I wonder, hypothetically, if the intel gathered was shown to apple that their (apple) executives were the next target of terrorism if they'd have any reservations about assisting the feds in this endeavor?

No this is a discussion about due process' date=' the right to privacy, the needs of law enforcement in the age of global terrorism enabled by high technology, the limits of government power and the age-old struggle between big business and big government to decide who's really in control. You're welcome to add to it if you like.[/quote']

 

What would the Obama admin really do with any info?

First, I find it somewhat hard to believe that the government doesn't have the ability to hack the phone on their own. I think they are asking for permission from google as a courtesy gesture, but I think if it came down to it the government would be capable of doing it on their own. If independent hackers can hack into celebrities phones, there is no reason to believe that our government wouldn't be able to do it as well.

 

Secondly, If the government does hack the phone on their own, and finds information of future attacks, communications between terrorist groups, or other information that could have put the safety of our citizens in jeopardy, could Apple be held liable, and be charged with treason? Would covering up terrorist intelligence be considered aiding a terrorist organization?

 

Personally, and I have no hard evidence to suggest this is true, but I would not be surprised if this was all being done as a publicity stunt. It would not surprise me if Apple and the Feds are operating together behind closed doors. Apple doesn't want to make it seem as if they are slaves to the federal government, and will turn over personal information at the drop of a hat. The government doesn't want to make it seem as if they are infringing upon civil liberties and forcing a private company to give up sensitive information.

 

I am not saying this is the case, but there are definitely reasons why Apple and the Feds are having this "dispute" over the issue.

If I'm a developer at Apple, I have logic sitting on my desk that bypasses the encryption call that fires when the phone is powered up.

 

There's no way when testing new logic , I enter in a # passcode each time to get to my new logic.

 

This is a dog an pony show by Apple.

Break into this one phone in your offices, dump the contents and give to FBI.

 

They might just save a few innocent lives.

What would the Obama admin really do with any info?

 

To be perfectly honest, I'm less concerned about the administration publishing my secrets than I am about the FBI's inability to hold onto one. It happens. And if that back door coding got into the wrong hands, it's completely ruined the most secure smartphone yet developed.

 

Software pioneer John McAfee says he and his team will decrypt the San Bernadino shooter's phone for free just so Apple doesn't have to develop and hand over what he considers to be a massively dangerous back door around smartphone security.

 

Business Insider: McAfee says he'll do it for free

McAfee sales skyrocket!!!!

 

Only in America.

 

Go get'em John!!!!

First, I find it somewhat hard to believe that the government doesn't have the ability to hack the phone on their own. I think they are asking for permission from google as a courtesy gesture, but I think if it came down to it the government would be capable of doing it on their own. If independent hackers can hack into celebrities phones, there is no reason to believe that our government wouldn't be able to do it as well.

 

Secondly, If the government does hack the phone on their own, and finds information of future attacks, communications between terrorist groups, or other information that could have put the safety of our citizens in jeopardy, could Apple be held liable, and be charged with treason? Would covering up terrorist intelligence be considered aiding a terrorist organization?

 

Personally, and I have no hard evidence to suggest this is true, but I would not be surprised if this was all being done as a publicity stunt. It would not surprise me if Apple and the Feds are operating together behind closed doors. Apple doesn't want to make it seem as if they are slaves to the federal government, and will turn over personal information at the drop of a hat. The government doesn't want to make it seem as if they are infringing upon civil liberties and forcing a private company to give up sensitive information.

 

I am not saying this is the case, but there are definitely reasons why Apple and the Feds are having this "dispute" over the issue.

 

That's kind of like Smith and Wesson being charged with a murder when one of their guns were used in the commission of said act.

That's kind of like Smith and Wesson being charged with a murder when one of their guns were used in the commission of said act.

 

There are some similarities between the two. However, I don't think that that example matches the exclusivity of the current situation. If Smith and Wesson knowingly sold a gun to a known terrorist, then yes I could see them being charged with aiding a terrorist.

I haven't seen any comments about one detail of this situation that I think is VERY significant: Apple sells the majority of their phones in countries other than the United States. What happens if they are given a judge's order in the UK to unlock an iPhone...or China...or Iran...or Saudi Arabia?

I haven't seen any comments about one detail of this situation that I think is VERY significant: Apple sells the majority of their phones in countries other than the United States. What happens if they are given a judge's order in the UK to unlock an iPhone...or China...or Iran...or Saudi Arabia?

 

China has already asked (demanded?).

First, I find it somewhat hard to believe that the government doesn't have the ability to hack the phone on their own. I think they are asking for permission from google as a courtesy gesture, but I think if it came down to it the government would be capable of doing it on their own. If independent hackers can hack into celebrities phones, there is no reason to believe that our government wouldn't be able to do it as well.

 

Secondly, If the government does hack the phone on their own, and finds information of future attacks, communications between terrorist groups, or other information that could have put the safety of our citizens in jeopardy, could Apple be held liable, and be charged with treason? Would covering up terrorist intelligence be considered aiding a terrorist organization?

 

Personally, and I have no hard evidence to suggest this is true, but I would not be surprised if this was all being done as a publicity stunt. It would not surprise me if Apple and the Feds are operating together behind closed doors. Apple doesn't want to make it seem as if they are slaves to the federal government, and will turn over personal information at the drop of a hat. The government doesn't want to make it seem as if they are infringing upon civil liberties and forcing a private company to give up sensitive information.

 

I am not saying this is the case, but there are definitely reasons why Apple and the Feds are having this "dispute" over the issue.

 

This wouldn't surprise me either.

iPhone is the bloodline of Apple. If they show a code to hack it, it would have an e-coli like effect on Chipotle, if not worse.

China has already asked (demanded?).

 

Demanded. The UK is trying to make it law there as well.

There are some similarities between the two. However, I don't think that that example matches the exclusivity of the current situation. If Smith and Wesson knowingly sold a gun to a known terrorist, then yes I could see them being charged with aiding a terrorist.

 

So, you're saying Apple knowingly sold their phones to known terrorists?

No no not at all. I am saying that if a terrorist used a Smith and Wesson gun, and the FBI wanted to check the Smith and Wesson data base to see if the terrorist or known accomplices to the terrorist had also purchased a gun, I would hope the Smith and Wesson would comply.