So there already exists a backdoor into current and future iPhones?
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.
President Obama: 'You Cannot Take an Absolutist View' on Encryption Issue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So there already exists a backdoor into current and future iPhones?
Yes. It seems crazy because you're so used to it, but I use the train and bus as often as the plane, and there are no checks whatsoever there. I haven't had to show up two hours early, I can turn up minutes before, and walk straight on.
So far, none of the trains and busses I've been on have crashed, exploded, or been hijacked. And funnily enough, it's very rare for any of that to happen to planes - that's why it makes the news if it does happen. Cars kill thousands of people every year, hundreds crash every day. Everybody has been involved in a car crash, or knows somebody who has. So why not ensure ludicrous security for cars? Has everybody forgotten about the truck bomb in Oklahoma? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing
What is it about planes that makes everyone so paranoid?
I'm just waiting for the punchline of "well, apart from our FBI phones.... we want them to be be really secure"... 
As always with politicians he's living in this 1950's utopian dreamworld where he can have a secure phone but he can spy on anyone else's...i'm not sure how often we can keep saying this.... It's binary... it's either secure or it's not... you create a backdoor and any 12 year old with a laptop and access to google will be able to get it....
I guess what he's really saying is that he doesn't want the great unwashed masses to have the same level of security as him. mmmmm.....
As always with politicians he's living in this 1950's utopian dreamworld where he can have a secure phone but he can spy on anyone else's...i'm not sure how often we can keep saying this.... It's binary... it's either secure or it's not... you create a backdoor and any 12 year old with a laptop and access to google will be able to get it....
I guess what he's really saying is that he doesn't want the great unwashed masses to have the same level of security as him. mmmmm.....
It's not a great analog, since there are other ways to get into a safe if you can't open the lock. They may be unsubtle and unlikely to go unnoticed by the owner, but they exist.
Some.posters here maue be too young to remember pre 9/11 travel. I'm only 30 myself, but I remember a time where one's family coikd walk them to the gate without much couldn't all. My grandmother lived with us growing up and would take a 2-3 month trip to Hungary every other year. I got to walk her to the gate every time, no security checks whatsoever, and watch the plane take off from the nearest window.
I disagree with Obama on this. You allready have this situation where governments around the world are tapping phonecalls, e-mails, sms, etc and so do hackers around the world. Even if Apple, but also othe smartphone builders, doesn't succeed in protecting their owners from others teying to steal there information it's their duty to at least try to make a phone as a closed system as possible because if you built in an open door for any goverment then other bad people, governments, organisations etc won't hesitate to get in as well.
Not only doesn't an open iOS for the goverment stop any terrorist for doing bad stuff it makes privacy less private for millions of users out there.
Not only doesn't an open iOS for the goverment stop any terrorist for doing bad stuff it makes privacy less private for millions of users out there.
Your reply makes no sense as there are ways to get in to the iPhone (that damage the phone but data can be recovered from the chip), that the NSA and others must have. However in this case the FBI wants it all packaged up in to a nice and neat app and developed by Apple themselves. It is almost a public shaming in to developing the tool that everyone will know about and ALL governments will require. The correct analog would be that whenever a Manufacturer sell a safe, they send a spare key to the police, as well as a tracker showing where that safe is at all times (gps in phones).
For a while I've wondered where technology would go, smaller more smart devices, helping people have easier lives - wireless connectivity, smart homes, efficient buildings etc. I think all of that will have to take a hold and we are on the cusp of being pushed down a security game of cat and mouse.
Is that really the case? I mean yes, you can probably remove the chips and read the ones and zeros, but the point is that it's all encrypted on the phone too, isn't it?
I understand Obama's point, and I can see the analog with warrants to search properties etc. If we could genuinely be certain a warrant produced a once-only method of getting into one phone, then I'd be all for it. But what a lot of people are saying is that's really not how this works.
I hate to say it but it's time Obama went. He is completely out of touch on this. If someone wants access for a legitimate reason they should approach Apple and they will do it if genuine. That is how it has always worked and it does work and is how it should be.
Apple never said they would not unlock this guys phone they even tried but the FBI screwed themselves over by trying to change the password.
What Apple is against is the FBI wanting a Backdoor put in so they can get access themselves when needed. This is not safe and not how it should be. Every major tech company in the world gets this but governments don't. Those that should want to protect instead are trying to push fear to gain control.
Apple are spot on with this and I applaud them for it.
Apple never said they would not unlock this guys phone they even tried but the FBI screwed themselves over by trying to change the password.
What Apple is against is the FBI wanting a Backdoor put in so they can get access themselves when needed. This is not safe and not how it should be. Every major tech company in the world gets this but governments don't. Those that should want to protect instead are trying to push fear to gain control.
Apple are spot on with this and I applaud them for it.
Of course you can: encryption is either secure, or it's not secure. The FBI & friends try to propose a third option which basically is:
- it's "secure" but we can break it, but because we are special it doesn't count
- but it's not an issue for you (unless you have something to hide...)
- and nobody else in the world will be able to break it the same way (because magic)
- and even if they do, it's more your problem than ours...
If you weaken encryption on the iPhone and stock Android. People will just turn to open source solutions and load those onto their Android phones. The only thing that will happen is the privacy conscious will leave iOS and go to Android where they'll be able to install any hard encryption system they want.
