Support
Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
The Apple Matter
I avoided talking about this because I didn't understand the issue. I didn't understand why Apple claimed that breaking one phone would "create a master key" to unlock all others. That seemed to me to not make any sense, but then, I'm so completely ignorant of these things I could also not just say "Oh they're lying."
By the way, here's a question that I'm sure I know the answer to, but I haven't seen it addressed directly: Couldn't you have just touched the dead guy's thumb to the fingerprint ID thing? Works in action movies, right? Now I think that that can only be done if it's less than 48 hours since the last time the phone was accessed, and I guess the FBI didn't get the phone in this window. Either that, or the terrorist disabled that feature and made the password the only way to get into the phone. Anyway, for the future, always touch the dead guy's thumb to the phone as soon as you can. Cut off his damn thumb and keep it in your desk drawer. I wish I could find the article that pointed this out, but over the weekend I read a guy noting that this particular court order is unprecedented. Note that usually courts ask you produce documents in your possession. That's not the case here. The "document" the FBI wants Apple to produce does not currently exist* -- a signed and certified bit of coding that can be installed into the phone. Apple says they have no such thing, and the court is therefore ordering Apple to write the document. (Here, the document is computer code.) According to this article, the "document" sought is a custom version of Apple's OS with the various brute-force-password-hack defenses deactivated. I guess the idea is that the hard drive of the phone would be run from this new, easily-hacked-by-brute-force-guessing OS, rather than the one that actually exists, which will permanently blow up all data after ten consecutive failed guesses at the password. That does seem unprecedented, because courts usually don't order people to become, essentially, unpaid deputies of the United States government's law enforcement squads. Essentially the court is commandeering Apple and its employees for the effort. This guy went on to say that if there were a law passed granting courts this authority, or demanding that tech companies create and keep a skeleton key file for their records, then the court could issue this order. But absent such a new power granted by the legislature (which would itself be very controversial), a court simply cannot order people to basically join the FBI's counter-terrorism/cryptography division. Now... there are actually sever ways around this. All are strange. I do believe that there is a doctrine permitting police to commandeer vehicles in emergency situations. They may be even able to commandeer people if necessary. But I don't know the limits of this, and I assume it can only be done in true emergencies, and only for a short period of time. There are no emergency circumstances with this phone -- it's been sitting around for months and months, and while the FBI might hope there is some information on the phone linking the San Bernadino killer to other terrorists, they can't claim they know that. A court actually can commandeer people for certain purposes -- to be jurors. If a court can't find enough people through its regular juror selection process, a judge actually has the power to send out a bailiff to start randomly grabbing people off the street to fill a jury. That's what a judge told me when I was on a jury, in his "here's some fun facts about jury duty speech," and I believe him. I do not know, however, if any judge anywhere has ever sent out a bailiff to commandeer people for the purposes serving as experts/investigators/codebreakers in a matter. I highly doubt it. The third possibility is weird, and I guess it's the government's ultimate trump card: A government may draft into its armed services experts it has need of -- mostly doctors, but also technical experts. I'm not sure about this but I think there's probably a special draft board for doctors. Might also have them for other expert functions. This would be unprecedented, but I guess the Army could decide that it needs codebreakers for its own war on terror, and that therefore, it's going to draft seven or eight key people in Apple's security department. I don't know, but I assume that there are circumstances that must be met for any kind of draft to happen. A presidential order declaring the draft to now be in operation, and I assume that itself would require an actual declaration of war. I'm not sure if these vague authorizations for hostilities suffice. Anyway, those are my weird thoughts on the matter. Barring any of those being applicable or possible, I think this guy is right that while the government can demand you turn over papers, it cannot impress you into its service to affirmatively create those papers on its behalf. I also think the FBI is being very, very greedy here. Because they're not, as far as I can tell, saying: "We'll give you this phone. Create a Skeleton Key to get into it, then send us back the security-broken phone." I think they're not asking for that for two reasons: 1. This would case a chain-of-custody problem as far as evidence. You couldn't prosecute someone based on the evidence on the phone -- a defendant would object that anyone at Apple could have put whatever they wanted on the phone. 2. I think they want this Skeleton Key for future use. I say they're greedy because, look: I get why Apple doesn't want to just give this to the FBI. It would be one thing if the FBI was saying "Just give us back the broken phone," in which case the Skeleton Key would remain in Apple's possession. But they seem to be demanding the key itself. As far as not making a prosecution: Well, that's life. Sometimes you gather information that can't be used in a prosecution, but still can be used to gather additional evidence that itself can be used in a prosecution. That is, you collect it for intelligence purposes, not for case-building prosecutorial purposes. I have a strong feeling that Apple would refuse to do even this much. Even if the key were permitted to remain in house, I think they'd refuse to build it anyway, and refuse to comply with law enforcement's demands to use it on this phone. But I think the FBI would have a stronger case if they weren't demanding that Apple turn over this particular file. All of the above thoughts are tentative. I do not believe in any of them strongly. I am just groping along, as many of you are, over unknown terrain which is completely dark to me. More thoughts on this, and James Comey's argument in the FBI's favor, from John Sexton, who is now a staff writer at Hot Air. Here's Tim Cook's argument. * I should note that Apple claims this doesn't exist. A lot of people are skeptical of that -- including me. I have trouble believing that a company wouldn't create this themselves, because, look, you're going to need it a lot. But, taking them at their word, they claim that no such security-crippled OS exists. Update: JackStraw says that commandeering the services of people for law enforcement isn't as unprecedented as the article I reference (but still cannot find to link for you) claims. He says he knows that in telephone companies, when wiretap orders come down, private citizen employees of the telephone company are required to do the work themselves. But I suppose that could just be a voluntary accommodation: Maybe the FBI would send people down to do it themselves, and the phone company would rather not have agents blundering around, not knowing where the bathrooms are, etc. So maybe they just say "Look, we'll just do it, okay?" Jack also mentions uncompensated records searches, but it's common and routine, even if annoying, that the government and courts frequently demand you search your records for relevant documents about a third party. Update: Publius has an good post explaining some the technical details here.Comments
(Jump to bottom of comments)1
And now to read the content.
Posted by: johnd01 at February 22, 2016 03:59 PM (ukNFU)
2
from what i know, i agree with apple
Posted by: nckate at February 22, 2016 03:59 PM (aA5gp)
3
Anyone else generally wary about applying a law from the 1700s to a tech company?
Posted by: joe, living dangerously at February 22, 2016 03:59 PM (34w2E)
4
Go to the EFF webpage. Much more.
Posted by: Rd at February 22, 2016 03:59 PM (v0YLX)
5
Ace, the reason Apple is hesitant is that even if they made the "Master Key" completely in-house, all it would take is an engineer to leak it, and boom, now it's out there in the world and every single iPhone can get cracked if they get their hands on it. And chances are the government would eventually, not to mention less savory types.
Whereas right now no such crack exists.
Whereas right now no such crack exists.
Posted by: mAc Chaos at February 22, 2016 04:00 PM (ggX8y)
6
I have a sneaking suspicion Apple has already given this key to China.
Posted by: MTF at February 22, 2016 04:00 PM (TxJGV)
7
Solid post and agree on all points. Past actions prove what an untrustworthy actor pretty much every government agency has become.
OT: Cruz firing ComDir. Crap. What a shitshow.
OT: Cruz firing ComDir. Crap. What a shitshow.
Posted by: KillianThyme at February 22, 2016 04:01 PM (n2r4H)
8
If the iphone belonged to one of the Bundys, Apple wold have no issues. But it belonged to a Muslim terrorist and it's all about security and privacy and shit.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:01 PM (0LHZx)
9
I think it's telling that the feds admit to having dozens more phones in their possession that they've been unable to crack but ether did not succeed, or did not attempt, to obtain this same court order. Were they, perhaps, waiting for a case that would sway public opinion?
Do they know Americans so well that they know many will toss aside liberty and free enterprise under the guise of keeping us safe?
Do they know Americans so well that they know many will toss aside liberty and free enterprise under the guise of keeping us safe?
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 22, 2016 04:01 PM (8PbKi)
10
A simple analogy may help. ACME has created a super secure safe. It has a self-destruct mechanism. If you try to drill it or cut it or torch it, that mechanism will be activated and the contents of the safe destroyed, incinerated.
It has a combination lock. You you enter the wrong combination N times in a row, that self-destruct mechanism is also triggered.
The FBI wants to force ACME to engineer a way to deactivate that self-destruct mechanism, so they can brute-force the combination, entering as many incorrect combinations as they like until they stumble on the correct one.
It has a combination lock. You you enter the wrong combination N times in a row, that self-destruct mechanism is also triggered.
The FBI wants to force ACME to engineer a way to deactivate that self-destruct mechanism, so they can brute-force the combination, entering as many incorrect combinations as they like until they stumble on the correct one.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:02 PM (dvuhZ)
11
With all the money that the government spends on the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc. I can't understand why they need outside help to crack this phone. Aren't gov't employees the best and brightest and they could make a fortune in the private sector?
/
/
Posted by: Jubal Anderson Early at February 22, 2016 04:02 PM (RdP/w)
12
A) Bullshit, they already know how to bypass and break into the phone.
B) NOBODY had to know about his, Apple could just have done the right thing on the down low, as I understand they have before.
I believe this is all a marketing stunt by Apple to gain market share.
Fuck Apple
B) NOBODY had to know about his, Apple could just have done the right thing on the down low, as I understand they have before.
I believe this is all a marketing stunt by Apple to gain market share.
Fuck Apple
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (mw8Dm)
13
Ace, the reason Apple is hesitant is that even if they made the "Master Key" completely in-house, all it would take is an engineer to leak it, and boom, now it's out there in the world and every single iPhone can get cracked if they get their hands on it. And chances are the government would eventually, not to mention less savory types.
Whereas right now no such crack exists.
***
It doesn't have to be leaked. Just the knowledge that it is being built will drive every hacker looking to make a name for himself to poke and prod Apple relentlessly in search of it.
Whereas right now no such crack exists.
***
It doesn't have to be leaked. Just the knowledge that it is being built will drive every hacker looking to make a name for himself to poke and prod Apple relentlessly in search of it.
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (8PbKi)
14
My default position is to push back on the government - especially the federal government that does not enjoy the plenary power the states have. So for now I am siding with Apple - even if they are being hypocritical about it (which I don't know to be true but have heard thrown around).
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (gmeXX)
15
Ace, it's even more mind-boggling than what you have stated. The FBI accidentally reset the password. It was *their fault* they can't get the data but they want Apple to fix it.
Posted by: Sabrina Chase at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (K0Jjb)
16
Cut off his damn thumb and keep it in your desk drawer.
*****
Who among us hasn't tried that? I found that after six months or so I had a drawer full of thumbs and no longer could tell whose was whose.
*****
Who among us hasn't tried that? I found that after six months or so I had a drawer full of thumbs and no longer could tell whose was whose.
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (NeFrd)
17
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:01 PM (0LHZx)
If you care about information privacy, you shouldn't be bashing the company for doing the right thing for the wrong reason here.
If you care about information privacy, you shouldn't be bashing the company for doing the right thing for the wrong reason here.
Posted by: joe, living dangerously at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (KUaJL)
18
Go to the EFF webpage. Much more.
Seconded.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
Seconded.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (uURQL)
19
I have a sneaking suspicion Apple has already given this key to China.
Posted by: MTF at February 22, 2016 04:00 PM (TxJGV)
Actually, being forced to give it to China and every other authoritarian state is one of the reasons Apple stated for not wanting to oblige in the first place. Also, moar copyright infringement.
I have a sneaking suspicion Apple has already given this key to China.
Posted by: MTF at February 22, 2016 04:00 PM (TxJGV)
Actually, being forced to give it to China and every other authoritarian state is one of the reasons Apple stated for not wanting to oblige in the first place. Also, moar copyright infringement.
Posted by: KillianThyme at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (n2r4H)
20
t doesn't have to be leaked. Just the knowledge that it is being built will drive every hacker looking to make a name for himself to poke and prod Apple relentlessly in search of it.
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (8PbKi)
As if they don't already?
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (8PbKi)
As if they don't already?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (mw8Dm)
21
The government is basically commandeering christian bakers to bake gay wedding cakes. Tim Cook didn't have a problem with that - and was vocally opposed to state laws that would have protected the bakers.
I guess as long as the government pays the apple employee's wages for the time spent on the effort, I'm ok with them living under the same standards.
I guess as long as the government pays the apple employee's wages for the time spent on the effort, I'm ok with them living under the same standards.
Posted by: lymond at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (koywJ)
22
This whole thing has so much weirdness around it that I don't know what to believe (factually believe, I do know what I think about what is best).
I mean I don't know how reliable any of the facts I've read are.
1. Supposedly, the FBI has a backlog of 82 or 140 some cases with the same desired outcome. This is the most telegenic way of getting the camel's nose under the tent.
2. Supposedly the County, owner of the phone, changed the password at the FBI's insistence. And then lost it somehow.
Those are the questionable facts.
We do know that the authorities have all the metadata, so it's not a question of "we need to know who they were talking to". They're just hoping that there is text information which will be further useful.
And yes, the FBI is trying to dragoon Apple into creating a new work product which will defeat part of the core value of Apple's existing work product.
I do not trust them, Sam I Am.
I mean I don't know how reliable any of the facts I've read are.
1. Supposedly, the FBI has a backlog of 82 or 140 some cases with the same desired outcome. This is the most telegenic way of getting the camel's nose under the tent.
2. Supposedly the County, owner of the phone, changed the password at the FBI's insistence. And then lost it somehow.
Those are the questionable facts.
We do know that the authorities have all the metadata, so it's not a question of "we need to know who they were talking to". They're just hoping that there is text information which will be further useful.
And yes, the FBI is trying to dragoon Apple into creating a new work product which will defeat part of the core value of Apple's existing work product.
I do not trust them, Sam I Am.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (1xUj/)
23
I have an iPhone. I prefer it to remain out of Uncle Sam's possession, thank you very much.
After all, currently Uncle Sam views me as more of an enemy than they do, say, Abdul Mohammed Akbar Derka Derka Hussein, head honcho of the Al ISIS Qaeda Caliphate, Nairobi branch. They are much more willing to gun down an American conservative than they are a goat worshipping fanatic just off the bus from Mecca.
After all, currently Uncle Sam views me as more of an enemy than they do, say, Abdul Mohammed Akbar Derka Derka Hussein, head honcho of the Al ISIS Qaeda Caliphate, Nairobi branch. They are much more willing to gun down an American conservative than they are a goat worshipping fanatic just off the bus from Mecca.
Posted by: Vanceone at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (itHw7)
24
I agree with Apple as well. And Ace's right, the court is in effect "drafting" Apple to work for the government against their will and without compensation. And to compromise their own product which will be detrimental to the company.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (LA7Cm)
25
Apple has one argument similar to Ace's. If the Congress wanted tech companies to do this for the government, they would have passed a law telling them they must.
No way will Congress pass such a law. So instead the feds picked a tear jerker terrorism case to FORCE Apple to break their own phone.
One question? Will the feds reimburse Apple for the value of the company that is destroyed when Apple breaks their own phone?
Hey it's just another few billion dollars we don't have anyway
No way will Congress pass such a law. So instead the feds picked a tear jerker terrorism case to FORCE Apple to break their own phone.
One question? Will the feds reimburse Apple for the value of the company that is destroyed when Apple breaks their own phone?
Hey it's just another few billion dollars we don't have anyway
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 04:05 PM (v0YLX)
26
I like apples.
Posted by: Joey B. right behind you, touching you, whispering in your ear at February 22, 2016 04:05 PM (pMGkg)
27
>>That does seem unprecedented, because courts usually don't order people to become, essentially, unpaid deputies of the United States government's law enforcement squads. Essentially the court is commandeering Apple and its employees for the effort.
I can give you a couple examples of where this is not true. When I worked for the phone company, we routinely got requests for wiretaps or record searches (we being the company, not me personally) and it was our employees who were forced to do the work.
At my current company, we were requested (strongly) by a certain government agency to provide a whole bunch of documentation regarding some of our products that were suspected of ending up in a restricted country. Since we sell through distributors around the world I can tell you this entailed a shitload of work by my company.
I think this happens a lot more often than people think. I know it does.
I can give you a couple examples of where this is not true. When I worked for the phone company, we routinely got requests for wiretaps or record searches (we being the company, not me personally) and it was our employees who were forced to do the work.
At my current company, we were requested (strongly) by a certain government agency to provide a whole bunch of documentation regarding some of our products that were suspected of ending up in a restricted country. Since we sell through distributors around the world I can tell you this entailed a shitload of work by my company.
I think this happens a lot more often than people think. I know it does.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 22, 2016 04:05 PM (/tuJf)
28
>>>ce, the reason Apple is hesitant is that even if they made the "Master Key" completely in-house, all it would take is an engineer to leak it, and boom, now it's out there in the world and every single iPhone can get cracked if they get their hands on it.
right, good point.
Of course, a law could be passed authorizing salaries of $1,000,000 per year to thirty encryption experts at Apple, android, etc., and furthermore declaring that anyone signing up to work for Uncle Sam is immune to suits about trade secrets.
What I mean to say, the government just needs to get one of these engineers to leak.
right, good point.
Of course, a law could be passed authorizing salaries of $1,000,000 per year to thirty encryption experts at Apple, android, etc., and furthermore declaring that anyone signing up to work for Uncle Sam is immune to suits about trade secrets.
What I mean to say, the government just needs to get one of these engineers to leak.
Posted by: ace at February 22, 2016 04:05 PM (dciA+)
29
Apple claimed that breaking one phone would "create a master key" to unlock all others. That seemed to me to not make any sense, but then, I'm so completely ignorant of these things I could also not just say "Oh they're lying."
All the iPhones are designed to run the same operating system, which is why they can be mass produced, etc etc.
A custom OS that works for one phone will by default work with the rest, unless they build special protections to make it only work on a particular phone. And those special protections could be defeated, making the custom OS work on any iPhone.
All the iPhones are designed to run the same operating system, which is why they can be mass produced, etc etc.
A custom OS that works for one phone will by default work with the rest, unless they build special protections to make it only work on a particular phone. And those special protections could be defeated, making the custom OS work on any iPhone.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:05 PM (uURQL)
30
That does seem unprecedented, because courts usually don't order people to become, essentially, unpaid deputies of the United States government's law enforcement squads. Essentially the court is commandeering Apple and its employees for the effort.
From what I read, the order does allow Apple to charge the government a reasonable amount for their time. But, even with that, I still agree with where you come down on this.
From what I read, the order does allow Apple to charge the government a reasonable amount for their time. But, even with that, I still agree with where you come down on this.
Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at February 22, 2016 04:05 PM (R+30W)
31
Seems like you could slip something in the code to fabricate evidence as well. Or the FBI coders could once they got the "master key."
Posted by: brak at February 22, 2016 04:05 PM (MJuTN)
32
Everybody will have to revert to the Palm OS under President Sanders' forward-thinking first term
Posted by: Bigby's Oven Mitts at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM (NeFrd)
34
A) Bullshit, they already know how to bypass and break into the phone.
B) NOBODY had to know about his, Apple could just have done the right thing on the down low, as I understand they have before.
I believe this is all a marketing stunt by Apple to gain market share.
Fuck Apple
-----------
Not so fast NGU. Whether Apple did this for publicity or not doesn't really concern me. Commadeering the private sector in the area of evidence gathering does. Apple may be wrong on this - especially if they already have this capability. But I'm not sure why I should side with the government here.
B) NOBODY had to know about his, Apple could just have done the right thing on the down low, as I understand they have before.
I believe this is all a marketing stunt by Apple to gain market share.
Fuck Apple
-----------
Not so fast NGU. Whether Apple did this for publicity or not doesn't really concern me. Commadeering the private sector in the area of evidence gathering does. Apple may be wrong on this - especially if they already have this capability. But I'm not sure why I should side with the government here.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM (gmeXX)
35
>>>That does seem unprecedented, because courts usually don't order people to become, essentially, unpaid deputies of the United States government's law enforcement squads. Essentially the court is commandeering Apple and its employees for the effort.
The anti money laundering laws compel people to be unpaid deputies. and it is wrong then too.
The anti money laundering laws compel people to be unpaid deputies. and it is wrong then too.
Posted by: x at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM (nFwvY)
36
If past performance is any indicator of future results, then we only need to look at past events where cryptographic advancements were said to be unbreakable and subject to government regulation.
Eventually an academic team would announce a newly discovered technique that would crack previously unbreakable crypto and the issue would disappear from public media, only to be resurrected at the next new advancement in crypto.
I find it curious that the FBI is admitting they can't crack this phone.
Eventually an academic team would announce a newly discovered technique that would crack previously unbreakable crypto and the issue would disappear from public media, only to be resurrected at the next new advancement in crypto.
I find it curious that the FBI is admitting they can't crack this phone.
Posted by: Rumpoled the Slav at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM (lFKwJ)
37
>>>Ace, it's even more mind-boggling than what you have stated. The FBI accidentally reset the password. It was *their fault* they can't get the data but they want Apple to fix it.
that's not true. Well, it's garbled. Apparently someone working for the COUNTY that Fareed worked for did this. Not someone in the FBI.
I guess he was trying to be helpful. Instead, he blew everything up.
John Sexton's post, which I have now linked at the end of the article, explains this.
that's not true. Well, it's garbled. Apparently someone working for the COUNTY that Fareed worked for did this. Not someone in the FBI.
I guess he was trying to be helpful. Instead, he blew everything up.
John Sexton's post, which I have now linked at the end of the article, explains this.
Posted by: ace at February 22, 2016 04:07 PM (dciA+)
38
Reminds me of the story of the little FBI agent who would get upset when he couldn't solve a crime. So he would shout "Terrorist" every time he was stumped. And all the other Agencies and corporations would come running to help the little agent, because it was the right thing to do. But after awhile, many of the Agencies and Corporations quit coming even though the little agent would keep shouting "Terrorist!" but there really wasn't anything to it...it was just the little agent unable to solve his little problem.
And then one day, no one came.
And then one day, no one came.
Posted by: Diogenes at February 22, 2016 04:07 PM (r65B3)
39
The story Fox carried on this a few days ago was a Judge ordered them to provide a way to get into the phone, sort of an electronic search warrant. And the DOJ told Apple once they got into the phone they could destroy the code.
As long as everybody maintains strict control of the code with only one or two people with access there should not be a problem with this.
As long as everybody maintains strict control of the code with only one or two people with access there should not be a problem with this.
Posted by: Vic-we have no party at February 22, 2016 04:07 PM (t2KH5)
40
I guess I'd be a little more supportive of Apple if they acted like this everywhere. You know like that place over there where sweet and sour pork is real.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 22, 2016 04:07 PM (659DL)
41
have a sneaking suspicion Apple has already given this key to China.
===
China will give it to us in exchange for classified inf.... O wait, already got that stuff.
===
China will give it to us in exchange for classified inf.... O wait, already got that stuff.
Posted by: Bigby's Oven Mitts at February 22, 2016 04:07 PM (3ZtZW)
42
"Also, moar copyright infringement." I'm a dumbass. Meant more IP piracy. With that kind of access to an essential communications tool...
Posted by: KillianThyme at February 22, 2016 04:07 PM (n2r4H)
43
This is not a "master key" or a crack. The root of trust for iOS is owned by Apple. Put simply, this means Apple can push out system updates to any individual Apple device, and no one else can.
Somewhere in the system code is something along the lines of:
if (inputPassword != devicePassword) {
doSecurityRoutine;
}
(It probably doesn't look exactly like this, but the functionality is basically the above.)
My understanding is that the FBI wants Apple to disable this routine for one specific device that is already owned by the government.
This isn't a threat if leaked into the wild. Any would-be hackers would have to own the Apple code repository and root of trust. If they already own that, they don't need the commented out version of iOS, as they could push out any updates they want.
I suspect that Apple's big motivation is that a lot of their growth comes from countries that aren't exactly friendly to the U.S..
Somewhere in the system code is something along the lines of:
if (inputPassword != devicePassword) {
doSecurityRoutine;
}
(It probably doesn't look exactly like this, but the functionality is basically the above.)
My understanding is that the FBI wants Apple to disable this routine for one specific device that is already owned by the government.
This isn't a threat if leaked into the wild. Any would-be hackers would have to own the Apple code repository and root of trust. If they already own that, they don't need the commented out version of iOS, as they could push out any updates they want.
I suspect that Apple's big motivation is that a lot of their growth comes from countries that aren't exactly friendly to the U.S..
Posted by: Seldom at February 22, 2016 04:07 PM (o9Let)
44
I think the government should only get one bite at the apple.
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:08 PM (NeFrd)
45
This is kind of related to my concern about law enforcement in general. Every new technology and thing that comes out, they use and abuse until a court finally rules that they can't any longer because its a huge abuse of privacy.
And every time that happens, they whine about how its stopping them from getting bad guys, about how they will get away and don't you want to fight crime?
The problem is, just 40 years ago they didn't have DNA or a searchable international fingerprint database, or the ability to open up other states' criminal files to compare, or have video cameras everywhere to tap into and check the records of.
And yet, somehow, they were able to solve crimes. In fact, about the same percentage of crimes they solve now. Its almost as if actual police work, procedure, and ground pounding worked. Its just harder and takes longer.
Its like these guys are just lazy as hell and want to have everything just handed to them, damn the civil rights and anyone's privacy.
And every time that happens, they whine about how its stopping them from getting bad guys, about how they will get away and don't you want to fight crime?
The problem is, just 40 years ago they didn't have DNA or a searchable international fingerprint database, or the ability to open up other states' criminal files to compare, or have video cameras everywhere to tap into and check the records of.
And yet, somehow, they were able to solve crimes. In fact, about the same percentage of crimes they solve now. Its almost as if actual police work, procedure, and ground pounding worked. Its just harder and takes longer.
Its like these guys are just lazy as hell and want to have everything just handed to them, damn the civil rights and anyone's privacy.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 22, 2016 04:08 PM (39g3+)
46
If I got this right the phone was NOT his personal phone, it was a company or in this case local government owned phone.
Posted by: Skip at February 22, 2016 04:08 PM (l+OuH)
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Ace Brand Banhammers, an Outrage Outlet Exclusive! at February 22, 2016 04:08 PM (hLRSq)
48
I agree with Apple as well. And Ace's right, the court is in effect "drafting" Apple to work for the government against their will and without compensation. And to compromise their own product which will be detrimental to the company.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (LA7Cm)
Commadeering the private sector in the area of evidence gathering does. Apple may be wrong on this - especially if they already have this capability. But I'm not sure why I should side with the government here.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM (gmeXX)
A) Who said it would be without compensation?
B) Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
C) And who's privacy is being violated? A name please
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (LA7Cm)
Commadeering the private sector in the area of evidence gathering does. Apple may be wrong on this - especially if they already have this capability. But I'm not sure why I should side with the government here.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM (gmeXX)
A) Who said it would be without compensation?
B) Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
C) And who's privacy is being violated? A name please
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:08 PM (mw8Dm)
49
>>>I can give you a couple examples of where this is not true. When I worked for the phone company, we routinely got requests for wiretaps or record searches (we being the company, not me personally) and it was our employees who were forced to do the work.
good point, i didn't consider that.
good point, i didn't consider that.
Posted by: ace at February 22, 2016 04:08 PM (dciA+)
50
I do believe that there is a doctrine permitting police to commandeer vehicles in emergency situations.
Saw that in one of those naked police squad movies.
Saw that in one of those naked police squad movies.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 22, 2016 04:09 PM (FkBIv)
51
I believe that there is a lot of FUD floating around on this issue. I have heard/read a lot of various things. Such as: someone at the shooters office changed the password remotely thus creating the difficulty; the FBI does not want the key themselves; a secure Apple facility would make and use the key with FBI there to get the evidence; the owner of the phone, state of CA has ask Apple to open the phone. Plus other things.
Don't know truth from fiction right now.
I can not believe that Apple has such a key already.
Don't know truth from fiction right now.
I can not believe that Apple has such a key already.
Posted by: lynndy at February 22, 2016 04:09 PM (DaWUf)
52
I find it curious that the FBI is admitting they can't crack this phone.
Posted by: Rumpoled the Slav at February 22, 2016
BINGO!!!!!
Great observation. So is this the FBI admitting incompetence, or a cover for something else?
Posted by: Rumpoled the Slav at February 22, 2016
BINGO!!!!!
Great observation. So is this the FBI admitting incompetence, or a cover for something else?
Posted by: Diogenes at February 22, 2016 04:09 PM (r65B3)
53
I can't figure out Twitter, but I feel qualified to comment on Apple's 128 bit, 7th dimensional encryption pass keys.
I'm from AoSHQ.
I'm from AoSHQ.
Posted by: jwest at February 22, 2016 04:09 PM (Zs4uk)
54
One other thing here is the FBI itself screwed up when they first got the phone and did something that made it almost impossible to get into it.
Posted by: Vic-we have no party at February 22, 2016 04:09 PM (t2KH5)
55
24 This whole thing has so much weirdness around it that I don't know what to believe (factually believe, I do know what I think about what is best).
I mean I don't know how reliable any of the facts I've read are.
1. Supposedly, the FBI has a backlog of 82 or 140 some cases with the same desired outcome. This is the most telegenic way of getting the camel's nose under the tent.
2. Supposedly the County, owner of the phone, changed the password at the FBI's insistence. And then lost it somehow.
Those are the questionable facts.
We do know that the authorities have all the metadata, so it's not a question of "we need to know who they were talking to". They're just hoping that there is text information which will be further useful.
And yes, the FBI is trying to dragoon Apple into creating a new work product which will defeat part of the core value of Apple's existing work product.
I do not trust them, Sam I Am.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (1xUj/)
All true from the reports I saw.
Also the NYPD has 170 phones they want to break into also.
Everyone in law enforcement wants this, and 99% of the cases are bullshit drug cases, petty theft and nothing to do with TEH TERRORISM!
I mean I don't know how reliable any of the facts I've read are.
1. Supposedly, the FBI has a backlog of 82 or 140 some cases with the same desired outcome. This is the most telegenic way of getting the camel's nose under the tent.
2. Supposedly the County, owner of the phone, changed the password at the FBI's insistence. And then lost it somehow.
Those are the questionable facts.
We do know that the authorities have all the metadata, so it's not a question of "we need to know who they were talking to". They're just hoping that there is text information which will be further useful.
And yes, the FBI is trying to dragoon Apple into creating a new work product which will defeat part of the core value of Apple's existing work product.
I do not trust them, Sam I Am.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (1xUj/)
All true from the reports I saw.
Also the NYPD has 170 phones they want to break into also.
Everyone in law enforcement wants this, and 99% of the cases are bullshit drug cases, petty theft and nothing to do with TEH TERRORISM!
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (v0YLX)
56
I have trouble believing that a company wouldn't create this themselves, because, look, you're going to need it a lot.
If it exists it will be stolen and negate all their security efforts and market cred therein.
If it exists it will be stolen and negate all their security efforts and market cred therein.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (DL2i+)
57
Some idiot called up Rush today and was all "why do you not want Apple to give this to the feds to stop terrorism?" Implied not rolling over for guvmint = supporting terrorism and that the only reason to oppose this would be if you have something to hide.
Rush said ok let the feds walk into your home without a warrant, you have nothing to hide right? And this will totally stay in only good hands and never get leaked to anyone bad right?
What a maroon of a caller.
Rush said ok let the feds walk into your home without a warrant, you have nothing to hide right? And this will totally stay in only good hands and never get leaked to anyone bad right?
What a maroon of a caller.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (hvf9s)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (659DL)
59
One other thing here is the FBI itself screwed up when they first got the phone and did something that made it almost impossible to get into it.
Posted by: Vic-we have no party at February 22, 2016 04:09 PM (t2KH5)
????
Ha? And what was that?
Posted by: Vic-we have no party at February 22, 2016 04:09 PM (t2KH5)
????
Ha? And what was that?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (mw8Dm)
60
Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
When EVERYTHING is considered national security...
When EVERYTHING is considered national security...
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (FkBIv)
Posted by: What difference... at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (q4hvt)
62
If I got this right the phone was NOT his personal phone, it was a company or in this case local government owned phone.
***
This isn't an issue of the privacy of the owner of the phone.
***
This isn't an issue of the privacy of the owner of the phone.
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (8PbKi)
63
If modern encryption is as sound as it theoretically is, then it modern encryption when done right, is computationally infeasible to break (meaning it would take 100s or 1000s of years to break). Unless a secret weakness or other backdoor is inserted in the code.
However this phone is not that hard to break. The data encryption is strong. However the true key to is not some simple 4 digit passcode. That 4-digit passcode unlocks the actual key, which is stored in a special chip (or the CPU itself, this gets involved). And the manufactures make it impossible to read that information off the chip without destroying it.
4 digit passcodes, 10,000 possible combinations are trivial to break. So they build in a defense in. If more than N incorrect combinations are entered, the data is erased, wiped. And the passcode can only be entered in via the onscreen interface.
The FBI wants Apple to create custom firmware/OS for the phone that will defeat that data erase feature, and furthermore allow the passcode to be entered in via automated interface, such as the USB, wifi, or the cell link.
IOW, make it trivial for the FBI to brute force the 10,000 combinations.
However this phone is not that hard to break. The data encryption is strong. However the true key to is not some simple 4 digit passcode. That 4-digit passcode unlocks the actual key, which is stored in a special chip (or the CPU itself, this gets involved). And the manufactures make it impossible to read that information off the chip without destroying it.
4 digit passcodes, 10,000 possible combinations are trivial to break. So they build in a defense in. If more than N incorrect combinations are entered, the data is erased, wiped. And the passcode can only be entered in via the onscreen interface.
The FBI wants Apple to create custom firmware/OS for the phone that will defeat that data erase feature, and furthermore allow the passcode to be entered in via automated interface, such as the USB, wifi, or the cell link.
IOW, make it trivial for the FBI to brute force the 10,000 combinations.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (dvuhZ)
64
A) Who said it would be without compensation?
B) Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
C) And who's privacy is being violated? A name please
------------
What does compensation have to do with it? This isn't a 5th A issue.
National Security does mean something, so do my Constitutional rights. And so do my rights as a private party to not be commandeered by the government.
B) Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
C) And who's privacy is being violated? A name please
------------
What does compensation have to do with it? This isn't a 5th A issue.
National Security does mean something, so do my Constitutional rights. And so do my rights as a private party to not be commandeered by the government.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (gmeXX)
65
Thought I heard that they already 'broke' 70 or so phones
Posted by: RWC-Team BOHICA at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (/D5Lf)
66
"1. This would case a chain-of-custody problem as far as evidence."
If this were a ticking time (nuclear) bomb scenario, I might have some sympathy for the Feds' case, but clearly it isn't since chain-of-custody means jack-all when it comes to finding and killing terrorists.
If this were a ticking time (nuclear) bomb scenario, I might have some sympathy for the Feds' case, but clearly it isn't since chain-of-custody means jack-all when it comes to finding and killing terrorists.
Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (t5zYU)
67
One other thing here is the FBI itself screwed up when they first got the phone and did something that made it almost impossible to get into it.
I tried the wrong password 5 times and it locked up. I don't get it, doesn't everyone use PASSWORD?
I tried the wrong password 5 times and it locked up. I don't get it, doesn't everyone use PASSWORD?
Posted by: FBI Agent at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (39g3+)
68
If the phone belonged to a TEA party member Apple would have the key to The FBI in under 15 minutes.
Posted by: Dennis Sutton at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (6wsr1)
69
My understanding is that the FBI wants Apple to disable this routine for one specific device that is already owned by the government.
This isn't a threat if leaked into the wild. Any would-be hackers would have to own the Apple code repository and root of trust. If they already own that, they don't need the commented out version of iOS, as they could push out any updates they want.
If you assume that the FBI will not keep a copy, that the feds are not a threat to individual liberty, and there will never be a Manning/Snowden to leak it out.
This isn't a threat if leaked into the wild. Any would-be hackers would have to own the Apple code repository and root of trust. If they already own that, they don't need the commented out version of iOS, as they could push out any updates they want.
If you assume that the FBI will not keep a copy, that the feds are not a threat to individual liberty, and there will never be a Manning/Snowden to leak it out.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (uURQL)
70
I can't figure out Twitter, but I feel qualified to comment on Apple's 128 bit, 7th dimensional encryption pass keys.
I'm from AoSHQ.
***
I don't find many arguing the tech aspects, but the legal/overreach concerns of the case.
I'm from AoSHQ.
***
I don't find many arguing the tech aspects, but the legal/overreach concerns of the case.
