If they have enough info on a suspected terrorist to hack his phone, they should prob go ahead and bring him or her in for a chat.

 

Well they are dead...so there's that

The problem is there is no way to unlock an individual phone without changing the software on the entire system and creating a backdoor system wide.

 

Not true...If the new "Back door" was developed it could be put on this one phone only.

 

Yes government has asked that the electronic back door be installed in thier operating system. But this could be done as a One Off type of installation.

Well they are dead...so there's that

 

There are other terrorist we have allowed in this country. This goes much further than SB.

But what about national security ? What if this guy was communicating with known terrorists?

 

It's certainly a thorny problem in this new age of technology, but the ends can't be used to justify the means, especially when the means are essentially determined through government fiat.

 

If Congress wants to pass a law regulating the use of encryption or other security features and they can do so in a way that can survive 1st and 4th amendment challenges in court, then it would at least give their practices some legitimacy, though I would still oppose it.

 

This is one of the same problems with the various NSA surveillance programs. They were entirely unknown to the public until Snowden's leak. These were not laws or programs created through a democratic process where people were aware of what was at stake. The NSA dreamt up the programs and enacted them on their own. Among the perverse outcomes is that people who have since attempted to challenge the programs in court have largely been rebuffed along the lines of this Catch-22: Because the programs are secret, challengers can't prove that their information was collected by them, therefore they don't have standing to challenge them.

 

The other issue is that by making exceptions for what powers the government can have or conditionalizing rights of citizens in cases of terrorism opens the door for more exceptions. When we say that terrorism is such a tremendous issue that we must make these exceptions to prevent it, what happens when another issue comes along to supplant it? I expect that these exceptions will carry over to new issues.

 

Or if the executive branch is allowed to create its own programs in secret and free themselves from legal challenges as long it's to stop "terrorism," and if the executive branch gets to define what "terrorism" is, then what is to stop them from expanding that definition (and how will we know)? It would seem there is nothing to stop the expansion of the definition of "terrorism" into "cyberterrorism" and then including things like file sharing or cyberbullying under its scope, justifying even more invasive surveillance and enforcement.

 

This is the context through which I see this case with Apple. One might argue that this is merely one case where the government is asking for cooperation. But we know that the government has asked for a "backdoor" into encryption as a matter of universal policy well before this case and it has been a contentious issue among Apple, Samsung, and other tech firms. David Cameron has demanded it in the UK and has banned services like What's App that use it. Therefore, I don't expect the government's use of such a backdoor to be limited to this one case, but to become standard practice going forward. So, I think Tim Cook is in the right to demand a higher and more legitimate burden than pointing out that this case involves terrorism.

Not true...If the new "Back door" was developed it could be put on this one phone only.

 

Yes government has asked that the electronic back door be installed in thier operating system. But this could be done as a One Off type of installation.

But then it exists and thus could be used to hack into any iPhone.

I understand that is always your default position and I appreciate that. But there are some circumstances where one loses the expectations of certain rights and freedoms. This is a case where a warrant for the information has been issued by a judge in good standing.

 

On Apples side of this, I'm not sure I like the government forcing a company to "invent" something that currently doesn't exsist.

 

If I was Apple I would figure out how to unlock this phone, then unlock it and remove the new program from the phone and hand an unlocked phone over to the FBI. If Apples biggest concern that this new backdoor could get leaked in some way, then they would be the ones holding onto the new tech, if it leaked it would be on them.

 

From the Customer Letter @Habib provided:

 

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.

Not true...If the new "Back door" was developed it could be put on this one phone only.

 

Yes government has asked that the electronic back door be installed in thier operating system. But this could be done as a One Off type of installation.

 

I'm no expert on this, but have some background in this area. What you are wanting Apple to do is not as easy as you are portraying it.

 

What the FBI wants is a crack for their encryption algorithm. They want Apple to develop that crack, which, IMHO, would be a major job unto itself. The crack would have to be part of the encryption key derivation software for the algorithm. Once that's out of the bag, it can't be put back. I'm not even sure they could do it for data already encrypted on an existing phone.

