FBI Concerned With New Default Encryption Settings in iOS and Android Devices

[jmpage2]

hate to divulge the solution to my enemies but.....


also, still trying to figure out how all of you gripe about government intrusion, and blindly pull the "D" lever over and over again

You are kidding yourselves if you think "R" is any better. Prism started under "R". Turning prisons into money making big business and locking people up with mandatory minimum sentences started with "R".

Both parties only have interest in what benefits the party leadership and politicians as well as the very wealthy who bankroll the elections.

This used to be our country but we let them steal it.

 

[rGiskard]

Wouldn't it be more sensible for everyone to keep things they do not want discovered by law enforcement off their phones? I know I do...

Unless you leave your phone at home, law enforcement can track your movements. They can analyze your call records and learn about everyone you call. They can compare your home internet and phone internet usage to see what you're hiding. If you use Tor, then have you flagged for closer scrutiny.

That is too much power for any government to have. I don't believe our current government will use this to suppress dissent and impose tyranny, but letting the power accumulate virtually guarantees that at some future time, it WILL be used. It may 100 years from now, but historically, such power never goes unused.

 

[mrxak]

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.

I think it will take a new amendment that declares the contents of people's minds immune to government investigation, and creates a provision for external memory devices that are considered part of people's minds. As technology progresses, humanity is evolving to be partly digital. I'm not saying we're cyborgs yet, but pretty close in the way we use our devices and the ways in which we communicate with other people, and we're only going to get closer and closer in the coming decades.

So what, when people do start replacing body parts, including parts of their brains, with technology, will the government try to claim they should be allowed access to the data stored on them? I'm very worried they will absolutely try to get their hands on that data, and even with a warrant I have a lot of problems with that.

Nearer-term, imagine the Apple Watch. Data is stored on it, some of it may be stored "in the cloud" or transmitted via networks to other devices you own. Some of this data is the sort of deeply personal and intimate data the government would likely be unable to get through traditional means. I don't imagine many judges would give the police a warrant to listen to somebody's heart beat, for example, but that data will be there on your Apple Watch, possibly transmitted by you to devices or individuals you've expressly authorized.

Don't think the police will ever want to get that data? What if you're suspected of murder, and they know you own an Apple Watch, but don't have any witnesses or physical evidence you were at the crime scene. If they could get heart rate data on you at the time of the murder, and your heart rate was elevated from the adrenaline and exertion required to stab somebody a bunch of times, I guarantee you the police would like to present that data as evidence in court.

I also guarantee you some big government agency is going to think up the idea of monitoring everybody's heart data constantly, in order to predict and solve crimes and terrorism without any other evidence. More sensors are coming, more personal data collection is coming, and governments and law enforcement agencies are going to want access.

We need protection from this future, the Founding Fathers had no way to predict. Sadly the 10th Amendment is weaker than ever these days, or a new amendment probably wouldn't be required.

 

[skunk]

Unless you leave your phone at home, law enforcement can track your movements. They can analyze your call records and learn about everyone you call. They can compare your home internet and phone internet usage to see what you're hiding. If you use Tor, then have you flagged for closer scrutiny.

That is too much power for any government to have. I don't believe our current government will use this to suppress dissent and impose tyranny, but letting the power accumulate virtually guarantees that at some future time, it WILL be used. It may 100 years from now, but historically, such power never goes unused.

The fact remains, if you do have something to hide, you would be well advised to adjust your behaviour accordingly.

 

[Heltik]

Next time I kidnap a child, at least I'll know I can store their location in my iPhone in case I forget where I left them.

 

[macidiot]

Comey, you want to see the information?

Get a warrant, seize the phone, and have a court compel the owner to unlock it.

In other words, prove to someone other than yourself that there is a good reason to see someone's personal information.

And while your at it, try reading the Constitution.

 

[iLLUMI]

FBI?
I thought FBI stood for Fully Bendable iPhone? No?

I know I know, enough already with the bending iPhone jokes.

 

[skunk]

We need protection from this future

Too late. The Government is already allowed to search your phone, with a warrant. The issue is not permission, it is capability.

 

[gnasher729]

i have nothing to hide...

Get a life. I've got lots of things to hide

 

[koruki]

Haha, and of course he plays the "think of the children card".
Boy, that's getting super old!
Glassed Silver:mac

Think of the children, go clean out those churches first. Not my iPhone.

 

[Edd.Dantes]

This is akin to the gun control argument.

When you take away guns (from law abiding citizens), criminals will still have them.

If you take away security (encryption), criminals will still be criminals and circumvent/evade the law.

Just because there is more security in these OS's doesn't mean criminals will suddenly start trusting their phone with the nefarious details of their enterprise.

This FBI guy is just hoping people are stupid enough to agree with him. Americans are generally stupid but not when it comes to privacy. I'm live in the USA, so simmer down.

 

[gnasher729]

Iphone 6, the choice of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

Al-Qaeda maybe. ISIS thinks the iPhone is the work of the devil and wouldn't touch it.

 

[aaronvan]

****** the NSA, FBI, and the rest of the security organs.

 

[skunk]

Al-Qaeda maybe. ISIS thinks the iPhone is the work of the devil and wouldn't touch it.

No, that's the iPhone666.

 

[Edd.Dantes]

Comey, you want to see the information?

Get a warrant, seize the phone, and have a court compel the owner to unlock it.

In other words, prove to someone other than yourself that there is a good reason to see someone's personal information.

And while your at it, try reading the Constitution.

Thank you for understanding liberty and how this country legislates from the bench these days. Also, the alphabet organizations in this country make their own laws, on the fly. America's greatest illusions are safety, privacy and freedom.

