Don't turn this into a gun control debate when you clearly don't know anything about guns or the law.
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.
Campaigners Rally to Support Apple's Stance on Government Backdoors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Take your pick for this particular version of the slippery slope fallacy, which by the way both sides of the aisle use when it suits them:
- "Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession."
- Cindy Cohen, executive director of digital liberties group The Electronic Frontier Foundation, was also in attendance. "We want to show Apple that people are standing with them," she said. "Once Apple does it, other people are going to come and say, 'Apple, do it for me.' How do they say no the next time?"
Both apple and Google are welcome to move their HQ to Canada away from this non-sense and other Trump-esque ideas.
It's no slippery slope to believe that this software would end up in the wrong hands. It would inevitably happen because you elect a new government every 4 years, it's only a matter of time before someone untrustworthy (or someone who can be bribed) has access to it.
And if that doesn't happen - someone will create their own homebrew version that does exactly the same thing.
It's simply naive to think that this backdoor would be secure - and even if it is, in the absolute best case scenario, I don't want the god damn government snooping on my stuff!!!
The whole thing is just another bad idea in the long sad history of bad ideas.
Did you support Kim Davis when she refused to sign same sex marriage licenses because it went against her beliefs? I have no problem with Apple fighting this using whatever legal means are at their disposal but I don't think they get to decide what court orders they follow or not. And no where is Tim Cook saying Apple from a technical standpoint can't follow this court order.
If only Apple has access to the firmware and only Apple can sign it how is it not secure? Or are you saying Apple could easily be hacked and this firmware stolen? If it's that easy to hack Apple's systems then I guess I need to stop using iCloud.
When I seen the headlines of this all I could say is I am damn proud of Apple being a Tech company that is standing their ground and holding firm on this because at the end of the day it doesn't matter who or what the invasive government wants that they think they can just set forth orders and get while violating the rights and privacy of every person in this country regardless if foreign or domestic.
Tim really is doing a fine job with Apple in his hands and this is also making for an even stronger company.
Tim really is doing a fine job with Apple in his hands and this is also making for an even stronger company.
Scape goat.
If the government do not want terrorism...
1. Stop invading other countries for oil.
2. Enforce a better education to U.S. citizens, free of charge
3. Support your citizens with comprehensive plans like Europe and Germany with free health insurance and unemployment.
That way you will have little to worry about. Go to the root. Snitching cellphones will not resolve a thing, that is just gossiping.
If the government do not want terrorism...
1. Stop invading other countries for oil.
2. Enforce a better education to U.S. citizens, free of charge
3. Support your citizens with comprehensive plans like Europe and Germany with free health insurance and unemployment.
That way you will have little to worry about. Go to the root. Snitching cellphones will not resolve a thing, that is just gossiping.
There was a study recently of available encryption libraries. They found 800+ and something like 500 of them were free and open source solutions available on the Internet. Many of them are made internationally.
You are NEVER going to stop determined terrorists from hiding their communications.
All this would do is put normal people at risk. The FBI knows this and they don't care. This isn't about preventing terrorists, it's about controlling people. And it's about setting precedent so they can try to start using this data to track everyone and bust more people for petty crimes so they can feed the prison industrial complex.
It's different because the police searching a random house doesn't put the security of other houses at risk. Forcing Apple to develop software to crack iOS puts every iOS device at risk.
Damn ****ing right it should. If our right to own guns trumps national security, our right to privacy should as well.
What you have just described is not technically possible.
You're right*. If Apple chooses to push this case to its endpoint, it'll be decided upon the 'The 4th Amendment Third-Party Doctrine'.<--- nice compendium for further search, if nothing else.
* It's telling of Cook's (and legal team's) thinking that he used 'the deepest respect for America's democracy' in his open letter.
Then let them face the consequence. They are doing the wrong thing in order to do the right thing. They could comply with the courts but then they'd be doing the right thing in order to do the wrong thing. They're kinda in a lose-lose situation anyway in terms of legality and morality, but I fundamentally believe that they have chosen to protect the correct side.
I don't get your logic. It really isn't. You have the keys to your house. That's the encryption of the phone if we're talking like for like here. If they get the search warrant, they bust your door down if you don't let them in. Same as a request for Apple to open the door. It doesn't mean the FBI will get access to this code. I'd assume Apple employees at a very high level do the work and assist. FBI isn't asking for a backdoor, it just wants Apple to open the front door for the information.
