I May Just Have to Buy an iPhone Now

[paflyer]

I don't really see the correlation between this and the current situation, sorry.

There is no proof that anything of value is on that phone, unlike your situation where there would be exigent circumstances (aka you can HEAR the screaming that correlates to torture) that would allow the police to proceed.

Law & Order gas leak anyone? <- humor

So let's say they do cave and go in and find a video of dancing bears that was on the phone that the killers just watched for 18 minutes. You're saying that video of dancing bears is worth my privacy?

Screw that, provide some proof that something is actually THERE before you go looking for it.

What is this, the whole nuclear missiles the middle east all over again? It was wrong then, and it's still wrong now.

This government recently gave our arch enemy the right to nuclear technology and a big check to develop it and we're worried about some guy's iPhone?

 

[Kritchlow]

Warrants are issued with a big rubber stamp. Open your freaking eyes, dude.

Ahh... Okay. It just baffles me when you hear of courts throwing out evidence because it was illegally seized. Guess my eyes are open enough to see that fairly often.

 

[pilot_dude]

Maybe Henning wasn't banned but is working for the FBI to unlock the phone. He lied about everything else too bad he isn't here to fabricate a story about this.

 

[wsuffa]

DOJ has now issued a request to the judge to order Apple to "immediately" comply without respect to the appeals dates.

The way this is being handled should concern everyone.

 

[Mike Smith]

It is unbelievable to me that people would so easily give up the rights that so many fought and died to give them, and all for an elusive "feeling" of safety that is so patently false.

 

[Kritchlow]

It is unbelievable to me that people would so easily give up the rights that so many fought and died to give them, and all for an elusive "feeling" of safety that is so patently false.

I'm not giving up any rights, but I believe Apple should open the phone.

If the FBI was demanding Apple open the phone WITHOUT a court order, than that would be giving up our rights.

 

[FastEddieB]

If it hasn't been mentioned, Donald Trump has called for a boycott of Apple until they comply.

Next thing you know, he'll call for waterboarding Tim Cook in the interest of National Security. Or worse!

Heaven help us!

 

[RJM62]

If it hasn't been mentioned, Donald Trump has called for a boycott of Apple until they comply.

Next thing you know, he'll call for waterboarding Tim Cook in the interest of National Security. Or worse!

Heaven help us!

I'm thinking about starting a Tim Cook Legal Defense Fund.

Rich

 

[FastEddieB]

 

[cowman]

To think, in a few months we may have to chose between this idiot and Hillary Clinton

 

[jbarrass]

What if your government decides for whatever reason that YOURE a terrorist?

And yeah, even if I knew (which is impossible) something was going to happen, I wouldn't give up, or "relax" my rights..whatever that's sposed to mean. Troops know that people are going to shoot at them, do they just tuck tail and run or surrender? No, they fight back!

My rights are worth more than your "saftey".

You give up your rights, we might as well lower all the American flags and broadcast our surrender, because that's exactly what you do when you allow a "terrorist" a nut job or a power crazy government worker to dictate how you live your life and what rights you are "allowed" to have.

You have a constitution or your don't, your rights are rights, not suggestions, they are not given to you by government, they are yours at birth, you do more damage than 100 9/11 attacks when you give up those rights, frankly anyone who votes to try to take my rights away from me is much more of a "terrorist" then any nut job with a AK.

As a veteran it absolutely maddens me at all the people who will just walk away from our rights just to make it easy for the bureaucrats.

Rights are worth fighting for.

I believe Cook when he says it's unreadable without changing the OS to put a back door in. The Feds doublespeak that well "we're not really talking about a backdoor" is BS

Remember, we're not talking about "our" government, it's every government where iPhones are sold. The Chinese already know too much about me, They don't need access to my phone too...

We need more security, not less.

 

[Kritchlow]

As a veteran it absolutely maddens me at all the people who will just walk away from our rights just to make it easy for the bureaucrats.

Rights are worth fighting for.

I believe Cook when he says it's unreadable without changing the OS to put a back door in. The Feds doublespeak that well "we're not really talking about a backdoor" is BS

Remember, we're not talking about "our" government, it's every government where iPhones are sold. The Chinese already know too much about me, They don't need access to my phone too...

