U.S. Government Calls Apple's Opposition to iPhone Unlocking Order a 'Diversion,' Says Fears Are 'Overblown'

[pooleman]

On the one hand there's probably no reason that Apple couldn't create a special firmware load for this device that would allow a brute attack to succeed and honor the DOJ request.

On the other hand that opens Pandora's Box when Apple will be asked to do the same thing hundreds of times a year anytime any local/state/national government wants the same thing.. they will have set the precedent.

I think the precident the has already been set. I personally don't understand why Apple can't unlock the phone and create a new encryption sequence (or whatever the proper term is) in a new iOS release. The Terrorists phone will be unlocked and the other phones out there will be updated and untouchable to the Feds.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Um, no.
Before Apple gets to have a go at that phone, they will need to have repeated tries of a range of phones to ensure it does not accidentally break. The need to guarantee that the software will work, not modifications get done to the firmware/storage etc. This means it needs, by design, to work on multiple devices .

There are also other law enforcement agencies waiting in the wings to get their hundreds of phones cracked, just as soon as the precedent can be created.

If this goes ahead, the FBI wins, godwins law may start applying to the US.

Plus there is one more particular. In order to comply with the FBI requests, the "hacking software" will have to be developed as by FBI specifications. In other words, it's the FBI that would have to decide the final requirement to say that Apple complied with it. I don't expect to see the FBI writing in the SRD that "this software shall work only on iPhone with UDID 20942234".

 

[pat500000]

If fear was overblown...FBI has no reason to worry about backdoor..."there's nothing to fear."

 

[yaxomoxay]

I think the precident the has already been set. I personally don't understand why Apple can't unlock the phone and create a new encryption sequence (or whatever the proper term is) in a new iOS release. The Terrorists phone will be unlocked and the other phones out there will be updated and untouchable to the Feds.

because as soon as they develop and distribute it that backdoor will be the most sought piece of tech by hackers, crackers, fanboys, governments, terrorists, competitors.

If we want to go Tom Clancy on this, there is another danger. The backdoor is the dream of any government/terrorist group. You just need a single article by a newspaper saying that "XYZ is in charge of developing the code to break the iphone, and he was successful" and you've put XYZ and his family in serious danger.

 

[jmpage2]

I think the precident the has already been set. I personally don't understand why Apple can't unlock the phone and create a new encryption sequence (or whatever the proper term is) in a new iOS release. The Terrorists phone will be unlocked and the other phones out there will be updated and untouchable to the Feds.

There's absolutely no reason that Apple can't create a special FW version for this one phone that is rooted and doesn't apply to any other devices... get that phone upgraded to that FW release and make it vulnerable to an attack.

However I am opposed on any number of reasons to Apple doing it. Things like that have a tendency to get out into the wild and once they do, all bets are off.

Additionally, Apple does not keep the encryption keys of their devices any longer.... that's why they can no longer honor these types of requests. The drive of the phone is literally encrypted with a key that Apple does not have.

 

[pooleman]

because as soon as they develop and distribute it that backdoor will be the most sought piece of tech by hackers, crackers, fanboys, governments, terrorists, competitors.

If we want to go Tom Clancy on this, there is another danger. The backdoor is the dream of any government/terrorist group. You just need a single article by a newspaper saying that "XYZ is in charge of developing the code to break the iphone, and he was successful" and you've put XYZ and his family in serious danger.

What if this backdoor or "key" was developed to only work if the physical phone had to be physically plugged in to the decryption tool? That way a warrant would have to be sought and issued, and executed instead of anyone just accessing your phone over the air?
[doublepost=1457651051][/doublepost]

There's absolutely no reason that Apple can't create a special FW version for this one phone that is rooted and doesn't apply to any other devices... get that phone upgraded to that FW release and make it vulnerable to an attack.

However I am opposed on any number of reasons to Apple doing it. Things like that have a tendency to get out into the wild and once they do, all bets are off.

Additionally, Apple does not keep the encryption keys of their devices any longer.... that's why they can no longer honor these types of requests. The drive of the phone is literally encrypted with a key that Apple does not have.

For the record I'm not trying to argue with you.

 

[ActionableMango]

The Government cannot force a private company to create something that doesn't exist. That is slavery.

Are you kidding? They do that all the time. When I worked at AT&T the government passed all sorts of regulation for features that didn't exist, and we had to build them. Enhanced 9-1-1, Local Number Portability, Wireless Emergency Alerts, etc. And yes, probably some stuff for the FBI or NSA too, but I wouldn't know about that.

 

[nt5672]

well this just shows that politicians have no idea about how technology actually works as usual. shocker

They know exactly how it works, they just don't give a hoot. They want absolute power and the people will eventually give it to them.
[doublepost=1457652032][/doublepost]

It already has more.

