Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Tim Cook: Apple Won't Create 'Backdoor' to Help FBI Access San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone

vannibombonato said:
Where is the limit?
If creating a backdoor meant avoiding another 9/11, what would be the right thing to do?
Click to expand...

Three men in suits walk up to you and say, "we've been able to mathematically prove that shooting and killing you right here, right now, will stop another 9/11."

You're going to accept that?

I think the mania for "privacy" has gone way beyond common sense: until 10 years ago we were all happily storing our personal info in our houses, in paper, and no one was seriously worrying about someone sneaking in our houses to look at our family pictures, love letters or -oh my God!- our weight.
Click to expand...

So why have privacy at all? Why not just make everything public?

We too often forget that in 99.99% of the cases NO ONE COULD CARE LESS about our oh-so-precious pictures, messages, etc.
Click to expand...

Wrong, if that information were easily accessible it would be mined using big data technologies. Why? Because businesses would make more money.

There is quite simply nothing to protect, our personal info are valuable only to ourselves.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the most uneducated statement in this debate.

"Just" give me a common password for all my info/website, and if someones steals my device, big deal, let me make a call and block all access. End of story.
Click to expand...

If that happened, how would you prove you're you. Someone else has all your information, and could be you in every sense of the word.

All they would have to do is beat you to the punch...

See how bad of an idea you represent?
 
  • Like
Reactions: duffman9000
Spectrum said:
It's not any phone. It's a specific phone suspected to contain incriminating evidence on it. I couldn't give a crap about the American constitution. I just have a view about what I consider to be morally right and morally wrong.
Click to expand...
It is not possible to unlock one phone without creating the potential to unlock all of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AFDoc and caligurl
mrkramer said:
You can't give them access when it is proven to be necessary without opening it up to whatever hackers want to get. Which are you more worried about, identity theft as a result of a hacker getting personal information off of your phone or the slight possibility that if the FBI doesn't get into this phone there will be another terrorist attack? I can guarantee that only one of those is likely to be a real worry, and it's not another terrorist attack.
Click to expand...

Yes, I get that. I dont want the government to have open access on anyone. It's clear, starting with our President, all government will abuse authority. But there has to be a solution. Between all involved, they have to come up with something besides privacy for all including mass murders, and privacy for no one. These arguments that it has to be one of two extremes just reflects our divisive politics, and the rhetoric our media constantly shoved down our throat.

And you're point is BS anyway. Potential identity theft would be such an afterthought if a major attack like in Paris was prevented.
 
dmylrea said:
OR, would require a warrant from a judge in order to have a phone unlocked. Just like now, we have warrants for search and seizure against suspected criminals. Should those be outlawed also, because it invades the privacy of the suspected criminal?
Click to expand...

Based on your logic the government should be able to tell me whether I am able to own a paper shredder or an incinerator.
 
inhalexhale1 said:
Yes, I get that. I dont want the government to have open access on anyone. It's clear, starting with our President, all government will abuse authority. But there has to be a solution. Between all involved, they have to come up with something besides privacy for all including mass murders, and privacy for no one. These arguments that it has to be one of two extremes just reflects our divisive politics, and the rhetoric our media constantly shoved down our throat.
Click to expand...
They can do investigations like they used to a couple years ago before smart phones. If the only evidence to link someone to a crime is on their phone, it isn't very likely that they were far enough along in their plans to actually be a threat.
 
dmylrea said:
How did a search warrant to enter your house and go through your belongings ever become legal then? I don't see people marching in DC over the ability of the police to just break into your house whenever they want to go through your things!

Oh, wait...they don't because they need just cause and approval from a judge.

Somehow, I can't see the difference here...
Click to expand...

The difference is scale. Serving a warrant on your house has actual physical limitations. The law enforcement organization has to have an actual person travel to the house, serve the warrant, and take the time to perform the search. Electronic surveillance is comparatively boundless with deep access to our communications and interactions with other people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AFDoc and RogerWilco
This might be the most important letter ever penned by an American company. It was beautiful. The fact that things have gone this far confirms how good their security is. If Apple is ordered to include a back door, it will destroy their business. Surely there is no way a court would order Apple to destroy their business.

So what happens if Apple still refuses? Are we going to trash a cherished American company? They have enough money to fight the government in court for years. Or to relocate their entire operation overseas. If Apple includes a back door, then criminals will have the capability to access any Apple device. These same criminals, funny enough, will just root an Android device and install their own encryption tools. They'll be the only ones with privacy.

If this happens, then all of my current Apple devices are my final Apple devices. I'll go buy a pile of them in their current state and keep them as backups for years. I'll disable all software updates and delete my iCloud account. I'll make due with what I have. I bet there would be a lucrative market for old iPhone repair and replacement parts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: riomp300 and derek4484
scaramoosh said:
This is a battle they will lose, proving someone committed a crime is more important.
Click to expand...

Silly. We already know they committed the crime, and they've already been killed. There is nothing left to investigate. This is solely about the FBI trying to force weaker encryption on everybody because they hate the way Apple instituted their new encryption and security features starting in iOS7. I applaud Apple over this.
 