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 22, 2016 04:13 PM (8PbKi)
71
I can give you a couple examples of where this is not true. When I worked for the phone company, we routinely got requests for wiretaps or record searches (we being the company, not me personally) and it was our employees who were forced to do the work.
good point, i didn't consider that.
---------------
Perhaps it just never occurred to the phone companies to push back on this.
good point, i didn't consider that.
---------------
Perhaps it just never occurred to the phone companies to push back on this.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:13 PM (gmeXX)
72
If the phone belonged to a TEA party member Apple would have the key to The FBI in under 15 minutes.
This.
This.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 22, 2016 04:13 PM (659DL)
73
If the phone belonged to a TEA party member Apple would have the key to The FBI in under 15 minutes.
***
Bullshit. You think not one of the dozens of phones they haven't been able to crack belonged to someone on the right?
***
Bullshit. You think not one of the dozens of phones they haven't been able to crack belonged to someone on the right?
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 22, 2016 04:13 PM (8PbKi)
74
>> Do you need a thumb drive?
>> Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM
Does everyone see what Seamus did there?
Can you digit?
>> Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM
Does everyone see what Seamus did there?
Can you digit?
Posted by: Duncanthrax the Bellicose at February 22, 2016 04:13 PM (ml1PM)
75
>>Rush said ok let the feds walk into your home without a warrant, you have nothing to hide right? And this will totally stay in only good hands and never get leaked to anyone bad right?
But the government does have a warrant. The only unique thing here is the iPhone. If this was stored in a filing cabinet they would either go to the company that made it for a key or they would break the lock. The problem here is breaking the lock destroys the data.
But the government does have a warrant. The only unique thing here is the iPhone. If this was stored in a filing cabinet they would either go to the company that made it for a key or they would break the lock. The problem here is breaking the lock destroys the data.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM (/tuJf)
76
Doctor who treats a patient after an MVA can be compelled to testify at trial or depo. Give opinions etc. So can the engineer who designed the brakes or what have you.
Happens a lot. Trust me.
Now professional are generally reimbursed for their professional time but they do have to do it. They try to avoid and often do by being aggravating and non cooperative, but if you push it you can make them do it. You just may not like the work product.
Doctor who treats a patient after an MVA can be compelled to testify at trial or depo. Give opinions etc. So can the engineer who designed the brakes or what have you.
Happens a lot. Trust me.
Now professional are generally reimbursed for their professional time but they do have to do it. They try to avoid and often do by being aggravating and non cooperative, but if you push it you can make them do it. You just may not like the work product.
Posted by: simplemind at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM (JTwsP)
77
The skeleton key is the new OS. So Apple would be turning over the key when they turned over the phone with the new OS on it. The only way around that would be for Apple to turn over the data on the phone and then disinstall the new OS giving the FBI back a nonworking device. I side with Apple.
Posted by: scofflaw_x at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM (y9ZJX)
78
jwest, please tell us again how Putin is a dreamy democrat.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (659DL)
He agrees with Hillary on foreign policy* and Bernie on American economic policy.
*At least what he's read.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (659DL)
He agrees with Hillary on foreign policy* and Bernie on American economic policy.
*At least what he's read.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Ace Brand Banhammers, an Outrage Outlet Exclusive! at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM (hLRSq)
79
What does compensation have to do with it? This isn't a 5th A issue.
National Security does mean something, so do my Constitutional rights. And so do my rights as a private party to not be commandeered by the government.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (gmeXX)
I quoted 2 replies in my responce..the other person mentioned compensatoin.
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
National Security does mean something, so do my Constitutional rights. And so do my rights as a private party to not be commandeered by the government.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (gmeXX)
I quoted 2 replies in my responce..the other person mentioned compensatoin.
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM (mw8Dm)
80
The precedent will be sold to us under the guise of "fighting terrorism" ...
... but the bulk of the implementation will be against US Citizens, born and raised in the US.
You can bet your ass on it.
... but the bulk of the implementation will be against US Citizens, born and raised in the US.
You can bet your ass on it.
Posted by: Irony at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM (BHaRb)
81
They're just hoping that there is text information which will be further useful.
Group ISIS selfies ftw.
That's what got the AlQ? looking to shoot up Ft. Dix way back when.
Smartphone camera'd themselves training. Some dood at the Circuit City saw the pix and phoned em in.
Group ISIS selfies ftw.
That's what got the AlQ? looking to shoot up Ft. Dix way back when.
Smartphone camera'd themselves training. Some dood at the Circuit City saw the pix and phoned em in.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM (DL2i+)
82
I'll bet Tim Cook would cooperate if the FBI was going after a Christian baker who refused to bake a ghey wedding cake. Because then it would be an urgent matter of national security that the wreckers' co-conspirators all be exposed and brought to justice.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:15 PM (8ZskC)
83
When I worked for the phone company
But the phone company had the data, and just had to gather it. Just like any other entity that would have to pull files, make copies, etc.
In this case Apple does not have any data. They are being told to create a key to open someone else's safe that hey happened to make. And it will also work on every other safe they made.
But the phone company had the data, and just had to gather it. Just like any other entity that would have to pull files, make copies, etc.
In this case Apple does not have any data. They are being told to create a key to open someone else's safe that hey happened to make. And it will also work on every other safe they made.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:15 PM (z4pSV)
84
i'm with apple on this one....
Posted by: phoenixgirl, i was born a rebel at February 22, 2016 04:15 PM (0O7c5)
85
One more comment,
The feds want the ability to use this as a software upload via wifi, bluetooth and other ways. Read the court order.
Why would they need that capability?
Because they want to hack more than the dead terrorists phone?
"Mr. Smith, welcome to FBI HQ. Please sit next to this wifi router and bluetooth site with your shiny iPhone we need to snoop."
The feds want the ability to use this as a software upload via wifi, bluetooth and other ways. Read the court order.
Why would they need that capability?
Because they want to hack more than the dead terrorists phone?
"Mr. Smith, welcome to FBI HQ. Please sit next to this wifi router and bluetooth site with your shiny iPhone we need to snoop."
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 04:15 PM (v0YLX)
86
I tried the wrong password 5 times and it locked up. I don't get it, doesn't everyone use PASSWORD?
Posted by: FBI Agent
Have you tried GUEST?
Posted by: FBI Agent
Have you tried GUEST?
Posted by: Sterling Archer at February 22, 2016 04:15 PM (zmW4B)
87
Rush said ok let the feds walk into your home without a warrant, you have nothing to hide right? And this will totally stay in only good hands and never get leaked to anyone bad right?
But the government does have a warrant. The only unique thing here is the iPhone. If this was stored in a filing cabinet they would either go to the company that made it for a key or they would break the lock. The problem here is breaking the lock destroys the data.
------------
Yeah, not a perfect analogy by Rush there (if that is what he said). I'm not even sure this is necessarily a 4th A issue. The issue is when can the government commandeer a private party to take a certain action it does not want to take. In general, my default answer is just about never. Strikes me as one of those 9th amendment rights that we have retained.
But the government does have a warrant. The only unique thing here is the iPhone. If this was stored in a filing cabinet they would either go to the company that made it for a key or they would break the lock. The problem here is breaking the lock destroys the data.
------------
Yeah, not a perfect analogy by Rush there (if that is what he said). I'm not even sure this is necessarily a 4th A issue. The issue is when can the government commandeer a private party to take a certain action it does not want to take. In general, my default answer is just about never. Strikes me as one of those 9th amendment rights that we have retained.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:16 PM (gmeXX)
88
This is all just to distract people from the fact that the FBI isn't going to do jack shit about Hillary. All the leaks a few weeks ago about how the investigators were all set to go and were pissed about White House comments, etc were bullshit as well. The FBI is a complete joke of a law enforcement agency and should be disbanded, not given more power.
Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at February 22, 2016 04:16 PM (nFdGS)
89
If American companies in WW2 were like Apple, we'd be speaking German or Japanese. Or Russian in the 50s
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:16 PM (mw8Dm)
90
"Couldn't you have just touched the dead guy's thumb to the fingerprint ID thing?"
No, because the phone in question was an iPhone 5c, which doesn't have the Touch ID sensor.
No, because the phone in question was an iPhone 5c, which doesn't have the Touch ID sensor.
Posted by: Adam at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (QuuqF)
91
If I had to guess , I bet Apple has a key for phones sold in China. Again just a guess.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (nS+hx)
92
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
The government can get a warrant for things that exist.
They are asking for something that doesn't exist.
It's true, as noted upthread, that they can make companies do work, but that work mostly means looking through data which exists.
They are asking that Apple create a new work product which undermines a key feature of the work product they sell to the world.
Also, they have fucked up everything they've touched in this case and don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.
The government can get a warrant for things that exist.
They are asking for something that doesn't exist.
It's true, as noted upthread, that they can make companies do work, but that work mostly means looking through data which exists.
They are asking that Apple create a new work product which undermines a key feature of the work product they sell to the world.
Also, they have fucked up everything they've touched in this case and don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (1xUj/)
93
I'll bet Achmed the Clock Boy could break into that phone and expose the contents in a few minutes.
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (NeFrd)
94
I know I'm a nut. But I don't believe a word of this if for real.
I think the phones are already easily opened by apple and they do so when requested. This is just a show.
It keeps apple's cred.
It tells the terrorists that their data is safe, so no reason to move and re-purpose your plans achmed.
If this was real, you'd never see one word of it on the news. Not. One. Word.
This is a sales job.
I know I'm a nut. But I don't believe a word of this if for real.
I think the phones are already easily opened by apple and they do so when requested. This is just a show.
It keeps apple's cred.
It tells the terrorists that their data is safe, so no reason to move and re-purpose your plans achmed.
If this was real, you'd never see one word of it on the news. Not. One. Word.
This is a sales job.
Posted by: simplemind at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (JTwsP)
95
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
------------
This isn't a 4th A issue - to me. They clearly are entitled to the information. I'm not sure that entitlement means that a private party must be forced to develop a way for them to get it.
------------
This isn't a 4th A issue - to me. They clearly are entitled to the information. I'm not sure that entitlement means that a private party must be forced to develop a way for them to get it.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (gmeXX)
96
If I had to guess , I bet Apple has a key for phones sold in China. Again just a guess.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (nS+hx)
From what I have read Apple has made a whole host of privacy concessions to the Chicoms
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (nS+hx)
From what I have read Apple has made a whole host of privacy concessions to the Chicoms
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:18 PM (mw8Dm)
97
A court actually can commandeer people for certain purposes -- to be
jurors. If a court can't find enough people through its regular juror
selection process, a judge actually has the power to send out a bailiff
to start randomly grabbing people off the street to fill a jury. That's
what a judge told me when I was on a jury, in his "here's some fun facts
about jury duty speech," and I believe him.
I don't know about some stupid judge, but they did this in "The Untouchables" and I always believe Hollywood.
jurors. If a court can't find enough people through its regular juror
selection process, a judge actually has the power to send out a bailiff
to start randomly grabbing people off the street to fill a jury. That's
what a judge told me when I was on a jury, in his "here's some fun facts
about jury duty speech," and I believe him.
I don't know about some stupid judge, but they did this in "The Untouchables" and I always believe Hollywood.
Posted by: Kasper Hauser in Berlin at February 22, 2016 04:18 PM (HqpV0)
98
The issue is when can the government commandeer a private party to take a
certain action it does not want to take. In general, my default answer
is just about never.
You mean like Christian bakeries?
certain action it does not want to take. In general, my default answer
is just about never.
You mean like Christian bakeries?
Posted by: Tami at February 22, 2016 04:18 PM (v0/PR)
99
If American companies in WW2 were like Apple, we'd be speaking German or Japanese. Or Russian in the 50s
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:16 PM (mw8Dm)
-----------
Perhaps we don't trust our government in the same way we did back then - not that there was much of a reason to trust it then.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:16 PM (mw8Dm)
-----------
Perhaps we don't trust our government in the same way we did back then - not that there was much of a reason to trust it then.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:18 PM (gmeXX)
100
I'll bet Achmed the Clock Boy could break into that phone and expose the contents in a few minutes.
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon
*picks up rock*
I just invented a way to crack iPhones.
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon
*picks up rock*
I just invented a way to crack iPhones.
Posted by: Clockmed at February 22, 2016 04:18 PM (zmW4B)
101
IRT drafting experts from Apple's security dept., good luck forcing them to do anything useful. You can make them wear a uniform, but you can't make them do something where you have no way of verifying they're making an honest effort.
Posted by: Jack O'Spades at February 22, 2016 04:18 PM (xQZ/Y)
102
The phone companies are different, actually. THere is a specific federal law that requires phone companies to assist the government in wire taps. If you want a license to operate a phone system (ie, this is something the govt "owns", the right to operate an interstate phone network, like the radio broadcast spectrum), then you must agree to work for the gubmint if it requires you for a wiretap.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (dvuhZ)
103
For all my contempt for Apple and its current management, I say Apple is correct here. What the government does not need now is even greater power to invade the privacy of its citizens.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (8ZskC)
104
-
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM
----------
And does this warrant also trump the privacy rights of all umpteen-million iphone users? (assuming apple ain't lying)
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:14 PM
----------
And does this warrant also trump the privacy rights of all umpteen-million iphone users? (assuming apple ain't lying)
Posted by: irright at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (pMGkg)
105
#69: It doesn't matter if the Feds keep a copy. They can't get the copy onto a device without either control of the Apple credentialing and distribution infrastructure or a phone that's already been jailbroken.
It isn't a cryptographic hack; it is an update to the code. (And a pretty basic one at that.)
It isn't a cryptographic hack; it is an update to the code. (And a pretty basic one at that.)
Posted by: Seldom at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (o9Let)
106
Slavery was outlawed...
This is not a military draft.
They ALREADY have the F'n META DATA... which Congress says companies must keep, and the Gov can get.... so they know WHO was called on this phone.
And they know everything except the last 6 weeks of data, because it had been backing up to the cloud before that... and they already changed the password on the backup data.
Andddd... this is a phone the bad guy did NOT bother destroying, when he destroyed his other TWO phones.
Sooo.... the FBI is making a huge deal out of what is most probably a nothing burger... meaning they are after something else....
AND... a last point. As soon as Apple does this for the US Government.... EVERY OTHER Gov in the world will insist THEY have it too...
This is not a military draft.
They ALREADY have the F'n META DATA... which Congress says companies must keep, and the Gov can get.... so they know WHO was called on this phone.
And they know everything except the last 6 weeks of data, because it had been backing up to the cloud before that... and they already changed the password on the backup data.
Andddd... this is a phone the bad guy did NOT bother destroying, when he destroyed his other TWO phones.
Sooo.... the FBI is making a huge deal out of what is most probably a nothing burger... meaning they are after something else....
AND... a last point. As soon as Apple does this for the US Government.... EVERY OTHER Gov in the world will insist THEY have it too...
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (f7rv6)
107
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
===
Does the warrant specify the govt is to be allowed into the phones of all owners? Or one? Does the warrant cover all data in the phone, or does it require the surrender of an unlocked intact phone?
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
===
Does the warrant specify the govt is to be allowed into the phones of all owners? Or one? Does the warrant cover all data in the phone, or does it require the surrender of an unlocked intact phone?
Posted by: Bigby's Oven Mitts at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (3ZtZW)
108
The issue is when can the government commandeer a private party to take a certain action it does not want to take. In general, my default answer is just about never.
Ha ha. April 15 th is coming up isn't it?
The issue is when can the government commandeer a private party to take a certain action it does not want to take. In general, my default answer is just about never.
Ha ha. April 15 th is coming up isn't it?
Posted by: simplemind at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (JTwsP)
109
The government can get a warrant for things that exist.
They are asking for something that doesn't exist.
It's true, as noted upthread, that they can make companies do work, but that work mostly means looking through data which exists.
They are asking that Apple create a new work product which undermines a key feature of the work product they sell to the world.
Also, they have fucked up everything they've touched in this case and don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (1xUj/)
The GOT the Warrant from a duly constituted Federal court. You don't like the ruling challange it, but if you lose, and I think Apple will lose, if you don't comply get ready to be sanctioned or jailed.
They are asking for something that doesn't exist.
It's true, as noted upthread, that they can make companies do work, but that work mostly means looking through data which exists.
They are asking that Apple create a new work product which undermines a key feature of the work product they sell to the world.
Also, they have fucked up everything they've touched in this case and don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 04:17 PM (1xUj/)
The GOT the Warrant from a duly constituted Federal court. You don't like the ruling challange it, but if you lose, and I think Apple will lose, if you don't comply get ready to be sanctioned or jailed.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (mw8Dm)
110
I'm betting there are already Chinese hackers in that phone.
Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (oVJmc)
111
NGU ... If the Democrat and Republican parties. in WW2 were like those of today ... We'd be proudly taught about our collaboration with either Stalin or Hitler.
This government is not to be trusted.
This government is not to be trusted.
Posted by: Irony at February 22, 2016 04:20 PM (BHaRb)
112
Ace, Thanks for the background. I've been trying to piece this all together as well. I haven't read all the entries before mine and I agree with your thoughts about this pending any additional information.
I am 100% empathetic to Apple's situation here but not 100% sympathetic to their public stance. From what I know, Apple provides other governments (looking at you Red China) with phones/technology to allow the same sort of thing they are denying the FBI. Now, let's be clear, I'm not saying that since it's okay for Red China it should be for the US; I'm saying they should exercise consistency in their alleged "virtue".
Also, what are/were the issues regarding some local LEO accidentally enabling the phone's security? Is this a red herring or an apocryphal story?
I am 100% empathetic to Apple's situation here but not 100% sympathetic to their public stance. From what I know, Apple provides other governments (looking at you Red China) with phones/technology to allow the same sort of thing they are denying the FBI. Now, let's be clear, I'm not saying that since it's okay for Red China it should be for the US; I'm saying they should exercise consistency in their alleged "virtue".
Also, what are/were the issues regarding some local LEO accidentally enabling the phone's security? Is this a red herring or an apocryphal story?
Posted by: Arizona Mike at February 22, 2016 04:20 PM (bp5MX)
113
If more than N incorrect combinations are entered,
The test also slows down each fail.
Market Ticker has a bunch re: this.
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231146
The test also slows down each fail.
Market Ticker has a bunch re: this.
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231146
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:20 PM (DL2i+)
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:20 PM (z4pSV)
115
Also, this is the same FBI that spent about an hour and a half looking at the terrorits' apartment and said "we're done here" and let the media paw over old passports and family photos.
The stupid password could have been on the refrigerator door.
They are just looking for ways to make sure that we have no privacy rights in the future.
The stupid password could have been on the refrigerator door.
They are just looking for ways to make sure that we have no privacy rights in the future.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 04:20 PM (1xUj/)
116
1. This would case a chain-of-custody problem as far as evidence. You couldn't prosecute someone based on the evidence on the phone -- a defendant would object that anyone at Apple could have put whatever they wanted on the phone.
I don't buy this argument because that means the gov't would always have to do every piece of the work. If it sent a sample of something to a private lab, that doesn't break chain of custody. My understanding is that chain of custody just means you have to know who has the evidence at each step. I assume the Apple employees would be required to sign some sort of form that they affirm what they found was what was on the phone.
I don't buy this argument because that means the gov't would always have to do every piece of the work. If it sent a sample of something to a private lab, that doesn't break chain of custody. My understanding is that chain of custody just means you have to know who has the evidence at each step. I assume the Apple employees would be required to sign some sort of form that they affirm what they found was what was on the phone.
Posted by: WOPR at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (LTDSy)
117
15 Ace, it's even more mind-boggling than what you have stated. The FBI accidentally reset the password. It was *their fault* they can't get the data but they want Apple to fix it.
Posted by: Sabrina Chase at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (K0Jjb)
Yes this complicated matters and closed off some easier, simpler paths to getting the data off of the phone. And this password fuckup is all on the county/FBI.
My understanding of the larger issue is that thus far Apple has had an out when the government came and asked them to break into a phone by claiming that they simply didn't have the software to do it and it would take non-trivial development effort to potentially create this software and hence it was not a court-ordered request that they could reasonably fulfill.
But once they create this software - even if it were to never leave Apple's possession - they can no longer claim this exemption and would have to use it whenever the government requests it and potentially hand it over to the government.
Posted by: Sabrina Chase at February 22, 2016 04:03 PM (K0Jjb)
Yes this complicated matters and closed off some easier, simpler paths to getting the data off of the phone. And this password fuckup is all on the county/FBI.
My understanding of the larger issue is that thus far Apple has had an out when the government came and asked them to break into a phone by claiming that they simply didn't have the software to do it and it would take non-trivial development effort to potentially create this software and hence it was not a court-ordered request that they could reasonably fulfill.
But once they create this software - even if it were to never leave Apple's possession - they can no longer claim this exemption and would have to use it whenever the government requests it and potentially hand it over to the government.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (pAlYe)
Posted by: x at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (nFwvY)
119
AND... a last point. As soon as Apple does this for the US Government.... EVERY OTHER Gov in the world will insist THEY have it too...
Which is why its curious its all public right? Cause if it weren't a show, it would have made more sense to keep it secret. But since its a SHOW, its intended for public consumption.
AND... a last point. As soon as Apple does this for the US Government.... EVERY OTHER Gov in the world will insist THEY have it too...
Which is why its curious its all public right? Cause if it weren't a show, it would have made more sense to keep it secret. But since its a SHOW, its intended for public consumption.
Posted by: simplemind at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (JTwsP)
120
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
I have difficulty seeing a person's phone as being something other than one of their "papers and effects."
The fact that somebody else might have the key to your house does not mean that law enforcement can go to your mortgage company and tell them go unlock your door.
(I was going to use an apartment analogy, but the house-with-a-mortgage analogy is probably more appropriate to the situation of a phone owned by a person but a third party, Apple in one case and the mortgage company in the other, having a legitimate interest in the property.)
I for one refuse to be stampeded into acquiescing in the totalitarian Panopticon State by the "what do you have to hide" class of argument.
I have difficulty seeing a person's phone as being something other than one of their "papers and effects."
The fact that somebody else might have the key to your house does not mean that law enforcement can go to your mortgage company and tell them go unlock your door.
(I was going to use an apartment analogy, but the house-with-a-mortgage analogy is probably more appropriate to the situation of a phone owned by a person but a third party, Apple in one case and the mortgage company in the other, having a legitimate interest in the property.)
I for one refuse to be stampeded into acquiescing in the totalitarian Panopticon State by the "what do you have to hide" class of argument.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (s5o+q)
121
>>But the phone company had the data, and just had to gather it. Just like any other entity that would have to pull files, make copies, etc.
In this case Apple does not have any data. They are being told to create a key to open someone else's safe that hey happened to make. And it will also work on every other safe they made.
That wasn't the issue I was addressing, I was speaking to ace's concern about the government being able to force companies to do work in a criminal investigation without getting paid. It is not uncommon is all I was saying.
As to how much work it would take to modify the IOS, none of us really no. For all we know Apple already knows how to do this since they wrote the code.
As to the idea that this could get out, the government has said repeatedly that they don't want the key, they want the data and they would be happy for Apple to take the phone, unlock it, and then the FBI would brute force the password and get the data. There is no more chance of this getting out than any other Apple secret they keep squirreled away in Cupertino.
In this case Apple does not have any data. They are being told to create a key to open someone else's safe that hey happened to make. And it will also work on every other safe they made.
That wasn't the issue I was addressing, I was speaking to ace's concern about the government being able to force companies to do work in a criminal investigation without getting paid. It is not uncommon is all I was saying.
As to how much work it would take to modify the IOS, none of us really no. For all we know Apple already knows how to do this since they wrote the code.
As to the idea that this could get out, the government has said repeatedly that they don't want the key, they want the data and they would be happy for Apple to take the phone, unlock it, and then the FBI would brute force the password and get the data. There is no more chance of this getting out than any other Apple secret they keep squirreled away in Cupertino.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (/tuJf)
122
And does this warrant also trump the privacy rights of all umpteen-million iphone users? (assuming apple ain't lying)
Posted by: irright at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (pMGkg)
And of course you point out people who's rights have been violated right? Or how breaking this one phone will lead to that?
Posted by: irright at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (pMGkg)
And of course you point out people who's rights have been violated right? Or how breaking this one phone will lead to that?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (mw8Dm)
123
The GOT the Warrant from a duly constituted Federal court. You don't like the ruling challange it, but if you lose, and I think Apple will lose, if you don't comply get ready to be sanctioned or jailed.
----------
NGU - No one is challenging the validity of the warrant. No one is saying that the feds are not entitled to the information in the phone. That is not the issue.
----------
NGU - No one is challenging the validity of the warrant. No one is saying that the feds are not entitled to the information in the phone. That is not the issue.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (gmeXX)
124
Ace- I worked for a software company recently. We developed a messaging and info storage capability that LOCKED your info. You, the cops, the judge, and whomever could have stood there with a gun to our head, under a guillotine, with lit torches and a can of gasoline, and we still could not have produced an unlock code to get at info once it was encrypted. The NSA COULD POTENTIALLY have cracked it brute-force, but it would have taken YEARS (with current super-computer ability) and been worthless for a case. The application of the code is still being commercialized. But the underlying capability is there, and can be used NOW. Drawback? If you lost your 'key' you lose your info. Period. Dot.
Not all problems NEED an answer. Or even have one.
Not all problems NEED an answer. Or even have one.
Posted by: Mr Wolf at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (cjgnX)
125
Here is the solution.
Apple writes the code
It gets stored on Hillary's secure bathroom server
The Government uses the code.
The server then gets wiped.
Like with a cloth.
Apple writes the code
It gets stored on Hillary's secure bathroom server
The Government uses the code.
The server then gets wiped.
Like with a cloth.
Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (ptqRm)
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (sdPF/)
127
Apple schmapple.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (qUNWi)
128
>>A) Who said it would be without compensation?
B) Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
C) And who's privacy is being violated? A name please
--------------------------
A. Won't be compensation for the devaluation of their overall work product.
B. Since the government has proven time and again they don't care or at best are mind boggling incompetent, it certainly isn't a reason to diminish your or my rights now in the name of national security.
C. Yours or mine tomorrow potentially.
B) Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
C) And who's privacy is being violated? A name please
--------------------------
A. Won't be compensation for the devaluation of their overall work product.
B. Since the government has proven time and again they don't care or at best are mind boggling incompetent, it certainly isn't a reason to diminish your or my rights now in the name of national security.
C. Yours or mine tomorrow potentially.
Posted by: Aviator at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (c7vUv)
129
And a pretty basic one at that.
Posted by: Seldom at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (o9Let)
You need to go read the EFF article someone posted above.
Posted by: Seldom at February 22, 2016 04:19 PM (o9Let)
You need to go read the EFF article someone posted above.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (z4pSV)
130
They have another motive: to establish legal precedent for issuing directives to private companies based on "security" and "public safety".
If you can force a company to write software that's against their own business interests, you can force a company to do anything - like produce smart guns, or turn over their customer list without cause, or change their Board of Directors because of the political climate.
Not that liberals would do anything like that, of course.
And since when does this administration prosecute terrorists? That right there should tip you off something's funny.
If you can force a company to write software that's against their own business interests, you can force a company to do anything - like produce smart guns, or turn over their customer list without cause, or change their Board of Directors because of the political climate.
Not that liberals would do anything like that, of course.
And since when does this administration prosecute terrorists? That right there should tip you off something's funny.
Posted by: Xavier at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (vOXzd)
131
They should waterboard the guy who works for the county until he remembers the new password.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (cXiMR)
132
But once they create this software - even if it were to never leave Apple's possession - they can no longer claim this exemption and would have to use it whenever the government requests it and potentially hand it over to the government.
---------
Ding ding ding.
---------
Ding ding ding.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (gmeXX)
133
Oh, and the password is 1 2 3 4 5.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy!
Remarkable! I have the same combination on my luggage!
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy!
Remarkable! I have the same combination on my luggage!
Posted by: President Skrewb at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (zmW4B)
134
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (s5o+q)
Did you skip the part about the warrant?
Did you skip the part about the warrant?
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (nS+hx)
135
So did Trump win Cacalacky?
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (qUNWi)
136
NGU - No one is challenging the validity of the warrant. No one is saying that the feds are not entitled to the information in the phone. That is not the issue.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (gmeXX)
Actually a lot of people are.
But what is your argument then.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (gmeXX)
Actually a lot of people are.
But what is your argument then.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (mw8Dm)
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (uURQL)
138
Apple unlocked the phone for them, then the idiots in the government locked it again, without keeping a copy of the password.
this whole mess is bullshit.
this whole mess is bullshit.
Posted by: redc1c4 at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (obZhs)
139
I'm a tech person. Hundreds of thousands of lines of code under my belt. I know what Apple could easily do to unlock this phone. In the 'high level' source code it might require the addition of one word 'not'. As in 'if password is not correct... Continue'. Pretty much that simple. But then the FBI could look at the before and after machine code and apply the few bite difference on any phone and run amok on anyone.
It would be nice, in my humble opinion, for Apple to unlock this phone. But without constraints on the FBI they will have given away the keys to their products security.
I see the lines on the continuum and its neither all black or all white.
It would be nice, in my humble opinion, for Apple to unlock this phone. But without constraints on the FBI they will have given away the keys to their products security.
I see the lines on the continuum and its neither all black or all white.
Posted by: mega machines at February 22, 2016 04:24 PM (fbovC)
140
Posted by: Jack O'Spades at February 22, 2016 04:18 PM (xQZ/Y)
The difference between God and a federal judge is God does not think he is a federal judge. If you want to be sitting in a cell for contempt of court for disobeying a court order go right ahead.
Disclaimer: I am not saying this is right or wrong; I am saying that it can and has happened. Such as refusing to turn over notes on sources has gotten principled reporters jail time.
The difference between God and a federal judge is God does not think he is a federal judge. If you want to be sitting in a cell for contempt of court for disobeying a court order go right ahead.
Disclaimer: I am not saying this is right or wrong; I am saying that it can and has happened. Such as refusing to turn over notes on sources has gotten principled reporters jail time.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Ace Brand Banhammers, an Outrage Outlet Exclusive! at February 22, 2016 04:24 PM (hLRSq)
141
tech loony-toon, potential murderer and Libertarian Presidential candidate John McAfee has offered to unlock the phone for free.
http://tinyurl.com/jskp65e
http://tinyurl.com/jskp65e
Posted by: wiserbud at February 22, 2016 04:24 PM (AqEbb)
142
Did they try the password: ISIS69. Pretty sure that's it.
Posted by: scofflaw_x at February 22, 2016 04:24 PM (y9ZJX)
143
Oh, and the password is 1 2 3 4 5.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (sdPF/)
Wow. what a coincidence! That's the same combination I have on my luggage!
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (sdPF/)
Wow. what a coincidence! That's the same combination I have on my luggage!
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:24 PM (z4pSV)
144
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM
-------
So your advice is: Give up.
(sorry, couldn't help myself)
-------
So your advice is: Give up.
(sorry, couldn't help myself)
Posted by: irright at February 22, 2016 04:24 PM (zxnPQ)
145
The phone was a 5c which doesn't have finger print scanning.
Posted by: Lauren at February 22, 2016 04:25 PM (x0RiQ)
146
As I said before on one of these discussions, the issue boils down to: Do you believe a citizen has a right to strong encryption, as strong as ingenuity allows, which will allow that citizen to lock even the wonderful govt out of it.
I say yes. The US govt doesn't think so. It doesn't say so, but considering it considers encryption to be a "munition", I think we can be sure it does.
They would love a law preventing a private citizen from using encryption they can't break.
I say yes. The US govt doesn't think so. It doesn't say so, but considering it considers encryption to be a "munition", I think we can be sure it does.
They would love a law preventing a private citizen from using encryption they can't break.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:25 PM (dvuhZ)
147
When the DoJ and courts starts using The All Writs Act of 1789, irrespective of the substantive conversation, you know they are reaching.
That should be your first "clue" something extraordinary, in a judicial sense, is afoot here.
If you look at the history of that Act, you'll see some highly controversial actions have followed it.
By the way, it is indeed that the court is compelling someone to "produce" something which they don't currently possess. So it's really forced manufacturing on the grounds it is their IP which is otherwise limiting access to the information.
Either way, I think SCOTUS gets involved as there are Constitutional issues involved.
By the way, your simple articulation is a very good one.
That should be your first "clue" something extraordinary, in a judicial sense, is afoot here.
If you look at the history of that Act, you'll see some highly controversial actions have followed it.
By the way, it is indeed that the court is compelling someone to "produce" something which they don't currently possess. So it's really forced manufacturing on the grounds it is their IP which is otherwise limiting access to the information.
Either way, I think SCOTUS gets involved as there are Constitutional issues involved.
By the way, your simple articulation is a very good one.
Posted by: Marcus T at February 22, 2016 04:25 PM (GGCsk)
148
Ha? And what was that?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (mw8Dm)
The first tech that got the phone changed something in it that caused it to block all the normal ways of resetting the code. I don't know all the details because the story was sketchy.
That is the other problem here, we are depending on an ignorant press here to give us details. I have no idea how much of this we can believe.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:10 PM (mw8Dm)
The first tech that got the phone changed something in it that caused it to block all the normal ways of resetting the code. I don't know all the details because the story was sketchy.
That is the other problem here, we are depending on an ignorant press here to give us details. I have no idea how much of this we can believe.
Posted by: Vic-we have no party at February 22, 2016 04:25 PM (t2KH5)
149
A) Who said it would be without compensation?
B) Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
C) And who's privacy is being violated? A name please
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:08 PM (mw8Dm)
I'm going to try not to go full-bore snark on you here, but I disagree quite strongly.
A) So your freedom, and, more troublingly, the freedom of your countrymen, is for sale
B) This is the wrong question to ask, because "national security" in this instance was not served by *failing to screen Farook and Malik* DURING the visa application process. This smells to me like the FBI using a politicized case to make a power grab.
C) You have no issue making the leap from a single terrorist incident to the practically infinite umbrella term of "national security" but you DO have an issue with assuming that an infinitely-transmissible and replicable piece of software that renders phone encryption moot could pose a privacy issue for anyone other than the dead terrorist in question.
The question is: what level of privacy, what level of risk, is acceptable in an age of potentially nuclear terrorist attack?
I believe there must still be a line drawn to protect individual privacy, and that applying actual standards to immigration, visas, enforcing the GOSHDARN law, and screening visitors to our country based on common sense + publicly available social media information can reduce the need to break into anyone's phone, anywhere, any time to an acceptable, though not ironclad, level.
Hey FBI: keep tabs on the people at the mosque. If I can get a targeted ad based on the interpolation of metadata across the four devices I use in a weekday, you can figure out who's at high risk of getting shooty and splodey. Maybe, just maybe, you're asking apple the wrong question here.
B) Does National Security not mean anything anymore to anyone.
C) And who's privacy is being violated? A name please
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:08 PM (mw8Dm)
I'm going to try not to go full-bore snark on you here, but I disagree quite strongly.
A) So your freedom, and, more troublingly, the freedom of your countrymen, is for sale
B) This is the wrong question to ask, because "national security" in this instance was not served by *failing to screen Farook and Malik* DURING the visa application process. This smells to me like the FBI using a politicized case to make a power grab.
C) You have no issue making the leap from a single terrorist incident to the practically infinite umbrella term of "national security" but you DO have an issue with assuming that an infinitely-transmissible and replicable piece of software that renders phone encryption moot could pose a privacy issue for anyone other than the dead terrorist in question.
The question is: what level of privacy, what level of risk, is acceptable in an age of potentially nuclear terrorist attack?
I believe there must still be a line drawn to protect individual privacy, and that applying actual standards to immigration, visas, enforcing the GOSHDARN law, and screening visitors to our country based on common sense + publicly available social media information can reduce the need to break into anyone's phone, anywhere, any time to an acceptable, though not ironclad, level.
Hey FBI: keep tabs on the people at the mosque. If I can get a targeted ad based on the interpolation of metadata across the four devices I use in a weekday, you can figure out who's at high risk of getting shooty and splodey. Maybe, just maybe, you're asking apple the wrong question here.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (xuouz)
150
I have done got so far behind on this I just going to move on.
Posted by: Vic-we have no party at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (t2KH5)
151
NGU - No one is challenging the validity of the warrant. No one is saying that the feds are not entitled to the information in the phone. That is not the issue.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (gmeXX)
Actually a lot of people are.
But what is your argument then.
-------------
Quite simply that the government does not have the right to commandeer Apple to create something that will give them access to this product.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:22 PM (gmeXX)
Actually a lot of people are.
But what is your argument then.
