FBI gets court order forcing Apple to engineer a backdoor into iPhone

2»

Comments

  • LincLinc Bard Detroit
    edited February 2016

    Ottawa Citizen Op-Ed
    In my judgment [...] Multinationals such as Apple (and Google and Microsoft) collect far more data about individuals than governments do, analyse it far more, and have far fewer constraints on how it gets used.

    This guy is an utter idiot who is confusing basic issues. You don't "collect and analyze" encrypted data. It's kinda the point.

    @Gargoyle
    It can be argued that this is hypocrisy on the part of Apple

    I don't see how that argument can be made honestly.

  • GargGarg Purveyor of Lincoln Nightmares

    @Linc said:

    Ottawa Citizen Op-Ed
    In my judgment [...] Multinationals such as Apple (and Google and Microsoft) collect far more data about individuals than governments do, analyse it far more, and have far fewer constraints on how it gets used.

    This guy is an utter idiot who is confusing basic issues. You don't "collect and analyze" encrypted data. It's kinda the point.

    He's just waving his hands in the direction of the large amount of data that these corporations have on us. I don't care if Apple treats certain parts of this personal data differently and throws it in an encrypted bucket, because to whatever extent they do that, that makes them the exception rather than the rule. He is right that when he says that corporations operate under less constraints with your data than the government does (legally, although it's clear that the government doesn't always follow the law).

    Plus, there are usually exceptions for the use of your personal data once it is de-identified. When that happens, we don't know in what ways its de-identified, how its aggregated, or how easy it would be to guess who I am again if you had the data.

    I don't think the Op-Ed is particularly insightful, I just expect that some people will make the connection between his argument that tech megacorps don't really care about our privacy because of [other actions], to another wherein they should just give up the facade and cooperate with the Feds.

  • LincLinc Bard Detroit

    @Gargoyle said:
    I don't care if Apple treats certain parts of this personal data differently and throws it in an encrypted bucket, because to whatever extent they do that, that makes them the exception rather than the rule.

    You don't care that Apple is trying to encrypt user data and make it inaccessible to everyone, themselves included, because everyone else is being promiscuous with your data?

    @Gargoyle said:
    He is right that when he says that corporations operate under less constraints with your data than the government does (legally, although it's clear that the government doesn't always follow the law).

    Yes. And he'd also be right if he said a lot of CEOs are wealthy. Or that it rains a lot in spring. And it'd have about as much to do with the legal issue at hand.

  • @Linc said:

    Ottawa Citizen Op-Ed
    In my judgment [...] Multinationals such as Apple (and Google and Microsoft) collect far more data about individuals than governments do, analyse it far more, and have far fewer constraints on how it gets used.

    This guy is an utter idiot who is confusing basic issues. You don't "collect and analyze" encrypted data. It's kinda the point.

    He's not talking about the phone. The data he's referring to is not encrypted from Apple or Google. It's decrypted when it reaches them and they mine it as they see fit. They may encrypt it on their servers but they have the keys and can decrypt it whenever they want.

    Apple already surrendered the cloud data they had.

  • LincLinc Bard Detroit
    edited February 2016

    @alberio said:
    They may encrypt it on their servers but they have the keys and can decrypt it whenever they want.

    That isn't true of all data. For example, iMessage data is end-to-end encrypted, and Apple does not have the keys.

    Apple already surrendered the cloud data they had.

    And they're working towards encrypting more of it, which means that sort of legal order won't necessarily be possible in the future. If they are forced to create this backdoor, that improvement and all made in the future are moot.

  • GargGarg Purveyor of Lincoln Nightmares

    @Linc, you're getting bogged down in the Apple particulars, but this case is important because of the implications for the users of all devices that don't want them snooped on. Do you want solidarity, or not?

  • @Linc - Really I'm agnostic on whose phone tech this is.

    The details of what is and isn't encrypted and what they do today vs what they are planning to do isn't all that important to the issue. The real issues are very much larger than just Apple and this phone. We won't solve the issue here. This needs to be a public debate and these things need to be looked at in the clear daylight not the shadows. The issues need to be looked at from many perspectives, legal, policy, markets, global impact.

    Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Facebook all act in their own self interest. Improving security is part of that. They don't all do it the same way. Some much less than others because they also don't have the same values. If those values coincide with consumer values then fine. If they don't then consumers can decide. If they give in on this they will erode consumer confidence and face all kinds of legal challenges. Many of those we will never hear about. In the long term they (not just Apple) are afraid of the offshore company that will produce a cheaper more secure phone.

    If you read the articles, it seems this only became public when the Feds forced it out. Apple had requested the order be sealed. Some of these have suggested they might have done it on the quiet. Who knows.

    There are also arguments the creation of this could be challenged as a forensic tool forcing outside review and risking exposure. Other concerns include law enforcement requests, secret FISC warrants, unfriendly powers, etc. Frankly if they loose, they are looking at a bag of snakes. The whole industry is. I'm sure many more arguments will emerge.

    I still think Apple did us a huge favour by bring this debate into the light. I just think the reasons they are fighting this are more complex.

