At Congressional Hearing Apple Says 'The World is Watching' iPhone Unlocking Battle

[paul4339]

The best part is starting around 1:05:00, where Rep. John Conyers asks Comey if the FBI will seek to use the precedent gained from a win in the San Bernardino to unlock other devices from Apple or any other companies.

Comey answers: Of course.

This is after he says it's only about this case and days after stating to the public that it's not about precedence.

.

 

[thatanonymoususer]

Funny how the pro big government liberals here are against the FBI simply because it is their iPhones that may be affected.

Hussein and his band of men are another Pro Government faction. The flip flops are so very evident. Hypocrisy, the very element Apple relies on, has been a staple of POTUS operations for far too long

It's all a big lie.

Honestly, the lack of privacy considerations was part of the reasoning that pushed me to Apple in the first place. Microsoft has had a history of complying and implementing these things for government agencies in secret in the past.

Please don't make grand generalizations about a population that you don't know anything about.

 

[Solomani]

Susan Landau raised some salient questions about the FBI's available technology, suggesting the government agency needs to focus on innovating and recruiting talent to build better tools rather than asking Apple to build the software. "Instead of laws and regulations that weaken our protections, we should enable law enforcement to develop twenty-first century capabilities for conducting investigations," she said.

It's a nice question that Senator Landau raised. But she has one big flaw in her logic. In a capitalistic society like the USA, the best and brightest (scientists and engineers) will almost always take jobs in private enterprise, rather than take a similar job with Government.

So you see, Senator Landau…. THAT's why the Government's technology will always be a step behind.

 

[You are the One]

Just have the OPM guard the cracked iOS. That should be safe. These federal mega idiots can't even protect the personal information of their own employees. Their so-called security is like the Emperors New Clothes. As soon as the FBI has the tool the Chinese will have it as well.

All this babble about national security, the biggest threat to national security you have in US is your own retarded government and all its corrupted acronym agencies.

Part of the purpose of the US Constitution was to protect against vermin of this type. No wonder they work so hard to dismantle the Constitution completely.

 

[Mac2me]

Susan Landau raised some salient questions about the FBI's available technology, suggesting the government agency needs to focus on innovating and recruiting talent to build better tools rather than asking Apple to build the software. "Instead of laws and regulations that weaken our protections, we should enable law enforcement to develop twenty-first century capabilities for conducting investigations," she said.

It's a nice question that Senator Landau raised. But she has one big flaw in her logic. In a capitalistic society like the USA, the best and brightest (scientists and engineers) will almost always take jobs in private enterprise, rather than take a similar job with Government.

So you see, Senator Landau…. THAT's why the Government's technology will always be a step behind.

Point of note, Susan Landau is not a senator.

 

[MH01]

Thanks for fighting this on a global scale apple and thinking outside the US

Now if only you cared so much about the rest of us when you launched serviced that are US only

Sadly this issue is not about OUR privacy, but both FBI and Apple will pretend it's about us and our best interest at hand.

To be honest my bigger concern is the headphone jack in iPhone 7 and pricing due strong US dollar, when I make a decision about an upgrade this year.

 

[diegogaja]

Indeed.

Like bakers being forced to bake cakes for those who wilfully sin.

That would suck to be a baker that didn't believe in baking cakes...

(In case it went over some heads the fallacy here is false analogy...)
[doublepost=1456902086][/doublepost]With the govt there is no such thing as a 1 time exception, it's called a precedent.

Apple is creating a backdoor/key. In this case, think of the backdoor/key as a process rather than a simple code.

And how would anyone do that but Apple ? which of course they would refuse to do since the FBI had now got access to what they were after on one device.?

just coming from a different point of view...

Apple controls this, not the FBI. so why should Apple hand anything over... Apple does at their facilities, and hands the phone to the FBI, so they can brute force it... Only Apple can do the IMEI Not the FBI, which would require new firmware only for that only device, but that's allot better the the FBI getting keys for all devices.

 

[randomgeeza]

He's damn right the world's watching. This is a world issue. Not an American issue. Sincerely, a Dutch person on Apple's side.

Britain too...

 

[mi7chy]

Meanwhile, Apple customers in China are scratching their head why Apple has been freely handing over dissident data to the Chinese government as part of the deal to do business there.

 

[Piggie]

The thing is Apple WILL Lose.

Why?

Because they are "Setting Themselves Up For A Fail" with this PR move.

Why do I say that?

Look at is this way...............

Say we have 100,000 bad people around the world planning acts of terror on western countries, abducting children and women from poor countries as prostitutes, members of governments around the world (USA of course)
All the devious, evil, bad people you can think of.

Apple/Tim during all of this are basically putting up a GIANT NEON Flashing sign that says, "Use out products and you will be save from the authorities, we will, with our last dying breath not let anyone find out the bad things you are doing"

This stance, WILL... By it's very nature, attract the 100's of thousands to use iPhones etc for their bad/evil/illegal deeds.