-------------
Quite simply that the government does not have the right to commandeer Apple to create something that will give them access to this product.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (gmeXX)
152
"If American companies in WW2 were like Apple, we'd be speaking German or Japanese. Or Russian in the 50s"
And if I owned a company, and America's government were like the American government during WW2*, I'd probably cooperate voluntarily and patriotically. But America's government today has proven itself to be untrustworthy, traitorous, and malignant to individual liberties. So I'm kind of torn on this.
* Manzanar, the New Deal, the voyage of the St. Louis, the growth of the welfare state, and trying to pack the Supreme Court notwithstanding, I mean. I'm not trying to do a definitive expose on the problems of the FDR administration, just trying to make a point.
And if I owned a company, and America's government were like the American government during WW2*, I'd probably cooperate voluntarily and patriotically. But America's government today has proven itself to be untrustworthy, traitorous, and malignant to individual liberties. So I'm kind of torn on this.
* Manzanar, the New Deal, the voyage of the St. Louis, the growth of the welfare state, and trying to pack the Supreme Court notwithstanding, I mean. I'm not trying to do a definitive expose on the problems of the FDR administration, just trying to make a point.
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (iIzG7)
153
The government can get a warrant for things that exist.
Mostly. However, if discoverable data is locked in a safe and the key has gone missing, the government can compel the safe's owner to obtain a replacement key or it can have the safe broken into. The Apple situation is somewhat analogous, except that the creation of a key would be far more complicated and it would jeopardize the security of Apple's entire product line.
Mostly. However, if discoverable data is locked in a safe and the key has gone missing, the government can compel the safe's owner to obtain a replacement key or it can have the safe broken into. The Apple situation is somewhat analogous, except that the creation of a key would be far more complicated and it would jeopardize the security of Apple's entire product line.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (8ZskC)
154
AND... a last point. As soon as Apple does this for the US Government.... EVERY OTHER Gov in the world will insist THEY have it too...
yep, and it will be on 4chan within 24 hours after that
yep, and it will be on 4chan within 24 hours after that
Posted by: brak at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (MJuTN)
155
Damn. There's a lot of unsecured luggage out there!
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (uiVGU)
156
#130: I did. It's FUD.
Posted by: Seldom at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (o9Let)
157
1. everytime i get an update i have to enter my passcode. before and after the install.
there's no way they don't have the passcode.
2. he's dead
there's no way they don't have the passcode.
2. he's dead
Posted by: concrete girl at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (0KgAM)
158
A. Won't be compensation for the devaluation of their overall work product.
B. Since the government has proven time and again they don't care or at best are mind boggling incompetent, it certainly isn't a reason to diminish your or my rights now in the name of national security.
C. Yours or mine tomorrow potentially.
Posted by: Aviator at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (c7vUv)
A) Crap. And that is why I think this is all a show by Apple
B) So then you want to abolish the Constitution and law of the land? Ready to give up and ferment Revolution? If not. Then you still have to abide by the Law or work to change those you don't like
C) How? I have nothing to hide. And if the Gov wants to investigate me, let them get a warrant have a go at it.
B. Since the government has proven time and again they don't care or at best are mind boggling incompetent, it certainly isn't a reason to diminish your or my rights now in the name of national security.
C. Yours or mine tomorrow potentially.
Posted by: Aviator at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (c7vUv)
A) Crap. And that is why I think this is all a show by Apple
B) So then you want to abolish the Constitution and law of the land? Ready to give up and ferment Revolution? If not. Then you still have to abide by the Law or work to change those you don't like
C) How? I have nothing to hide. And if the Gov wants to investigate me, let them get a warrant have a go at it.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:27 PM (mw8Dm)
159
If American companies in WW2 were like Apple, we'd be speaking German or Japanese. Or Russian in the 50s
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Gotta love those old movies. The CEO of Acme tells the government "we'll build all the tanks and planes and have our workers working 25 hours a day and only charge you one dollar more than cost." Something tells me the facts were somewhat different.
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Gotta love those old movies. The CEO of Acme tells the government "we'll build all the tanks and planes and have our workers working 25 hours a day and only charge you one dollar more than cost." Something tells me the facts were somewhat different.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 22, 2016 04:27 PM (FkBIv)
160
Did you skip the part about the warrant?
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (nS+hx)
Yeah, pretty much.
But the warrant is against Apple, not against whoever owns the phone, right?
As other commenters have noted (now that I've somewhat caught up) that still seems exceptionally problematic at best, and possibly impossible to fulfiill at worst.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (nS+hx)
Yeah, pretty much.
But the warrant is against Apple, not against whoever owns the phone, right?
As other commenters have noted (now that I've somewhat caught up) that still seems exceptionally problematic at best, and possibly impossible to fulfiill at worst.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 04:27 PM (s5o+q)
161
Do you need a thumb drive?
>> Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM
Does everyone see what Seamus did there?
Can you digit?
Posted by: Duncanthrax
Why did you finger Muldoon?
>> Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:06 PM
Does everyone see what Seamus did there?
Can you digit?
Posted by: Duncanthrax
Why did you finger Muldoon?
Posted by: rickb223 at February 22, 2016 04:27 PM (TUUTu)
162
At his point in our nation's history, I wouldn't trust the government with a cheese grater.
Posted by: Soona at February 22, 2016 04:27 PM (Fmupd)
163
If only they asked me, I could have told them "The password is..."
Posted by: disembodied voice from the game show at February 22, 2016 04:28 PM (H9MG5)
Posted by: Your Friendly Neighborhood Baggage Handlers at February 22, 2016 04:28 PM (1xUj/)
165
Now... there are actually sever ways around this.
Like cutting off his thumb?
Cutting of the thumbs of Apple staff until they concede?
Like cutting off his thumb?
Cutting of the thumbs of Apple staff until they concede?
Posted by: andycanuck at February 22, 2016 04:28 PM (WOyz5)
166
Weaponsman is reporting that the phone was unlocked and that the FBI changed the password but now they can't remember what the password was changed to. He said that was released in a friday evening document dump. Kinda makes you wonder....
Posted by: crookedrecords at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (EdMxw)
167
Quite simply that the government does not have the right to commandeer Apple to create something that will give them access to this product.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (gmeXX)
So you say. Let's see what the Courts say. And this case is clearly National Security, contrary to what others here may say, and I am appalled that an American company is putting profit before that.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:26 PM (gmeXX)
So you say. Let's see what the Courts say. And this case is clearly National Security, contrary to what others here may say, and I am appalled that an American company is putting profit before that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (mw8Dm)
168
iPhone 5c does not have a fingerprint scanner button, so you can't unlock it using the dead guy's thumb.
Posted by: Emmie at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (ezXrF)
169
I don't trust the feds not to abuse this special software if Apple were to develop it and hand it over. Not.At.All.
I don't trust Apple to not use this to grandstand about how much they protect their subscribers' data when they've already been cooperating with the NSA, and, in all likelihood, accommodating other intrusive security-type requests from foreign governments (which is common, since the US has more stringent privacy and wiretapping laws than other countries).
Ugh.
I don't trust Apple to not use this to grandstand about how much they protect their subscribers' data when they've already been cooperating with the NSA, and, in all likelihood, accommodating other intrusive security-type requests from foreign governments (which is common, since the US has more stringent privacy and wiretapping laws than other countries).
Ugh.
Posted by: Lizzy at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (NOIQH)
170
As I said before on one of these discussions, the issue boils down to: Do you believe a citizen has a right to strong encryption, as strong as ingenuity allows, which will allow that citizen to lock even the wonderful govt out of it.
====
If they go ahead and destroy the encryption, there'll be 100s of apps released immediately after that replicate that feature in entirely new ways. eg, the users will route around the failure.
====
If they go ahead and destroy the encryption, there'll be 100s of apps released immediately after that replicate that feature in entirely new ways. eg, the users will route around the failure.
Posted by: Bigby's Oven Mitts at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (3ZtZW)
171
It's worth pointing out that it's a government phone (ie, the scumbag's county employer). Not so much a privacy issue in this case.
Limbaugh went on a long tear this afternoon about how a competent IT department would have had controls on the phone the whole time.
Limbaugh went on a long tear this afternoon about how a competent IT department would have had controls on the phone the whole time.
Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (oVJmc)
172
88 Rush said ok let the feds walk into your home without a warrant, you have nothing to hide right? And this will totally stay in only good hands and never get leaked to anyone bad right?
But the government does have a warrant. The only unique thing here is the iPhone. If this was stored in a filing cabinet they would either go to the company that made it for a key or they would break the lock. The problem here is breaking the lock destroys the data.
)
So Apple shoud do this because they have a court order?
And everyone knows judges orders are always perfect!
We have no need for Appeals Courts and Supreme Courts because the first judge always get it right?
Apple should fight this. And I support Apple fighting it.
But the government does have a warrant. The only unique thing here is the iPhone. If this was stored in a filing cabinet they would either go to the company that made it for a key or they would break the lock. The problem here is breaking the lock destroys the data.
)
So Apple shoud do this because they have a court order?
And everyone knows judges orders are always perfect!
We have no need for Appeals Courts and Supreme Courts because the first judge always get it right?
Apple should fight this. And I support Apple fighting it.
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (v0YLX)
173
"Apple unlocked the phone for them, then the idiots in the government locked it again, without keeping a copy of the password."
Ha. So yes, they can unlock it at will. They just don't want to do it since the backdoor they have built in only works -- ONCE!
If you believe that, I got a bridge for sale.
"Apple unlocked the phone for them, then the idiots in the government locked it again, without keeping a copy of the password."
Ha. So yes, they can unlock it at will. They just don't want to do it since the backdoor they have built in only works -- ONCE!
If you believe that, I got a bridge for sale.
Posted by: simplemind at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (JTwsP)
174
there's no way they don't have the passcode.
That's part of the factual basis that we don't really know.
Supposedly the County changed the password and lost it. How is that possible?
How is that Apple's fault?
That's part of the factual basis that we don't really know.
Supposedly the County changed the password and lost it. How is that possible?
How is that Apple's fault?
Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (1xUj/)
175
B) So then you want to abolish the Constitution and law of the land? Ready to give up and ferment Revolution? If not. Then you still have to abide by the Law or work to change those you don't like
C) How? I have nothing to hide. And if the Gov wants to investigate me, let them get a warrant have a go at it.
------------
NGU - your passion is compelling, but it is not winning me over. I would argue that forcing Apple to do this weakens the Constitution more than anything.
And the argument that you have nothing to hide is somewhat meaningless with a government that may be willing to plant evidence and a body of law that no longer requires any finding of mens rea.
C) How? I have nothing to hide. And if the Gov wants to investigate me, let them get a warrant have a go at it.
------------
NGU - your passion is compelling, but it is not winning me over. I would argue that forcing Apple to do this weakens the Constitution more than anything.
And the argument that you have nothing to hide is somewhat meaningless with a government that may be willing to plant evidence and a body of law that no longer requires any finding of mens rea.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (gmeXX)
176
Vic, as usual nails it. The entire tale stinks worse than the south side of a northbound steer, and I too don't believe anything beyond "the FBI has a phone". Everything else is just...
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 04:30 PM (sdPF/)
177
Like cutting off his thumb?
Cutting of the thumbs of Apple staff until they concede?
Posted by: andycanuck
Dey took my tumbs!
Cutting of the thumbs of Apple staff until they concede?
Posted by: andycanuck
Dey took my tumbs!
Posted by: guy from that movie I can't remember at February 22, 2016 04:30 PM (zmW4B)
178
But the warrant is against Apple, not against whoever owns the phone, right?
As other commenters have noted (now that I've somewhat caught up) that still seems exceptionally problematic at best, and possibly impossible to fulfiill at worst.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 04:27 PM (s5o+q)
The Owners of the phone, San Benadino, have already given explicit permission to open the phone and gather the data
As other commenters have noted (now that I've somewhat caught up) that still seems exceptionally problematic at best, and possibly impossible to fulfiill at worst.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 04:27 PM (s5o+q)
The Owners of the phone, San Benadino, have already given explicit permission to open the phone and gather the data
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:30 PM (mw8Dm)
179
"if there were a law passed granting courts this authority,"
From what I can tell, the government (and Gabe) think the All Writs Act is all you need
From what I can tell, the government (and Gabe) think the All Writs Act is all you need
Posted by: Knemon at February 22, 2016 04:30 PM (4FRv/)
180
169. I should have searched comments first. I see others have pointed out about the fingerprint scanner.
Posted by: Emmie at February 22, 2016 04:30 PM (ezXrF)
181
Doesn't Apple have more cash than the Government? How would you ever figure out the value of the loss of current and future market share?
If Apple had done this on the down-low for the Government, it would have leaked or been disclosed in court when they try the third shooter (who they said didn't exist in a stunning example of competence).
The Government, if they still had cigarette smoking guys wearing red vests - would have made an IRS ruling wrt to Apple's Irish Dodge and pointed a multi-billion gun at their head., and said why don't you help us.
If Apple had done this on the down-low for the Government, it would have leaked or been disclosed in court when they try the third shooter (who they said didn't exist in a stunning example of competence).
The Government, if they still had cigarette smoking guys wearing red vests - would have made an IRS ruling wrt to Apple's Irish Dodge and pointed a multi-billion gun at their head., and said why don't you help us.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 04:31 PM (cXiMR)
182
Re: JackStraw
"He says he knows that in telephone companies, when wiretap orders come down, private citizen employees of the telephone company are required to do the work themselves."
Phone companies do not do this in response to arbitrary court orders or from sense of civic duty. Congress specifically press-ganged them into it: https://www.eff.org/issues/calea
"He says he knows that in telephone companies, when wiretap orders come down, private citizen employees of the telephone company are required to do the work themselves."
Phone companies do not do this in response to arbitrary court orders or from sense of civic duty. Congress specifically press-ganged them into it: https://www.eff.org/issues/calea
Posted by: Ken in NH at February 22, 2016 04:31 PM (6qAvd)
183
>>Mostly. However, if discoverable data is locked in a safe and the key has gone missing, the government can compel the safe's owner to obtain a replacement key or it can have the safe broken into. The Apple situation is somewhat analogous,
1)except that the creation of a key would be far more complicated - Objection. Asserts facts not in evidence.
2)and it would jeopardize the security of Apple's entire product line. - Objection. Conjecture. The government has offered to let Apple open the phone with zero government oversight. There is no evidence at all that anyone other than Apple would ever see this code.
1)except that the creation of a key would be far more complicated - Objection. Asserts facts not in evidence.
2)and it would jeopardize the security of Apple's entire product line. - Objection. Conjecture. The government has offered to let Apple open the phone with zero government oversight. There is no evidence at all that anyone other than Apple would ever see this code.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 22, 2016 04:31 PM (/tuJf)
184
Fedzilla fighting it out with Steve Handjobs is one of those conflicts that's like the Iran-Iraq War.
I want for it to go on for as long as possible with maximum bloodshed and collateral damage to both combatant parties.
I want for it to go on for as long as possible with maximum bloodshed and collateral damage to both combatant parties.
Posted by: torquewrench at February 22, 2016 04:31 PM (noWW6)
185
-
164 If only they asked me, I could have told them "The password is..."
Posted by: disembodied voice from the game show at February 22, 2016 04:28
rhubarb
164 If only they asked me, I could have told them "The password is..."
Posted by: disembodied voice from the game show at February 22, 2016 04:28
rhubarb
Posted by: irright at February 22, 2016 04:31 PM (zxnPQ)
186
" a defendant would object that anyone at Apple could have put whatever they wanted on the phone."
I would actually challenge the "hack" that Apple would be performing. It's an extraordinary measure that's never been done before. Did it damage the phone or otherwise remove exculpatory evidence? There are enough questions to produce doubt.
I would actually challenge the "hack" that Apple would be performing. It's an extraordinary measure that's never been done before. Did it damage the phone or otherwise remove exculpatory evidence? There are enough questions to produce doubt.
Posted by: Marcus T at February 22, 2016 04:31 PM (GGCsk)
187
And the Gov has a warrant. And a warrant trumps your privacy rights.
A warrant is supposed to be applicable to one person's papers/home/safe/etc.
They are demanding access to EVERY person's (who has an iPhone) phone.
It's the difference between asking a bank for records from a single account and asking for unfettered access to the bank's database.
Sure, they can promise from now until eternity they'll only use the skeleton key for this one phone. I don't believe them, and neither should you.
A warrant is supposed to be applicable to one person's papers/home/safe/etc.
They are demanding access to EVERY person's (who has an iPhone) phone.
It's the difference between asking a bank for records from a single account and asking for unfettered access to the bank's database.
Sure, they can promise from now until eternity they'll only use the skeleton key for this one phone. I don't believe them, and neither should you.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:32 PM (jhqr1)
188
Apple unlocked the phone for them, then the idiots in the government locked it again, without keeping a copy of the password."
So much for your concerns over the sanctity of security. Its already got a back door to all your phones.
Apple unlocked the phone for them, then the idiots in the government locked it again, without keeping a copy of the password."
So much for your concerns over the sanctity of security. Its already got a back door to all your phones.
Posted by: simplemind at February 22, 2016 04:32 PM (JTwsP)
189
everytime i get an update i have to enter my passcode
I Thought you had to enter you AppleID for updates, which is different from your passcode, and is able to be reset by Apple.
I Thought you had to enter you AppleID for updates, which is different from your passcode, and is able to be reset by Apple.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:32 PM (z4pSV)
190
A presidential order declaring the draft to now be in operation, and I assume that itself would require an actual declaration of war.
There was a draft for Viet Nam and it wasn't a declared war.
But the argument you forgot to make is that Barky can do anything he damn well pleases. There is no law, only a retarded, dog-eating, Indonesian Sukarno knock-off.
There was a draft for Viet Nam and it wasn't a declared war.
But the argument you forgot to make is that Barky can do anything he damn well pleases. There is no law, only a retarded, dog-eating, Indonesian Sukarno knock-off.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 22, 2016 04:32 PM (zc3Db)
191
Hey FBI: keep tabs on the people at the mosque.
===
O cmon, that's like real police work! Modern law enforcement is to let the machines do as much as possible, then come in and fuck things up.
===
O cmon, that's like real police work! Modern law enforcement is to let the machines do as much as possible, then come in and fuck things up.
Posted by: Bigby's Oven Mitts at February 22, 2016 04:32 PM (3ZtZW)
192
So you say. Let's see what the Courts say. And this case is clearly National Security, contrary to what others here may say, and I am appalled that an American company is putting profit before that.
-----------
Good thing the courts never get anything wrong. I have no doubt there may be some National Security element to this - how much - I have no idea.
Apple may be putting profit first, but we should all be willing to not acquiesce so quickly to a governmental demand. We are not subjects.
-----------
Good thing the courts never get anything wrong. I have no doubt there may be some National Security element to this - how much - I have no idea.
Apple may be putting profit first, but we should all be willing to not acquiesce so quickly to a governmental demand. We are not subjects.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:32 PM (gmeXX)
193
If they go ahead and destroy the encryption, there'll be 100s of apps released immediately after that replicate that feature in entirely new ways. eg, the users will route around the failure.
Posted by: Bigby's Oven Mitts at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (3ZtZW)
Good looks Bigby, it's all too easy to forget the infuriating ingenuity of the free market in the heat of a "we stand at the edge of a precipice" argument like this.
Posted by: Bigby's Oven Mitts at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (3ZtZW)
Good looks Bigby, it's all too easy to forget the infuriating ingenuity of the free market in the heat of a "we stand at the edge of a precipice" argument like this.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:32 PM (xuouz)
194
And the argument that you have nothing to hide is somewhat meaningless with a government that may be willing to plant evidence and a body of law that no longer requires any finding of mens rea.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (gmeXX)
As much as I hate distrust Fredo, this JUstice Department, and others, I still believe in America. It sucks and is imperfect, but still better than all the other systems in the World and I am not ready to give up on it just yet. So I will continue to obey it's laws and also "protect and defend" it, unlike Apple which is only in this for profit
And the argument that you have nothing to hide is somewhat meaningless with a government that may be willing to plant evidence and a body of law that no longer requires any finding of mens rea.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (gmeXX)
As much as I hate distrust Fredo, this JUstice Department, and others, I still believe in America. It sucks and is imperfect, but still better than all the other systems in the World and I am not ready to give up on it just yet. So I will continue to obey it's laws and also "protect and defend" it, unlike Apple which is only in this for profit
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:33 PM (mw8Dm)
Posted by: RWC-Team BOHICA at February 22, 2016 04:33 PM (/D5Lf)
196
169. I should have searched comments first. I see others have pointed out about the fingerprint scanner.
Posted by: Emmie at February 22, 2016 04:30 PM (ezXrF)
That's okay. Hacking off mohammed's dead fingers one by one was probably worthwhile for the entertainment value alone.
Posted by: Emmie at February 22, 2016 04:30 PM (ezXrF)
That's okay. Hacking off mohammed's dead fingers one by one was probably worthwhile for the entertainment value alone.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:33 PM (8ZskC)
197
In general, it is my understanding that the court can only compel companies to produce something they have that actually exists. It is beyond the power of the court to order a company to produce code that doesn't exist.
Even if Apple were drafted, the government literally cannot compel the creative process.
Even if Apple were drafted, the government literally cannot compel the creative process.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:33 PM (OrI3J)
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (z4pSV)
199
San Bernadino County owns that iPhone. Their IT department should have set it up & given to Terrorist.
I'm not going to bother to add his name.
I'm not going to bother to add his name.
Posted by: Carol at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (sj3Ax)
200
172 It's worth pointing out that it's a government phone (ie, the scumbag's county employer). Not so much a privacy issue in this case.
Limbaugh went on a long tear this afternoon about how a competent IT department would have had controls on the phone the whole time.
Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (oVJmc)
But the county's IT department wasn't competent. They never installed the remote management code which would have let them get control of it.
Limbaugh went on a long tear this afternoon about how a competent IT department would have had controls on the phone the whole time.
Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (oVJmc)
But the county's IT department wasn't competent. They never installed the remote management code which would have let them get control of it.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (pAlYe)
201
By the powers invested in me by this parish, I hereby do commandeer this thread and all those persons within. And that means you, smart ass, to chase that outta control Trump thread below!
Posted by: sheriff j.w. pepper at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (WOyz5)
202
A warrant is supposed to be applicable to one person's papers/home/safe/etc.
They are demanding access to EVERY person's (who has an iPhone) phone.
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
They are demanding access to EVERY person's (who has an iPhone) phone.
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
203
Big problem for me is that the FBI didn't bother to monitor the suspects social media or check the information on the wife's application. If you don't bother to do the basics, why should you get extraordinary privileges?
Also, I read that the phone password was changed while in FBI hands. Any truth to that?
Also, I read that the phone password was changed while in FBI hands. Any truth to that?
Posted by: Notsothoreau at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (Lqy/e)
204
I'm sure Apple would crack the phone for the Chinese communists in a heartbeat.
Whole thing is bullshit PR.
Whole thing is bullshit PR.
Posted by: TexasJew at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (N7G17)
205
And the argument that you have nothing to hide is somewhat meaningless with a government that may be willing to plant evidence and a body of law that no longer requires any finding of mens rea.
------------------
I'm not worried. I've never had to buy tampons.
------------------
I'm not worried. I've never had to buy tampons.
Posted by: Soona at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (Fmupd)
206
But the argument you forgot to make is that Barky can do anything he damn well pleases. There is no law, only a retarded, dog-eating, Indonesian Sukarno knock-off.
With a pen and a phone.
With a pen and a phone.
Posted by: rickb223 at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (TUUTu)
207
And this case is clearly National Security, contrary to what others here may say,
No, it certainly is not a National Security issue. Frankly, it isn't even close.
and I am appalled that an American company is putting profit before that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (mw8Dm)
There are millions of reasons to hate apple and consider them douchebags. This isn't one of them.
No, it certainly is not a National Security issue. Frankly, it isn't even close.
and I am appalled that an American company is putting profit before that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (mw8Dm)
There are millions of reasons to hate apple and consider them douchebags. This isn't one of them.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (zc3Db)
208
185, here's some popcorn...
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (uiVGU)
209
Why doesn't the FBI just hire those guys who hacked the celebrity nude photos from iPhones in "The Fappening"?
Posted by: Marcus T at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (GGCsk)
210
B) So then you want to abolish the Constitution and law of the land?
Ready to give up and ferment Revolution? If not. Then you still have to
abide by the Law or work to change those you don't like
C) How? I have nothing to hide. And if the Gov wants to investigate me, let them get a warrant have a go at it.
Neither the Constitution nor federal law allows what the judge ordered.
Ready to give up and ferment Revolution? If not. Then you still have to
abide by the Law or work to change those you don't like
C) How? I have nothing to hide. And if the Gov wants to investigate me, let them get a warrant have a go at it.
Neither the Constitution nor federal law allows what the judge ordered.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (OrI3J)
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (DL2i+)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (NeFrd)
213
"The FBI had the company reset the password and then lost it."
Bwah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah.
Maybe the G men should go after the phone on "Tax evasion".
Bwah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah.
Maybe the G men should go after the phone on "Tax evasion".
Posted by: Dead Al Capone who is voting for Hillary at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (cCxiu)
214
*gloatingly strokes Samsung S6*
Posted by: RWC-Team BOHICA at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (/D5Lf)
215
Even if it was a 5s or newer, and had a touch ID sensor, using a corpse's finger would not work. Short version is: you gotta be alive for it to scan your thumbprint.
I know, the movies lied. Shock.
I know, the movies lied. Shock.
Posted by: ChrisValentine at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (+7LfL)
Posted by: JackStraw at February 22, 2016 04:36 PM (/tuJf)
217
>>It's the difference between asking a bank for records from a single
account and asking for unfettered access to the bank's database.
So...like the big data dumps the NSA asked for and received from Verizon and others that Snowden revealed? Bulk customer data as opposed to a targeted search of a named user(s).
That's the part that makes me uneasy: I'm all for service providers fulfilling subpoenas because this is the existing process; I am not for essentially handing over the ability to retrieve the data to the feds so that they may bypass the pesky subpoena part as needed.
account and asking for unfettered access to the bank's database.
So...like the big data dumps the NSA asked for and received from Verizon and others that Snowden revealed? Bulk customer data as opposed to a targeted search of a named user(s).
That's the part that makes me uneasy: I'm all for service providers fulfilling subpoenas because this is the existing process; I am not for essentially handing over the ability to retrieve the data to the feds so that they may bypass the pesky subpoena part as needed.
Posted by: Lizzy at February 22, 2016 04:36 PM (NOIQH)
218
>>B) So then you want to abolish the Constitution and law of the land? Ready to give up and ferment Revolution? If not. Then you still have to abide by the Law or work to change those you don't like
Actually, I oppose this bullshit for the very reason I DO CARE about the Constitution. It's the feds that are trying to wipe their ass with it in this case.
I usually agree with you, But in this case we will just need to agree to disagree and hopefully do so respectfully.
Actually, I oppose this bullshit for the very reason I DO CARE about the Constitution. It's the feds that are trying to wipe their ass with it in this case.
I usually agree with you, But in this case we will just need to agree to disagree and hopefully do so respectfully.
Posted by: Aviator at February 22, 2016 04:36 PM (c7vUv)
219
170 I don't trust the feds not to abuse this special software if Apple were to develop it and hand it over. Not.At.All.
I don't trust Apple to not use this to grandstand about how much they protect their subscribers' data when they've already been cooperating with the NSA, and, in all likelihood, accommodating other intrusive security-type requests from foreign governments (which is common, since the US has more stringent privacy and wiretapping laws than other countries).
Ugh.
Posted by: Lizzy at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (NOIQH)
-----------
I wouldn't like that, but I am less concerned about the NSA having the capability than the federal, state and local law enforcement. Imagine if Officer Psycho in Podunk NY has this capability? You get pulled in for DUI and next thing you know those pictures of your wife are being emailed to all the officers, their friends and buddies in six states.
And YES that has happened to real people, including teenagers with smart phones.
I don't trust Apple to not use this to grandstand about how much they protect their subscribers' data when they've already been cooperating with the NSA, and, in all likelihood, accommodating other intrusive security-type requests from foreign governments (which is common, since the US has more stringent privacy and wiretapping laws than other countries).
Ugh.
Posted by: Lizzy at February 22, 2016 04:29 PM (NOIQH)
-----------
I wouldn't like that, but I am less concerned about the NSA having the capability than the federal, state and local law enforcement. Imagine if Officer Psycho in Podunk NY has this capability? You get pulled in for DUI and next thing you know those pictures of your wife are being emailed to all the officers, their friends and buddies in six states.
And YES that has happened to real people, including teenagers with smart phones.
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 04:36 PM (v0YLX)
220
Being a tech person as well, and I must confess - not an Apple iPhone user (love my Galaxy) - there are several moving pieces here.
1) The passcode up until a recent IOS release was just 4 digits. This has been expanded to allow a more complex numerical code to unlock the phone.
2) To help protect the intellectual property of their IOS, not to mention prevent malware from infecting the phone, iPhones only run software that has a digital certificate/signing key from Apple. This signing key is (should be) a very tightly held secret. This must never be shared with anyone, whether you have a badge or not. If someone gets this key they can use it to "sign" their own software and now the iPhone is vulnerable and no longer secure.
3) Encryption. There are "keys" used in encryption - be it data on disk, data in flight (across the internet - think https://), etc. Part of the encrypting key on the iPhone 5c is the passcode referenced above.
4) I believe the iPhone has mechanisms in place to prevent or discourage "brute-force" password cracking. After so many attempts, it prevents another attempt for so many minutes. These delays get longer the more invalid attempts are tried. The iPhone can be configured such that if "n" number of attempts (10 for example) are tried, then the device is wiped clean.
It is the last two items that challenge the FBI. How to decrypt the device. Well, if they could guess the pass code, they could brute force it. But they don't know if the phone is configured to wipe itself clean after a certain number of invalid attempts.
An interesting side note - the original pass code was CHANGED by the towel-heads employer at the FBI request, if I'm not mistaken. Then someone FORGOT what the passcode is. Hence the dilemma they are in.
Apple has marketed the recent iPhones as being safe and secure. We all need to be aware of information security. We can now use our smartphones to pay bills, automatically log into bank accounts, etc. So it is crucial that this data is protected - encrypted. Don't fault Apple for this.
Another thing to think about. This isn't like we are in a ticking time bomb scenario. The miscreants stopped breathing with the help of bacon and .40 SW lead, but mostly the lead.
1) The passcode up until a recent IOS release was just 4 digits. This has been expanded to allow a more complex numerical code to unlock the phone.
2) To help protect the intellectual property of their IOS, not to mention prevent malware from infecting the phone, iPhones only run software that has a digital certificate/signing key from Apple. This signing key is (should be) a very tightly held secret. This must never be shared with anyone, whether you have a badge or not. If someone gets this key they can use it to "sign" their own software and now the iPhone is vulnerable and no longer secure.
3) Encryption. There are "keys" used in encryption - be it data on disk, data in flight (across the internet - think https://), etc. Part of the encrypting key on the iPhone 5c is the passcode referenced above.
4) I believe the iPhone has mechanisms in place to prevent or discourage "brute-force" password cracking. After so many attempts, it prevents another attempt for so many minutes. These delays get longer the more invalid attempts are tried. The iPhone can be configured such that if "n" number of attempts (10 for example) are tried, then the device is wiped clean.
It is the last two items that challenge the FBI. How to decrypt the device. Well, if they could guess the pass code, they could brute force it. But they don't know if the phone is configured to wipe itself clean after a certain number of invalid attempts.
An interesting side note - the original pass code was CHANGED by the towel-heads employer at the FBI request, if I'm not mistaken. Then someone FORGOT what the passcode is. Hence the dilemma they are in.
Apple has marketed the recent iPhones as being safe and secure. We all need to be aware of information security. We can now use our smartphones to pay bills, automatically log into bank accounts, etc. So it is crucial that this data is protected - encrypted. Don't fault Apple for this.
Another thing to think about. This isn't like we are in a ticking time bomb scenario. The miscreants stopped breathing with the help of bacon and .40 SW lead, but mostly the lead.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:36 PM (jxbfJ)
221
They are asking that Apple create a new work product which undermines a key feature of the work product they sell to the world.
Thereby asserting there is nothing you can write and hide from them forever.
Thereby asserting there is nothing you can write and hide from them forever.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:36 PM (DL2i+)
222
...Rosebud
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (NeFrd)
For a jihadist? I would expect something more like "derka derka jihad".
...Rosebud
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 22, 2016 04:35 PM (NeFrd)
For a jihadist? I would expect something more like "derka derka jihad".
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:36 PM (uURQL)
223
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
Go actually read the court order, then get back to us.
Go actually read the court order, then get back to us.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (z4pSV)
224
If only they asked me, I could have told them "The password is..."
Posted by: disembodied voice from the game show
Should have asked Allen Ludden or Betty White.
Posted by: disembodied voice from the game show
Should have asked Allen Ludden or Betty White.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (FkBIv)
225
"What I think you ought to do is boycott Apple until such time as they give that security number," he [Trump] said.
"How do you like that? I just thought of that!"
Wannabe President Genius thinks Apple is already in possession of a number they just have to type in.
Hair Weasel FTW!
"How do you like that? I just thought of that!"
Wannabe President Genius thinks Apple is already in possession of a number they just have to type in.
Hair Weasel FTW!
Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (1xUj/)
226
>>>In general, it is my understanding that the court can only compel
companies to produce something they have that actually exists. It is
beyond the power of the court to order a company to produce code that
doesn't exist.
Even if Apple were drafted, the government literally cannot compel the creative process.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:33 PM (OrI3J)<<<
Just wait 'til I get a court order to compel those evil pharmaceutical companies to cure cancer... for national security!!!
>>>In general, it is my understanding that the court can only compel
companies to produce something they have that actually exists. It is
beyond the power of the court to order a company to produce code that
doesn't exist.
Even if Apple were drafted, the government literally cannot compel the creative process.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:33 PM (OrI3J)<<<
Just wait 'til I get a court order to compel those evil pharmaceutical companies to cure cancer... for national security!!!
Posted by: Joke Biden, now in charge of curing cancer at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (H9MG5)
227
The article reported that analysts believe Apple likely handed over its operating system source code as part of the agreement. If true, this would mean that the Chinese government knows how Apple's software works, including its security system.
Oh and Apple moved Chinese user data to China to help our China with their requests.
http://tinyurl.com/gkpj89k
Oh and Apple moved Chinese user data to China to help our China with their requests.
http://tinyurl.com/gkpj89k
Posted by: WOPR at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (LTDSy)
228
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
--------------
You're wrong. As Rush explained last week, they want the key to unlock any iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
--------------
You're wrong. As Rush explained last week, they want the key to unlock any iPhone.
Posted by: Soona at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (Fmupd)
229
A warrant is supposed to be applicable to one person's papers/home/safe/etc.
They are demanding access to EVERY person's (who has an iPhone) phone.
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
It may only be a semantic point, but is the court order against Apple technically a "warrant?"
I don't know enough lawyering to know.
They are demanding access to EVERY person's (who has an iPhone) phone.
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
It may only be a semantic point, but is the court order against Apple technically a "warrant?"
I don't know enough lawyering to know.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (s5o+q)
230
this whole mess is bullshit.
Posted by: redc1c4 at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (obZhs)
Someone has a great analogy of different govmint agencies and how they would go about finding a rabbit in a forest I think. If I recall the FBI just burns the whole frickin' forest down.
Sadly the FBI still fits that analogy here.
this whole mess is bullshit.
Posted by: redc1c4 at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (obZhs)
Someone has a great analogy of different govmint agencies and how they would go about finding a rabbit in a forest I think. If I recall the FBI just burns the whole frickin' forest down.
Sadly the FBI still fits that analogy here.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 04:38 PM (hvf9s)
231
Also, I read that the phone password was changed while in FBI hands. Any truth to that?
Posted by: Notsothoreau at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (Lqy/e)
Yes, apparently by the government employer of the douchebag terrorist reset the password and then they "lost" the new password that they themselves set... I guess they didn't have any sticky notes handy to write it down.
Posted by: Notsothoreau at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (Lqy/e)
Yes, apparently by the government employer of the douchebag terrorist reset the password and then they "lost" the new password that they themselves set... I guess they didn't have any sticky notes handy to write it down.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:38 PM (OrI3J)
232
They are asking that Apple create a new work product which undermines a key feature of the work product they sell to the world.
And the 2nd Apple creates it they'll have to give it to the PLA who'll use it to murder people because PLA.
Maybe a redundant comment for security purposes.
And the 2nd Apple creates it they'll have to give it to the PLA who'll use it to murder people because PLA.
