I disagree, if he helps the government do something illegal in the name of security, is that really providing long term security? No, it just provides temporary security from these threats and not from the long term threat of the government, because where does it stop?
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.
Justice Department Calls Apple's Privacy Case Stance a 'Marketing Strategy'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A marketing strategy? What about the fact that Apple wanted to keep this whole issue sealed, and not make it public? But the FBI purposely made it public in order to try to put pressure on Apple. A bunch of disingenuous SOBs, these guys are.
Eff you too, DOJ.
Eff you too, DOJ.
I'm calling the FBI communists! I'm with Apple all the way in this one.
I disagree because this is bringing the issue to the public's attention and as a result, WE can win the war and potentially even put back control of the government into the hands of the people, where according to the constitution it SHOULD be.
What in the Hell are you even talking about? Our freedoms are based in the unequivocal fact that there are times when the ends do not justify the means. This is one of those times. Forcing Apple to give up the security and privacy of all of their customers is not worth the inconsequential data that will be recovered from this dead terrorist's phone.
Uh no ... he isn't. This isn't about handing over information to the government, which they've done before. They're telling Apple to create a backdoor into their devices, which will compromise the security of hundreds of millions of users all across the world. This isn't just a United States issue ... it is a world issue. This would compromise device security across the planet. So this is a lot bigger than it appears to be.
Looks like someone just took AP Government. The social contract has been broken as it's no longer rule by the people for the people, but rather rule by the corporations, banks, and rich. You have to be pretty blind to think laws should be followed blindly and the founding fathers even stated that when the government no longer represents the people, that it should be stood up against.
Donald asking to boycott Apple in favor of Samsung is a "Marketing Strategy ". Made me wonder how much Samsung paid him.
I don't know how else to word FBI's communist like requests and actions.
Also, I think Snowden is a national hero, and I think he should be the next president.
No. The way it works is that a random key is used to encrypt the memory. That key is then encrypted using another key derived from the passcode. So if you change your passcode, only the first key needs to be reencrypted.
It doesn't really matter if Apple does it inhouse or not. The problem is that once the precedent is established and the weakened iOS version created, the feds will request it again for other cases, and other governments will also demand access.
Because the SECOND they do this, every single government agency in the world will demand Apple start doing this every time they want access to a phone. Even to phones they may have stolen from enemy countries. Can you imagine North Korea stealing an iPhone from a U.S. official and then demanding that Apple help them unlock it to get government secrets?
It's not as far fetched as you might think if the FBI wins this one.
That isn't even a scenario. The problem is that if Apple creates a backdoor, then other people will eventually be able to find out how to use that backdoor ... not just the FBI. That is one of the many problems this would cause. It throws security completely out the window. It's completely idiotic.
Obama's administration needs to back off on this issue. There are some limits to your powers over people and their information.
Oh, sorry, I thought you were doing an impression of the "Apple's a bunch of commie, terrorist sympathizers!" thing that's popping up.
Except that backdoor wouldn't exist except on the very device they want to unlock. It has nothing to do with every other iphones in the world : this is a version that would be installed only on one device.
The point isn't the backdoor, it's the precedent. If Apple were to lose this or cave, then it would be harder for them to stand firm on security when it's your phone the FBI wants into.
I have full faith that Apple's massive team of accountants can handle the paper pushers at the IRS.
According to McAffey there already exist at least one way to get around the primary concern of the FBI : The auto-wipe after 10 failed attempts. It requires physical control of the device - which they have.
The other two concerns are the delays after several failed attempts before you can attempt again, and having to manually put the code you wish to try in.
The first two issues would be solved by McAffee's route (involves resetting the memory that holds the attempt counts), the last cannot.
The FBI wants a custom firmware to disable the first two issues and enable the ability to have a computer enter the codes so they can crack it faster. A package which if it got out would make everyone's phone weaker. And as was mentioned elsewhere, the chances of them letting apple to be the ones to have it during the cracking so as to minimize it getting out - if they'd even let Apple be the ones to install the firmware - are low to slim.
The difference here is that Apple is being compelled to create a tool to hand over information not theirs.
When a court order is issued to a company it's almost always been to hand over something they posses - objects or their own actual records. Occasionally to have some assistance. All of which Apple has provided to the best of it's abilities.
Oh no, I didn't realize my comment could have been interpreted both ways until you pointed it out. Thanks!
I have read conflicting information in UK news sites where the FBI clearly stated it has no wish to be involved in the process of installing this software, nor know how it works, or be present during the process, and requests Apple perform the installation and development of the software at it's HQ only and then delete the software.
So it will be very interesting reading the real evidence when this goes further up the legal chain.
I get that. I'm simply refering to the "it's stupid because it would create a backdoor" and the "Apple can't do it anyway!" things.
The whole consistent emphasis on security is a marketing strategy. Apple knows that people will feel better about using Apple products if they feel their data is secure. And having a secure platform makes companies more comfortable having Apple devices connected to their enterprise systems. It allows development of features like ApplePay.
If Apple deliberately compromised their own system, it would be bad for their marketing strategy. And incidentally also bad for Apple customers.