 

[phalseHUD]

FBI create smokescreen

If it hasn't already been said, these "concerns" the FBI have could just be a smokescreen to give citizens a false sense of security in the commas they use. Excuse my cynicism here but I believe I'm justified based on previous revelations regarding privacy.

 

[Vanilla Face]

IMHO, Apple did this as response to the government abusing the system; asking for data when it wasn't necessary. I'm sure if there were a limited number of cases of the government requesting info it wouldn't have come down to this. I'm sure it's been a huge waste of Apple resources and now they don't have to worry about it.

 

[Atomic Walrus]

Hail Hydra.

 

[galenmd]

I think it will take a new amendment that declares the contents of people's minds immune to government investigation, and creates a provision for external memory devices that are considered part of people's minds. As technology progresses, humanity is evolving to be partly digital. I'm not saying we're cyborgs yet, but pretty close in the way we use our devices and the ways in which we communicate with other people, and we're only going to get closer and closer in the coming decades.

So what, when people do start replacing body parts, including parts of their brains, with technology, will the government try to claim they should be allowed access to the data stored on them? I'm very worried they will absolutely try to get their hands on that data, and even with a warrant I have a lot of problems with that.

Nearer-term, imagine the Apple Watch. Data is stored on it, some of it may be stored "in the cloud" or transmitted via networks to other devices you own. Some of this data is the sort of deeply personal and intimate data the government would likely be unable to get through traditional means. I don't imagine many judges would give the police a warrant to listen to somebody's heart beat, for example, but that data will be there on your Apple Watch, possibly transmitted by you to devices or individuals you've expressly authorized.

Don't think the police will ever want to get that data? What if you're suspected of murder, and they know you own an Apple Watch, but don't have any witnesses or physical evidence you were at the crime scene. If they could get heart rate data on you at the time of the murder, and your heart rate was elevated from the adrenaline and exertion required to stab somebody a bunch of times, I guarantee you the police would like to present that data as evidence in court.

I also guarantee you some big government agency is going to think up the idea of monitoring everybody's heart data constantly, in order to predict and solve crimes and terrorism without any other evidence. More sensors are coming, more personal data collection is coming, and governments and law enforcement agencies are going to want access.

We need protection from this future, the Founding Fathers had no way to predict. Sadly the 10th Amendment is weaker than ever these days, or a new amendment probably wouldn't be required.

Holy ******. This was an amazing post

 

[aaronvan]

Ficke sie FBI, mein Freunde. Ficke them good.

 

[chrmjenkins]

I don't follow, perhaps because you don't either. Just this year, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that cell phone data is protected from warrantless search. The real concern at issue here is whether an individual can prevent a search even after a search warrant is issued by a court.

That's actually exactly what I was addressing. I'm having trouble comprehending that you didn't get that I was attempting to do so.

 

[mrxak]

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.

You have to assume whatever it is they think they'll find is worse than contempt of court. Maybe you got a virus that downloaded some kiddie porn, and you're guilty without even knowing it. Maybe you've accidentally received a phone call from a terrorist who misdialed, and now you're on a watch list and the fact you've marked a date on your calendar coincidentally the same way as some sleeper cell means you're part of a bomb plot. Maybe you visited a website that cached a copyrighted image on your phone and you had no idea. There's an unlimited number of scenarios where you could get in serious trouble without even realizing you're in serious trouble, and there's so many laws that it's impossible not to run afoul of a few as you go about your benign business.

So whenever you have people in authority yelling at you to decrypt your stuff, the smartest thing you can do is politely decline and call a lawyer. Maybe you spend a few months in jail for contempt of court, that's likely better than whatever nightmare scenario you might have stumbled into by no fault of your own. You have to assume that since they arrested you, they suspect you of doing something bad for some reason. Even if you know you're innocent, that doesn't guarantee they can't convict you anyway.

Besides, the only reason a few judges are locking people up for contempt is because they think it'll work. If enough innocent people refuse, and do their jail time, however unfair that might be, they'll be forced to stop trying that tactic and go back to doing actual police work to find evidence.

 

[gnasher729]

Some courts have found this (refusing to give up encrytion keys) 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.

It's dependent on the situation, and quite simple: If the fact that you know the encryption key by itself is evidence against you, then you cannot be told to give up the encryption key. If the fact that you know the encryption key is not evidence against you, then you have no right to protect the encrypted data.

For example if you have an encrypted hard drive and you claim you just bought it from eBay and didn't have time yet to reformat it and you don't know the encrytion key, then decrypting the drive proves that you were lying - you don't have to decrypt it. If it is known that the encrypted drive is yours and you used it every day in the last week, you have to decrypt it.

 

[Prof.]

Boo ****ing hoo! Cry me a river, FBI/CIA/NSA.

 

[powerstrokin]

If it hasn't already been said, these "concerns" the FBI have could just be a smokescreen to give citizens a false sense of security in the commas they use. Excuse my cynicism here but I believe I'm justified based on previous revelations regarding privacy.

I hear you. Most information on the phone is backed up to the cloud. While Apple has said they will not allow access to the servers, they have not specifically ruled out that they would block access thru back doors or whatever other means.

On top of that, the path from phone to server is still tee'd anyways, with one branch going right to the NSA. They built the damn storage facility in Utah for this, in case anyone here has forgotten. That's just one facility THAT WE KNOW OF. Anyone really think there isn't more? We have black sites dotting the whole earth.

Get real. This is a smokescreen as phalseHUD said.

Your data is not yours anymore, sad to say.