Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I had to come here and share this... Just had an interesting conversation with a business guy I know. He's a hardcore Trump supporter who believes that government should get out of the corporate world, get rid of regulations and out of our lives. He complained how companies have to comply with all these "crazy" labor and environmental requirements. Anyway... I tried to change the topic and asked him about his new phone. Big mistake.

He spent the next five minutes literally yelling about how Apple is "communist and supports terrorist" because they would not unlock iPhones of the terror suspect. He thinks Apple should help the government. I asked about the point he made earlier... you know, about government getting out of our lives and not compelling corporation to comply with government regulations? Crickets...

Hypocrisy and stupidity from Trump-loving Republicans is amazing these days. They really do create their own reality...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ravenstar
The government was able to track and arrest criminals long before there were smart phones. There are only 2 possible reason for the FBI wanting weak encryption; 1) they are just lazy, or 2) they just want to spy on everyone.

I disagree with both reasons.


You are oversimplifying a complex problem of balancing privacy versus security It's not an either/or problem where law enforcement is either good or evil. In the past, information wasn't sent and stored in encrypted form. Criminals used non-encrypted means such as landlines, mail, paper records, etc., that could be intercepted or discovered. People felt as strong, actually probably felt stronger than the current generation, about the privacy of their "persons, houses, papers, and effects" as people do with their cell phone data, and we have always had to balance the trade off of effective law enforcement versus the 4th Amendment.

I don't support a back door approach because the government has proven itself incapable of containing such a key, but reasonable people will struggle with the question of how to deal with encryption when it is used by terrorists to hide a plot to release chemical weapons on a city, or a someone has been murdered and the evidence is on the phone, or a group trafficking children as sex slaves is able to operate by means of encryption. If we could move beyond vilifying people that we disagree with, there might be a technological solution that would satisfy most people.
 
I had to come here and share this... Just had an interesting conversation with a business guy I know. He's a hardcore Trump supporter who believes that government should get out of the corporate world, get rid of regulations and out of our lives. He complained how companies have to comply with all these "crazy" labor and environmental requirements. Anyway... I tried to change the topic and asked him about his new phone. Big mistake.

He spent the next five minutes literally yelling about how Apple is "communist and supports terrorist" because they would not unlock iPhones of the terror suspect. He thinks Apple should help the government. I asked about the point he made earlier... you know, about government getting out of our lives and not compelling corporation to comply with government regulations? Crickets...

Hypocrisy and stupidity from Trump-loving Republicans is amazing these days. They really do create their own reality...

Yes, the government should stay out of our lives completely. He was right about trhe first thing. And wrong about the second.
 
There is a way around it; serve the warrant forcing people to enter the passcode. If they refuse, then they can serve jail time until they give up.

Companies should and must not be forced to weaken security just so governments can access the data. Governments are not entitled to everything, period.

Just enter it wrong 10x and watch the phone get wiped. :)
 
I had to come here and share this... Just had an interesting conversation with a business guy I know. He's a hardcore Trump supporter who believes that government should get out of the corporate world, get rid of regulations and out of our lives. He complained how companies have to comply with all these "crazy" labor and environmental requirements. Anyway... I tried to change the topic and asked him about his new phone. Big mistake.

He spent the next five minutes literally yelling about how Apple is "communist and supports terrorist" because they would not unlock iPhones of the terror suspect. He thinks Apple should help the government. I asked about the point he made earlier... you know, about government getting out of our lives and not compelling corporation to comply with government regulations? Crickets...

Hypocrisy and stupidity from Trump-loving Republicans is amazing these days. They really do create their own reality...


You hit all the talking points in your story-- "business," "guy," "hates the environment, " "hates labor," "Trump supporter," "Republican," (although you could have worked in that he was leering at at the waitress and didn't tip her), but now that you got that political attack out of your system do you have anything to contribute to the discussion as to possible solutions to a difficult problem that despite your attempt, shouldn't be in an "us versus them" approach as all reasonable people want to figure out how to protect privacy while also protecting people from criminals?
 
