Apple - A Message to Our Customers

[BigD1]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave

They were too busy looking at American citizens and missed these terrorists. UD

Amen brother! The woman was posting her support of ISIS on Facebook before she was let into the USA. Makes one wonder who is guarding the gate, and just who else got in so easy. There is a chance that the mass killings would have never happened if she had been kept out.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint

Originally Posted By: grampi

This thread is overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining people's privacy. While I am also concerned about people's privacy, if one person's life could be saved by unlocking this phone, that is more important than privacy...

That's how I feel.

I am sure one life could be saved by seizing all the guns. I guess you two are for that also?

 

[TWG1572]

I've never understood people's willingness to trade away freedoms and a basic expectation of privacy on the assumption that they aren't doing anything wrong, so who cares? It reminds me of a poem I read in school many years ago, which has stuck with me since. First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out -because I was not a communist; Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist; Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew; Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me. This is bigger than just one phone. It sets a precedent, and as stated earlier "lets the camels nose in the tent".

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave

Originally Posted By: Nate1979

If the back door is only accessible by warrant I dont see the issue. With a warrant they have many ways to watch you, this is a minor one. I dont think they are asking for unfettered access.

Not under the patriot act. FBI conducted warrantless investigations into peoples data, banking, and communication and phone records over 190K times so far. They also conducted over 3900 warrantless searches of homes and businesses. The Fisa court only reject like .3 percent of all requests. Its a drone court system. They were too busy looking at American citizens and missed these terrorists. UD

Wait, are you saying the FBI without court order was spying on Americans? I don't follow this issue on a regular basis but what you are saying seems to be double speak. On one hand you mention the it is Court reviewed (FISA court) and on the other hand you said the FBI did not have court review (i.e. warrantless). Which is it? You may disagree with the court and that is a separate issue.

 

[UncleDave]

Actually yes- the FBI can issue an NSL which gives them warrantless access to you data, cell records, bank records, transactions - none of this has any oversight. The same FBI then bypasses the local authorities and goes to a secret court also with no oversight called FISA an they can get a "sneak peak"- where thy can go search your business and property and can steal records photos practically anything they want and they dont even have to tell you there are doing it. They did this over 3900 times. They aren't supposed to do this to American citizens but they do. FISA's rejection rate is actually more like .03% a kangaroo secret court with no oversight may meet your definition of a "warrant" but how is it a "warrant" if they dont even have to tell you? Heres some pretty accurate 3rd party info on whats going on. https://www.aclu.org/infographic/surveillance-under-patriot-act http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/03/fisa-court-rubber-stamp-drones

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

No need for any risks. Simply have Apple develop the allegedly needed software in house and use it on the one phone. Simple. Then give the data to the FBI.

Isn't that begging for chain of custody issues? Also, once the phone is unlocked, the FBI could reverse-engineer the firmware.

The FBI would ONLY be given the data off the phone ... NO code, NO tools.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: javacontour

Originally Posted By: grampi

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

When do you give all your passwords to the FBI, then? Would you also be perfectly happy to have your house searched by the police?

That isn't what they're asking for...they're asking for access to this one, particular phone...

No, they are asking for a master key. I think Apple has said they are willing to open a single phone. They are not willing to divulge how or provide the details of how it's done. Once you hand code to another party, it's out of your control. No guarantee that the FBI or any other party or agency won't use that code or reverse engineer it to unlock any other phone.

If Apple has already said they would get the info off of THIS phone and give it to the FBI (which I have not heard that yet), then the FBI should take that offer and then get lost. The FBI should NOT get code to unlock any phone they think they need to look at. IF that comes up in their investigations, then they would need a high court order for Apple (or whoever) to glean that info on a case by case basis.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: BubbaFL

Originally Posted By: hatt

If there is a backdoor, there is no security. An easy concept to grasp.

If a backdoor can be created as easily as is claimed, there is no security.

It would require a rewrite of IOS and then that version of IOS installed on a device. It isn't "easy" but it could be done. Your assumption that it is "easy" and thus there is no security is far too simple. If this product was created by somebody able to reverse-engineer IOS, they would still need to get that software installed on the device (like a jailbreak) which Apple has continued to make more and more difficult because of security. Apple's IOS releases are distributed directly by Apple (unlike Android which is often distributed by the carriers) and there is a rather robust signing/certificate process in place to ensure that only official software is installed. It is a closed system of security with encryption on top of it. A backdoor placed into an official version of IOS by Apple and enabling the installation of that software onto devices opens the door for that software to be pirated and once in the wild pose a massive security risk and this is why they are opposed to it.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: dishdude

Originally Posted By: demarpaint

Originally Posted By: grampi

This thread is overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining people's privacy. While I am also concerned about people's privacy, if one person's life could be saved by unlocking this phone, that is more important than privacy...

That's how I feel.

I am sure one life could be saved by seizing all the guns. I guess you two are for that also?

Seizing all the guns is hardly the same thing as accessing one phone...

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: BubbaFL

Originally Posted By: Colt45ws

There is no way to access that data without opening up every iphone to breach.

Apple knows how to breach the phone. They admit as much in their letter. And if Apple already knows how to breach the phone, your security is no better than their ability to keep the secret.

No, what Apple is saying is that they could build a backdoor into IOS for this purpose; basically break their own product to allow a special version of IOS to access the data via a tool or the like subsequently bypassing the encryption but that defeats the purpose of the encryption and building that back door, even if the version of IOS would be only for this purpose, opens two holes, the first being the allowance of the encryption to be bypassed and the second the existence of the software that enables/performs this. Once that hole is there, a 3rd party could work to develop a product to exploit it. As it stands, none of this stuff exists, if it did, as somebody else has said, the FBI wouldn't be asking Apple to do it because they would be doing it themselves.