We need more security, not less.

I said it before, I'll say it again....
Nobody is forfeiting their rights here.

1) the owner of the phone wants it to be cracked.
2) there is a court order, as in warrant, to do so. Just like any other warrant to search your computer or home.

I don't understand the resistance here.

 

[jbarrass]

Then do you believe Apple has a key they could just turn over and open it?

Or do you believe cook who says it's secure and they can't open it?

Or do you believe they are being tasked with NSAs mission to just hack it somehow?

Who's liable if their attempt to hack it corrupts it.

This situation has emense unanticipated consequences.

We need more security, not less.

 

[Kritchlow]

Then do you believe Apple has a key they could just turn over and open it?

Or do you believe cook who says it's secure and they can't open it?

Or do you believe they are being tasked with NSAs mission to just hack it somehow?

Who's liable if their attempt to hack it corrupts it.

This situation has emense unanticipated consequences.

We need more security, not less.

Again, your last statement is silly.
You could take that to the extreme and say law enforcement cannot take fingerprints or dna from a crime scene..

Hello... They did this by the book!!! They have a court order just like any other search warrant!!! What the eff is so hard to understand about that???

Or perhaps you don't believe in any court ordered search warrants???

 

[jbarrass]

Don't put words in my mouth. You're the one taking it to the extreme.

My identity has been hacked 7 times worthy of someone buying me identity protection. I want to protect my personal information.

I do, strongly, believe in warrants and have no problem with the FBI or NSA hacking this dead terrorists phone all day long. They don't even need one since the owner gave permission.

I strongly object to not being allowed to protect my info. Creating a back door does that. Cyber crime is a big problem. I don't want the Chinese to have any more access than they do.

 

[Kritchlow]

Don't put words in my mouth. You're the one taking it to the extreme.

My identity has been hacked 7 times worthy of someone buying me identity protection. I want to protect my personal information.

I do, strongly, believe in warrants and have no problem with the FBI or NSA hacking this dead terrorists phone all day long. They don't even need one since the owner gave permission.

I strongly object to not being allowed to protect my info. Creating a back door does that. Cyber crime is a big problem. I don't want the Chinese to have any more access than they do.

Hmm... Not sure I understand your entire rant, but if your identity has been stolen seven times, might I suggest Lifelock??

 

[Catalo]

I'm not giving up any rights, but I believe Apple should open the phone.

If the FBI was demanding Apple open the phone WITHOUT a court order, than that would be giving up our rights.

On the latest version of ios or anything over version 8.1 they are unable to open it. They are cooperating with the fbi but refusing to make a huge gaping security issue in their software by creating a backdoor. Maybe they say they will only use it once and maybe they are telling the truth but the security the U.S. government uses is less then top notch. There have several hackings of classified data from people other then nsa workers. To give them something as powerful as that would be a mistake.

 

[denverpilot]

What I can't figure out is why Apple didn't keep the whole thing secret, crack it themselves (and not let the Feds have the cracked device at ALL), pull the data, and hand the Feds a USB stick.

Somehow the whole thing got FUBAR somewhere and Apple knew the story they were working with the Feds got out, is my guess. Then they HAD to say no, because they'd never sell another phone to any country or person again who wanted assurances their data was encrypted on the device.

Maybe that's the part they're not saying here. Maybe it's not encrypted after all and the passcode lock is the only thing standing in the Feds way but it'll wipe after ten attempts.

We aren't hearing the whole story here of course, but we can also tell that because the story doesn't make any sense.

 

[denverpilot]

Hmm... Not sure I understand your entire rant, but if your identity has been stolen seven times, might I suggest Lifelock??

That'd be a stupid mistake. LifeLock CEO has had his identity stolen for credit more than five times and the company lost a Federal case for false advertising and has paid millions in fines and changed their wording carefully in their ads (and fired and replaced the CEO) to even stay alive. They're con-artists selling snake oil.

 

[jbarrass]

Hmm... Not sure I understand your entire rant, but if your identity has been stolen seven times, might I suggest Lifelock??

