US v Apple

[4est_4est_Gump]

I am sure there is some person way that can get into the phone without Apple having to get involved. They do it all the time on TV shows.

One security expert has already volunteered his company to do it for free...



Also, the intel is time-sensitive. Anyone who would have been in the network is either overseas or going to strike before the FBI gets their name. It's been a while so, I assume, that there is not much there, maybe yoga lessons and wedding plans.

I think that this sets a terrible precedent.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Actually, it's a straight up first amendment issue. Computer code was classified as speech a few years back. What the fibbies are demanding is flat out unconstitutional.

That's an interesting argument.

Apple is full of shit. Does anyone really believe they don't have software to crack the phone already?

If one of Cook's relatives were killed in San Bernandino (sp) this would be a non-story.

It doesn't matter what I believe, it matters what I can prove. Honestly no, I don't believe anybody in the history of ever built something they couldn't crack even if they had to build the tools along the way to do it. But that's their story and they're sticking to it.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

That's an interesting argument.



It doesn't matter what I believe, it matters what I can prove. Honestly no, I don't believe anybody in the history of ever built something they couldn't crack even if they had to build the tools along the way to do it. But that's their story and they're sticking to it.

The problem is that the FBI isn't asking Apple to break the encryption on that ONE phone. They're asking Apple to provide a back door be built into iOS that can be used to bypass the encryption on any iOS device.

Given the past history of warrantless spying on US Citizens by the alphabet agencies and the likelihood that this backdoor will make iOS devices more vulnerable to hackers both domestic and foreign Apple is right to refuse to comply.

If the FBI wanted that ONE device unlocked that would be a different story. They have cause and a warrant to do so. Asking for unfettered access to ever single iOS device is insane.

 

[warrior queen]

If it were about unlocking one single phone, I'd have no problem with that.
Asking for access to many is a different story.

Having said that, if any of the people here had loved ones that were the victims, I think most naysayers would change their vote.

 

[Noor]

That's why I said "this particular case". This case is the person is dead and is guilty of killing quite a few people and there's a decent chance others were involved. This is a very limited and unique case.

I forgot to add in my first reply that Apple would need to be paid the going rate for the work. No freebies and the FBI would pay for the secure room and all the equipment.

Hacking into one phone is a lot different than creating a way into all iphones.
It's kind of like breaking down one door in one house or giving the government a master key to all our doors in all our houses.

 

[about_average]

Hacking into one phone is a lot different than creating a way into all iphones.
It's kind of like breaking down one door in one house or giving the government a master key to all our doors in all our houses.

Yes, I know, that's why I'm opposed to what the FBI is asking for.
It's why I said all code and hardware must be destroyed once the data is retrieved would be the only way I'd even consider allowing it, if it were my decision.

 

[Noor]

Yes, I know, that's I'm opposed to what the FBI is asking for.
It's why I said all code and hardware must be destroyed once the data is retrieved would be the only way I'd even consider allowing it, if it were my decision.

The FBI just wants an easy way around the dirty work of breaking a phone and getting themselves warrants.

 

[warrior queen]

Hacking into one phone is a lot different than creating a way into all iphones.
It's kind of like breaking down one door in one house or giving the government a master key to all our doors in all our houses.

Here, they already have that to a degree.
In most states, police etc can enter any property if they have 'reasonable suspicion' of illegal activity.
Reasonable suspicion has been defined as 'belief that illegal activity has taken place, or is likely to take place ' - meaning if it hasn't happened yet but the authorities think it might at some undetermined future time.

This has not resulted in more than a handfull of raids on homes so far...... which is kinda surprising.

 

[about_average]

The FBI just wants an easy way around the dirty work of breaking a phone and getting themselves warrants.

Who would they serve the warrant to? Farook is dead.

 

[Sean Renaud]

His estate I assume.

 

[Noor]

Who would they serve the warrant to? Farook is dead.

If I remember correctly, it was a company phone. Didn't the company already try to reset the phone or something?

