Judge orders Apple to help FBI hack SC Terrorists iPhone

Originally posted by Surtur
The problem with them trying to be a company that fights for your security is this story right here, which even if it isn't 100% the same it still doesn't reflect on them well. For some people all they'll need to know is Apple would help out in the past, but not with terrorists.

I also suspect this might be about marketing, but in a different way: Apple doesn't want to seem incompetent. Since I would ask why the government isn't asking them to do what they did before..and the only thing that makes sense is because they can't, so they think the only option is for Apple to mess with the security of all customers. You might think "wait it makes Apple look good, their devices are so secure" but some would see it and think "Hmm, Apple can't even get into an individual device, to the point where the only way is to screw over every customer?".

Plus it just seems the scale has changed. Apple was cool with invading the privacy of customers, just not in a way that screwed over every single customer. Which eh, doesn't paint them as champions for freedom and privacy. So they *will* invade your privacy if possible, just they won't sacrifice the security of everyone to do it. Is that a fair statement to make?

I agree that the FBI chose a very good case to get their framing through. This is a convicted terrorist and that's how a lot of news outlets will report it ("Apple refuses to help in case of convicted terrorist"😉. It sucks for people who value their privacy, but it's good that Apple is standing up for them (Microsoft and Google agreed as well).

Oh no, you misunderstand the technical background. Apple is working towards being unable to get into an iPhone. That's the holy grail of security, if not even the company that makes your device can get it, that's the goal. Apple has taken many steps to get us there and the iPhone 5C is a transitional step where Apple is still able to get in with a lot of effort, this may not even be possible with the iPhone 5s and subsequent models anymore.

I dont think Apple was "cool" with invading the privacy of their users previously. They were just aware that the laws of the US were written in such a way that they couldn't avoid complying.

See for me some reason I just feel..weary of that. Of something that is utterly 100% hack proof. Not that I want people to be able to be hacked, but just look at a situation like this with the phone..I have no idea what is on the phone, but what if in the future there was a case where something potentially threatening to national security was on a phone? Or even not a threat to national security, but something that could save hundreds of lives?

I am uncomfortable about both things, about the government spying on us..but on the other hand about tech so advanced that our intelligence agency just can't crack it at all.

Originally posted by Surtur
See for me some reason I just feel..weary of that. Of something that is utterly 100% hack proof. Not that I want people to be able to be hacked, but just look at a situation like this with the phone..I have no idea what is on the phone, but what if in the future there was a case where something potentially threatening to national security was on a phone? Or even not a threat to national security, but something that could save hundreds of lives?

I am uncomfortable about both things, about the government spying on us..but on the other hand about tech so advanced that our intelligence agency just can't crack it at all.

That's fair enough, it's a valid viewpoint to have. But you must realise that if the FBI has a backdoor into your phone that backdoor can also be used by China, that backdoor can also be used by Russian Hackers, that can be used by anyone with malicious intent as well.

There's no backdoor that only good guys can use. And I personally think people should have the right to a perfectly private and secure computer.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/san-bernardino-shooting/we-don-t-want-break-anyone-s-encryption-fbi-fires-n523186

FBI says they simply want to be able to type in passwords without the data being erased. How does making this one specific phone able to have as many password guesses as they need..going to seriously compromise the security of other customers? It's hard to believe altering this one phone would set off a chain reaction to every other I-Phone user.

Also the article says Apple has stated they literally lack the capability to break their own encryptions. It's almost like that question..can God make a rock so heavy even he can't lift it?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I agree that the FBI chose a very good case to get their framing through. This is a convicted terrorist

Convicted Terrorist?

I thought this was just another case of Workplace Violence like the Ft Hood incident.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Convicted Terrorist?

I thought this was just another case of Workplace Violence like the Ft Hood incident. [/B]

Yeah, you make a good point, I guess we don't really know why they did it, and I was a bit too quick to claim terrorism, though it seems like they had connections to extremist organizations.

I also misspoke saying he was convicted, since he's dead. However there isn't really any doubt as to his guilt, I guess that's what I meant really.

