Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone for FBI [Updated]

[JohnGrey]

But however you go about your revenge, don’t corrupt your mind or do any harm to your mother

Oh, you can Google. Well done, you.

 

[Urban Joe]

omg I thought Gates was dead. Is this his attempt at a resurrection?

 

[whsbuss]

This made me lose some respect for Bill Gates.

Never had any
[doublepost=1456258694][/doublepost]

I'm surprised that the FBI didn't just go to the morgue, take the phone with them, press the dead perp's thumb on the Touch ID reader and unlock the phone that way (under a court order)... That is assuming that Touch ID was being used on the phone in question.

Its an iPhone 5c - no Touch ID

 

[old-school]

Personally I think this all requires debate and I'd really value Gates' input into that debate as well as Apple's

 

[JohnGrey]

Personally I think this all requires debate and I'd really value Gates' input into that debate as well as Apple's

I would appreciate his input were he a neutral party in the debate. Given that government-accessible backdoors have been in Windows since at least 2000, he's not neutral.

 

[RadioGaGa1984]

Of course he has nothing to worry about.
There is no need for the FBI to ever ask Microsoft to open up windows. Even they can hack that.

 

[lordofthereef]

Bill Gates isn't Microsoft anymore folks. Nothing he says should be interpreted as being affiliated, endorsed, erc. By Microsoft unless the company specifically states that to be the case.

 

[old-school]

I would appreciate his input were he a neutral party in the debate. Given that government-accessible backdoors have been in Windows since at least 2000, he's not neutral.

Appreciate how open Windows is and how his values are more liberal than that of Apple's. That's why I'd like him to balance the argument in any debate with Apple. Personally I side with Apple but the debate with the brightest in the industry is what I'd like to see.

 

[Alenore]

Uh, no, not like that at all. Apple's older versions of iOS did not have the encryption and security protections it does today, and they complied with warrants to hand over this unencrypted data, the same way hundreds of other tech companies would. Microsoft has actually created backdoors for the government, was the first to sign up to PRISM, and has unecrypted people's private data. Microsoft also gave China the source code for Windows and other software, presumably so the Chinese govt. can exploit bugs to spy on its citizens.

Microsoft and Apple are worlds apart on a commitment to protect the privacy of its users.

You're wrong. Apple had encryption key before and thus could decrypt datas, which they did.

 

[NT1440]

I don't understand the media's obsession of holding up an oligarch (Gate's donations and how they are applied are literally shaping the world for millions regardless of any "benevolence" they may be driven by...though I don't think shifting countries to a market based economy does anything other than open up new markets for the current power structures) is supposed to do anything but appeal to the technology illiterate....

 

[Jimmy James]

He's trying to level the playing field between Windows Mobile and iOS?

 

[Arndroid]

My question was why this reasoning was valid. You're repeating the reasoning people have said before, but I don't really understand the reasoning.

In all honesty, I appreciate your effort in trying to explain to me why Apple is creating a master key, but in this case I don't think it helps to create an abstract discussion. I'm well aware of how the encryption in the iPhone technically works.
[doublepost=1456218482][/doublepost]Yes. I follow you.
Whoah, this escalated quickly. First, the FBI doesn't want a special customized software version. They want a phone that is flashed with the special customized software version. That's a whole different story. As far as I know, it's not possible to extract IPSW files from phones. Apple doesn't have to release the special firmware. They can also prevent it from being used by simply not signing the firmware. As I said, it's not even possible to downgrade to an iOS firmware version of choice (of which IPSW files are publicly available). Why would it be possible to flash a custom iOS firmware version that is only available inside Apple and is not being signed by Apple? How would that be possible? Apple has full control.


I can see the slippery slope in this case, but at this point the discussion is not so much anymore about encryption, but more about corrupt police officers. Also, if somehow the whole world got access to this special firmware and if somehow the whole world can actually flash it into a phone, and if somehow the password entry delay built in to the secure enclave (which the 5c doesn't have, but the 5s and up do have) was disabled (that's a lot of "if's"), then still a simple six-charachter alphanumeric password would make all of these efforts useless and make the phone unbreakable.

I think the danger of which Apple / Tim Cook speaks is greatly exaggerated.

This is not hard. If a precedent is set law enforcement will petition the court in the same way to access any and every phone they want access to. If that doesn't bother you then no amount of explaining will make you understand what the problem is.