Um... the FBI already has full access to every state's drivers license database.. with pics of your face. They already have that information. Will the iPhone X make it better? Nope! Not unless they find a way to pull that information off the physical device... one at a time.
Umm, I’m talking about them now being able to unlock your phone.
 
I had to come here and share this... Just had an interesting conversation with a business guy I know. He's a hardcore Trump supporter who believes that government should get out of the corporate world, get rid of regulations and out of our lives. He complained how companies have to comply with all these "crazy" labor and environmental requirements. Anyway... I tried to change the topic and asked him about his new phone. Big mistake.

He spent the next five minutes literally yelling about how Apple is "communist and supports terrorist" because they would not unlock iPhones of the terror suspect. He thinks Apple should help the government. I asked about the point he made earlier... you know, about government getting out of our lives and not compelling corporation to comply with government regulations? Crickets...

Hypocrisy and stupidity from Trump-loving Republicans is amazing these days. They really do create their own reality...
Yes, also if you ask about Putting America First® but then ask about supporting Israel. But the Democrat party has similar problems. One example is if you just take what you said and flip it. The only parties that are honest to their values are the two "third parties," probably because they don't have any voter base to appeal to.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: iMi
This is why I'll only buy Apple devices. Literally, the only company I trust with my data right now is Apple.
Really? They have already proven that they can't be trusted either.
[doublepost=1508871591][/doublepost]
There is a way around it; serve the warrant forcing people to enter the passcode. If they refuse, then they can serve jail time until they give up.

Companies should and must not be forced to weaken security just so governments can access the data. Governments are not entitled to everything, period.
Exactly, in other words follow legal procedures to obtain the information. I am still surprised that no company has implemented something like try to unlock the phone with a specific finger or set of fingers x number of times and the phone will completely and securely be erased, seems like a complete solution to the problem that way, no data would be left to look at, they can have my passcode, who cares?
[doublepost=1508871801][/doublepost]
You hit all the talking points in your story-- "business," "guy," "hates the environment, " "hates labor," "Trump supporter," "Republican," (although you could have worked in that he was leering at at the waitress and didn't tip her), but now that you got that political attack out of your system do you have anything to contribute to the discussion as to possible solutions to a difficult problem that despite your attempt, shouldn't be in an "us versus them" approach as all reasonable people want to figure out how to protect privacy while also protecting people from criminals?
Honestly, I am a business guy and republic, I support Trump over the other choices we had (all were pretty ugly) and even I think Apple was right on not unlocking the phone, even if they had the technical ability to do so, which is doubtful to begin with.

We already do have a system in place that protects privacy while at the same time protects us from criminals, it is called getting a warrant to require the potential criminal to provide their passcode, it is simple and straight forward, follow the law of the land and you get both.
 
What do you think is the overall probability the FBI will arrest you and demand access to the data on your smartphone - you, Joe Shmo? Haven't exactly been reading tons of articles about innocent people getting their phones confiscated and tapped.

Now, what do you think is the overall probablility the FBI will arrest and demand access to smartphone data on a terrorist suspect?

Solution: Encrypt everyone's data to protect our privacy from the bad, bad police and FBI.
 
There are more guns in the USA than iPhones. There are over 10,000 people murdered by guns every year (and what's worse, 20,000 suicides using guns). Fear of terrorism is totally irrational.


Over 10,000 people were murdered WITH guns.. Big difference..


James
 
You are oversimplifying a complex problem of balancing privacy versus security It's not an either/or problem where law enforcement is either good or evil. In the past, information wasn't sent and stored in encrypted form. Criminals used non-encrypted means such as landlines, mail, paper records, etc., that could be intercepted or discovered. People felt as strong, actually probably felt stronger than the current generation, about the privacy of their "persons, houses, papers, and effects" as people do with their cell phone data, and we have always had to balance the trade off of effective law enforcement versus the 4th Amendment.

I don't support a back door approach because the government has proven itself incapable of containing such a key, but reasonable people will struggle with the question of how to deal with encryption when it is used by terrorists to hide a plot to release chemical weapons on a city, or a someone has been murdered and the evidence is on the phone, or a group trafficking children as sex slaves is able to operate by means of encryption. If we could move beyond vilifying people that we disagree with, there might be a technological solution that would satisfy most people.

