Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

FBI Director 'Not Trying to Set Precedent' With iPhone Unlock Demand

rdowns said:
http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/18/no-apple-has-not-unlocked-70-iphones-for-law-enforcement/
Click to expand...

From your cited article:

It has not unlocked these iPhones — it has extracted data that was accessible while they were still locked.
Click to expand...

There may be technical distinctions between unlocking and extracting, but from a legal perspective, this article makes distinctions without differences. Whether it is unlocking or extracting, Apple has helped law enforcement in the past, and are refusing to do so now in spite of a court order directing them to do so.
 
CmdrLaForge said:
Apple should just give the FBI the information without giving them the key to anything. And this special iOS version could be tailored to the iPhones serial number in question. I saw Apples response claiming there servers are not save and someone could steal it from them. Well then Apple simply do not connect that computer to the internet. I guess Ethan Hunt still could get it but he could also unlock any phone so..
Click to expand...

Once the software is created law enforcement will ask, "well you did it before which means you can do it again". Just delete it again...

Oh but do it again now. Oh you can delete it now. Oh wait do it again! Just leave it in now that will be much easier. Kthnxbai your friends from the FBI.
 
H2SO4 said:
To answer your question directly, I wouldn’t be happy about it and would say no for as long as I could. Also I suspect that a lot of the people at this link felt the same as you did at one point. (This is why it needs to be discussed deeply without a load of that heart strings tugging crap both sides are putting forward).
But once I’ve been handed my writ……

That said, all over the world you know that half of these people are on Facebook/Twitter giving away the secrets of themselves and family and friends without permission. Can’t say how annoyed I was to find that a friend of mine had plastered photos of me all over Facebook which are then of given names and details by others.
In addition, you know that ISPs/Telecoms everywhere have to keep years of emails, call records and internet browsing records for everybody right?

How much privacy do you think you have left?
Click to expand...
That happens, and to answer your question: "Sadly not nearly as much as I'd want", but as a poster on Facebook or Twitter, you, and you only, control what info you decide to post there. I suspect most savvy terrorists, and with the constant exposure of crimes solved by cracking seized computers, increasingly even ordinary career criminals with an IQ over 110, wouldn't leave an incriminating trail of evidence in their search history.

Terrorists are getting smarter and more sophisticated. Weakening our smartphones with forced decryption as an option, will move the terrorists to alternate methods of communicating their evil intentions, thus making us no safer, while all law abiding citizens will once again have been scammed to give up more privacy and freedom under the guise of patriotism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001, Benjamin Frost and LizKat
Meh. Apple will do it sooner or later. If not this time, the FBI will simply set up another false flag and try again, maybe with another manufacturer.
 
For crying out loud, leave the good-intentioned American companies alone and stop hiring terrorists in the first place!
 
I mean, maybe he's really not.

Doesn't mean that someone else won't try to abuse it later.
 
Popeye206 said:
Seems to me a good way to end this is to have Apple invite the FBI into Cupertino... work on the issue together and anything done is purely kept in-house.

Trust me... the last thing I want is to see a back-door mandated on smart phones. It would open the door to cyber terrorism which IMHO is our biggest threat. Not to mention the fun the hackers would have just trying to crack our phones and steal information.
Click to expand...
That won't end it. The FBI or some other law enforcement agency will then have a different case that will tug at your heartstrings just as hard or harder, and you will want Apple to invite THEM to Cupertino. Then your ex's lawyer finds a friendly judge to collect your phone and take it to Cupertino so they can find evidence to give your ex full custody of the kids. There will be a court order, and you and Apple will have to comply.

All three cases might be for the best. (Maybe your ex deserves full custody rights.) It doesn't affect me, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: duffman9000 and LizKat
duffman9000 said:
Once the software is created law enforcement will ask, "well you did it before which means you can do it again". Just delete it again...

Oh but do it again now. Oh you can delete it now. Oh wait do it again! Just leave it in now that will be much easier. Kthnxbai your friends from the FBI.
Click to expand...

If there is a legal court order why not? They can also get a search warrant for anyones house by court order and go through your underwear.
 
macs4nw said:
wouldn't leave an incriminating trail of evidence
Click to expand...

Well exactly. The San Bernardino iPhone 5C belonged to the guy's employer. The guy and his wife destroyed the electronics they personally owned. What's on a work phone? Work stuff.

This is a pathetic request to use as a wedge for trying to make Apple create an iOS with a backdoor.

The only reason this particular iPhone has been put into play is that "deterring terrorism" has been a strong selling point in the USA ever since 2001. This time the overreach has been too obvious, the potential benefit too small and the potential cost too great.

Surely the FBI realizes that a backdoor to encrypted data is a handout to state-sponsored and freelance hackers and criminals. Cyberterrorism is already rampant. Let the FBI work on that.

CmdrLaForge said:
If there is a legal court order why not? They can also get a search warrant for anyones house by court order and go through your underwear.
Click to expand...