Maybe a redundant comment for security purposes.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:38 PM (DL2i+)
233
The same FBI who is "investigating" Hillary for "evidence" of a crime when many people are already sitting in prison for lesser offenses?
That FBI?
That FBI?
Posted by: Marcus T at February 22, 2016 04:38 PM (GGCsk)
234
As is true with anything in life, if you (in this instance Apple) does it for one instance, they'll be doing it for everybody. Everybody with a court order or some other type of influence peddling scheme.
As stated in a prior post, I'm not an Apple fan, but I'm 100% behind their decision on not caving to the government.
As stated in a prior post, I'm not an Apple fan, but I'm 100% behind their decision on not caving to the government.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:38 PM (jxbfJ)
235
The NSA superspooks have been suspected, hell just about assured to be so, to have moles all in the big tech companies. Moles whose job is to insert supersecret backdoors (remember Stuxnet? That exploited no less than 4 "0 day" exploits in Windows. Now, what are the odds of someone discovering those 4 without putting them in there themselves) into everything they can.
So it's possible the NSA has hardware backdoors built in to ever damn iPhone, that possibly Apple proper doesn't even know about. Only the moles inside would, and in a compartmentalized fashion.
But, they wouldn't let anyone know that. Even the FBI for a mere criminal investigation. Hell, the NSA may have all the data on this stupid phone, checked out the leads for any big national security concern, taken care of it, and the FBI knows nothing.
So it's possible the NSA has hardware backdoors built in to ever damn iPhone, that possibly Apple proper doesn't even know about. Only the moles inside would, and in a compartmentalized fashion.
But, they wouldn't let anyone know that. Even the FBI for a mere criminal investigation. Hell, the NSA may have all the data on this stupid phone, checked out the leads for any big national security concern, taken care of it, and the FBI knows nothing.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:38 PM (dvuhZ)
236
68 If the phone belonged to a TEA party member Apple would have the key to The FBI in under 15 minutes.
Posted by: Dennis Sutton at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (6wsr1)
_____
Yep. This has nothing to do with security or privacy. Apple just doesn't want to upset the SJWs.
Posted by: Dennis Sutton at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (6wsr1)
_____
Yep. This has nothing to do with security or privacy. Apple just doesn't want to upset the SJWs.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:39 PM (0LHZx)
237
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Dude, you are asserting that Apple is lying. You're not basing this on your actual understanding of the process.
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Dude, you are asserting that Apple is lying. You're not basing this on your actual understanding of the process.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 22, 2016 04:39 PM (1xUj/)
238
They took my tumbs guy was Eric Roberts in Prince of New York.
It's worth pointing out that it's a government phone (ie, the scumbag's county employer). Not so much a privacy issue in this case.
Good point Pappy.
It's worth pointing out that it's a government phone (ie, the scumbag's county employer). Not so much a privacy issue in this case.
Good point Pappy.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 04:39 PM (qUNWi)
239
this whole mess is bullshit.
Posted by: redc1c4 at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (obZhs)
Someone has a great analogy of different govmint agencies and how they would go about finding a rabbit in a forest I think. If I recall the FBI just burns the whole frickin' forest down.
Sadly the FBI still fits that analogy here.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 04:38 PM (hvf9s)
***
That was me, quoting an old Soviet joke....
Posted by: redc1c4 at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (obZhs)
Someone has a great analogy of different govmint agencies and how they would go about finding a rabbit in a forest I think. If I recall the FBI just burns the whole frickin' forest down.
Sadly the FBI still fits that analogy here.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 04:38 PM (hvf9s)
***
That was me, quoting an old Soviet joke....
Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 22, 2016 04:39 PM (lutOX)
240
Here is link to what Rush had to say about this:
http://tinyurl.com/gl2lzsb
http://tinyurl.com/gl2lzsb
Posted by: Carol at February 22, 2016 04:39 PM (sj3Ax)
241
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
History shows that, once such a key exists, the government will use it to violate all of our fourth amendment rights.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
History shows that, once such a key exists, the government will use it to violate all of our fourth amendment rights.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:40 PM (OrI3J)
242
I'm guessing they already used at least one of the password guesses on ISISis#1?
Posted by: Marcus T at February 22, 2016 04:40 PM (GGCsk)
243
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231146
That author is of the opinion that the FBI is lying. I agree.
They have other avenues of attack, ones that do not compromise the chain of evidence. Loading a new ROM onto the phone will destroy that chain. Therefore, they must be using an emulator on a Mac using a downloaded ROM Image. As such, they can keep a master copy, and then make a copy of that and use in the emulator. If that is rendered dead or with such a long wait time as to be effectively dead, they can simply make a copy and run another instance of the emulator.
Rinse. Lather. Repeat. Yes, a bit of a pain in the ass. And it is possible that the phone's owner set something other than a 4 or 6 digit pin, it could be alpha numeric, and a lot longer than 6 characters.
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231146
That author is of the opinion that the FBI is lying. I agree.
They have other avenues of attack, ones that do not compromise the chain of evidence. Loading a new ROM onto the phone will destroy that chain. Therefore, they must be using an emulator on a Mac using a downloaded ROM Image. As such, they can keep a master copy, and then make a copy of that and use in the emulator. If that is rendered dead or with such a long wait time as to be effectively dead, they can simply make a copy and run another instance of the emulator.
Rinse. Lather. Repeat. Yes, a bit of a pain in the ass. And it is possible that the phone's owner set something other than a 4 or 6 digit pin, it could be alpha numeric, and a lot longer than 6 characters.
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at February 22, 2016 04:40 PM (1hM1d)
244
There have been arguments that Apple has done this before, and I haven't verified it. They may have, but on prior versions of IOS. Before they introduced encryption, before they enforced the signing of the IOS code.
From a 100,000 foot view, it looks like precedent was set, but I argue that the circumstances are different now.
From a 100,000 foot view, it looks like precedent was set, but I argue that the circumstances are different now.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:40 PM (jxbfJ)
245
>> Imagine if Officer Psycho in Podunk NY has this capability? You get
pulled in for DUI and next thing you know those pictures of your wife
are being emailed to all the officers, their friends and buddies in six
states.
Ugh, yes! I've read stories about that sort of thing happening.
pulled in for DUI and next thing you know those pictures of your wife
are being emailed to all the officers, their friends and buddies in six
states.
Ugh, yes! I've read stories about that sort of thing happening.
Posted by: Lizzy at February 22, 2016 04:40 PM (NOIQH)
246
Just wait 'til I get a court order to compel those evil pharmaceutical companies to cure cancer... for national security!!!
Hmm. After I order the Department of Agriculture to plant all those Magic Unicorn Trees That Grow Free Shit this may be a great second act!
Hmm. After I order the Department of Agriculture to plant all those Magic Unicorn Trees That Grow Free Shit this may be a great second act!
Posted by: Bernie Sanders at February 22, 2016 04:40 PM (8ZskC)
247
>>> Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 22, 2016 04:39 PM (lutOX)
Well I loved it! Funny because it's true.
Well I loved it! Funny because it's true.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 04:41 PM (hvf9s)
248
Can the encrypted data be directly copied off the storage in the phone?
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 04:41 PM (evdj2)
249
As much as I hate distrust Fredo, this JUstice Department, and others, I still believe in America. It sucks and is imperfect, but still better than all the other systems in the World and I am not ready to give up on it just yet. So I will continue to obey it's laws and also "protect and defend" it, unlike Apple which is only in this for profit
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:33 PM (mw8Dm)
I'm a bit of an Apple skeptic but I have to defend them on this point.
If they were *solely* interested in profit, then the easy path would be to quietly give the government what it wants and still tout their products as being super secure and protected. I think they do have an case against complying with this court order - though perhaps not quite as strong as they think.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:33 PM (mw8Dm)
I'm a bit of an Apple skeptic but I have to defend them on this point.
If they were *solely* interested in profit, then the easy path would be to quietly give the government what it wants and still tout their products as being super secure and protected. I think they do have an case against complying with this court order - though perhaps not quite as strong as they think.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 04:42 PM (pAlYe)
250
Apple didn't unlock the phone, San Bernardino county reset the iCloud password at the behest of the FBI, the passcode to unlock the phone is a separate security function.
Posted by: All Teh Meh at February 22, 2016 04:42 PM (oP9cX)
251
68 If the phone belonged to a TEA party member Apple would have the key to The FBI in under 15 minutes.
Posted by: Dennis Sutton at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (6wsr1)
_____
Help communists. Oh boy!! We will help in any way we can.
Posted by: Dennis Sutton at February 22, 2016 04:12 PM (6wsr1)
_____
Help communists. Oh boy!! We will help in any way we can.
Posted by: Facebook at February 22, 2016 04:42 PM (0LHZx)
252
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
Right, but how often do you honestly expect that to last? Did you read the post? Ace brings this issue up specifically.
Just like the tolls on every bridge are "just to pay for the costs of construction."
40 years and 5 billion dollars later the state legislature passes a resolution to raise the toll from $3.50 to $5.00
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
Right, but how often do you honestly expect that to last? Did you read the post? Ace brings this issue up specifically.
Just like the tolls on every bridge are "just to pay for the costs of construction."
40 years and 5 billion dollars later the state legislature passes a resolution to raise the toll from $3.50 to $5.00
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:42 PM (xuouz)
253
how long* not how often
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (xuouz)
254
The government has offered to let Apple open the phone with zero government oversight. There is no evidence at all that anyone other than Apple would ever see this code.
False.
The gov't can (and has done in the past) handed over a phone to Apple and asked for a disk image of a device. The Feebs don't want that.
The Feebs are asking for an "instrument" to hack the phone. A forensics tool. Part of the process of getting a court-approved instrument verified involves putting the tool through third party testing (think NIST). Then the defense will attack the tool, and Apple must defend it in court.
Guess what third party testing means. That's right, it means Apple aren't the only guys with the code.
Source: A court recognized iOS forensics expert. https://t.co/cTXKEHl3kl
False.
The gov't can (and has done in the past) handed over a phone to Apple and asked for a disk image of a device. The Feebs don't want that.
The Feebs are asking for an "instrument" to hack the phone. A forensics tool. Part of the process of getting a court-approved instrument verified involves putting the tool through third party testing (think NIST). Then the defense will attack the tool, and Apple must defend it in court.
Guess what third party testing means. That's right, it means Apple aren't the only guys with the code.
Source: A court recognized iOS forensics expert. https://t.co/cTXKEHl3kl
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (jhqr1)
255
204 Big problem for me is that the FBI didn't bother to monitor the suspects social media or check the information on the wife's application. If you don't bother to do the basics, why should you get extraordinary privileges?
Also, I read that the phone password was changed while in FBI hands. Any truth to that?
Posted by: Notsothoreau at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (Lqy/e)
According to ABC News, the FBI had the San Bernadino IT dept reset the Apple i cloud password. And that fucked a lot of shit up.
I wonder if the password was in the shredded paper left in the killers apartment that everyone went tramping through 24 hours later?
Maybe the now resurrected THIRD Shooter has the password?
Also, I read that the phone password was changed while in FBI hands. Any truth to that?
Posted by: Notsothoreau at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (Lqy/e)
According to ABC News, the FBI had the San Bernadino IT dept reset the Apple i cloud password. And that fucked a lot of shit up.
I wonder if the password was in the shredded paper left in the killers apartment that everyone went tramping through 24 hours later?
Maybe the now resurrected THIRD Shooter has the password?
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (v0YLX)
256
You're wrong. As Rush explained last week, they want the key to unlock any iPhone.
Posted by: Soona at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (Fmupd)
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Soona at February 22, 2016 04:37 PM (Fmupd)
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
257
249: It likely could, but that is cryptographically strong (barring secret NSA backdoors and weakness, or perhaps a quantum computer some speculate they may have or be about to have go online) and cannot be broken. It is computationally infeasible per current known crypto tech.
The key to decode it is stored inside the phone is in a special way.
The passcode unlocks that key.
The key to decode it is stored inside the phone is in a special way.
The passcode unlocks that key.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (dvuhZ)
258
And YES that has happened to real people, including teenagers with smart phones.
====
Which, I'm raising my kid to be aware of all the cameras trained on him at all times, while pointing outwards to where there are considerably less of them in the countryside. I will encourage him to think deeply on that, and hope his generation will end this outrage because we are so fkng cowardly in the face of obvious fascism.
====
Which, I'm raising my kid to be aware of all the cameras trained on him at all times, while pointing outwards to where there are considerably less of them in the countryside. I will encourage him to think deeply on that, and hope his generation will end this outrage because we are so fkng cowardly in the face of obvious fascism.
Posted by: Bigby's Oven Mitts at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (3ZtZW)
259
There is no more chance of this getting out than any other Apple secret they keep squirreled away in Cupertino.
Nonsense, it'll be extorted out within days of it's creation.
Nonsense, it'll be extorted out within days of it's creation.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (DL2i+)
260
239 They took my tumbs guy was Eric Roberts in Prince of New York.
I thought it was The Imam of Tribeca
I thought it was The Imam of Tribeca
Posted by: x at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (nFwvY)
261
Apple is doing this for profit as well as making the SJWs happy. Read the majority of comments here....oh well I hate Apple, but you know they're doing the right thing on this one.
Playing you all like a fucking fiddle.
Playing you all like a fucking fiddle.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (0LHZx)
262
Can the encrypted data be directly copied off the storage in the phone?
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 04:41 PM (evdj2)
If the geniuses at the FBI can't take the chips out and dump the data then they ought to contract that Japanese or Chinese. Those guys can clone a chip like no ones business. Their entire tech sectors were built on cracking and stealing chips.
I would just like to see the people at the FBI who screwed this up thrown in jail. THAT is the real national security issue, here - the incompetent minions of Barky who can't be trusted to do anything. I wouldn't cry if Tim Cook got thrown in jail with them ... just for the hell of it.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 04:41 PM (evdj2)
If the geniuses at the FBI can't take the chips out and dump the data then they ought to contract that Japanese or Chinese. Those guys can clone a chip like no ones business. Their entire tech sectors were built on cracking and stealing chips.
I would just like to see the people at the FBI who screwed this up thrown in jail. THAT is the real national security issue, here - the incompetent minions of Barky who can't be trusted to do anything. I wouldn't cry if Tim Cook got thrown in jail with them ... just for the hell of it.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (zc3Db)
263
My problem is Apple's faux concern with security for their customer and protecting the general rights of privacy. They should say they are concerned only with profits arising from customer demands in the US since they do not have that concern in China. Nothing wrong with that as a profit driven corporation. I'm still undecided on which side I'm on but I know that If I side with Apple it's not based on their reasoning.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (nS+hx)
264
I wonder if the password was in the shredded paper left in the killers apartment that everyone went tramping through 24 hours later?
That was appalling. No amount of excuse-making could hide the fact that the physical investigation by the FBI was a monstrous clusterfuck.
That was appalling. No amount of excuse-making could hide the fact that the physical investigation by the FBI was a monstrous clusterfuck.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:45 PM (8ZskC)
265
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
How are you privy to what the FBI does and does not want to do?
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
How are you privy to what the FBI does and does not want to do?
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:45 PM (uURQL)
266
Re. Dead Guy's Thumb: Aside from the other issues, iPhones require an actual passcode (not a thumb scan) if: (a) The phone was powered off and on, (b) the phone hasn't been unlocked in 48 hours, or (c) You do five failed fingerprint-scans in a row. I think this is specifically to address the "policeman pushes your thumb down on the reader" issue.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201371#help
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201371#help
Posted by: Andrew S. at February 22, 2016 04:45 PM (0I/a1)
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 22, 2016 04:45 PM (AA6QE)
268
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
You are wrong. Please cite your source for this info or stop posting this crap.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
You are wrong. Please cite your source for this info or stop posting this crap.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (z4pSV)
269
How are you privy to what the FBI does and does not want to do?
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:45 PM (uURQL)
because I can read and THAT is what they said the other day
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:45 PM (uURQL)
because I can read and THAT is what they said the other day
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (mw8Dm)
270
NO they are not. ONLY this iPhone.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
Nope.
The gov't has gone to Apple for a disk image of devices before. That is the equivalent of "only this iPhone".
They are asking for an instrument that can reproducibly cause the iPhone unlock destruct system to fail. That means all iPhones boys and girls.
See this court-recognized iOS forensics expert testimony for more info:
https://t.co/cTXKEHl3kl
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:34 PM (mw8Dm)
Nope.
The gov't has gone to Apple for a disk image of devices before. That is the equivalent of "only this iPhone".
They are asking for an instrument that can reproducibly cause the iPhone unlock destruct system to fail. That means all iPhones boys and girls.
See this court-recognized iOS forensics expert testimony for more info:
https://t.co/cTXKEHl3kl
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (jhqr1)
271
You are wrong. Please cite your source for this info or stop posting this crap.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (z4pSV)
google it yourself. They said exactly that the other day
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (z4pSV)
google it yourself. They said exactly that the other day
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (mw8Dm)
272
Imagine if Officer Psycho in Podunk NY has this capability? You get
pulled in for DUI and next thing you know those pictures of your wife
are being emailed to all the officers, their friends and buddies in six
states.
Right. Local law enforcement is not to be trusted with these things. Not like the FBI.
Btw, we love your wife's new grooming. The Brazilian gives it a certain flair.
pulled in for DUI and next thing you know those pictures of your wife
are being emailed to all the officers, their friends and buddies in six
states.
Right. Local law enforcement is not to be trusted with these things. Not like the FBI.
Btw, we love your wife's new grooming. The Brazilian gives it a certain flair.
Posted by: Bill from NSA (Bob's on break) at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (1xUj/)
273
There should not even be a debate whether the government can do this to a private company. This is an excuse to have a back door to all our phones. Screw them.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (UnJ7w)
274
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
You need to desist from posting until you've read the links provided, both in ace's original post and extensively here in the comments. Because it appears to me that you're totally and completely wrong.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
You need to desist from posting until you've read the links provided, both in ace's original post and extensively here in the comments. Because it appears to me that you're totally and completely wrong.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (xuouz)
275
All I know is that I don't buy Apple products as I don't want to give them money to further destroy my country with.
Posted by: Tilikum KAW Assholier Than Thou at February 22, 2016 04:48 PM (+aCe4)
276
There should not even be a debate whether the government can do this to a private company. This is an excuse to have a back door to all our phones. Screw them.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (UnJ7w)
Hey! We're on the same side of this one! I love the internet.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (UnJ7w)
Hey! We're on the same side of this one! I love the internet.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:48 PM (xuouz)
277
>>I wouldn't cry if Tim Cook got thrown in jail with them ... just for the hell of it.
Oh, can I choose my cell mate?
Oh, can I choose my cell mate?
Posted by: Tim Cook at February 22, 2016 04:48 PM (c7vUv)
278
Read some legal mumbo jumbo about this. According to some legal types, it will probably require an act of Congress to allow the DOJ to get what it wants from Apple.
Posted by: Wendy at February 22, 2016 04:48 PM (bpemY)
279
This is not faux concern. Far from it. The US govt wants a master key or backdoor to everything making it impossible for any citizen to encrypt something and keep them out.
THe FBI and every damn level of law enforcement has a hardon for this. They want to "wiretap" everything. Have the ability to bypass all encryption.
And I say they can go fuck themselves.
THe FBI and every damn level of law enforcement has a hardon for this. They want to "wiretap" everything. Have the ability to bypass all encryption.
And I say they can go fuck themselves.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (dvuhZ)
280
You need to desist from posting until you've read the links provided, both in ace's original post and extensively here in the comments. Because it appears to me that you're totally and completely wrong.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (xuouz)
up yours I'll post when and where I want.
And I am not wrong
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (xuouz)
up yours I'll post when and where I want.
And I am not wrong
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (mw8Dm)
281
My understanding is the phone itself was never broken into...
the Back up data, which was 6 weeks old was.... the ability to change the password on backup data in the cloud already exists...
They have all his data except for that 6 weeks.
They also have the META Data of who he called and when...
Now they want a new Code Signed version of the OS (must be code signed or the phone will not take the update).
It must also FORCE the update... ie bypass the normal update routine where you choose when and if to update (because the phone is currently not working).
Now the story is that because they changed the Password on the backup, they can no longer use that venue to force the updated O/S onto the phone (which is why that was a screwup).
the Back up data, which was 6 weeks old was.... the ability to change the password on backup data in the cloud already exists...
They have all his data except for that 6 weeks.
They also have the META Data of who he called and when...
Now they want a new Code Signed version of the OS (must be code signed or the phone will not take the update).
It must also FORCE the update... ie bypass the normal update routine where you choose when and if to update (because the phone is currently not working).
Now the story is that because they changed the Password on the backup, they can no longer use that venue to force the updated O/S onto the phone (which is why that was a screwup).
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (f7rv6)
282
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
The problem is that once a 'master key' is created the government can then force Apple to use it for them whenever they want. And even hand it over to the government if they want it.
What the FBI *says* they want at the moment is different from what they can do later if they decide to.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
The problem is that once a 'master key' is created the government can then force Apple to use it for them whenever they want. And even hand it over to the government if they want it.
What the FBI *says* they want at the moment is different from what they can do later if they decide to.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (pAlYe)
283
Nevergiveup there are 1) multiple links here that dispute what you're saying, which I assume you're unaware of and 2) you've provided no link to what you're claiming the FBI said.
Rectify one of those two points and there'll be no further disagreement.
Rectify one of those two points and there'll be no further disagreement.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (xuouz)
284
245 There have been arguments that Apple has done this before, and I haven't verified it. They may have, but on prior versions of IOS. Before they introduced encryption, before they enforced the signing of the IOS code.
From a 100,000 foot view, it looks like precedent was set, but I argue that the circumstances are different now.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:40 PM (jxbfJ)
--------
If you locked up an early IPhone, you brought it to the Apple Store and they reset the password. The new phones are designed to make that impossible.
Because, guess what? Every hacker, iPhone thief and government also had the same fucking software three days after the stores got it!
And if Apple does this, the same thing will happen, it will just take a little longer for the feds or a broke Apple employyee to leak it.
From a 100,000 foot view, it looks like precedent was set, but I argue that the circumstances are different now.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:40 PM (jxbfJ)
--------
If you locked up an early IPhone, you brought it to the Apple Store and they reset the password. The new phones are designed to make that impossible.
Because, guess what? Every hacker, iPhone thief and government also had the same fucking software three days after the stores got it!
And if Apple does this, the same thing will happen, it will just take a little longer for the feds or a broke Apple employyee to leak it.
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 04:50 PM (v0YLX)
285
Not sure anyone will see it way down here, but link in nick goes to a nice article about the legal difference between "reasonable assistance" and creating a "forensic instrument" and why this the later (and problematic).
Posted by: Bitblt at February 22, 2016 04:50 PM (0fEyW)
286
am i missing something? can't you just get their phone records?
Posted by: kvjsbarandgrill at February 22, 2016 04:50 PM (p37L8)
287
there's no way they don't have the passcode
Just because you have to enter a password to access a service does not mean that service knows your password. All intelligent services do not, in fact, know your password. What they do is check your password against a hash or other cryptographic data that is not your password and cannot be transformed into your password (except by brute force checking every possible password).
There are services that store your password in plaintext or its equivalent; you want to avoid those services.
Think of it as your password is the key, and when you want to access a service, you put your key in the lock and see if it works. The service has the lock, but does not have a key, and cannot transform the lock into a key (except by brute force trying all sorts of shapes of keys).
Just because you have to enter a password to access a service does not mean that service knows your password. All intelligent services do not, in fact, know your password. What they do is check your password against a hash or other cryptographic data that is not your password and cannot be transformed into your password (except by brute force checking every possible password).
There are services that store your password in plaintext or its equivalent; you want to avoid those services.
Think of it as your password is the key, and when you want to access a service, you put your key in the lock and see if it works. The service has the lock, but does not have a key, and cannot transform the lock into a key (except by brute force trying all sorts of shapes of keys).
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (2lndx)
288
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possession of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Read my link. That's a court recognized iOS forensic expert talking and he says otherwise. The tool the FBI is demanding will have to go through certification in order to be a court recognized instrument. That puts the tool in third party hands ... and the FBI's.
Here's the link again: https://t.co/cTXKEHl3kl
Read my link. That's a court recognized iOS forensic expert talking and he says otherwise. The tool the FBI is demanding will have to go through certification in order to be a court recognized instrument. That puts the tool in third party hands ... and the FBI's.
Here's the link again: https://t.co/cTXKEHl3kl
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (jhqr1)
289
One thing overlooked on this whole issue is there was a warrant for Apple to do this. Putting aside whether you agree with it or not, since when do companies just say fuck it, when served with a warrant to provide info?
Funny how the left never has to abide by court decisions they don't like, but when the right says even a peep about disagreeing with the courts it's all "SETTLED LAW BITCHES!!!"
Funny how the left never has to abide by court decisions they don't like, but when the right says even a peep about disagreeing with the courts it's all "SETTLED LAW BITCHES!!!"
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (0LHZx)
290
And this case is clearly National Security, contrary to what others here
may say, and I am appalled that an American company is putting profit
before that.
Nonsense on stilts. What are they going to find one more ISIS shooter?
Meanwhile everything Apple and everyone else put into securing phones is a do over only to be invalidated by the next Feeb who hits up a judge or PLA General who insists on a slowdown at the fab.
may say, and I am appalled that an American company is putting profit
before that.
Nonsense on stilts. What are they going to find one more ISIS shooter?
Meanwhile everything Apple and everyone else put into securing phones is a do over only to be invalidated by the next Feeb who hits up a judge or PLA General who insists on a slowdown at the fab.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (DL2i+)
291
up yours I'll post when and where I want.
And I am not wrong
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (mw8Dm)
Haha that's the spirit! Seriously.
And I am not wrong
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (mw8Dm)
Haha that's the spirit! Seriously.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (xuouz)
292
248 >>> Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 22, 2016 04:39 PM (lutOX)
Well I loved it! Funny because it's true.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 04:41 PM (hvf9s)
***
Thought the CIA and KGB were pretty funny, too...
CIA concludes there is no rabbit, and never was one....
KGB comes out with a bear in chains, and he's screaming "All right, all right! I'm the rabbit!"
Well I loved it! Funny because it's true.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 04:41 PM (hvf9s)
***
Thought the CIA and KGB were pretty funny, too...
CIA concludes there is no rabbit, and never was one....
KGB comes out with a bear in chains, and he's screaming "All right, all right! I'm the rabbit!"
Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (lutOX)
293
Now, sit back and keep an eye on Washington. Expect to see some type of legislation introduced to have some type of "back door" on all encryption routines so the government doesn't have to go through this mess again. They can do it at will.
Listen people. We want to be left alone. Keep government out of our lives, right? We should always be distrustful of the government because history shows us time and time again that power corrupts.
This is just another salvo in the right to privacy.
As stated several times in this thread We are not in a ticking time bomb situation here. The killers are now maggot food. The FBI f*cked up by having the passcode changed and then forgetting what they changed it to. (Perhaps they should try the combo they use for their luggage - 1, 2, 3, 4 - a la Spaceballs).
Don't let the government win here.
Listen people. We want to be left alone. Keep government out of our lives, right? We should always be distrustful of the government because history shows us time and time again that power corrupts.
This is just another salvo in the right to privacy.
As stated several times in this thread We are not in a ticking time bomb situation here. The killers are now maggot food. The FBI f*cked up by having the passcode changed and then forgetting what they changed it to. (Perhaps they should try the combo they use for their luggage - 1, 2, 3, 4 - a la Spaceballs).
Don't let the government win here.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (jxbfJ)
294
I don't have an apple phone so however this goes NEENER NEENER NEENER
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:52 PM (xuouz)
295
I guess as long as the government pays the apple employee's wages for the time spent on the effort, I'm ok with them living under the same standards.
Posted by: lymond at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (koywJ)
I'm not so sure I'd be "OK" with a tyranny equally applied.
I do believe that there is a doctrine permitting police to commandeer vehicles in emergency situations. They may be even able to commandeer people if necessary. -ace-
But in this case, it's more like commandeering Ford's production facility and talent to make a car they can use.
Add me to the list of folks who wonder why this is being played out so publicly. Neither the government nor Apple need to play out their dispute in the press.
Something smells.
Posted by: lymond at February 22, 2016 04:04 PM (koywJ)
I'm not so sure I'd be "OK" with a tyranny equally applied.
I do believe that there is a doctrine permitting police to commandeer vehicles in emergency situations. They may be even able to commandeer people if necessary. -ace-
But in this case, it's more like commandeering Ford's production facility and talent to make a car they can use.
Add me to the list of folks who wonder why this is being played out so publicly. Neither the government nor Apple need to play out their dispute in the press.
Something smells.
Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 22, 2016 04:52 PM (kKHcp)
296
am i missing something? can't you just get their phone records?
Posted by: kvjsbarandgrill
They have the records. They have the data. They have all of it.
The Feds want apple to castrate their security tech. Yes, for all devices.
Posted by: kvjsbarandgrill
They have the records. They have the data. They have all of it.
The Feds want apple to castrate their security tech. Yes, for all devices.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 22, 2016 04:52 PM (AA6QE)
297
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (mw8Dm
You forget about the reasons for the Patriot Act and how the gov't actually uses that law?
If I'm not sure on a position about giving the gov't more power I usually side against in principle. They cannot be trusted no matter what they say or promise.
You forget about the reasons for the Patriot Act and how the gov't actually uses that law?
If I'm not sure on a position about giving the gov't more power I usually side against in principle. They cannot be trusted no matter what they say or promise.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 04:52 PM (UnJ7w)
298
because I can read and THAT is what they said the other day
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (mw8Dm)
What else has the government said ... ?
"If you like your healthcare, you can keep your healthcare", wasn't it?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (mw8Dm)
What else has the government said ... ?
"If you like your healthcare, you can keep your healthcare", wasn't it?
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 04:52 PM (uURQL)
299
There should not even be a debate whether the
government can do this to a private company. This is an excuse to have a
back door to all our phones. Screw them.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (UnJ7w)
Hey! We're on the same side of this one! I love the internet.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:48 PM (xuouz)
Me three Ghost... now we just need to persuade you to vote for Cruz:-P
government can do this to a private company. This is an excuse to have a
back door to all our phones. Screw them.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (UnJ7w)
Hey! We're on the same side of this one! I love the internet.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:48 PM (xuouz)
Me three Ghost... now we just need to persuade you to vote for Cruz:-P
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:52 PM (OrI3J)
300
The problem is that once a 'master key' is created the government can then force Apple to use it for them whenever they want. And even hand it over to the government if they want it.
ONLY with a warrant
ONLY with a warrant
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:53 PM (mw8Dm)
301
The government has offered to let Apple open the phone with zero
government oversight. There is no evidence at all that anyone other than
Apple would ever see this code.
FFS you work in China don't you? The minute it exists it WILL be stolen.
government oversight. There is no evidence at all that anyone other than
Apple would ever see this code.
FFS you work in China don't you? The minute it exists it WILL be stolen.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 04:53 PM (DL2i+)
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 22, 2016 04:54 PM (AA6QE)
303
up yours I'll post when and where I want.
And I am not wrong
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (mw8Dm
Up your nose with a rubber hose you slaver.
And I am not wrong
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:49 PM (mw8Dm
Up your nose with a rubber hose you slaver.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 04:54 PM (UnJ7w)
304
One thing overlooked on this whole issue is there was a warrant for Apple to do this. Putting aside whether you agree with it or not, since when do companies just say fuck it, when served with a warrant to provide info?
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (0LH
I'm sure your legal knowledge exceeds the paltry yield of my 30 years of litigation experience, but I think you're wrong. You can't use a warrant to force a private company to create an IOS any more than you could use a warrant to compel Ford to build a 100-mpg automobile. Even for national security.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (0LH
I'm sure your legal knowledge exceeds the paltry yield of my 30 years of litigation experience, but I think you're wrong. You can't use a warrant to force a private company to create an IOS any more than you could use a warrant to compel Ford to build a 100-mpg automobile. Even for national security.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:54 PM (8ZskC)
305
The problem is that once a 'master key' is created the government can then force Apple to use it for them whenever they want. And even hand it over to the government if they want it.
ONLY with a warrant
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Oh, you crack me up!
ONLY with a warrant
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Oh, you crack me up!
Posted by: Bill from NSA (Bob's on break) at February 22, 2016 04:54 PM (1xUj/)
306
>>>190 everytime i get an update i have to enter my passcode
>>>I Thought you had to enter you AppleID for updates, which is different from your passcode, and is able to be reset by Apple.
they switch things up. sometimes they ask you to enter your apple id. then "agree" to the user agreement, then the update, then your passcode. on other updates i've only punched for the update, agreed, then at the end, had to enter the passcode.
i remember this because i've had to go look up my freakin apple id. (pain)
>>>I Thought you had to enter you AppleID for updates, which is different from your passcode, and is able to be reset by Apple.
they switch things up. sometimes they ask you to enter your apple id. then "agree" to the user agreement, then the update, then your passcode. on other updates i've only punched for the update, agreed, then at the end, had to enter the passcode.
i remember this because i've had to go look up my freakin apple id. (pain)
Posted by: concrete girl at February 22, 2016 04:55 PM (0KgAM)
307
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.Posted by: Nevergiveup
If the FBI were to walk out of Apple's IT department with a phone modified to accept any password (which is my quick and dirty solution) the extremely easy to discern difference, when looking at the machine code on the phone, between before and after would make it extremely simple for upper level law enforcement to apply the same modification to any phone.
The answer to me is:
1. The FBI comes to Apple
2. Apple makes the phone accessible
3. The FBI collects whatever information it can
4. The FBI drops the phone on the table and leaves Apple
5. Apple smashes the phone to bites
If the FBI were to walk out of Apple's IT department with a phone modified to accept any password (which is my quick and dirty solution) the extremely easy to discern difference, when looking at the machine code on the phone, between before and after would make it extremely simple for upper level law enforcement to apply the same modification to any phone.
The answer to me is:
1. The FBI comes to Apple
2. Apple makes the phone accessible
3. The FBI collects whatever information it can
4. The FBI drops the phone on the table and leaves Apple
5. Apple smashes the phone to bites
Posted by: mega machines at February 22, 2016 04:55 PM (fbovC)
308
"I avoided talking about this because I didn't understand the issue."
How much better the world would be if others would adopt this idea.
How much better the world would be if others would adopt this idea.
Posted by: s at February 22, 2016 04:55 PM (HCXGq)
309
Warrants. Yeah, those are always infallible. Ask all those people on the business end of a SWAT raid who were seen by LEOs at some home indoor gardening store and thus gave probably cause for a search for pot growing.
Or the informants got the address wrong. Ooops, baby maimed by a flash bang grenade. At very likely dogs shot dead all over the place.
Or the informants got the address wrong. Ooops, baby maimed by a flash bang grenade. At very likely dogs shot dead all over the place.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:55 PM (dvuhZ)
310
275
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in
possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
Not being an encryption specialist, but assuming that the phone contains significant amounts of data. Assume that the FBI has a copy of the data on the phone in its encrypted format. Now, Apple goes and gives them the unencrypted data. I don't think it would be very difficult for the government to reverse engineer the encryption since they would have the "before" and "after".
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in
possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:43 PM (mw8Dm)
Not being an encryption specialist, but assuming that the phone contains significant amounts of data. Assume that the FBI has a copy of the data on the phone in its encrypted format. Now, Apple goes and gives them the unencrypted data. I don't think it would be very difficult for the government to reverse engineer the encryption since they would have the "before" and "after".
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:55 PM (jxbfJ)
311
The government has offered to let Apple open the phone with zero government oversight. There is no evidence at all that anyone other than Apple would ever see this code.
FFS you work in China don't you? The minute it exists it WILL be stolen.
The minute it exists, the OPM will give China root access.
FFS you work in China don't you? The minute it exists it WILL be stolen.
The minute it exists, the OPM will give China root access.
Posted by: rickb223 at February 22, 2016 04:55 PM (TUUTu)
Posted by: x at February 22, 2016 04:55 PM (nFwvY)
313
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (nS+hx)
Actually this all came about Post Snowden...
Tecks like me, and privacy folks, wanted a secure system.
So Apple produced one... one that if you locked it down was VERY secure.
Its giving what the market wants...
Now the Government is pulling the National Security card, on a fishing expedition to force Apple to renege on that already sold security feature.
Actually this all came about Post Snowden...
Tecks like me, and privacy folks, wanted a secure system.
So Apple produced one... one that if you locked it down was VERY secure.
Its giving what the market wants...
