeping the citizens unreasonably fearful of attacks from what ever bogeyman is in vogue they are able to keep passing laws, implementing surveillance , and imposing restrictions that would not be possible when people are not frightened.

Internet scammers use the same trick which is why you email account/bank account has been hacked and will shut down in 2 hours if you do not click on this link. Its to frighten you, its to reduce time to think and rationalise and its to push you into making poor choices you would not normally make.

for example
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...hecking-comparison-gun-deaths-and-terrorism-/

You are about 10,000 times more likely to be shot by an american than killed through terrorism . Or given that 55% of murders are by Friends/Family/colleagues (i.e. known to you), you are 5,000 times more likely to be killed by someone you "trust".

You are even far more likely to be killed in a car, or win a reasonable sum of money in a lottery.


Panic, thats how bad choices get made for you.

 

[mariusignorello]

An idea to think about:

The government isn't the problem when it comes to privacy, it's us. We have all these cameras and microphones on us all day. Anyone can record and post anything they want (not that they shouldn't be able to).

 

[maxsix]

Nice Spin Job. They knew exactly what we wanted to hear. They're so smart

 

[oplix]

Cook is such a bae

 

[springsup]

"Hi, it's the xyz-agency, we need to get into a Surface Pro"
"Sure, here is the key, help yourself"

The scenario I'm more worried of goes more like:

"Hello, it's the NYPD. We have a report from an individual who claims that her boyfriend repeatedly raped her while videotaping the events on his phone. He doesn't dispute the existence of the video, but claims the sex was consensual and the allegation is revenge for some suspicion of cheating. He refuses to unlock his phone, as per his constitutional rights.

The phone contains definitive proof - either this man is an abusive sexual assaulter, or he isn't. We don't have enough evidence to secure a conviction without this evidence, and will have to let him go unless you can provide the key to decrypt his data."

In olden times, society understood perfectly well that in such circumstances, a person's otherwise-inaccessible personal affects might need to be investigated. That's why they created warrants. Now we've shut the most important places of the 21st century - the digital worlds inside our smartphones - out of the warrant system.

Government surveillance in general is bad, but I feel we will regret how we're reacting to secure our liberty. We're being held hostage by the NSA - either we submit to their privacy-invading schemes, or we make it incredibly hard for local police to perform the targeted, specific police work that is necessary for a functioning society.

 

[springsup]

You could keep photos on a standard camera and lock it away in your house which law enforcement would need a warrant to search. Allowing access to a device without a warrant is lazy. And this isn't about protecting a child from this type of behaviour. It's about ego because knowledge is power. If it was put to a vote, would you think people would vote for the federal government to be able to monitor everything we do and access everything we have without permission for the sake of protecting us from bad people? If the answer is yes, it's because of how people have been slow fed enough fear speeches for them to feel like they are walking around the street with a sniper scoping them out at all times whilst also having to walk around mines they can't see.

The whole point is that warrants now basically mean nothing when it comes to smartphones. Whether or not the police obtain a warrant, they can't access your data unless they get the PIN.

"Oooh... you got a warrant. What you gonna do? Call Apple and have them give the key to my iPhone? Nice try, sucker!"

 

[Tubamajuba]

Nice Spin Job. They knew exactly what we wanted to hear. They're so smart

Please demonstrate how any of that is a "spin job". You know, it is possible for Apple to do something that isn't the worst thing in the world, and it's okay to admit that.

 

[farmboy]

TSA hasn't even stopped any real terrorist plots.

No way to know. Any planes been hijacked recently? From anywhere that has an airport security system?

It's always difficult to measure deterrent effect. Like how the mere threat of nuclear annihilation has prevented hot wars. You can guess, you might even have some data, but you really don't know. Doesn't mean it's not effective.

 

[Phil A.]

I love Apple's stance on security and privacy but I wish we as users could opt in and out of some of these features. For instance I would be okay with Apple storing my health, fitness, and Siri data in the cloud and not only on my device. I don't like that when I restore my iPhone from iCloud I lose all this data. I want to be able to tell Apple what I want to keep secure and what I don't necessarily care about keeping secure.

Health data is included in iCloud backups as it says here: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT203037
I know for a fact it works because I upgraded to a 6S plus last week and restored my iCloud backup which brought all my health data over. If you have had issues, it's not by design

 

[btbeme]

Correct. So make sure you have an alphanumeric passcode and you turn your device OFF/RESTART before you have to hand it over. Odds of most people needing to do that are slim but keep it in mind TouchID will not work if the phone is restarted or turned off/on.

Or just let it sit for 48 hours, whereupon the passcode is needed as well. Any lawyer should be able to stall for 48 hours.

 

[btbeme]

We got PLENTY of crap going on right here, from so-called "upstanding" citizens, that needs to be stopped.
/QUOTE]

See, that is an opinion, which is a form of free speech protected by law. And as citizens ("upstanding" or not) they are entitled to the same protection as your pompous butt (assuming you are a citizen of the United States).

 

[Eorlas]

I love Apple's stance on security and privacy but I wish we as users could opt in and out of some of these features. For instance I would be okay with Apple storing my health, fitness, and Siri data in the cloud and not only on my device. I don't like that when I restore my iPhone from iCloud I lose all this data. I want to be able to tell Apple what I want to keep secure and what I don't necessarily care about keeping secure.

iirc, this works with encrypted backups.