I suspect this is the face Apple wants to present to the public. I also suspect that behind closed doors the hack the FBI wants is being done.
 
dmylrea said:
Unfortunately, in today's world many more innocent people will die because the terrorists get to enjoy our "freedom" including access to our technology to ensure their communications are secure.
Click to expand...

And many innocent people will survive because of the security of their communications.
 
mrkramer said:
It is not possible to unlock one phone without creating the potential to unlock all of them.
Click to expand...
Says who? Tim? He's talking crap and just pandering to popular opinion. Will it cost Apple? Probably? Would they rather not have to do it? Probably. Tim's just being lazy cos he doesn't have a solution to a problem Apple have created for themselves.

How about if Tim turned around and said: We are really happy to aid the FBI in the pursuit of these criminals. We've engineered a way to make it possible to retain complete security to all devices in the wild, but permitting access to a phone only under controlled conditions using a piece of hardware present within an Apple lab so that on presentation of a warrant the FBI can legally retrieve information from any locked phone.

I remain astonished that people care about the privacy of their cat photos more than the ability to maintain a fair and balanced society.
 
There is no free lunch here folks. If you want privacy, then it's privacy for all, including terrorists, criminals and the like. If you think that Apple should create a backdoor so the NSA/FBI/CIA etc can snoop on 'suspected criminals' then everyone's privacy is finished. It's really an all or nothing proposition here which is why it is so important.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anim8or and MrAverigeUser
mrkramer said:
They can do investigations like they used to a couple years ago before smart phones. If the only evidence to link someone to a crime is on their phone, it isn't very likely that they were far enough along in their plans to actually be a threat.
Click to expand...

Right! Because we live in the same world as when smart phones weren't around. Grow up.
 
Spectrum said:
Says who? Tim? He's talking crap and just pandering to popular opinion. Will it cost Apple? Probably? Would they rather not have to do it? Probably. Tim's just being lazy cos he doesn't have a solution to a problem Apple have created for themselves.
Click to expand...
Says the entire field of computer security and cryptology.

Christ.
 
spacemnspiff said:
“It has been two months now, and we are still working on it,” he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...823-02b905009f99_story.html?wpisrc=nl_rainbow
Click to expand...


That´s at least misleading...

Knowing that after 10 faulty passcodes the iPhone will erase automatically all stored dada, they have NOT tried to use brute force and other related technics but some other technics. And apple did help them, as TC said. They just don´t give the secret services of whatsoever country the chance to gat ALL data of EVERY citizen in the world.

Because if you install a backdoor it is just a matter of time that other secret services will identify the backdoor as well - and use it. The other secret services are not less intelligent than the US authorities… perhaps even…. *****
 
NT1440 said:
Says the entire field of computer security and cryptology.

Christ.
Click to expand...
Forgive me: I though the letter was written by Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, a brand famously proud of self-promotion and how they can do everything in the best interest of their customers...(aka cash cows, or victims in this case)...
 
Spectrum said:
Seriously?!? So...if some awful,awful crime was acted on you or your family and the FBI were confident enough to issue a warrant that would enable access to evidence on a phone that would then incriminate the perpetrator...you are saying you'd rather retain your right to privacy than to have a means for the FBI to make a prosecution??!? What on earth do you keep on *your* phone that you don't want the FBI to ever see!?!

I am astounded. Truly truly astounded.
Click to expand...

The problem here is that this is not just about phones. It's about tablets, laptops, etc.. Some of us work hard at developing new businesses, trade secrets, methodologies, etc.. It could be new algorithms to accomplish a certain task or notes about a new manufacturing technique to revolutionize an industry. Just because we may have nothing to hide in a legal or moral sense, it does not mean that there are not things to keep private by nearly any means possible. Laws as they are currently established in the USA grant us the privacy to our own thoughts, journals and privileged conversations between family members, business associates and legal council. Our personal devices are a very extension of those private things.

Creating a back door into these private things would be no different than developing a machine that could scan a person's brain and read through their own thoughts or memories. What if you were suspected of a crime and called into a police station for questioning. They put you in a special room with a multitude of sensors and proceed to strike casual conversation with you, all the while, unbeknownst to you, a team in another room is pouring through nearly every thought, memory, dream or idea stored in your brain.... Would you be OK with this or are you complacently submissive to the idea of such a police state -- all in the name of hopefully catching a criminal as they are committing a crime, or hopefully even before they do.

What if the above could be done remotely?
 
MrAverigeUser said:
That´s WRONG.

Knowing that after 10 faulty passcodes the iPhone will erase automatically all stored dada, they have NOT tried to use brute force but other technics.
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, that erase only happens if the user has selected that option. Unless something has changed in iOS 9 when I wasn't paying attention.

Cheers
 
I'm with Apple on this one. Once the iPhone's encryption can be cracked, that capability won't be limited to the US government. Heck, even if it was guaranteed to stay limited to the FBI, I wouldn't trust them with it. Snowden's done a lot of harm, but he's also made us aware of how little the US gov't values the privacy of individuals. Their use of a workaround to crack iOS encryption wouldn't be limited to terrorist investigations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RogerWilco
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back