Now the Government is pulling the National Security card, on a fishing expedition to force Apple to renege on that already sold security feature.
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 04:56 PM (f7rv6)
314
I suspect that if this gambit to force Apple into unzipping their fly fails ... the County employee will remember the password and all will be moot.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 04:56 PM (cXiMR)
315
The FBI didn't secure the apartment that the terrorists lived in.....I seem to recall a video of 30 or so reporters and cameramen rifling through it about two days after the attack...
THIS is insane.
The FBI wasn't concerned with the reports by multiple witnesses of more than the two known terrorists shot and killed when the attack was "fresh"...the FBI told us that the people reportedly going in and out of the terrorist's apartment had no bearing on the case....we got the perps...SHUT UP they said.
THIS is insane.
Reportedly the terrorists had multiple pipe bombs etc etc that were found by the FBI and yet we still have NO clue what these terrorists were planning on blowing up with said pipe bombs. (sounds like more than a shoot up the joint thingy eh?)
THIS is insane.
The FBI has become purposely infested with incompetent leftist loons that don't have a clue how to catch real bad guys....but, by God, they can go after anyone that is concerned about a massive centralized government stamping out freedom...and they will...relentlessly.
THIS is NOW the purpose of ALL heavily armed Federal departments.
WELCOME to your NEW and IMPROVED Fundamentally changed America. I would like to give a big shout out to the Media and leftists everywhere....
The FBI didn't secure the apartment that the terrorists lived in.....I seem to recall a video of 30 or so reporters and cameramen rifling through it about two days after the attack...
THIS is insane.
The FBI wasn't concerned with the reports by multiple witnesses of more than the two known terrorists shot and killed when the attack was "fresh"...the FBI told us that the people reportedly going in and out of the terrorist's apartment had no bearing on the case....we got the perps...SHUT UP they said.
THIS is insane.
Reportedly the terrorists had multiple pipe bombs etc etc that were found by the FBI and yet we still have NO clue what these terrorists were planning on blowing up with said pipe bombs. (sounds like more than a shoot up the joint thingy eh?)
THIS is insane.
The FBI has become purposely infested with incompetent leftist loons that don't have a clue how to catch real bad guys....but, by God, they can go after anyone that is concerned about a massive centralized government stamping out freedom...and they will...relentlessly.
THIS is NOW the purpose of ALL heavily armed Federal departments.
WELCOME to your NEW and IMPROVED Fundamentally changed America. I would like to give a big shout out to the Media and leftists everywhere....
Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin @ Free Citizen 4 Now at February 22, 2016 04:56 PM (Qj6zv)
316
And this case is clearly National Security, contrary to what others here may say, and I am appalled that an American company is putting profit before that.
I honestly do not understand this attitude. Apple cannot give them what they're asking for without compromising every user they have. It'd be like a webcam company being compelled to open their devices to the gov't so they can make sure all of your private conversations are recorded.
Should it be illegal to whisper? National security's at risk. Maybe you should be compelled to record and submit all of your conversations.
I honestly do not understand this attitude. Apple cannot give them what they're asking for without compromising every user they have. It'd be like a webcam company being compelled to open their devices to the gov't so they can make sure all of your private conversations are recorded.
Should it be illegal to whisper? National security's at risk. Maybe you should be compelled to record and submit all of your conversations.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:56 PM (jhqr1)
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 04:57 PM (qUNWi)
318
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 04:48 PM (xuouz)
Just because we disagree passionately on certain things doesn't mean I don't respect the hell out of y'all.
Just because we disagree passionately on certain things doesn't mean I don't respect the hell out of y'all.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 04:57 PM (UnJ7w)
319
Yeah, any backdoors won't leak out. This is the same govt. that had the entire fucking OPM database hacked. And let Hillary run a home brew server with above top secret info on it.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 04:57 PM (dvuhZ)
320
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 04:46 PM (mw8Dm)
So you can't cite a source. Big surprise.
Try this one:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
Excerpt:
In this case, the FBI is requesting that Apple create and digitally sign a special version of iOS which is modified in three ways, as specified on page 8 of the court order:
iOS can be set to erase its keys after 10 incorrect passcode guesses. The FBI wants software with this feature disabled.
iOS imposes increasingly long delays after consecutive incorrect passcode guesses to slow down guessing (this is commonly called rate limiting). The FBI wants software that accepts an arbitrary number of guesses with no delays.
iOS requires individual passcodes be typed in by hand. The FBI wants a means to electronically enter passcodes, allowing it to automatically try every possible code quickly.
The FBI has told the court that its goal is to guess Farook's passcode to unlock his phone. If it just tries entering passcodes, though, it might erase the device's keys, at which point the data may never be recoverable. Hence, it wants Apple to write special "cracking software" to ensure that can't happen, and to make the passcode-guessing process easier and faster.
So you can't cite a source. Big surprise.
Try this one:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
Excerpt:
In this case, the FBI is requesting that Apple create and digitally sign a special version of iOS which is modified in three ways, as specified on page 8 of the court order:
iOS can be set to erase its keys after 10 incorrect passcode guesses. The FBI wants software with this feature disabled.
iOS imposes increasingly long delays after consecutive incorrect passcode guesses to slow down guessing (this is commonly called rate limiting). The FBI wants software that accepts an arbitrary number of guesses with no delays.
iOS requires individual passcodes be typed in by hand. The FBI wants a means to electronically enter passcodes, allowing it to automatically try every possible code quickly.
The FBI has told the court that its goal is to guess Farook's passcode to unlock his phone. If it just tries entering passcodes, though, it might erase the device's keys, at which point the data may never be recoverable. Hence, it wants Apple to write special "cracking software" to ensure that can't happen, and to make the passcode-guessing process easier and faster.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:57 PM (z4pSV)
321
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Oh, if you actually believe that, I have bridge in Brooklyn for sale, cheap!
NO, they want Apple to unlock the phone and they do NOT want to be in possesion of the work around. They want Apple to retain that.
Oh, if you actually believe that, I have bridge in Brooklyn for sale, cheap!
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (1hM1d)
322
You can't use a warrant to force a private company to create an IOS any more than you could use a warrant to compel Ford to build a 100-mpg automobile.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:54 PM (8ZskC)
That's what the EPA is for.
I wonder why they don't have the EPA go after apple because its encryption is contributing to global warming? That seems like the easiest way to cut through all this.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:54 PM (8ZskC)
That's what the EPA is for.
I wonder why they don't have the EPA go after apple because its encryption is contributing to global warming? That seems like the easiest way to cut through all this.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (zc3Db)
323
If anyone from Apple is reading this thread?
Next product needs more user settable passwords.
One to open the phone.
And one or more that will BRICK the phone if entered.
eg My phone password is 1357.
The brick codes are 1234, and 2468.
Even if the gov has this new software, what are the chances they brick the phone first?
Next product needs more user settable passwords.
One to open the phone.
And one or more that will BRICK the phone if entered.
eg My phone password is 1357.
The brick codes are 1234, and 2468.
Even if the gov has this new software, what are the chances they brick the phone first?
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (v0YLX)
324
In both the motion to the court AND the court order, Apple is given the opportunity to provide the data to the government, or the ability for the FBI to get into the phone in a DIFFERENT manner so long as it meets the needs of the order. What I find interesting (not being a lawyer, so please correct me here) is that Tim Cook, so far as I have seen, has not addressed this possibility.
Posted by: e2pilot at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (Vx3T2)
325
314
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (nS+hx)
Actually this all came about Post Snowden...
Tecks like me, and privacy folks, wanted a secure system.
So Apple produced one... one that if you locked it down was VERY secure.
Its giving what the market wants...
Now the Government is pulling the National Security card, on a
fishing expedition to force Apple to renege on that already sold
security feature.
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 04:56 PM (f7rv6)
EXACTLY!!!!
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (nS+hx)
Actually this all came about Post Snowden...
Tecks like me, and privacy folks, wanted a secure system.
So Apple produced one... one that if you locked it down was VERY secure.
Its giving what the market wants...
Now the Government is pulling the National Security card, on a
fishing expedition to force Apple to renege on that already sold
security feature.
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 04:56 PM (f7rv6)
EXACTLY!!!!
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jxbfJ)
326
290 One thing overlooked on this whole issue is there was a warrant for Apple to do this. Putting aside whether you agree with it or not, since when do companies just say fuck it, when served with a warrant to provide info?
Funny how the left never has to abide by court decisions they don't like, but when the right says even a peep about disagreeing with the courts it's all "SETTLED LAW BITCHES!!!"
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (0LHZx)
Because court orders are not unlimited. A court order has to be tailored to the issue at hand and has to be feasible and reasonable for the recipient to carry out.
Also Apple is not ignoring the court order - they are contesting it by arguing to the court that this request is not reasonable since they do not have this forensic tool and that it's essentially ordering them to create one.
Funny how the left never has to abide by court decisions they don't like, but when the right says even a peep about disagreeing with the courts it's all "SETTLED LAW BITCHES!!!"
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (0LHZx)
Because court orders are not unlimited. A court order has to be tailored to the issue at hand and has to be feasible and reasonable for the recipient to carry out.
Also Apple is not ignoring the court order - they are contesting it by arguing to the court that this request is not reasonable since they do not have this forensic tool and that it's essentially ordering them to create one.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (pAlYe)
327
The answer to me is:
1. The FBI comes to Apple
2. Apple makes the phone accessible
3. The FBI collects whatever information it can
4. The FBI drops the phone on the table and leaves Apple
5. Apple smashes the phone to bites
That option is already available in a slightly different form. The FBI sends the phone to Apple. Apple dumps a disk image. The Feebs walk out with the disk image and no new freaking tool that unlocks all Apple phones.
1. The FBI comes to Apple
2. Apple makes the phone accessible
3. The FBI collects whatever information it can
4. The FBI drops the phone on the table and leaves Apple
5. Apple smashes the phone to bites
That option is already available in a slightly different form. The FBI sends the phone to Apple. Apple dumps a disk image. The Feebs walk out with the disk image and no new freaking tool that unlocks all Apple phones.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jhqr1)
328
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 04:54 PM (8ZskC)
I think this is another issue in dispute whether there is an undue hardship for Apple to give access to the FBI. I don't think the amount of work you indicated would be necessary if other experts are to be believed.
I think this is another issue in dispute whether there is an undue hardship for Apple to give access to the FBI. I don't think the amount of work you indicated would be necessary if other experts are to be believed.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:59 PM (nS+hx)
329
All you people who totally do not trust the Government or The Courts? So what kind of government do you want and where do you want to live? NONE of the candidates running now will change the basic framework. So do where do you want to move to or do you want revolution?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:00 PM (mw8Dm)
330
Me three Ghost... now we just need to persuade you to vote for Cruz:-P
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:52 PM (OrI3J)
I like Cruz just as much as Trump. I have lots of LIV friends who know me as the political wonk/whackjob in their lives, so they're willing to kick politics around with me. If I talk about Cruz they hear "sitting Senator with x record on y legislation and z position on issue w..." and their eyes glaze over.
Trump makes their eyes light up. He talks about policy in a way that is insultingly simple to us but to them it's him coming to them on their turf without pretense. They know he's telling the establishment to get bent and they think he's hilarious. Kids I know who've never voted, and whose parents have never voted, are pumped about Trump.
And the best part is...while they're innately socially liberal (well I don't want to discriminate against anybody, and I don't think much of people who do...) the liberal reaction to Trump, the kneejerk, "I'm in charge here and how dare you say a good thing about someone who's a misogynist &c &c" shrieking from the average SJW, is a major turnoff! And it has the exact opposite result of most leftist grandstanding: it makes the LIV feel principled for standing up to the bullying.
This is a low form of political discourse and participation, and I don't know better than anyone else whether a president Trump would be good for the country. But it WOULD be a blow to the left. And I think we need that. I think we might need it even more than us here at the HQ realize.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 04:52 PM (OrI3J)
I like Cruz just as much as Trump. I have lots of LIV friends who know me as the political wonk/whackjob in their lives, so they're willing to kick politics around with me. If I talk about Cruz they hear "sitting Senator with x record on y legislation and z position on issue w..." and their eyes glaze over.
Trump makes their eyes light up. He talks about policy in a way that is insultingly simple to us but to them it's him coming to them on their turf without pretense. They know he's telling the establishment to get bent and they think he's hilarious. Kids I know who've never voted, and whose parents have never voted, are pumped about Trump.
And the best part is...while they're innately socially liberal (well I don't want to discriminate against anybody, and I don't think much of people who do...) the liberal reaction to Trump, the kneejerk, "I'm in charge here and how dare you say a good thing about someone who's a misogynist &c &c" shrieking from the average SJW, is a major turnoff! And it has the exact opposite result of most leftist grandstanding: it makes the LIV feel principled for standing up to the bullying.
This is a low form of political discourse and participation, and I don't know better than anyone else whether a president Trump would be good for the country. But it WOULD be a blow to the left. And I think we need that. I think we might need it even more than us here at the HQ realize.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:01 PM (xuouz)
331
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jhqr1)
But that's not what the FBI asked for, and it would still force Apple to create the "skeleton key" which does not exist at this time.
But that's not what the FBI asked for, and it would still force Apple to create the "skeleton key" which does not exist at this time.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 05:01 PM (z4pSV)
332
Hence, it wants Apple to write special "cracking software" to ensure that can't happen, and to make the passcode-guessing process easier and faster.
Oh but it's only for this phone! There would never never be another case where they really really wanted to use this -- now created -- tool to get into other phones.
Why are clingers so paranoid?
Also, you're wife is gaining weight. Is she depressed because you're cheating on her and that's why she's eating all the chocolate, or did you start cheating because she's getting fat?
Oh but it's only for this phone! There would never never be another case where they really really wanted to use this -- now created -- tool to get into other phones.
Why are clingers so paranoid?
Also, you're wife is gaining weight. Is she depressed because you're cheating on her and that's why she's eating all the chocolate, or did you start cheating because she's getting fat?
Posted by: Bill from NSA (Bob's on break) at February 22, 2016 05:01 PM (1xUj/)
333
NONE of the candidates running now will change the basic framework. So do where do you want to move to or do you want revolution?
What does that have to do with FBI vs. Apple?
It's not like it's a binary choice between FBI getting everything it wants or Somalia.
What does that have to do with FBI vs. Apple?
It's not like it's a binary choice between FBI getting everything it wants or Somalia.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 05:01 PM (uURQL)
334
What I find interesting (not being a lawyer, so please correct me here) is that Tim Cook, so far as I have seen, has not addressed this possibility.
Posted by: e2pilot at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (Vx3T2)
_____
Cuz he's a leftist and leftists never have to address shit.
Posted by: e2pilot at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (Vx3T2)
_____
Cuz he's a leftist and leftists never have to address shit.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 05:01 PM (0LHZx)
335
That option is already available in a slightly different form. The FBI sends the phone to Apple. Apple dumps a disk image. The Feebs walk out with the disk image and no new freaking tool that unlocks all Apple phones.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jhqr1)
Well I have no problem with that, but there will be a freaking tool to unlock the phone..Apple would still have to do that.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jhqr1)
Well I have no problem with that, but there will be a freaking tool to unlock the phone..Apple would still have to do that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:01 PM (mw8Dm)
336
ANd now we have the "If you don't like it, get out" argument in a slightly different form, but the same logically. You don't trust "our government" then get out.
First was the "What do you have to hide" argument, now this next fallacy.
First was the "What do you have to hide" argument, now this next fallacy.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 05:02 PM (dvuhZ)
337
They should say they are concerned only with profits arising from customer demands in the US since they do not have that concern in China.
I'm pretty sure that the Chinese don't have that pesky 4th amendment to deal with. Which come to think of it, the Fed level alphabet agencies seem to treat that more of a suggestion than something to be obeyed and protected.
Is that were you would like our government to go?
They should say they are concerned only with profits arising from customer demands in the US since they do not have that concern in China.
I'm pretty sure that the Chinese don't have that pesky 4th amendment to deal with. Which come to think of it, the Fed level alphabet agencies seem to treat that more of a suggestion than something to be obeyed and protected.
Is that were you would like our government to go?
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (1hM1d)
338
326 314
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (nS+hx)
Actually this all came about Post Snowden...
Tecks like me, and privacy folks, wanted a secure system.
So Apple produced one... one that if you locked it down was VERY secure.
Its giving what the market wants...
Now the Government is pulling the National Security card, on a
fishing expedition to force Apple to renege on that already sold
security feature.
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 04:56 PM (f7rv6)
EXACTLY!!!!
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jxbfJ)
They don't provide that for phones they sell in China right? I understand but don't blow smoke up my ass Apple and tell me its your concern for the 4th amendment.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 04:44 PM (nS+hx)
Actually this all came about Post Snowden...
Tecks like me, and privacy folks, wanted a secure system.
So Apple produced one... one that if you locked it down was VERY secure.
Its giving what the market wants...
Now the Government is pulling the National Security card, on a
fishing expedition to force Apple to renege on that already sold
security feature.
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 04:56 PM (f7rv6)
EXACTLY!!!!
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jxbfJ)
They don't provide that for phones they sell in China right? I understand but don't blow smoke up my ass Apple and tell me its your concern for the 4th amendment.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (nS+hx)
339
The FBI is asking for Apple-signed custom firmware. Even if it is installed at an Apple site, you can bet they'll be keeping a copy of it for themselves.
The FBI got the warrant while claiming it would be uniquely focused on that one device, if that's not true then Apple 100% needs to be fighting this or else the FBI or any other agency won't even need to bother getting warrants for millions of other phones.
The FBI got the warrant while claiming it would be uniquely focused on that one device, if that's not true then Apple 100% needs to be fighting this or else the FBI or any other agency won't even need to bother getting warrants for millions of other phones.
Posted by: Sjg at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (gDSJf)
340
Related to previous thread and the Twitter Shadowbanning:
The head of the Twitter Trust & Safety Council, aka Twitter Thought Polizei, is Del Harvey and her twitter handle is @delbius .
Enjoy. Weirdly she has few retweets or likes; people afraid to tick her off?
The head of the Twitter Trust & Safety Council, aka Twitter Thought Polizei, is Del Harvey and her twitter handle is @delbius .
Enjoy. Weirdly she has few retweets or likes; people afraid to tick her off?
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (hvf9s)
341
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:01 PM (xuouz)
Thanks for the anecdotes. Intellectual wonkery is severely overrated and the source of much of modern society's problems.
"We have a grand unified scientific theory for how to run everything."
Thanks for the anecdotes. Intellectual wonkery is severely overrated and the source of much of modern society's problems.
"We have a grand unified scientific theory for how to run everything."
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (uURQL)
Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (ptqRm)
343
Even if govt wasn't able to reverse engineer the code, how would Apple be able to refuse another request having done it already? One way or another all iPhones are vulnerable if Apple does what's being requested.
Posted by: All Teh Meh at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (oP9cX)
344
I have no doubt that the FBI hackers can create the required spoofed iOS version that allows unlimited unlock attempts.
What the FBI CANNOT do is verify to the terrorist's iPhone that the FBI's iOS is a legitimate update to the Apple phone iOS. Only Apple can do that with its encryption key that verifies that it's the authentic iOS publisher.
Apple no doubt already has development tools and setups in its Cupertino headquarters to let it download a new iOS version to a specific set of test phones (it would be bad to be able to test that only by pushing the new version to all iPhones worldwide). I expect it would be pretty easy for Apple to update the terrorist's phone's iOS to the unlockable version, test passcodes until they find the right one, roll back the iOS to the protected version, and then hand the phone back to the FBI with the correct passcode.
This doesn't require anyone to make a backdoor or hack Apple's encryption or compromise everyone's security. It just requires Apple to stand up and say, yeah, if you commit a crime using an iPhone, we're not going to passively assist you by refusing to get the data off your device.
What the FBI CANNOT do is verify to the terrorist's iPhone that the FBI's iOS is a legitimate update to the Apple phone iOS. Only Apple can do that with its encryption key that verifies that it's the authentic iOS publisher.
Apple no doubt already has development tools and setups in its Cupertino headquarters to let it download a new iOS version to a specific set of test phones (it would be bad to be able to test that only by pushing the new version to all iPhones worldwide). I expect it would be pretty easy for Apple to update the terrorist's phone's iOS to the unlockable version, test passcodes until they find the right one, roll back the iOS to the protected version, and then hand the phone back to the FBI with the correct passcode.
This doesn't require anyone to make a backdoor or hack Apple's encryption or compromise everyone's security. It just requires Apple to stand up and say, yeah, if you commit a crime using an iPhone, we're not going to passively assist you by refusing to get the data off your device.
Posted by: stuiec at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (eetvJ)
345
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:00 PM (mw8Dm)
I want a gov't small enough to drown in a bathtub. Any candidate that supports that with a track record has my vote.
I want a gov't small enough to drown in a bathtub. Any candidate that supports that with a track record has my vote.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (UnJ7w)
346
Ace - re: your update, JackStraw is correct, but there is a specific law that requires them to do that: CALEA. There's some old precedent that predates CALEA (see: U.S. v. New York Telephone Company, available on Google Scholar), but the assistance there was (1) trivial - basically plugging in some gov-provided equipment; (2) paid for by the government; (3) involved commonly-used equipment, not new cutting edge hacking tools; and (4) involved a highly-regulated public utility that had been granted a legal monopoly, not a private business in an unregulated industry.
Posted by: T at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (1Dc9T)
347
Why don't they just unscrew the cover and look at all the files inside with a magnifying glass.
Posted by: Not a techy at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (XtAzU)
348
Also Apple is not ignoring the court order - they are contesting it by arguing to the court that this request is not reasonable since they do not have this forensic tool and that it's essentially ordering them to create one.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (pAlYe)
I agree with both of you. It's fucked up that a revered leftist institution (why, btw. they're a major technology corporation) gets the political/media space to contest the court order in this way when a conservative organization would be chokeslammed for doing the same, and the media would gloat about it.
They're also doing the right thing.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (pAlYe)
I agree with both of you. It's fucked up that a revered leftist institution (why, btw. they're a major technology corporation) gets the political/media space to contest the court order in this way when a conservative organization would be chokeslammed for doing the same, and the media would gloat about it.
They're also doing the right thing.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (xuouz)
349
That option is already available in a slightly different form. The FBI sends the phone to Apple. Apple dumps a disk image. The Feebs walk out with the disk image and no new freaking tool that unlocks all Apple phones.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jhqr1)
And the encryption on the data....?
It's not difficult to pull data off of a flash drive once you have physical access to the chip. But if the data itself is encrypted, all you have is garbage.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (jhqr1)
And the encryption on the data....?
It's not difficult to pull data off of a flash drive once you have physical access to the chip. But if the data itself is encrypted, all you have is garbage.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (pAlYe)
350
Here's a section from the opinion:
***
Moreover, it can hardly be contended that the Company, a highly regulated public utility with a duty to serve the public, had a substantial interest in not providing assistance. Certainly the use of pen registers is by no means offensive to it. The Company concedes that it regularly employs such devices without court order for the purposes of checking billing operations, detecting fraud, and preventing violations of law....
***
Moreover, it can hardly be contended that the Company, a highly regulated public utility with a duty to serve the public, had a substantial interest in not providing assistance. Certainly the use of pen registers is by no means offensive to it. The Company concedes that it regularly employs such devices without court order for the purposes of checking billing operations, detecting fraud, and preventing violations of law....
Posted by: T at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (1Dc9T)
351
Apple knew exactly how the FBI uses brute force to hack a phone in response to a warrant. They deliberately created a phone that the FBI could not hack. Then they offered it for sale to the general public. This is merely the first best case where we know a terrorist had one of their phones.
They should lose their patent in eminent domain.
They should lose their patent in eminent domain.
Posted by: Cbris Balsz at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (4zXgv)
352
1) I always assume the government is lying.
2) I always assume the government is lazy.
With that, there is a long row to hoe for the government to make a case they need into this phone.
2) I always assume the government is lazy.
With that, there is a long row to hoe for the government to make a case they need into this phone.
Posted by: RoyalOil at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (fQ/0p)
353
Another angle is that it is a thirteenth amendment issue:
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction"
You can be subpoenaed to testify but it is different from being forced to work and make some product when not as punishment for a crime (like making license plates in the state prison or whatev).
What seems illogical is that the government claims it lacks the means to reverse engineer the code in question and make the necessary hack, They already blow billions on complete garbage but getting actual intel on our enemies seems to be beyond them. I think they already can but the feds want to force all to kowtow and "submit."
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction"
You can be subpoenaed to testify but it is different from being forced to work and make some product when not as punishment for a crime (like making license plates in the state prison or whatev).
What seems illogical is that the government claims it lacks the means to reverse engineer the code in question and make the necessary hack, They already blow billions on complete garbage but getting actual intel on our enemies seems to be beyond them. I think they already can but the feds want to force all to kowtow and "submit."
Posted by: chris at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (BDnev)
354
>>Update: JackStraw says that commandeering the services of people
for law enforcement isn't as unprecedented as the article I reference
(but still cannot find to link for you) claims. He says he knows that in
telephone companies, when wiretap orders come down, private citizen
employees of the telephone company are required to do the work
themselves.<<
Just an FYI, but the government compensates telecoms for the work they do installing wiretaps. Law enforcement agencies also compensate telecoms for the tolls they pull for subpoenas/NSLs.
I have a hard time believing that the government would not compensate Apple if Apple made a program to help the FBI get into the phone Farouk used.
for law enforcement isn't as unprecedented as the article I reference
(but still cannot find to link for you) claims. He says he knows that in
telephone companies, when wiretap orders come down, private citizen
employees of the telephone company are required to do the work
themselves.<<
Just an FYI, but the government compensates telecoms for the work they do installing wiretaps. Law enforcement agencies also compensate telecoms for the tolls they pull for subpoenas/NSLs.
I have a hard time believing that the government would not compensate Apple if Apple made a program to help the FBI get into the phone Farouk used.
Posted by: MacGruber at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (FEAjO)
355
The FBI has told the court that its goal is to guess
Farook's passcode to unlock his phone. If it just tries entering
passcodes, though, it might erase the device's keys, at which point the
data may never be recoverable. Hence, it wants Apple to write special
"cracking software" to ensure that can't happen, and to make the
passcode-guessing process easier and faster.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:57 PM (z4pSV)
Neither the FBI nor the courts have the right to force companies to create something that does not already exist.
Farook's passcode to unlock his phone. If it just tries entering
passcodes, though, it might erase the device's keys, at which point the
data may never be recoverable. Hence, it wants Apple to write special
"cracking software" to ensure that can't happen, and to make the
passcode-guessing process easier and faster.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 04:57 PM (z4pSV)
Neither the FBI nor the courts have the right to force companies to create something that does not already exist.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (OrI3J)
356
Apple sucks for not doing everything they can to help catch and kill murdering bastards and anyone that believes that there is any privacy is living in a fantasy world.
Speaking of fantasy world, here is what a 4kb of top-notch executable code looks like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx8jYFrj_zU
Speaking of fantasy world, here is what a 4kb of top-notch executable code looks like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx8jYFrj_zU
Posted by: goon at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (gy5kE)
357
About drafting folks into government service / law enforcement ,(forget the Draft" ) ,in the GreatFlood of 1927 , folks were drafted for levee work at the point of a gun . Most were black folks , and all that entails in MS of that time , but a lot were white . And they were not asked , they were told .
Posted by: jay hoenemeyer at February 22, 2016 05:06 PM (uvj0z)
358
...Nor was the ... order in any way burdensome. The order provided that the Company be fully reimbursed at prevailing rates, and compliance with it required minimal effort on the part of the Company and no disruption to its operations.
Posted by: T at February 22, 2016 05:06 PM (1Dc9T)
359
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (1hM1d)
Apple doesn't give a crap about the 4th amendment. They would write code to eliminate the 4th amendment if it meant higher profits.
Apple doesn't give a crap about the 4th amendment. They would write code to eliminate the 4th amendment if it meant higher profits.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 05:06 PM (nS+hx)
360
Even if govt wasn't able to reverse engineer the code, how would Apple be able to refuse another request having done it already? One way or another all iPhones are vulnerable if Apple does what's being requested.
And that's the problem.
And that's the problem.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:06 PM (8ZskC)
361
I can't figure out Twitter, I've got Hillary's foreign policy and Bernie's domestic (healthcare) policy.
All of which is correct.
And if you haven't noticed, the candidate that shares my view is about to win the republican nomination for president.
Better get with the program.
All of which is correct.
And if you haven't noticed, the candidate that shares my view is about to win the republican nomination for president.
Better get with the program.
Posted by: jwest at February 22, 2016 05:07 PM (Zs4uk)
362
>>> Neither the FBI nor the courts have the right to force companies to create something that does not already exist. Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (OrI3J)
The only exception I will allow to this is flying cars. Where is my flying car already???
/sarc
The only exception I will allow to this is flying cars. Where is my flying car already???
/sarc
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 05:07 PM (hvf9s)
363
So Apple created a data storage system that is impossible to comply with a subpoena. That's not going to last long.
Apple will create a backdoor because of this: Governments are going to make it illegal to supply employees with devices that are crack-proof. Therefore, any device the government buys will have to have the backdoor.
So if Apple wants to sell iPhones to San Bernardino county or any other government entity, including universities, they will have to provide them with the backdoor.
Apple will create a backdoor because of this: Governments are going to make it illegal to supply employees with devices that are crack-proof. Therefore, any device the government buys will have to have the backdoor.
So if Apple wants to sell iPhones to San Bernardino county or any other government entity, including universities, they will have to provide them with the backdoor.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 22, 2016 05:07 PM (Xd2w5)
364
Thanks for the anecdotes. Intellectual wonkery is severely overrated and the source of much of modern society's problems.
"We have a grand unified scientific theory for how to run everything."
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (uURQL)
Yep. All should be equal before the law, and that means that even LIVs, if they make a decision about something, should have equal representation, an equal say. Their input is, in fact, just as important as Matt Yglesias' or mine or ace's. I'd even go so far as to say that LIV opinions are an important check on our "betters" in warshington
"We have a grand unified scientific theory for how to run everything."
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 22, 2016 05:03 PM (uURQL)
Yep. All should be equal before the law, and that means that even LIVs, if they make a decision about something, should have equal representation, an equal say. Their input is, in fact, just as important as Matt Yglesias' or mine or ace's. I'd even go so far as to say that LIV opinions are an important check on our "betters" in warshington
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:07 PM (xuouz)
365
It just requires Apple to stand up and say, yeah, if you commit a crime using an iPhone, we're not going to passively assist you by refusing to get the data off your device.
Posted by: stuiec at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (eetvJ)
___
Depends on
1) the crime
2) the criminal
In this case the crime was committed by a poor, Muslim immigrant. And so, Apple will fight like hell to besmirch a good man's name.
Now had that criminal been a tea party member who, oh I dunno, wrote a less than complimentary tweet about Barack....Apple would be writing the code as we speak.
Posted by: stuiec at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (eetvJ)
___
Depends on
1) the crime
2) the criminal
In this case the crime was committed by a poor, Muslim immigrant. And so, Apple will fight like hell to besmirch a good man's name.
Now had that criminal been a tea party member who, oh I dunno, wrote a less than complimentary tweet about Barack....Apple would be writing the code as we speak.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 22, 2016 05:07 PM (0LHZx)
366
330
All you people who totally do not trust the Government or The Courts? So
what kind of government do you want and where do you want to live? NONE
of the candidates running now will change the basic framework. So do
where do you want to move to or do you want revolution?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:00 PM (mw8Dm)
Personally, I'm in AllenG's camp - Burn it down, salt the earth and scatter the stones.
Why do you put so much trust into the governemnt?We are at the precipice of a dangerously slippery slope here. The government, and by association the Chinese, Russians and whoever else, has been clammering for some type of "back door" access to any and all encryption technology.I still maintain that the FBI has an image already of the phone in its encyrpted format. If Apple takes the phone, decrypts the data and provides an image of the data (not the phone itself), the government will have all they need to determine the encrption algorithms used and gain the ability to decrypt any phone.Look, the FBI screwed up. They technically destroyed evidence. Destroyed it when they insisted the county change the passcode.
All you people who totally do not trust the Government or The Courts? So
what kind of government do you want and where do you want to live? NONE
of the candidates running now will change the basic framework. So do
where do you want to move to or do you want revolution?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:00 PM (mw8Dm)
Personally, I'm in AllenG's camp - Burn it down, salt the earth and scatter the stones.
Why do you put so much trust into the governemnt?We are at the precipice of a dangerously slippery slope here. The government, and by association the Chinese, Russians and whoever else, has been clammering for some type of "back door" access to any and all encryption technology.I still maintain that the FBI has an image already of the phone in its encyrpted format. If Apple takes the phone, decrypts the data and provides an image of the data (not the phone itself), the government will have all they need to determine the encrption algorithms used and gain the ability to decrypt any phone.Look, the FBI screwed up. They technically destroyed evidence. Destroyed it when they insisted the county change the passcode.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 05:08 PM (jxbfJ)
367
Has everyone who thinks the FBI is just doing there job protecting the nation gone insane?
This is the same government that allowed a Chinese company root access to it's computers. Where they firmly believe that if you are skeptical about Government; you're as bad as a terrorist and need to be put on the not fly list.
And re the last; they have a no fly list that no one can know they're on until they're refused to be allowed to fly and there's no way to get off the list and there is no judicial over sight that's transparent to the public.
Where they routinely incarcerate people and don't let anyone know they've been 'arrested'. Where they seize your files and other possessions while doing an investigation and you aren't allowed to know what the investigation is and you can't talk about it to anyone and where trying to find out anything is almost impossible.
Where they routinely record your private email and voicemail and monitor your cell phone calls using fake towers without a warrant.
And I could go on and on.
But those folks do not deserve the benefit of the doubt if anything they deserve the benefit of believing that they are up to no good and that they will use this trial case to make APPLE do this more and more for less and less emergency reasons and soon it will be 'do it or else'.
Sorry, you can't keep squawking about security while giving up your freedom to a bunch that you wouldn't trust to mow you're lawn without screwing it up.
And I firmly believe that a lot of you all work for some of these very governmental agents and should recuse yourself if you do or if you work for the government in any way shape or form because your opinion is also suspect.
Apple should just say NO. Tell the FBI to take a flying leap at a rolling donut.
This is the same government that allowed a Chinese company root access to it's computers. Where they firmly believe that if you are skeptical about Government; you're as bad as a terrorist and need to be put on the not fly list.
And re the last; they have a no fly list that no one can know they're on until they're refused to be allowed to fly and there's no way to get off the list and there is no judicial over sight that's transparent to the public.
Where they routinely incarcerate people and don't let anyone know they've been 'arrested'. Where they seize your files and other possessions while doing an investigation and you aren't allowed to know what the investigation is and you can't talk about it to anyone and where trying to find out anything is almost impossible.
Where they routinely record your private email and voicemail and monitor your cell phone calls using fake towers without a warrant.
And I could go on and on.
But those folks do not deserve the benefit of the doubt if anything they deserve the benefit of believing that they are up to no good and that they will use this trial case to make APPLE do this more and more for less and less emergency reasons and soon it will be 'do it or else'.
Sorry, you can't keep squawking about security while giving up your freedom to a bunch that you wouldn't trust to mow you're lawn without screwing it up.
And I firmly believe that a lot of you all work for some of these very governmental agents and should recuse yourself if you do or if you work for the government in any way shape or form because your opinion is also suspect.
Apple should just say NO. Tell the FBI to take a flying leap at a rolling donut.
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at February 22, 2016 05:08 PM (Xo1Rt)
368
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 04:58 PM (pAlYe)
Well.. and the bigger question becomes.... just what gives a Judge the Authority to ORDER someone who has NOT broken the law, to do something?
Judges are not supposed to be Dictators....
Well.. and the bigger question becomes.... just what gives a Judge the Authority to ORDER someone who has NOT broken the law, to do something?
Judges are not supposed to be Dictators....
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:08 PM (f7rv6)
369
So if Apple wants to sell iPhones to San Bernardino county or any other government entity, including universities, they will have to provide them with the backdoor.
Apple could offer a variation of the iPhone to corporate and institutional customers that had a back door.
Apple could offer a variation of the iPhone to corporate and institutional customers that had a back door.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (8ZskC)
370
This doesn't require anyone to make a backdoor or
hack Apple's encryption or compromise everyone's security. It just
requires Apple to stand up and say, yeah, if you commit a crime using an
iPhone, we're not going to passively assist you by refusing to get the
data off your device.