 

[Tech198]

hehe... I like being confused... gives a sense of where to go next

 

[dk001]

Because they are opposing it, they are willingly ready to take the fallout, especially if things don't pan out in their favor.

To say that a Judge is an impartial party in a decision like this is completely foul. Not only is he biased from his relationship, which Apple as a private entity (and citizen) lack, the FBI and DOJ have used very underhanded techniques in order to sway the public opinion. How many years have they had to work alongside tech companies to provide solutions that don't directly impede our rights? How many other options were explored before needing to drop to such drastic measure publicly against Apple? What about other communications on the real device, communication channels, and various other outlets of data... or is this a "evidence under the floorboard" situation? It was the FBIs choosing to bring this into the public and therefore the public needs appropriate knowledge to make a sound judgement either way... and the publics support matters or else this would have stayed sealed.

It's all muddy and it's all unjustified given the context and considering the weight of this, the forcing a company to cripple its own encryption for government surveillance and interop, it is a flat out dangerous precedent.
Not only that, the chances that the FBI or any government entity won't use this ruling to their benefit, twisting what the outcome was under a guise is almost moot.

This would be a difference cause if it was only about the phone, and if the FBI and DOJ hadn't begun setting the specific pieces they chose into play. This is not about the phone and the governments justification for the the government approval is bogus - I should add that I promise I'm not a conspiracy nut or trying to force you to change your opinion, just the potential implications for the FBIs argument that is groundless.

To say "Go somewhere else" is a ridiculous solution. The FBI and DOJ are the ones positioning this, so to encourage anyone who struggles with the government to "deal with it or leave" is naive, in my opinion. Especially given the context, this affects everyone and rules have already been played unfairly.

Hmmm... wonder if this has any bearing...
The Magistrate is an appointee - she was appointed by Obama
The US Attorney who submitted the warrant is the former deputy mayor of Homeland Security
The FBI...
The DOJ...

Interesting
[doublepost=1456269010][/doublepost]

I would appreciate his input were he a neutral party in the debate. Given that government-accessible backdoors have been in Windows since at least 2000, he's not neutral.

Doesn't matter. Get it into an open discussion with all sides represented. From that a path forward may be identified.

 

[Andres Cantu]

Never had any
[doublepost=1456258694][/doublepost]
Fair enough. Would have been a much different world without him, though.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

THis is not about a back door, just acces to specefic phones in an ongoing investigation.

Keep believing that...

 

[Karma*Police]

I like Bill because of his charity efforts but this is like a human rights issue. Setting a precedent that the government can require companies to put backdoors in their products or weaken security in any way is very bad.

I'm honestly surprised that Bill would not realise the full ramifications of this. The FBI is using this case to get their foot in the door that's all. If they succeed then the NSA, CIA, GCHQ (UK), FIS (Russia) and whoever else will demand the same firmware that the FBI wants.

It will not just be about one terrorists phone. It will be about every phone in the world.

It's possible that he doesn't understand all the details; I've seen a lot of misleading headlines and I'm sure there are a lot of misinformed people as a result.

 

[JohnGrey]

It's possible that he doesn't understand all the details; I've seen a lot of misleading headlines and I'm sure there are a lot of misinformed people as a result.

He knows perfectly well what it means and he gave a brief window into what he fears most whilst 'clarifying his remarks'. He said:

"I hope," he said in the Financial Times interview, "that we have that debate so that the safeguards are built and so people do not opt -- and this will be country by country -- [to say] it is better that the government does not have access to any information." http://www.cnet.com/news/bill-gates-fbi-apple-iphone-backdoor-san-bernardino/

He wants to smooth this fracas over, not because he has any great desire for balancing personal privacy and protection, but because the last thing he wants is for the issue of corporate-aided, extralegal surveillance to become a burning issue for the populace. If, as he says, people decide en masse that such a thing is intolerable, Windows and Microsoft, which still constitutes a significant portion of his personal wealth, will make a very loud boom as it craters. More than that, it will bring Microsoft's collusion with the government to a very public and uncomfortable head that will seriously endanger the humanist, philanthropic renaissance man image that he has attempted to cultivate since visibly leaving Microsoft.

 

[oldhifi]

send another update to your OS Bill...we need it..
[doublepost=1456277083][/doublepost]if this was on a winders phone a 5 year old could crack it..