 

Developing encryption algorithms is a very lengthy and expensive proposition. You don't just throw one away and develop another.

I think what the FBI is looking for was destroyed on the personal Iphone of the nut job. They want to hack his work phone which was not destroyed for a reason. Guessing they come up with nothing if they indeed get Apple to hack it.

But then it exists and thus could be used to hack into any iPhone.

Only if installed on all phones....should be someway that Apple can apply it to this one phone only...they are pretty smart at Apple, there has to be a way to impact just one phone without giving the technology to do so to the FBI.

There are other terrorist we have allowed in this country. This goes much further than SB.

I know, but right now we are talking about this phone. If others are under suspicion enough that there is a warrant to search their phone, then I agree bring em in for questioning, water boarding, whatever....

If our Government, as most believe, is responsible for Stuxnet Virus to sabotage the Iran Nuclear Program and they are responsible for the Equation Group (world wide computer espionage), and if we are to believe most of what Edward Snowden had to say on this specific topic there is zero doubt in my mind that the second Apple creates any type of backdoor/encryption keys, even if it is only intended for an individual phone, our Government will immediately start manipulating the code and spread it to every capable phone on the planet. This practice/method of operation is essentially the NSA's Mission Statement.

 

https://nsa.gov1.info/data/

Another layer to this that I haven't seen touched on: Apple has substantial business reasons not to develop this backdoor. Security has become an area of competition, especially in the device/smartphone market where people are increasingly storing and sending sensitive personal and financial data. If Apple creates this backdoor, then it essentially neuters their encryption claims and weakens their competitiveness against the rest of the industry.

Another layer to this that I haven't seen touched on: Apple has substantial business reasons not to develop this backdoor. Security has become an area of competition, especially in the device/smartphone market where people are increasingly storing and sending sensitive personal and financial data. If Apple creates this backdoor, then it essentially neuters their encryption claims and weakens their competitiveness against the rest of the industry.

 

IMO that is Apples main concern. There is a reason Apple has never developed the software to do what the FBI is asking them to do. What kind of compensation is the government willing to offer Apple to do this? I'm not just talking about paying the wages of the techs that would have to develop the crack, I'm talking about compensation if Apple takes a huge hit in sales for developing such a crack. I seriously doubt the government is willing to offer up hundreds of millions of dollars to Apple if in fact their customer base decided not to buy their products due to security vulnerabilities.

 

I'm not a privacy nut by any means, nor do I own an iphone. I'm also all for catching and killing terrorists. But I have to side with Apple on this one. Now if the government can figure out how to get into the phone on their own, more power to them. However Apple should not be forced to do the FBI's job for them.

Another layer to this that I haven't seen touched on: Apple has substantial business reasons not to develop this backdoor. Security has become an area of competition, especially in the device/smartphone market where people are increasingly storing and sending sensitive personal and financial data. If Apple creates this backdoor, then it essentially neuters their encryption claims and weakens their competitiveness against the rest of the industry.

 

IMO that is Apples main concern. There is a reason Apple has never developed the software to do what the FBI is asking them to do. What kind of compensation is the government willing to offer Apple to do this? I'm not just talking about paying the wages of the techs that would have to develop the crack, I'm talking about compensation if Apple takes a huge hit in sales for developing such a crack. I seriously doubt the government is willing to offer up hundreds of millions of dollars to Apple if in fact their customer base decided not to buy their products due to security vulnerabilities.

 

I'm not a privacy nut by any means, nor do I own an iphone. I'm also all for catching and killing terrorists. But I have to side with Apple on this one. Now if the government can figure out how to get into the phone on their own, more power to them. However Apple should not be forced to do the FBI's job for them.

 

So scary guys. If it truly is an issue of money/competition then it is only a matter of time before it happens.

So scary guys. If it truly is an issue of money/competition then it is only a matter of time before it happens.

 

 

Your probably right, Apple shouldn't be forced to crack their own encryption though. To be honest, I imagine the NSA or some other government entity has a team assembled and are working on it as I type this.