• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigations

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
In a New York case that mirrors the legal wrangling unfolding over the FBI investigation into last year’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, U.S. Magistrate Judge James Orenstein denied a request from federal prosecutors that he make Apple unlock a drug dealer's iPhone.

The FBI was simply asking for too much. Good decision. I believe this case, along with the San Bernardino case, will end up in SCOTUS.

Article is here.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Good for Apple. The "I want more government intrusion crowd" are probably fuming.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Will be appealed. At least this time Apple does not look like it is using the "we cant" bull**** argument.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Good for Apple. The "I want more government intrusion crowd" are probably fuming.

Agreed, this is a good round win for them. Up through the courts this case goes.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Glad to see that. I heard an argument earlier that is the government forces them to make a code to unlock the phones, it could be in violation of the 13th amendment. I thought that was an interesting take.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Glad to see that. I heard an argument earlier that is the government forces them to make a code to unlock the phones, it could be in violation of the 13th amendment. I thought that was an interesting take.

I saw that too, it was a good take to have on it.

But I still think this comes down to a very strong point that Apple makes. For Apple to do what the government wants here means designing a product that purposefully has a security flaw in it that really anyone could exploit for whatever reason. It is a step backwards for technology products where the only beneficiary is governments (pure and simple open spying request) *and* those willing to engage in electronic based crimes (data theft, data hijacking, hacking, identity theft, etc.)

I do not think enough people realize the damage this sort of request does to an industry and to the populace in general.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

And this is part of the point Apple was making.

It's not "just" the terrorists phone. The government is wanting this in a broad fashion.

Once a tool to backdoor the iPhone is created, the act of forcing Apple to agree to break into your property on behalf of the government becomes far easier and plausible.

You can't force someone to open something they don't have the key for. Which is why the government is attempting to force Apple to expend it's private resources to unwillingly create a key, and then wants to force them to use it to open things up.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

The FBI wants apple to create a new OS that disables the security wipe after 10 attempts to unlock, that way the FBI can brute force their way through the key code. After Apple creates this software, what is to stop the FBI from seizing it as a national security measure?
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Will be appealed. At least this time Apple does not look like it is using the "we cant" bull**** argument.

It's not just "we can't". That is an oversimplification that is taking the whole thing out of context. Yes, they can create a backdoor. It is after all just coding. The whole picture that you're ignoring with your statement here is that they (Apple) cannot do it without making it to where EVERYONE's iPhone/iPad is subject to that same coding that the FBI wants.

The FBI wants Apple to create coding that will break into SB shooters phone. Specifically coding that will disable the 10 attempt limit so that they can brute force the phone. Due to the way that the evidentiary laws work if Apple were to make such coding and put it on that phone the FBI would then have full custody of that coding and be able to reverse engineer that coding and then use it themselves on any Apple product (particularly since they want the coding to be able to be transmitted wirelessly) and also give that coding to any other government department, such as the NSA. (in point of fact it would prolly be the NSA that reverse engineers it to begin with) After that then that coding is out there. There have been plenty of times that the FBI computers were hacked (along with other government agencies computers). Which means that coding would also be subject to being let loose among the hacker world. That is what Apple is trying to prevent. It's not that they can't do it. It's that if they do it then every single IPhone/IPad/Mac computer etc etc etc will be at jeapordy not only from hackers but also government abuse. And Snowden proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that our government is quite willing to abuse its power to spy.

And frankly this is the only real reason that the FBI wants this code. Despite their claim of wanting to find out if those phones have potential terrorists on it, that is only partially the reason. The real reason that they want it is so that the government can use it to spy on anyone that has an Apple product. Otherwise there would have been no need, no reason what so ever, to demand that the coding includes a way to wirelessly over ride the 10 attempt limit. They have the physical phone. There is absolutely no reason to do it wirelessly. None. When they demanded that the coding include a wireless option they showed their true intentions.

And yes, I'm quite willing to give up a little bit of security in order to preserve my right to privacy. And no, I have nothing bad to hide from the government. I do however want to hide my private information from the government since there is absolutely no reason for them to have that information.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

It's not just "we can't". That is an oversimplification that is taking the whole thing out of context. Yes, they can create a backdoor. It is after all just coding. The whole picture that you're ignoring with your statement here is that they (Apple) cannot do it without making it to where EVERYONE's iPhone/iPad is subject to that same coding that the FBI wants.

