Campaigners Rally to Support Apple's Stance on Government Backdoors

[Rigby]

There's a first time for everything. And read the order. Apple has the option to do this in their facility under their control. They aren't being forced to give a back door to all iOS devices. They need to open 1 phone. That's it.

Do you really believe that? Once the precedent is set, and the software created, the feds will come back for more, and it will likely become a routine instrument just like all the other once "extraordinary" powers that were granted after 9/11. And other governments, including oppressive ones, will demand the same access that the US government has. And so on.

 

[erzhik]

This is noble and all, but don't these people have jobs?!

Majority of Apple fanboys don't hold any jobs.

 

[Wondercow]

They have abided by a legal search warranty 20-70 times prior in unlocking or otherwise assisting in accessing a locked iDevice. Is the specific or broad enough for you? Now they are being presented with another legal search warrant/search order.

They've probably decrypted more than 70 devices over the years. But that's still not what you were claiming--what you were claiming as truth is actually false, and you're apparently upset that you got called out. The fact remains that it's not the situation you thought it was and your anger is misplaced.

This time they are choosing not to comply. They are choosing not to comply for reasons other than what you are claiming.

Really? Please cite the reasons I'm claiming.

They can abide by this order without giving the government the means to break all encryption on iDevices. Even if the Feds did manage to break the encryption Apple could easily write as new encryption pattern and release it in an update, just as they do when other security flaws are exposed.

What does this have to do with the fact that you were wrong in your assumption? Again, notice how I didn't speak to any of this; I called you out on your erroneous claim that this situation has happened before and Apple capitulated.

What is most likely is that Apple choosing to not comply simply as a PR stunt.

Why is that "most likely"? Just because it's what you assume, or want to believe, doesn't automatically make it the most likely scenario.

So for you, good sir, do not tell me to move on. You have presented nothing that has, or that should change my mind.

Yes I have, you just don't want to admit or accept it. You claimed this exact situation has happened before. It is fact that it hasn't. Move on.

 

[Wondercow]

My statement is that Apple has complied with these "types" of orders before. IS this one a little different? Sure? They are not giving away the kingdom as many here are claiming. Again, read the order. I never said the "EXACT" situation has happened before. I also have no anger. I deal with dopes like you all the time and I never get upset. For instance, I would not get impatient with a person who had a broken leg and was taking a long time to walk through a cross walk. In the same respect, you have a broken brain, and I will not get impatient or upset with you as you try to mentally hobble through this discussion.

You are being intentionally obtuse and nitpicking very small points in order to purposely cloud the issue. This is a common side effect of people with your particular mental disorder, I have dealt with it often, it doesn't bother me.

This type of order has never been issued before, and yes, I have read it. It's not nitpicking--this is a completely different circumstance than any before, so, by saying this type has happened is saying that this exact situation has happened.

As to anger, when one needs to resort to infantile name-calling it proves that one is angry. And you haven't addressed my post, you're conveniently side-stepping in favour of personal attacks

 

[ptb42]

What they didn't want to do was to build a backdoor into iOS as asked by the FBI, so the FBI could use that version of iOS to break into an iPhone if that iPhone helps any investigations.

You are the first person in the thread that I thought was a good place to reply. I wanted to post something that I just realized, and haven't seen anyone else post, or write.

If Apple were to build an iOS version that did this, it would work -- for the iPhone 5C and earlier. Or to state it another way, an iPhone or iPad with the A6 processor, and earlier. It wouldn't work (in a reasonable time) for an iDevice with an A7 (or later) processor.

The reason? The A7 introduced the Secure Enclave. Earlier versions had some of its features, but the Secure Enclave has an extremely important feature, with respect to this issue:

To further discourage brute-force passcode attacks, there are escalating time delays after the entry of an invalid passcode at the Lock screen. If Settings > Touch ID & Passcode > Erase Data is turned on, the device will automatically wipe after 10 consecutive incorrect attempts to enter the passcode. This setting is also available as an administrative policy through mobile device management (MDM) and Exchange ActiveSync, and can be set to a lower threshold.

On devices with an A7 or later A-series processor, the delays are enforced by the Secure Enclave. If the device is restarted during a timed delay, the delay is still enforced, with the timer starting over for the current period.

This is from: https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf

The delay escalates to 1 hour after 9 attempts. So, it would take over a year to exhaustively search the entire keyspace, of a 4-digit passcode. Of course, I'd check the common passcodes first (1111, 1234, etc.).

My point: a backdoor'ed iOS would only be useful for older iDevices. An relatively recent one would still be effectively secure, especially with a complex passcode.

 

[dannyyankou]

Sign this if you don't want your phone to be vulnerable to hacking-

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/apple-privacy-petition

 

[doelcm82]

You are the first person in the thread that I thought was a good place to reply. I wanted to post something that I just realized, and haven't seen anyone else post, or write.

If Apple were to build an iOS version that did this, it would work -- for the iPhone 5C and earlier. Or to state it another way, an iPhone or iPad with the A6 processor, and earlier. It wouldn't work (in a reasonable time) for an iDevice with an A7 (or later) processor.

The reason? The A7 introduced the Secure Enclave. Earlier versions had some of its features, but the Secure Enclave has an extremely important feature, with respect to this issue:

To further discourage brute-force passcode attacks, there are escalating time delays after the entry of an invalid passcode at the Lock screen. If Settings > Touch ID & Passcode > Erase Data is turned on, the device will automatically wipe after 10 consecutive incorrect attempts to enter the passcode. This setting is also available as an administrative policy through mobile device management (MDM) and Exchange ActiveSync, and can be set to a lower threshold.

On devices with an A7 or later A-series processor, the delays are enforced by the Secure Enclave. If the device is restarted during a timed delay, the delay is still enforced, with the timer starting over for the current period.

This is from: https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf

The delay escalates to 1 hour after 9 attempts. So, it would take over a year to exhaustively search the entire keyspace, of a 4-digit passcode. Of course, I'd check the common passcodes first (1111, 1234, etc.).

My point: a backdoor'ed iOS would only be useful for older iDevices. An relatively recent one would still be effectively secure, especially with a complex passcode.

My point: If Apple can be forced by court order to write new code to allow access to an older version of iOS, it sets a precedent. They can later be forced by court order (or by law) to design a back door into the "secure enclave". If the next terrorist uses an iPhone 7S that has a setting to erase the contents if you insert the wrong pentalobe screwdriver, on what grounds can Apple refuse to give the government a back door to retrieve erased data?

 

[Sanlitun]

This is noble and all, but don't these people have jobs?!

It's hard to take a point seriously when the picture is all Millennial hipsters who were going to hang out at the mall by the Apple store anyways..

 

[dejo]

Mod Note: This thread is closed temporarily to clean up all the off-topic bickering and insults. When it reopens, please remain civil and on-topic. Thank you.