Senator Planning Legislation to Punish Companies That Don't Unlock Encrypted Devices

[JM]

Take off that tin foil hat. How do you go from one iPhone getting "backdoored" to everyone's iPhone getting open access for all hackers or even FBI? Do you know how many near impossible "what if's" have to happen?



Do you understand technology?
Do you understand how digital signatures work?
Do you know iphones will only install iOS from Apple that is signed by Apple?
Do you know the court order is for a special version of iOS that is coded to only work on the ID of the one specific iPhone 5c?
Do you know if the FBI or hackers try to change the ID in that special version of iOS, then the digital signiture won't be valid and can't be installed on other people's iphones?

I don't know if you lean left or right, but just thought I'd throw out there that the right uses the "slippery slope" argument against gay marriage and drugs, and now if the left is using a slippery slope argument, then I think I agree with some early poster that US politics is just f***ed. Haha.
[doublepost=1455920754][/doublepost]

Thats what politicians respond to. I can't vote in NC. I can however monetarily support people I agree with on issues I feel strongly about. If politicians can't get out of the primary, they'll start making good decisions.

The reason the NRA has been so successful blocking background checks for gun purchases is they can get voters to vote on a single issue. Tech companies and the tech community need to start asserting themselves more aggressively. A few wins in places and you will have Senators and Congressman who would sooner burn themselves at the stake than to weaken device encryption.

No, that's not it. They all have guns. No one f***s with a gun.

 

[pat500000]

North Carolina Senator Richard Burr, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is working on legislation that would penalize companies that don't comply with court orders to unlock encrypted devices, according to The Wall Street Journal. The move comes a day after Apple announced that it would oppose an order to unlock the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone 5c.

The bill could reportedly be written in way that modifies the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which compelled communications companies to build their systems in a way that would allow them to comply with court orders.
For the past several months, Burr has been pressuring technology companies to work closely with law enforcement to prevent encrypted devices and services from being used to plan and execute crimes, going as far as telling some that they needed to consider changing their business model. He's also claimed that district attorneys have complained to him about encryption as they are "beginning to get to a situation where they can't prosecute cases."

Apple CEO Tim Cook has continually maintained that unlocking any device, or creating any type of backdoor, would weaken encryption across the board and allow both bad guys and good guys to access users' personal data.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: Senator Planning Legislation to Punish Companies That Don't Unlock Encrypted Devices

Senator...we will punish. Keep your mouth shut..and let the people of freedom kick you out of the office.

 

[LizKat]

It's all fun an games until an elected official looses his or her phone and once in the wrong hands, it gets hacked and its contents spread online.

Yes and don't think this hasn't occurred to all of them. They're all in their offices trying to come up with press statements that sound very patriotic about San Bernardino but also very compelling about data privacy, and gnashing their teeth wishing the San Bernardino couple had smashed their iPhone and left some $30 burner behind.

 

[JM]

I call for legislation requiring all gun owners to be forced under law, to reveal what guns they have, what ammunition where they got the gun. Including name address and where the guns are stored. This information should be stored in a national data base accessible to all government agencies, federal, state and local. With full access and disclosure to all citizens via freedom of information act. This will protect us from a much more serious threat, at least based on deaths. Help authorities protect us from the 10,000 death occurring annually from violent gun acts. Contact your representatives to get this going.

Let's put a dent in the 10,000 gun deaths annually, a much larger number than terrorist related deaths.

If the San Bernadino police had known these two terrorists were amassing a cache of weapons, an investigation and visit might have prevented this tragedy.

See I was all ready to say something silly and funny, but then upon further pondering, you have a point.

(My original comment if you're interested was: "no, no, no. See, the government should only have access to ONLY those two terrorists' gun purchase history. That way it would protect our privacy still. See? Makes perfect logical sense. Only have gun databases of just the terrorists."

Actually, comment's absurdity still applies....
[doublepost=1455922466][/doublepost]

What a world it would be if everyone voted third party just once... Instead of this ridiculous D vs R, as if there was any real difference.

Mmm, truth.
[doublepost=1455922944][/doublepost]

This is the the White supremacist's view, but it has no basis in reality.

Most terrorist activity is perpetrated by White males, generally Christian in their beliefs.

Oh reeeeeeeeeaaally?

Please. Elucidate.

...About the terrorist activity.

I'll wait.
[doublepost=1455923110][/doublepost]

Whilst I am ultimately on Apple's side in this it does become very tricky. If your spouse/child/sibling had been abducted and their location was on a locked iPhone you'd very much want for someone to unlock it if they could.

Would there be a way for Apple to build a hardware solution that could, when connected to a phone, unlock it, maybe the hardware device with some kind of key stored in the inaccessible secure enclave?

It wouldn't allow for any phone to be accessed remotely but would provide that ultimate 'break glass' option...

Heh. You said break glass. Heh heh. iPhone.. Heh heheheh hem

 

[Larry-K]

What a world it would be if everyone voted third party just once... Instead of this ridiculous D vs R, as if there was any real difference.