The FBI wants Apple to create coding that will break into SB shooters phone. Specifically coding that will disable the 10 attempt limit so that they can brute force the phone. Due to the way that the evidentiary laws work if Apple were to make such coding and put it on that phone the FBI would then have full custody of that coding and be able to reverse engineer that coding and then use it themselves on any Apple product (particularly since they want the coding to be able to be transmitted wirelessly) and also give that coding to any other government department, such as the NSA. (in point of fact it would prolly be the NSA that reverse engineers it to begin with) After that then that coding is out there. There have been plenty of times that the FBI computers were hacked (along with other government agencies computers). Which means that coding would also be subject to being let loose among the hacker world. That is what Apple is trying to prevent. It's not that they can't do it. It's that if they do it then every single IPhone/IPad/Mac computer etc etc etc will be at jeapordy not only from hackers but also government abuse. And Snowden proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that our government is quite willing to abuse its power to spy.

And frankly this is the only real reason that the FBI wants this code. Despite their claim of wanting to find out if those phones have potential terrorists on it, that is only partially the reason. The real reason that they want it is so that the government can use it to spy on anyone that has an Apple product. Otherwise there would have been no need, no reason what so ever, to demand that the coding includes a way to wirelessly over ride the 10 attempt limit. They have the physical phone. There is absolutely no reason to do it wirelessly. None. When they demanded that the coding include a wireless option they showed their true intentions.

And yes, I'm quite willing to give up a little bit of security in order to preserve my right to privacy. And no, I have nothing bad to hide from the government. I do however want to hide my private information from the government since there is absolutely no reason for them to have that information.

Fighting the access code is also good for Apple business. Everyone knows about NSA's backdoor to MicroSoft products. Perhaps Apple users feel more secure. I know I would.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

The FBI is demanding that Apple code a new iOS backdoor for the SB iPhone that:

1) Does away with the iOS command that all internal data will be wiped (deleted) if there are 10 consecutive incorrect attempts to enter the security-keycode (this allows a "brute-force" attack on iPhone security)

2) Does away with the iOS command that the security-keycode can only be entered on the iPhone screen (this allows stand-aside supercomputers to act as the security-keycode interface)

3) Does away with the iOS command that there be a minimum pause (88 ms initially) between attempts to enter the security-keycode (this will allow supercomputers to enter keycode combinations at a brute-force rate)
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

The FBI was simply asking for too much. Good decision. I believe this case, along with the San Bernardino case, will end up in SCOTUS.

Article is here.

“This phone may contain evidence that will assist us in an active criminal investigation and we will continue to use the judicial system in our attempt to obtain it,” the department said in a statement.

This statement says it all. Government wants the ability to go fishing anywhere, anytime, it chooses. Apple has built in a system that prevents fishing. Apple is protecting my privacy. Apple is correct.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Glad to see that. I heard an argument earlier that is the government forces them to make a code to unlock the phones, it could be in violation of the 13th amendment. I thought that was an interesting take.

Not just the 13th, but the first and fifth as well.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

It's not just "we can't". That is an oversimplification that is taking the whole thing out of context. Yes, they can create a backdoor. It is after all just coding. The whole picture that you're ignoring with your statement here is that they (Apple) cannot do it without making it to where EVERYONE's iPhone/iPad is subject to that same coding that the FBI wants.

No it is not an oversimplification.

The FBI wants Apple to create coding that will break into SB shooters phone. Specifically coding that will disable the 10 attempt limit so that they can brute force the phone.

Correct... which means Apple already has a way to get onto the phone, else they could not add the new code.

Due to the way that the evidentiary laws work if Apple were to make such coding and put it on that phone the FBI would then have full custody of that coding and be able to reverse engineer that coding and then use it themselves on any Apple product (particularly since they want the coding to be able to be transmitted wirelessly) and also give that coding to any other government department, such as the NSA. (in point of fact it would prolly be the NSA that reverse engineers it to begin with) After that then that coding is out there. There have been plenty of times that the FBI computers were hacked (along with other government agencies computers). Which means that coding would also be subject to being let loose among the hacker world. That is what Apple is trying to prevent. It's not that they can't do it. It's that if they do it then every single IPhone/IPad/Mac computer etc etc etc will be at jeapordy not only from hackers but also government abuse. And Snowden proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that our government is quite willing to abuse its power to spy.