Life lock sux. I get what OMB, anthem, target, and the others choose for me. Actually the OMB one seems pretty effective.

As they saying goes, there are 10 kind of people in this discussion. Those that understand the technology and those that don't.

 

[Kritchlow]

Life lock sux. I get what OMB, anthem, target, and the others choose for me. Actually the OMB one seems pretty effective.

As they saying goes, there are 10 kind of people in this discussion. Those that understand the technology and those that don't.

I'm all about the $1m Guarantee... Regardless of how well they do, I am protected by a recovery guarantee. Other companies..??

Truly I'm not being argumentative. I'm more than willing to learn in order to make the best choice.

 

[Sundancer]

Spectrum is wide, from uber security to perfect privacy. . .Personally, I'm willing to accept a few thousand casualities now and then, in exchange for maximizing freedom (and privacy).

I understand if others are further over to security side of the curve, however.

Me, as IT guy, I'd never have anything of import stored on an Apple device, or a Windows device that is network discoverable.

 

[James331]

Apple should put their low level flunkie on it, I mean someone who would be lucky to get a job with the geek squad. Let him fail and tell the FBI, NSA, CIA, Berry and the world that they tried and failed, their product is just too good. Sorry, gave it the good old college try.

 

[N801BH]

What I can't figure out is why Apple didn't keep the whole thing secret, crack it themselves (and not let the Feds have the cracked device at ALL), pull the data, and hand the Feds a USB stick.

Somehow the whole thing got FUBAR somewhere and Apple knew the story they were working with the Feds got out, is my guess. Then they HAD to say no, because they'd never sell another phone to any country or person again who wanted assurances their data was encrypted on the device.

Maybe that's the part they're not saying here. Maybe it's not encrypted after all and the passcode lock is the only thing standing in the Feds way but it'll wipe after ten attempts.

We aren't hearing the whole story here of course, but we can also tell that because the story doesn't make any sense.

Nate makes some great points....

Let's look at this from a different angle....

First, as another poster said..... San Bernadino County owns the phone and wants it cracked...... Why the hell does the FBI need a warrant..

Second... Apple / Cook see this train wreck coming and cleverly spin it to their favor...

Apple press release... " We are not going to cooperate with the U.S government in the interest of protecting our customers privacy"

and a few BILLION people around the world say ... Hey, I like Apples stance and their concern for our privacy.....

You CANNOT buy that kind of positive publicity..

Third.. Nate is right on with common sense.. If the feds and Apple did this correct, the skunkworks of Apple would have retrieved the data, put it on a thumb drive, handed if off to the FBI... And NO one would have a clue this all transpired.. IMHO..

 

[Kritchlow]

Spectrum is wide, from uber security to perfect privacy. . .Personally, I'm willing to accept a few thousand casualities now and then, in exchange for maximizing freedom (and privacy).

I understand if others are further over to security side of the curve, however.

Me, as IT guy, I'd never have anything of import stored on an Apple device, or a Windows device that is network discoverable.

This, imho, is a nut job opinion.

 

[N801BH]

Apple should put their low level flunkie on it, I mean someone who would be lucky to get a job with the geek squad. Let him fail and tell the FBI, NSA, CIA, Berry and the world that they tried and failed, their product is just too good. Sorry, gave it the good old college try.

Too..

 

[Kritchlow]

Too..

Again... Nobody has answered the question. A legal court order has been issued. This is not a rogue invasion of privacy. Due course has been done.

Do you think court ordered warrants should be be defied??

 

[N801BH]

Again... Nobody has answered the question. A legal court order has been issued. This is not a rogue invasion of privacy. Due course has been done.

Do you think court ordered warrants should be be defied??

Hmmm...

Warrant against who???

Apple does NOT own the phone... San Bernadino county does..

That entire thing stinks to high heaven... IMHO...

 

[Kritchlow]

Hmmm...

Warrant against who???

Apple does NOT own the phone... San Bernadino county does..

That entire thing stinks to high heaven... IMHO...

Oh heavens to mercy....

The owner of the phone gave permission and the court orderd it. Not sure what else to say.