You know this is not the same as complying with a search warrant. Apple has already tried to provide technical assistance to the FBI in this case using existing knowledge and capability. This request mandates construction of entirely new product by a corporation. Further it diminishes the value of existing product and hollows out the achievements of the company's employees. Not to mention the main issue here which is that creating a backdoor for use by anyone makes it potentially available to anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spinnyd, dk001, jettredmont and 1 other person
tgara said:
Remember, two years ago, nobody was making any of the current "sky is falling" arguments, and the iOS was less secure.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Two years ago, Apple didn't have ApplePay and HealthKit and HomeKit. Now your phone has health and financial data, and the ability to unlock your front door.

And you're wrong about nobody making "sky is falling" arguments. It's in response to WikiLeaks, data breaches like what happened to Target, "Fapgate", and many other incidents that Apple (and many other companies) have stepped up their security.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jettredmont and LizKat
bbeagle said:
I've thought about that too - but as I understand it, you can put your phone into DFU mode (Device Firmware Upgrade mode), connect your phone to iTunes, and without a passcode, you can update your operating system.

The only firmware allowed to update the phone in this mode is Apple-signed code. So, yes, I think Apple can do this. This is sort of Apple's backdoor that exists already.

Apple doesn't want to create this version of the OS, because Apple can't just destroy it, it will be needed every other day when the FBI wants to unlock yet another phone. So, this OS will have to be kept somewhere within Apple. This opens it up to the possibility of an employee leaking this OS out somewhere defeating all of Apple's security. Additionally, the employees who create this could simply re-create it out in the wild when they leave Apple, as they know how to do it.
Click to expand...
Turn off your phone, hold the home button and plug it in to iTunes -- it allows you to "update" instead of restore
 
The security measures are there to protect the innocent's privacy from being violated. If Apple adds software to disable security features in order for FBI to brute-force access a device, then that opens a huge security hole that any hacker could use to get around the phones security.

I hope justice can be served to a madman without requiring all innocent people to open their doors for attack by anyone, government or otherwise. If all evidence for justice is locked away in that phone, then justice fails us and that sucks.

Maybe they should just take McAfee's offer to hack the phone for the evidence...
 
  • Like
Reactions: jettredmont
CmdrLaForge said:
Apple should just give the FBI the information without giving them the key to anything. And this special iOS version could be tailored to the iPhones serial number in question. I saw Apples response claiming there servers are not save and someone could steal it from them. Well then Apple simply do not connect that computer to the internet. I guess Ethan Hunt still could get it but he could also unlock any phone so..
Click to expand...

This is not an option, Apple have been issued with a court order that if allowed to stand would set a precedent that this kind of unlocking is allowed and indeed would be required. It wouldn't therefore do Apple any good to restrict access to the software as the government/FBI/NSA could demand they do it again and again. Even if they destroyed the software they could be required to write it again and again. The order effectively turns Apple into a branch of the US government, the very same engineers voluntarily employed by Apple to write the software that keeps iOS secure would be required to undo their own work, they would become de facto government employees.

This is much bigger than this one case, Apple knows it and the FBI knows it too.
[doublepost=1456160000][/doublepost]
tgara said:
From your cited article:



There may be technical distinctions between unlocking and extracting, but from a legal perspective, this article makes distinctions without differences. Whether it is unlocking or extracting, Apple has helped law enforcement in the past, and are refusing to do so now in spite of a court order directing them to do so.
Click to expand...

That is irrelevant. Apples past cooperation does not legally compel them to keep helping, even if the cases were similar, which they are not. No legal precedent was set in those cases, in stark contrast to this case that would indeed set legal precedent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
MacRumors said:
"The San Bernardino litigation isn't about trying to set a precedent or send any kind of message," Comey said
Click to expand...

But you will, you ...ing goof.

This guy's been railing on how phone encryption is making surveillance difficult for law enforcement and combating terrorism, now he's got his ace in the hole.

If this fails he's just going to wait to double-down on some heinous child predator case.

I've seen less transparent eyeglasses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaTOAGU
"The San Bernardino litigation isn't about trying to set a precedent or send any kind of message..."

It might not be about that, but that's exactly what IT WILL DO. Geez, a 1st grader can figure that out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaTOAGU
mytdave said:
"The San Bernardino litigation isn't about trying to set a precedent or send any kind of message..."

It might not be about that, but that's exactly what IT WILL DO. Geez, a 1st grader can figure that out.
Click to expand...

Exactly right. This it what annoys me so much about this man, as Director of the FBI his integrity should be above reproach but he's being completely disingenuous here and always is about this subject.
 
H2SO4 said:
Just to play devils advocate. The other precedent is, "Global corporation decides they are above the law, snubs FBI request” ?
Click to expand...

No, actually any individual or entity has the right to say "no" and appeal the decision. Apple is not stuck unless/until the case is heard by the Supreme Court. Hopefully they can tie this up in litigation for years, or at least until we get enough elected representatives with a spine who will pass legislation that will block the FBIs backdoor attempt, and set law to protect encryption/privacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skinned66
CaTOAGU said:
That is irrelevant. Apples past cooperation does not legally compel them to keep helping, even if the cases were similar, which they are not. No legal precedent was set in those cases, in stark contrast to this case that would indeed set legal precedent.
Click to expand...

Even if you are right (which you are not btw), the valid court order does indeed compel them to help in THIS case. See paragraphs 2 and 3, especially.

https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/6053155/in-the-matter-of-the-search.0.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back