Apple vs. the FBI

fecurtis · 02-25-2016, 03:06 PM

What do you guys think of this whole Apple/Tim Cook vs. the FBI? I know privacy is a big deal for a lot of people and this is really the first time a large corporation has stood up and are planning to fight the US Government over it.

For those who don't know, basically the premise is this, the FBI wants Apple to take the phone used by the shooter in San Bernardino and remove the feature where the phone will wipe itself after so many consecutive log in attempts. This way the FBI can use brute force to unlock the phone (brute force is when you just try every single possible password combination until you get one that unlocks the phone).

Apple has no such software and they're refusing to update iOS with such a feature as it would effectively be creating a backdoor, or a security flaw on purpose.

Apple is arguing that to have the Federal Government make Apple create such software would be against their First Amendment rights. They argue that you can't make someone say something they don't want to, you can't make someone write something they don't want to either (in this case, writing computer code).

Do you guys agree with what Apple is doing?

RedlinePSI · 02-25-2016, 03:34 PM

Are you sure you have that right? This is the first I heard of them wanting to update the software to remove the 10 password-erase feature. Plus, if that was the case how would they even update the phone without having the ability to unlock it?

As I understood it, the FBI fucked up and changed the iCloud password in attempt to get into the phone. Once they did that, they essentially closed the last possible way in to the phone. Now the FBI wants Apple to create a back door to break the encryption on the phone. Apple is saying if they create something like that it will compromise the safety of everybody's data out there.

fecurtis · 02-25-2016, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

Are you sure you have that right? This is the first I heard of them wanting to update the software to remove the 10 password-erase feature.

Yup.

Quote:

Last week, the Justice Department sought and obtained a California judge’s order telling Apple to disable a feature that automatically clears data from a phone after 10 incorrect attempts at entering a password.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...mepage%2Fstory

RedlinePSI · 02-25-2016, 04:11 PM

Hm, so same question. How do they plan to install an iOS update on a locked phone? Apple doesn't have some magic key, they are not able to crack the encryption either. Hence the previous requests for them to create a way. I am pretty sure there is a lot of misinformation flying around the media on this case.

I will vote for Apple on this one. The government is basically saying that our devices should never be totally secure, in case they ever want/need to break in to them. I say that's bullshit. My personal belongings and data are none of your business. Until I commit a crime, I can do whatever I want with MY belongings and you have no right to limit my security with no just cause, on the chance you ever want at it. You cannot purposely leave a window open in technology, it WILL be exploited. It's hard enough to keep hackers out as it is.

fecurtis · 02-25-2016, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

Hm, so same question. How do they plan to install an iOS update on a locked phone? Apple doesn't have some magic key, they are not able to crack the encryption either. Hence the previous requests for them to create a way. I am pretty sure there is a lot of misinformation flying around the media on this case.

I will vote for Apple on this one. The government is basically saying that our devices should never be totally secure, in case they ever want/need to break in to them. I say that's bullshit. My personal belongings and data are none of your business. Until I commit a crime, I can do whatever I want with MY belongings and you have no right to limit my security with no just cause, on the chance you ever want at it. You cannot purposely leave a window open in technology, it WILL be exploited. It's hard enough to keep hackers out as it is.

Not sure, this is straight from Tim Cook:

Quote:

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.

http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

No idea how'd they actually would install it, but I'm sure there's away.

csu87 · 02-25-2016, 04:30 PM

If you really believe Apple cant figure out a way to get into a locked iPhone without creating a security flaw for everyone's iphone, you are kidding yourself. They created the thing.

Yes Apple should let the FBI into the phone. Who knows what could be on that phone that could prevent another terrorist attack.

eluded · 02-25-2016, 04:38 PM

Apple estimated 1600 man hours to create govOS

csu87 · 02-25-2016, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eluded

Apple estimated 1600 man hours to create govOS

well when the government will foot the bill, of course you are gonna say its gonna cost a lot

PINeely · 02-25-2016, 04:55 PM

I have a feeling that there isn't much on that phone which would be important. The shooters seem to have acted out of inspiration from ISIS but I doubt they were networking with other terrorists or anything like that. If the order stands it will also set precedent for the Feds to demand the same of other phone manufacturers.

RickFLM4 · 02-25-2016, 05:02 PM

I go back and forth on this one, starting with the irony of tech firms that exploit personal information for their own benefit refusing to assist in a terrorist investigation on the basis Apple is objecting.

I'm not sure I am convinced that if Apple does this is creates a security flaw that anyone can exploit (no matter how many times Tim Cook and others say "back door"). I am also not entirely convinced the password lock feature is as secure as it sounds. The phone belonged to the guy's employer and apparently they were too lazy or stupid to control the device the way they should. Most people with a device provided by an employer know their employer knows / can easily know what's on it. As such I'm not sure the customer / terrorist had a right to privacy.