What bothers many is how many people prefer corporations governing we the people, instead of we the people. The anti-government folk have yet to put out anything that makes having big business do governing being a superior choice.
[doublepost=1457649956][/doublepost]
. . . .

That's easy, corporations cannot lock you up. The government can with or without reason and throw away the key (they just gave to call it terrorism, at least today, tomorrow who knows). Corporations can't just walk in and take your money, i.e. Obamacare. The government can and did. Corporations can't just walk in take your property. Law enforcement (the government) can, its called Civil Forfeiture and it is now lawful in most jurisdictions. You have no recourse even if you are not convicted or even charged with a crime.

Considering what we know about the government why would anyone with a reasonable logical mind want any government agency to have more power?

 

[eac25]

I just got the taste of bile in the back of my mouth from reading that brief. This is going to get ugly on the 22nd...

 

[KJL3000]

loosing privacy and freedom is where terrorism wins.

 

[eac25]

Um, no.
Before Apple gets to have a go at that phone, they will need to have repeated tries of a range of phones to ensure it does not accidentally break. The need to guarantee that the software will work, not modifications get done to the firmware/storage etc. This means it needs, by design, to work on multiple devices .

Actually, they do not need to write it so it will run on multiple devices - they can write multiple instances for the multiple test devices and sign each independently, then once proof of concept is validated write the specific instance for the subject device and sign that.

 

[brianvictor7]

Prosecutors representing the United States government today filed another document (via The Verge) to support the motion to compel Apple to unlock the iPhone used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook, calling the original order a "modest" request that would not result in a universal "master key" and dismissing many of Apple's legal arguments.

The document says Apple's rhetoric is false and "corrosive of the very institutions that are best able to safeguard our liberty and our rights." Apple's efforts, and those of its supporters, to highlight the wider issues the order could have on encryption, are a "diversion," says the government.

Unsurprisingly, the government argues that the All Writs Act does, in fact, give the courts the power to compel Apple to unlock the iPhone, disagreeing with Apple's argument that Congress' choice not to expand on the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act serves as evidence Congress has limited the assistance companies must provide to law enforcement.

It also walks through several prior court cases in an effort to challenge many of Apple's claims, including that no company has been conscripted to produce code for the government and that it would be an undue burden for Apple to create new software for the FBI.

Apple is accused of "deliberately" raising technological barriers preventing the government from obtaining the data on the iPhone through a lawful warrant. "Apple alone can remove those barriers so the FBI can search the phone," reads the document, "and it can do so without undue burden." Apple is "one of the richest and most tech-savvy companies in the world," and is "more than able to comply with the AWA order." The government goes on to suggest that there's no evidence a narrow order could apply to additional devices in the future, but if it does, Apple is "more than able to comply with a large volume of law-enforcement requests."Several sections in the motion also disagree with the notion that the software could be used on other devices and could fall into the hands of hackers or lead to Apple being forced to comply with data requests from foreign governments.Apple and the U.S. government have been engaged in a fierce public battle over the order that would require Apple to help the FBI break into the iPhone of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook by creating new software to circumvent passcode restrictions on the device. Apple believes complying with the demand would set a dangerous precedent that could lead to the overall weakening of encryption on smartphones and other electronic devices.

Apple executives, including Tim Cook, Eddy Cue, and Craig Federighi have all given public interviews in recent weeks explaining Apple's stance, positioning the government's request as an overreach of power that could snowball into a continual stream of invasive demands impacting the privacy rights of its customers across the world.

Apple is scheduled to appear in court to fight the order on March 22, the day after its planned March 21 event that will see the debut of the iPhone SE and the new 9.7-inch iPad.

Update: Apple legal chief Bruce Sewell spoke with reporters following the government's filing, reports CNBC. He said the DOJ is "desperate" and has "thrown all decorum to the wind."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. Government Calls Apple's Opposition to iPhone Unlocking Order a 'Diversion,' Says Fears Are 'Overblown'

Our fears are only overblown until they aren't :/

 

[Gudi]

Apple speculates that if it submits to a lawful order in America, Apple will have no choice but to help other totalitarian regimes suppress dissidents around the globe all the same.

They really think, they are something special, don't they?

Apple's fears are overblown for reasons both factual and legal.

Why don't you tell that dissident Snowden! When he gets traced by Kill Team 6.

 

[eac25]

loosing privacy and freedom is where terrorism wins.

Honestly, I'm not entirely sure this actually even was an act of terrorism. I think it was a mass killing, certainly, by a couple of nut jobs that were inspired by terrorist organizations and acts. But I'm not so sure that actually makes it a terrorist act.

Fine line, I know - and just a thought - but one that potentially weakens the FBI's case in a way (i.e., that it's actually *not* a public safety issue any more since the killers are dead). Thoughts???