And the people this hurts most are consumers. Hard criminals will always have access to encryption without shared keys to the government or their device manufacturer. Only consumers with nothing criminal will have their security diminished.
What Obama doesn't understand about encryption is that if you have a shared key a "master key" that key has to be stored somewhere. You can either use the same key for every device or generate a key at the point of encryption and store each key in a database.
This master key or these master keys will eventually get stolen and that puts every device at risk. You can't simply make an encrypted system with a flaw like this, it undermines the security so much that it makes having the encryption pointless in the first place. It's like having a front door with tons of impervious locks on it and then right next to it is an open window.
Honestly I see Obama as a traitor to the American people and of humanity as a whole after reading his statements. He is so consumed with catching bad guys that the freedoms America stands for have gone completely out of the window.
Benjamin Franklin once said “Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" Obama should heed those words and switch his position on this. What a traitor.
And the people this hurts most are consumers. Hard criminals will always have access to encryption without shared keys to the government or their device manufacturer. Only consumers with nothing criminal will have their security diminished.
What Obama doesn't understand about encryption is that if you have a shared key a "master key" that key has to be stored somewhere. You can either use the same key for every device or generate a key at the point of encryption and store each key in a database.
This master key or these master keys will eventually get stolen and that puts every device at risk. You can't simply make an encrypted system with a flaw like this, it undermines the security so much that it makes having the encryption pointless in the first place. It's like having a front door with tons of impervious locks on it and then right next to it is an open window.
Honestly I see Obama as a traitor to the American people and of humanity as a whole after reading his statements. He is so consumed with catching bad guys that the freedoms America stands for have gone completely out of the window.
Benjamin Franklin once said “Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" Obama should heed those words and switch his position on this. What a traitor.
I'm sorry that the smartphone as it is today and the security issue wasn't around in 2008. Obama would not have gotten elected.
Yes, this is all fine and I am aware and agree this is disgusting. My point was, was the family in the photo actually killed by an Obama drone? Some may not think this does not matter, because we KNOW it is happening. But if someone wants to argue for the other side, and it is found out that the family in that photo was shelled by a tank, then it becomes easy for them to discredit any other claim that our side makes.
That's the only reason I was asking. It gets increasingly harder to educate the sheeple on the truth, and have them believe the hard facts, when the internet becomes saturated with half truths and even lies. Thank you for the link.
Are all iPhones the same? Couldn't this be solved by making each iPhone unique? They sure know how to regulate iPhone unlocking.
great points. never thought about it like that
If they think you have a secret worth knowing they'll waterboard the S**t out of you.
Mr. President I'm going to take an absolutest stance on encryption.
"He used warrants to search homes and possessions, something the public agrees is necessary, as a parallel to accessing data on a smartphone."
Fine, if a Gov or Local official serves me 'a warrant' to open my phone, I'll do it. Otherwise, if not, I go to jail. I understand this as my choice. It is not Apple's phone, they just made it and sold it to me.
Why don't they serve Syed Farook a warrant to open his phone ... Oh wait!
Case closed. Move on to the next criminal.
Fine, if a Gov or Local official serves me 'a warrant' to open my phone, I'll do it. Otherwise, if not, I go to jail. I understand this as my choice. It is not Apple's phone, they just made it and sold it to me.
Why don't they serve Syed Farook a warrant to open his phone ... Oh wait!
Case closed. Move on to the next criminal.
Yes, if you'd read the article you'd have read the bit where Obama acknowledges exactly that point and why it is causing the sort of rift we are seeing here.
You're right in a sense, but think about the implications of the FBI having the technical know how to open any IPhone. I would never trust the government with such power, because I believe it can be abused and used in an unchecked manner. My argument during this whole debate has been that Apple should make a version of the OS that would allow the government to access the phone, provided the government can show probable cause and there was a lawful search warrant approved by a neutral judge. Apple should be in charge of the system, not the government. This way, there are more checks in place that can protect people's privacy, while at the same time letting law enforcement and security agencies do their jobs.
Just as a point of clarification, the original order issued by the court in the California San Bernardino case included an offer to Apple that if they found the FBI's request burdensome to tell the court and they would consider their concerns and make adjustments to the order. But Apple never responded to this. Instead, Tim Cook publish his silly customer letter on the Apple website.
In my view, Apple is acting like a petulant child during this whole affair, and I say this as a long time Apple user and shareholder as I write this on my iPad Air!
The Reg's take on Obama's blabber:
Obama puts down his encrypted phone long enough to tell us: Knock it off with the encryption
Obama puts down his encrypted phone long enough to tell us: Knock it off with the encryption
I laughed out loud after reading this. Thanks for the chuckle this morning.
Have you ever considered working in the Apple public relations department? If they do not have any openings, I'm sure you could write for MacRumors, iMore, or The Verge.
Yes I have read previously where and when that was, but I do not remember the specifics (it was possibly Afghanistan). That family was murdered in drone strike during the Obama administration.
Are you trolling or just talking out of turn with a poor understanding of Mr. Trump's positions?
Since you seem not to be aware, he supports the FBI (and Obama's ) position here. So, given that OP believed Obama's suggestion was "treasonous," why would he vote for Trump?
Last edited: