Apple vs FBI

Anything and Everything political, express your view, but play nice
Bubba
Site Admin
Posts: 26274
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 08:42
Location: Where the climate suits my clothes

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by Bubba »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
Bubba wrote:
Coydog wrote:
Bubba wrote:A short story entitled "The Apple of My (FB) Eye"

Apple fights (wink, wink) the FBI, knowing that they will end up helping them anyway, whether by court order or voluntarily after the legal case has run its course. Apple wins the respect of its customers for fighting (wink, wink) the good fight, then provides the FBI with what it needs. FBI keeps the results of the investigation under wraps but ends up learning what, if anything, the cell phone can provide in the way of information. Everyone wins. We live happily ever after.

The End.
Including the terrorists, who strive to deprive us of our liberties.
What liberty do you have to hide information from investigators after a crime as been committed and a search warrant has been issued? How is this different from having a search warrant to search the home of the terrorist after the fact? The FBI is only asking Apple for assistance in opening the door without blowing up the evidence inside. If Apple is concerned about the FBI using the key to open other doors, they can keep it themselves and or destroy the key once they open the door for the FBI in this case.

Personally, I think Apple is fighting right now in order to have the court develop a protocol in advance of them actually providing the assistance required.
Forcing a private company to backdoor it's own security and compromise it's integrity with it's customers is much different than a house warrant executed on John Doe. I'm pretty surprised you'd be okay with this. Would you be okay with the Gov't forcing a private sector technology company to provide the encryption key used by a private sector Energy company so they can access their industrial control systems?
Private companies turn over private information all the time with, naturally, various confidentiality agreements in place. If the government had a valid reason to gain that information, supported by a court order, the technology company and the energy company could either fight it or comply. What would be a valid need in that case? I have no idea - I can't conjure up the crime that might have been committed that would justify such access - but if such a crime were committed and the government, in the course of its investigation, needed such access, they would have a right to ask and the company would have a right to either comply or fight. In the end, I think the court would order compliance subject to various protections, especially in the case of terrorism where other laws also apply.

I have no problem with the court issuing an order or with Apple fighting the order. In the end, Apple will probably lose but also gain legal protection along with protocols for use of the modified system.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"

Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald

"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Bubba
Site Admin
Posts: 26274
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 08:42
Location: Where the climate suits my clothes

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by Bubba »

Coydog wrote:
Bubba wrote: What liberty do you have to hide information from investigators after a crime as been committed and a search warrant has been issued? How is this different from having a search warrant to search the home of the terrorist after the fact? The FBI is only asking Apple for assistance in opening the door without blowing up the evidence inside. If Apple is concerned about the FBI using the key to open other doors, they can keep it themselves and or destroy the key once they open the door for the FBI in this case.

Personally, I think Apple is fighting right now in order to have the court develop a protocol in advance of them actually providing the assistance required.
What right does the FBI have to force Apple to provide a back door decryption protocol to my personal iPhone? If the FBI is only "asking", then Apple can say "no" and we all move on.

I have every right to protect my information. I don’t always have the expectation of privacy, but I certainly have the right to it and using encryption helps to protect my information as I see fit. If the government forces technology providers to furnish decryption protocols, then, in time, that information is essentially available to anyone for any purpose.

Of course, the FBI would only avail itself to this information to catch the bad guys and would never snoop on law abiding citizens - 'cause that never happens. And if they ever did, what do law abiding citizens have to hide anyway?
You have a right to protect your information subject to 4th Amendment protection subject as well as to 4th Amendment access.

"[t]he 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."

The interesting question here, with Apple, is whether a third party (Apple) can be forced by court order to assist with that search. If a journalist (i.e. third party), rightly or wrongly, can be compelled to give up sources in a criminal investigation or be held in contempt, then I think Apple will eventually have to comply.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"

Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald

"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
brownman
Postinator
Posts: 7351
Joined: Dec 6th, '07, 17:59
Location: Stockbridge Boulevard

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by brownman »

This is more about Apple commerce than anything else.
Apple pushing back is a valiant effort to demonstrate 'protection' to/of it’s user base.
Cook acting as a 'privacy savior' while they face continued erosion of market share.
The effort will be largely ineffective against the rising tide of disclosure.