Whether the US citizens as members on here trust the FBI is another issue. A lot of you clearly don't. But this is advocating that criminals should have rights on their data if you won't let your law enforcement get access to the last months worth of communication. If the facts regarding what the FBI want to do aren't moral/legal; Apple needs to speak out more and tell us. Not hide behind PR speak.
[doublepost=1455806951][/doublepost]
Don't confuse tech companies liaising with law enforcement to allow transfer of encrypted data (that's easy) rather than opening backdoors. A few are pursuing this technical backdoor agenda which is not even included in this situation. Read the facts.
This just isn't a valid comparison. See my post above. The FBI physically searching your house doesn't put the security of your neighbors house at risk.
Requiring Apple to build software to break in to iOS puts everyone at risk.
No. It's protecting the privacy rights of innocent Americans. That's the entire point of the 4th amendment.
If doing so means we can't track criminals this way, so be it. You can't violate all Americans constitutional rights to catch a few crooks. Find another way. It's not like the FBI was unable to investigate crimes before smart phones existed.
That isn't the same thing, I don't know why we need to confuse things with analogies as the original concept is simple enough anyway.
Look - if I was a terrorist and I knew the FBI can access iOS devices then I'd use something else to communicate and the attacks would carry on coming. Simple as that.
This legislation is pointless and eventually will only serve to spy on US citizens like they have been doing already - it's just now they have been caught out (Thanks to Snowden) they have to do it legally.
I don't doubt that Tim Cook believes everything he wrote in that letter. But as I said yesterday this is no longer a theoretical debate. I think it's going to take more than that letter for Apple to convince the public that "hacking" into this one phone, from a dead terrorist who killed 14 people and which is owned by the local government who has approved the "hacking".
If Apple helps the FBI access one iPhone, that some how leads to all iphones being accessible by all criminals and all governments around the world.
But I do. Both professionally and personally. Just because YOU say something doesn't make it so. Staying that I CLEARLY don't know something when you have zero idea who I am, just shows that you CLEARLY don't know how forums or the internet works. Unless of you course you are NRA/Pro-guns then nothing is going to change that lead and sulphur poisoned mind.
Invoking a All Writs Act is a prime example of misuse in the modern age. As is the incredibly stupid gun lack-of-controls.
Again, this isn't just hacking into one phone. It's creating a backdoor on every iOS device so you can be hacked by the government and whoever is smart enough to create a tool to do it themselves (Which will happen if the backdoor is created).
Your facts are wrong. Apple was ordered by a magistrate judge to create the backdoor. It therefore is a "court order," although subject to review by the judge (who outranks the magistrate). Incidentally, although chiding others for not reading Cook's essay, you apparently didn't notice that he refers twice to "opposing" an "order." He's referring to the magistrate's order.
This has nothing to do with the NSA. Here, after Apple initially refused the FBI's request, the FBI needed a court order and obtained one. And no, as a foreign citizen this doesn't directly affect your "rights." The issue, from Apple's perspective, is that once a backdoor is created, it is subject to abuse. You could be affected by the law of unintended consequences, i.e., a hacker using this would-be backdoor to gain access to your phone.
As a lawyer, I'm further troubled by the fact that this magistrate's order calls for Apple to create software that doesn't already exist. This, to me, is beyond the bounds of what can reasonably be expected by non-parties to a lawsuit, even if we assume the discovery sought is otherwise permissible.
A warrant permits the government to search for and seize something that already exists (physical property or information). What the FBI is attempting to do in this case is force Apple to develop something that does not already exist. This is exactly analogous to the FBI showing up at your door and telling you to put your life on hold and spend the next x months working for them involuntarily. Think "press gang".
This is a really dangerous precedent aside from the personal privacy/encryption issues.
I also think the government doesn't need Apple to crack this phone - I am 100% certain the NSA could do this through several means. Either the NSA doesn't want to play ball with the FBI or (more likely) the FBI found a case and a sympathetic judge to force the issue so they have an easy way to examine any iPhone seized without obtaining technical support from the NSA/CIA through the FISA court.
If there's an exploit it will inevitably be exploited. This isn't a slippery slope, it's inevitable.
Why the hell not? We have a President who ignores court orders all the time running around saying catch me if you can with his "pen and his phone" If it's good for Obama it should be good for Apple.
The terrorist is dead. You can't prosecute a dead body.
Meanwhile, if Apple complied, the software that would have to be developed would put all users privacy at risk.
You're either for privacy and information security or you aren't. There's no middle ground. There's no "only in this case". When it comes to information security, it's all or nothing.
- Status