Apple is fighting the FBI
-
@Dashrender said:
Apparently there are another dozen cases very similar to this one in adjudication right now. The FBI picked this one to push hard on because they knew they could get the most public support when trying to take down
terroristfreedom.FTFY
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Then the government will probably sue them to stop it from being released.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Agreed - the current problem is that the phone (this old version, not sure it applies to iPhone 6 and newer) will update even when locked.
-
@BRRABill said:
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Then the government will probably sue them to stop it from being released.
Much harder to do.
-
@BRRABill said:
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Then the government will probably sue them to stop it from being released.
And Apple has no requirement to tell anyone that they have done it. The government would need to make a slew of new laws to try to head this off at the pass. Once it is released, too late.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BRRABill said:
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Then the government will probably sue them to stop it from being released.
And Apple has no requirement to tell anyone that they have done it. The government would need to make a slew of new laws to try to head this off at the pass. Once it is released, too late.
I was just about to say the same thing. Laws are the only way this could be prevented.
And if they build it into the hardware so it can't be updated via software, then it can't be changed through an software update either. -
WOW!
“If a person is an American citizen or resident, their rights may be appropriately determined by U.S. law, and it seems appropriate for U.S. law to permit the extraterritorial and unilateral reach of a search warrant to that person’s data regardless of where it is located,”
https://www.petri.com/microsoft-exec-testifies-that-legal-conflicts-are-undermining-tech-gains
Wow oh wow I don't agree. For example, the US Gov't can't force Switzerland to hand over bank accounts etc, why would data be any different?
-
@Dashrender said:
Wow oh wow I don't agree. For example, the US Gov't can't force Switzerland to hand over bank accounts etc, why would data be any different?
Bank accounts ARE data.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Wow oh wow I don't agree. For example, the US Gov't can't force Switzerland to hand over bank accounts etc, why would data be any different?
Bank accounts ARE data.
Again, thank you for making my point.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
What is your stance of the UK? They are moving toward this too, if they don't already have it.
UK is in terrible shape. They will follow the US into total disaster. The spying five are all less than free and have citizenry that has never taken freedom very seriously. Societies use the word "free" a lot when they want to hide the fact that they aren't very free.
The Five Eyes are strapping their countries in for a scary ride. We're at the stage where mom is trying to strap her screaming and kicking child into a car seat... Though the twist of the story is that isn't her kid, the car is a creepy van, and mom is a previous offender. Total kidnapping of freedom and it's disgusting to witness.
-
@BBigford Agreed. Here's more fuel for the fire (at least mine)
"Whoopsie!" does not cut it somehow. Best part is they don't even know what they sent because they deleted our copy right after. Criminal negligence or intent, your choice.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/spy-canada-electronic-metadata-1.3423565
-
Kind of what you guys were discussing yesterday, that Apple realizes they are the weak point here, and want to fix that.
"Apple increases the security measures within iOS with every major software release, but yesterday news broke that the company is working to remove the current passcode-free recovery option from future iPhones, while it wants to begin encrypting iPhone backups on iCloud.
Why make these moves? The company has been ordered to create software to allow the FBI to access data stored on the iPhone but — were these new changes implemented — it would be unable to do that. In effect, the company has identified itself as a potential weak point in the security process because the FBI can compel it to provide data, thus, removing its ability to do that, mitigates that risk. Or at least it forces the FBI to find new ways to get inside devices."
-
Kudos to Apple.
-
facebook and Google have stepped in to side with Apple as well today.
-
-
You see the FBI inadvertently caused this problem themselves?
Nice...
-
Apple is using First Amendment as defense to not do this.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
The All Writs Act only authorizes a federal court. The FBI attempting to use it appears to be an attempt to openly inform the US public that the FBI is now seeing itself as both the executor AND the creator of laws. This looks like a fundamental subjugation of the US legal system. It would mean that the police have more authority than the law.
In practice anymore they do.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/technology/apple-fbi-hearing-unlock-iphone.html
U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhoneSeems like someone else is helping FBI unlocking the phone!
-
I've heard suppositions where some people believe that the government can already do this, and that this whole case is a smoke screen to have people believe their devices are secure.
Personally, it feels like the FBI's backing off with a claim of a third party is every bit as likely that they feel they are loosing the case and want to back away from this before precedent is set.