Not really, we are talking about a government here in the USA that has passed laws that say police departments can take someone's possession as long as they think the person was involved in a crime. No court, no trial, no redress for the innocent, just an officer's decision to take the brand new Mercedes. All in the name of fighting crime? I think not. It is in the name of police power.

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty. Well its gone. What ever happened to a system of laws, they are gone. Under this environment no matter how much common sense you think applies, it does not. Why? Because the need to get your private information has nothing, nothing to do with protecting you. Again the Supreme Court has ruled that the police have no duty to protect you. The have one job, to collect people to put before a judge, nothing else. Breaking into people's phone has nothing to do with this. Just because someone said something, or talked to someone, or had some dissident idea, does not make them guilty of crime.

What we need is real police work, not a bunch of hackers setting around a computer terminal trying to find someone they can pin a crime on to make their weekly quota.
 
  • Like
Reactions: extrachrispy
What do you think is the overall probability the FBI will arrest you and demand access to the data on your smartphone - you, Joe Shmo? Haven't exactly been reading tons of articles about innocent people getting their phones confiscated and tapped.

Now, what do you think is the overall probablility the FBI will arrest and demand access to smartphone data on a terrorist suspect?

Solution: Encrypt everyone's data to protect our privacy from the bad, bad police and FBI.

Customs agents at the airport can demand access to your smartphone when you make re-entry into this country if they have a reason to believe that something is fishy...


James
 
  • Like
Reactions: extrachrispy
Customs agents at the airport can demand access to your smartphone when you make re-entry into this country if they have a reason to believe that something is fishy...
So? You can already be physically detained, and have your luggage searched. Search my stupid phone, I really don't care. And if you care so much - exactly what are you hiding?

Imagine the incredible power terror networks have - all planning data, recordings, maps, all communications, photos, etc. etc. are all safely encrypted. Searching someone's home is a joke - store everything on your phone. All they can get you for are bomb-making materials, that's about it.

I can just see the future tragedies left unsolved - "Sorry, we can't find the killers. No data trail, everything's encrypted". All so that your d*ick pics and lame FB posts are safe...
 
  • Like
Reactions: danny_w
Over 10,000 people were murdered WITH guns.. Big difference..


James

Excellent point. In 2017 so far we have 80,000 from unintended Hospital Infection, 204,000 from Medical Errors, 284,000 from Tobacco, and 27,000 from Drunk Driving. It seems to me that if people really wanted to do the right thing we would concentrate on some of these issues that are killing more people instead of guns and terrorism. But the focus on guns and terrorism is not about guns and terrorism, it is just a smoke screen for political power, and enhancing the ruling class.
 
Let's just say for argument's sake that you are right (which I don't personally believe you are), but let's just say that you are. There are a couple of problems with this: First, Apple does NOT have the decryption keys, that is not the way the system is built. Even if they wanted to or were forced to by the FBI, there is nothing for them to "give up." The entire encryption/decryption system lives inside each individual phone.

Secondly, even if they DID build their system where they (Apple) DID have the decryption keys, every expert I ever read or listened to says that there's a 99% chance that this exploit WILL always end up in the wild, meaning that any hacker out there will be able to get their hands on it and then what? How "Safe" will we be then? What if the terrorists get their hands on it? What then? I'm sure you'd be one of the first to go out there screaming and yelling at Apple with a "How could they let this happen?" rant.

People really need to stop with this "ticking time-bomb" scenario and how this is the only way to stop the next bomb. We have highly capable intelligence and law enforcement officials in this country and use a wide array of tactics to uncover such scenarios (and with a high success rate nonetheless). If this is the ONLY way that authorities can stop the next "ticking time-bomb," then we have a lot more to worry about then our stupid phones. You need to stop watching the TV series 24 and start reading the Bill of Rights.

P.S. And just because we are doing or did nothing wrong or illegal, doesn't give you OR the government the right to know everything about me or anyone else's privacy. You might also want to pick up a history book or two on that subject.

Indeed. Between CALEA and pen registers, "they" can get a warrant to get a wiretap, which occurs within the telephone company, not within the user's iPhone. Note that that is easily thwarted via VoIP apps that use end-to-end encryption, many of which are offered via third-party developers.