ACLU and EPIC champions ... more power to you.
https://www.epic.org/
http://www.dataprotection2016.org/

Bob & Alice .. out

:Toast
Last edited by brownman on Feb 17th, '16, 12:31, edited 1 time in total.
Forever .. Goat Path
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19560
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

Bubba wrote:Private companies turn over private information all the time with, naturally, various confidentiality agreements in place. If the government had a valid reason to gain that information, supported by a court order, the technology company and the energy company could either fight it or comply. What would be a valid need in that case? I have no idea - I can't conjure up the crime that might have been committed that would justify such access - but if such a crime were committed and the government, in the course of its investigation, needed such access, they would have a right to ask and the company would have a right to either comply or fight. In the end, I think the court would order compliance subject to various protections, especially in the case of terrorism where other laws also apply.

I have no problem with the court issuing an order or with Apple fighting the order. In the end, Apple will probably lose but also gain legal protection along with protocols for use of the modified system.
I'm aware they do, but I think this is not Apple's data to provide, it's our data IMHO. Once a backdoor is developed there is no way to ensure who might be able to use it against any of the 100 million US iPhone users.

Perhaps the FBI would like to investigate US-based Energy systems to analyze data for a possible breach or as a stress test or some other means. Industrial Control Systems are under cyber threat everyday - just consider what the US did in Iran nuclear plant with Stuxnet.

I think it's dangerous to set the precedent that if a private citizen commits a crime, all products in their possession (before, during, and after the crime) may be forced to give up their IP, data security, etc. to help the Gov't solve a crime.
Coydog
Guru Poster
Posts: 5926
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 12:23

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by Coydog »

Bubba wrote:
Coydog wrote:
Bubba wrote: What liberty do you have to hide information from investigators after a crime as been committed and a search warrant has been issued? How is this different from having a search warrant to search the home of the terrorist after the fact? The FBI is only asking Apple for assistance in opening the door without blowing up the evidence inside. If Apple is concerned about the FBI using the key to open other doors, they can keep it themselves and or destroy the key once they open the door for the FBI in this case.

Personally, I think Apple is fighting right now in order to have the court develop a protocol in advance of them actually providing the assistance required.
What right does the FBI have to force Apple to provide a back door decryption protocol to my personal iPhone? If the FBI is only "asking", then Apple can say "no" and we all move on.

I have every right to protect my information. I don’t always have the expectation of privacy, but I certainly have the right to it and using encryption helps to protect my information as I see fit. If the government forces technology providers to furnish decryption protocols, then, in time, that information is essentially available to anyone for any purpose.

Of course, the FBI would only avail itself to this information to catch the bad guys and would never snoop on law abiding citizens - 'cause that never happens. And if they ever did, what do law abiding citizens have to hide anyway?
You have a right to protect your information subject to 4th Amendment protection subject as well as to 4th Amendment access.

"[t]he 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."

The interesting question here, with Apple, is whether a third party (Apple) can be forced by court order to assist with that search. If a journalist (i.e. third party), rightly or wrongly, can be compelled to give up sources in a criminal investigation or be held in contempt, then I think Apple will eventually have to comply.
By "assist" you mean the court is compelling Apple to create completely new software that would essentially enable the government to break into any iPhone. Seems like the basis for unreasonable search and seizure to me. If we provide the government the means to penetrate our private conversations, it most certainly will - I think Edward Snowden proved that one beyond a reasonable doubt.
St. Jerry
Powderhound
Posts: 1514
Joined: Nov 12th, '04, 17:59
Location: NYC

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by St. Jerry »

"There can be no Liberty unless there is security first." - President James Buchannan
Ron Paul 2012
Coydog
Guru Poster
Posts: 5926
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 12:23

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by Coydog »

“Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons.”

- Ron Paul
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19560
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

Coydog wrote:“Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons.”