Posted by: stuiec at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (eetvJ)
Like the "crime" the FBI implies is inherent in joining a Tea Party group. Or the "crime" of bad though against protected groups?
hack Apple's encryption or compromise everyone's security. It just
requires Apple to stand up and say, yeah, if you commit a crime using an
iPhone, we're not going to passively assist you by refusing to get the
data off your device.
Posted by: stuiec at February 22, 2016 05:04 PM (eetvJ)
Like the "crime" the FBI implies is inherent in joining a Tea Party group. Or the "crime" of bad though against protected groups?
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (OrI3J)
371
Just started reading this post but wanted to mention that the terrorist's work phone (the phone in question, owned by the county) is an iPhone 5c, which does not have TouchID...so the dead guy's fingerprints are of no use. The only way to secure those is with a PIN (or possibly pattern lock).
Posted by: garagelogician at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (W6jGg)
372
The Obama administration told a magistrate judge Friday it would be willing to allow Apple to retain possession of and later destroy specialized software it was ordered to create to help federal authorities hack into the encrypted iPhone belong to Syed Rizwan Farook.
Apple may maintain custody of the software, destroy it after its purpose under the order has been served, refuse to disseminate it outside of Apple and make clear to the world that it does not apply to other devices or users without lawful court orders, the Justice Department told Judge Sheri Pym. No one outside Apple would have access to the software required by the order unless Apple itself chose to share it.
Although the judge instructed Apple to create the software for the FBI, she said it could be loaded onto the phone at an Apple facility. The Justice Department made explicit Friday that Apple could retain custody of the software at all times.
Apple may maintain custody of the software, destroy it after its purpose under the order has been served, refuse to disseminate it outside of Apple and make clear to the world that it does not apply to other devices or users without lawful court orders, the Justice Department told Judge Sheri Pym. No one outside Apple would have access to the software required by the order unless Apple itself chose to share it.
Although the judge instructed Apple to create the software for the FBI, she said it could be loaded onto the phone at an Apple facility. The Justice Department made explicit Friday that Apple could retain custody of the software at all times.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (mw8Dm)
373
BTW , about this Apple thing , sure would be a thing of beauty to watch one of these Silicone Valley ( sic ) mutts do the perp walk ,no Armani , just prison orange and manacles , they all be in such love with the Big Government / Obama / SJW thing .
Posted by: jay hoenemeyer at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (uvj0z)
Posted by: cool breeze at February 22, 2016 05:10 PM (ckvus)
375
Regardless of what happens with this Apple situation, I have drawn the line at being coerced by MS to upgrade to windows 10.
Posted by: The Walking Dude at February 22, 2016 05:10 PM (cCxiu)
376
Well.. and the bigger question becomes.... just what gives a Judge the Authority to ORDER someone who has NOT broken the law, to do something?
Obamacare. It's a tax. You MUST buy it.
Obamacare. It's a tax. You MUST buy it.
Posted by: rickb223 at February 22, 2016 05:10 PM (TUUTu)
377
If search warrants are always perfectly reasonable and executed perfectly, why are so many trials decided by what evidence is quashed or thrown out?
Search warrants, Court Orders?
I do not trust law enforcement AT ALL.
Ask the Duke Lacrosse team.
Ask the Wisconsin John Doe victims.
Ask True the Vote and all the other Tea Party groups that never received IRS approval, but did get OSHA inspections, Health Dept inspections, IRS Audits etc.
They may not be after me today, but eventually they will get down their list, and I will probably be on it. So Will YOU.
Search warrants, Court Orders?
I do not trust law enforcement AT ALL.
Ask the Duke Lacrosse team.
Ask the Wisconsin John Doe victims.
Ask True the Vote and all the other Tea Party groups that never received IRS approval, but did get OSHA inspections, Health Dept inspections, IRS Audits etc.
They may not be after me today, but eventually they will get down their list, and I will probably be on it. So Will YOU.
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 05:10 PM (v0YLX)
378
Sorry if someone already posted this but a few things...
1. The phone in question is a 5C, which does NOT have a finger print scanner on the home button.
2. The FBI could probably do this on their own, but would be way easier for them to just have Apple do it for them. Plus it's not really about the data on the phone, which most likely is backed up in iCloud anyway, but more about the FBI setting a precedent that these companies have to comply.
3. It's possible for Apple to write the software to only disable the security features on this one phone, writing the code in a way that it only will install on this one piece of hardware, but it will set a precedent that Apple will then have to comply with all other warrants in the future. There's no way to stop other courts from ordering the same thing for an endless amount of other phones.
1. The phone in question is a 5C, which does NOT have a finger print scanner on the home button.
2. The FBI could probably do this on their own, but would be way easier for them to just have Apple do it for them. Plus it's not really about the data on the phone, which most likely is backed up in iCloud anyway, but more about the FBI setting a precedent that these companies have to comply.
3. It's possible for Apple to write the software to only disable the security features on this one phone, writing the code in a way that it only will install on this one piece of hardware, but it will set a precedent that Apple will then have to comply with all other warrants in the future. There's no way to stop other courts from ordering the same thing for an endless amount of other phones.
Posted by: jmarcellais at February 22, 2016 05:10 PM (ZGDOy)
379
Neither the FBI nor the courts have the right to force companies to create something that does not already exist.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (OrI3J)
Or that renders their security product completely insecure.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (OrI3J)
Or that renders their security product completely insecure.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 05:10 PM (z4pSV)
380
Now, sit back and keep an eye on Washington. Expect to see some type of legislation introduced to have some type of "back door" on all encryption routines so the government doesn't have to go through this mess again. They can do it at will.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (jxbfJ)
As I recall, a bunch of cocksuckers in the bureaucracy and Congress have been agitating for encryption backdoor legislation for years. YEARS.
Now, sit back and keep an eye on Washington. Expect to see some type of legislation introduced to have some type of "back door" on all encryption routines so the government doesn't have to go through this mess again. They can do it at will.
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 04:51 PM (jxbfJ)
As I recall, a bunch of cocksuckers in the bureaucracy and Congress have been agitating for encryption backdoor legislation for years. YEARS.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (S7qKa)
381
Like the "crime" the FBI implies is inherent in joining a Tea Party group. Or the "crime" of bad though against protected groups?
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (OrI3J)
THIS guy was a fuckin terrorist with professed idiological ties to ISIS and killed X number of people.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (OrI3J)
THIS guy was a fuckin terrorist with professed idiological ties to ISIS and killed X number of people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
382
Apple should just say NO. Tell the FBI to take a flying leap at a rolling donut.
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at February 22, 2016 05:08 PM (Xo1Rt)
*Stands up with an American flag in one hand, a lit sparkler in the mouth and a crisp salute with the other hand*
Outstanding post!
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at February 22, 2016 05:08 PM (Xo1Rt)
*Stands up with an American flag in one hand, a lit sparkler in the mouth and a crisp salute with the other hand*
Outstanding post!
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (UnJ7w)
383
My take:
Look at it like a safe. If I am in the safe-making business, the LAST thing I want is to create a way to bypass the locks on my safe. If someone stole or copied this "back door", I could be held liable. That's not to say that someone else can't crack my safe. Maybe they can but I'm not in the business of giving them a way to do it nor does it make sense for me to build something intentionally that can be found.
Along comes the government who says, "You safe works as advertised. Now break into it because we said so, under penalty of law".
My answer is "fuck you". I am no throwing all the years of work and money I put into making this work for you to decide that it DOES work and that cannot be permitted. If I had shareholders, I cannot throw out the money they invested for years to throw out what they paid for.
If Apple had a key, fine. They can provide it to the government if the government has a valid warrant. If there is no key, the government should have no authority to compel me to make something that 1. I don't have, 2. would cause me liability to have, 3. puts me, my customers, or my shareholders at risk.
Look at it like a safe. If I am in the safe-making business, the LAST thing I want is to create a way to bypass the locks on my safe. If someone stole or copied this "back door", I could be held liable. That's not to say that someone else can't crack my safe. Maybe they can but I'm not in the business of giving them a way to do it nor does it make sense for me to build something intentionally that can be found.
Along comes the government who says, "You safe works as advertised. Now break into it because we said so, under penalty of law".
My answer is "fuck you". I am no throwing all the years of work and money I put into making this work for you to decide that it DOES work and that cannot be permitted. If I had shareholders, I cannot throw out the money they invested for years to throw out what they paid for.
If Apple had a key, fine. They can provide it to the government if the government has a valid warrant. If there is no key, the government should have no authority to compel me to make something that 1. I don't have, 2. would cause me liability to have, 3. puts me, my customers, or my shareholders at risk.
Posted by: Damiano at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (XItbt)
384
OT
The Kalamazoo shooter has been arraigned on charges of 6 counts of murder and 2 counts of assault with attempt to murder.
He has not given police any indication of why he did this.
Meanwhile, the 14 year old girl who was shot in the parking lot of the Cracker Barrel had been initially declared brain dead, and organ transplantation was being arranged. Her mother was holding her hand and felt the girl squeeze it. Her doctor then asked her to give a thumbs up sign and she raised both thumbs.
She continues on support, but it sounds like we have a miracle occurring here. One of those, "it's not your time yet, go back".
The Kalamazoo shooter has been arraigned on charges of 6 counts of murder and 2 counts of assault with attempt to murder.
He has not given police any indication of why he did this.
Meanwhile, the 14 year old girl who was shot in the parking lot of the Cracker Barrel had been initially declared brain dead, and organ transplantation was being arranged. Her mother was holding her hand and felt the girl squeeze it. Her doctor then asked her to give a thumbs up sign and she raised both thumbs.
She continues on support, but it sounds like we have a miracle occurring here. One of those, "it's not your time yet, go back".
Posted by: Jen the original at February 22, 2016 05:12 PM (gOsh1)
385
6 months from now the phone is cracked, files downloaded and decrypted...
32 MB of Goat Pron set to Nickleback tunes...
6 months from now the phone is cracked, files downloaded and decrypted...
32 MB of Goat Pron set to Nickleback tunes...
Posted by: Bets... at February 22, 2016 05:12 PM (+zqYj)
386
"By the way, here's a question that I'm sure I know the answer to, but I
haven't seen it addressed directly: Couldn't you have just touched the
dead guy's thumb to the fingerprint ID thing?"
Most such biometric input devices have a "proof of life" check.
haven't seen it addressed directly: Couldn't you have just touched the
dead guy's thumb to the fingerprint ID thing?"
Most such biometric input devices have a "proof of life" check.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 22, 2016 05:12 PM (oKE6c)
387
I am 100% behind Apple on their stance. There is no law in the U.S. that compels a company to MAKE a product under force of court order. Over and done. Apple wins any court case.
The other thing I keep turning over in my mind...30 years ago there was no way for the government to find out what you watched on TV or any of your conversations over your phone (unless they had a court order to tap your phone line). So why is the government so presumptuous to think that they have a right to access your phone and all of it contents and that businesses who create these phones and the software must be complicit in providing the info/access/etc?
Yeah, it sucks that you might not be able to find out what you want on this dead guy's iPhone, but too bad. That's the way it is. To me, freedom and law are more important than the FBI's desire to get into an iPhone.
The other thing I keep turning over in my mind...30 years ago there was no way for the government to find out what you watched on TV or any of your conversations over your phone (unless they had a court order to tap your phone line). So why is the government so presumptuous to think that they have a right to access your phone and all of it contents and that businesses who create these phones and the software must be complicit in providing the info/access/etc?
Yeah, it sucks that you might not be able to find out what you want on this dead guy's iPhone, but too bad. That's the way it is. To me, freedom and law are more important than the FBI's desire to get into an iPhone.
Posted by: K-E at February 22, 2016 05:13 PM (OV2w5)
388
I have a hard time believing that the government would not compensate
Apple if Apple made a program to help the FBI get into the phone Farouk
used.
Creating the tool negates all their prior security work. So they do it over and then the Feebs come again, someone steals it again and they start over again.
Apple if Apple made a program to help the FBI get into the phone Farouk
used.
Creating the tool negates all their prior security work. So they do it over and then the Feebs come again, someone steals it again and they start over again.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:13 PM (DL2i+)
389
Ot Apparently , according to people on RS McCain's websitr an alternative to Twitter, Quitter is also stopping registrations of people known to be conservatives.
Here's another alternative:
https://freezepeach.xyz/main/all
Here's another alternative:
https://freezepeach.xyz/main/all
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 22, 2016 05:13 PM (w4NZ8)
390
Remember the force colonoscopy. Local cops (where was it, New Mexico?) thought some guy was holding his ass cheeks tight and walking funny. Bingo, must have drugs up his ass. Took him to a hospital and got a forced colonoscopy.
One hospital refused I think, another complied (after the warrant had expired or something).
ANyway, warant to force ram a tube up someone's ass.
One hospital refused I think, another complied (after the warrant had expired or something).
ANyway, warant to force ram a tube up someone's ass.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 05:13 PM (dvuhZ)
391
...Nor was the ... order in any way burdensome. The
order provided that the Company be fully reimbursed at prevailing rates,
and compliance with it required minimal effort on the part of the
Company and no disruption to its operations.
Posted by: T at February 22, 2016 05:06 PM (1Dc9T)
The Court had no authority to order what they did... whether the court considered the order burdensome or not is beside the point.
order provided that the Company be fully reimbursed at prevailing rates,
and compliance with it required minimal effort on the part of the
Company and no disruption to its operations.
Posted by: T at February 22, 2016 05:06 PM (1Dc9T)
The Court had no authority to order what they did... whether the court considered the order burdensome or not is beside the point.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (OrI3J)
392
THIS guy was a fuckin terrorist with professed idiological ties to ISIS and killed X number of people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
And one demented monster with an AR-15 killed a bunch of kids at Sandy Hook. So if the crime is heinous enough we should all sit by and allow our freedoms to be eroded away in the name of security?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
And one demented monster with an AR-15 killed a bunch of kids at Sandy Hook. So if the crime is heinous enough we should all sit by and allow our freedoms to be eroded away in the name of security?
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (8ZskC)
393
370 So if Apple wants to sell iPhones to San Bernardino county or any other government entity, including universities, they will have to provide them with the backdoor.
Apple could offer a variation of the iPhone to corporate and institutional customers that had a back door.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (8ZskC)
-------
COMPETENT IT DEPARTMENTS already have the means of doing this. It is called Mobile Device Management.
There are companies that make software to do this, quickly, easily and completely
San Bernadino had the software!
Were they COMPETENT???
Apple could offer a variation of the iPhone to corporate and institutional customers that had a back door.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (8ZskC)
-------
COMPETENT IT DEPARTMENTS already have the means of doing this. It is called Mobile Device Management.
There are companies that make software to do this, quickly, easily and completely
San Bernadino had the software!
Were they COMPETENT???
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (v0YLX)
394
>>Neither the FBI nor the courts have the right to force companies to create something that does not already exist.<<
But the government has the right to legislate the specs for a product. Like requiring Apple products be responsive to subpoena requests.
If Apple does not like it, then they can simply leave the US market.
It's a give/take in this country. If Cook doesn't like it, then I'm sure he will find a much better environment in Somalia or China.
But the government has the right to legislate the specs for a product. Like requiring Apple products be responsive to subpoena requests.
If Apple does not like it, then they can simply leave the US market.
It's a give/take in this country. If Cook doesn't like it, then I'm sure he will find a much better environment in Somalia or China.
Posted by: MacGruber at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (FEAjO)
395
Apple could offer a variation of the iPhone to corporate and institutional customers that had a back door.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (8ZskC)
Which would end the argument that Apple is forced to do labor against its will. They can build it, no problem.
But eventually a court is going to say "Get me the data, I don't care how, this is a legal subpoena."
I don't know if it's even legal having information on a device that is impervious to subpoena.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (8ZskC)
Which would end the argument that Apple is forced to do labor against its will. They can build it, no problem.
But eventually a court is going to say "Get me the data, I don't care how, this is a legal subpoena."
I don't know if it's even legal having information on a device that is impervious to subpoena.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (Xd2w5)
396
So what they are really asking for is for Apple to modify, compile and sign an OS, yes? This seems trivial enough that the labor part of the argument isn't significant, I don't think.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (evdj2)
397
THIS guy was a fuckin terrorist with professed idiological ties to ISIS and killed X number of people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
SO? You don't get to take our liberties away with that excuse.
As Franklin said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve Liberty nor Safety.".
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
SO? You don't get to take our liberties away with that excuse.
As Franklin said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve Liberty nor Safety.".
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (UnJ7w)
398
Posted by: Nevergiveup
1. What degree of confidence do you have that the data the government wants (which is only the last six weeks following the last cloud upload) is sufficiently valuable to warrant all this hub-bub?
2. Do you agree that the government already has all of the metadata for this period, and thus knows with whom Terror Boy has been in contact?
3. Do we know whether the FBI has taken the prudent step of subpoenaing the records of those counterparties who are presumably yet extant.
4. Does the FBI's utter disregard of the crime scene at Terror Couple's home give you any pause with respect to their thoroughness in this case?
1. What degree of confidence do you have that the data the government wants (which is only the last six weeks following the last cloud upload) is sufficiently valuable to warrant all this hub-bub?
2. Do you agree that the government already has all of the metadata for this period, and thus knows with whom Terror Boy has been in contact?
3. Do we know whether the FBI has taken the prudent step of subpoenaing the records of those counterparties who are presumably yet extant.
4. Does the FBI's utter disregard of the crime scene at Terror Couple's home give you any pause with respect to their thoroughness in this case?
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (1xUj/)
399
Take a flying leap at a rolling donut.
Just brilliant. I mean, I've heard it before, but y'all do have a way with words.
My favorite was one of the commenters a few weeks ago saying that some annoying thing or another "frosts my grommet"
fucking lol
Just brilliant. I mean, I've heard it before, but y'all do have a way with words.
My favorite was one of the commenters a few weeks ago saying that some annoying thing or another "frosts my grommet"
fucking lol
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (xuouz)
400
One hospital refused I think, another complied (after the warrant had expired or something).
ANyway, warant to force ram a tube up someone's ass.
-----------
Somewhat analogous. Hospital had every right to not comply.
ANyway, warant to force ram a tube up someone's ass.
-----------
Somewhat analogous. Hospital had every right to not comply.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:15 PM (gmeXX)
401
"The Court had no authority to order what they did... whether the court considered the order burdensome or not is beside the point.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (OrI3J) "
This is an excerpt from a previous case that I was arguing does not support the FBI in this instance. Couldn't submit the whole quote in one post, for some reason. See my comment at 347.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (OrI3J) "
This is an excerpt from a previous case that I was arguing does not support the FBI in this instance. Couldn't submit the whole quote in one post, for some reason. See my comment at 347.
Posted by: T at February 22, 2016 05:15 PM (1Dc9T)
402
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (mw8Dm)
That's all good. Basically what I've been saying. I suspect if Apple hadn't bitched and moaned the FBI would have walked away with a cracked phone and screwed them.
That's all good. Basically what I've been saying. I suspect if Apple hadn't bitched and moaned the FBI would have walked away with a cracked phone and screwed them.
Posted by: mega machines at February 22, 2016 05:15 PM (fbovC)
Posted by: J Edgar Hoover at February 22, 2016 05:15 PM (nS+hx)
404
330 All you people who totally do not trust the Government or The Courts?
I can come up with plenty of examples of Fed level government malfeasance, but the Tuskegee syphilis experiment should shock you to your core. Otherwise: the VA, the FBI's various clusterfucks that ended up killing people, the corruption that's readily apparent at many levels of the Fed government.
Stuff done with the best of intentions. Fortunately, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs...
330 All you people who totally do not trust the Government or The Courts?
I can come up with plenty of examples of Fed level government malfeasance, but the Tuskegee syphilis experiment should shock you to your core. Otherwise: the VA, the FBI's various clusterfucks that ended up killing people, the corruption that's readily apparent at many levels of the Fed government.
Stuff done with the best of intentions. Fortunately, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs...
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at February 22, 2016 05:15 PM (1hM1d)
405
I for one will not stand by and watch all of you people badmouth the United States of America!
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:16 PM (qUNWi)
406
Give the feds nothing. They're too stupid to know how to use what tools they already have in any meaningful way.
There are 14 dead people in just this one instance because of the incompetence that spans across at least 4 federal agencies. Fuck them.
There are 14 dead people in just this one instance because of the incompetence that spans across at least 4 federal agencies. Fuck them.
Posted by: Fritz at February 22, 2016 05:16 PM (BngQR)
407
Apple may maintain custody of the software, destroy it after its purpose
under the order has been served, refuse to disseminate it outside of
Apple and make clear to the world that it does not apply to other
devices or users without lawful court orders, the Justice Department
told Judge Sheri Pym. No one outside Apple would have access to the
software required by the order unless Apple itself chose to share it.
And the PLA will certainly honor the judges ruling.
under the order has been served, refuse to disseminate it outside of
Apple and make clear to the world that it does not apply to other
devices or users without lawful court orders, the Justice Department
told Judge Sheri Pym. No one outside Apple would have access to the
software required by the order unless Apple itself chose to share it.
And the PLA will certainly honor the judges ruling.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:16 PM (DL2i+)
408
San Bernadino had the software!
Were [the administrators of this government entity] COMPETENT???
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (v0YLX)
Anything else?
Were [the administrators of this government entity] COMPETENT???
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (v0YLX)
Anything else?
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (xuouz)
409
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."-- Benjamin Franklin
I misquoted him slightly in my last post.
I misquoted him slightly in my last post.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (UnJ7w)
410
Give the feds nothing. They're too stupid to know how to use what tools they already have in any meaningful way.
There are 14 dead people in just this one instance because of the incompetence that spans across at least 4 federal agencies. Fuck them.
Posted by: Fritz at February 22, 2016 05:16 PM (BngQR)
Cut.
Jib.
There are 14 dead people in just this one instance because of the incompetence that spans across at least 4 federal agencies. Fuck them.
Posted by: Fritz at February 22, 2016 05:16 PM (BngQR)
Cut.
Jib.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (xuouz)
411
>>I am 100% behind Apple on their stance. There is no law in the U.S. that compels a company to MAKE a product under force of court order. Over and done. Apple wins any court case.
Perhaps you are unaware of Obamacare.
Perhaps you are unaware of Obamacare.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (/tuJf)
412
THIS guy was a fuckin terrorist with professed idiological ties to ISIS and killed X number of people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
SO? You don't get to take our liberties away with that excuse.
As Franklin said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve Liberty nor Safety.".
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (UnJ7w)
Sorry that is an argument that undermines anything else you say and that I might even have sympathies for. This is not a gray area. THIS is a case where you error on the side of National Security. No matter how the FBI may or may not have fucked the case up so far.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
SO? You don't get to take our liberties away with that excuse.
As Franklin said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve Liberty nor Safety.".
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (UnJ7w)
Sorry that is an argument that undermines anything else you say and that I might even have sympathies for. This is not a gray area. THIS is a case where you error on the side of National Security. No matter how the FBI may or may not have fucked the case up so far.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (mw8Dm)
413
Apple's position makes it impossible for the government to execute on warrants, i.e., judicially-approved, reasonable searches supported by probable cause. In this case, there's no doubt the phone is a highly useful piece of evidence in the case (and intel for a broader investigation / counter-attack), and frankly, would have been WAY more useful if it had been cracked within a day or two of the attack.
I don't think Apple should be permitted to refuse to help in that effort simply because doing so requires that it expend effort. The distinction between spending time and money finding a document already in your possession and fixing a problem of your sole creation strikes me as sophistry. I feel as though courts have "necessary and proper" type powers to aid in the execution of orders that are clearly within their authority. So, it's clearly within the court's authority to issue a warrant for this nutball's phone, and it can issue necessary orders to enforce that order. (That's kinda made up, but I'm a lawyer and I have a good feel for these things!)
I also don't think it would be tremendously burdensome for Apple to comply, and Ace notes, it seems doubtful that they don't already have something to help. Plus, its objections are purely hypothetical--hackers will want at this if we create it. Yeah well duh, so put it on a secure system not connected to external networks and only use it when the government comes knocking with a warrant? Why is this so hard?
Known criminals do not have a right to protect information from government inspection simply because a private company wants to provide its customers with a level of information-security heretofore unknown.
I don't think Apple should be permitted to refuse to help in that effort simply because doing so requires that it expend effort. The distinction between spending time and money finding a document already in your possession and fixing a problem of your sole creation strikes me as sophistry. I feel as though courts have "necessary and proper" type powers to aid in the execution of orders that are clearly within their authority. So, it's clearly within the court's authority to issue a warrant for this nutball's phone, and it can issue necessary orders to enforce that order. (That's kinda made up, but I'm a lawyer and I have a good feel for these things!)
I also don't think it would be tremendously burdensome for Apple to comply, and Ace notes, it seems doubtful that they don't already have something to help. Plus, its objections are purely hypothetical--hackers will want at this if we create it. Yeah well duh, so put it on a secure system not connected to external networks and only use it when the government comes knocking with a warrant? Why is this so hard?
Known criminals do not have a right to protect information from government inspection simply because a private company wants to provide its customers with a level of information-security heretofore unknown.
Posted by: gts109 at February 22, 2016 05:18 PM (KIvt1)
414
Stuff done with the best of intentions.
------------
I don't think the Tuskagee experiments were done with the best of intentions.
------------
I don't think the Tuskagee experiments were done with the best of intentions.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:18 PM (gmeXX)
415
370 So if Apple wants to sell iPhones to San Bernardino county or any other government entity, including universities, they will have to provide them with the backdoor.
Apple could offer a variation of the iPhone to corporate and institutional customers that had a back door.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (8ZskC)
there is already an Ap for that....
Its $4.00 extra a month per phone...
You can also use it on KIDS phones, so you can see what the heck they are doing.
Most however, work off the backup data on the cloud... and this guys phone had not backed up data for about 6 weeks.
Apple could offer a variation of the iPhone to corporate and institutional customers that had a back door.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (8ZskC)
there is already an Ap for that....
Its $4.00 extra a month per phone...
You can also use it on KIDS phones, so you can see what the heck they are doing.
Most however, work off the backup data on the cloud... and this guys phone had not backed up data for about 6 weeks.
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:18 PM (f7rv6)
416
The Justice Department made explicit Friday that Apple could retain custody of the software at all times.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (mw8Dm)
But says nothing about the phone. This is more mumbo-jumbo from a judge that doesn't understand the technology.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (mw8Dm)
But says nothing about the phone. This is more mumbo-jumbo from a judge that doesn't understand the technology.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 05:18 PM (z4pSV)
417
FBI Director Comey, if this is Syed's phone, try this password:
"mywifeisabitch" You're welcome.
"mywifeisabitch" You're welcome.
Posted by: Fritz at February 22, 2016 05:19 PM (BngQR)
418
Even though I don't know how to use it, I do know how to conduct business - and this Twitter controversy is an opportunity.
If Twitter doesn't want conservative business, let them do with it. I'm certain some enterprising technically inclined person will start a Twitter-like clone that welcomes not only conservatives, but all users.
Only idiots will be left on Twitter, whining about how their ideological brothers are being tossed off unfairly.
Free enterprise. Learn it. Use it. Enjoy it's benefits.
If Twitter doesn't want conservative business, let them do with it. I'm certain some enterprising technically inclined person will start a Twitter-like clone that welcomes not only conservatives, but all users.
Only idiots will be left on Twitter, whining about how their ideological brothers are being tossed off unfairly.
Free enterprise. Learn it. Use it. Enjoy it's benefits.
Posted by: jwest at February 22, 2016 05:19 PM (Zs4uk)
419
391 Remember the force colonoscopy. Local cops (where was it, New Mexico?) thought some guy was holding his ass cheeks tight and walking funny. Bingo, must have drugs up his ass. Took him to a hospital and got a forced colonoscopy.
One hospital refused I think, another complied (after the warrant had expired or something).
ANyway, warant to force ram a tube up someone's ass.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 05:13 PM (dvuhZ)
Yep, they gave the poor bastard three or four enemas, because DAMMIT! he was not complying with their authoritah!
I think Dr. Bombay at the hospgital got his credentials pulled this time. The hospital got theirs put on probation. Last I heard, the cops were still employed.
Turns out this wasn't the first time they did it to someone either.
One hospital refused I think, another complied (after the warrant had expired or something).
ANyway, warant to force ram a tube up someone's ass.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 05:13 PM (dvuhZ)
Yep, they gave the poor bastard three or four enemas, because DAMMIT! he was not complying with their authoritah!
I think Dr. Bombay at the hospgital got his credentials pulled this time. The hospital got theirs put on probation. Last I heard, the cops were still employed.
Turns out this wasn't the first time they did it to someone either.
Posted by: rd at February 22, 2016 05:19 PM (v0YLX)
420
Here is another reason I'm calling the Fed's bluff: Mcaffee volunteered that he and his team would hack the phone and provide the data to the FBI for free within 3 weeks.
Easy peasy. Problem solved. Apple isn't compelled to do anything that is bad for itself, it's shareholders or it's customers. They can pay McAfee to give them the procedure to hack the phone so they can improve their security. McAfee gets the liability he volunteered for if a shit ton of phones suddenly get hacked. The FBI gets their data.
But, rather than take McAfee up on what he VOLUNTEERED to do FOR FREE, the FBI and now DOJ chose lawfare against Apple.
Easy peasy. Problem solved. Apple isn't compelled to do anything that is bad for itself, it's shareholders or it's customers. They can pay McAfee to give them the procedure to hack the phone so they can improve their security. McAfee gets the liability he volunteered for if a shit ton of phones suddenly get hacked. The FBI gets their data.
But, rather than take McAfee up on what he VOLUNTEERED to do FOR FREE, the FBI and now DOJ chose lawfare against Apple.
Posted by: Damiano at February 22, 2016 05:19 PM (XItbt)
421
Like the "crime" the FBI implies is inherent in
joining a Tea Party group. Or the "crime" of bad though against
protected groups?
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (OrI3J)
THIS guy was a fuckin terrorist with professed idiological ties to ISIS and killed X number of people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
Yes he was. And what a compounded tragedy it will be if the government not only allowed his terrorism (because they refuse to target muslims that they have reasonable cause to target) but them used that terrorism as the emergency they were looking for to abrogate all citizen's fourth amendment right to be secure in their person and possessions.
joining a Tea Party group. Or the "crime" of bad though against
protected groups?
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (OrI3J)
THIS guy was a fuckin terrorist with professed idiological ties to ISIS and killed X number of people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:11 PM (mw8Dm)
Yes he was. And what a compounded tragedy it will be if the government not only allowed his terrorism (because they refuse to target muslims that they have reasonable cause to target) but them used that terrorism as the emergency they were looking for to abrogate all citizen's fourth amendment right to be secure in their person and possessions.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:20 PM (OrI3J)
422
Did the court even talk to Apple before issuing this order....?
Posted by: VA GOP Sucks at February 22, 2016 05:20 PM (16TRA)
423
This seems trivial enough
It isn't.
Read the EFF and Market Ticker links.
Realize the FSB will steal it.
It isn't.
Read the EFF and Market Ticker links.
Realize the FSB will steal it.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:20 PM (DL2i+)
424
This is no different from when I brought a warrant to force Ghostbusters, Inc., to shut down their containment facility. It was a good idea then, it's a good idea now!
Posted by: Walter Peck at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (2lndx)
425
Has anybody trotted out ol' Benji Franklin's "those who would sacrifice essential liberty . . . " quote yet on this thread?
If not, consider it trotted.
If not, consider it trotted.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (s5o+q)
426
THIS is a case where you error on the side of National Security.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (mw8Dm)
Well I'll error for liberty before I error for national security, or God forbid error on the sacred precepts of diction and syntax.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (mw8Dm)
Well I'll error for liberty before I error for national security, or God forbid error on the sacred precepts of diction and syntax.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (xuouz)
427
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:14 PM (xuouz)
Ah. shorter url in your nic. Thanks.
re: the phrase 'take a flying leap at a rolling donut'
has another word in place of leap but Ace likes us to reduce the eff words during the daytime/kiddie hours so as to reduce advertiser complaints.
Ah. shorter url in your nic. Thanks.
re: the phrase 'take a flying leap at a rolling donut'
has another word in place of leap but Ace likes us to reduce the eff words during the daytime/kiddie hours so as to reduce advertiser complaints.
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (Xo1Rt)
428
This is not a gray area. THIS is a case where you error on the side of National Security. No matter how the FBI may or may not have fucked the case up so far.
----------
Once again NGU - no dice. Is this a gray area - perhaps. I'm of the opinion it isn't really gray at all - Apple wins. But I acknowledge it is probably in the gray area - they win because I usually side against the government in the gray areas. Now national security could change things - but this isn't war (not a declared war anyway). This is dealing with something imminent - as it has been sitting around. Seems to me if it was as urgent as you say, the government would have figured a way to get the data without having to go to Apple.
----------
Once again NGU - no dice. Is this a gray area - perhaps. I'm of the opinion it isn't really gray at all - Apple wins. But I acknowledge it is probably in the gray area - they win because I usually side against the government in the gray areas. Now national security could change things - but this isn't war (not a declared war anyway). This is dealing with something imminent - as it has been sitting around. Seems to me if it was as urgent as you say, the government would have figured a way to get the data without having to go to Apple.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (gmeXX)
429
This is no different from when I brought a warrant to force Ghostbusters, Inc., to shut down their containment facility. It was a good idea then, it's a good idea now!
Posted by: Walter Peck at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (2lndx)
Good, those guys were dicks
Posted by: Walter Peck at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (2lndx)
Good, those guys were dicks
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (xuouz)
430
No doctor worth his license should comply with an order for a forced medical procedure (and I don't believe can be forced to comply). One, a colonoscopy has risks, serious risks (colon puncture, happened to a buddy of mine, was in a mess for a while). If there is no valid medical reason to perform it, then it is malpractice to subject a patient to that risk.
Any doctor worth two cents would not do that. Dammit, I'm a doctor, not a cop.
Any doctor worth two cents would not do that. Dammit, I'm a doctor, not a cop.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 05:22 PM (dvuhZ)
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:22 PM (DL2i+)
432
Apple's position makes it impossible for the government to execute on warrants, i.e., judicially-approved, reasonable searches supported by probable cause. In this case, there's no doubt the phone is a highly useful piece of evidence in the case (and intel for a broader investigation / counter-attack), and frankly, would have been WAY more useful if it had been cracked within a day or two of the attack.
Posted by: gts109
Bullshit. Apple can turn over the data and probably already has .
The feds aren't looking for evidence. They are asking for Apple to castrate its security. Period.
Posted by: gts109
Bullshit. Apple can turn over the data and probably already has .
The feds aren't looking for evidence. They are asking for Apple to castrate its security. Period.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 22, 2016 05:22 PM (AA6QE)
433
THIS is a case where you error on the side of National Security
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (mw8Dm)
Like when the federal gov't interned American citizens with Japanese ancestory?
I was joking before when I said it but now I mean it, take a hike you Slaver.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (mw8Dm)
Like when the federal gov't interned American citizens with Japanese ancestory?
I was joking before when I said it but now I mean it, take a hike you Slaver.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:22 PM (UnJ7w)
434
417 The Justice Department made explicit Friday that Apple could retain custody of the software at all times.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (mw8Dm)
*This time*. Note that they didn't say that they agree to never ask for this software in the future. This is a case where you have to look at legal capabilities and not just what's being requested at this moment.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (mw8Dm)
*This time*. Note that they didn't say that they agree to never ask for this software in the future. This is a case where you have to look at legal capabilities and not just what's being requested at this moment.
Posted by: Maetenloch at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (pAlYe)
435
Has anybody trotted out ol' Benji Franklin's "those who would sacrifice essential liberty . . . " quote yet on this thread?
If not, consider it trotted.
Pretty much eveything's been said 3 or 4 times already.
If not, consider it trotted.
Pretty much eveything's been said 3 or 4 times already.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (qUNWi)
436
It isn't.
Read the EFF and Market Ticker links.
Realize the FSB will steal it.
I did, and it's trivial. The OS is a program. They have the source code. Comment out the tests in the code, compile and sign. The signing is the part they don't want to do because if their signing key is compromised, people could load anything onto the iPhone.
Read the EFF and Market Ticker links.
Realize the FSB will steal it.
I did, and it's trivial. The OS is a program. They have the source code. Comment out the tests in the code, compile and sign. The signing is the part they don't want to do because if their signing key is compromised, people could load anything onto the iPhone.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: Soona at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (Fmupd)
Posted by: bjk at February 22, 2016 05:24 PM (x2rNW)
439
Like when the federal gov't interned American citizens with Japanese ancestory?
---------
Heinous. Which is why I said above, even during WWII our government was not to be trusted (certainly not always).
