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

[rdlink]

That is true, but it would still be a victory for all Americans, so let's hope they do indeed rule in Apple's favor and the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case, would save a lot of tax dollars that way.

I'm actually torn on that issue. I would like to have a quick resolution to this, and I think that the 9th Circuit would make it happen fairly quickly. On the other hand a Supreme Court ruling would set a precedent that all Circuits and states would have to follow.

 

[tentales]

Just finished watching the initial PBS review (News Hour and they did a very poor job of covering even the basic issues. Focused primarily on Comey and Vance. All else received a mention.

Watching the News reports on this after watching the entire event today, it is beyond sad to see what the varying news agencies do with the information they have. This appears to be the "marketing" aspect; the headlines.

Poor job indeed, but I'm not surprised. The media loves controversy and stokes the fires in both directions.
No wonder the U.S. is such a divided country politically and in other ways.
[doublepost=1456927001][/doublepost]

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.

Criminals & terrorists are tech savvy, don't you know ? It doesn't take this ruling to make them use iPhones more or less.
You never miss an opportunity to diss Apple.
Why are you even on MR ? All your posts are anti-Apple. Just a resident troll?

 

[RedOrchestra]

Seems like Apple lawyer Bruce Sewell found out, you can't always count on your iPad Pro, when you most need to

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/02/paper-apples-ipad-pro-fails-lawyer-bruce-sewell

 

[tentales]

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.

First of all Landau is a Professor of cybersecurity and a subject matter expert. I find her logic pretty flawless.
Having worked in this industry for over 30 years, I find that bright engineers can be found anywhere. Pay is but one factor in where the "best and brightest" decide to go. If you recall, the internet was not developed in the private sector, neither was the WWW.

 

[DearthnVader]

It's amazing that the FBI has forgotten about all the trouble that the founding fathers went to to protect people from unreasonable searches and self incrimination. I know that this case is very different, but at least our politicians in the beginning were clear that government had to be limited in its power over people's freedoms.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

In this case the FBI certainly has a warrant to seize and search the phone, so unless someone can make an argument that cell phones fall outside persons, houses, papers, and effects, into a category that is not subject to search and seizure with a due warrant?

May I take spousal privilege for my iPhone, please?

 

[vkd]

Contents of all politicians phones should be made public, seeing as THEY are the lying, cheating thieves that perpetrate so-called terrorism.

 

[emulator]

The world is watching. I'm watching, and rooting for Apple, from the Netherlands

Just hang on tight! Your multi cultural country is about to collapse anyway. Just keep working and working and working all day while your government feed the roaches.

 

[2457282]

Comey, hire a hacker who is versed in jailbreaking iphones. I think that will go much faster for you than this legal/political mess.

 

[wovel]

Not if Comey had his way.

"Your personal private thoughts are protected by the vicious guard dog that is your not having to say anything to us. We're just asking you to take the guard dog away."

That was such an absurd analogy Comey used. Will the phone wiping mechanism bite someone? Will people from the FBI be physically harmed if they try to do their jobs themselves instead of conscripting people?

 

[merkinmuffley]

Seems like Apple lawyer Bruce Sewell found out, you can't always count on your iPad Pro, when you most need to

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/02/paper-apples-ipad-pro-fails-lawyer-bruce-sewell

Wonder what went wrong with the IPad Pro that forced Sewell to switch to paper?

 

[DJ Dilbert]

If Apple loses this battle, they should just build a backdoor to the FBI's backdoor. Allowing them to patch the hole after the FBI gets what they want.

 

[phillipduran]

To most people Minority Report was a horrific sic-fi movie. To Comey it was apparently a Disney fantasy.

I feel like the people in the agency now are the kids that grew up watching hollywood spy movies. They understand their power and place not from studying law but from watching TV.

 

[DJ Dilbert]

Wonder what went wrong with the IPad Pro that forced Sewell to switch to paper?

The FBI was probably hacking into it.

 

[thermodynamic]

Apple says lots of things. Is there an ulterior motive, apart from profit? Given the number of human rights violations it supports (can't they vote with their wallet lest they want more corporate welfare or bailout?) it seems a tiny bit dubious that they really care about rights.

 

[duffman9000]

Sewell contradicted previous reports that the problem couldn’t arise because the FBI was asking for the bypass to be done in Apple’s own labs. Sewell said that the agency wants Apple to put the compromised version of iOS onto a hard drive and send it to the FBI. I was almost tempted to give Apple an extra point for that.

That's from 9to5mac. Is anyone keeping track of the half truths and outright lies told by the FBI?

 

[techwhiz]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

In this case the FBI certainly has a warrant to seize and search the phone, so unless someone can make an argument that cell phones fall outside persons, houses, papers, and effects, into a category that is not subject to search and seizure with a due warrant?

May I take spousal privilege for my iPhone, please?

They have a warrant to search, no doubt. They have the permission from the county which owns the phone. What they don't have is the authority to force someone (Apple) to develop a method so they can search. You do understand the distinction?

 

[sehix]

Precedent doesn't mean illegal.

Neither is "legal" necessarily good.

 

[Ethosik]

Would people stop saying this is a backdoor. It is not. It is just weakening the front door (the passcode). They will still need to try passcodes until they get the right one. How is this a backdoor?

 

[duffman9000]

Would people stop saying this is a backdoor. It is not. It is just weakening the front door (the passcode). They will still need to try passcodes until they get the right one. How is this a backdoor?

