Apple and National Security

http://nyti.ms/1Q1OpeO

If it were possible to hack into that one phone (was it Farook's) without creating a universal software-key for all Apple phones, then I would say Apple should comply with the subpoena. This (I think) would maintain the personal privacy of the larger public and provide valuable information for keeping the larger public safe from terrorists. On the downside it would not be so good for Apple's reputation and it would put wedge in the door making many us feel less secure in our privacy.

As Apple explains it, it is not possible to hack into just one phone. They would have to write software that is essentially a universal key. There would be no way to guarantee the security of key. Not only might law enforcement agencies use it in unwarranted ways, but it would inevitably leak into the public domain where criminals would use it to commit fraud, theft and other nefarious crimes.

One question is, is Apple correct? They're certainly between a rock and hard place. Most hard-ass-let's-carpet-bomb-'em-to-oblivion types are against anyone or anything that might provide protection for a terrorist. Libertarians, on the other knee, jerk the other way. Both are right wing stances. The rest of us are aware of the complexities and nuances of the issue.

Currently, I lean in favor of Apple (as if any action will depend upon my leaning - dickish or not) because I think the case they make is probably correct. Certainly if Apple writes a skeleton key, it will eventually end up in the hands of criminals. The risk of being a victim from illicit use of such a key is (I think) greater than the risk of being a victim of terrorism. The only problem with this argument is it relies on an assumption (Apple has to make a universal key to crack Farook's phone) that I'm taking on authority (Apple's). Another seemingly relevant question is: once the key is made, can all other phones be quickly updated by having customers download and install modified OS's that defeat the key?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Another seemingly relevant question is: once the key is made, can all other phones be quickly updated by having customers download and install modified OS's that defeat the key?

---

This is a good question. Or is there any way for apple to extract the information and safeguard the process they used to do it? Or would that lead to too much potential that the universal key becomes publicly available? Is apple concerned that if they extract the information they will be acting as de facto agents of the government which is not a position they should have to take?

I have not read enough about the controversy to know what can be done to safeguard privacy and release specific information.

The case does seem to break new ground in the sense that it is not the actual accessing of unauthorized information that is at issue but the ability to access information. The government has the authority to view one person's data, but viewing that data would break down any technological barrier to viewing other people's data. So the question is: does giving someone the potential to invade your privacy invade your privacy? Do you feel a subjective invasion of privacy knowing that someone could access personal information? I think yes. If apple is being honest about the universality of the key and the sensitivity of the information they would release, I agree with them.

John McAfee said he would hack the phone for free. But the government won't take him up on it because their goal isn't that phone but rather all phones.

Are you a gullible idiot who'll believe anything an anti-patriot says, or do you just make this shit up? Yes, McAfee offered his services (although the NSA has far superior expertise), but the rest is just fluff, the kind you dream on.

The other day the government broke into my sock drawer and matched the dress socks with the athletic socks. It's obvious they're not content with privacy violations but are now playing mind games. We should not have people working in government because we can't trust people. We shouldn't have laws because we can't trust words. The only thing I have faith in is the rightness of my universal distrust of everyone and their motives.

It's a cross roads...Attachment 916222Attachment 916223

It takes an incredibly naive idiot to believe that the FBI only wants into one phone.

I never said they only want one phone (I've got two myself). But to think that's the reason they're refusing McAfee's offer is stupidity sublime.

I agree with Trish...When I first read about this several days ago, I figured if they can do it with one phone...why not. But that was also based on some of the erroneous information we received by the news articles. Many of the journalists reporting on this issue are as tech savvy as many of us...which is to say - not at all. They also don't bother reading the actual court order, so they, like many of us, respond on an emotional level without knowing all the facts.
Having read their response, I currently agree with Apple.
This however, is not a 'right' or 'left' issue. As long as it's 'their man' (or woman) in office, a voter will often give carte blanche regardless of political affiliation.
BTW - here's the actual court order:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...sst-iPhone.pdf

oh and yes, I inadvertently upvoted his comment again

It seems Apple has an out with the "unreasonably burdensome" clause at the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fred41

oh and yes, I inadvertently upvoted his comment again

---

Pretty soon we're gonna have to get you on an aiding and abetting charge of some kind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

Pretty soon we're gonna have to get you on an aiding and abetting charge of some kind.

---

Damn sausage fingers have a mind of their own :)

Personally, I don't like the idea of anyone outside of Apple being able to crack the encryption that protects my Apple Pay. I would just as soon keep my bank number and card number out of the hands stores that I shop at. The subpoena needs rewording. It reaches too far. All the FBI needs is the data. They can preserve chain of custody without a remote tap. Once the device is open, it's all their's. I'm perfectly comfortable with the army of cyber security tech geeks @ the FBI being unable to decrypt a 5c.

I turned off that auto-erase shit on my 6+ because, in my developing sinility, I might space my code & overchew my fingers.

By the way: the owner of the phone is dead, right? So why didn't the geniuses just use the corpse's fingers to open it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hippifried

I turned off that auto-erase shit on my 6+ because, in my developing sinility, I might space my code & overchew my fingers.

---

I had an old android phone that was mostly wiped by a drunk GF that kept trying to upload some spanish music videos on it while I was sleeping. It was annoying and time consuming, but the important stuff was backed up and replaced in time.