On the other hand, it is a little concerning the government could order a tech firm to violate a customer's security in the future using this case as a precedent. They should have their own specialists that can do exactly what they are asking Apple to do, when authorized by a court, so their lack of expertise is also concerning for different reasons.

I'll say I agree with the government on this particular case but think Congress / President should put together some legislation to guide these situations in the future. They are only going to grow in importance over time.

M3 Number 86 · 02-25-2016, 05:29 PM

just do this

http://www.businessinsider.com/john-...or-free-2016-2

Lucky John · 02-25-2016, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

I will vote for Apple on this one. The government is basically saying that our devices should never be totally secure, in case they ever want/need to break in to them. I say that's bullshit. My personal belongings and data are none of your business. Until I commit a crime, I can do whatever I want with MY belongings and you have no right to limit my security with no just cause, on the chance you ever want at it. You cannot purposely leave a window open in technology, it WILL be exploited. It's hard enough to keep hackers out as it is.

So what you are saying is yes because people have been murdered here, and more may die because a corporation is refusing to assist and follow a judges order to assist, then Apple should be assisting?

JasonCSU · 02-25-2016, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by csu87

Yes Apple should let the FBI into the phone. Who knows what could be on that phone that could prevent another terrorist attack.

Absolutely not. By doing so sets a precedent allowing government agencies/law enforcement to force tech companies into creating back doors or security holes in their products and services thereby making them less secure which will affect everyone using those products or services.

This isn't about just one phone. If Apple does this, it will open up a floodgate of similar requests possibly to the point where the government even attempts to ban encryption. I for one am not willing to give up privacy for potential security which could lead us further to a big brother type of police state.

Verbiage · 02-25-2016, 05:48 PM

This reminds me to a certain degree of a parallel to Tor (the encrypted/proxy browser used for incognito web surfing) and how the FBI had a hand in tracking down illegal activity from it.

Of course they didn't force the developers of Tor to isolate certain individuals since that would go against the premise of the browser itself (not all users had malicious intent), but Apple should have the right to maintain their security measures for more reasons than just this individual case, as Jason has stated.

Verbiage · 02-25-2016, 05:49 PM

OP, I only voted "unsure" because I wasn't aware of the story and voted ignorantly before reading. Please take my vote back and count me as a "Yes".

bosstones · 02-25-2016, 06:11 PM

I side w/ the FBI on this one and I think, more than anything, Apple is worried about public image...especially considering that their stock price has fallen. The phone belonged to the county dept and they consented to have the phone searched.

To me, it doesn't matter if the FBI tried something to access it and f'ed up (not sure if this happened), thus needing Apple's help. This is not really new ground, just a new application of what things like search warrants are for. Apple can do what the FBI is requesting, but won't, even if the phone & magic sauce stayed in their possession the whole time.

I do agree that it likely contains little of use if anything at all, though.

cays · 02-25-2016, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JasonCSU

Absolutely not. By doing so sets a precedent allowing government agencies/law enforcement to force tech companies into creating back doors or security holes in their products and services thereby making them less secure which will affect everyone using those products or services.

This isn't about just one phone. If Apple does this, it will open up a floodgate of similar requests possibly to the point where the government even attempts to ban encryption. I for one am not willing to give up privacy for potential security which could lead us further to a big brother type of police state.

This. If we give up an inch of our personal liberties - which are now and will be under ever-increasing attack - the government will take the proverbial mile. Guaranteed.

EL Jeffe 5 · 02-25-2016, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bosstones

I side w/ the FBI on this one and I think, more than anything, Apple is worried about public image...especially considering that their stock price has fallen. The phone belonged to the county dept and they consented to have the phone searched.

To me, it doesn't matter if the FBI tried something to access it and f'ed up (not sure if this happened), thus needing Apple's help. This is not really new ground, just a new application of what things like search warrants are for. Apple can do what the FBI is requesting, but won't, even if the phone & magic sauce stayed in their possession the whole time.

I do agree that it likely contains little of use if anything at all, though.

Why would you side with Government. All they want to do I take our freedom.

Ali Shiralian · 02-25-2016, 06:56 PM

Apple is a multi billion dollar business and as such is more worried about what the public thinks of its products than our personal liberties. If Apple agrees and give FBI what they want, majority of iPhone and other Apple product users might think twice about buying their products. Blackberry here in Canada has been using encryption since I can remember and that was one of the reasons it was attractive to big corporations and even governments. Having said that, I think our personal liberties have been compromised and Apple, as commandable as their resistance is, can not stop higher powers to gain personal informations on civilians. It's a moot point...

sixburgh · 02-25-2016, 07:12 PM

County government that owned the iPhone paid for but never installed a feature that would have allowed the FBI to easily unlock the phone. It is the county's property. This is not one's personal phone. It belong to a terrorist who was bent on killing USA civilians,
Give up Apple. It's just one phone.

