Twitter, eBay, Airbnb, Reddit and More Officially Supporting Apple in FBI Fight [Updated]

[Michaelgtrusa]

Very good news.

 

[Tech198]

Here's what i found on Wikipedia :

"McAfeefounderJohn McAfeehas publicly volunteered to decrypt the iPhone used by the San Bernardino shooters, avoiding the need for Apple to build a backdoor. McAfee claims that he and his team can complete the task in three weeks, and that the FBI has not been able to accomplish the task on its own because of what he claims to be a lack of "true hackers" working for them."

So FBI say they don't have "true hackers" but a antivirus company can do it in 3 weeks ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_v._Apple

 

[8692574]

Here's what i found on Wikipedia :

"McAfeefounderJohn McAfeehas publicly volunteered to decrypt the iPhone used by the San Bernardino shooters, avoiding the need for Apple to build a backdoor. McAfee claims that he and his team can complete the task in three weeks, and that the FBI has not been able to accomplish the task on its own because of what he claims to be a lack of "true hackers" working for them."

So FBI say they don't have "true hackers" but a antivirus company can do it in 3 weeks ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_v._Apple

Advertizing at it's best!!

McAwhat??

 

[bushido]

even the United Nations have jumped in now "this may very well open Pandoras Box" they said

 

[keysofanxiety]

No matter what side

Because the words would be hollow. There have always been men like you, born with the benefit of a free society of laws, and spineless enough to give them away rather than make difficult decisions, ready to sacrifice a good that is real and material and present even now for a potential good later. If you accept that, that's your decision, but don't you dare bloviate at me as though my intractable desire to protect the rights guaranteed each of us, even you, is somehow a mark of stupidity.

One of the most articulated and truest comments I've read on this subject. Thank you for saying it how it is.

 

[Benjamin Frost]

Actually Apple does think privacy trumps everything. They built, practically speaking, an unbreakable encryption system for their phone. They could have approached the issue in a more measured way if they had wanted to, but they decided privacy was of the utmost importance.

In this particular case, the damage is done and I support Apple's position. If they engineered a version of iOS to bypass the existing security system, it would be a disaster, essentially a master key for anyone who had the software. But that doesn't mean Apple holds any sort of moral or ethical high ground here.

They are providing a means to secure information with 99.99999999% certainty that no one will ever be able to access it, yet washing their hands of all responsibility when it comes to people using the fruits of their labor for terrible things. Some are sensational, like organizing a terrorist attack or running a child porn ring. Some are more mundane, like defrauding Medicare or making shady real estate deals that trample on low income people. The data, the evidence, that once existed in filing cabinets, notes on the fridge, floppy disks, etc. and could be collected using a legal search warrant is now locked away behind an impenetrable wall. And that's ok?

Your reasoning doesn't make sense.

We all have minds. Two criminals can get together and plot a crime in their heads. No-one can access that data other than through them. One criminal can plot a crime on his own; no need for any incriminating evidence anywhere—look at that guy who shot several people in a cinema, or the Scandinavian man who shot dozens.

You might as well accuse God for allowing us to think thoughts that no-one else can see.

A child can write details of a crime on a piece of paper, then burn that paper. I presume you'll be accusing the inventor of paper and manufacturers of paper of being privy to criminal activity and demand the outlawing of paper.

 

[kemal]

Looks like Blackberry has become the brand of choice by the FBI.

 

[Benjamin Frost]

The misguided attitude that the govt has a right to anything at anytime is unethical and dangerous.

A picture itself is not the crime btw. Possession of a pic of a crime doesn't make them a criminal. If it's something they took themselves then it still isn't a crime. Instead, it's proof of a crime.

I, and others, may be more inclined to agree with you if this was the only absolute way the FBI could have stopped this crime. However, the crime has been committed. The killers primary communication devices were both destroyed. This was his work phone that very likely, as stated by the FBI and many experts, it has zero value in terms of the investigation. And as a matter fact 90 to 95% of what's on this phone could be discovered through other methods such as using phone calls and data records in the metadata from the phone companies (or through other messages the FBI hadn't screwed up).

