Apple Refusal to Unlock iPhone on San Bernardino Terrorist Incident vs Justice Department.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2016 10:31 PM GMT
    I have been watching the news on this topic and personally I can not believe it has come to this. It is the same old stance of protecting the rights of the individual versus society. This is nothing new that we have not heard or has been documented in our history. I understand the point that Apple is trying to make of letting the genie out of the box and leaving its customers data and information open to others to get, but it goes larger than this in my opinion.

    When a person commits a crime against society and there is clear evidence from witnesses, video, etc., at what point we continue to protect those rights versus society and the population at large. Should those rights not be rescinded in view of the crimes they have committed against society?

    ISIS and other terrorists groups are laughing at this and I am sure happy that this is occurring. By the time they do open the data, it be too late - persons of interest would have vanished, sleepers terrorist would have moved on, etc.

    Anyway, I am just angry at the stupidity of our nation sometimes, but if I was the Attorney General I would go after Apple with full force and relentless after them and especially Tim Cook.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/business/justice-department-calls-apples-refusal-to-unlock-iphone-a-marketing-strategy.html?smtyp=cur&_r=0
  • Fireworkz

    Posts: 606

    Feb 21, 2016 11:40 PM GMT
    There is a line here.
    It comes to the point where all a government needs to do is declare someone a terrorist with little evidence and have access to their private files.
    It will be like living in cold war Russia or East Germany.

    If Apple capitulates in the US they will have to do the same in China and other countries which have more of a record of human rights abuses.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2016 11:44 PM GMT
    uombroca saidI have been watching the news on this topic and personally I can not believe it has come to this. It is the same old stance of protecting the rights of the individual versus society. This is nothing new that we have not heard or has been documented in our history. I understand the point that Apple is trying to make of letting the genie out of the box and leaving its customers data and information open to others to get, but it goes larger than this in my opinion.

    When a person commits a crime against society and there is clear evidence from witnesses, video, etc., at what point we continue to protect those rights versus society and the population at large. Should those rights not be rescinded in view of the crimes they have committed against society?

    ISIS and other terrorists groups are laughing at this and I am sure happy that this is occurring. By the time they do open the data, it be too late - persons of interest would have vanished, sleepers terrorist would have moved on, etc.

    Anyway, I am just angry at the stupidity of our nation sometimes, but if I was the Attorney General I would go after Apple with full force and relentless after them and especially Tim Cook.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/business/justice-department-calls-apples-refusal-to-unlock-iphone-a-marketing-strategy.html?smtyp=cur&_r=0

    This iphone thing is just a red herring. Previous to the San Bernardino shootings, the government has been battling technology companies to allow a backdoor or secret key to bypass encryption. The San Bernardino shooting came at the right time and the feds are using it as an excuse to push their agenda.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2016 7:20 PM GMT
    a Canadian bank or an Asian retailer, foreign legitimate business will not buy less American technology if there is a back door.

    its a useless gesture in that Jailbreaking / rooting will become common, not the exception and Apple will loose control of their product.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 22, 2016 8:42 PM GMT
    Apple has been cooperating with the government for years as long as it was secret. The judge made this case public and Apple made a calculated business decision. In every privacy statement Apple is very clear that no matter what your privacy settings are Apple will collect everything your device and does and that Apple will do whatever it wants with the information.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 23, 2016 1:26 PM GMT
    http://www.pcworld.com/article/3035747/security/proper-device-management-could-have-prevented-the-whole-fbi-apple-fight.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 23, 2016 6:01 PM GMT
    paradox saidhttp://www.pcworld.com/article/3035747/security/proper-device-management-could-have-prevented-the-whole-fbi-apple-fight.html

    ^^ THIS ^^

    This is exactly what I've been saying to anyone that asks my opinion. If a business issues the equipment, it is the business' responsibility to manage it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 24, 2016 5:36 AM GMT
    JonSpringon said
    paradox saidhttp://www.pcworld.com/article/3035747/security/proper-device-management-could-have-prevented-the-whole-fbi-apple-fight.html
    ^^ THIS ^^
    This is exactly what I've been saying to anyone that asks my opinion. If a business issues the equipment, it is the business' responsibility to manage it.

    I think they're done with the phase 1 finger pointing as to whose fault it is. Now they're on to phase 2, trying to get the data.

    Since it's well known that Apple has stored all of that data on their servers and is using it for data mining and who knows what else, it doesn't seem unreasonable for the feds to ask for a copy of his data.

    The only reason Apple doesn't want to give it to them is that they've made a point of saying they "protect" the privacy of the iPhone users.

    In the end, as usual with Apple, it's about marketing and profits.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 24, 2016 5:59 AM GMT
    I'm not so sure.

    First, every thing we're hearing about this issue is being relayed by technically -illiterate reporters.

    Second, I think on balance, most of us are probably safer if governments/terrorists/criminals can't read the data on our phones when ever they want to.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 24, 2016 7:23 AM GMT
    It's a work phone. Not sure what they expect to find on it. When I turn mine back in, IT will assume I'm asexual and have no friends.


    Then, there's this:

    http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5645
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 24, 2016 4:22 PM GMT
    Jimib:
    "Apple has been cooperating with the government for years as long as it was secret. The judge made this case public and made a calculated business decision. In every privacy statement Apple is very clear that no matter what your privacy settings are Apple will collect everything your device and does and that Apple will do whatever it wants with the information. "

    This holds true for all the tech companies. Every app on your phone, computer, tablet, etc. is collecting your data no matter what privacy settings you put in place.

    That said, one way to look at this situation is like a diary. If the diary were written in code, it would up to the feds to break the code and decipher the diary entries. It would not be the responsibility of the diary or pen or pencil company, nor the friends and relatives of the writer. It is the feds' responsibility to break the code in less than 10 tries.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 24, 2016 9:02 PM GMT
    I'm missing a connection here. If Apple extracts the data for the FBI how does this automatically allow criminals and terrorists to get at encrypted phone data?
  • hebrewman

    Posts: 1367

    Feb 25, 2016 2:15 AM GMT
    I side with Apple. Support them 100%.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2016 7:24 AM GMT
    Lumpyoatmeal saidI'm missing a connection here. If Apple extracts the data for the FBI how does this automatically allow criminals and terrorists to get at encrypted phone data?


    For the most part, there is no difference between the three. Plenty of places you could be summarily executed for viewing this very web page. Don't forget Goebbels, Mao, Meese, et al. Utterly unthinkable that such... Persons could come to power. Except that they do.

    For that matter, the FBI has a longer history of committing crime and terrorism than they do of preventing it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2016 7:34 AM GMT
    mindgarden said
    Lumpyoatmeal saidI'm missing a connection here. If Apple extracts the data for the FBI how does this automatically allow criminals and terrorists to get at encrypted phone data?

    For the most part, there is no difference between the three. Plenty of places you could be summarily executed for viewing this very web page. Don't forget Goebbels, Mao, Meese, et al. Utterly unthinkable that such... Persons could come to power. Except that they do.
    For that matter, the FBI has a longer history of committing crime and terrorism than they do of preventing it.

    Yes, but I'm talking about today in the US. In the future if the US were to go down the rat hole and get some totalitarian government I don't think that today's laws are going to slow them down from taking away our freedoms.

    This kind of logic reminds me of the nutjobs that were hyperventilating over the RFID tags on merchandise in the stores; they were claiming that the government could use them to spy on our purchasing. One woman being interviewed on PBS radio even claimed that the government had the power to spy on us from 100 miles away using a web cam. If the nutjobs spew out enough buzz words it seems to convince a lot of people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2016 7:38 AM GMT
    Meese wasn't that long ago. In fact, the fucker is still running around loose. Trump, Cruz, and Rubio are currently running for president.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2016 8:41 AM GMT
    Well, like I said, if things go to hell in a hand basket they'll quickly change the laws to suit their needs. Look at the history of Germany leading up to WWII. If some crazy comes to power and wants to round us up and gas us they'll find the means quickly enough and today's laws will get tossed out in the blink of an eye.
  • jperfit

    Posts: 593

    Feb 25, 2016 9:06 AM GMT
    JonSpringon said
    paradox saidhttp://www.pcworld.com/article/3035747/security/proper-device-management-could-have-prevented-the-whole-fbi-apple-fight.html

    ^^ THIS ^^

    This is exactly what I've been saying to anyone that asks my opinion. If a business issues the equipment, it is the business' responsibility to manage it.



    I hope apple sticks to its guns, they do not(apple) work for the govt, the phones were given by the county, apple has nothing to do with how they manage their phones; its not apple fault if they didn't install admin rights so they would have control over all data with regards to each employee phone
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2016 3:09 PM GMT
    Does the existence of both proprietary and open-source code change the discussion?

    If the phone were run with open-source code, then an owner could rewrite any portion of the code to customize their phone, and the provider of the original open-source code wouldn't be liable for that legal change. But, if the code is proprietary (as with Apple, Android, Microsoft, etc.) does that change the responsibility of who provided the code?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2016 7:55 PM GMT
    CrabNebula saidDoes the existence of both proprietary and open-source code change the discussion?

    If the phone were run with open-source code, then an owner could rewrite any portion of the code to customize their phone, and the provider of the original open-source code wouldn't be liable for that legal change. But, if the code is proprietary (as with Apple, Android, Microsoft, etc.) does that change the responsibility of who provided the code?

    Android is open source:

    http://www.google.com/search?q=download+android+os

    But Apple's and Microsoft's phone/tablet operating systems are not.

    Modified versions of the Android system are readily available. For a while I was using Cyanogen on an old phone.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2016 8:00 PM GMT
    See this thread:

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/4185289

    What's at stake is not unlocking the phone but getting Apple to release this particular customer's data that lives on Apple's servers.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Feb 25, 2016 8:05 PM GMT
    They should unlock it. Terrorists have no constitutional rights. It is a fact that felons loose all rights. That is how we are able to give them the death penalty. The US can stop their sales here in America if it poses a threat to the country and in this case, it does.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2016 12:58 AM GMT
    Forcing Apple to break their software is wrong. It violates both their 1'st and 5'th Amendment Rights.

    Do you wish to be ordered to make an inferior product by The Government?

    Think...Clearly.

    If Apple is forced to break a product, then here's what happens...folks load phones with open source software. In open source, like LINUX, everyone can view the code, and, in fact, that's what makes LINUX so secure.

    This is a case of government grossly overstepping its bounds.

    Right now, every single one of your SMS/MMS messages is being captured and sent to the NSA for data mining...and, in fact, that has been done by secret courts, and secret grand juries, since 2001. It's wrong, and it violates the 4'th Amendment.

    NSA and Homeland Security want access to every traffic camera, every municipal camera, every drone that's hovering to run it through supercomputer farms for facial recognition. Do you WANT that level of snooping in your life?

    How about utility bill monitoring (another reality). Do you want the police coming if your AC bill is too high. They do it.

    At what point is it enough? Where does that snooping end. Don't we have a 4'th Amendment?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2016 1:04 AM GMT
    CrabNebula saidDoes the existence of both proprietary and open-source code change the discussion?

    If the phone were run with open-source code, then an owner could rewrite any portion of the code to customize their phone, and the provider of the original open-source code wouldn't be liable for that legal change. But, if the code is proprietary (as with Apple, Android, Microsoft, etc.) does that change the responsibility of who provided the code?


    If you use a gun to kill someone is the gun maker liable? The answer is no. Congress passed a law protecting them in 2007.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 26, 2016 6:02 AM GMT
    So I watch Tim Cook's (Apple CEO) interview last night with David Muir and I understand his rationale of Apple's unwillingness to comply with the FBI Justice Dept. To recap what I got from listening to the interview-

    * Apple would have to create in essence a software that would open every phone, not just the specific phone of the terrorist.

    * The danger of this software falling in the wrong hands (bad guys) and it goes contrary to what Apples has noted as primary safety to its customers and protection of their data. If FBI compels them to build this with this court order what else would the government ask Apple to do? Where does it stop?

    *Apple has cooperated with the Justice department and given them everything they have. The FBI as well as Apple is unsure if anything is still in the phone..nobody knows and will not know until the phone is opened.

    * FBI made a fatal error by not following Apple initial instruction that the phone could have been backed up to the icloud if the network at the home would have been still in place... plug the phone in an outlet in the home of the terrorist prior to dismantling the hardware/software at the terrorist house an allowing the iPhone to backup to the iCloud. Then Apple could have provided contents of the iCloud. However this was not followed.

    * Apple asking for a commission to be created to discuss the bigger issue in view that this is more than just a terrorist phone, it impacts a large issue.

    I understand better the issue now, but we have to come up with a solution that satisfies still protection of privacy data and how do we get information from a terrorist that uses our protection of privacy against us. The terrorist cells are laughing at us because of this.