Which is why the FBI has suggested that Apple do all the work and give them the information... you forgot to mention that part eh? And chances are the NSA already has the ability to gain access to any iPhone they want, but does not want to share this with the FBI due to departmental infighting and exposing that they can... it is the NSA after all.

And yes, I'm quite willing to give up a little bit of security in order to preserve my right to privacy. And no, I have nothing bad to hide from the government. I do however want to hide my private information from the government since there is absolutely no reason for them to have that information.

And yet you have no problem with private companies having the information, using it and selling it?

Listen I dont like government or private companies have so much information about me, but I do understand that to make society work that this is needed. One of the things that is acceptable is the ability of government via a warrant to gain access to criminals information so they can put them away for crimes. So when a private company like Apple first says it cant and then changes to it wont, then my alarm bells start running. Then they claim security for its users, and yet Apple is not know for its security nor caring much about its users.. which I have pointed out and proved many times.

So we are back to why Apple does not want to do it.. and it is clear now that it is because of marketing and keeping a myth alive instead of actually caring about their users. Why? Because they have already (many times) given to the government, the information on users iCloud accounts. If Apple were soooo bent on defending their users privacy, then why did they never fight those cases? Or why was Apple not part of the protest against the US law that requires cloud services to hand over information on non-US based users? Microsoft and Google are fighting it.. but Apple is never mentioned..why is that?

Privacy is fine and dandy.. but protecting your privacy also protects the privacy of pedophiles and terrorists... you like that?
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Correct... which means Apple already has a way to get onto the phone, else they could not add the new code.
Incorrect. The FBI demanded SB backdoor does not currently exist empirically.

Its creation will require a SCIF, 1 project manager, 7 software engineers, 1 QA manager, 1 document writer, extremely high security, total document/log/device destruction.

This endeavor will cost ~$23 million dollars and take 4-6 weeks.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

And this is part of the point Apple was making.

It's not "just" the terrorists phone. The government is wanting this in a broad fashion.

Once a tool to backdoor the iPhone is created, the act of forcing Apple to agree to break into your property on behalf of the government becomes far easier and plausible.

You can't force someone to open something they don't have the key for. Which is why the government is attempting to force Apple to expend it's private resources to unwillingly create a key, and then wants to force them to use it to open things up.



Worse, if Apple makes the tool for the FBI and they use it to break that one phone, there is immediately the risk that:

1. They will now use it on any phone they please;

2. Their hackers will figure out a way to remotely apply to phones at their leisure;

3. They will share it with other agencies;

4. A third party might successfully hack into Apple, FBI, or any agency that gets their hands on it and steal it for their own purposes.

Etc etc etc.


Huge risk all around.





It's not like they stayed within the extremely broad bounds of the Patriot Act - the NSA did massive illegal wiretapping, used its powers illegally to help other agencies conduct drug investigations and other things not related to terrorism, etc - so what reason could anyone have to trust the FBI with this?
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

And chances are the NSA already has the ability to gain access to any iPhone they want, but does not want to share this with the FBI due to departmental infighting and exposing that they can...

Except that the NSA used its wiretapping powers in any number of illegal ways, some of which were to assist other federal agencies conducting investigations that had nothing to do with terrorism.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Simpleχity;1065613467 said:
Incorrect. The FBI demanded SB backdoor does not currently exist empirically.

No I am correct. The backdoor does not exist, but Apple does have a method of getting it on the phone which is what they claimed they could not. Hence Apple does have the ability to get onto the phone.. something Apple has denied they can.

Its creation will require a SCIF, 1 project manager, 7 software engineers, 1 QA manager, 1 document writer, extremely high security, total document/log/device destruction.

This endeavor will cost ~$23 million dollars and take 4-6 weeks.

So what? That is a few minutes worth of Apple profit..
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Except that the NSA used its wiretapping powers in any number of illegal ways, some of which were to assist other federal agencies conducting investigations that had nothing to do with terrorism.

And? The NSA still exists and you seriously think they stopped just because Snowdon exposed them? HAHAHA
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

A win for Apple and the American People.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

No I am correct. The backdoor does not exist, but Apple does have a method of getting it on the phone which is what they claimed they could not. Hence Apple does have the ability to get onto the phone.. something Apple has denied they can.



So what? That is a few minutes worth of Apple profit..

The back door would work on All they use the same codes. Funny how when ZTE was caught with a backdoor installed the US government forced them to remove it. The government wants access to ALL cell phones not just two terrorists, you might feel comfortable with that and trust them to never abuse that power, I would not and do not trust government.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

Except that the NSA used its wiretapping powers in any number of illegal ways, some of which were to assist other federal agencies conducting investigations that had nothing to do with terrorism.