Hard to take the side of the FBI when there are so many other options if they just do their own work. But they use this as a way to try to force the hand of private companies and the government.

Quite.

And another thing: if a phone is physically destructible, then logically—at least, the twisted logic of the FBI, the FBI could demand that Apple should make a phone that is indestructible, so that criminal evidence is not destroyed. Where do they stop? Why should we have any privacy at all? It only makes it harder for the police to catch criminals.

The mind is inherently prone to corruption and evil. The safest way of preventing crime would be to forbid man from making any criminal thoughts at all. Currently, the only way of achieving that is the elimination of mankind.

Orwell dreamt up the nightmare of thoughtcrime in the novel 1984. We are truly seeing the nightmare coming true in 2016, and Big Brother is not just the FBI, but all governments—particularly the UK—who are trampling on our privacy with a big boot. To do so is to stamp out the human spirit forever.

God forbid.

 

[spazzcat]

Here's what i found on Wikipedia :

"McAfeefounderJohn McAfeehas publicly volunteered to decrypt the iPhone used by the San Bernardino shooters, avoiding the need for Apple to build a backdoor. McAfee claims that he and his team can complete the task in three weeks, and that the FBI has not been able to accomplish the task on its own because of what he claims to be a lack of "true hackers" working for them."

So FBI say they don't have "true hackers" but a antivirus company can do it in 3 weeks ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_v._Apple

This is telling me, antivirus companies write virus to keep themselves in business...

 

[Tycho24]

Lots of you seem to have a lot to hide

If not, THEY DONT GIVE A **** ABOUT YOU

1. 
   "In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist; And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist; And then they came for the Jews, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew; And then . . . they came for me . . .
   but there was no one left to speak up for me."

 

[darcyf]

I really feel for those five families who have sided with the FBI. Their grief is pushing them towards an outcome that would put even more people in greater danger, but grief is just that powerful of a force that it can do such things. This is why an impartial justice system is so vital. Flawed as most are.

 

[coolfactor]

I have very mixed feelings on this issue.

That said, the idea that we, as a society, should accept that phones, computers, and other digital devices protected by strong encryption are 100% private zones is like saying we should allow rooms the government may never, under any circumstance, access in a home.

No, the equivalent would be: FBI wants a webcam installed in every home that they can turn on anytime that they want to. With homes, they can break down the door. With today's strong encryption, the technology does not yet exist to break it, so they want law written that gives them a "digital doorway". It's an abuse of power.

I stand by Apple on this.

 

[Superhai]

That said, the idea that we, as a society, should accept that phones, computers, and other digital devices protected by strong encryption are 100% private zones is like saying we should allow rooms the government may never, under any circumstance, access in a home. [...]

If the FBI knows that X is a pedophile and has shoeboxes full of kiddie porn pictures in a room at his house, should they not be allowed to serve a warrant and search the home?

It is not any room in your home, but more the safe where you keep your most valuable information (it is just that is equally practical and cost-effective to keep our crap as well). Do safe manufacturers keep a master key available to any agency that asks for it? Of course the manufacturer will assist in breaking the safe, as Apple has done in this case. But demanding that the manufacturer creates a master key is different.

There are no-one as I am aware of who deny that a police agency should have the right to search a home or safe or phone if they believe it contains child-porn, or any other criminal activity or evidence of. The question is how far should they be able to go. On the flip-side as I have said before, parents should be able to store pictures of their loved ones on their phones without fearing that paedophiles can access them. A compromised security regime gives the criminals equal access as FBI or other agencies.

And phones don't just store pictures of loved ones or yourself. Many many people use them for confidential documents which if compromised can help terrorists plan or make attacks easier or more efficient. It can be anything from building plans, security/safety instructions plans etc.

And moreover you have industrial espionage, smuggling, identity theft, economic crimes, and also some petty crimes made easier with poorer security of our digital devices.

 

[DJ Dilbert]

I know this is just a theory, but with just about every tech company under the sun backing Apple on privacy, perhaps we'll end up seeing a level of security everywhere and on every device that we never thought was possible. Something that no company can break into and cannot give access even if ordered to.

 

[dk001]

I wonder if FBI will join these companies too.

The NSA likely has but with the brief marked TSEO and a gag order in place preventing any disclosure we will never know the if or the what.

 

[duffman9000]

Most corporation will never stand against the government. Why? because payback is hell. So rejoice while it lasts because it will not last long.

True, but if payback comes expect Apple and hopefully the other tech companies on board to give the government hell in return.

 

[Wondercow]

You are wrong. Entering your passcode is like opening your door to police officers with a search warrant.

You are, if memory serves, from the UK and the poster to whom you replied may not be. As I understand your laws, throughout the EU one must provide passwords to law enforcement. In the US and Canada things are different: we don't have to give our passwords to the authorities; however, we can be forced to place a finger on the scanner to unlock a device.

Edit: "Throughout", not "through"

 

[stanman64]

This is fantastic.

On the other side, not to be harsh... but the families of the victims are being ignorant. They are putting emotion over logic. They are willing to compromise hundreds of millions of devices for something that could be nothing due to their emotional attachment. I understand where they are coming from, but they are being selfish. I would like to say even if I were in their shoes, I would be able to see what is right, but then again, who knows...
[doublepost=1457107533][/doublepost]

I know this is just a theory, but with just about every tech company under the sun backing Apple on privacy, perhaps we'll end up seeing a level of security everywhere and on every device that we never thought was possible. Something that no company can break into and cannot give access even if ordered to.

Like a kind of rally by all tech companies binding together... I like it.

"Yeah well if you want to steal our data, we will just make it impossible everywhere! Take that government!"

 

[Wondercow]

I know this is just a theory, but with just about every tech company under the sun backing Apple on privacy, perhaps we'll end up seeing a level of security everywhere and on every device that we never thought was possible. Something that no company can break into and cannot give access even if ordered to.

You know what the odd thing is, though? Amazon seems to be getting rid of device-level encryption. It's been depreciated in the latest Fire OS, yet they threw their hat in with Apple on this issue!

 

[dk001]

I don't find this troubling at all. Who cares if someone has something on their phone. That something is just a picture or words. Pictures and words should not be against the law. When people really break the law is when they do something physical, like take the pictures, make the bomb, hit the kid, etc. Needing pictures and words from a phone are just excuses for government overreach and for the government to take the easy way out. There were not any smart phones 50 years ago, yet we still caught terrorists, thieves, child pornographers, etc.

Bad people cannot hide from the authorities even if they have encrypted phones. They will still make mistakes. They will still get caught. We don't need to make all phones easy to read in order to catch criminals. If that is the goal, they you have to be OK with the government monitoring every phone call and every email. Because that makes catching the criminal really really easy.

The other issue is that once the government can read the phone, then the bad guys and gals will find another way to store information and the only result of this goody-too-shoes approach is the LACK of security us good-guys and good-gals have against hackers.

One aspect many forget is that the data on a device is not what leads to a capture. The data and the data review is reactive, not proactive for the case. It can lead to other suspects or confirm events. It is still reactive. After the fact.

If the FBI is really pushing on prevention, they need a proactive approach .... hmmmm .... surveillance. Remote stealthy access that allows them to watch... Wait. That's what the NSA is for isn't it?

So what exactly does the FBI want? In the end I suspect (what a word!) they want the ability to engage in stealthy real-time surveillance of whomever they choose whenever they choose. And they want corporate America to build it for them. This is followed by requests from China, Russia, France, England,...

Sounds ludicrous yet is a natural progressive follow through on what the FBI is asking for. Fekkin' scary it is.
[doublepost=1457109024][/doublepost]

Actually Apple does think privacy trumps everything. They built, practically speaking, an unbreakable encryption system for their phone. They could have approached the issue in a more measured way if they had wanted to, but they decided privacy was of the utmost importance.

In this particular case, the damage is done and I support Apple's position. If they engineered a version of iOS to bypass the existing security system, it would be a disaster, essentially a master key for anyone who had the software. But that doesn't mean Apple holds any sort of moral or ethical high ground here.