 

[KJL3000]

 

[bruinsrme]

Is this the same government that said the Iran deal was good for everyone?
Didn't Iran just launch a ballistic missile?

 

[Benjamin Frost]

I have to say, you Americans here on MacRumors seem like a good bunch of fellows, but your government is appalling. I don't hold the UK one in high esteem, either.

These statements from them are nothing short of embarrassing and unworthy of intelligent discourse. They appear to be taking the judges for cretins with low intelligence.

My gut feeling is that the US security departments need a complete overhaul, starting with the removal of James Comey. Is this or is this not the most incompetent US government in its history?

 

[Rocketman]

Is this the same government that said the Iran deal was good for everyone?
Didn't Iran just launch a ballistic missile?

So did N Korea and showed off a miniaturized nuke on the same day.

Neutron bomb is looking pretty good now, eh?
[doublepost=1457654342][/doublepost]

My gut feeling is that the US security departments need a complete overhaul, starting with the removal of James Comey. Is this or is this not the most incompetent US government in its history?

As a USA patriot I agree. BTW UK is the 51st state these days. We are that close.

 

[rdlink]

I love the smell of desperation in the morning.

 

[KJL3000]

I have to say, you Americans here on MacRumors seem like a good bunch of fellows, but your government is appalling. I don't hold the UK one in high esteem, either.

These statements from them are nothing short of embarrassing and unworthy of intelligent discourse. They appear to be taking the judges for cretins with low intelligence.

My gut feeling is that the US security departments need a complete overhaul, starting with the removal of James Comey. Is this or is this not the most incompetent US government in its history?

I don't think there's a government out there that isn't dreaming about surveillance in certain degrees even if they would never admit it ... No matter what political system. It's the easiest way to keep people in control. In the end, it is all about power, all this has nothing to do with making our lives securer in any way... This is happening worldwide, not only in the US...

 

[adamneer]

The US government is incredibly concerned with the safety and well-being of its citizens, clearly. That's why they are so hard on the tobacco industry, which causes over 480,000 deaths per year in America alone. I mean, they still allow them to sell cigarettes, sure, but they won't even allow them to advertise directly to children anymore!

 

[ks-man]

Well for all the people who said that the FBI should design a system to do it themselves. Guess that might be their next step. This really could put Apple in a difficult position. No way they could allow their source code out

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/fbi-threatens-to-demand-apple-s-secret-source-code-214832611.html

 

[Flight Plan]

So serious question if Apple is forced to do this: What happens when their own employees don't want to be on the feature team for this? Apple is going to have a hard time finding iOS engineers that are going to willingly corrode the security of the platform.

An even MORE SERIOUS question.

For the purpose of this question, let's assume that Apple loses the case and is forced to provide a back door. Yes, it is a back door, don't try to mess with me on this.

Now what happens when a former employee uses that back door to share US strategic secrets with any badguys, foreign or domestic?

Or maybe they'll just post online the personal information of say, everybody being treated at one particular drug rehab clinic, or maybe a health clinic that specializes in treating for mental health or HIV?

Apple needs to say no, even if there are penalties forthcoming.
[doublepost=1457656021][/doublepost]

Hi Guys.

FBI states Apple has not charged them for past cooperation as allowed by law.
Item #1. Bill them for all past cooperation so some bean counter has to notice fallout from this action.

How will that change anything? It's not THEIR money, it's mine!

...lots of other stuff...

TL;DR. The point is that the government doesn't have the right to do this, and the government should have prevented the SB terrorists from even gaining entry into the US. This is the fault of the President and both houses of Congress. That's how simple this is.

 

[Rogifan]

Are you kidding? They do that all the time. When I worked at AT&T the government passed all sorts of regulation for features that didn't exist, and we had to build them. Enhanced 9-1-1, Local Number Portability, Wireless Emergency Alerts, etc. And yes, probably some stuff for the FBI or NSA too, but I wouldn't know about that.

Where those laws passed by Congress? What Apple is being asked to do isn't coming from Congress.

 

[Avenged110]

Also it is not just going to be Apple that is affected by a precedent being set. All tech companies will be exposed to this precedent. DOJ will be knocking on other tech companies saying "we need information and you have to do it because if Apple can and has to do it, so do you"

Also worth noting, that opens up countless opportunities for potential security leaks. Right now, the barrier to entry (broken iOS security) is a team at Apple creating code and signing it. If that is overcome, wouldn't it be far easier for an individual to potentially leak information?
-----

Where[sic] those laws passed by Congress? What Apple is being asked to do isn't coming from Congress.

If anything, that is what Apple is specifically requesting. 'Fight the battle over encryption in Congress.'
-----
Side note: having not looked into this issue too closely, hopefully someone more informed can let me know: has it ever even been confirmed that the phone does, in fact, have a 4-digit passcode on it? Because if it doesn't, isn't this all pretty much for nothing?