ASBSECU E93 · 02-25-2016, 07:30 PM

If the government does not have the knowledge or technical expertise to hack this single phone - then hire the encryption engineer from Apple to hack the phone...

Kong Sheng Han · 02-25-2016, 07:46 PM

I think it could open the door for them to abuse their powers. No thanks.

View Poll Results: Do you agree with Apple's stance against the US Government?
Yes	83	69.17%
No	29	24.17%
Unsure	8	6.67%
Voters: 120. You may not vote on this poll

02-25-2016, 03:06 PM	#1
fecurtis Banned 3262 Rep 6,299 Posts Drives: 2014 BMW 335i M-Sport Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Arlington, VA iTrader: (0)	Apple vs. the FBI What do you guys think of this whole Apple/Tim Cook vs. the FBI? I know privacy is a big deal for a lot of people and this is really the first time a large corporation has stood up and are planning to fight the US Government over it. For those who don't know, basically the premise is this, the FBI wants Apple to take the phone used by the shooter in San Bernardino and remove the feature where the phone will wipe itself after so many consecutive log in attempts. This way the FBI can use brute force to unlock the phone (brute force is when you just try every single possible password combination until you get one that unlocks the phone). Apple has no such software and they're refusing to update iOS with such a feature as it would effectively be creating a backdoor, or a security flaw on purpose. Apple is arguing that to have the Federal Government make Apple create such software would be against their First Amendment rights. They argue that you can't make someone say something they don't want to, you can't make someone write something they don't want to either (in this case, writing computer code). Do you guys agree with what Apple is doing?
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

02-25-2016, 03:34 PM	#2
RedlinePSI Lieutenant 127 Rep 502 Posts Drives: Something else Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: LI, NY iTrader: (0)	Are you sure you have that right? This is the first I heard of them wanting to update the software to remove the 10 password-erase feature. Plus, if that was the case how would they even update the phone without having the ability to unlock it? As I understood it, the FBI fucked up and changed the iCloud password in attempt to get into the phone. Once they did that, they essentially closed the last possible way in to the phone. Now the FBI wants Apple to create a back door to break the encryption on the phone. Apple is saying if they create something like that it will compromise the safety of everybody's data out there.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

02-25-2016, 04:11 PM	#4
RedlinePSI Lieutenant 127 Rep 502 Posts Drives: Something else Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: LI, NY iTrader: (0)	Hm, so same question. How do they plan to install an iOS update on a locked phone? Apple doesn't have some magic key, they are not able to crack the encryption either. Hence the previous requests for them to create a way. I am pretty sure there is a lot of misinformation flying around the media on this case. I will vote for Apple on this one. The government is basically saying that our devices should never be totally secure, in case they ever want/need to break in to them. I say that's bullshit. My personal belongings and data are none of your business. Until I commit a crime, I can do whatever I want with MY belongings and you have no right to limit my security with no just cause, on the chance you ever want at it. You cannot purposely leave a window open in technology, it WILL be exploited. It's hard enough to keep hackers out as it is.
	Appreciate 5 Quote

02-25-2016, 04:30 PM	#6
csu87 Banned 2134 Rep 3,554 Posts Drives: 09 335xi Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Northern Colorado iTrader: (0)	If you really believe Apple cant figure out a way to get into a locked iPhone without creating a security flaw for everyone's iphone, you are kidding yourself. They created the thing. Yes Apple should let the FBI into the phone. Who knows what could be on that phone that could prevent another terrorist attack.
	Appreciate 2 Quote

02-25-2016, 04:38 PM	#7
eluded 2JZ-GTE 3042 Rep 3,992 Posts Drives: 340 6MT, 50e, others Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Sofia iTrader: (0)	Apple estimated 1600 man hours to create govOS __________________ A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

02-25-2016, 04:55 PM	#9
PINeely Lieutenant Colonel 1086 Rep 1,912 Posts Drives: 2013 535i, 2015 Tundra 1794 Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Jackson, MS iTrader: (2)	I have a feeling that there isn't much on that phone which would be important. The shooters seem to have acted out of inspiration from ISIS but I doubt they were networking with other terrorists or anything like that. If the order stands it will also set precedent for the Feds to demand the same of other phone manufacturers.
	Appreciate 1 Quote

