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.
Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone for FBI [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
To be fair, I think that argument is a red herring.
Presumably the police / security services are not pro-actively looking at everyone's personal information as a matter of course.
In which case the idea of voluntarily giving that information to them has no practical equivalence to them seeking access to that information in specific, and presumably extreme, circumstances.
Gates Trump-eting: "I agree 100 percent with the courts. In that case, we should open it up." […] "I think security, overall, we have to open it up and we have to use our heads. "
Eh..Bill Gates has other things to worry about these days, like solving world humanitarian problems than Windows Phones and profits.
Once the FBI gets Apple to bypass (backdoor) the security on this phone, they can ask Apple to do the same for newer more secure OS too.
Proof positive naïveté can't be moderated by wealth.
Ps makes one wonder how much warrantless help Microsoft gave the govt spooks with access to MS mail, messaging, Skype, etc.
Ps makes one wonder how much warrantless help Microsoft gave the govt spooks with access to MS mail, messaging, Skype, etc.
Again, I'm disappointed with his attitude.
The government has used the 'state secrets' blanket to hide a heck of a lot of things, seemingly very embarrassing things, and can't be trusted to realistically judge and decide what is 'vital', and what isn't.
To now find out that the FBI now has a Starbucks bag of iPhones, and is holding up their hand saying, 'Well, and while you are at it...' is disingenuous and troubling.
If a 'tool' is released to 'slurp' iPhones, you can bet 'suspect' iPhones will be slurped within an angstrom of their lives.
Perhaps the only thing that Apple could do is to allow deeper API's for developers to offer hard encryption apps that can interact with iOS at a deeper level, and then take themselves out of the business of protecting our data.
I remember during the Clinton administration, there was a website that, in response to the idea that only people with something to hide would use hard encryption, had text blocks, and web-apps that allowed people to insert encrypted blocks in their emails, and on their websites. We seem to need that again.
If keeping your information out of the hands of a jaundiced and ham-handed paranoid 'security ecosystem' is illegal, than Patriots should have hard encryption. We *should* be able to protect our lives, at some level, from a suspicious government that has a long history of trouncing rights, and trouncing peoples lives.
[doublepost=1456242647][/doublepost]
AND once a backdoor is 'enabled', it's only a matter of time until some nefarious agency/country/group develops a 'hack kit' for ripping down the protections of the iPhone, and then all bets are off. Zombie iPhones in the future? Hmm...
[doublepost=1456242894][/doublepost]
It's the cosmic rays...
The government has used the 'state secrets' blanket to hide a heck of a lot of things, seemingly very embarrassing things, and can't be trusted to realistically judge and decide what is 'vital', and what isn't.
To now find out that the FBI now has a Starbucks bag of iPhones, and is holding up their hand saying, 'Well, and while you are at it...' is disingenuous and troubling.
If a 'tool' is released to 'slurp' iPhones, you can bet 'suspect' iPhones will be slurped within an angstrom of their lives.
Perhaps the only thing that Apple could do is to allow deeper API's for developers to offer hard encryption apps that can interact with iOS at a deeper level, and then take themselves out of the business of protecting our data.
I remember during the Clinton administration, there was a website that, in response to the idea that only people with something to hide would use hard encryption, had text blocks, and web-apps that allowed people to insert encrypted blocks in their emails, and on their websites. We seem to need that again.
If keeping your information out of the hands of a jaundiced and ham-handed paranoid 'security ecosystem' is illegal, than Patriots should have hard encryption. We *should* be able to protect our lives, at some level, from a suspicious government that has a long history of trouncing rights, and trouncing peoples lives.
[doublepost=1456242647][/doublepost]
AND once a backdoor is 'enabled', it's only a matter of time until some nefarious agency/country/group develops a 'hack kit' for ripping down the protections of the iPhone, and then all bets are off. Zombie iPhones in the future? Hmm...
[doublepost=1456242894][/doublepost]
It's the cosmic rays...