So the snowball will start growing and growing so to speak, the momentum will be such that there will be more and more iPhones/Apple products that hold more and more data needed to catch/convict all these people.

Eventually, it will break, and even the normal people (here now) will have to give in and say, we need to access these people's data for the protection of normal people.

I cannot see any other long term scenario happening other than this.

 

[576316]

The statement that the federal agencies need to move into the 21st century is correct. If it is possible for Apple to build the software to unlock the iPhones, why is it then not possible for the FBI to build it themselves. If I ran a business that relied on the security of my system, I would not knowingly infringe on that security by building something that can break into it, this lowers the transparency of the safety of the data of consumers. Lock pickers can crack safes, hackers can breach encryption. The right people just need to be hired.

To be honest, it concerned me quite greatly how clearly none of the old men in suits at congress had a clue about the technology they were talking about. They just don't seem qualified to discuss these issues.

 

[daleski75]

I am watching this very closely as this very closely as I am sure Google, Microsoft are as well and I would not be surprised if there are already discussions going on in the 'dark web' about how to obtain such a tool if/when it ever exists.

To me it looks like here in the UK and the USA they are slowly turning into a police state.

 

[BMcCoy]

I cannot see any other long term scenario happening other than this.

If our only way to stop these "bad people" is to access their phones, we've already lost.

 

[gnasher729]

Comey complained that there are "warrant-proof spaces". Nothing will change that. In this case, the killer had three phones. Two of them he put himself into a "warrant-proof space".

No I understand that. What I mean is that in other threads - people are assuming that they want Apple to create a backdoor that the FBI can access - thereby weakening iOS and a potential to be a further security risk. My point was - isn't it possible what they want (esp in this one case) is for Apple to create a version of their iOS which can be transferred to the phone in question to allow for brute force attacks to gain access?

That may be what they say they want. What Apple has said again and again and again is that such an iOS version would inevitably get out in the wild, and then it can be installed on any iPhone. (I doubt that the iPhone has much protection against people copying the firmware that is on the phone - after all, there is very little reason to copy the firmware that is on my phone. But this version is _dangerous_).

If our only way to stop these "bad people" is to access their phones, we've already lost.

Consider that in order to get their phones, you first have to find them. That's what people always forget who come up with stupid "think of the children" scenarios, where someone has kidnapped a child and the location is on the phone - but you can only get the phone if you find the kidnapper first and then you should get all the information out of them!

 

[Northgrove]

It's too bad that a balance between privacy and control often has to be fought for. I am often surprised by how few care, making these things often seem like uphill battles when they shouldn't be. The problems this would cause seem so obvious to me that I wonder why there is even a discussion. Yes, FBI need a certain amount of control of the populace to do their job in times of need. But FBI in turn need to be kept in check. There's a balance to be found here.

 

[gnasher729]

For everyone saying this, imagine if this was being debated in a different country. Instead of terrorism, it's about Apple being forced to unlock (which backdoor or not, brute-force on 6 didgets is basically instant) a US spy's phone that potentially contains contact information about other spys or contains national secrets. It's not a big leap. I say this as an American.

Six digits isn't "basically instant". Trying one million passcodes takes at least a day; the whole system is designed so that checking a passcode takes 80 milliseconds. That's not an artificial delay, that's how long it takes. Six random digits and uppercase / lowercase letters takes about 5 years.

 

[John Mcgregor]

FBI can take that phone and insert it slowly in a very dark place.

 

[BvizioN]

Your data is, will be and can accessed according to your country's laws. Nothing that happens in the US will change that.

Not my data. I have done nothing wrong and I don't want nosy FBI spying on my phone.

 

[diipii]

Apple's head lawyer Bruce Sewell and FBI Director James Comey today testified at a U.S. congressional hearing on encryption issues, where both sides reiterated many of the same arguments that have been circulating since Apple was ordered to help the FBI unlock the iPhone used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook.

Several interesting tidbits came up throughout the testimony, which lasted for most of the day. One of the most concerning points raised at the hearing (via The Verge) covered the precedent that would be set for other countries around the world should Apple be forced to break into an iPhone in the United States.Sewell went on to say that Apple has not received similar demands for data from "any other country," but that if the company is ordered to comply, "it will be a hot minute before we get those requests from other places."

Sewell also shared an interesting tidbit on the disappearance of Malaysia Flight 370 when asked how quickly Apple is able to respond to government requests for assistance. When the flight went missing, Apple started working with officials "within one hour" to attempt to locate the plane. "We had Apple operators working with telephone providers all over the world, with the airlines, and with the FBI to find a ping," he said.

At the hearing, FBI Director James Comey testified during the first panel, while Sewell testified during the second, accompanied by Worcester Polytechnic Institute professor Susan Landau, who sided with Apple, and New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance, who sided with the FBI.