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Don't be hating on Bill too much ... He's just trying to earn his "Government Good Ol' Boy" merit badge. ;-)

 

[cocacolakid]

When you stop to realize that the guy who introduced Windows on the world, the most unsecure, easily hacked operating system in history, it's not surprising Gates is for the Feds destorying iOS security.

 

[JamesPDX]

 

[Merkie]

Apple is being told to create a cracked version of iOS that, when loaded onto a locked phone, not only won't wipe the phone after x tried, but also will remove the mandatory delay between entering keycodes, and will allow a USB be cable be sent to send codes at very high speed.
This version of the OS does not exist now. Without it, even a simple four digit passcode (when auto-wiping is enabled) is very good protection of the data, because barring partial information on the passcode it's unlikely to get the right code in the first ten tries. Even without auto-wiping, between the delay between tries and the need of human entering of the code through the touchpad, entering 5000 different codes will take a long time (10,000 possible codes but on average will stop halfway). With the OS installed, it's a few minutes work. Even with a six digit passcode, pretty fast. An alphanumeric passcode in theory would take forever, but people aren't great with passwords they have to memorize (particularly passwords they have to enter on an iPhone keyboard) so likely to be guessable. And this version of the OS would work, directly or with minor modifications, on every iPhone. Thus the master key.
And it will have to work on many iPhones, because right after the iPhone in this case is unlocked, there's a prosecutor in NY with 72 phones to unlock, the Justice department is actually preparing requested court orders for another dozen phones - and that's while the case is in question. Once there's a firm precedent, the demands will be flow. The master will be used again and again and again. And if one employee can be bribed or extorted into releasing it (or some government simply makes the demand, give it to us including the loading tools), it's out in the wild.
Oh, and "easily technically comply"? Nope. It's a new version of the OS with significant changes, plus a loader tool. That is not a minor development effort (plus testing to make sure it doesn't wipe phones by accident). Then there's all the employee time loading the hacked OS on the iPhones in the dozens/hundreds/thousands of court orders that flow in. And if any of the cases provide evidence used in court, the employees have to testify about what they did to allow it to be unlocked. And because the FBI phrased the order as the creation of an instrument, the defense can demand a copy of the tool for independent third party validation - another way for the tool to leak into the wild.
The inevitable result of Apple creating this tool will be that, within a year, your passcode on your iPhone will go from "pretty good protection of the data within" to a single button saying "open me"

Still:
- It's only 72 phones, not 72 million phones. For every single phone, a court order is required
- We have no problem with house warrants and forced entry if the owner does not comply (I guess there are probably thousands of house warrants being executed every day), why is a "phone warrant" suddenly an issue?
- Apple can easily disable the tool for public use. As I said before, we can't even choose our own iOS version of our liking (and these are firmware files that are publicly available and have been installed before on millions of iPhones)
- This method won't even work on the 5s and up because the delay between passcodes is enforced by hardware
- A six-character alphanumeric passcode even further mitigates the risk for end users

We're not opening Pandora's box here.
[doublepost=1456303976][/doublepost]

This is not hard. If a precedent is set law enforcement will petition the court in the same way to access any and every phone they want access to. If that doesn't bother you then no amount of explaining will make you understand what the problem is.

I understand what a precedent is, but why should that bother me? House warrants have been publicly accepted for decades, a far more private place which the government can easily obtain access to if necessary. I see no national outcry over that. Why is a phone warrant suddenly so much more severe?

This is exactly the issue at hand, how severe actually are the consequences? That's far from obvious, yet you're posing like it is. I think the consequences are not very severe at all, for a number of reasons. That's the whole point.

 

[k995]

Keep believing that...

Then you should look to live in another country if you have that little confidence in your own gouvernement.
[doublepost=1456305491][/doublepost]

When you stop to realize that the guy who introduced Windows on the world, the most unsecure, easily hacked operating system in history, it's not surprising Gates is for the Feds destorying iOS security.

He's not and windows isnt that bad. ANything else?

 

[djgamble]

Bill Gates is a smart man and I gain more respect for him every time he speaks (I used to hate the guy).

Love how he just shuts down all the BS libertarian arguments (and web nerds claiming a 'back door' would be necessary) and says 'they have access to that information and they are waiting for a court order'. Sums it up PERFECTLY! I'd be spooked if Apple had a policy of just giving out all info as soon as the government said 'hey gimme!!' Wait for the courts and see...