Google CEO Calls FBI's Request for Apple Backdoor 'A Troubling Precedent'

[JamesPDX]

At this moment, I have no reason to believe Google would have said no as Apple did.

Ha ha, you're only saying that because of the data constantly being harvested from all Google accounts.
Here's a good one: http://www.theonion.com/article/frustrated-nsa-now-forced-rely-mass-surveillance-p-50550
[doublepost=1455760846][/doublepost]

Read "1984" for the answer.

Crikey! "1984" is probably the password!

 

[trssho]

FBI ultimately wants a backdoor to everything, and it shocks me how so many are indifferent about that.
Why isn't the 4th amendment as passionately protected as the 2nd amendment?

1. 
   The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly ...

Seems like a "reasonable search" to me. Seems there is probable cause to search. Not weighing in on if Apple should or should not, but I feel here the 4th amendment gives access.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

Perhaps his response is BS.

 

[ptb42]

Well, this isn't quite as bad as it looked when I first saw the headlines. Basically, they want the ability to brute force the passcode. I'm actually surprised that they haven't figured out a way to be able to brute force it already. This seems like a pretty inefficient way to do it too. They'll be bounded by the speed of the phone. You'd think they'd try and get the data itself off of the phone and attempt the brute force using their own systems. It's just an AES block cipher, isn't it?

Before posting more uninformed comments, I suggest that you read the iOS Security Guide, or one of the many good articles on the 'Net that summarize it.

TL;DR: the passcode (simple or complex) is only one part of the encryption key. There's a device-specific key on the device, created at the time of manufacture of the processor chip. It's impossible to read it -- only to use it in encryption-related operations. And, it can be written/cleared, thus "wiping" the device in one fell swoop.

Further, the passcode cannot be easily brute-forced: every attempt requires 80ms, enforced by the hardware. That's not a big impediment for a 4-digit passcode, but a 6-character complex passcode would require up to 5.5 years to crack.

 

[felt.]

No surprise here.

https://www.google.com/takeaction/issue/encryption/

 

[LizKat]

Cook's unbendable stance is commendable.

If only the iPhone were as unbendable.

Actually the 5C is pretty darn sturdy.

 

[Jeremy1026]

Fun twist of events: Apple agree's to make the special build for the FBI. What the FBI doesn't know though is that when installed it wipes all data off the phone except for the passcode. The FBI then brute forces the passcode now that there isn't a limit on incorrect entries. The FBI asks Apple WTF. Apple replies with, "you said you wanted past the passcode."

 

[goobot]

Why does Obama want to take away your privacy?

I read the article and saw no mention of Obama in it anywhere.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

Hypocrisy galore.

Including Snowden .
Break the law, intrude, steal, reveal , invade all without autorization if it suits him...
But others should not do it..

Uh - I think you're quite confused on the Snowden issue. He was employed by the NSA and directed to invade people's privacy. He rightfully thought that this was poor behavior, and blew a dog whistle. He then fled the country.

He didn't choose to steal anything. He actually chose to severely impaired his own freedom by speaking out. Unfortunately, it has had very little impact. The government still acts as if nobody has a right to privacy. A lot of people just shrug and act like privacy isn't desirable.

 

[DCJ001]

Nice, let's hope Apple holds strong and stands their ground now that Google is with them.

Alphabet (formerly known as Google) has nothing to do with Apple's perspective on this matter.

 

[bladerunner2000]

Why does Obama want to take away your privacy?

I didn't know Obama works for the FBI. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone. However, howcome you didn't mention Trump wanting to take away people's right to privacy?

 

[Kabeyun]

Why isn't the 4th amendment as passionately protected as the 2nd amendment?

A very astute question indeed.

Vociferous defenders of the latter often invoke liberty, but we must all must realize that true liberty lies in the former.

 

[macfacts]

With the specifics on what they want Apple to do, it becomes crystal clear on how readily that would allow others to gain entry into Apple Devices. *sighs*

How does a special version of iOS (with out the password try limit and is only installable on that one iphone 5c) that is digitally signed with a key that only Apple has, allow the FBI to use it on all iPhones?

 

[NT1440]

How does a special version of iOS (with out the password try limit and is only installable on that one iphone 5c) that is digitally signed with a key that only Apple has, allow the FBI to use it on all iPhones?

Right?

I mean, no company has ever been infiltrated by intelligence officers for decades at a time.....

 

[citysnaps]

Nice, let's hope Apple holds strong and stands their ground now that Google is with them.

This is something Apple has lead and been very vocal about while others have pretty much remained silent. At this point I can't see what google or other companies do or not do affecting Apple's ability to stand strong

 

[macfacts]

Before posting more uninformed comments, I suggest that you read the iOS Security Guide, or one of the many good articles on the 'Net that summarize it.

TL;DR: the passcode (simple or complex) is only one part of the encryption key. There's a device-specific key on the device, created at the time of manufacture of the processor chip. It's impossible to read it -- only to use it in encryption-related operations. And, it can be written/cleared, thus "wiping" the device in one fell swoop.

Further, the passcode cannot be easily brute-forced: every attempt requires 80ms, enforced by the hardware. That's not a big impediment for a 4-digit passcode, but a 6-character complex passcode would require up to 5.5 years to crack.

