This is why I will not own any Apple products!

[rentz]

NSA only captures meta-data. Not content. ...

which is even more intrusive than capturing content:

http://www.businessinsider.com/metadata ... ent-2013-8

and that only applies to phone calls, they can capture the entire content of digital information as soon as it moves outside US boarders which most tech companies have global data centers.

[mrvmax]

I'm on my phone so it's difficult to search the whole thread but read this before jumping to conclusions
http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

[rentz]

I'm on my phone so it's difficult to search the whole thread but read this before jumping to conclusions
http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

bingo...theyve helped they havent refused, but they are now being asked to write a new ios with a backdoor and that is where they are telling the fbi they will not comply.

When the FBI has requested data that’s in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we’ve offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal.

We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.

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.

[mr1337]

I don't have an iPhone, but I agree with their stance on not making a back-door-able operating system to let the FBI into the phone. This would surely be abused by the NSA and FBI, creating even more 4th Amendment violations.

It's easy to get up in arms when the government pulls the "terrorism" card to trump our rights, but we would not have one bit of it if (or rather, 'when') the government uses the "because terrorists" excuse to take away our 2nd Amendment rights.

I'm for the preservation of ALL rights. Even when it's not the easiest thing to do.

[The Annoyed Man]

Bitter, I have to respectfully disagree.....

I'm on my 3rd iPhone. I appreciate the privacy from the overreaching grasp of an out of control federal gov't which, particularly under the direction of a racist fascist like Obama, thinks it has no limits to its power over our lives. If that means that Apple has exclusive use of my data so that they can try to sell me stuff, well at least I'm being marketed to by a company which cares more about my 4th Amendment rights than does the government which is charged with protecting those rights.

If it is possible for Apple to cooperate with that investigation without revealing their encryption methods to gov't, then maybe they should cooperate. But if cooperation means revealing their encryption methods, thereby unlocking all iPhones to gov't intrusion at will, then the Obama administration can go fly a kite........EVEN if that means that some connection to other terrorists goes undiscovered.

"You'll be safer" as an excuse for giving NSA unprecedented access in all of history to the private data of loyal American citizens has turned out NOT to have prevented jihadist attacks in this country. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security and passage of the "Patriot" Act has made us LESS secure in our persons and affairs, while adding a HUGE bureaucracy with vast powers onto the backs of already overburdened taxpayers - a bureaucracy, which once created, will NEVER disappear from that burden. The last time I boarded a plane, I had to submit to having my privates jostled by a woman in uniform with an attitude.

If Apple can and will protect this lowly consumer's privacy from the intrusions of such a gov't, I applaud and thank them. Just look at what the pursuit of terrorism has done to both our liberties and our presumption of innocence even without criminal charges. We now live in an ages where we have to PROVE to gov't that our continued personal liberty is merited every single day by submitting to daily ongoing invasions of our privacy. Is THAT what generations of Americans fought and died for?

Those terrorists are dead. Good. Some of their associations have already been discovered. Good. I seriously doubt that giving THIS gov't access to the data of ALL Apple users will catch a single terrorist....... But it WILL diminish the Constitution that much more. TRUE Liberty is not without risk. I would rather assume that risk than surrender my Liberty. If others are more concerned about their risk than their liberty, then let them take steps individually to mitigate their risks (by carrying a gun, for instance). But the argument that ALL must surrender their liberty so that SOME can feel safe is bovine waste product, and it has done more to damage liberty in this country than almost any other influence.

While I heartly agree with the majority of your points, I think that your argument is as well formed as it is misplaced. WHY can't Apple just simply open that one phone and provide the needed assistance to that investigation? You know that they can - they simply choose not to. Apple doesn't give a dang about our rights, they are about as far left wing a company in philosophy as exists. They are doing this for commercial gain, likely due to the well deserved perception that their products are in fact NOT secure.

And while I am all for privacy and probably quite libertarian in that regard (shoot, I am still a Blackberry user), let's not get all crazy here. I have been finger printed, subject to multiple FBI background checks, regular lie detector screenings (try keeping a straight face when some kid just out of college asks if you have ever lied to your wife or a co-worker!) all for work, and so far, I am still here unscathed, posting my opinions.

