Pls. share WHY you disagree....

Obviously those records are available by other means, but is searching a file cabinet fundamentally different from searching a phone, which is simply an electronic filing cabinet?

In this case, the government isn't clear on what they are looking for so I'm reluctant to be on their side.

But what if a phone contained the only evidence -not call records, but photos, notes, maps, etc.- that could prove guilt? Why would we be content with throwing it all away and saying, "Oh, well, maybe better luck next time."?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

In this case, they are asking the phone maker to give them something the maker does not have, and does not have for a good reason.

If the Gov. wants to make its own code for hacking into an phone, that is one thing.
But here, the Gov. wants company which built the phone to create and give away a code which then can be used on any other customer's phone in the future,
thus ruining a major design pitch that a customer bought the phone for...privacy.

Usually in these cases the FBI would try to co-erce the phone owner into giving up the password.
but in this case, the owner is ded.


The letter really covers it well, which is why I included the link.

I'm not for that.

and can't guarantee a "key" to unlock encryption won't be compromised.

in fact, by not having access to customer's phone data, Apple comes across as MORE trusted, much more than when AT&T secretly turned over ALL phone data to the Gov.

and of course Apple "can't guarantee a "key" to unlock encryption won't be compromised." by giving it to the FBI..
that's the WHOLE point of their refusal.
Duh.

It's not available by traditional hack. The data can be accessed by installing an earlier version of iOS which cannot be done unless in physical possession of the phone. Apple can access and deliver the data to the FBI without providing a "key".

Complying with a court order to supply the data would in no way compromise the privacy other iPhone owners.

They are asking Apple to change the iOS that runs on all phones to create a backdoor on all of them. Not 2 phones, but millions.

The software would still exist and could be stolen or hacked. For instance, LE would have that copy and could use it on other devices.

It's a 'sticky widget' because traditionally we've given LE full rights to gather evidence after a crime.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

They are asking for a generic back door.

It is not a 'sticky widget' because law enforcement (or any governmental agency) does not have any rights. People have rights, government has powers.

Yes LE has the authority to gather evidence. LE has no right to gather evidence. LE has the phone, and no way to unlock it, and that is the limit of the evidence they have.

What LE should do instead, is get a warrant for the information on the phone, serve Apple with the Warrant, send the phone to Apple Labs, and have Apple unlock the phone if it is possible. LE should not be looking for a generic tool that can be used on millions of phones.

Also, we need to look at precedent....this could open the door to sorts of precedent.

the truth is NSA and related depts want every bit of information they can get their hands on, and a locked door drives them mad.

indicates they want the tool, to keep, IMHO.

Mind you, I would like the Feds to have access to that information, but for Apple to cave would be the harbinger of disaster for the rest of us.

I'm pretty sure the Feds can fine someone to hack that phone without involving Apple.

I get frustrated sometimes when it seems people do not get how far we have gone down the slippery slope of Gov't spying.

speaking of, I just posted this:

US intelligence chief: we might use the internet of things to spy on you
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027619772

EVERY phone call went straight into Gov. listening post...remember that?

Now the NSA is wanting ISPs to keep detailed records of user's internet use for at least a year at a time.

As you point out, creating a hack into one indiv. phone can probably be done by the Gov.
The fact they are pushing so hard for Apple to do it indicates something bigger is at play.

Apple just wants to hoard the data they collect, and aren't much into sharing...

I can recognize PR grandstanding when I see it...

Logical: Oh for fuck's sake. You missed the whole point!

Iggo: Missed the point? I think it's more like he aimed right past the point.

Maybe I missed YOUR point, but I thought I was agreeing with you that he was nowhere near the point.

Whatevs.

Have a wonderful day.

How did you even GET there???????

I can't access your money, so I must be "hoarding" it.

Instead, the FBI is demanding Apple develop new software. That should be a big clue that Apple does not actually have the data.

Wow....a court is telling a company it has to develop a new technology/system/product just to give to the FBI.
The implications of that are quite staggering.

Apple could provide a way to access the data but Apple would retain control of the technology..there is no "key" given to the feds. Only the unencrypted messages would be given to the FBI.

Apple, The FBI And iPhone Encryption: A Look At What's At Stake
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/17/467096705/apple-the-fbi-and-iphone-encryption-a-look-at-whats-at-stake

Apple's view is that the customer owns their own data not Apple. Apple has shared all that it has in this case but what the government is asking for is for apple to engineer a new operating system which Apple at this time nether owns nor intended to make which would create a new "backdoor" into the devices that they make and sell which would allow the FBI to get into any apple product. The problem is if apple changed the operating software then all of Apple's product would no longer be safe from any hacker using the same "backdoor".

an iPhone. It makes no sense that they ask for something that could actually undermine our National Security.

I did a bit more digging..
What the FBI wants:

FBI wants a custom firmware load that will allow:

Any number of password attempts. No "10 wrong and you're done" auto-wipe.

Any means of entering them. No "must key them on the screen."

This then means the FBI can attempt to "brute force" the password using a computer over the USB interface and, they demanded, any other means such as Wifi, cellular or Bluetooth!

So this means for the future they would not even have to physically posses the device, they could hack it any time they wanted, from anywhere, at any time.

As if there is a choice for him.

What the government is asking for would fundimentaly break security. It would be nothing but embarrassing if he had any other stance on this.

Apple fans once again cheering for normal things as if it is innovative.

They hide their profits off shore. And employ slave labor from China to make these iphones. Not much to be proud of imo.

Apple Unlocked iPhones for the Feds 70 Times Before
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/17/apple-unlocked-iphones-for-the-feds-70-times-before.html

And FWIW, if you think Apple wouldn't instantly comply with a similar Chinese order, you're bullshitting yourselves...

EDIT: forgot link -- http://qz.com/618371/apple-is-openly-defying-us-security-orders-but-in-china-it-takes-a-very-different-approach/

From your link:

And, two technical experts told The Daily Beast, the company could do so with the phone used by deceased San Bernardino shooter, Syed Rizwan Farook, a model 5C. It was running version 9 of the operating system.

It adds several important factors to the issue, and begs a few questions:


Apple HAS provided info. since 2012, the article seems to say, under the court orders re: the Prism Act.

In this case, the court orders are using an antiquated All Writs Act, which seems to be an objection of Apple.

but, it turns out,

In retrospect it looks a lot like Ms. Swift & Apple started a controversy to generate a lot of attention, to the benefit of both parties.

Here Apple might be putting on a show of resisting but will eventually be forced to acquiesce under duress. They'll be able to please the FBI and will also be able to tell their customers that they fought the good fight in spite of The Man.