Fortunately, this is a defense-in-depth sort of thing. Most bad actors aren't going to be smart enough to use encryption; they'll use the PSTN (or today's digital equivalent), and NSA will snarf up the conversation quite handily.

The remaining tiny fraction who ARE smart enough to use encrypted comms will also be smart enough to jailbreak their phones and install whatever apps they want, so banning encrypted VoIP apps from the app store won't accomplish the goal of "keeping us safe;" all it will do is deny us privacy.
[doublepost=1508876074][/doublepost]
So? You can already be physically detained, and have your luggage searched. Search my stupid phone, I really don't care. And if you care so much - exactly what are you hiding?

Recently, a NASA engineer, a U.S. citizen with a foreign-sounding name, was forced to unlock his phone. Customs took a complete image of it. There was trade-secret stuff on that phone.

What am I hiding? My financial data, my social network, my personal photos, my Keychain, access to every web login I possess, access to my home network, and on and on. Are you going to seriously tell me that I should trust the same government who GAVE my SF-86 to China to keep the rest of that private?

Imagine the incredible power terror networks have - all planning data, recordings, maps, all communications, photos, etc. etc. are all safely encrypted. Searching someone's home is a joke - store everything on your phone. All they can get you for are bomb-making materials, that's about it.

I can just see the future tragedies left unsolved - "Sorry, we can't find the killers. No data trail, everything's encrypted". All so that your d*ick pics and lame FB posts are safe...

Any terror network sophisticated enough to use encryption is also sophisticated enough to jailbreak their phones and use an app that the U.S. government doesn't have the keys to. The problem you cite above then still exists, and all of us have given away our privacy for nothing.
[doublepost=1508876361][/doublepost]
It would be much better if Apple started bending over backwards to help law enforcement, else there will be consequences for Apple and its users that will be a lot worse for everyone's security.

I ask again: I should trust the same government that gave my SF-86 away to China with a backdoor to my iPhone?

Not. A. Chance.
[doublepost=1508876455][/doublepost]
Well said. All luggage through the airport must have a lock the TSA can open. Eventually I believe the government will take a similar approach.

This is the same TSA whose employees have been caught stealing from luggage, right?
[doublepost=1508876567][/doublepost]
You’re making up a fictional doomsday scenario. Good for a laugh, but not really accurate in terms of what’s going on now.

And what are all of the people talking about terrorist doomsday scenarios doing?
[doublepost=1508876821][/doublepost]
One thing can't be denied: If your child is kidnapped, Apple or Android, you'd be begging the governments to crack that device no matter your postion before. lol

#include <hitchens/razor.h>
[doublepost=1508878332][/doublepost]
This argument is annoying. You just simply don't take into account the fact that long before there were smartphones, most of the communication wasn't encrypted between two devices you simply cannot access.
I could plan everything on an encrypted phone and nobody could ever find out what i said, who i planned to kill or whatever people do.
So yeah, you can do any detective work you want, but even then you're allowed to break into a safe if you have a reason to, which you can't do with a phone (the equivalent of a numeric safe).

Say you do get into the safe, and all of the documents are written in Navajo.

Now what?
[doublepost=1508878763][/doublepost]
If your family was killed by a terrorist, and they couldn't solve the crime because all planning data and info was encrypted on iPhones, would you be saying that?

Be honest.

If, in the ten-thousand-times-less-likely-than-a-fatal-lightning-strike instance that my family was killed by a terrorist, and the even-less-likely-case that "they" couldn't solve the crime because all of the planning data and info was encrypted on iPhones, and "they" were too incompetent to make use of the vast amounts of unencrypted metadata that went into generating what's on that iPhone, then yes, I would still be saying that there should be no backdoor.
 
The FBI has been pretty quick to proclaim what they can't do. They've also been pretty loud about it too. My inner cynic is telling me something. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

exactly! just because the FBI says it can't do something doesn't mean their buddies the NSA can't!

and while we're on the subject, just because Apple says they don't spy on their users doesn't mean they don't turn a blind eye to Facebook spying on Apple users– there's a reason why Apple gave FB the keys to the iOS kingdom way back in 2012 less than a year after Steve died.
 