If this was a PC instead of a handheld smartphone this would never be an issue.

Good grief.

 

[Sundancer]

This, imho, is a nut job opinion.

Which part? Accepting casualties, or securing important data?

 

[N801BH]

Oh heavens to mercy....

The owner of the phone gave permission and the court orderd it. Not sure what else to say.

If this was a PC instead of a handheld smartphone this would never be an issue.

Good grief.

Good grief yourself...

Apple has created a SECURE operating system with NO backdoor.....

What the hell are they supposed to do???

 

[Kritchlow]

Which part? Accepting casualties, or securing important data?

THERE IS A COURT ORDER TO CRACK THE PHONE. THAT MAKES IT CONSTITUTIONAL, NO DIFFERENT THAN A SEARCH WARRANT FOR A HOME PC.

What part of that do you not grasp?

 

[denverpilot]

Me, as IT guy, I'd never have anything of import stored on an Apple device, or a Windows device that is network discoverable.

This, imho, is a nut job opinion.

Not really. As an IT guy with a security background, I completely understand what he's saying.

In fact, I'm convinced that there's even more weirdness to this case because FBI may not have the ability to bust this device, but I'm not convinced NSA doesn't. And this is a case one would think is squarely in NSA's court. But they don't want someone at FBI to know their capabilities.

These OSs are a total mess when it comes to real security. I'm not completely buying that there isn't a government agency that can't crack Apple or any other device if they feel a significant need to. And their reasons they don't feel a significant need to in this case, is definitely interesting if you think that one all the way through. (Not enough of a real national security threat to expose their capabilities. And yes, they DO think that way.)

Plausible scenario: FBI wants their day in the spotlight. NSA may have told them to **** up a rope. FBI decided to strong arm Apple. Apple decided to make marketing hay with it.

We aren't going to get the whole story. Not for a couple of decades at least. There's also some agency or agencies embarrassed here because they watched the guy go marry the girl overseas and bring her back with him and nobody thought to look into it, nor bar him from government jobs, nor ... All sorts of screw ups there.

Less Plausible but still Plausible: FBI knows they missed something badly, and wants a "win" to keep the questions at bay once someone makes the right FOIA request and figures out the magnitude of their ****-up.

Something is weird in this case. Very weird.

And there's also the distinct possibility of it all being disinformation. FBI takes Apple to court after Apple already handed over the information. Apple wins marketing points with the world. Bad guys and gals relax because they think FBI didn't get data, and make a mistake and contact someone the FBI is watching.

All sorts of cloak and dagger possibilities with this one. To think a tiny number of in the know NSA/FBI and Apple folks wouldn't play a disinformation game with the world, is crazy in the national security business.

The big thing the carriers wanted once it started to leak that they were complicit in mass wiretapping was simply to be indemnified of all liability of those actions. It was a big deal to them. They didn't care at all if government wanted to place the taps. They wanted the same get out of jail free card the government has.

They just wanted not to get sucked into civil and criminal liability. Once they shuffled things around so that their liability fell back on the FISA courts, they never said another word. Note: They didn't ever come out and say they removed the fiber taps ether.

We very well could all just be being played. Wouldn't surprise me a bit.

 

[Sundancer]

But I have yet to see Apple suit up like the millitary and murder anyone, lock anyone in a cage, water board anyone, or force me to give them 25% of my income at the threat of being kidnaped and locked in a box somewhere or murdered if I don't go along with the aforementioned kidnapping.

And as far as the Feds limitations, all they have to do is use the "t word" and all those limitations go away, heck they don't even have to show their "proof". Most times that's not even required in the stacked system we have now.

Yeah apple is ultimately only responsible to their share holders, but I still trust them much more then the government. Apples motives are clear as a for profit group, the us government is a little more murky and a lot more dangerous then even the worst criminals.

Apple hasn't had to defend a nation, either, or manage a few hundred thousand people who do. If they did, they'd find some rogue operators in thier ranks, as well.

Yeah, the Fed checks and balances are less than perfect. But some exist. I think it's naive to trust Apple "much more than the gov't". And gov't motives are no more opaque than Apple's; keep the fat hats on the Hill re-elected, and the electorate semi-satisfied.

 

[denverpilot]

THERE IS A COURT ORDER TO CRACK THE PHONE. THAT MAKES IT CONSTITUTIONAL, NO DIFFERENT THAN A SEARCH WARRANT FOR A HOME PC.



What part of that do you not grasp?

Hmm. Lower courts have never ordered anyone to do anything that was unconstitutional now apparently?

Hell, even SCOTUS has never reversed itself?

Hold Apple in contempt and send it to appeal. At least a decade of good press for Apple out of that. It should hit SCOTUS sometime around 2028.

They've already screwed their shot at getting Apple to comply by taking it to court in the first place.

Or they haven't. See disinformation section above.

 

[eetrojan]

Oh heavens to mercy....

The owner of the phone gave permission and the court orderd it. Not sure what else to say.

If this was a PC instead of a handheld smartphone this would never be an issue.

Good grief.

It really doesn't matter that the owner of the phone says it's OK.

The issue is whether Apple can legally be required to build a special version of its operating system which could be used as a de facto "back door" to gain access to the data on any phone.

It is also the proverbial camel's nose under the tent for forcing Apple (and others) to make other special changes the government demands in the future due to some other pressing need.

Apple issued a press release that drove the government to bring a motion to compel even before Apple's deadline for responding to the court order. In it, Apple says:

The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by "brute force," trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.

The implications of the government's demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone's device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone's microphone or camera without your knowledge.

I agree with Apple. I hope they fight the order and win. If they lose, and they are in fact capable of making these modifications, and are forced to make them, I hope that they subsequently implement further improved device security that cannot be overridden, even by Apple.

The government has signaled that if a corporation can in fact override its privacy features, they will FORCE that company to comply. No bueno, in my opinion.

 

[Sundancer]

THERE IS A COURT ORDER TO CRACK THE PHONE. THAT MAKES IT CONSTITUTIONAL, NO DIFFERENT THAN A SEARCH WARRANT FOR A HOME PC.

What part of that do you not grasp?

Dude, read first, then respond, O.K.? I didn't express an opinion about the court order/warrant. . .argue at will, but at read with some comprehension first.

 

[Kritchlow]

Hmm. Lower courts have never ordered anyone to do anything that was unconstitutional now apparently?

Hell, even SCOTUS has never reversed itself?

Hold Apple in contempt and send it to appeal. At least a decade of good press for Apple out of that. It should hit SCOTUS sometime around 2028.

They've already screwed their shot at getting Apple to comply by taking it to court in the first place.

Or they haven't. See disinformation section above.

Perhaps I'm missing something (seriously, not sarcastically).. Why is this unconstitutional? There is a court order so that should suffice.. If no why not?

 

[denverpilot]

Perhaps I'm missing something (seriously, not sarcastically).. Why is this unconstitutional? There is a court order so that should suffice.. If no why not?

You are definitely having reading comprehension issues tonight. I didn't say it was or wasn't unconstitutional. I said we have a system to determine that -- it's called the appeals process. And it goes all the way to SCOTUS and takes a long assed time. And Apple has enough money to pay the lawyers and wait.

FBI stupidly or smartly (we don't know which) handed Apple the PR win of the century with this one by taking it to court.

The sales of iPhones in years to come to places and people who want their data as secure as possible will easily pay for the lawyers and whatever fine is eventually levied if SCOTUS disagrees with Apple.

Apple is laughing all the way to the bank on this one. Free marketing from the government claiming they can't crack Apple's technology for 10-15 years as this works its way through the court system? That's massive. They're thanking the deity they got taken to court on this one.

 

[Sundancer]

Yes, correct. . . It ain't unconstitutional till a higher court says it is. It'll play out in the courts, as it should, I think. If Apple can't get a judge to stop the process, they comply, or are in contemp. Unless they can get relief appealing up.

I don't have a dog in the fight, and I think if Apple did cave, it wouldn't hurt them; average Joe won't care, and corporate, gov't, criminal, and other actors who do care would just modify their usage of the devices.