- Ron Paul
Good quote and one that's still support by his son, Rand, given his response to the demand for Apple's compliance. Trump, on the other hand, has asserted "who does Apple think they are". :roll:

I'll vote for Bernie before Trump.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by madhatter »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
Coydog wrote:“Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons.”

- Ron Paul
Good quote and one that's still support by his son, Rand, given his response to the demand for Apple's compliance. Trump, on the other hand, has asserted "who does Apple think they are". :roll:

I'll vote for Bernie before Trump.
brilliant...

Image

no thanks....
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
Bubba
Site Admin
Posts: 26274
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 08:42
Location: Where the climate suits my clothes

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by Bubba »

Interesting...

Apple Leans on 227-Year-Old Law in Encryption Fight

http://time.com/4227236/apple-fbi-san-b ... tter-brief" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"

Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald

"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
brownman
Postinator
Posts: 7351
Joined: Dec 6th, '07, 17:59
Location: Stockbridge Boulevard

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by brownman »

Many rivers to cross before 'hold your nose and vote' day arrives.
Will be interesting to see who actually makes it to the bridge :lol:

Some prophecies pointed to this Apple battle, and how it might play out.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/civil-liabi ... asy-part-i

Proprietary elements have long been a key Apple design criteria. May be coming home to roost.
While contrary to their revenue model, backward compatibility would sure be of benefit now.

The backdoor stance is pure smokescreen.
Remove the 10 try logon restriction on the dirtbag's phone.
Hand the phone back to the FBI for inspection.
Brute force dictionary attack would crack the logon quickly.
Password is likely Allah Akbar or Eat more Goat with a number/symbol.

Sound the trumpets ... voice support for the user base ...
Meanwhile, innovation is still stalled and Alphabet market cap pulls away.
Steve Jobs would have handled this quite differently.

Think Snow!
:Toast
Forever .. Goat Path
Coydog
Guru Poster
Posts: 5926
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 12:23

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by Coydog »

brownman wrote:
The backdoor stance is pure smokescreen.
Remove the 10 try logon restriction on the dirtbag's phone.
Hand the phone back to the FBI for inspection.
Brute force dictionary attack would crack the logon quickly.
Password is likely Allah Akbar or Eat more Goat with a number/symbol.
Yep, a smokescreen by the FBI.

The FBI wants Apple to create and provide them a modified OS that can defeat the built-in security protocols. If the FBI simply wanted the information saved on this one iPhone, Apple could no doubt hack the phone, provide the unlocked phone to the FBI and then destroy the tools.

However, the FBI wants the unlocked phone and the tools used to unlock it. If successful, does anyone believe the FBI’s demands will end with a court ordered backdoor to the outdated iPhone 5?
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19560
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

Coydog wrote:
brownman wrote:
The backdoor stance is pure smokescreen.
Remove the 10 try logon restriction on the dirtbag's phone.
Hand the phone back to the FBI for inspection.
Brute force dictionary attack would crack the logon quickly.
Password is likely Allah Akbar or Eat more Goat with a number/symbol.
Yep, a smokescreen by the FBI.

The FBI wants Apple to create and provide them a modified OS that can defeat the built-in security protocols. If the FBI simply wanted the information saved on this one iPhone, Apple could no doubt hack the phone, provide the unlocked phone to the FBI and then destroy the tools.

However, the FBI wants the unlocked phone and the tools used to unlock it. If successful, does anyone believe the FBI’s demands will end with a court ordered backdoor to the outdated iPhone 5?
This. Pretty sure Snowden can tell you how it will all work out ... or anyone with common sense.
brownman
Postinator
Posts: 7351
Joined: Dec 6th, '07, 17:59
Location: Stockbridge Boulevard

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by brownman »

As U know, work has been underway for quite a while on this front.
Sooner or later, with or without Cook, Lockheed Martin and Xcode people will storm the castle.

https://theintercept.com/2015/03/10/isp ... s-secrets/

Prerequisites for joining ISIS ... iPhone and a white Toyota pickup :wink:

:Toast
Forever .. Goat Path
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19560
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: Apple vs FBI

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

Image
Post Reply