So, we can agree to disagree on the integrity of Apple, but as for the rest, you are the closest thing to mom and apple pie for me!

Bitter, we're almost on the same page. My impression is that the gov't is pressuring Apple to write a new version of iOS with a backdoor in it. THAT, I cannot support. But like I said above, if Apple is able to provide the information in this case that the gov't is looking for, without compromising the security (and privacy) of customer data, then they should cooperate. I'm not technically savvy enough to know if that is possible. I would assume that it is, but I don't know for sure. But like I said, if cooperation means giving gov't a back door into my data from now on, by rewriting iOS and then including the backdoor in the next update download, then no, I can't support that.

[Jusme]

[/quote]
Bitter, we're almost on the same page. My impression is that the gov't is pressuring Apple to write a new version of iOS with a backdoor in it. THAT, I cannot support. But like I said above, if Apple is able to provide the information in this case that the gov't is looking for, without compromising the security (and privacy) of customer data, then they should cooperate. I'm not technically savvy enough to know if that is possible. I would assume that it is, but I don't know for sure. But like I said, if cooperation means giving gov't a back door into my data from now on, by rewriting iOS and then including the backdoor in the next update download, then no, I can't support that.[/quote]




You also have to think about Apple's position, if they did write the software to access any phone, who would buy another iphone, ipad, etc..This would completely destroy their company. This is just another attempt by this administration, to try to distract everyone from the egg on their face by saying "look, we are trying to do something but this evil corporate giant is defying us" While also continuing their policy of executive branch overreach.

Go Apple!!!

[The Annoyed Man]

Bitter, we're almost on the same page. My impression is that the gov't is pressuring Apple to write a new version of iOS with a backdoor in it. THAT, I cannot support. But like I said above, if Apple is able to provide the information in this case that the gov't is looking for, without compromising the security (and privacy) of customer data, then they should cooperate. I'm not technically savvy enough to know if that is possible. I would assume that it is, but I don't know for sure. But like I said, if cooperation means giving gov't a back door into my data from now on, by rewriting iOS and then including the backdoor in the next update download, then no, I can't support that.

You also have to think about Apple's position, if they did write the software to access any phone, who would buy another iphone, ipad, etc..This would completely destroy their company. This is just another attempt by this administration, to try to distract everyone from the egg on their face by saying "look, we are trying to do something but this evil corporate giant is defying us" While also continuing their policy of executive branch overreach.

Go Apple!!!

Quoting from the article:

In a statement posted on Apple's website early Wednesday, CEO Tim Cook said the order by U.S. Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym "has implications far beyond the legal case at hand."

"We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good," Cook's statement read in part. "Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone."

Pending evidence to the contrary, I have to assume that, when Cook states that the government is asking them NOT just to hack into the phone, but to build a backdoor to the iPhone's OS, that he is talking about something which will affect all iPhone users, present and future, and NOT just the individual phone in question. If that is the case, then I have to believe him, and heck no, I can't go along with that.

[Dave2]

WHY can't Apple just simply open that one phone and provide the needed assistance to that investigation? You know that they can - they simply choose not to.

Because, at least according to Apple's claims, there isn't a mechanism for them to open any phone, regardless of what the warrant says. Assuming they're telling the truth, it's not a matter of willingness — it is literally impossible for them to comply.

Regarding a hypothetical "custom" iOS that doesn't enforce the policy that deletes the phone after 10 failed unlock attempts, it still might not be possible. If that functionality is done in hardware, it won't matter what the OS says because the OS wouldn't be what's doing the deletion. There is precedent for this... iPhones (and iPads) that support TouchID (and possibly the older ones as well... I'm not sure) have dedicated security hardware for verifying that nobody has tampered with the fingerprint scanner. If I were designing a security system, that's how I'd do it. Once you become convinced the device has been compromised, then you have to assume the OS might be as well, so the correct course of action is to do the wiping in hardware, specifically to prevent someone from carrying out the very kind of attack that the courts are ordering Apple to do.

Plus, unless the phone is set to automatically install (not just download) OS updates without asking first, it won't matter because the iPhone in question won't load the new OS.