Would that include countries where they have neither Democrats, Republicans or voting?

 

[JM]

In terms of the number of plots foiled as well as the total amounts of people killed, domestic terrorist incidences in the U.S. far outnumber those from any foreign source.

You're selective and questionable information is astounding. Please tell me more.

 

[HEK]

Whilst I am ultimately on Apple's side in this it does become very tricky. If your spouse/child/sibling had been abducted and their location was on a locked iPhone you'd very much want for someone to unlock it if they could.

Would there be a way for Apple to build a hardware solution that could, when connected to a phone, unlock it, maybe the hardware device with some kind of key stored in the inaccessible secure enclave?

It wouldn't allow for any phone to be accessed remotely but would provide that ultimate 'break glass' option...

No no no, never back door the enclave. That is prescription for disaster. Why not permit torture to extract the information. Let's take the criminal's family and execute them in front of them till they give up location. Sometimes bad things happen to people, doesn't give us excuse to do anything we want. If you could get your spouse/child/sibling back at cost, like giving up all our liberties, should that be allowed? The US government has a supposed policy of not negotiating for hostages. The hostages may die, that is cost sometimes, regardless of how distasteful it may be.
[doublepost=1455928937][/doublepost]

Yes and don't think this hasn't occurred to all of them. They're all in their offices trying to come up with press statements that sound very patriotic about San Bernardino but also very compelling about data privacy, and gnashing their teeth wishing the San Bernardino couple had smashed their iPhone and left some $30 burner behind.

They smashed the two other phones they had that contained the info FBI wants.

 

[LizKat]

They smashed the two other phones they had that contained the info FBI wants.

Well exactly, and how likely is it that they left anything of "value" to the FBI on his work phone. It's not like they didn't realize that one was a company phone. The FBI has what there is to have now already, by getting the call records and stuff. That's it. That's all there is.

This isn't about this phone, it's about setting a precedent by using this phone as the wedge because, terrorism.

 

[OtherJesus]

Would that include countries where they have neither Democrats, Republicans or voting?

Nope.

 

[chiefsilverback]

No no no, never back door the enclave.

I wasn't suggesting putting a backdoor in the secure enclave, but using it to store half the key that would be needed to authenticate some hardware device that could extract data from a physical phone?

Given that Apple have apparently created the holy grail of devices that is entirely unhackable I'm sure they could create something. I think the issue, as I alluded to earlier is that they would then come under pressure from other countries to provide the same service!?!?

 

[tgara]

This isn't about this phone, it's about setting a precedent by using this phone as the wedge because, terrorism.

But the precedent was set many years ago, and not in Apple's favor. If law enforcement shows up at a bank, shows a warrant, and asks the bank manager to open a particular safe deposit box because the cops don't have the key, he has to comply. This situation with Apple and its iPhone is very similar. I don't see how Apple gets out of this smelling like a rose.

 

[maxsix]

Regardless of their party (and there are plenty on both sides), those that back this legislation will find themselves squarely on the wrong side of history.

I wouldn't be so quick to jump to a conclusion. This is not about to be resolved anytime soon. The parties involved have highly refined fighting skills. A knock down drag out fight has just begun. At this juncture it's pure guesswork to choose who the Victor will be.

 

[LizKat]

This situation with Apple and its iPhone is very similar

It's not similar because unlike the bank manager with the vault key, Apple does not have what to just open the phone with, and would have to create new work product in order to comply with request to create a way to bypass the too-many-attempts error risking a wipe of the phone.

In creating such new work product for the FBI (which first of all how can a government make a corporation create a product?) they create something that can be adapted and used for other purposes than opening the particular phone.

That the code would even exist would be a risk to other phones' security, not to mention a precedent enabling government to be asking for it again only more quickly at another time, for another phone. Meanwhile who is to say how or when the code might be acquired by someone with other intent and interest.

The cost for the supposed benefit to FBI on this one phone (with its info getting older by thie minute already for months) is too high. That's part of why I don't think the request is just about "this one phone, this one time" or they would have dropped it by now. It's about getting access more quickly in the future, using this effort, if successful, as the wedge.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

This face represents a government that has become the exact opposite of what the founding fathers envisioned. ”He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.”...Benjamin Franklin.

Looking at it, that face actually looks somewhat familiar. ...like a not-too-distant relative of one of the greatest working comedians today, Bill Burr, who also hails from the east coast, from the descendants of Aaron Burr. ...and whose rantings & ravings of pragmatic absurdity regularly touch on, dismantle, & ridicule exactly this kind of abuse. Perhaps someone should drop him a note. That'd make for quite the Easter Sunday family gathering. Orator vs Orator, another historic Burr showdown.

There are probably a million Burr's out & about by now, who knows.

 

[tgara]

It's not similar because unlike the bank manager with the vault key, Apple does not have what to just open the phone with, and would have to create new work product in order to comply with request to create a way to bypass the too-many-attempts error risking a wipe of the phone.