Front door, side door, or back door. Call it whatever you wish.

• Part of the court order also instructed Apple to essentially design a system by which pins could be sent electronically to the device, allowing for rapid brute forcing while still giving Apple plausible deniability that they hacked a customer device in a literal sense.

Source.

 

[dk001]

I watched this live. I was genuinely surprised by how nonpartisan it was, and how everyone except for 1-2 congresspeople supported Apple's position.

The only two who I felt went way beyond acting in an impartial and ethical manner where Gowdy and Sensenbrenner. Unrealistic "what if... " scenarios, questions framed around examples that had no relevance, to outright threatening that Apple "won't like what we come up with... ". Aside from that, it was a great watch.
[doublepost=1456941740][/doublepost]

China could require Apple to unlock an iPhone right now, whether the U.S. does or not. It could ban the sale of Apple products in China and confiscate and destroy all Apple property in China. A U.S. law requiring the hack may make it more palatable, but no provision of international law requires China to follow U.S. municipal law. Of course there are diplomatic consequences to consider, but it's China's decision.

China could however the impact to the way China is viewed, especially the Government would preclude that from happening unless the Chinese could couch this under the guise of "well they do it... ". With the current world economy and China's emerging position in it, they do not want to step back. Things are going too well for this type of behavior to become a public world wide spectacle.
Just my opinion...
[doublepost=1456943764][/doublepost]

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.

You miss the point it appears.
There is nothing that says the NSA / China / others have not already broken iPhone access.

Aside from that. Let's say the FBI wins and now Apple has to give them access.

1. We know the DOJ has another 12 in queue.
2. We know NYC has 175+ in queue.
3. We know LAPD/LA Sheriff's Department has 400+ in queue.
4. There are likely thousands more beyond that.
5. We now have a new Apple department and our personal privacy is shot.
6. Next law enforcement asks the same of Android. The same of Windows. The same of....
7. Then this is expanded to all similar devices; tablets, notebooks, home systems, cars, etc...
8. However we aren't done yet!
9. Now the FBI wants a "small" expansion to allow remote install.
10. Then the FBI wants remote stealth install.
11. Now we add in all the international nation states. And their law enforcement.
12. By now the criminals have it.
13. Terrorists have long ago moved on to any of the 400 or so international (read - not American) encryption offers.

However let's get back to your concern. Apple now has a backlog of 6 months plus due to the number of requests.
We now live in a police state as our every thought, post, call, message, surf, search is available for review or monitoring...

Where does it end.
Your "snowball" is a maybe at best. The scenario I laid above is a given if the FBI get's their way.
We need a different solution. This FBI "request" isn't it.
[doublepost=1456943918][/doublepost]

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.

Go back and rewatch the hearing. There were a few that were willing to learn and a couple of others that understood.
It is always a challenge when we are governed predominately by "generalists" who make decisions based on summaries or titles. Some by headline.
[doublepost=1456944024][/doublepost]

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.

Why would Google or MS be wanting this tool? They would be next in the request list from the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to provide exactly the same thing.

 

[dk001]

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.

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.

What makes you think that the NSA and China don't already have the ability to break into these devices? Think Hong Kong last year....
They would not share that with the FBI as it would become front page news and force the NSA to develop new tools.
This is why I really like seeing Apple, Google and others continue to advance the level of personal privacy protection.

 

[JohnGrey]

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?

Nope, not whilst maintaining evidentiary purity. Whether soliciting a lab service or using a forensic tool for digital investigation, the tool or service in question must be peer-reviewed and vetted by outside parties, to ensure that the tool is not altering or creating novel data. If Apple produces the tool, the manner in which it can be used becomes known and reproducible, made all the more troubling because it can loaded onto an active device trivially, as the way the bootloader behaves allows the custom firmware to be loaded and flashed from RAM without touching the nonvolative data partition.

If Apple is coerced, unconstitutionally I might add, to make this tool, it will both enter the wild to be used by malicious third parties and a version to be used independently of Apple's participation will eventually be demanded. Count on it.

 

[dk001]

Comey, hire a hacker who is versed in jailbreaking iphones. I think that will go much faster for you than this legal/political mess.

That is exactly the kind of talent the FBI should have in house.
That they don't, or appear not to have, is very disconcerting. This means the "bad guys" are decades ahead in the terms of technology.

 

[duffman9000]

Nope, not whilst maintaining evidentiary purity. Whether soliciting a lab service or using a forensic tool for digital investigation, the tool or service in question must be peer-reviewed and vetted by outside parties, to ensure that the tool is not altering or creating novel data. If Apple produces the tool, the manner in which it can be used becomes known and reproducible, made all the more troubling because it can loaded onto an active device trivially, as the way the bootloader behaves allows the custom firmware to be loaded and flashed from RAM without touching the nonvolative data partition.

If Apple is coerced, unconstitutionally I might add, to make this tool, it will both enter the wild to be used by malicious third parties and a version to be used independently of Apple's participation will eventually be demanded. Count on it.

The FBI's second biggest lie is saying that the tool doesn't have to leave Apple's location.
Honestly, I think they think we're stupid. Morons, I have morons on my team!

 

[dk001]

If Apple loses this battle, they should just build a backdoor to the FBI's backdoor. Allowing them to patch the hole after the FBI gets what they want.

Then we get the "I want a back door to the back door you built to my back door... " ad infinitum.