I can't see anything important being on the work phone in question. I assume anyone he contacted from it could be gotten from the phone company...no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hippifried

By the way: the owner of the phone is dead, right? So why didn't the geniuses just use the corpse's fingers to open it?

---

I'm thinking he used a numeric password, not a fingerprint.

There is a short-term, and a long-term issue here, the short-term one being the access to the data on phone, the long-term issue being Apple's proprietary technology.

I am not an expert on this, but if the Court order is followed, does it mean that technology that belongs solely to Apple -ie its Proprietary Technology- would no longer be secret/protected? It would be of importance to Apple because the corporation may lose control of a key valuable asset, rather as if a trading company on Wall St were forced to disclose the algorithms it uses to analyse market data to add value to its trades.

It just so happens that some people have been predicting the demise of Apple precisely because it clings to its proprietary technology in a computing industry where sharing across platforms with a standardized language promotes growth -and popularity with consumers. I believe that this is often referred to as Investor's Dilemma, the odd situation where the very factors that lead to a company's spectacular success contain within the business model the seeds of its own destruction; it may also be part of Disruptive Innovation, where a new innovative product in effect wipes the floor with its competitors without being able to guarantee its own survival in the long term Two links below on this.

My view is that the brand, Apple, will survive, but that the corporation is less than 10 years away from a crisis which will result in a buy-out with Apple technology modified to be transferable across platforms in ways it cannot be at the moment.
Perhaps the law, by entering Apple's secret world, is going to present the company with a new suit of clothes?

Apple and the Investor's Dilemma -a long academic piece but interesting nevertheless-
https://stratechery.com/2010/apple-innovators-dilemma/

Disruptive Innovation here-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disrup..._of_disruption

Many of you probably already read this, but here's also a CNET article, that answers a lot of questions in layman's terms, that some of us have asked:http://www.cnet.com/news/apple-versu...n-a-tizzy-faq/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hippifried

By the way: the owner of the phone is dead, right? So why didn't the geniuses just use the corpse's fingers to open it?

---

this gave me a good laugh. if only the feds had someone as smart as you working for them

Stavros:
Your prediction about Apple collapsing because of their proprietary tech, has been recited, practically word for word, for the last 15 years that I know of. Maybe 20.

If the FBI wants to get into "terrorist's" phones, perhaps they should make an effort to sell the bad guys on Samsung or whatever. I like having this hard core encryption protecting me from all the bullshit that seems to plague everything else. I've had bank accounts, on line email accounts, windows computers, non-Apple phones, & other IDs hacked &/or vandalized. Nothing at all to or through my Apple macbook-air,or my Iphone. With apple-pay, the merchant never sees my bank info. In a second or 2, the encrypted transaction goes to Apple, then Wells Fargo, & back to the merchant. All Walmart/Kroger/etc... sees is the approval. I'm sold.

BTW; Havn't various law enforcement entities, at different levels from city/county to state & federal, been trying to force Apple into this for some time now, & been shot down by the courts every time? That's the rumor. Butteye see now that it's all different because it's "terrorism" & Muslims ("Islamists") to boot. When the "T word" gets invoked, it's a whole new set of rules. Right? I don't know. We'll see what the Supremes have to say without Scalia. Wonder what he would say about this mess. Strict constructionism v the unenumerated right to privacy. This could get to be entertaining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hippifried

Stavros:
Your prediction about Apple collapsing because of their proprietary tech, has been recited, practically word for word, for the last 15 years that I know of. Maybe 20.

---

A fair point. On the other hand, it might yet happen...maybe President Trump will help the little guys and send an anti-trust bill to Congress to break up those giant corporations like Microsoft, Goldman Sachs, IBM, Apple -and the Trump Organization...

Been there done that. Microsoft skated out of it by bailing out apple. That way, they were able to point and say "see we have competition

BTW: I gotta wonder, now that the suit is moot, how the feds managed to skirt the encryption. Do they have a back door that'll open iphones across the board? New system update this morning. Speculation is that what they did won't work on newer phones, butteye don't know who's fueling that speculation. Haven't seen a statement by Apple yet.

Scuttlebutt is the phone was broken by Cellebrite which is an Israeli security firm made up of retired Israeli cyber-intelligence professionals homologous of ex-NSA types (not McAfee :D ). My guess is that all phones are compromised. So if you're going to put top secret private shit on a phone use real encryption. Public key codes and other methods are still unbreakable.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/mee...es-for-the-fbi

Cellebrite proclaim their abilities:
"Cellebrite's Advanced Investigative Services (CAIS) offers global law enforcement agencies a breakthrough service to unlock Apple devices running iOS 8.x.
This unique capability is the first of its kind – unlock of Apple devices running iOS 8.x in a forensically sound manner and without any hardware intervention or risk of device wipe."
http://www.cellebrite.com/Pages/cell...running-ios-8x

The question is, was there anything of value to the FBI on the iPhone, which was the phone issued to Farook by his employers? In the vehicle ambushed as he made his getaway there were two personal phones destroyed beyond recovery, maybe they were the ones with any evidence of third party collusion in the murders.

Either way, access to our personal data is one of the key issues in liberty and the law, as the 'Snooper's charter' as the Draft 'Communications Bill' makes its way through the House of Commons...