In creating such new work product for the FBI (which first of all how can a government make a corporation create a product?) they create something that can be adapted and used for other purposes than opening the particular phone.

That the code would even exist would be a risk to other phones' security, not to mention a precedent enabling government to be asking for it again only more quickly at another time, for another phone. Meanwhile who is to say how or when the code might be acquired by someone with other intent and interest.

The cost for the supposed benefit to FBI on this one phone (with its info getting older by thie minute already for months) is too high. That's part of why I don't think the request is just about "this one phone, this one time" or they would have dropped it by now. It's about getting access more quickly in the future, using this effort, if successful, as the wedge.

I have to disagree with you. If the police came down to a bank with a warrant to search a safe deposit box, and the bank manager did not have the master key, the police would get a locksmith to make one, or they would open it by brute force. The difference in this situation is that making a new OS system for the iPhone is not something just anyone can do, and they cannot use "brute force" lest they lose all the data on the phone. The FBI needs Apple's technical assistance, but they are refusing. I'm sure if the FBI could do it themselves, they would.

Once that new master key for the bank safe deposit is created, all your arguments and concerns about iPhone security and the ramifications of opening it are exactly analogous to the safe deposit situation: The new master key for the safe deposit box can be used to open other safe deposit boxes. It would put at risk the contents of other safe deposit boxes. The government can ask for it again and again. The key might be stolen by a thief who could use it to open all the other safe deposit boxes. Yet searches and seizures of the contents of safe deposit boxes happens frequently in the criminal context, and nobody complains about that.

One issue I see is that Apple's position on its security encryption has changed recently. Apple was saying just a few months ago that the encryption on its latest smartphones was so secure that even Apple could not break it. But it turns out the FBI thought of a way to break into iPhones by having Apple make and install a modified OS that disables a feature that destroys information on a phone if too many incorrect passcodes are entered. So Apple has been forced to change its position from “it’s not possible” to cooperate with legal court orders to break into the phones of terrorists and criminals, to “we refuse to cooperate” with such orders. Looked at this way, Apple is on very shaky legal ground IMHO.

 

[teslo]

i'm just curious at what point are ALL MR stories locked down for being 'political in nature...'

 

[balamw]

i'm just curious at what point are ALL MR stories locked down for being 'political in nature...'

MOD NOTE: Do you mean "locked down" in the sense that they get discussed in PRSI by those who have posting rights or "locked down" in the sense of closed and no one can participate?

The latter is a much higher bar, when we have tried to let discussion happen in PRSI under the Rules for Appropriate Debate and it has devolved into a series of personal attacks on other users.

It's really not that difficult to earn the right to participate in PRSI, but it is a LOT easier to lose it when one just can't resist ad hominem attacks and similar violations of the rules.

B

 

[JM]

i'm just curious at what point are ALL MR stories locked down for being 'political in nature...'

Ha.

"Bought an iPhone? Hmm, you must be a liberal! Android is for conservatives! rabble rabble rabble!"

 

[thewitt]

Burr will find out that his constituents are opposed and he will drop this nonsense. There are already local activists outside his offices here in Charlotte.

 

[revelated]

Split the difference.

Companies are forced to bypass encryption if and only if hacking is made legal AND every such device is immediately unencrypted by forced update.

So, for people like this Senator who might own an iDevice, when someone hacks into it and shares your nude selfies, you can do absolutely NOTHING about it in retaliation but whine in private.

If that sounds unacceptable, it means you really don't understand why encryption is important in the first place.

 

[michaelsviews]

If I'm not mistaken, Mr Burr is up for reelection this year.

https://action.burrforsenate.com/go/sign-up-to-join-the-team/

 

[tgara]

Burr will find out that his constituents are opposed and he will drop this nonsense. There are already local activists outside his offices here in Charlotte.

Maybe, but the public at large generally agree with the FBI stand on this one.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2016/02...s-want-the-phone-unlocked/?mod=trending_now_2

 

[koruki]

Oh North Carolina.. the irony .. where Apples Data center is located. Should they pack up and go?

 

[bent christian]

Maybe, but the public at large generally agree with the FBI stand on this one.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2016/02...s-want-the-phone-unlocked/?mod=trending_now_2

No, 510 adults agree.

 

[petsounds]

I actually meant that the locked iPhone is on the table in front of you and stored on it is the location.

Re. Find My iPhone, isn't that subject to the same encryption as the rest of Apple's services? You'd still need the password in order to find the phone...

Sorry, misunderstood you. I'm not sure about the Find My iPhone data in the cloud. From Apple's government info requests page, which makes it hard to tell whether Apple supplies location info for these requests or denies them:

The vast majority of the requests Apple receives from law enforcement come from an agency working on behalf of a customer who has requested assistance locating a stolen device. We encourage any customer who suspects their device is stolen to contact their respective law enforcement agency.