[Bitter Clinger]

WHY can't Apple just simply open that one phone and provide the needed assistance to that investigation? You know that they can - they simply choose not to.

Because, at least according to Apple's claims, there isn't a mechanism for them to open any phone, regardless of what the warrant says. Assuming they're telling the truth, it's not a matter of willingness — it is literally impossible for them to comply.

Regarding a hypothetical "custom" iOS that doesn't enforce the policy that deletes the phone after 10 failed unlock attempts, it still might not be possible. If that functionality is done in hardware, it won't matter what the OS says because the OS wouldn't be what's doing the deletion. There is precedent for this... iPhones (and iPads) that support TouchID (and possibly the older ones as well... I'm not sure) have dedicated security hardware for verifying that nobody has tampered with the fingerprint scanner. If I were designing a security system, that's how I'd do it. Once you become convinced the device has been compromised, then you have to assume the OS might be as well, so the correct course of action is to do the wiping in hardware, specifically to prevent someone from carrying out the very kind of attack that the courts are ordering Apple to do.

Plus, unless the phone is set to automatically install (not just download) OS updates without asking first, it won't matter because the iPhone in question won't load the new OS.

Aples claims are nonsense. There is always a solution. The real problem is that there is likely no will to implement it at Apple.

[Dave2]

Aples claims are nonsense. There is always a solution. The real problem is that there is likely no will to implement it at Apple.

The solution is to physically desolder the flash chips from the iPhone's motherboard, solder them into some nonexistent custom hardware designed to have direct access to them, then spend the next century or so brute-forcing the encryption.

And yes, if Apple made their security system the way they claim they did, and the gov is telling the truth about not having cracked Apple's encryption, that (potentially) really is the only way.

[rentz]

WHY can't Apple just simply open that one phone and provide the needed assistance to that investigation? You know that they can - they simply choose not to.

Because, at least according to Apple's claims, there isn't a mechanism for them to open any phone, regardless of what the warrant says. Assuming they're telling the truth, it's not a matter of willingness — it is literally impossible for them to comply.

Regarding a hypothetical "custom" iOS that doesn't enforce the policy that deletes the phone after 10 failed unlock attempts, it still might not be possible. If that functionality is done in hardware, it won't matter what the OS says because the OS wouldn't be what's doing the deletion. There is precedent for this... iPhones (and iPads) that support TouchID (and possibly the older ones as well... I'm not sure) have dedicated security hardware for verifying that nobody has tampered with the fingerprint scanner. If I were designing a security system, that's how I'd do it. Once you become convinced the device has been compromised, then you have to assume the OS might be as well, so the correct course of action is to do the wiping in hardware, specifically to prevent someone from carrying out the very kind of attack that the courts are ordering Apple to do.

Plus, unless the phone is set to automatically install (not just download) OS updates without asking first, it won't matter because the iPhone in question won't load the new OS.

Aples claims are nonsense. There is always a solution. The real problem is that there is likely no will to implement it at Apple.

bottom line, unless any of us are iphone developers we don't know and we're just guessing.
there isnt ALWAYS a way to break into encryption easily.
my speculation is that given enough time they could find a hardware solution by cracking open the phone and trial and error, my guess is they haven't gone that far yet.

[Dave2]

bottom line, unless any of us are iphone developers we don't know and we're just guessing.

I am, at the hobbyist level, at least (anyone hiring?). My claims regarding encryption don't have anything to do with it, though.

[rentz]

bottom line, unless any of us are iphone developers we don't know and we're just guessing.

I am, at the hobbyist level, at least (anyone hiring?). My claims regarding encryption don't have anything to do with it, though.

what you said above is basically what i was getting at, they're going to need a hardware workaround and risk destroying the phone.

[anygunanywhere]

Apple has unlocked phones 70 times before says the feds.

Apple does not dispute the figures.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... efore.html

[rentz]

Apple has unlocked phones 70 times before says the feds.

Apple does not dispute the figures.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... efore.html

But what model and version of os? Older versions did not have the same security settings on by default . A phone with an older os may very likely be quite easy to get into

The article has a quote that Apple can unlock it and won't, which if true is where I disagree with them since they have a federal court order and the govt followed all required legal requirements ...but it still seems to be a lot of hearsay from both sides