Really? So the next time hundreds of people get blown the **** up, and you find out this could've been prevented will you be saying the same thing?

I don't understand this mind set. I never will. The FBI doesn't give a **** about you and me. Are you planning to kill someone? They're looking for the people who will kill us and our families.

This is a problem that WILL eventually cause death and destruction, but thats fine right?

Ben Franklin would disagree with you:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
 
Or far-rightwing "The guv'ment gonna come 'n' take my babies!" (stainless steel spaghetti strainer on their head) comments.

If I can be made by man, it can be broken down by man. It's a peeing contest in "bet you can/can't" depending on the individual invested interest.

One thing can't be denied: If your child is kidnapped, Apple or Android, you'd be begging the governments to crack that device no matter your postion before. lol

Funny that you should write "The guv'ment gonna come 'n' take my babies!":
http://dailysignal.com/2017/06/27/new-law-canada-remove-kids-parents-reject-transgender-ideology/
 
  1. How did they manage before smartphones?
  2. Cell tower pings aren't encrypted. If they have the suspect's phone number, they can track it via triangulation.


1. Theres a lot of things that are made easier with technology.
2. My point is if people that are affiliated with illegal operations are arrested there is no way for them to get more information off the devices. Any dummy knows they can use a cell tower ping to try to locate to a general area.
[doublepost=1508934127][/doublepost]
While that certainly *sounds* reasonable, I'll give you a very specific and real scenario where you are absolutely wrong.

Consider the case of the US "No Fly" list. YOU, as an individual, could be put on that list because your name is similar to someone who did something bad.. might do something bad... associates with people who do something bad... bought a latte and said hello to someone who does something bad... etc. The Feds DO NOT publish information on how and why specific names are on that list. The Feds DO NOT even publish that list! YOU won't learn about it unless and until you are prevented from purchasing an airline ticket.

What then? Absolutely nothing! You can petition all you want but the "average joe" you refer to has zero mechanism to get off the list. Oh... and while you're on it... do you think it's possible that the Feds might want to observe you?


Would you mind citing one real world example of this?
 
I think this FBI concern about encrypted devices is largely overblown.

The FBI has almost a century of history investigating and prosecuting criminals without access to the data on their smartphones, for the very good reason that smartphones didn't exist. The FBI, and other law enforcement agencies relied on evidence such as fingerprints, paper documents, photographic and audio recordings, eyewitnesses, and informants in order to build their cases.

Absolutely, I understand the desire amongst some in the law enforcement community to be able to rifle through a suspect's phone. It might be helpful for them to pile on additional charges, or to find additional suspects to investigate. But the truth of the matter is - that's a bonus.

The FBI has considerable access to unencrypted data regarding a suspects contacts. If nothing else, the simple telephone records maintained by every carrier will let a law officer, with an appropriate warrant, know precisely who a suspect has been talking to. If that information isn't enough - then I'm very sorry, but law enforcement needs to try a bit harder.

Because I'm not prepared to surrender completely any illusion I might maintain of personal privacy, just to make lazy cops jobs a little easier.

So, **** you, Mr FBI director.
 
I see my TSA allegory is misconstrued by some people. Simply put, you don't have reasonable expectation of privacy with your luggages. Not only you gave it away voluntarily at the airport check in, you don't store any sensitive materials on it 24/7. Nobody in their right mind uses luggages as a safe box, not to mention the unimaginable interests to obtain this "standard keys" that will open all safe boxes.
 
1. Theres a lot of things that are made easier with technology.
2. My point is if people that are affiliated with illegal operations are arrested there is no way for them to get more information off the devices. Any dummy knows they can use a cell tower ping to try to locate to a general area.
[doublepost=1508934127][/doublepost]


Would you mind citing one real world example of this?

Certainly! The late Ted Kennedy was famously put on the No Fly list. Fortunately for him he had contacts and sufficient clout to (a) find out he was ON the list, and (b) get himself OFF the list. The average Joe can't really do either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: extrachrispy
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.