And? The NSA still exists and you seriously think they stopped just because Snowdon exposed them? HAHAHA


I didn't say they stopped. That would also be completely inconsistent with my other post, above the one you responded to.

I didn't even mention Snowden.






I believe you can figure out where to shove that...
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

So what? That is a few minutes worth of Apple profit..

The judge ruled the government does not have the authority to force a company into servitude to the government. So up it goes.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

No I am correct. The backdoor does not exist, but Apple does have a method of getting it on the phone which is what they claimed they could not. Hence Apple does have the ability to get onto the phone.. something Apple has denied they can.
Apple has never denied the theoretical ability to create a backdoor. However, no empirical backdoor currently exists and Apple would rather not create one.

A backdoor would have to be created, developed, tested, validated, utilized, and then destroyed.
 
Re: Apple wins a round in fight over accessing locked iPhones in criminal investigati

No it is not an oversimplification.

When you boil an argument down to two words...yes, it is an over simplification.

Correct... which means Apple already has a way to get onto the phone, else they could not add the new code.

Wrong, they have to create a way to get that new coding onto the phone, if forced to do this.

Which is why the FBI has suggested that Apple do all the work and give them the information... you forgot to mention that part eh? And chances are the NSA already has the ability to gain access to any iPhone they want, but does not want to share this with the FBI due to departmental infighting and exposing that they can... it is the NSA after all.

I don't recall the FBI ever saying that they're willing to give Apple sole custody of that iPhone and never wanting that iPhone back. If they have then it would be a complete lie due to evidentiary laws. As for the NSA, its quite possible that they do have it. Until such evidence that they do comes out then we can't say for definitively that they do. I'm quite willing to go with the possibility that they don't and as such I don't want Apple to give them the ability.

And yet you have no problem with private companies having the information, using it and selling it?

There are laws on what type of information that they sell. Otherwise I agree to the TOS that they have if I want to use their products. The TOS for the Government is outlined in the Constitution, when the government tries to abuse the power outlined in that Constitution then yeah, I have a problem with it. Just liked I'd have a problem with a private company that sold information about me that is against the law to sell.

Listen I dont like government or private companies have so much information about me, but I do understand that to make society work that this is needed. One of the things that is acceptable is the ability of government via a warrant to gain access to criminals information so they can put them away for crimes. So when a private company like Apple first says it cant and then changes to it wont, then my alarm bells start running. Then they claim security for its users, and yet Apple is not know for its security nor caring much about its users.. which I have pointed out and proved many times.

Society can work just fine without the government knowing every single little thing that there is to know about us. It's done that for thousands of years.

And perhaps you can point out where exactly that Apple said that they can't do what the government wants them to do. Let's get some context here. ;)

So we are back to why Apple does not want to do it.. and it is clear now that it is because of marketing and keeping a myth alive instead of actually caring about their users. Why? Because they have already (many times) given to the government, the information on users iCloud accounts. If Apple were soooo bent on defending their users privacy, then why did they never fight those cases? Or why was Apple not part of the protest against the US law that requires cloud services to hand over information on non-US based users? Microsoft and Google are fighting it.. but Apple is never mentioned..why is that?

And in each of those 70 times that Apple has done this previously they were using a different iOS. Tell me Pete, why is it that everyone in the tech industry is supporting Apple in this? And I'm not just talking about companies, but individuals. Individuals that don't even own a company and yet know more about the tech world than both you and me combined? All of them agreeing with Apple.

Privacy is fine and dandy.. but protecting your privacy also protects the privacy of pedophiles and terrorists... you like that?

There's an old saying here in the US. It is better to let 100 criminals go than to convict one innocent person. The meaning being that the innocents rights are far more important than getting the bad guy at all costs. So, to answer your question, no I don't like it. I do however recognize that in a free society it is sometimes necessary to let those pedophiles and terrorists escape in order to preserve what it is exactly that made America so great in the first place.

Another old saying that we have in the US. Coined by Franklin... "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I happen to agree with him.

One more old saying... "The road to hell is paved with good intentions.".

So, yes, I'm quite willing to protect the privacy of a pedophile and a terrorist in order to protect not only my right to privacy, but also everyone else's right to privacy and even further, our future generations privacy.
 
Back
Top Bottom