Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Working on Security Measures to Make iOS Devices 'It Can't Hack'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I dunno, despite Apple's open letter where they're completely unbiased and said it wasn't a marketing stunt - it really is. But I like that. I think these big companies are realising us normal people want good security on our devices. Recently, with the next iPhones rumoured to have no headphone port and the Galaxy S7 being water-resistant, I've been swayed away from them. But news like this does help keep me as a customer and subscriber.
They're on our side but it certainly helps their profits to be so.
You can attempt to physically recover data from chips but it's an absolute nightmare and not particularly practical. There is an interesting story about it here:- http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/17/infineon_tpm_crack/
There's a huge difference though between running an exploit when the phone is already unlocked and trying to decrypt a locked device.
Meanwhile I'll just stroll out to the mailbox and see if I have received yet another credit card replacement after some corporate dunce of a CEO has rolled the dice on security as a cuttable cost, and lost yet again while not bothering to secure customer data, hence breach, hence new card. You wonder how many of us actually still have an identity that is not out there fully assembled and waiting to be assumed by someone else for the best price.
bravo Apple.I really admire their hardcore resistance on this issue.
That's the longest 'meanwhile' I've ever read.
if everyone took a step back and look at the issue at hand in isolation here, without the noise of herd mentality, I dont think this issue is such a clear cut to Apple's side.
Apple has made it into something else entirely than what the FBI had wanted - making it into a fight on the legal integrity of encryption. This is not a fight about some master lock, this is a fight about 1 specific phone, and whether or not Apple would help the FBI brute force a pin code.
The fact is, this phone was a phone owned by a terrorist. If you are a terrorist I would hope that the law does not prevent the authorities to catch you, I would hope that a judge can sign a warrant, after human review, for the cops to break into your house, your safe and read your bank transactions in order to catch you. Why should that capability be limited to their phones? Why is their phone so sacred?
We are not talking about giving the government the key to break every encryption known to man here, therein lies the hyperbole. We are talking about 1 phone, a terrorist's phone. And we are talking about a mechanism to speed up the FBI's brute force method. That's the issue. Not about the legality of some magical master key.
Apple has made it into something else entirely than what the FBI had wanted - making it into a fight on the legal integrity of encryption. This is not a fight about some master lock, this is a fight about 1 specific phone, and whether or not Apple would help the FBI brute force a pin code.
The fact is, this phone was a phone owned by a terrorist. If you are a terrorist I would hope that the law does not prevent the authorities to catch you, I would hope that a judge can sign a warrant, after human review, for the cops to break into your house, your safe and read your bank transactions in order to catch you. Why should that capability be limited to their phones? Why is their phone so sacred?
We are not talking about giving the government the key to break every encryption known to man here, therein lies the hyperbole. We are talking about 1 phone, a terrorist's phone. And we are talking about a mechanism to speed up the FBI's brute force method. That's the issue. Not about the legality of some magical master key.
No, if they're legitimately willing to take the step, they can go much further. They can make the all cryptographic information be stored in a Trusted Computing Module that is destructible upon being physically accessed (a common hardware arrangement for secure USB drives like IronKey), require that a PIN be used before boot, require that no firmware update can be executed without the device PIN and that device PINs cannot be delivered remotely.
Two factor auth with fingerprint and passphrase is something I desperately want. Even a 4 digit PIN would be essentially impossible to brute force if it needs a fingerprint along with it. A passphrase would be even better.
edit: This also provides legal protection in the US, since you can be compelled to give up a fingerprint, but not a password. Combining the two would be awesome.
edit: This also provides legal protection in the US, since you can be compelled to give up a fingerprint, but not a password. Combining the two would be awesome.
Spare us the emotional equivocation. It's not about preserving the rights of a terrorist, nor catching one. The terrorist is dead. The manner in which this tool could be abused has been shown unequivocally and repeatedly in all of these threads. What those, like yourself, would have us do is to simply trust the government. I don't, most of those that argue against Apple's cooperation don't, and given what we know about the US government's extralegal domestic surveillance activities, can you honestly blame us for thinking that?
And those of us with that stance aren't even necessarily afraid of anything being found out immediately, if there is even anything to find out. What we fear, correctly, is what happens with the data that is taken from us, without our knowledge that it's even been taken, and filed away. In an increasingly-polarised nation, what happens when a particular administration decides that people that are concerned with constitutionality are a hindrance or danger to the state? Or people that support the right to bear arms? It happened to the members of the Tea Party, who were hounded by the IRS (with impunity I should note), and it can happen to any of us. How many of us will one day find ourselves sitting in a Kafkaesque trial, finding our words, written and transmitted in private, used against us?
[doublepost=1456364306][/doublepost]
Just be aware of the safe combination standard. If they do that, never, ever write down the password. If you do, and they're aware of it, you can be compelled to turn it over.
I've missed the last few years. If they are going to discuss this I'm in!
[doublepost=1456365018][/doublepost]Bring on iOS 10 and the next iPhone. Apple seems to be the only company who truly cares about this and it looks like Apple will stand alone.
Yea Tim! Gays in Russia thank you. All dissidents everywhere thank you. Stand strong against this administration and its constant overreach. Your board member has some experience there. Thank goodness for your foresight there.
When you talk about establishing sovereignty in the International Community, that amount of cash is a starting point.
[doublepost=1456366087][/doublepost]
It is classic DefCon irony that the one company most of the cyberpunks, tech-anarchists and other outlaw types hate in the business is the one that's actually covering their butts.
I could see them moving things like the delay between pass codes and auto wipe into hardware where Apple cannot even modify it.
Imagine if Obama instead would just simply keep his promises to leading 9/11 families’ faces and declassify the 28 Pages, instead of protecting al-Qaeda (and G.W. Bush) for 9/11. This ‘Apple fighting the government’ wouldn’t be necessary.
In Trump Will Declassify The 28 Pages:
San Bernardino shooting happened because of Obama.
Fmr. Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), Sept. 10, 2015
@ 5:28
“Why has the United States government－through two administrations [Bush and Obama]－gone to such lengths to COVER UP and now [OBAMA] ENGAGE IN AGGRESSIVE DECEPTION to keep this information from the American people?”
Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), August 2014
@ 3:04 & 3:34
“The Bush people do not want it [28 Pages] released.”
“President Obama, I don’t know what kind of [secret] arrangement he has with former president George Bush.”
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), June 2, 2015
@ 12:15
“Some of the best intelligence we have [to win the “war on terror”], is in these 28 Pages.”
“Why has the United States government－through two administrations [Bush and Obama]－gone to such lengths to COVER UP and now [OBAMA] ENGAGE IN AGGRESSIVE DECEPTION to keep this information from the American people?”
Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), August 2014
@ 3:04 & 3:34
“The Bush people do not want it [28 Pages] released.”
“President Obama, I don’t know what kind of [secret] arrangement he has with former president George Bush.”
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), June 2, 2015
@ 12:15
“Some of the best intelligence we have [to win the “war on terror”], is in these 28 Pages.”
San Bernardino shooting happened because of Obama.
While not disagreeing, I don't think it is based upon marketing. This opportunity was put in front of them. Had they done anything else, it would have surely gone badly. Does that mean that making this decision is a marketing stunt? I just consider it to be a smarter decision. But I'm not disagreeing that it benefits them considerably to stand against the FBI and their requests.
You must have missed the story that said the FBI has 12 other phones they also want this done to. You are too trusting if you don't see this as a slippery slope. Once a company can be forced to write software for the government (illegal conscription) there is no end to what the government will do.
I'm still waiting to hear some kind of comment from Al Gore (Apple Board member and former executive branch employee).