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.
FBI Concerned With New Default Encryption Settings in iOS and Android Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh here comes the "boogeyman" scare tactics from the Gov. This really shows how little they regard the rest of us.
----------
Yea then Apple can launch single payer healthcare, end the wars in the middle east, make college free and abolish all student debt, and repair the infrastructure. So many possibilities.
----------
Yea then Apple can launch single payer healthcare, end the wars in the middle east, make college free and abolish all student debt, and repair the infrastructure. So many possibilities.
So... he's complaining because he has to follow due process? Yes, you wont be able to access "liberated" devices without the indited suspects approval. Cry me a ****ing river. The NSA probably already has enough back-doors into common devices anyways.
While I see your sarcasm, it's not like any of those acronym agencies are doing a very good at that list as-is.
While I see your sarcasm, it's not like any of those acronym agencies are doing a very good at that list as-is.
And "Apple Bank" here just made it policy not to store keys in their lockboxes. The FBI apparently doesn't like that, because they lack the capability to forcibly knock your front door down with some kind of tool.
Hah, yeah 3 other people said the same thing. I forgot maybe the most obvious 4 letter word of them all!
There totally are locks and vaults that advertise themselves as not being openable without the consent of the owner... it would defeat the purpose if a vault could be opened without it.
I guess the big difference is in marketing, though. Those locks and vaults don't mention the government in their marketing. But they don't do that because there's no big organization like PRISM just for opening every vault ever sold.
I guess the big difference is in marketing, though. Those locks and vaults don't mention the government in their marketing. But they don't do that because there's no big organization like PRISM just for opening every vault ever sold.
If I don't do anything wrong, why is it so important for them to be able to see my data? 
Privacy and being secure in your person and papers trumps law enforcements ability to do their job. If they cant see encrypted data, then they need to gather the data they can see or catch someone in the act.
Oh well if someone wants to say you're not allowed to look at my phone even if you think it might solve a crime. It's mine and last I checked, our government was designed to serve us and our constitution and bill of rights goes out of its way to limit the powers of the government.
To bad I say, go cry to someone else because I welcome anything that returns more privacy and control to the people. Even if it does mean someone baddies might get away and that the law enforcement might have to find different ways to intercept terrorism.
It is sad that they try to sell this with fear. Things could blow up, people might be kidnapped, think about terrorism. We need to be able to see everything they say. Sorry, the government has show in these recent years a lack of judgement with the powers they have been granted. They need to have those powers reigned in and they need to know that they will often run into a brick wall where they have no authority or power to circumvent when they are dealing with a United States citizen. Stand for privacy and control over your rights.
Privacy and being secure in your person and papers trumps law enforcements ability to do their job. If they cant see encrypted data, then they need to gather the data they can see or catch someone in the act.
Oh well if someone wants to say you're not allowed to look at my phone even if you think it might solve a crime. It's mine and last I checked, our government was designed to serve us and our constitution and bill of rights goes out of its way to limit the powers of the government.
To bad I say, go cry to someone else because I welcome anything that returns more privacy and control to the people. Even if it does mean someone baddies might get away and that the law enforcement might have to find different ways to intercept terrorism.
It is sad that they try to sell this with fear. Things could blow up, people might be kidnapped, think about terrorism. We need to be able to see everything they say. Sorry, the government has show in these recent years a lack of judgement with the powers they have been granted. They need to have those powers reigned in and they need to know that they will often run into a brick wall where they have no authority or power to circumvent when they are dealing with a United States citizen. Stand for privacy and control over your rights.
Aww shame! They're a little concerned they may not be able to warrantlessly spy on everything we do and say. Poor Big Brother, that must be a bit of a bummer.
I am unmoved by the claims that they need unfettered access to our private lives due to fears over criminal or terrorist activity.
Remember Ben Franklin's words, "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
I am unmoved by the claims that they need unfettered access to our private lives due to fears over criminal or terrorist activity.
Remember Ben Franklin's words, "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Anybody with eyes that can see knew this was coming. The Fascists do not believe in personal privacy, only in state control. This could be the big battle that will determine if the USA really has liberty or not.
Stay tuned. The end of America as America thinks it is may be at hand if the bad guys (US government) win this war over privacy and control.
Stay tuned. The end of America as America thinks it is may be at hand if the bad guys (US government) win this war over privacy and control.
No, it's really not the issue because there are other ways of getting evidence than off a phone! If all the evidence they have of a crime is on a phone and nowhere else then they have a flimsy case to begin with and are most likely just fishing for evidence, and that IS against the law in most civilized countries!
I agree with most of the sentiment here and appreciate the issue of privacy. I can understand that having access to the information may help some kind of investigation, but we're not taking a step back by any means if it's kept private. It'll just be like we/they don't have a phone.
So I write an encrypted message on a piece of paper that only I can decode the meaning of. Does our government ask Bic and Dunder Mifflin to know the code and help them understand what I did? (maybe a bit of a stretch for an analogy but I'll go there)
So I write an encrypted message on a piece of paper that only I can decode the meaning of. Does our government ask Bic and Dunder Mifflin to know the code and help them understand what I did? (maybe a bit of a stretch for an analogy but I'll go there)
This is B.S. - A close friend of mine at RAND made it clear that everything...EVERYTHING we post, say, text etc. is collected.
Obviously by Apple and Google stating they keep our stuff private, and the FBI coming out with 'concerns' like this, is designed to fool the bad guys into thinking they can use their iPhones etc. without being tracked.
It's a brilliant strategy don't you think? Only obvious to a few.
Obviously by Apple and Google stating they keep our stuff private, and the FBI coming out with 'concerns' like this, is designed to fool the bad guys into thinking they can use their iPhones etc. without being tracked.
It's a brilliant strategy don't you think? Only obvious to a few.
That's the part that made me chuckle as well. No one is above the law except "them".
So you have nothing on your phone you would want to keep private? Cool, give me all your usernames and passwords.
Until you do.
Someday, the government will criminalize something you are doing legally today.
And despite the prohibition on ex post facto law, they'll make it retroactive.
And they'll use their archive of information about you to convict you.
"own goal"
The Government, through the actions of Director Comey's FBI and the NSA, brought this upon themselves.
He might "understand" the need for privacy but it's something he and his predecessors should have considered earlier. This action by Apple and Google would not have happened had the FBI and NSA not placed themselves above the Constitution.
The Government, through the actions of Director Comey's FBI and the NSA, brought this upon themselves.
He might "understand" the need for privacy but it's something he and his predecessors should have considered earlier. This action by Apple and Google would not have happened had the FBI and NSA not placed themselves above the Constitution.
Some courts have found this to be a violation of the 5th amendment. Others have found it to be obstruction of justice or at least contempt of court.
It's not difficult to imagine a scenario where the penalty for not unlocking a phone would be less than the penalty for whatever they might find.