02-25-2016, 05:02 PM	#10
RickFLM4 Brigadier General 10975 Rep 4,821 Posts Drives: M4 Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: PB County, FL iTrader: (0)	I go back and forth on this one, starting with the irony of tech firms that exploit personal information for their own benefit refusing to assist in a terrorist investigation on the basis Apple is objecting. I'm not sure I am convinced that if Apple does this is creates a security flaw that anyone can exploit (no matter how many times Tim Cook and others say "back door"). I am also not entirely convinced the password lock feature is as secure as it sounds. The phone belonged to the guy's employer and apparently they were too lazy or stupid to control the device the way they should. Most people with a device provided by an employer know their employer knows / can easily know what's on it. As such I'm not sure the customer / terrorist had a right to privacy. On the other hand, it is a little concerning the government could order a tech firm to violate a customer's security in the future using this case as a precedent. They should have their own specialists that can do exactly what they are asking Apple to do, when authorized by a court, so their lack of expertise is also concerning for different reasons. I'll say I agree with the government on this particular case but think Congress / President should put together some legislation to guide these situations in the future. They are only going to grow in importance over time. __________________ Current: 2018 SO/SS F83 ZCP Gone: 2015 SO/SO F82
	Appreciate 0 Quote

02-25-2016, 05:29 PM	#11
M3 Number 86 Major General 3221 Rep 6,218 Posts Drives: black m3 Join Date: Mar 2015 Location: pasadena iTrader: (1)	just do this http://www.businessinsider.com/john-...or-free-2016-2 __________________ dadmobile IG: @M3number86 youtube: track vids
	Appreciate 0 Quote

02-25-2016, 05:48 PM	#14
Verbiage Dismembered Member 3583 Rep 9,213 Posts Drives: F80 ZCP 6MT, R55 Clubman S 6MT Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: DMV iTrader: (6)	This reminds me to a certain degree of a parallel to Tor (the encrypted/proxy browser used for incognito web surfing) and how the FBI had a hand in tracking down illegal activity from it. Of course they didn't force the developers of Tor to isolate certain individuals since that would go against the premise of the browser itself (not all users had malicious intent), but Apple should have the right to maintain their security measures for more reasons than just this individual case, as Jason has stated. __________________ My delivery experience and beach photoshoot here.
	Appreciate 1 Quote

02-25-2016, 05:49 PM	#15
Verbiage Dismembered Member 3583 Rep 9,213 Posts Drives: F80 ZCP 6MT, R55 Clubman S 6MT Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: DMV iTrader: (6)	OP, I only voted "unsure" because I wasn't aware of the story and voted ignorantly before reading. Please take my vote back and count me as a "Yes". __________________ My delivery experience and beach photoshoot here.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

02-25-2016, 06:11 PM	#16
bosstones Lieutenant Colonel 1154 Rep 1,543 Posts Drives: o_0 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Suburbia iTrader: (0)	I side w/ the FBI on this one and I think, more than anything, Apple is worried about public image...especially considering that their stock price has fallen. The phone belonged to the county dept and they consented to have the phone searched. To me, it doesn't matter if the FBI tried something to access it and f'ed up (not sure if this happened), thus needing Apple's help. This is not really new ground, just a new application of what things like search warrants are for. Apple can do what the FBI is requesting, but won't, even if the phone & magic sauce stayed in their possession the whole time. I do agree that it likely contains little of use if anything at all, though. __________________ - Jeff bosstones' flickr
	Appreciate 0 Quote

02-25-2016, 06:56 PM	#19
Ali Shiralian Lieutenant Colonel 813 Rep 1,986 Posts Drives: 2014 335i xdrive, 2014 X5 3.5d Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Owen sound, Ontario, canada iTrader: (0) Garage List 2017 Lexus RX 350 F ... [0.00] 2017 Jaguar F Type ... [0.00] 1990 Miata [9.00] 2014 X5 [9.00]	Apple is a multi billion dollar business and as such is more worried about what the public thinks of its products than our personal liberties. If Apple agrees and give FBI what they want, majority of iPhone and other Apple product users might think twice about buying their products. Blackberry here in Canada has been using encryption since I can remember and that was one of the reasons it was attractive to big corporations and even governments. Having said that, I think our personal liberties have been compromised and Apple, as commandable as their resistance is, can not stop higher powers to gain personal informations on civilians. It's a moot point...
	Appreciate 0 Quote

02-25-2016, 07:12 PM	#20
sixburgh Lieutenant 198 Rep 428 Posts Drives: 2010 128i 6 MT BMW PE Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Atlanta, GA iTrader: (0)	County government that owned the iPhone paid for but never installed a feature that would have allowed the FBI to easily unlock the phone. It is the county's property. This is not one's personal phone. It belong to a terrorist who was bent on killing USA civilians, Give up Apple. It's just one phone.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

02-25-2016, 07:46 PM	#22
Kong Sheng Han Banned 303 Rep 1,140 Posts Drives: Something something racecar Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Austin, Texas iTrader: (2) Garage List 2011 BMW 328i [0.00] 2001 BMW M3 [0.00]	I think it could open the door for them to abuse their powers. No thanks.
	Appreciate 0 Quote