---------
Heinous. Which is why I said above, even during WWII our government was not to be trusted (certainly not always).
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:24 PM (gmeXX)
440
Dammit, I'm a doctor, not a cop.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius)
That's what I keep telling them.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius)
That's what I keep telling them.
Posted by: Bones McCoy at February 22, 2016 05:24 PM (FkBIv)
441
@391 (pubilis), I remember reading about that forced colonoscopy. Didn't the hospital bill the poor guy for the procedure after they found nothing?
You see this is the great thing about our current government.
1.) They will anally probe ANYONE.
2.) Then they will charge you for it, because it's a tax.
You see this is the great thing about our current government.
1.) They will anally probe ANYONE.
2.) Then they will charge you for it, because it's a tax.
Posted by: The Walking Dude at February 22, 2016 05:25 PM (cCxiu)
442
I am 100% behind Apple on their stance. There is no
law in the U.S. that compels a company to MAKE a product under force of
court order. Over and done. Apple wins any court case.
Perhaps you are unaware of Obamacare.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (/tuJf)
There they are attempting to make us purchase a product. They cannot however, force insurance companies to provide that product; which is why the Obama admin is blatantly illegally trying to bribe companies to stay in the market with 7 billion of our dollars.
law in the U.S. that compels a company to MAKE a product under force of
court order. Over and done. Apple wins any court case.
Perhaps you are unaware of Obamacare.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (/tuJf)
There they are attempting to make us purchase a product. They cannot however, force insurance companies to provide that product; which is why the Obama admin is blatantly illegally trying to bribe companies to stay in the market with 7 billion of our dollars.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:25 PM (OrI3J)
443
Once again NGU - no dice. Is this a gray area - perhaps. I'm of the opinion it isn't really gray at all - Apple wins. But I acknowledge it is probably in the gray area - they win because I usually side against the government in the gray areas. Now national security could change things - but this isn't war (not a declared war anyway). This is dealing with something imminent - as it has been sitting around. Seems to me if it was as urgent as you say, the government would have figured a way to get the data without having to go to Apple.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (gmeXX)
Neither of us know what is on that phone. But this guy had no expectation of privacy on that phone. Apple could have helped the gov behind the scenes like they apparently have in the past. What they are doing now is a business move. Has nothing to do with privacy.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:21 PM (gmeXX)
Neither of us know what is on that phone. But this guy had no expectation of privacy on that phone. Apple could have helped the gov behind the scenes like they apparently have in the past. What they are doing now is a business move. Has nothing to do with privacy.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:25 PM (mw8Dm)
444
Wow. They shadow banned Adam Baldwin.
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 22, 2016 05:25 PM (iQIUe)
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:25 PM (qUNWi)
446
Nice to see the codswallop being tossed around.
This entire tale is one of media feeding. Ascribing it some legal or moral high ground is nothing more than arguing on angels and pinheads.
What should be noted (perhaps on some Smart Militarylike Blog) is the commentary on the left in full throated SJW support of Apple vs. their own "government".
Comments from this cluster of Feds, OTOH, seem to be along the lines of "hey, we're on the same side of things".
I'm just chuckling. And cooking up some more popcorn.
This entire tale is one of media feeding. Ascribing it some legal or moral high ground is nothing more than arguing on angels and pinheads.
What should be noted (perhaps on some Smart Militarylike Blog) is the commentary on the left in full throated SJW support of Apple vs. their own "government".
Comments from this cluster of Feds, OTOH, seem to be along the lines of "hey, we're on the same side of things".
I'm just chuckling. And cooking up some more popcorn.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:25 PM (C9pBZ)
447
Pretty much eveything's been said 3 or 4 times already.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (qUNWi)
Yeah at least. 5 times once Amy Schumer comes through here.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (qUNWi)
Yeah at least. 5 times once Amy Schumer comes through here.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:25 PM (xuouz)
448
weft, I disagree. I think that if Apple handled this carefully or did it in-house, it could be done without compromising everyone's phone.
Posted by: gts109 at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (KIvt1)
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (evdj2)
450
They cannot however, force insurance companies to provide that product;"
Awe, that's so cute. Now bake me a cake.
Awe, that's so cute. Now bake me a cake.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (C9pBZ)
451
Well I'll error for liberty before I error for national security, or God forbid error on the sacred precepts of diction and syntax.
Technically we can't tell how well your fingers are pronouncing what they're typing.
Technically we can't tell how well your fingers are pronouncing what they're typing.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (1xUj/)
452
421
Yes he was. And what a compounded tragedy it will be if the government
not only allowed his terrorism (because they refuse to target muslims
that they have reasonable cause to target) but them used that terrorism
as the emergency they were looking for to abrogate all citizen's fourth
amendment right to be secure in their person and possessions.
Preach on brother
Yes he was. And what a compounded tragedy it will be if the government
not only allowed his terrorism (because they refuse to target muslims
that they have reasonable cause to target) but them used that terrorism
as the emergency they were looking for to abrogate all citizen's fourth
amendment right to be secure in their person and possessions.
Preach on brother
Posted by: Our Country Is Screwed at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (jxbfJ)
453
Okay we have people who say that Apple must protect this at all costs because they don't want to expose their customers and it's overly burdensome to do in the first place. And then you have Mcafee who says he can get into it in three weeks from scratch. Okay.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 05:27 PM (nS+hx)
454
Neither of us know what is on that phone. But this guy had no expectation of privacy on that phone. Apple could have helped the gov behind the scenes like they apparently have in the past. What they are doing now is a business move. Has nothing to do with privacy.
-------------
I'll stipulate everything you said was true. Still doesn't change anything for me. Apple is a private person. Being a corporation does not give the federal government the power to compel Apple to create a product it does not want to create.
-------------
I'll stipulate everything you said was true. Still doesn't change anything for me. Apple is a private person. Being a corporation does not give the federal government the power to compel Apple to create a product it does not want to create.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:27 PM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:28 PM (xuouz)
456
I must admit I did not see the forced enema thing coming.
But who does right?
Posted by: eleven
No one expects the Spanish Enema!
But who does right?
Posted by: eleven
No one expects the Spanish Enema!
Posted by: Monty Python at February 22, 2016 05:28 PM (FkBIv)
457
Pretty much eveything's been said 3 or 4 times already.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (qUNWi)
Some things bare repeating. Often.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (qUNWi)
Some things bare repeating. Often.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:28 PM (UnJ7w)
458
weft, I disagree. I think that if Apple handled this carefully or did it in-house, it could be done without compromising everyone's phone.
I agree. The code will be totally safe.
I agree. The code will be totally safe.
Posted by: Snichard Rowden at February 22, 2016 05:29 PM (2lndx)
459
compile and sign.
The signing is deliberately non-trivial time or personnel wise.
It WILL be extorted by neerdowell industries (a shadow government operation) the second the capability is created.
The PLA will crack Chinese Christian phones and put them in death camps with this while the FBI can't find a guy that practically foamed at the mouth in line at the airport.
The signing is deliberately non-trivial time or personnel wise.
It WILL be extorted by neerdowell industries (a shadow government operation) the second the capability is created.
The PLA will crack Chinese Christian phones and put them in death camps with this while the FBI can't find a guy that practically foamed at the mouth in line at the airport.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:29 PM (DL2i+)
460
Snichard, I'm not following you.
Posted by: gts109 at February 22, 2016 05:30 PM (KIvt1)
461
My take on this is that Apple does not give a shit about privacy or integrity as can be seen by how they sacrificed those in order to do business in China. On the other hand, they are still smarting from"the fappening" when someone hacked into Apple's servers where photos taken with iPhone automatically without the phone users' knowledge. The naked pictures of Jennifer Lawrence and other iPhone users that were posted to the internet reflected rather poorly on Apple's security. Being so secure that the FBI can't get in makes a different marketing statement.
In any event, if the FBI wants the information off of this iPhone or any other iPhone, they should set up an X-Prize competition with a cash prize for the winner and probably contracts to crack other iPhones for the top contenders.
In any event, if the FBI wants the information off of this iPhone or any other iPhone, they should set up an X-Prize competition with a cash prize for the winner and probably contracts to crack other iPhones for the top contenders.
Posted by: obnoxious ahole at February 22, 2016 05:30 PM (MpvuV)
462
The point is we're talking about a government that will literally ass-rape its citizens for some banned substances it doesn't like. And we want to trust them with the cryptographic keys to the kingdom.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 22, 2016 05:30 PM (dvuhZ)
463
FBI can't find a guy that practically foamed at the mouth in line at the airport.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:29 PM (DL2i+)
I resemble that remark!
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:29 PM (DL2i+)
I resemble that remark!
Posted by: FBI Top Men at February 22, 2016 05:30 PM (UnJ7w)
464
My takeaway is don't use a short passcode that can be brute forced.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (evdj2)
465
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:17 PM (mw8Dm)
If this government and it's minions hadn't shown so clearly that they are not to be trusted over the last 12 years or so, I would agree with you.
However, they have distinctly shown they are not to be trusted in fact it could be argued that they are actively trying to delegitimize normal dissent, deny people their rights for frivolous causes and will do or say anything to cover their ass when they get caught.
That they have yet to file any charges or brought in an indictment against Hillary Clinton is only the more recent example of the criminality and incompetence of at least this admin and all it's Departments.
So, NO you don't err on the side of National Security when the organs involved have cried wolf for years with no wolf on the horizon. And the wolves that do show up they had no clue about or didn't follow through for whatever reason. Most of the reasons being diversity and Political Correctness.
That this same Group (the FBI) does not proceed as zealously against CAIR and ISNA (2 known terrorist affiliated organizations) tells you all you need to know about how much they are worried about National Security.
I hate to tell you NGU but the Government you're talking about ceased to exist 14 years ago and it hasn't looked back.
We the citizens are now routinely looked at as suspects and criminals without justification and so accordingly we must assume the same attitude that the oppressed do about the security services of the nation they live in and that is they are geared towards and guided by their desire and aim of incarcerating anyone they decide they want to incarcerate regardless of their rights or the evidence or the facts.
They've chosen this dichotomy. This us versus them attitude.
They work for US but they act like we're the enemy. And so we must take steps to protect ourselves against our own government because they are our real threat and not enemies across the sea.
If this government and it's minions hadn't shown so clearly that they are not to be trusted over the last 12 years or so, I would agree with you.
However, they have distinctly shown they are not to be trusted in fact it could be argued that they are actively trying to delegitimize normal dissent, deny people their rights for frivolous causes and will do or say anything to cover their ass when they get caught.
That they have yet to file any charges or brought in an indictment against Hillary Clinton is only the more recent example of the criminality and incompetence of at least this admin and all it's Departments.
So, NO you don't err on the side of National Security when the organs involved have cried wolf for years with no wolf on the horizon. And the wolves that do show up they had no clue about or didn't follow through for whatever reason. Most of the reasons being diversity and Political Correctness.
That this same Group (the FBI) does not proceed as zealously against CAIR and ISNA (2 known terrorist affiliated organizations) tells you all you need to know about how much they are worried about National Security.
I hate to tell you NGU but the Government you're talking about ceased to exist 14 years ago and it hasn't looked back.
We the citizens are now routinely looked at as suspects and criminals without justification and so accordingly we must assume the same attitude that the oppressed do about the security services of the nation they live in and that is they are geared towards and guided by their desire and aim of incarcerating anyone they decide they want to incarcerate regardless of their rights or the evidence or the facts.
They've chosen this dichotomy. This us versus them attitude.
They work for US but they act like we're the enemy. And so we must take steps to protect ourselves against our own government because they are our real threat and not enemies across the sea.
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (Xo1Rt)
466
The PLA will crack Chinese Christian phones and put them in death camps with this while the FBI can't find a guy that practically foamed at the mouth in line at the airport."
Well, you know... can't make an omelet and all that.
Well, you know... can't make an omelet and all that.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (C9pBZ)
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (nS+hx)
468
Being a corporation does not give the federal government the power to compel Apple to create a product it does not want to create.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:27 PM (gmeXX)
I would argue it is not a product, but be that as it may, The Federal Government doesn't have that power,your right. But the Courts do. And I suspect they will uphold the Federal Court Decision. AND I think Apple knows they will and as I have said this is only a PR scam for them. But time will tell
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 05:27 PM (gmeXX)
I would argue it is not a product, but be that as it may, The Federal Government doesn't have that power,your right. But the Courts do. And I suspect they will uphold the Federal Court Decision. AND I think Apple knows they will and as I have said this is only a PR scam for them. But time will tell
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (mw8Dm)
469
I think that if Apple handled this carefully or did it in-house, it could be done without compromising everyone's phone.
Posted by: gts109
I think you mean if the FBI handled it carefully, and they are obviously not doing that.
The Feds are out of line here. Period.
Posted by: gts109
I think you mean if the FBI handled it carefully, and they are obviously not doing that.
The Feds are out of line here. Period.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (AA6QE)
470
I think that if Apple handled this carefully or did it in-house, it could be done without compromising everyone's phone.
Posted by: gts109 at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (KIvt1)
It seems to me that the evidence that's been presented here indicates that isn't the case. That the FBI had access to the phone and through either incompetence or malice reset the password and is now asking Apple to provide them with a tool to break into any and all phones in future. And that due to the process of building and testing that tool it won't be exclusively controlled by apple, but by the FBI and an unknown number of third parties.
This is where the key and lock analogy breaks down: software can be replicated and transmitted infinitely. If it exists, it will get out.
Oh and the FBI we're talking about is an organ of the same government where whole agencies are robbed of millions of pieces of extremely sensitive personal information on intelligence agents and their families, and where high ranking officials skirt security protocols and thumb their noses at the public about it.
And apparently they give people forced enemas too.
Fuck these guys.
Posted by: gts109 at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (KIvt1)
It seems to me that the evidence that's been presented here indicates that isn't the case. That the FBI had access to the phone and through either incompetence or malice reset the password and is now asking Apple to provide them with a tool to break into any and all phones in future. And that due to the process of building and testing that tool it won't be exclusively controlled by apple, but by the FBI and an unknown number of third parties.
This is where the key and lock analogy breaks down: software can be replicated and transmitted infinitely. If it exists, it will get out.
Oh and the FBI we're talking about is an organ of the same government where whole agencies are robbed of millions of pieces of extremely sensitive personal information on intelligence agents and their families, and where high ranking officials skirt security protocols and thumb their noses at the public about it.
And apparently they give people forced enemas too.
Fuck these guys.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:32 PM (xuouz)
471
Here's how this plays out if Apple complies:
1. Apple provides hack to Uncle Sam
2. Some time later, one or more iPhones with all the security in place gets hacked. Lawyers start a class action lawsuit against Apple for making a product that they knew could be hacked.
3. Apple loses market share because it's phone security is now consider to suck. iPhones make up 80% of its business so, even a 1- 2% drop will hit the share price hard. Shareholders sue because Apple created a hack that compromised the security of the product that shareholder dollars paid to develop.
4. The government eventually gets involved and sues Apple for advertising a secure product that they themselves proved is not secure by creating a hack.
Meanwhile, the government fails to screen hundred more "refugees" and other people from counties who hate us and they come here and kill dozens more people and blow shit up.
Why the fuck are we talking about Apple successfully doing its job instead of th government failing to perform the most obvious, minimal checks on people that want to kill us?
Apple's security works. The government's security does not. So let's sue Apple?
Yeah, that makes sense.
1. Apple provides hack to Uncle Sam
2. Some time later, one or more iPhones with all the security in place gets hacked. Lawyers start a class action lawsuit against Apple for making a product that they knew could be hacked.
3. Apple loses market share because it's phone security is now consider to suck. iPhones make up 80% of its business so, even a 1- 2% drop will hit the share price hard. Shareholders sue because Apple created a hack that compromised the security of the product that shareholder dollars paid to develop.
4. The government eventually gets involved and sues Apple for advertising a secure product that they themselves proved is not secure by creating a hack.
Meanwhile, the government fails to screen hundred more "refugees" and other people from counties who hate us and they come here and kill dozens more people and blow shit up.
Why the fuck are we talking about Apple successfully doing its job instead of th government failing to perform the most obvious, minimal checks on people that want to kill us?
Apple's security works. The government's security does not. So let's sue Apple?
Yeah, that makes sense.
Posted by: Damiano at February 22, 2016 05:32 PM (XItbt)
472
must admit I did not see the forced enema thing coming.
But who does right?
Posted by: eleven
----------------
The nozzle of death lurks everywhere..
But who does right?
Posted by: eleven
----------------
The nozzle of death lurks everywhere..
Posted by: Soona at February 22, 2016 05:32 PM (Fmupd)
473
The government ain't after farook's accomplices. Oh hell, no. They are after me and you. Don't doubt it for a minute, hoss.
Posted by: Eromero at February 22, 2016 05:32 PM (zLDYs)
474
*mumbles to self*
Maybe you guys would pay attention to what I say if I'd shaved lately. Or showered.
Anyway, again:
1. The FBI has the metadata. We know with whom that phone has communicated.
2. Have we seen any representation that they have tried and failed to obtain the contents of the data from the parties with whom that phone communicated? (In the mere six weeks' gap).
It seems they want to use a sledgehammer on a mouse mostly because they want a new sledgehammer
Maybe you guys would pay attention to what I say if I'd shaved lately. Or showered.
Anyway, again:
1. The FBI has the metadata. We know with whom that phone has communicated.
2. Have we seen any representation that they have tried and failed to obtain the contents of the data from the parties with whom that phone communicated? (In the mere six weeks' gap).
It seems they want to use a sledgehammer on a mouse mostly because they want a new sledgehammer
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:32 PM (1xUj/)
475
464 My takeaway is don't use a short passcode that can be brute forced.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (evdj2)
^^Smart man. May not ever be FBI-proof, but make it FBI-expensive.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (evdj2)
^^Smart man. May not ever be FBI-proof, but make it FBI-expensive.
Posted by: T at February 22, 2016 05:32 PM (1Dc9T)
476
The other weird thing going on however, is the extraordinary lengths the Government is going to.
They have the backup from 6 weeks before.
They have the META Data...
Yet are still apparently worried about fishing for info to go to great lengths to get it...
Question becomes.... why???
Do they believe... that there were other shooters? as the reports were from that day?
Do they KNOW they are missing something?
They have the backup from 6 weeks before.
They have the META Data...
Yet are still apparently worried about fishing for info to go to great lengths to get it...
Question becomes.... why???
Do they believe... that there were other shooters? as the reports were from that day?
Do they KNOW they are missing something?
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:33 PM (f7rv6)
477
And then you have Mcafee who says he can get into it in three weeks from scratch. Okay
McAfee is a nut. Really. Seriously, look it up.
This is not to say that the shooters didn't degrade their own security enough for a hacker to get in, or that there's not a security flaw that a good hacker might be able to exploit. But (a) there's no guarantee, and (b) I wouldn't put money down on McAfee being the hacker to do it without further screwing up the data on the phone.
Also, when it comes to "chain of custody" challenges, prosecutors are not going to want John McAfee's name to show up.
McAfee is a nut. Really. Seriously, look it up.
This is not to say that the shooters didn't degrade their own security enough for a hacker to get in, or that there's not a security flaw that a good hacker might be able to exploit. But (a) there's no guarantee, and (b) I wouldn't put money down on McAfee being the hacker to do it without further screwing up the data on the phone.
Also, when it comes to "chain of custody" challenges, prosecutors are not going to want John McAfee's name to show up.
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at February 22, 2016 05:33 PM (2lndx)
478
We interrupt this thread for an OT 'Brief Moment of Relaxation...'
Sun is out, blue sky, fluffy white clouds. Daddy Squirrel and Baby Squirrel are out stuffing their faces with corn from the seed mix I use. Momma Squirrel is taking a nap or something.
3 different bird species that I don't recognize are feeding too. Gotta get a bird book. This is new territory for me.
And that concludes your OT 'Brief Moment of Relaxation...'
You may now return to your regularly scheduled conversation on the Decline and Fall of the American Republic.
Thank you.
We interrupt this thread for an OT 'Brief Moment of Relaxation...'
Sun is out, blue sky, fluffy white clouds. Daddy Squirrel and Baby Squirrel are out stuffing their faces with corn from the seed mix I use. Momma Squirrel is taking a nap or something.
3 different bird species that I don't recognize are feeding too. Gotta get a bird book. This is new territory for me.
And that concludes your OT 'Brief Moment of Relaxation...'
You may now return to your regularly scheduled conversation on the Decline and Fall of the American Republic.
Thank you.
Posted by: Breathe In, Breathe Out at February 22, 2016 05:33 PM (+zqYj)
479
If Tim Cock doesn't wish to build a skeleton key for the iPhone, my guess is because he's worried about the stash of kiddie porn the FBI would find on his iPhone.
Posted by: angela urkel at February 22, 2016 05:33 PM (IDHFk)
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:33 PM (UnJ7w)
481
They cannot however, force insurance companies to provide that product;"
Awe, that's so cute. Now bake me a cake.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (C9pBZ)
Clever. That case could have stood a little appellate court action too.
Awe, that's so cute. Now bake me a cake.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:26 PM (C9pBZ)
Clever. That case could have stood a little appellate court action too.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:33 PM (OrI3J)
482
They've chosen this dichotomy. This us versus them attitude."
Ace should put this up as the "shorter version".
Ace should put this up as the "shorter version".
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:33 PM (C9pBZ)
483
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (Xo1Rt)
You make many good points. many I agree with. But most have nothing to do with this case. Your throwing everything into the stew and all it does is muddy the waters.
Anyway the Courts will decide soon enough
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (Xo1Rt)
You make many good points. many I agree with. But most have nothing to do with this case. Your throwing everything into the stew and all it does is muddy the waters.
Anyway the Courts will decide soon enough
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (mw8Dm)
484
>>> Like when the federal gov't interned American citizens with Japanese ancestory?
Saw posts about that on FB last week, the people posting implied we must make sure not to elect leaders that will do this ever again. Implied Trump will.
Yeah, which party was in charge of the camps? And which will no doubt be again? This is why they don't teach history, so dems don't haz a sad realizing their party is full of screw ups.
Saw posts about that on FB last week, the people posting implied we must make sure not to elect leaders that will do this ever again. Implied Trump will.
Yeah, which party was in charge of the camps? And which will no doubt be again? This is why they don't teach history, so dems don't haz a sad realizing their party is full of screw ups.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (hvf9s)
485
Pretty much eveything's been said 3 or 4 times already.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (qUNWi)
Yeah, I figured, but since we're to the "Does too!" "Does not!" part of the thread discussion, I thought I'd trot it out.
Using the word trot a lot. I like it. It's a funny-sounding word.
Trot.
Posted by: eleven at February 22, 2016 05:23 PM (qUNWi)
Yeah, I figured, but since we're to the "Does too!" "Does not!" part of the thread discussion, I thought I'd trot it out.
Using the word trot a lot. I like it. It's a funny-sounding word.
Trot.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (s5o+q)
486
>>The distinction between spending time and money finding a document already in your possession and fixing a problem of your sole creation strikes me as sophistry.
Perhaps you don't understand that those of us who feel that the government should have access to our "papers and effects" don't think there is a "problem of your sole creation". It's called a feature.
Perhaps you don't understand that those of us who feel that the government should have access to our "papers and effects" don't think there is a "problem of your sole creation". It's called a feature.
Posted by: Aviator at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (c7vUv)
487
FBI can't find a guy that practically foamed at the mouth in line at the airport.
Isn't it sufficiently obvious that we were told to stand down?
Isn't it sufficiently obvious that we were told to stand down?
Posted by: The FBI at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (ckvus)
488
Some things bare repeating. Often.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:28 PM (UnJ7w)
Some days you eat the bare.
And some days the bare eats you.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:28 PM (UnJ7w)
Some days you eat the bare.
And some days the bare eats you.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:35 PM (xuouz)
489
So tired of the old...if you believe in limited government you are FOR no government at all...leave the country if you HATE our government....blah blah blah.
We have a big government political party and their willing enablers in the media that now compare the founding fathers to terrorists while claiming actual murdering terrorists are just misunderstood.
The FBI seems to be incompetent. Maybe, just maybe we shouldn't give it EVEN MORE power.
Now add on every other alphabet agency to the list of departments that are out of control like the FBI...things are going in a bad direction in this country...towards no accountability at all of leftist government actions.
(does anyone really need a refresher on Fast and Furious, IRS targeting conservatives, the VA death "scandal" etc etc )
When big government targets you (whether you did something wrong or not) you are gonna get screwed. The founders knew this...so they wanted government LIMITED.
So maybe we should question authority a little bit more in this country...maybe we should talk more about limited government and checks on power...instead of the whole Obama/FBI/EPA etc etc. has your best interests at heart rubber stamp thingy.
I blame the leftist media/education lap dogs for most of this nonsense these days....they have been pushing big government savior for generations now...and even some good sensible people on this blog fall for the leftist narrative at times.
So tired of the old...if you believe in limited government you are FOR no government at all...leave the country if you HATE our government....blah blah blah.
We have a big government political party and their willing enablers in the media that now compare the founding fathers to terrorists while claiming actual murdering terrorists are just misunderstood.
The FBI seems to be incompetent. Maybe, just maybe we shouldn't give it EVEN MORE power.
Now add on every other alphabet agency to the list of departments that are out of control like the FBI...things are going in a bad direction in this country...towards no accountability at all of leftist government actions.
(does anyone really need a refresher on Fast and Furious, IRS targeting conservatives, the VA death "scandal" etc etc )
When big government targets you (whether you did something wrong or not) you are gonna get screwed. The founders knew this...so they wanted government LIMITED.
So maybe we should question authority a little bit more in this country...maybe we should talk more about limited government and checks on power...instead of the whole Obama/FBI/EPA etc etc. has your best interests at heart rubber stamp thingy.
I blame the leftist media/education lap dogs for most of this nonsense these days....they have been pushing big government savior for generations now...and even some good sensible people on this blog fall for the leftist narrative at times.
Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin @ Free Citizen 4 Now at February 22, 2016 05:35 PM (Qj6zv)
490
Yeah, I figured, but since we're to the "Does too!" "Does not!" part of the thread discussion, I thought I'd trot it out.
Using the word trot a lot. I like it. It's a funny-sounding word.
Trot.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (s5o+q)
Red Sox right fielder #7 Trot Nixon has maybe the greatest baseball name of all time.
Using the word trot a lot. I like it. It's a funny-sounding word.
Trot.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (s5o+q)
Red Sox right fielder #7 Trot Nixon has maybe the greatest baseball name of all time.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:35 PM (xuouz)
491
Snichard, I'm not following you.
Apple is not a single entity. All it takes is one employee with access to the code and an agenda, and the code is leaked.
Apple is not a single entity. All it takes is one employee with access to the code and an agenda, and the code is leaked.
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (2lndx)
492
Pig trotters is good eats.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (evdj2)
493
I would argue it is not a product, but be that as it may, The Federal Government doesn't have that power,your right. But the Courts do. And I suspect they will uphold the Federal Court Decision. AND I think Apple knows they will and as I have said this is only a PR scam for them. But time will tell
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (mw8Dm)
Software is intellectual property.
They are trying to force Apple to create...
That is like forcing Speech....
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:31 PM (mw8Dm)
Software is intellectual property.
They are trying to force Apple to create...
That is like forcing Speech....
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (f7rv6)
494
1. The FBI has the metadata. We know with whom that phone has communicated.
2. Have we seen any representation that they have tried and failed to obtain the contents of the data from the parties with whom that phone communicated? (In the mere six weeks' gap)."
Damnit man, quit with the common sense!
2. Have we seen any representation that they have tried and failed to obtain the contents of the data from the parties with whom that phone communicated? (In the mere six weeks' gap)."
Damnit man, quit with the common sense!
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (C9pBZ)
495
Looks like, based on what NGU posted, it's over. Apple addressed its concerns to the FBI, the FBI agreed that was reasonable, and the phone will be password unprotected. Held by Apple and destroyed.
The FBI gets what it wants, Apple gets what it wants (along with a couple hundred billions of free publicity) and the public should feel secure in knowing their phones are relatively safe from indiscriminate seizure and exposure.
The FBI gets what it wants, Apple gets what it wants (along with a couple hundred billions of free publicity) and the public should feel secure in knowing their phones are relatively safe from indiscriminate seizure and exposure.
Posted by: mega machines at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (fbovC)
496
Awe, that's so cute. Now bake me a cake.
Not exactly the same thing, although I believe that one is also unconstitutional.
In that case a company was refusing to sell a product they already made to someone against their will.
In this case, the product doesn't exist and they are being forced to create it.
Not exactly the same thing, although I believe that one is also unconstitutional.
In that case a company was refusing to sell a product they already made to someone against their will.
In this case, the product doesn't exist and they are being forced to create it.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (z4pSV)
497
Yeah, I figured, but since we're to the "Does too!" "Does not!" part of the thread discussion, I thought I'd trot it out.
Using the word trot a lot. I like it. It's a funny-sounding word.
Trot.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (s5o+q)
Red Sox right fielder #7 Trot Nixon has maybe the greatest baseball name of all time.
And yet we got through a whole thread of fish puns without mentioning trot lines.
Using the word trot a lot. I like it. It's a funny-sounding word.
Trot.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (s5o+q)
Red Sox right fielder #7 Trot Nixon has maybe the greatest baseball name of all time.
And yet we got through a whole thread of fish puns without mentioning trot lines.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (1xUj/)
498
I missed the part where the FBI screwed up the password on purpose to create this mess. I thought a county employee changed the password.
Also, why is it not technically feasible for Apple to handle cracking open this phone (and others like it) and then hand it back to the FBI with the same security features as before. Then, all the FBI knows is the new password, thus giving it access to the data on the phone? Perhaps that's not what they're seeking, but I think the gov't would accept that as a compromise.
Also, why is it not technically feasible for Apple to handle cracking open this phone (and others like it) and then hand it back to the FBI with the same security features as before. Then, all the FBI knows is the new password, thus giving it access to the data on the phone? Perhaps that's not what they're seeking, but I think the gov't would accept that as a compromise.
Posted by: gts109 at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (KIvt1)
499
Well I have no problem with that, but there will be a freaking tool to unlock the phone..Apple would still have to do that.
Not if Apple has a copy of the private encryption key.
Not if Apple has a copy of the private encryption key.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (jhqr1)
500
Yeah, which party was in charge of the camps? And which will no doubt be again? This is why they don't teach history, so dems don't haz a sad realizing their party is full of screw ups.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (hvf9s)
Sad and disgusting thing was George Takei supporting the party that personally interned him and his family but goes batshit crazy on the right because of gay marriage. Interesting time to be alive.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 05:34 PM (hvf9s)
Sad and disgusting thing was George Takei supporting the party that personally interned him and his family but goes batshit crazy on the right because of gay marriage. Interesting time to be alive.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (UnJ7w)
501
Hmmm...
Should we target companies who make a secure product target a specific demographic of people coming from specific places, demographics which have been exclusively responsible for multiple attacks on Americans and others around the world and the cause of 98% of every mass murder that has occurred on the past 20 years or more.
Yeah, let's target the company and it's security.
The U.S. Government: Keeping America safe by making things LESS secure.
Should we target companies who make a secure product target a specific demographic of people coming from specific places, demographics which have been exclusively responsible for multiple attacks on Americans and others around the world and the cause of 98% of every mass murder that has occurred on the past 20 years or more.
Yeah, let's target the company and it's security.
The U.S. Government: Keeping America safe by making things LESS secure.
Posted by: Damiano at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (XItbt)
502
Waterboard the iPhone. Waterboard the board of directors of Apple. Waterboard the Congress. Hell, waterboard every weird looking, burka draped America hating blow-job out there roaming the streets. Then we'll be getting things sorted out without all of the double-talk and hand wringing. We are up against murderers!
Posted by: goon at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (gy5kE)
503
Software is intellectual property.
They are trying to force Apple to create...
That is like forcing Speech....
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (f7rv6)
We'll know by the end of the month when the Court rules
They are trying to force Apple to create...
That is like forcing Speech....
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (f7rv6)
We'll know by the end of the month when the Court rules
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (mw8Dm)
504
>>>If Tim Cock doesn't wish to build a skeleton key for the iPhone, my guess is because he's worried about the stash of kiddie porn the FBI would find on his iPhone.
Posted by: angela urkel<<<
What's to stop the FBI from placing it there and then throwing his ass in jail?
Posted by: angela urkel<<<
What's to stop the FBI from placing it there and then throwing his ass in jail?
Posted by: Fritz at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (BngQR)
505
Software is intellectual property.
They are trying to force Apple to create...
That is like forcing Speech....
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (f7rv6)
There . . . Are . . . FOUR . . . passcodes!
They are trying to force Apple to create...
That is like forcing Speech....
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (f7rv6)
There . . . Are . . . FOUR . . . passcodes!
Posted by: Jean Luc Pomme at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (s5o+q)
506
And the encryption on the data....?
It's not difficult to pull data off of a flash drive once you have physical access to the chip. But if the data itself is encrypted, all you have is garbage.
I'm pretty sure Apple has the private encryption key.
It's not difficult to pull data off of a flash drive once you have physical access to the chip. But if the data itself is encrypted, all you have is garbage.
I'm pretty sure Apple has the private encryption key.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (jhqr1)
507
The security pro isions should not be implemented in a simple.fashion that can be rem'd out or identified in compiled binaries. The security posture is likely instantiated in a runtime generated array from the key itself. No key, no array, no boot.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (ssCrr)
508
Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin @ Free Citizen 4 Now at February 22, 2016 05:35 PM (Qj6zv)
Note... the Dept of EDUCATION, has a SWAT Team, that has done Raids in California (Turlock).
Note... People are now being arrested by US Marshalls in Texas, for not paying their student Loans.
This Government is out of control.
Note... the Dept of EDUCATION, has a SWAT Team, that has done Raids in California (Turlock).
Note... People are now being arrested by US Marshalls in Texas, for not paying their student Loans.
This Government is out of control.
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (f7rv6)
Posted by: Mortimer at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (TY4TN)
510
I blame the leftist media/education lap dogs for most of this nonsense these days....they have been pushing big government savior for generations now...and even some good sensible people on this blog fall for the leftist narrative at times.
Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin @ Free Citizen 4 Now at February 22, 2016 05:35 PM (Qj6zv)
Yeah it's in the air. It's a cultural aesthetic that's been repeated so many times, shoehorned into so many aspects of our society, that it's in many cases undetectable. The justifications for it are so well-worn they don't even register as dogma, and leftists don't even feel compelled to examine or question them.
Institutional racism? It's affirmative action.
Affirmative
Action
So self-evidently propaganda it's actually funny. Except it's deadly serious.
We may, in fact, be oh so totally f*cked.
Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin @ Free Citizen 4 Now at February 22, 2016 05:35 PM (Qj6zv)
Yeah it's in the air. It's a cultural aesthetic that's been repeated so many times, shoehorned into so many aspects of our society, that it's in many cases undetectable. The justifications for it are so well-worn they don't even register as dogma, and leftists don't even feel compelled to examine or question them.
Institutional racism? It's affirmative action.
Affirmative
Action
So self-evidently propaganda it's actually funny. Except it's deadly serious.
We may, in fact, be oh so totally f*cked.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (xuouz)
511
And yet we got through a whole thread of fish puns without mentioning trot lines."
Well, nice opening a can of worms there...
Well, nice opening a can of worms there...
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (C9pBZ)
512
Not if Apple has a copy of the private encryption key.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (jhqr1)
???
If they have that, then they have been lying all along
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (jhqr1)
???
If they have that, then they have been lying all along
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (mw8Dm)
513
If the iphone belonged to one of the Bundys, Apple wold have no issues.
What did Al, Peg, Kelly, of Grand Master B ever do to Apple?
What did Al, Peg, Kelly, of Grand Master B ever do to Apple?
Posted by: Paladin (Moderately Nefarious) at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (LTquJ)
514
Not exactly the same thing, although I believe that one is also unconstitutional.
In that case a company was refusing to sell a product they already made to someone against their will.
In this case, the product doesn't exist and they are being forced to create it.
I doubt the case was over an off the shelf cake. It was over a contract to make a future cake.
In that case a company was refusing to sell a product they already made to someone against their will.
In this case, the product doesn't exist and they are being forced to create it.
I doubt the case was over an off the shelf cake. It was over a contract to make a future cake.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (evdj2)
515
And yet we got through a whole thread of fish puns without mentioning trot lines.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (1xUj/)
Trot's about the sam as salmon.
GAR!
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (1xUj/)
Trot's about the sam as salmon.
GAR!
