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.
U.S. Attorney General Says iPhone Unlock Request Won't Lead to Widespread Privacy Breaches
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Or overt propaganda. Wanna see something funny? Watch RT TV sometime. Pure Russian propaganda. Then compare it to the public statements of officials of the Executive branch for the past couple of years. Same techniques. Then get a paper bag ready and watch MSNBC.
cites:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
http://www.logicalfallacies.info
cites:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
http://www.logicalfallacies.info
Why doesn't she understand?
First of all that's not how it works. Like Apple says, doing this would create a sort of universal "skeleton key" to backdoor any iPhone.
Secondly the American people simply do not trust the 3 letter agencies anymore.
Even funnier is sitting down with Colbert to try and justify this backdoor to the public when most of his viewers are young liberal white men, the exact people who will absolutely refuse to budge when it comes to encryption!
First of all that's not how it works. Like Apple says, doing this would create a sort of universal "skeleton key" to backdoor any iPhone.
Secondly the American people simply do not trust the 3 letter agencies anymore.
Even funnier is sitting down with Colbert to try and justify this backdoor to the public when most of his viewers are young liberal white men, the exact people who will absolutely refuse to budge when it comes to encryption!
I read somewhere the city was actually paying for some remote access platform/service for managing and insuring access to the phones.
They just didn't install it on a lot of the phones.
To be fair, they don't want a back door. If the phone was a castle, they're not asking Apple to build a secret passage, just fill in the moat and permanently drop the drawbridge so they can take their time easy with a battering ram.
While it might be a first for an AG, late night talk shows have had a definite impact. They can and do bring up important issues (although I'll grant Colbert's current show isn't traditionally one of those, his previous one was.)
Back door is a term of art. Your analogy was, well, an analogy. They want access to phones and they want a tool that they can replicate to phones outside of the "spy" jurisdiction to the "criminal" jurisdiction. They want it to offset total incompetence of the FEDGOV authorities on how they handled evidence to begin with because they BRICKED IT!!!!!
Loretta Lynch said:
Liar. Lightweight Colbert didn't call her out on anything and wonders why his ratings are in the trash.
Loretta Lynch said:
So important that you, Comey, and Obama get to use the first phones with a backdoor and will continue using backdoor-enabled phones for the rest of your lives? If it's safe and secure for everyone, it should be safe and secure for you guys, too, right?
Oh you won't?
The political class of this country needs a reset. It's ridiculous that propaganda like this passes for news and that interviewers don't get hostile with them the moment they start pushing an agenda.
Yea... just trust us...
It isn't like we we just snuck CISA into a last-minute budget bill that most of Congress-persons didn't even read or realize was there.... or give the executive branch over-reaching control of trade agreements... or lost hundreds of billions of dollars in the defense department because, you know, the data is in old COBOL systems so we just can't get at it anymore, oopsie.... or...
It isn't like we we just snuck CISA into a last-minute budget bill that most of Congress-persons didn't even read or realize was there.... or give the executive branch over-reaching control of trade agreements... or lost hundreds of billions of dollars in the defense department because, you know, the data is in old COBOL systems so we just can't get at it anymore, oopsie.... or...
GOVos for uncrackable with Russian cracking or encryption. Gov os2 for no intrusion due to Russian or Turkish encryption.
First we had to suffer under Eric Holder. And now this lady….
We are watching a historic event unfolding.
The USG and the federal establishment are going absolutely ballistic over the resistance to the introduction of the total surveillance state.
If they don't succeed in capturing the publics support by appearing on talk shows the next step will be another false flag.
How about having a gang of iPhone/iPad equipped "Takfiri"-patsies blowing up something.
Maybe something like this?
[doublepost=1457784375][/doublepost]Trust us they say...
FBI channels Kafka with new rules on slurping Americans' private data
I'd rather trust a rattle snake.
The USG and the federal establishment are going absolutely ballistic over the resistance to the introduction of the total surveillance state.
If they don't succeed in capturing the publics support by appearing on talk shows the next step will be another false flag.
How about having a gang of iPhone/iPad equipped "Takfiri"-patsies blowing up something.
Maybe something like this?
FBI channels Kafka with new rules on slurping Americans' private data
I'd rather trust a rattle snake.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Daily_Show_with_Jon_Stewart_guests
Why doesn't she understand?
First of all that's not how it works. Like Apple says, doing this would create a sort of universal "skeleton key" to backdoor any iPhone.
Secondly the American people simply do not trust the 3 letter agencies anymore.
Even funnier is sitting down with Colbert to try and justify this backdoor to the public when most of his viewers are young liberal white men, the exact people who will absolutely refuse to budge when it comes to encryption!
How about someone from Apple says that under oath. So far, Apple has been playing the media like a finely tuned piano.
With the court date for the iPhone unlocking case between Apple and the FBI just over a week away, United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch decided to speak on the issue during an episode of The Late Show With Stephen Colbert last night (via TechCrunch). After Colbert asked about her likely stance on the topic, Lynch said that she has "had a number of great conversations with Tim Cook on issues of privacy," and remarked on the sensitivity of the issue.
As it has been heavily reported since mid-February, the case revolves around the FBI's request for Apple to unlock the iPhone 5c of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook. Apple CEO Tim Cook has taken a stance against the court order, which Colbert brought up to Lynch in last night's interview. The host noted Cook's belief that creating such a backdoor into the iPhone could lead to a "slippery slope" into privacy concerns for all Apple device users.
Lynch's defense lies in Cook's alleged misrepresentation of what the FBI wants the company to do in regards to Farook's iPhone. In the interview, she claims that they are "not asking for a backdoor," and that the court order filed requesting Apple's compliance is "very narrow," suggesting Cook's fear of an anti-privacy precedent is unwarranted.
Lynch's comments support a recent document released by the prosecutors representing the United States government in the case against Apple, in which they refer to the original filing for Apple's participation a "modest" request that would never lead to a "master key" that could unlock all iPhones against the will of their owners. Nevertheless, Apple will appear in court to fight the order on March 22, following the recently confirmed March 21 date of its "Let Us Loop You In" media event.
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: U.S. Attorney General Says iPhone Unlock Request Won't Lead to Widespread Privacy Breaches
Total Liar
Me too (I pay more this year than last, but the increase was COLA-level, not the 20-30% it had been every single year prior to ACA taking effect). And, my daughters' birth control is 100% covered, which is huge. And they are eligible to stay on my insurance much longer than before. And when they do age out or set out they will have a base level of insurance available to them as well, which was certainly not the case when I had to start providing for my own family.
It isn't single-payer, and I think that we should still keep that as a goal. But politically-motivated anecdotes aside, the ACA has done a hell of a lot of good.
Still, Obama and his AG are dead wrong on this issue. See how an adult can disagree with someone on one issue - even a very important issue - without denigrating them and saying they are always wrong on everything all the time?
[doublepost=1457807933][/doublepost]
Um, they have already stated that in a filing to the court, under oath. See https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2722199-5-15-MJ-00451-SP-USA-v-Black-Lexus-IS300.html for the Apple Motion to Vacate, which is a court document, signed and affirmed under penalty of perjury.
This is not Apple playing the press. This is Apple's sworn statements.
Of course and duh, for back ups etc.
However, my question was to explore if Apple would be willing to unlock a phone for something that was of extreme importance. (Think of whatever comes to mind, nuclear launch codes, defending earth from a meteorite hit, saving the entire planet or whatever.)
I would hope the answer is still no, regardless of what happens!
If there would be even that one exception, all encryption talk is bogus!
The phone information is worthless. It always has been and the FBI knows that.
There is ZERO intent to bring the phone information to trial, so defence lawyers are irrelevant.
However the FBI WILL have a phone that has the software on it. THAT will allow them to extract the software, and reverse engineering of that will allow them to attack any phone in the world, because they have the proof of concept code that details the weaknesses and how to attack them. The small piece of code that supposedly makes it useable on 1 phone only, well that is right up there with serial numbers, and we know how often they get cracked on commercial software.
This entire discussion is about unlocking phones for police, foreign governments, etc.
For a USA company like Apple they already do extraordinary measures for NSA but cannot talk about it, or even acknowledge it happens at all. So already for the ticking bomb (NBC) scenario both Google and Apple are on board.
That is yet another reason why the executive branch position is misdirection, lying and and a NEW extreme overreach. They want to gain total information awareness in a criminal prosecution arrangement like they already have for spying which shields U.S. Citizens from surveillance. If they use it for criminal prosecution they are required to disclose methods of the surveillance. For spying they do not, but cannot do a criminal prosecution. Only a kill or rendition order. Hence Guantanamo and getting total domestic information awareness is the goal here. The problem being there is no limit to domestic criminal cases associated so we lose essentially all remaining rights we have, all at once. Pleading the 5th would lose essentially all its value since the evidence would already be visible in hundreds more places than it is now. They could enforce all crimes essentially robotically.
Think of it like a photo ticket. They have been abused by governments so badly, lowering yellow light durations, secretly setting it to ticket 1-2 tenths of a second too soon so it is not discernible by attorneys, and other abuses, so many cities have been ordered by judges to remove them. Now imagine that technology applied to any crime associated with your phone. Somebody sends you spam with child porn, you are an insta-felon and all the other scenarios you can imagine. It is literally that bad.
So here we get to the nut. This is all actually about shutting down Guantanamo and having total information awareness domestically like they have now internationally. No other country has a constitution with rights like we have. We are the only country where the citizen is the sovereign, not the government.
USA is the only country Apple and Google can reside in and make the legal defense to protect encryption, due to a quirk in how our Constitution and Bill of Rights reads. An amazingly well thought out quirk by our founders, that shockingly protects even against technological improvements!
If USA made the tax laws any worse like Obama did and Hillary or Sanders say will certainly try, maybe Apple will do a corporate inversion and the entire planet will lose privacy rights then.
That's why both Democrats and Republicans should vote for a candidate that places the Constitution and BOR in high regard and will appoint judges with similar leanings, even if Democrats and Independents have to swallow their pride this year and vote Republican. The House and Senate already have a party majority that emphasizes these things. It also explains the internal Republican strife this season. To gain party support Trump will have to emphasize more fully Constitutional concern.
Rocketman
Last edited:
Just saying: Such a policy would obviously not have helped solving any crimes, because if the county had done all those things then the killer would most definitely not have left any evidence on that phone (it's unlikely anyway that he left any, since he destroyed his own two phones completely).
[doublepost=1457996024][/doublepost]
Apple's goal is to protect you from evil hackers (including for some people, evil hackers that are part of their own government). The state of security through passcode lock + deletion after ten attempts is: A hacker, actually just any person, has a one in thousand chance to unlock your phone. Nobody outside Apple can unlock it at all. Apple cannot unlock this phone _right now_. Apple cannot unlock the next generation of iPhones (5s) at all. Apple cannot unlock a phone with a serious passcode (8 digits). Nobody knows if Apple can create tools to unlock this phone. Apple refuses to create such tools.
For Apple, there would always be a balance act between the security of millions and millions of iPhone users, and the advantage of unlocking one phone. In the case in question, even top NSA people say that the balance is _against_ opening that iPhone, because the damage would be worse than the benefits. IF there was a situation where the balance was different, then Apple would unlock that phone. And then call back all iPhones and replace them with new, secure ones. I suppose Apple would need some truly outrageous information stored on that phone for that to happen.