Th story behind Apple refusing to work with FBI

[Solaris]

If the FBI wants into this phone why not take it apart, clone the memory contents of the phone and hack the clone as much as they want and leave the original intact. Might take them awhile to brute force the thing but eventually they would do it. What could be on there that they don't have anyhow? We know they really are recording every phone call. What they want is a backdoor into everything. Plain and simple.

Brute forcing it outside the phone would take a billion years.

[rotor]

If the FBI wants into this phone why not take it apart, clone the memory contents of the phone and hack the clone as much as they want and leave the original intact. Might take them awhile to brute force the thing but eventually they would do it. What could be on there that they don't have anyhow? We know they really are recording every phone call. What they want is a backdoor into everything. Plain and simple.

Brute forcing it outside the phone would take a billion years.

Well I guess they better start moving now because the clock is ticking.

[treadlightly]

You know, the funniest thing that's liable to happen in encryption is the day somebody is told to hand over his encryption key and the results are not what the prosecution wanted.

Imagine the court has seized encrypted data and demands the key. The plaintiff meekly hands over his throwaway key, the one that will decrypt his data in an alternate way. Instead of revealing the incriminating spreadsheet, it decrypts to a jpeg of the judge wearing a lampshade at a keg party.

A trivial stunt with one-time pads.

Truecrypt could do something similar. An encrypted disk volume was created a lot larger than needed, with a few files in it to make it look like it was in use.

A second encrypted volume was dropped on top of that, on the unused space. That second volume was at risk if you copied too much into the visibly present primary volume and overwrote any portion of the hidden volume. Decrypt with one key, there's the family reunion photos. Decrypt with the other key on an offset, and there are the blueprints of Donald Trump's secret underground toupee humidor.

Unfortunately, Truecrypt's second encryption jiggled the entropy just enough it was possible to deduce a second volume might be present, at which time your tormentors could get busy working on you.

Maybe in the Apple case they should go after the real villains, the people who made the base encryption so dang strong. I believe Apple uses AES. Whoever unleashed AES on the world...

Oh, wait, that was the government... Never mind.

One thing I'm not clear on is how Apple could install a compromised IOS without the passcode. I don't own any Apple mobile devices, so I'm not sure about the details. But if you can replace IOS on a locked phone without knowing the key, then it seems the phone is not as secure as it's perceived.

Nor would it seem difficult for the government to replace IOS with a simple facility to dump memory contents.

Either way, conscripting Apple's labor is a pretty iffy proposition.

[WildBill]

John McAfee describes the process of how to crack a phone.
He may be a weird dude, but when it comes to computers and software he knows what he's talking about.

[cb1000rider]

Another interesting point:
The US government has historically hobbled encryption for device manufacturers in the US. So people writing software, building network devices, etc have often faced a choice of using weak encryption or not selling on the world market:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of ... ted_States

There have been some changes that have improved this, somewhat, but as always regulation lags industry.

One of the impacts that I see frequently is security holes in encryption that affect you and me... Probably billions lost as weaker algorithms (which may have been required by the US government) get compromised.

No one wants to keep the FBI from inspecting a terrorists phone, but I think Apple is doing the right thing for those of us that stand protected by the constitution if the government is essentially demanding "the keys" to decrypt Apple devices. I'd feel very differently if our government had a history of doing the RIGHT thing and not broadly abusing their ability to spy on the American people.

Why do I care, if I have nothing to hide? Because I think the government should respect the constitution, even if that means we live with greater threats in our lives.

[JALLEN]

Why do I care, if I have nothing to hide? Because I think the government should respect the constitution, even if that means we live with greater threats in our lives.

Well, greater threats means more deaths, and more deaths mean more Democrat voters.... or is that what you meant by "greater threats" in the first place?

Realistically, one of the prime responsibilities we expect of government is supressing violence, and if violence starts making people afraid, they complain to their Congressmen to "do something." That's when the values of the Constitution is at risk.

[The Annoyed Man]

Why do I care, if I have nothing to hide? Because I think the government should respect the constitution, even if that means we live with greater threats in our lives.

Well, greater threats means more deaths, and more deaths mean more Democrat voters.... or is that what you meant by "greater threats" in the first place?

Realistically, one of the prime responsibilities we expect of government is supressing violence, and if violence starts making people afraid, they complain to their Congressmen to "do something." That's when the values of the Constitution is at risk.

You mean like when the democrat administration and state department got people killed in Benghazi, lied about the cause, and swarms of New Democrat voters were created as a result?

[Bitter Clinger]

Why do I care, if I have nothing to hide? Because I think the government should respect the constitution, even if that means we live with greater threats in our lives.

Well, greater threats means more deaths, and more deaths mean more Democrat voters.... or is that what you meant by "greater threats" in the first place?

Realistically, one of the prime responsibilities we expect of government is supressing violence, and if violence starts making people afraid, they complain to their Congressmen to "do something." That's when the values of the Constitution is at risk.

You mean like when the democrat administration and state department got people killed in Benghazi, lied about the cause, and swarms of New Democrat voters were created as a result?

New Democrat voters were created by not securing the borders. That is also the source of much of the crime that we are seeing and likely the next domestic terrorist attack as well. If there is data on that phone that could stop the next attack, than Apple should turn it over, full stop. Everything else is just commentary.

[JP171]

Why do I care, if I have nothing to hide? Because I think the government should respect the constitution, even if that means we live with greater threats in our lives.

Well, greater threats means more deaths, and more deaths mean more Democrat voters.... or is that what you meant by "greater threats" in the first place?