They are providing a means to secure information with 99.99999999% certainty that no one will ever be able to access it, yet washing their hands of all responsibility when it comes to people using the fruits of their labor for terrible things. Some are sensational, like organizing a terrorist attack or running a child porn ring. Some are more mundane, like defrauding Medicare or making shady real estate deals that trample on low income people. The data, the evidence, that once existed in filing cabinets, notes on the fridge, floppy disks, etc. and could be collected using a legal search warrant is now locked away behind an impenetrable wall. And that's ok?

And Apple is correct. Look at it from an agents purview.

1. Warrant for device access.
2. Data is produced from target device.
3. Data includes email, texts, financial, investments, health, contacts, etc ...
4. Using said data, law enforcement goes after other aspects of the suspects life
5. Using said data, law enforcement goes after anyone else listed or referenced in said device
6. Two months later you are found to be a non-person of interest.
7. Law enforcement still has all your data; forever.

Your device has more information on it than any other single thing you own. It's like granting law enforcement a warrant that says "ALL" on it triggering an in depth fishing expedition. A serious breach of your constitutional rights well beyond just "privacy".

Now add in other nation states that have the same requests.
This is so far beyond "privacy". However it started with a violation of it.

 

[Wondercow]

1. Warrant for device access.
2. Data is produced from target device.
3. Data includes email, texts, financial, investments, health, contacts, etc ...
4. Using said data, law enforcement goes after other aspects of the suspects life
5. Using said data, law enforcement goes after anyone else listed or referenced in said device
6. Two months later you are found to be a non-person of interest.
7. Law enforcement still has all your data; forever.

Your device has more information on it than any other single thing you own. It's like granting law enforcement a warrant that says "ALL" on it triggering an in depth fishing expedition. A serious breach of your constitutional rights well beyond just "privacy".

I'm not from the US, nor did I live through the '50s, but even I can see the parallels to McCarthyism--I wonder why so many others can't?

 

[dk001]

Are you kidding? If someone has a picture of a kid getting raping on his phone, that's totally fine? Who cares?

It's not just pictures and words. It's a person's life. It's a kid whose entire life is destroyed. What kind of utterly broken human being can't see that?

Yes, 50 years ago there were no smart phones. We have a genius in the house! And yes we still caught terrorists and child pornographers and all the other bad guys. Because the evidence was often tangible and could be gathered via a search warrant, via legal wire tapping, etc. But in the age of encryption, much of the evidence that once existed in a tangible form is now digital and locked away behind an impenetrable wall.

Your attitude is incredibly naive. More and more of the incriminating evidence that law enforcement needs lives on encrypted phones, not in filing cabinets, not in shoeboxes in the basement, not buried in the back yard.

I find the entire issue very troubling as I value my privacy. But the belief that all of our digital information should be a no-go zone for law enforcement and that we somehow have a right to absolute 100% privacy above all else in the digital realm is unethical.

That is the challenge and why this is so important.
I can request a warrant for Brown's domicile looking for photo's, etc.... What I cannot do is request a warrant for Brown's domicile for "everything / anywhere".
That is what is being asked with a smartphone or similar device.
This is aside from even getting in which is the bigger issue; forced conscription.

It's a minefield that needs a solution. I have not clue one on how to address it. I do know the FBI's request is not it.

 

[barmann]

Ask yourself this : Do you trust the government, and its agencies ?
For me, the answer is , in principle, yes; in reality sometimes more, sometimes less .

That's because, in principle, the government is by the people, for the people, and nothing else .
Checks and balances don't always work, hence the occassional doubts, but the US are no North Korea .

Now, do you trust private corporations and wealthy individuals, especially when they interfere with social or legal matters ?
Do you really want Apple, or any big company, have any say in law making ?

 

[unplugme71]

Nice to see a lot of tech giants backing a good cause. It's only a matter of time before the military, ATF, DEA, DOE, DOA, etc stands behind this,

 

[rsdotscot]

My son bought me a Fire TV Stick for the holidays and I stopped using that because Amazon dropped their encryption today.

I stopped buying from Amazon when they kicked Wikileaks off their servers without .gov even asking them to. They're the teacher's pet of tech companies.
[doublepost=1457127354][/doublepost]

That's because, in principle, the government is by the people, for the people, and nothing else .

Except when it's bought and paid for by special interest groups.