Microsoft is Actively Colluding with the NSA
"No software company has been quite as collaborative with the NSA as Microsoft has, e.g. in providing direct Skype access... Microsoft offers back doors at the operating systems level, not the just Internet/communications level; the NSA as a whole has come to share a bed with Microsoft (even staff intersections exist) and this technology giant, Microsoft, also receives payments for these abuses of privacy. e.g. from the CIA, based on clear disclosures (leaks)."
http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Microsoft_and_the_NSA
Last edited:
I get this reasoning, but Apple should only comply with the FBI if they have a court order. The judge is the only one to determine if Apple should help. Not Apple and certainly not the FBI.
If Apple doesn't like the way the law works, then they can do two things:
1. Relocate to a different country where the law works differently
2. Make sure they can't help (which is simple: enforce/encourage every iPad and iPhone without a secure enclave to use a six-character alphanumeric passcode, problem solved)
Until then, Apple has to follow the court order. I don't really see the difference with a house warrant. I really think the issue here is greatly exaggerated (I side with the FBI on this one).
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.
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"
Actually no. Apple can contest the order and appears to be doing to so.
Only for another case if a judge deems this needed.
Again what is the problem with this, this is the way such cases have been handled for decades.
Apple can appeal the court order. The Supreme Court has said that the All Writs Act cannot impose an undue burden on the party, and it's not difficult to show this would be a great burden. It also involves compelling Apple to create a new OS with significant code, code has been determined by precedent to be a form of speech so this would be the government compelling speech that the creator does not agree with so a First Amendment violation.
THis is not about a back door, just acces to specefic phones in an ongoing investigation.
Actually, in this case, Apple did provide all the data on iCloud which includes backups and logs. The thing they're refusing to do is create a new version of the OS plus a loader that turns the passcode on iPhones into a button that says "Open me"
If you’re really concerned with a safe future for your children:
Contact your Representative and Senator, and demand they cosponsor Rep. Walter Jones, Stephen Lynch and Thomas Massie’s H.R. 14, and Rand Paul, Kirsten Gillibrand and Ron Wyden’s S. 1471.
http://28pages.org/act/
▹ https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-resolution/14/text
▹ https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1471/text
Obama/USG is responsible for San Bernardino happening. In part, because Obama has broken his promises to 9/11 families’ faces and is still withholding the 28 pages. In part, by destroying Libya and trying to destroy Syria (Obama and CIA arming, aiding, supporting al-Qaeda).
NSA is collecting everything it can－and storing it. You don’t have their names; they’re not local and accessible. It isn’t a red herring, but might be fair to say it somewhat is false equivalency. But it makes the point: If you don’t care about privacy from law enforcement (or others,) then prove it.
Last edited:
Exactly, and while he's at it...he should remove the curtains from all his windows, and put cameras in his bathroom that feed directly to the FBI so they can monitor his every bowel movement. After all, if he "has nothing to hide" then he should be okay with it. The government is never wrong
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.
Last edited:
The standard is whether or not providing the court-imposed assistance to the FBI (e.g., modifying the OS) would be burdensome under the circumstances. Here, there is an ongoing investigation into an act of terrorism by Islamic jiihadists where several people were killed and many more were injured. Those terrorists probably had help in setting up and perpetrating these heinous acts, and the government needs to put a stop to it. Under those circumstances, having Apple modify an OS to allow access to the perp's phone, especially when they have said it is technically feasible, doesn't appear to me to be burdensome or unreasonable.
And your free speech argument is misplaced. There is a substantial public interest in the government completing this terrorism investigation in a thorough manner. Any free speech arguments Apple may make in this regard are likely not to hold up.
http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5645
It's been 2 months since that terrorist incident so there is very low probability the FBI will find any timely information on the device. Furthermore the FBI already has the cell records from the telephone provider and they have prior iCloud backups, further decreasing the likelihood any new relevant information will be found.
To see the burden on Apple, read the link above.
Yes, Apple can be ordered to help. But this is not the case. Apple has been instead ordered to create a product, a new version of iOS. According to which law a company can be ordered to do so? According to Apple no one, in fact Tim has said that Apple will fully comply with all lawful court orders.
And no one else legally could, as this software belongs to the IP holder. Apple could create this new iOS, but certainly can't be ORDERED to do so. I'm glad Apple said no, this is a road that leads to a fascist country.