 

[javacontour]

If you want to read the actual court order: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2714001/SB-Shooter-Order-Compelling-Apple-Asst-iPhone.pdf The part I have a problem with is asking Apple to provide the FBI with a binary to do this. Even if coded for only the device described in the order, one would think it could be modified to work on any device. I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but it seems to also give Apple and out and allow the work to be done in their facility so they don't give the FBI the binary to do the deed. It also doesn't unlock the phone. It just disables the permanent lockout after 10 failed PIN attempts. The FBI would still have to run brute force or whatever attack they plan on the PIN to access the phone.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979

Don't believe for a second that Apple couldn't make a secure back door. Lame excuse, and hiding behind the flag to do what they want. Just another reason I won't touch an Apple product.

There is no such thing as a secure back door, thats an oxymoron. By definition a backdoor is a security breach.

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

Originally Posted By: Nate1979

Don't believe for a second that Apple couldn't make a secure back door. Lame excuse, and hiding behind the flag to do what they want. Just another reason I won't touch an Apple product.

There is no such thing as a secure back door, thats an oxymoron. By definition a backdoor is a security breach.

So you are saying that Apple is able to design an OS which has many points of entry but is not able to design a secure method for the govt to gain access under court order? If the system already has a front door with a key why can't there be a back door with another key?

 

[GMFan]

This is an obstruction of justice. If the FBI rolls over they will be an embarrassment. Why would Apple gets a free pass? If this were anyone else they'd be charged with obstruction. This is no doubt a political move by Apple. Apple has admitted that it has unlocked phones dozens of times last year. Why won't they do it now? Is it because of the religious affiliation of the perps? Tim Cook should be hauled off to jail. The IRS crooks throw people in jail over small tax issues yet 2 Mooslems slaughter over a dozen people and Apple is impeding the investigation. How are people defending this?

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979

So you are saying that Apple is able to design an OS which has many points of entry but is not able to design a secure method for the govt to gain access under court order? If the system already has a front door with a key why can't there be a back door with another key?

Who makes the key? How is the key made? The "front door" key is made by the owner of the phone. He/She has control over that key. What about the back-door key? Who controls it? Is it the same key for every phone? That will be in the wild soon. Does Apple have a database of backdoor keys? How can we be certain it won't be compromised by bad actors? Same for an algorithm to make keys on demand. How do we know that algorithm will not be compromised or exposed allowing anyone with some information to make backdoor keys?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

Originally Posted By: Nate1979

Don't believe for a second that Apple couldn't make a secure back door. Lame excuse, and hiding behind the flag to do what they want. Just another reason I won't touch an Apple product.

There is no such thing as a secure back door, thats an oxymoron. By definition a backdoor is a security breach.

So you are saying that Apple is able to design an OS which has many points of entry but is not able to design a secure method for the govt to gain access under court order? If the system already has a front door with a key why can't there be a back door with another key?

Correct. Currently the only point of entry is with the PIN, passphrase or finger print of the user. This is the only point of entry into the device. The user has control over how simple or complex this is; how difficult it would be for somebody else to bypass the security on this single entry point. And, as noted, there's a limit as to how many attempts are allowed before the device locks, self-wipes....etc. And this is configurable by the user. A backdoor on the other hand would allow a special proprietary tool to access the data on the phone. This tool and mode of access would have to be universal, it could not be unique for each device like a finger print. And while there are most certainly people with the same passcode on their device out there, nobody knows who those people are so subsequently for the sake of argument, the front door for each phone is "unique", there is no master passphrase, it is per user. This is why it is secure. A backdoor, being universal, means that giving that access allows that access absolutely. To all devices running that operating system. It is a global compromise to the software, one key, all doors.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: GMFan

Apple has admitted that it has unlocked phones dozens of times last year.

Do you have more details on this? It would certainly be easy for Apple to unlock a phone for the purpose of reinstalling the OS. That means that any data on the device would be lost however because it would be encrypted with the key contained within the original OS. I can encrypt a hard drive and lock it with a password. I can take that hard drive out of that computer and put it in another computer but I cannot access that data unless I know the passphrase to unlock the encrypted contents. That does NOT however mean I can't just format the drive and install new software on it. But that DOES mean that all encrypted contents are gone.

 

[UncleDave]

There are no backdoor keys today. The feds are demanding Apple mod the entire IOS so they can come and go at will. Google agrees with Apples position. The story should be about how the DHS/FBI /NSA and C&I blew it - the subterfuge is working - you are all talking about apple vs the guys whose job it was to protect us and given unprecedented power to do so - that blew it. The sheep are easily distracted. UD

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: GMFan

This is an obstruction of justice. If the FBI rolls over they will be an embarrassment.

As usual, the FBI is going about this in the wrong way. All they understand is brute force, and expect everyone to comply with their tactics. All they need to do is ask for the data off the phone after Apple has encrypted it behind closed doors in their facility. The FBI is asking for the master key ... they need to go pound sand.

 

[GMFan]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

Originally Posted By: GMFan

This is an obstruction of justice. If the FBI rolls over they will be an embarrassment.

As usual, the FBI is going about this in the wrong way. All they understand is brute force, and expect everyone to comply with their tactics. All they need to do is ask for the data off the phone after Apple has encrypted it behind closed doors in their facility. The FBI is asking for the master key ... they need to go pound sand.

Well this wouldn't surprise me. If the FBI wants access to anyone's phone then I agree pound sand but if you're court ordered to unlock the terrorists phone than what is the problem? I'd have to imagine chain of custody of the phone could be handled correctly so data off device isn't deemed inadmissible in court.