Realistically, one of the prime responsibilities we expect of government is supressing violence, and if violence starts making people afraid, they complain to their Congressmen to "do something." That's when the values of the Constitution is at risk.

You mean like when the democrat administration and state department got people killed in Benghazi, lied about the cause, and swarms of New Democrat voters were created as a result?

New Democrat voters were created by not securing the borders. That is also the source of much of the crime that we are seeing and likely the next domestic terrorist attack as well. If there is data on that phone that could stop the next attack, than Apple should turn it over, full stop. Everything else is just commentary.

x a gazillion

[Soccerdad1995]

Why do I care, if I have nothing to hide? Because I think the government should respect the constitution, even if that means we live with greater threats in our lives.

Well, greater threats means more deaths, and more deaths mean more Democrat voters.... or is that what you meant by "greater threats" in the first place?

Realistically, one of the prime responsibilities we expect of government is supressing violence, and if violence starts making people afraid, they complain to their Congressmen to "do something." That's when the values of the Constitution is at risk.

This has all been covered before, by much more knowledgeable people than myself.

People are born with natural, inalienable, rights, some of which are called out in the Declaration of Independence. Yes, this includes the right to life (leading to protection from violence), but it also includes many other, equally important, rights.

People form governments for the sole purpose of protecting these natural rights.

Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these natural rights, the people have the right to overthrow that government and replace it with another of their choosing.

In the U.S., we have the right to free speech, assembly, privacy, and arms to ensure that the above process is (at least theoretically) possible.

[JP171]

Why do I care, if I have nothing to hide? Because I think the government should respect the constitution, even if that means we live with greater threats in our lives.

Well, greater threats means more deaths, and more deaths mean more Democrat voters.... or is that what you meant by "greater threats" in the first place?

Realistically, one of the prime responsibilities we expect of government is supressing violence, and if violence starts making people afraid, they complain to their Congressmen to "do something." That's when the values of the Constitution is at risk.

This has all been covered before, by much more knowledgeable people than myself.

People are born with natural, inalienable, rights, some of which are called out in the Declaration of Independence. Yes, this includes the right to life (leading to protection from violence), but it also includes many other, equally important, rights.

People form governments for the sole purpose of protecting these natural rights.

Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these natural rights, the people have the right to overthrow that government and replace it with another of their choosing.

In the U.S., we have the right to free speech, assembly, privacy, and arms to ensure that the above process is (at least theoretically) possible.

sorry dood, dead non phone owning terrorists have no rights period dot end full stop. the phone owner has the rights and it wasn't ACHMED the dead terrorist that owned the phone it was san bernidino county, they hold the rights not the craptastic butthat that was using it to get all his terrorist buddies to plan this and more terroristic acts

[92f-fan]

I have nothing to hide BUT
I do conduct banking on my phone
AND I expect my bank to protect my $
They do that by understanding the security of the devices that they let me use to alter my accounts

Security and encryption is required by and expected by all of us. Just because you dont think you directly use it doesnt mean you dont
If better security and encryption was used we wouldnt worry about the IRS, Target, Home Depot Breaches....

[cb1000rider]

New Democrat voters were created by not securing the borders. That is also the source of much of the crime that we are seeing and likely the next domestic terrorist attack as well. If there is data on that phone that could stop the next attack, than Apple should turn it over, full stop. Everything else is just commentary.

Certainly newly minted citizens looking for opportunity tend to vote Democratic. I do take pause pushing the whole deal on the Democrats though. It was Reagan and Bush who actually passed amnesty that resulted in the immediate minting of a a bunch of new citizens. We tend to do that every few decades and it's not just Democrats.

And lets say that Trump gets into office, arm-wrestles Mexico into building that wall for us, puts up a trade embargo that costs zero American jobs and all that jazz... IE - the influx problem is dealt with and the economy is still functional.

Here's what Republicans need to remember.. Assuming that there are some left after this coming implosion of an election:
Even if you stop all of the illegal migration, the birth rate within the Hispanic demographic means that Republicans might have to start actually accepting some of those 2nd-generation voters.. Alienating the majority of a population probably isn't a good long term strategy. That is, especially in our state, that particular demographic will be a powerful force...

Like it or not, it's in the statistics.. Gotta play the long game.

[BigGuy]

4 new ways to bypass passcode lock screen on iPhones, iPads running iOS 9

[Bitter Clinger]

New Democrat voters were created by not securing the borders. That is also the source of much of the crime that we are seeing and likely the next domestic terrorist attack as well. If there is data on that phone that could stop the next attack, than Apple should turn it over, full stop. Everything else is just commentary.

Certainly newly minted citizens looking for opportunity tend to vote Democratic. I do take pause pushing the whole deal on the Democrats though. It was Reagan and Bush who actually passed amnesty that resulted in the immediate minting of a a bunch of new citizens. We tend to do that every few decades and it's not just Democrats.

And lets say that Trump gets into office, arm-wrestles Mexico into building that wall for us, puts up a trade embargo that costs zero American jobs and all that jazz... IE - the influx problem is dealt with and the economy is still functional.

Here's what Republicans need to remember.. Assuming that there are some left after this coming implosion of an election:
Even if you stop all of the illegal migration, the birth rate within the Hispanic demographic means that Republicans might have to start actually accepting some of those 2nd-generation voters.. Alienating the majority of a population probably isn't a good long term strategy. That is, especially in our state, that particular demographic will be a powerful force...

Like it or not, it's in the statistics.. Gotta play the long game.

Since you seemed attuned to identity politics, I reckon you already realized that Republicans may well nominate Cruz or Rubio?