  • LincLinc Bard Detroit

    @Gargoyle said:
    @Linc, you're getting bogged down in the Apple particulars, but this case is important because of the implications for the users of all devices that don't want them snooped on. Do you want solidarity, or not?

    I don't understand this reply or how it follows what I was trying to say so I'm going to assume we are talking past each other and just :mullet:

  • LincLinc Bard Detroit

    This. This is solid.

  • GargGarg Purveyor of Lincoln Nightmares

    "It is also clear that the government has made the considered decision that it is better off securing such crypto-legislative authority from the courts," Orenstein said, "rather than taking the chance that open legislative debate might produce a result less to its liking."

    Daaaamn. Hope Obamacare covers burn ointment.

    "The debate must happen today, and it must take place among legislators who are equipped to consider the technological and cultural realities of a world their predecessors could not begin to conceive," the judge wrote in the 50-page decision.

    I wish we had more than a couple legislators that were so equipped...

    LincBHHammyRahnalH102
  • LincLinc Bard Detroit
    edited March 2016

    Why Are We Fighting the Crypto Wars Again?
    The iPhone Crisis reignited a conflict that should have been settled in the 90s. The loser is our national security.

    For decades, crypto had been considered a taboo topic of discussion, so deep into classified territory that when academics wrote papers with cryptographic implications, the government would quickly classify those documents, banning access even to their authors. Open statements almost never came from the National Security Agency (its name was seldom uttered, even in Congress), and its directors avoided public appearances with a zeal that made Howard Hughes look like Donald Trump.

    Then came Diffie and Hellman

    Garg
  • LincLinc Bard Detroit

    Things are not going according to plan for the FBI and Justice Department.

    StrikesGarg
  • GargGarg Purveyor of Lincoln Nightmares

    I liked the Woz's comment on his recent AMA:

    All through my time with personal computers from the start, I developed an attitude that things like movement towards newer, better technologies - like the Macintosh computer, like the touchscreen of the iPhone - that these were making the human more important than the technology. We did not have to modify our ways of living. So the human became very important to me. And how do you represent what humanity is?
    You know what, I have things in my head, some very special people in my life that I don't talk about, that mean so much to me from the past. Those little things that I keep in my head are my little secrets. It's a part of my important world, my whole essence of my being. I also believe in honesty. If you tell somebody, "I am not snooping on you," or, "I am giving you some level of privacy; I will not look in your drawers," then you should keep your word and be honest. And I always try to avoid being a snoop myself, and it's rare in time that we can look back and say, "How should humans be treated?" Not, "How can the police run everything?"
    I was brought up in a time when communist Russia under Stalin was thought to be, everybody is spied on, everybody is looked into, every little thing can get you secretly thrown into prison. And, no. We had our Bill of Rights. And it's just dear to me. The Bill of Rights says some bad people won't do certain bad things because we're protecting humans to live as humans.
    So, I come from the side of personal liberties. But there are also other problems. Twice in my life I wrote things that could have been viruses. I threw away every bit of source code. I just got a chill inside. These are dangerous, dangerous things, and if some code gets written in an Apple product that lets people in, bad people are going to find their way to it, very likely.

  • Strangely CALEA may HELP apple in this case ...

    https://backchannel.com/the-law-is-clear-the-fbi-cannot-make-apple-rewrite-its-os-9ae60c3bbc7b

    And no I'm not trolling

  • Hilarious and informative piece by John Oliver on Encryption https://youtube.com/watch?v=zsjZ2r9Ygzw

  • aspieRommelaspieRommel Icrontic politico Indianapolis, IN

    I figure everyone knows about this by now but the FBI got a 3rd party to crack it. Withdrawing order.

  • LincLinc Bard Detroit

    @aspieRommel said:
    I figure everyone knows about this by now but the FBI got a 3rd party to crack it. Withdrawing order.

    Pft. Also called "saving face while conceding".

    GHoosdumWinfrey
  • Good article here

  • Some updates as this isn't going away any time soon

    FBI paid over $1M to break into phone cbc.ca/news/technology/fib-iphone-cost-unlocking-1.3548036

    Round two (three,four, ...) reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-hearing-idUSKCN0XB2RU

    Proposed law to ban states (like New York and California) from banning encrypted devices cnet.com/uk/news/us-bill-aims-to-stop-state-bans-of-encrypted-phones/

  • TushonTushon I'm scared, Coach Alexandria, VA

    @alberio said:
    FBI paid over $1M to break into phone cbc.ca/news/technology/fib-iphone-cost-unlocking-1.3548036

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11544988 is a thread discussing it. The amount of double-think the FBI is engaging in is crazy.
    Specifically:

    James Comey, director of the FBI, said on Thursday that the cost was “worth it”, but added that an accommodation needed to be made with Apple and other technology companies in the future, as paying outside technologists to find ways to access highly-encrypted messages on phones used by terrorist suspects was not “scalable.”

    was not “scalable.”

    This is the same James Comey that said they just were just asking Apple for access to just that one phone.

    GargWinfrey_k
Sign In or Register to comment.