Pretty accurate.

Except for the fact Apple in the past totally helped people violate the privacy of their customers, so they don't have a leg to stand on. Doesn't matter if what the government is asking for now is way more then before, point is before they did it and didn't say no. So even if they aren't being asked to do 100% the same thing, they flat out violated privacy of customers before. What is that saying? If you feed a stray cat once don't be surprised if it comes back again for more.

Here is Bill Gates take on it, and he supports the FBI:

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/san-bernardino-shooting/bill-gates-backs-fbi-over-apple-san-bernardino-iphone-battle-n524031

You don't get to help the FBI violate privacy for an estimated 70 times and then suddenly grow a conscience. So it needs to be said if there is a victim in this scenario it is not Apple. The victims are their customers, and they are victims either way since Apple in the past already violated their privacy. So even if Apple is able to get out of doing this..the customers still have suffered. Just not every single customer, but still more then just 1.

I'd be quite curious to learn about the circumstances of these estimated 70 times they helped the FBI. Those situations better not of had anything to do with terrorism.

That's just not accurate. There's a huge difference between helping what is currently legally possible (which Apple is willing to do, and has done so in this very case), and creating a backdoor in the software that can potentially be exploited in the future by anyone.

Apple helped the FBI in this case as well, they provided iCloud backups. They helped them try to get the newest iCloud backup, but the FBI actually reset the iCloud password, making it impossible for Apple to help in this way.

There's really only two ways you can look at the FBI resetting the password (and thereby destroying its best chance to get the data) it's either incompetence (in which case we should definitely not let them make software decisions that affect a billion people) or it's malice (because they want a case of terrorism to strong arm Apple into creating an insecure backdoor for them (and for China and for Russian Hackers)). Neither makes the FBI look good in any way.

Just answer one simple question: in the past has Apple violated the privacy of certain customers for the FBI?

If you really want to learn more about this here's a couple of articles (though I think you really need to start by trying to understand the technical details to even begin to understand how it is so very different, and how dangerous a precedent this would be)

Why the FBI Request will affect Civil Rights for a generation:
http://www.macworld.com/article/3034355/ios/why-the-fbis-request-to-apple-will-affect-civil-rights-for-a-generation.html

The EFF on the law that the FBI uses to compell Apple to comply:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/judge-doj-not-all-writs

The ACLU's take:
https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-comment-fbi-effort-force-apple-unlock-iphone

Regarding the statement that Apple unlocked 70 phones and some technical background how it is incorrect:
http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/18/no-apple-has-not-unlocked-70-iphones-for-law-enforcement/

Noted Security Expert Bruce Schneier in The Washington Post on why to side with Apple:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/02/18/why-you-should-side-with-apple-not-the-fbi-in-the-san-bernardino-iphone-case/

The FBI's **** up (or malicious destruction of the way to get the information they need)
http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnpaczkowski/apple-terrorists-appleid-passcode-changed-in-government-cust#.yqzyw6eyE

The New York Times on the ramifications (for example for China) if the security is weakened:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/technology/apple-sees-value-in-privacy-vow.html?mwrsm=Twitter&_r=1

And finally Apple's FAQ regarding the issue:
http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/answers/

I could see it could set a dangerous precedent. But then isn't that sort of like the precedent Apple set by helping the FBI violate certain customers privacy in the past?

If they did this many many times before I can't really understand why they seem surprised the FBI would eventually up the ante and begin to ask for more and more.

Apple will win this, they have more money then Obama's bankrupt government.

What do you think about the help Apple has given the FBI in the past?

That was individual circumstances I believe, what no one is talking about is there is at least 157 phones that the FBI wants access too.

Wait what, because the FBI has been acting like they want access into a single phone. What are the other 156 phones for?

Other phones they want access too

But for what reason? They want the one phone because terrorism.

There are other phones they cannot get into that they want access to in other cases.

So why doesn't Apple just say "we'll help with the terrorism stuff, but nothing else" ? At least it shows a willingness to cooperate.