If it is "enforced by the hardware", why doesn't Tim Cook just say it is impossible instead of just saying "I don't want to do it"? Is this just some PR stunt by Apple to look good before they get fined big money and give in? There is a difference between "can't do it" and "don't want to do it".

 

[Sasparilla]

Frankly Sundar "may set a bad precedent" is what you say when a company starts doing something to their cable customers bill's. This is the future fate of privacy on all consumer electronic devices.

This sounds like a statement from a guy that is okay with no privacy for his customers but doesn't want his customers to know. I could see Microsoft making the same statement and we know they've already chosen to sell out their customers.

At this moment, I have no reason to believe Google would have said no as Apple did.

I fear your probably right, Google said nothing after the White House FBI get-together discussing how to give the govt a way around encryption (month ago or so) and only Tim said anything...everyone else was eerily quiet about it (especially troubling in Google's case with their background).

 

[MacCubed]

I feel like if Apple were to bend just for a single occasion, the FBI would keep pushing until they have full access

 

[LizKat]

I read the article and saw no mention of Obama in it anywhere.

Yeah, but some people around here mostly just read stuff between the lines.

Anyway it's not about Obama. The desire for 24/7 surveillance goes way back but certainly was propped up anew after 9/11 with that Information Awareness Office and the programs developed under that umbrella, like TIA. Just the idea of a government agency operation with that name, Total Information Awareness, is so grotesque to normal people. Please. Big Big Bro.

It's hard to believe that TIA was real, it's even harder to believe that much of it was ever wound down, even though Congress supposedly defunded the thing in 2003. Snowden's revelations made it clear that a lot of it didn't die.

Every time I get a brief beachball after hitting quit on a browser or mail, I just laugh and figure that's Cheney or Poindexter sucking up the latest picture of my sister's cats. When my shut down iPhone runs out of juice for no reason some days, I figure... should I put wallpaper on the thing asking "would you like some coffee?"

So on the thing with the FBI asking for an all-in on a smartphone? I hope Cook beats a path to the doors of the Supreme Court and takes amicus briefs from all of Silicon Valley with him.

Remember, this is a government that can't keep hackers out of its own employee data. That outsources coding of new websites to god knows whom. I'm sure they have some good hackers of their own by now, or at least I hope so, but really, asking a company to roll over on the value of its product line and produce data from an encypted phone is a bridge way too far. In the real world there's no such thing as just one time, just one phone, that's just nonsense.

 

[Mr. Donahue]

The shootings in San Bernardino was staged and fabricated by the government through media to create an excuse to have greater control over people. i know because one of the witnesses was wearing a Masonic hat.

 

[Nunyabinez]

How does a special version of iOS (with out the password try limit and is only installable on that one iphone 5c) that is digitally signed with a key that only Apple has, allow the FBI to use it on all iPhones?

Don't be naive. You expect that Apple would do this, unlock the phone and then say to the FBI "We're going to delete this software now." and the FBI is going to say "go ahead."

Once it exists, they will make sure it stays. You are awfully trusting of a government that has demonstrated it's predilection to surveil you and then lie about it.

 

[kdarling]

Well, this isn't quite as bad as it looked when I first saw the headlines. Basically, they want the ability to brute force the passcode. I'm actually surprised that they haven't figured out a way to be able to brute force it already. This seems like a pretty inefficient way to do it too. They'll be bounded by the speed of the phone. You'd think they'd try and get the data itself off of the phone and attempt the brute force using their own systems. It's just an AES block cipher, isn't it?

Makes me wonder if the government already has a way in, but is grandstanding with Apple to convince criminals to trust their iPhones.

The last thing the government wants, is for terrorists to find another communication method. The more that are on a single device, the easier it is to target crack attempts.

 

[jimbobb24]

If Obama had not abused the surveillance powers so much I might be inclined to support some government access. But I cannot trust any administration so this is one piece of info we will need to fight crime and terrorism without.

 

[macfacts]

Don't be naive. You expect that Apple would do this, unlock the phone and then say to the FBI "We're going to delete this software now." and the FBI is going to say "go ahead."

Once it exists, they will make sure it stays. You are awfully trusting of a government that has demonstrated it's predilection to surveil you and then lie about it.

If a special version of iOS is made that can only be installed on a specific iPhone with a specific serial number and is digitally signed by Apple, it doesn't matter if that version of iOS isn't deleted. If the FBI try to alter that version of iOS for a different serial number, the digital signature of that special iOS won't match and won't even be installable.

And to everyone talking about the secure enclaves in the iphones, the iphone 5c doesn't have that.

 

[Jeremy1026]

Uh - I think you're quite confused on the Snowden issue. He was employed by the NSA and directed to invade people's privacy. He rightfully thought that this was poor behavior, and blew a dog whistle. He then fled the country.

He didn't choose to steal anything. He actually chose to severely impaired his own freedom by speaking out. Unfortunately, it has had very little impact. The government still acts as if nobody has a right to privacy. A lot of people just shrug and act like privacy isn't desirable.

Do you think everyone in the NSA, including all the contractors that work for the NSA, sit around all day listening to your phone calls? IIRC, Snowden was a contractor who went snooping around and came across the documents, and wasn't actively involved in any of the internal spying.