Comey asked the committee to consider the implications of places law enforcement can't reach. "If there are warrant-proof spaces in American life, what does that mean? What are the costs?" Comey also reiterated the FBI's position that no other agency, such as the National Security Agency, has a tool that can break an iPhone 5c running iOS 9.

Susan Landau raised some salient questions about the FBI's available technology, suggesting the government agency needs to focus on innovating and recruiting talent to build better tools rather than asking Apple to build the software. "Instead of laws and regulations that weaken our protections, we should enable law enforcement to develop twenty-first century capabilities for conducting investigations," she said.

New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance said New York now has more than a hundred devices it would like to see unlocked, further confirming Apple's point that the argument isn't about just one iPhone. "No device or company, no matter how popular, should be able to exempt itself from court obligations unilaterally," he told the committee.

Statements from Comey, Sewell, Landau, and Vance outlining their positions are available from the Judiciary Committee website, as is a video that includes some of the testimony from the hearing. Apple and the FBI will face off at a court hearing over the iPhone issue on March 22.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: At Congressional Hearing Apple Says 'The World is Watching' iPhone Unlocking Battle

Your enemies are watching. They are always watching and should Apple win will immediately buy iphones. Why wouldn't they ? Why can't you see this ? Why is this thread repleat with blind macho BS ? Why do americans only see no further than the end of their own self-interest ? The fight against terrorism is global and the response should be everyone's concern. It also costs and if your phone is seen as a weak link in OUR security Apple should be the first to help. Cell phones are not the constitution. Apple does not write laws. Apple has a huge opinion of itself and badly needs putting back in its box.

 

[pika2000]

What I don't get from all of these debacles is, why don't people question the NSA? The NSA, according to their claim, should've prevented the whole thing to begin with.

 

[thekeyring]

When the director of the FBI was asked why they couldn't physically remove the iPhone's 'disk drive', make copies of it, and attack each copy at once with different passwords, he didn't seem to be able to follow along, and he pretty much said (unless I'm much mistaken) that the FBI hadn't even considered it.
[doublepost=1456916503][/doublepost]

The statement that the federal agencies need to move into the 21st century is correct. If it is possible for Apple to build the software to unlock the iPhones, why is it then not possible for the FBI to build it themselves. If I ran a business that relied on the security of my system, I would not knowingly infringe on that security by building something that can break into it, this lowers the transparency of the safety of the data of consumers. Lock pickers can crack safes, hackers can breach encryption. The right people just need to be hired.

Didn't this come up in court? I assumed the answer was obvious: no one had the source code for iOS other than Apple, so no one knows how to build the tool other than Apple.

 

[Jax44]

And how would anyone do that but Apple ? which of course they would refuse to do since the FBI had now got access to what they were after on one device.?

just coming from a different point of view...

Apple controls this, not the FBI. so why should Apple hand anything over... Apple does at their facilities, and hands the phone to the FBI, so they can brute force it... Only Apple can do the IMEI Not the FBI, which would require new firmware only for that only device, but that's allot better the the FBI getting keys for all devices.

The point is not rather Apple can do this in a locked room, for only this device and keep the code in house.

The point is once they do this then every country in the world will demand the same.

 

[thatanonymoususer]

Six digits isn't "basically instant". Trying one million passcodes takes at least a day; the whole system is designed so that checking a passcode takes 80 milliseconds. That's not an artificial delay, that's how long it takes. Six random digits and uppercase / lowercase letters takes about 5 years.

I don't know where you got 80ms, but I'll assume that you're correct.

.08s * 1,000,000 /60(to minutes) /60 (to hours = 22.22hours. Meaning that it would take a maximum of 22 hours and 13 minutes. So the worst-case scenario isn't even a day. This assumes that they were extremely unlucky and didn't guess correctly halfway through. I would also imagine that they would start a database of previously correct passwords to try first later - speeding up the process.

Compared to the many many years it would take otherwise, that is practically instant. Since they could get a computer to do it, they would be able to crack it without any human work other than plugging it in.

In the case of the iPhone though, that's not the point. The point is; do we really want to hand off this level of power to the FBI or a foreign government? Do we want them to be able to force someone to weaken their security because they can't be bothered to break it themselves even when said group handed over a backup of the device in question?

 

[lowendlinux]

If our only way to stop these "bad people" is to access their phones, we've already lost.

We've already lost because we're having the debate. Terrorists deal in fear

 

[Night Spring]

When the director of the FBI was asked why they couldn't physically remove the iPhone's 'disk drive', make copies of it, and attack each copy at once with different passwords, he didn't seem to be able to follow along, and he pretty much said (unless I'm much mistaken) that the FBI hadn't even considered it.

Yeah, I noticed that. There is, in fact, a reason why that wouldn't work (the iPhone is designed so a hardware chip is needed to decrypt the data, so attacking copies of the data wouldn't work), but the director didn't seem to be aware of this.