 

[about_average]

If I remember correctly, it was a company phone. Didn't the company already try to reset the phone or something?

maybe the served one to the Health Dept, or the Health Dept said have at it.
That's all beside the point though. The FBI can't decrypt it.
And if Farook was using iPGP for email then maybe the FBI will go after .... oh, wait, the PGP code is open source.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

If I remember correctly, it was a company phone. Didn't the company already try to reset the phone or something?

If I remember correctly Apple has stated that someone tried to reset the phone's password while it was in the custody of the FBI.

 

[Ishmael]

maybe the served one to the Health Dept, or the Health Dept said have at it.
That's all beside the point though. The FBI can't decrypt it.
And if Farook was using iPGP for email then maybe the FBI will go after .... oh, wait, the PGP code is open source.

*chuckle* There is that, isn't there? The govm't can't figure out how to hack open source code.

Actually they can.........given infinite tries. It's that 10 try suicide switch they can't get past. Perhaps this is just a way of trying to blame the failure on Apple. So Apple tries x number of times more, blows the fucking phone up, and then advertises...."Encryption so good even we can't break it." That's what I'd do, get the fucking Feds off my ass and sell more phones doing it.

Ishmael

 

[NtlSecAgcy]

Make no mistake concerning this particular battle, the war is about the future of private encryption and the federal government's power concerning that issue.

This is simply the first significant test case, the canary in the coal mine, if you will.

 

[Adre]

Make no mistake concerning this particular battle, the war is about the future of private encryption and the federal government's power concerning that issue.

This is simply the first significant test case, the canary in the coal mine, if you will.

Which is why it must go to the SCOTUS to establish law in this area.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

If it were about unlocking one single phone, I'd have no problem with that.
Asking for access to many is a different story.

Having said that, if any of the people here had loved ones that were the victims, I think most naysayers would change their vote.

I understand that last statement.

However, government is the surrender of personal vengeance to law, and our law says things like the government cannot issue a warrant for you to produce something that you do not possess...

 

[about_average]

*chuckle* There is that, isn't there? The govm't can't figure out how to hack open source code.

Actually they can.........given infinite tries. It's that 10 try suicide switch they can't get past. Perhaps this is just a way of trying to blame the failure on Apple. So Apple tries x number of times more, blows the fucking phone up, and then advertises...."Encryption so good even we can't break it." That's what I'd do, get the fucking Feds off my ass and sell more phones doing it.

That thought crossed my mind but I'm pretty sure the FBI would do the obvious, make Apple prove the process works on test phones before letting them do it to Farook's.

 

[about_average]

If I remember correctly Apple has stated that someone tried to reset the phone's password while it was in the custody of the FBI.

There are claims it was a Health Dept person who did it, and claims it was the FBI. See the link I posted today in my thread on the topic.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I saw that too...

 

[Ishmael]

That though crossed my mind but I'm pretty sure the FBI would do the obvious, make Apple prove the process works on test phones before letting them do it to Farook's.

No problem, add the service to the catalog. Valid court order and $500,000/per/phone/try. And that's ONLY if you aren't looking over our shoulder. If you want to watch, 10x the gross worth of the corporation. You can demand a service, but we still get to set the price.

Ishmael

 

[NtlSecAgcy]

The Court isn't constitutionally empowered to "establish" law in any area. Their constitutional charge is to interpret and then rule on law already established.

 

[Adre]

The Court isn't constitutionally empowered to "establish" law in any area. Their constitutional charge is to interpret and then rule on law already established.

The end result is established law. And btw, the SC is not beyond establishing law from time to time. Call it what you will.

 

[Doom_Guy]

From what I understand about Edward Snowden's NSA revelations, the government has a gigantic database of all people's telephone conversations and internet activities which are tracked and logged in real-time.

Why do they need someone to crack an encrypted cell phone when they probably already have the data stored somewhere?

They probably also have HH's dirty cellphone pictures too.

 

[NtlSecAgcy]

The end result is established law. And btw, the SC is not beyond establishing law from time to time. Call it what you will.

Unconstitutional is the only term it can be objectively called.