Thread: Apple's stand against the Feds

Unfortunately it is fully possible for them to pull it out of their ass in short order. As they are being asked to remove very specific features, which if their SD process is as should be, will be relatively easy for them to get to.

Also as pedantic as it sounds, the FBI aren't asking for a "back door" they're asking for the ability to try to brute force it, as Apple's current security software will erase the phone after a number of tries. If Apple could provide an actual back door into their encryption I would be more worried about apples dev practices and what you entrust to them.

It's a fair bet they'll buckle. Which would be a sad day for privacy. But that's the world today.

Geek

Lots of great points being made here. I think it's a slippery slope leading to a steep, ice-covered cliff. Maybe it's a separate issue, but one of the only bulwarks we have against the encroaching police state is the 4th amendment that is ignored more and more at all levels by FISA court abuses, secret police "Stingrays," the massive increase in "no-knock" full swat-team raids for minor offenses (in which many innocent people have been injured or killed), warrantless personal and car searches on no pc or pretext whatsoever (which I have personally witnessed), etc.

Normally I'd be the 1st one to rail against the power of a mega-corporation like Apple (probably on my ipad or iphone, lol), but given all that is potentially at stake, this seems like a major government overreach.

I really cannot believe the amount of doublespeak in this thread. Your Government department has made a very credible request for Apple to enable them to access data on a single phone without that single phone erasing records automatically.

That's it - end of story. Apple has been assured that they will not have to divulge how they did it and they can demand any other assurances they want. It will not apply to other phones and the phone in question will remain in their possession.

What else do you need? It seems to me that 9/11 rocked America to it's roots and you have still not recovered the sense of the nation that you were and still are. All this talk of privacy is nonsense - we all accept that the government can and will listen into conversations if it thinks it necessary. What is at issue here is an attempt to listen into previous conversations of a known terrorist - they were not alone.

Originally Posted by UKRob

I really cannot believe the amount of doublespeak in this thread. Your Government department has made a very credible request for Apple to enable them to access data on a single phone without that single phone erasing records automatically.

That's it - end of story. Apple has been assured that they will not have to divulge how they did it and they can demand any other assurances they want. It will not apply to other phones and the phone in question will remain in their possession.

What else do you need? It seems to me that 9/11 rocked America to it's roots and you have still not recovered the sense of the nation that you were and still are. All this talk of privacy is nonsense - we all accept that the government can and will listen into conversations if it thinks it necessary. What is at issue here is an attempt to listen into previous conversations of a known terrorist - they were not alone.

No, the problem is this country is probably polarized the way it was at the time of the Civil War. Many think the Govt is public enemy #1 and conspiracy theories rule. I mean, when a huge amount of folks believe the President is some muslim illegal alien who hijacked the election what more needs to be said.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

No, the problem is this country is probably polarized the way it was at the time of the Civil War. Many think the Govt is public enemy #1 and conspiracy theories rule. I mean, when a huge amount of folks believe the President is some muslim illegal alien who hijacked the election what more needs to be said.

This President and his administration have polarized the citizens!

"Never let good crisis go to waste" Rahm.

The 4th Amendment protects against unreasonable search and seizure. Is it therefore reasonable, or unreasonable, to breach the security of a cell phone device if it means saving lives?

Back when the 4th Amendment was written, a warrant could have been issued to seize and search the property of a single individual. It was most likely never conceived that in the future multitudes would, maybe foolishly, share and store sensitive information via electronic devices where a breach of one could mean a breach of all.

The real issue though is should Apple have to comply with the All Writs Act, and does the Federal Gov. have jurisdiction to enforce. Now that the FBI went around Apple, after Apple refused to comply, will Apple suffer any consequences? Will it be determined that they were legally obligated to cooperate with the FBI.

It's all elementary because like everything else it's the cost benefit thing. If there should ever be a mass incident in this country which could have been prevented with the info from the phone which Apple fought tooth and nail the question becomes how many have to die before Apple or any other outfit reconsiders. Absent that, when the public starts to boycott the company the company will fold like a deck of cards.

The writers of the Constitution believed that security of the nation is of such importance that the the federal government has essentially unlimited power to effect that security:

"The authorities essential to the common defense are these: to raise armies; to build and equip fleets; to prescribe rules for the government of both; to direct their operations; to provide for their support. These powers ought to exist without limitation, because it is impossible to foresee or define the extent and variety of national exigencies, or the correspondent extent and variety of the means which may be necessary to satisfy them. The circumstances that endanger the safety of nations are infinite, and for this reason no constitutional shackles can wisely be imposed on the power to which the care of it is committed. This power ought to be coextensive with all the possible combinations of such circumstances; and ought to be under the direction of the same councils which are appointed to preside over the common defense.

Whether there ought to be a federal government intrusted with the care of the common defense, is a question in the first instance, open for discussion; but the moment it is decided in the affirmative, it will follow, that that government ought to be clothed with all the powers requisite to complete execution of its trust. And unless it can be shown that the circumstances which may affect the public safety are reducible within certain determinate limits; unless the contrary of this position can be fairly and rationally disputed, it must be admitted, as a necessary consequence, that there can be no limitation of that authority which is to provide for the defense and protection of the community, in any matter essential to its efficacy that is, in any matter essential to the formation, direction, or support of the NATIONAL FORCES."

- Hamilton, Federalist #23

Whether or not anyone is for the help of the manufacture or against I guess we all know the answer now is it doesn't really matter, good old big brother was able one way or another to get inside the smart phone and now can get the info, they can do it. I believe that in the future all computers can be hacked or neutralized and taken control of and be used to control us. Through a code or a RF chip the human race is going to be changed drastically soon and computers will play a big part, they have already change peoples habits the IPOD and now the IPhone/Smart phone hand held computers everyone is now looking down at the device and blocking out everything around them in their lives. Revelation 13:16-18 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17. And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.