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:40 PM (s5o+q)
516
And yet we got through a whole thread of fish puns without mentioning trot lines.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (1xUj/)
My brain is fast but not malleable.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (1xUj/)
My brain is fast but not malleable.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:40 PM (xuouz)
517
Posted by: mega machines at February 22, 2016 05:37 PM (fbovC)
Nowhere does it say the phone will be kept by Apple.
It also doesn't address any of the other legal issues.
Nowhere does it say the phone will be kept by Apple.
It also doesn't address any of the other legal issues.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 05:41 PM (z4pSV)
518
Gts, precedent.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 05:41 PM (ssCrr)
519
B-E-S-U-R-E-T-O-D-R-I-N-K-Y-O-U-R-O-V-A-L-T-I-N-E
Posted by: Count de Monet at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (JO9+V)
520
Yeah, which party was in charge of the camps? And which will no doubt be again? This is why they don't teach history, so dems don't haz a sad realizing their party is full of screw ups.
Whenever a leftist drags out the line: "The US is the only country to use nukes on civilians", I love pointing out the POTUS at the time was a Dem.
You know if a Republican had done that they wouldn't blame "the US", they'd blame the GOP.
Whenever a leftist drags out the line: "The US is the only country to use nukes on civilians", I love pointing out the POTUS at the time was a Dem.
You know if a Republican had done that they wouldn't blame "the US", they'd blame the GOP.
Posted by: bonhomme at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (jhqr1)
521
It seems they want to use a sledgehammer on a mouse mostly because they want a new sledgehammer
And one for every future mouse. Because you might hide your cheese from them Mr. tax-unit.
And one for every future mouse. Because you might hide your cheese from them Mr. tax-unit.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (DL2i+)
522
You know, if Ace really cared about us, he'd come in about now and save us with a new post.
Maybe one of the mythical, legendary Floating Open Posts.
Or a Floating Auxiliary Post, perhaps.
Maybe one of the mythical, legendary Floating Open Posts.
Or a Floating Auxiliary Post, perhaps.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (s5o+q)
523
>>> Sad and disgusting thing was George Takei supporting the party that personally interned him and his family but goes batshit crazy on the right because of gay marriage. Interesting time to be alive.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (UnJ7w)
Supposedly he did a musical about his experience in the camps. I'm guessing no FDR bits in there to ruin the narrative.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (UnJ7w)
Supposedly he did a musical about his experience in the camps. I'm guessing no FDR bits in there to ruin the narrative.
Posted by: LizLem at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (hvf9s)
524
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:36 PM (C9pBZ)
Now that's funny to me. People are arguing privacy issues and then want to know the details of the FBIs investigation because , I guess , their right to know. Yes yes not exactly the same thing but close enough that I personally see a humorous inconsistency.
Now that's funny to me. People are arguing privacy issues and then want to know the details of the FBIs investigation because , I guess , their right to know. Yes yes not exactly the same thing but close enough that I personally see a humorous inconsistency.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (nS+hx)
525
I doubt the case was over an off the shelf cake. It was over a contract to make a future cake.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (evdj2)
I don't think that new cake was going to have any new features that the company was going to have to invent.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (evdj2)
I don't think that new cake was going to have any new features that the company was going to have to invent.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 05:43 PM (z4pSV)
526
The security pro isions should not be implemented in a simple.fashion that can be rem'd out or identified in compiled binaries. The security posture is likely instantiated in a runtime generated array from the key itself. No key, no array, no boot.
If that's the case, a hack isn't possible at all, and Apple isn't arguing that, which they surely would. The FBI isn't asking for a key to decrypt the data. They are asking that the 10 fail wipe be commented out so they can brute force it. That routine is most probably in the OS and could be commented out.
At least that's what I'm reading.
If that's the case, a hack isn't possible at all, and Apple isn't arguing that, which they surely would. The FBI isn't asking for a key to decrypt the data. They are asking that the 10 fail wipe be commented out so they can brute force it. That routine is most probably in the OS and could be commented out.
At least that's what I'm reading.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:43 PM (evdj2)
527
Maybe one of the mythical, legendary Floating Open Posts.
There was too much cheese in the morning thread and hardly any fiber.
No way a post would float.
There was too much cheese in the morning thread and hardly any fiber.
No way a post would float.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:43 PM (1xUj/)
528
It seems they want to use a sledgehammer on a mouse mostly because they want a new sledgehammer
And one for every future mouse. Because you might hide your cheese from them Mr. tax-unit."
Exactly so. Anyone believing this is all about "that one phone only" is... charming.
And one for every future mouse. Because you might hide your cheese from them Mr. tax-unit."
Exactly so. Anyone believing this is all about "that one phone only" is... charming.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:43 PM (C9pBZ)
529
Not exactly the same thing, although I believe that one is also unconstitutional.
In that case a company was refusing to sell a product they already made to someone against their will.
In this case, the product doesn't exist and they are being forced to create it.
=======
I doubt the case was over an off the shelf cake. It was over a contract to make a future cake.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (evdj2)
A reporter came into memories pizza and asked the owners if they would cater a hypothetical gay wedding. This reporter was straight and there was no specific gay wedding asking the pizza place (lol) to cater their hypothetically fabulous wedding.
Yeah I'd say that's a bad example. Unless you're talking about a different store?
In that case a company was refusing to sell a product they already made to someone against their will.
In this case, the product doesn't exist and they are being forced to create it.
=======
I doubt the case was over an off the shelf cake. It was over a contract to make a future cake.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:39 PM (evdj2)
A reporter came into memories pizza and asked the owners if they would cater a hypothetical gay wedding. This reporter was straight and there was no specific gay wedding asking the pizza place (lol) to cater their hypothetically fabulous wedding.
Yeah I'd say that's a bad example. Unless you're talking about a different store?
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:43 PM (xuouz)
530
Now that's funny to me. People are arguing privacy issues and then want to know the details of the FBIs investigation because , I guess , their right to know. Yes yes not exactly the same thing but close enough that I personally see a humorous inconsistency.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (nS+hx)
People have Rights...
Governments have Responsibilities and Powers.
Apples... oranges...
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (nS+hx)
People have Rights...
Governments have Responsibilities and Powers.
Apples... oranges...
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 22, 2016 05:44 PM (f7rv6)
531
B-E-S-U-R-E-T-O-D-R-I-N-K-Y-O-U-R-O-V-A-L-T-I-N-E
Posted by: Count de Monet at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (JO9+V)
LOL!
A crummy commercial!?!
Posted by: Count de Monet at February 22, 2016 05:42 PM (JO9+V)
LOL!
A crummy commercial!?!
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 05:44 PM (z4pSV)
532
If the Republicans want to play in Silicon Valley's money machine, they should offer Tim Cook transactional immunity on this issue in support of a dog and pony show up on the Hill.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (ssCrr)
533
I'm leaving now, horde.
Tell any idiots that post here this evening they're stupid, and tell them that from me.
Tell any idiots that post here this evening they're stupid, and tell them that from me.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (xuouz)
534
People are arguing privacy issues and then want to know the details of
the FBIs investigation because , I guess , their right to know.
I thought Contrarian Asshole Monday was next month.
huh.
the FBIs investigation because , I guess , their right to know.
I thought Contrarian Asshole Monday was next month.
huh.
Posted by: Mortimer at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (TY4TN)
535
Apple is not a single entity. All it takes is one employee with access to the code and an agenda, and the code is leaked.
All it takes is for them to crack open the idea of creating it and some Chinese security goon will demand it or production will stop.
All it takes is for them to crack open the idea of creating it and some Chinese security goon will demand it or production will stop.
Posted by: DaveA at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (DL2i+)
536
We'll know by the end of the month when the Court rules
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (mw8Dm)
And we all know the Court has infallibility built right in, kind of like the Pope.
The Court, being of the government, and government being of power, will rule for the government and power.
Wishing it won't denies more than a century of decisions to the contrary.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:38 PM (mw8Dm)
And we all know the Court has infallibility built right in, kind of like the Pope.
The Court, being of the government, and government being of power, will rule for the government and power.
Wishing it won't denies more than a century of decisions to the contrary.
Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (kKHcp)
537
I don't think that new cake was going to have any new features that the company was going to have to invent.
Apple doesn't have to invent anything to fulfill the request either.
Apple doesn't have to invent anything to fulfill the request either.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (evdj2)
538
I find it hard to trust either party in this. The Feds will most likely abuse any skeleton key-type access they are given, without bothering with warrants and all that old stuff. And Apple's principled stand is almost surely selective; it's hard to believe that they'd be putting up this fight had the shooters been, say, white Christians attacking an abortion clinic or LGBT event. Or that they haven't already handed stuff like this over to the Chinese, to avoid being shut out of that market.
Posted by: Stu-22 at February 22, 2016 05:46 PM (RMOpc)
539
So, the CIA, the FBI, and the KGB decide to settle, once and for all, the question of who was best at finding spies.
They go to the UN, and a neutral delegate comes up with an idea.
He takes a photograph of a rabbit that he's released into a forest, without saying which forest, and gives a copy of the picture to each agency.
The CIA recruits squirrels and birds on every continent as spies, collects the data, runs it through a supercomputer, and concludes that there is no rabbit, and never was one.
The FBI makes an approximate identification of the forest, based on the trees in the background. They go there, set it on fire, shoot everything that comes running out, and announce that the rabbit was killed resisting arrest.
The KGB take the photo, and send three men into the nearest woods. They emerge a few minutes later. A bear in chains, badly beaten, is heard to scream "All right, all right! You caught me! I'm the rabbit."
As this nation descends into anarcho-tyranny, Soviet humor becomes more an more appropriate.....
They go to the UN, and a neutral delegate comes up with an idea.
He takes a photograph of a rabbit that he's released into a forest, without saying which forest, and gives a copy of the picture to each agency.
The CIA recruits squirrels and birds on every continent as spies, collects the data, runs it through a supercomputer, and concludes that there is no rabbit, and never was one.
The FBI makes an approximate identification of the forest, based on the trees in the background. They go there, set it on fire, shoot everything that comes running out, and announce that the rabbit was killed resisting arrest.
The KGB take the photo, and send three men into the nearest woods. They emerge a few minutes later. A bear in chains, badly beaten, is heard to scream "All right, all right! You caught me! I'm the rabbit."
As this nation descends into anarcho-tyranny, Soviet humor becomes more an more appropriate.....
Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 22, 2016 05:46 PM (lutOX)
540
If the Republicans want to play in Silicon Valley's money machine, they should offer Tim Cook transactional immunity on this issue in support of a dog and pony show up on the Hill."
That would require some level of "smarts", thus eliminating most of the GOPe...
That would require some level of "smarts", thus eliminating most of the GOPe...
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:46 PM (C9pBZ)
541
I think a lot of the misunderstanding on this thread is because of an ignorance of technology. I have an elementary understanding of coding. As far as I understand even if Apple gave them the info on the phone the FBI could go back and do forensics on the phone and software to be able to break the encryption on the phones. I don't think other posters get this. They think Apple can simply extract the info and give the phone back without any harm being done to the whole encryption process. What do I know? I'm just another random Moron posting on a Very Smart Military Blog.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:46 PM (UnJ7w)
542
I thought Contrarian Asshole Monday was next month.
huh.
Posted by: Mortimer at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (TY4TN)
No, it wasn't.
(Obligatory)
huh.
Posted by: Mortimer at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (TY4TN)
No, it wasn't.
(Obligatory)
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 05:47 PM (s5o+q)
543
And we all know the Court has infallibility built right in, kind of like the Pope.
The Court, being of the government, and government being of power, will rule for the government and power.
Wishing it won't denies more than a century of decisions to the contrary.
Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (kKHcp)
And your point?
The Court, being of the government, and government being of power, will rule for the government and power.
Wishing it won't denies more than a century of decisions to the contrary.
Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (kKHcp)
And your point?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:47 PM (mw8Dm)
544
I'm leaving now, horde.
Tell any idiots that post here this evening they're stupid, and tell them that from me.
*scrolls, scrolls, scrolls*
Think I'll follow you out.
Tell any idiots that post here this evening they're stupid, and tell them that from me.
*scrolls, scrolls, scrolls*
Think I'll follow you out.
Posted by: Mortimer at February 22, 2016 05:47 PM (TY4TN)
545
Twho key things:
1. I don't think it's possible to "load" new software on this phone (iPhone 5c) without unlocking it with the pin/passcode first. AND knowing the AppleID Without those, to get data off this phone, you would have to disassemble the phone and attach the processor and memory chip onto a chip tester to read the stored data and then decrypt it on another computer - a process that could take hundreds of years with current technology.
2. What the FBI wants is a general backdoor they can use to get into any phone at any time. They are using the high-profile nature of this case to press the issue and issue vast amounts of fear, uncertainty and doubt on national security. This phone likely has little useful information pertaining to this investigation. Much is known about the calls, texts, and web access performed with it. It was a company phone and the two terrorists used their own personal phones mainly - which the FBI already has extracted information from.
1. I don't think it's possible to "load" new software on this phone (iPhone 5c) without unlocking it with the pin/passcode first. AND knowing the AppleID Without those, to get data off this phone, you would have to disassemble the phone and attach the processor and memory chip onto a chip tester to read the stored data and then decrypt it on another computer - a process that could take hundreds of years with current technology.
2. What the FBI wants is a general backdoor they can use to get into any phone at any time. They are using the high-profile nature of this case to press the issue and issue vast amounts of fear, uncertainty and doubt on national security. This phone likely has little useful information pertaining to this investigation. Much is known about the calls, texts, and web access performed with it. It was a company phone and the two terrorists used their own personal phones mainly - which the FBI already has extracted information from.
Posted by: Bob at February 22, 2016 05:47 PM (y7d6y)
546
Pick one:
Do you want your data to be secure or do you want your have intentional back doors build in to your data security?
I'll take the first option and live with the consequence that 1 in hundreds of millions of devices out there will have information on it that someone wants to kill me and I'll never know about it.
Do you want your data to be secure or do you want your have intentional back doors build in to your data security?
I'll take the first option and live with the consequence that 1 in hundreds of millions of devices out there will have information on it that someone wants to kill me and I'll never know about it.
Posted by: Damiano at February 22, 2016 05:47 PM (XItbt)
547
Tell any idiots that post here this evening they're stupid, and tell them that from me.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (xuouz)
*Cracks knuckles*
Oh it's on!
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (xuouz)
*Cracks knuckles*
Oh it's on!
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:48 PM (UnJ7w)
548
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:46 PM (UnJ7w)
They do NOT want Apple to decrypt the data
They do NOT want Apple to decrypt the data
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:48 PM (mw8Dm)
549
Posted by: Mortimer at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (TY4TN)
As I tell everyone, feel free to skip my posts.
As I tell everyone, feel free to skip my posts.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 22, 2016 05:48 PM (nS+hx)
550
Apple doesn't have to invent anything to fulfill the request either.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (evdj2)
Not paying attention are you?
Please go read the EFF document linked above.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:45 PM (evdj2)
Not paying attention are you?
Please go read the EFF document linked above.
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 05:49 PM (z4pSV)
551
>>And Apple's principled stand is almost surely selective; it's hard to believe that they'd be putting up this fight had the shooters been, say, white Christians attacking an abortion clinic or LGBT event.
Don't know that they wouldn't, but I doubt it. It would be a failure in their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders and would open them to lawsuits.
Don't know that they wouldn't, but I doubt it. It would be a failure in their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders and would open them to lawsuits.
Posted by: Aviator at February 22, 2016 05:49 PM (c7vUv)
552
What the FBI wants is a general backdoor they can use to get into any phone at any time. They are using the high-profile nature of this case to press the issue and issue vast amounts of fear, uncertainty and doubt on national security. "
This, plus the general "hey, we're on the same side of things here" play.
This, plus the general "hey, we're on the same side of things here" play.
Posted by: anon a mouse - now with more puppy! at February 22, 2016 05:49 PM (C9pBZ)
553
Maybe one of the mythical, legendary Floating Open Posts.
There was too much cheese in the morning thread and hardly any fiber.
No way a post would float.
That post isn't coming out for three days.
There was too much cheese in the morning thread and hardly any fiber.
No way a post would float.
That post isn't coming out for three days.
Posted by: rickb223 at February 22, 2016 05:49 PM (TUUTu)
554
I think a lot of the misunderstanding on this thread is because of an ignorance of technology.
Everyone on this thread is a technological genius compared to He of the Hair Weasel:
"What I think you ought to do is boycott Apple until such time as they give that security number," he said.
"How do you like that? I just thought of that!"
Everyone on this thread is a technological genius compared to He of the Hair Weasel:
"What I think you ought to do is boycott Apple until such time as they give that security number," he said.
"How do you like that? I just thought of that!"
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:49 PM (1xUj/)
555
131 They should waterboard the guy who works for the county until he remembers the new password.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (cXiMR)
--
I vote for this solution.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 04:23 PM (cXiMR)
--
I vote for this solution.
Posted by: @votermom at February 22, 2016 05:50 PM (cbfNE)
556
Nowhere does it say the phone will be kept by Apple. It also doesn't address any of the other legal issues.Posted by: db
See #372. Read it slowly. Apple creates the software and has control over it. Which means they can destroy it. Okay, perhaps not the actual phone, but in destroying the software they create to bypass the password they brick the phone.
Yeah, perhaps they need of go back and ensure the phone gets destroyed. I see your point. Correct you are.
See #372. Read it slowly. Apple creates the software and has control over it. Which means they can destroy it. Okay, perhaps not the actual phone, but in destroying the software they create to bypass the password they brick the phone.
Yeah, perhaps they need of go back and ensure the phone gets destroyed. I see your point. Correct you are.
Posted by: mega machines at February 22, 2016 05:50 PM (fbovC)
557
And your point?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:47 PM (mw8Dm)
Point is a lot of us will never agree with you on this issue. Ever.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 22, 2016 05:47 PM (mw8Dm)
Point is a lot of us will never agree with you on this issue. Ever.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:51 PM (UnJ7w)
558
Nood
Posted by: Skip at February 22, 2016 05:51 PM (l+OuH)
559
Grumps, Apple isn't describing the details of their security archeticuture, who h is good. The EFF article describes the security chip as controlling the delay on attempts; I would be shocked if the count wasn't baked in the asic as well.
The EFF article.alludes to another problem - why would the revised ode be able to run old keys?
The EFF article.alludes to another problem - why would the revised ode be able to run old keys?
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 05:52 PM (ssCrr)
560
This is not unlike the government forcing banks to lend to minorities that they knew were not financially able to pay back the loan.
When the subprime loan market went belly up, the government was forced(so they said) to bail out the banks that they forced to make these risky loans. All while the players in the government used the banks as political pawns .
Hillary and Bernie are still using them. They supported forcing subprime loans on banks so they could crow about equality and helping "poor people", then have used those same banks as examples of inequality and bank bailout.
Imagine the fun they will have with Apple. And I believe Tim Cook and others at Apple have noticed the history with the banks and are not going to put themselves in the same position.
When the subprime loan market went belly up, the government was forced(so they said) to bail out the banks that they forced to make these risky loans. All while the players in the government used the banks as political pawns .
Hillary and Bernie are still using them. They supported forcing subprime loans on banks so they could crow about equality and helping "poor people", then have used those same banks as examples of inequality and bank bailout.
Imagine the fun they will have with Apple. And I believe Tim Cook and others at Apple have noticed the history with the banks and are not going to put themselves in the same position.
Posted by: Jen the original at February 22, 2016 05:52 PM (gOsh1)
561
Guess Apple should satisfy our liberty right to have secure encrypted radio next, and sell that to ISIS.
And Raytheon can start selling fuses to Iran.
It's a right.
And Raytheon can start selling fuses to Iran.
It's a right.
Posted by: Cbris Balsz at February 22, 2016 05:52 PM (4zXgv)
562
And just so we don't forget: the real purpose for the Patriot Act was to give us a way to throw a couple of old ranchers in jail for five years, for starting a backdraft to stop a grass fire.
Posted by: Notsothoreau at February 22, 2016 05:52 PM (Lqy/e)
563
"How do you like that? I just thought of that!"
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:49 PM (1xUj/)
"Unless of course you have video evidence of me saying the opposite." "It would still be terrific if I said it though". "Did I mention Ted Cruz is a real nasty guy?"
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:49 PM (1xUj/)
"Unless of course you have video evidence of me saying the opposite." "It would still be terrific if I said it though". "Did I mention Ted Cruz is a real nasty guy?"
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 22, 2016 05:53 PM (UnJ7w)
564
Btw I think it's BS that someone completely forgot the 4 digit code that they changed it to. They would at least remember what it starts with, or what possible code they put in.
Posted by: @votermom at February 22, 2016 05:54 PM (cbfNE)
565
anon @ 511- You don't put worms on a trot line. You use 1 month old pig testicles. Port or starboard will work equally well.
Posted by: Eromero at February 22, 2016 05:55 PM (zLDYs)
566
"Unless of course you have video evidence of me saying the opposite." "It would still be terrific if I said it though". "Did I mention Ted Cruz is a real nasty guy?"
Posted by: Arson Wells
Heh.
I have been known to parody Teh Donald. The above was a direct quote though. He really thinks that apple just has a number that they could give the FBI to punch in.
Posted by: Arson Wells
Heh.
I have been known to parody Teh Donald. The above was a direct quote though. He really thinks that apple just has a number that they could give the FBI to punch in.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 22, 2016 05:56 PM (1xUj/)
567
Not paying attention are you?
Please go read the EFF document linked above.
I'm not seeing it. Would you mind c&p'ing the part that you think is relevant?
Please go read the EFF document linked above.
I'm not seeing it. Would you mind c&p'ing the part that you think is relevant?
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:56 PM (evdj2)
568
The EFF article describes the security chip as controlling the delay on attempts; I would be shocked if the count wasn't baked in the asic as well.
Then Apple should argue that the request is not feasible. That seems a no-brainer to me.
Then Apple should argue that the request is not feasible. That seems a no-brainer to me.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:58 PM (evdj2)
569
This should not be confusing because of technology.
Let's say you have valuable paper documents that you want to keep secure. You shop for a safe to store said documents.
Safe #1 allows you set the combination and has no known way to get in other than that combination. If you forget it, you're screwed.
Safe #2 allows you to set the combination but has a separate master key so a locksmith or whomever else has a master key can open it.
Question 1. Which safe do you consider to be more secure?
Question 2: Should the government have the authority to compel Safe #1 manufacturer to make their safe less secure?
Let's say you have valuable paper documents that you want to keep secure. You shop for a safe to store said documents.
Safe #1 allows you set the combination and has no known way to get in other than that combination. If you forget it, you're screwed.
Safe #2 allows you to set the combination but has a separate master key so a locksmith or whomever else has a master key can open it.
Question 1. Which safe do you consider to be more secure?
Question 2: Should the government have the authority to compel Safe #1 manufacturer to make their safe less secure?
Posted by: Damiano at February 22, 2016 05:58 PM (XItbt)
570
I'm not seeing it. Would you mind c&p'ing the part that you think is relevant?
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:56 PM (evdj2)
Link:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
See the section:
Would it be easy for Apple to write and test the requested cracking software?
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 05:56 PM (evdj2)
Link:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
See the section:
Would it be easy for Apple to write and test the requested cracking software?
Posted by: db at February 22, 2016 06:06 PM (z4pSV)
571
By which I mean were a court to order Phil Zimmerman to decrypt a PGP encrypted message, he could properly argue that he could not, and that that inability is built into the code. If Apple is in the same situation, they should just say that.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 06:06 PM (evdj2)
572
Grump, if i were Apple they get a laconic answer, in binary. I would give them nothing, especially technical design details.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 06:08 PM (ssCrr)
573
Link:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
See the section:
Would it be easy for Apple to write and test the requested cracking software?
That's what I've been reading. I guess you mean this statement: " Apple would also want to apply rigorous testing to any code it is signing."
That's an inference of the authors, not a statement of fact. If they never intent for the signed code to be propagated, it's just like lab software. So no, I don't find this persuasive.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
See the section:
Would it be easy for Apple to write and test the requested cracking software?
That's what I've been reading. I guess you mean this statement: " Apple would also want to apply rigorous testing to any code it is signing."
That's an inference of the authors, not a statement of fact. If they never intent for the signed code to be propagated, it's just like lab software. So no, I don't find this persuasive.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 06:10 PM (evdj2)
574
I just think that if it were a technical issue akin to unscrambling an egg they would say so.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 06:13 PM (evdj2)
575
Why would Apple say anything? Any information about their archeticuture is privileged AND playing this game is massive PR points.
The EFF stuff is informed speculation, but makes sense. Having a delay incremented by an unsuccessful count sounds like a feature I would implement in hardware.
The EFF stuff is informed speculation, but makes sense. Having a delay incremented by an unsuccessful count sounds like a feature I would implement in hardware.
Posted by: Jean at February 22, 2016 06:23 PM (ssCrr)
576
Question 1. Which safe do you consider to be more secure?
Question 2: Should the government have the authority to compel Safe #1 manufacturer to make their safe less secure?
Safe #1 should not be available for sale during the War on Terror. Anybody trying to sell that thing should forfeit their property to the wartime government.
Question 2: Should the government have the authority to compel Safe #1 manufacturer to make their safe less secure?
Safe #1 should not be available for sale during the War on Terror. Anybody trying to sell that thing should forfeit their property to the wartime government.
Posted by: Cbris Balsz at February 22, 2016 06:25 PM (4zXgv)
577
The EFF stuff is informed speculation, but makes sense. Having a delay incremented by an unsuccessful count sounds like a feature I would implement in hardware.
I agree. I was thinking that computation itself was cpu intensive and slow, by design. They could say 'No Brah, can't help you with the delay part of the request', but that would, or could, be separate from the 10 fail wipe code.
I agree. I was thinking that computation itself was cpu intensive and slow, by design. They could say 'No Brah, can't help you with the delay part of the request', but that would, or could, be separate from the 10 fail wipe code.
Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at February 22, 2016 06:29 PM (rwI+c)
578
So if this phone is County property and supposed to be used in conjunction with official business,wouldn't the County provide an access code?
And wouldn't those codes be on file?
So if this phone is County property and supposed to be used in conjunction with official business,wouldn't the County provide an access code?
And wouldn't those codes be on file?
Posted by: irongrampa at February 22, 2016 06:32 PM (P/8aq)
579
Hahaha, NGU must be up for promotion. What about usin' somma dose new-fangled dental instrumenats on thia here apple phone? Does the Rear Admiral in charge of dental work read thisa hear smart militair bloggy Thang?
Posted by: Jake from Planet State Farm at February 22, 2016 06:45 PM (msVAP)
580
e-verify - damn cons always trying to make me do govt.s investigative work.
Simple case: a low-life criminal creates a way that they know will assist other criminals in accomplishing their crimes. Govt. asks that criminal how he did it, he refuses to comply. Only way he don't go to jail is if he requests 5th amendment protection. How soon does Cook make that request?
Simple case: a low-life criminal creates a way that they know will assist other criminals in accomplishing their crimes. Govt. asks that criminal how he did it, he refuses to comply. Only way he don't go to jail is if he requests 5th amendment protection. How soon does Cook make that request?
Posted by: doug at February 22, 2016 06:56 PM (Y7fRE)
581
"Only way he don't go to jail is if he requests 5th amendment protection. How soon does Cook make that request?"
or he makes a big donation.
or he makes a big donation.
Posted by: Clinton Foundation at February 22, 2016 07:10 PM (cXiMR)
582
Based on Tim Cook's disregard for the truth in other matters, I am inclined to agree with Ace that Apple is lying. I do think the FBI should have just asked for an unbroken phone; they are going to need more than a name in a phone for a prosecution anyway, so I don't think the evidentiary issues matter. I think the best the FBI will get is leads and for that, an unbroken phone is fine. One thing I think Ace may have missed in this story is the phone belonged to the shooter's employer, and even in Cali, the employee has no reasonable expectation of privacy in equipment provided by his employer (so employer can read your emails on the company computer, go through your work desk, etc.) The employer, from what I hear, has no objection to the FBI getting into the phone.
I hate the smug left wing jackwagons at Apple and Twitter so much (with Facebook coming in a close 3rd, and google/alphabet right after that) that I wish I could short them out of existence. Maybe the Zero Hedge guys can figure it out. Twitter may go bankrupt on its own without being pushed over the edge; management can't figure out how to monetize the platform and no buyer has shown up yet. From what I hear on the business channel, instagram is much more popular and profitable than Twitter.
I hate the smug left wing jackwagons at Apple and Twitter so much (with Facebook coming in a close 3rd, and google/alphabet right after that) that I wish I could short them out of existence. Maybe the Zero Hedge guys can figure it out. Twitter may go bankrupt on its own without being pushed over the edge; management can't figure out how to monetize the platform and no buyer has shown up yet. From what I hear on the business channel, instagram is much more popular and profitable than Twitter.
Posted by: the other coyote at February 22, 2016 07:11 PM (yK44T)
Posted by: Mariobot at February 22, 2016 07:12 PM (zmW4B)
584
#578
I think the flaw in your argument is that the phone belonged to a county government, which is not competent enough to keep any access codes handy.
I think the flaw in your argument is that the phone belonged to a county government, which is not competent enough to keep any access codes handy.
Posted by: the other coyote at February 22, 2016 07:14 PM (yK44T)
585
Like the "crime" the FBI implies is inherent in joining a Tea Party group. Or the "crime" of bad though against protected groups?
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (OrI3J)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Oh, that hit me right in the funny bone.
Wait - you're not being facetious?
See, if it requires a court order compliant with the Fourth Amendment to get to the information, it's being done for a reason deemed legitimate not by the executive branch only, but by the judicial branch as well. That whole checks and balances thing.
The stuff you're thinking of is when the IRS decides on its own to take your information - which it has a statutory duty to treat as both confidential and apolitical - and to use it against you with absolutely no statutory authority or judicial review.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 22, 2016 05:09 PM (OrI3J)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Oh, that hit me right in the funny bone.
Wait - you're not being facetious?
See, if it requires a court order compliant with the Fourth Amendment to get to the information, it's being done for a reason deemed legitimate not by the executive branch only, but by the judicial branch as well. That whole checks and balances thing.
The stuff you're thinking of is when the IRS decides on its own to take your information - which it has a statutory duty to treat as both confidential and apolitical - and to use it against you with absolutely no statutory authority or judicial review.
Posted by: stuiec at February 22, 2016 07:15 PM (eetvJ)
586
Fock the FBI.
Posted by: Geoffrey at February 22, 2016 07:24 PM (LoRcb)
587
Now that this is public, Apple would lose millions of their corporate valuation if it bends (institutional inability to control their share volatility). That way it can sue the USG for damages large enough that they get future tax credits. Apple isn't vainly principled or stupid. It's a rational corporation. They have a fiduciary responsibility to return to investors, even if the end cost is passed to the American taxpayer who finds a government that can't control its expensive requests.
Posted by: August Balthazar at February 22, 2016 07:55 PM (33FvV)
588
Funds not finds*
Posted by: August Balthazar at February 22, 2016 08:01 PM (33FvV)
589
An excellent explanation of the technical issues here:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-apple-iphone-case
Posted by: Pecker Wood at February 22, 2016 08:19 PM (XaxMd)
590
No Agenda posits, fairly convincingly, that the FBI could have already had access to this phone, because it was government property in the first place and managed like many corporate phones are (so the department could have just reset the password and opened it), but they have been waiting for basically a convenient dead terrorist to get this software they want from Apple, because they have something like 175 phones they are sitting on where they can't get into them, and they really want to, so they are using this particular situation as leverage to get Apple to create software that will ultimately allow them to get into any iPhone similarly protected. So they are in a sense asking for a backdoor: they are asking for a special set of backdoor hacking tools that can be used to brute force open locked iPhones without erasing the content. I'm not sure how possible this is, but I'm guessing the goal is really not to get into this particular phone, but other phones that weren't the property of a government office and centrally managed.
Posted by: Kevin S. Willis at February 22, 2016 09:02 PM (zRrl2)
591
What does compensation have to do with it? This isn't a 5th A issue.
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (gmeXX)
More like 3rd A issue. Who wants the government living in your house?
Posted by: SH at February 22, 2016 04:11 PM (gmeXX)
More like 3rd A issue. Who wants the government living in your house?
Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 22, 2016 09:56 PM (O4NI/)
592
I for one refuse to be stampeded into acquiescing in the totalitarian Panopticon State by the "what do you have to hide" class of argument.
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (s5o+q)
"What do you have to hide?"
"None of your friggin' business."
BAM!! WHAM!! POW!!
Posted by: filbert at February 22, 2016 04:21 PM (s5o+q)
"What do you have to hide?"
"None of your friggin' business."
BAM!! WHAM!! POW!!
Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 22, 2016 10:16 PM (O4NI/)
593
353 Another angle is that it is a thirteenth amendment issue:
Posted by: chris at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (BDnev)
What's the over/under on that one showing up sometime within the next six months?
Posted by: chris at February 22, 2016 05:05 PM (BDnev)
What's the over/under on that one showing up sometime within the next six months?
Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 22, 2016 11:10 PM (O4NI/)
594
Incorrect on the chain-of-custody issue. So long as the FBI and Apple document the chain-of-custody there is no issue. Law enforcement routinely gives evidence to private parties, usually experts in some area, for analysis. If they document the custody and what is done, there is no problem. Apple can easily take custody of the phone, create the necessary programing, apply it to the phone, then return the phone to the FBI. Apple is lying when they claim this is a backdoor for every iPhone.
Posted by: Federale at February 23, 2016 11:08 AM (vC6Bj)
595
Every vehicle recall is a command for a vendor to invent something that doesn't exist.
Posted by: Chris Balsz at February 23, 2016 11:39 AM (/sHci)
596
The government doesn't have or need a special draft board for doctors, AFAICT. I know almost nobody will see this, but it's a decent story.
When I was just enrolling in medical school, I saw an elderly (over 80) dermatologist for a minor skin condition. He worked four mornings and one afternoon a week, just to keep his head in the game and have something to do.
He regaled me with some of his best stories for the better part of an hour. Sorry, other patients. Anyway, one of them involved his induction into the Navy Medical Corps.
When he was a medical student, Pearl Harbor happened. The next morning, representatives of the Army and Navy medical corps were in class and invited all of them to join one of the two. Of course, there was no requirement that any of them do so... but anyone who didn't would be eligible to be drafted as a buck private. Curiously, every member of the class joined one or the other that very day.
When I was just enrolling in medical school, I saw an elderly (over 80) dermatologist for a minor skin condition. He worked four mornings and one afternoon a week, just to keep his head in the game and have something to do.
He regaled me with some of his best stories for the better part of an hour. Sorry, other patients. Anyway, one of them involved his induction into the Navy Medical Corps.
When he was a medical student, Pearl Harbor happened. The next morning, representatives of the Army and Navy medical corps were in class and invited all of them to join one of the two. Of course, there was no requirement that any of them do so... but anyone who didn't would be eligible to be drafted as a buck private. Curiously, every member of the class joined one or the other that very day.
Posted by: Devilbunny at February 23, 2016 05:35 PM (Phc5G)
Processing 0.06, elapsed 0.0707 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0246 seconds, 604 records returned.
Page size 378 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.
MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Real Clear Politics
Gallup
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Primary Document: The Audio
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Top Top Tens
Democratic Forays into Erotica
New Shows On Gore's DNC/MTV Network
Nicknames for Potatoes, By People Who Really Hate Potatoes
Star Wars Euphemisms for Self-Abuse
Signs You're at an Iraqi "Wedding Party"
Signs Your Clown Has Gone Bad
Signs That You, Geroge Michael, Should Probably Just Give It Up
Signs of Hip-Hop Influence on John Kerry
NYT Headlines Spinning Bush's Jobs Boom
Things People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did You Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?"
Signs that Paul Krugman Has Lost His Frickin' Mind
All-Time Best NBA Players, According to Senator Robert Byrd
Other Bad Things About the Jews, According to the Koran
Signs That David Letterman Just Doesn't Care Anymore
Examples of Bob Kerrey's Insufferable Racial Jackassery
Signs Andy Rooney Is Going Senile
Other Judgments Dick Clarke Made About Condi Rice Based on Her Appearance
Collective Names for Groups of People
John Kerry's Other Vietnam Super-Pets
Cool Things About the XM8 Assault Rifle
Media-Approved Facts About the Democrat Spy
Changes to Make Christianity More "Inclusive"
Secret John Kerry Senatorial Accomplishments
John Edwards Campaign Excuses
John Kerry Pick-Up Lines
Changes Liberal Senator George Michell Will Make at Disney
Torments in Dog-Hell
Greatest Hitjobs
The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat