Posted on 02/17/2016 8:40:52 AM PST by redreno
Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, Inc. turned down the FBI’s demand using a 1789 federal ordinance to build a “backdoor†into iPhones allowing law enforcement to defeat encryption as he explained in a “Customer Letter†this morning posted to the company’s website.
Apple’s letter kicks off the highest profile defense of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment we are likely to see in our lifetimes
(Excerpt) Read more at photographyisnotacrime.com ...
Why was an earlier version of this thread pulled?
Trump says Apple should open it for the FBI.
I don’t know. However, pulling articles off Freerepublic without a simple notice to the sender is the main reason why I’ll never donate $ to operate this site.
This was all to protect the phone data of ONE of the Fraud’s terrorist buddies. Betting they anticipated the huge pushback to EVERYONE, which makes everyone forget about the ONE PHONE in question, to still protect the Fraud’s BFF terrorists.
I bet if it was some politically incorrect group suspected of a crime and it turned out a suspect used an i-Phone and it might have clues, Apple would be eager to help.
“Trump says Apple should open it for the FBI.”
Just another example of Trump being clueless.
Courageous decision. I’m grateful.
“This was all to protect the phone data of ONE of the Fraud’s terrorist buddies. Betting they anticipated the huge pushback to EVERYONE, which makes everyone forget about the ONE PHONE in question, to still protect the Fraud’s BFF terrorists.”
Nope. Apple can’t recover messages on the iPhone any better than LE can. The FBI is asking for a future back door...none exists now.
It seems like there should be some middle ground that would be acceptable. For instance, if the FBI were to supply the phone to Apple, then Apple could return the decrypted content of that phone to the FBI. I doubt that anyone would defend the privacy of the terrorists.
Horseclinton.
Every once in a while, we read about lots of “important” people getting their phones hacked and their personal photos are plastered all over.
It can obviously be done, with or without Apple’s assistance.
This is all a smokescreen to protect Hussein’s terrorist BFFs.
It’s not Apple’s phone. It belongs to a dead mussie. I don’t think the 4th. would apply. It would be up to the phone’s owner through their lawyer to refuse.
You know, if I thought the intent of Homeland Security was to protect us, I wouldn’t have an issue here.
However, they refused to look into the Tsarnaev brothers when the Russians were screaming at us to do so. The San Bernadino killers were posting radical Islam intent in plain view on Facebook.
The fact is Homeland Security was too busy looking at Tea Party members and Obama’s enemies to actually protect the American people.
Tim Cook is going to jail until he purges his contempt for the FEDERAL court. He won’t like jail and will try to use Habeas Corpus to get released but the Judge will be well within the sanction rules in keeping him right there. After about a year, I expect him to fold. Who does Apple think it is? This is a known terrorist!!
You are assuming they use strong encryption, and don't disable the security by using a simple password or completely turning encryption off. I don't think most famous people are that smart about their electronic security.
Apple turned them down, so the Fraud can say, “Sorry, we ‘tried’”, and half of American voters and seemingly not a few freepers will be satisfied, if not happy.
Does the company have 4th amendment protection?
You left out, "It's For the Children."
FauxNews’ big headline:
‘TOO DANGEROUS’: Apple won’t hack San Bernardino killer’s iPhone
Problem solved for the Fraud.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.