Posted on 02/17/2016 4:20:38 AM PST by John W
Take it to the Supreme Court so those schmucks can set precedent and create new law now that Alito is gone. We are so screwed.
C’mon. It was the equivalent of yelling “first!” Plus, this one actually had context. I’ve never mentioned it once before because I’m not one of those guys to toss something in there without context - this one was too good to pass up.
No one in the NSA or FBI can’t unlock the Phone.
You posted a double negative, and I’m not quite sure what you’re intending to say.
Oops I meant Scalia, long night plowing, coffee hasn’t kicked in yet.
“Take it to the Supreme Court so those schmucks can set precedent and create new law now that Alito is gone.”
Sam Alito is gone?
If we ban Muslim immigration, we don’t have to worry about their iPhones.
Apple could break into this one phone, provide the data to the FBI, and give them nothing more. In the past, gov’t had to get a court order requiring a phone company to perform a wire tap, but the phone company performed all the necessary steps and did not give gov’t access to their central office switching equipment.
The article is mixing what is needed from this one phone with requiring Apple to give gov’t the capability of decrypting every iphone, which definitely should not happen.
See correction
Exactly! I got that, in fact that's why I added the "smiley" to my comment -- I wasn't whining or complaining (as some earlier replies suggested) -- I was just giving you a good-natured retort.
Besides, your comment made me laugh -- that's why I thought to respond.
There is no backdoor. That’s the point. The government is basically ordering them to find a way to hack their own device.
Bingo. In the case of the SB terrorists, the FBI could have used the already open social media platform Twitter to find these terrorists *before* they struck. The government is more obsessed with knowing every private thought of every person than they are with actually catching terrorists.
One might also wonder about the competency of the FBI in the SB terrorist case as this agency didn't bother to secure the apartment of the terrorists, which was latter compromised evidence-wise by reporters.
Why not just give the Feds. the unencrypted data, and not the method for unlocking the “backdoor”? It’s a fricking dead Terrorist for heavens sake.
You said it.......keeping them out of our country is a good move.
One would think that a faggot CEO would approve of a "backdoor" entry into one of their products.
Only for putting stuff in, not for taking it out.
It is a travesty of nature and rationality that a Homosexual should be running a major company and imposing his perverted notions on the rest of us through his position of influence.
The queers have made it about being queer, so they don't get to turn it on an off as it suits their preference.
I will once again point out, that in 1787 we hanged them. In 1950 we tossed them into mental institutions. Now we celebrate their sickness and proclaim them "normal."
February 16, 2016A Message to Our Customers
The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers. We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.
This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.
The Need for Encryption
Smartphones, led by iPhone, have become an essential part of our lives. People use them to store an incredible amount of personal information, from our private conversations to our photos, our music, our notes, our calendars and contacts, our financial information and health data, even where we have been and where we are going.
All that information needs to be protected from hackers and criminals who want to access it, steal it, and use it without our knowledge or permission. Customers expect Apple and other technology companies to do everything in our power to protect their personal information, and at Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding their data.
Compromising the security of our personal information can ultimately put our personal safety at risk. That is why encryption has become so important to all of us.
For many years, we have used encryption to protect our customers’ personal data because we believe it’s the only way to keep their information safe. We have even put that data out of our own reach, because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business.
The San Bernardino Case
We were shocked and outraged by the deadly act of terrorism in San Bernardino last December. We mourn the loss of life and want justice for all those whose lives were affected. The FBI asked us for help in the days following the attack, and we have worked hard to support the government’s efforts to solve this horrible crime. We have no sympathy for terrorists.
When the FBI has requested data that’s in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we’ve offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal.
We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.
Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.
The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.
The Threat to Data Security
Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.
In today’s digital world, the “key” to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.
The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.
The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.
We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.
A Dangerous Precedent
Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority.
The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by “brute force,” trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.
The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.
Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government.
We are challenging the FBI’s demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications.
While we believe the FBI’s intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.
Tim Cook
My understanding is that a Federal Judge has issued an Order to Apple to unlock that phone. My understanding of the constitutional requirements is that a search order signed by a Judge is a constitutionally valid order.
We accept this methodology when it comes to our homes and our property, and I do not see any compelling reason why the same methodology should not also apply to data storage systems such as a Phone.
This current flap is not about the government having easy access to all devices. It is about getting court-ordered access by this device used by Terrorists who are also dead, and so no longer have any right to privacy anyway.
I'm sure Apple is trying to present it as being about everyone else, because when people do not wish to comply with something, they try to throw up roadblocks in any manner they are able. In this case, they are trying to stir up political opposition by scaring everyone else.
It is a dodge, and nothing else.
The data that they are looking for is only on the phone, because the phone wasn’t backing up to iCloud. The only way to get the data is to hack into the phone.
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.