Posted on 02/18/2016 11:59:30 AM PST by DUMBGRUNT
The California-based tech giant unlocked dozens of iPhones at federal investigators’ requests between 2008 and 2015, a prosecutor argued last year.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Most of the good lines have already been used, only 26 letters and hundreds of years?
Everybody knows it is good to recycle!
So I did.
Any software installed on an iPhone has to have an Apple key on it. The FBI can’t do what it wants to do here on their own.
Unless you can demonstrate that the 70 other phones they unlocked were all unlocked with the EXACT SAME PROCESS, then *YOU* can't demonstrate a parallel.
"The exact same thing" is not a requirement. The salient point is the fact that Apple achieved the legally requested result through whatever process they deemed viable to accomplish it.
I look at this a completely different way. When you are looking for a rats nest, you follow the rat home. I think its very possible, that they already have all the information from the phone, know how to get it from all active users, and all they have to do, is get close to an open phone, not turned off, and they can clone the contents by just getting close to the turned on phone.
I think that APPLE is helping create a false flag. The bad guys think that Apple will not help the govt, so go on their way, fat dumb and happy, all the while we are gathering intel.
Apple gets a good name for defending the small guy, the bad guys are giving up info without knowing it, and everybody wins.
The last thing the govt wants the bad guys to know is that they figured out how and are actively accumulating data. I think everybody forgets that when your IPhone is open and in use, your data can be captured by another phone, and duplicated. Its only when the phone is turned off, that you cannot remotely access data.
Phones can be turned on remotely as well. Law enforcement does this regularly to locate people with cell phones.
I hesitated to write this and read all the posts in this thread to see if anyone had thought of this, and did not see anything like it.
“Or the government is trying to bully Apple in the Court of Public Opinion to allow them a backdoor into all Apple phones, although they already have all the information they need.”
Horse puckey.
In an unusually detailed directive, Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym of the Federal District Court for the District of Central California ordered Apple to provide reasonable technical assistance to the F.B.I. in unlocking the phone. That assistance should allow investigators to bypass or erase the auto-erase function on the phone, among other steps, she wrote.
This is as specific a request as you could probably ask for and completely in line with the 4th amendment.
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.
If it is Apples position that they will not comply, the law then pursues whatever course they see as necessary. This isn’t about what Apple can or won’t do, anymore than if I am home and don’t want them to come into my house. I can fight or comply. That’s MY choice, but to say Apple has a right not to comply is just wrong. Saying “I don’t have it” does not costitute proof that you do not. And even if you do not, as a coporate citizen and member of society, asked to help track down mass murderers, why would you NOT do it?
Something seriously wrong with that. Unless it’s an ad to guarantee big sale in the Jihadi and Cartel business. Which Apple may want o capture. Cartels alone have more people than some countires.
Then your argument is that our legal system has broken down, not that Apple should refuse to comply with it.
If you are making the argument that our legal system has broken down, then you will find me to be a receptive listener.
If you are making the argument that Apple should be above the law, then you will find me uninterested in your assertion.
I don’t believe my other words are misleading.
In order to comply, Apple must expend its effort in creating something that does not currently exist (per their statements), and which does not alter the actual encryption. Further, if estimates of the time required to break the encryption that I have seen are correct, they must invest significant effort in brute forcing the phone if they wish to not make the stripped down OS directly available to the government.
If, perchance, the patched OS fails and the phone gets wiped, who would be held liable? If Apple is trying to decrypt, and something breaks, and the phone becomes useless, will Apple be blamed and perhaps even prosecuted?
This is not the same as simply applying an existing key, it is the commanded deconstruction of the engineering Apple built in, and commandeering Apple resources for a long-term battle to decrypt.
We disagree, Friend, but I appreciate your arguing in a forthright manner. I hope I have achieved the same.
Apple is technically correct if you call changing a couple of lines of code "Creating a New Operating system."
It is a deceitful method of concealing just how easy it is. Saying "create a new operating system" implies horrific levels of difficulty, but the truth is, every time they compile their latest code, they create a "new" operating system.
Once again, Technically correct, but grossly misleading.
What is your assessment of how easy it would be based on?
The fact that the development of software which is capable of counting to number "10" does not normally incorporate complex issues of coding.
From the article, a link to this article
WILL MY IPHONE BE AFFECTED?
While the only iPhone directly impacted by the order is the one that belonged to the terrorist, security and tech experts worry it could create a slippery slope and weaken security for all smartphone users.
The order mandated the software would be used only once - but there's no way to ensure it couldn't be duplicated, possibly by hackers, cybersecurity expert Vanita Pandey told the Daily News Wednesday.
The difference between you and me is that you trust the Government.
Exactly. Apple's assistance is necessary. It cannot reasonably be done any other way.
If Apple wants to be the gate keeper, let them be the gate keeper, but when a Judge tells them to "open the gate" they better D@mn well open the gate!
"We do it the hard way."
So why can't the county simply give Apple their permission to open it? Has anyone bothered to ask them?
I do not believe this is true.
I think that APPLE is helping create a false flag.
I DO believe this is true.
Yup.
Call a Wahhhhbulance. It just isn't fair. They are disobeying a lawful order. The courts will decide. Don't like the Constitution? Get it changed.
You have a condescending stance for someone who doesn't understand the technology.
The FBI is seeking a key that will open not just the phone in question, but all iPhone 5Cs.
You should read up on the NSA snooping, and the things that Edward Snowden had to say about what these assclowns are up to.
Danny's addressing a technical problem, not a question of Constitutional law. And the mass murderers were chased down hours after their crime, and not by the FBI.
Now we would like to see what was so important to encrypt, who he was talking to and what other mass murderers may be tracked down by accessing THIS phone.
That information resides with the cell carrier as well as within the phone's own encrypted logs. What's stored in the phone is one question. With whom the phone communicated is a whole other question, unprotected by the phone's encryption.
Once again, how do you know that defeating a much-touted, built-in security system requires merely "changing a couple of lines of code"? You seem to have convinced yourself that it only involves the part that counts how many attempts are made, but what's that based on? Have you written any commercial-grade security software?
Playing the devil’s advocate here, what’s to prevent Apple from FUBAR’ing the phone, (purely by accident, dontcha know), and just handing the phone back to the FBI , telling them that they couldn’t crack it?
Exactly right! Im litteraly shocked at the total lack of understanding of limited government principles on this board. I had to check the URL to see if I ended up on MSNBC somehow
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.