Two people pass a news stand with a headline about Apple's opposition of a court order to unlock an iPhone. Woman: I guess my iPhone is more secure than I thought.
Apple’s credibility would also be destroyed if they relented. Plus building a masterkey – which would be the result as Apple claims – could violate EU Data Protection laws that can (beginning 2018) result in fines of up to 2 % of the worldwide sales.
This may end up a very interesting case before SCOTUS. Apple is right to not want to open a “back door” that anyone can get through, as they noted, but what are the limits on what a warrant can mandate. CREATING a computer program that doesn’t currently exist doesn’t seem the same as just simply searching for evidence in what is not “property”. The phone is one thing, but the programming required to be created to secure the content????
Yes, but the court that decides this may end up being the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, not the conservative Scalia Supreme Court now that there is no Scalia..Sure, if there is some kind of consensus in which the liberals align with the conservatives, they can make a precedent-binding decisions..Absent that, a Scalia-less four-four tie leaves the lower court ruling in place.
The Apple encryption system is really, really secure if you use it right. Apple can’t decrypt the phone. The government wants Apple to change the design so they can spy on everybody. After Snowden, it is obvious that the rule of law is mostly ignored by the government when they have to opportunity to spy. Think about it, the way they would like to find potential wrong doers is to spy on everybody to find the very few who are plotting. Privacy is important, especially if you live in a repressive county.
The government of the usa already has access to everything on the planet. This entire media circus is just theater to make us think that our devices and communications are secure. They’re not.
Apple is opposing a judge’s order to help the FBI break into the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino, California, shooters, calling the directive “an overreach by the U.S. government.” Apple CEO Tim Cook says creating a backdoor to the iPhone would be dangerous and undermine decades of security advancements that protect customers. It is an unprecedented step – what ever the decision is, it will affect how data is secured.
If you want any security at all, don’t build a back door. This is akin to the government saying that everyone must hand over their house keys and car keys to them.
As far as this case goes, it’s probably moot. The existing phone isn’t built with a back door, so disabling the feature that erases data after 10 attempts is the only way to go.
What concerns me is that Apple is unwilling to give that a try. This gives the Government incentive to try it on their own. My fear is they just might succeed. Anything can be reverse engineered.
I would not give the Government the technology to do it. Let the Government give the phone to Apple and have Apple give them any data they retrieve. In this case, there is probable cause so 4th Amendment is still intact. However, Apple should be compensated for their efforts.
Let’s not forget that if Apple relented and permitted it to happen this one time, it would only pave the way for it to happen again and again in the future, because they’ll have effectively stated it’s okay to do that.
Personally, I praise Apple for making the stand and bringing the subject to a head. People have kind of been ignoring it for long enough, maybe now’s the time to work out how this sort of thing’s going to work in the future.
as7 about 8 years ago
Apple’s credibility would also be destroyed if they relented. Plus building a masterkey – which would be the result as Apple claims – could violate EU Data Protection laws that can (beginning 2018) result in fines of up to 2 % of the worldwide sales.
Ottodesu about 8 years ago
This cartoon was my reaction as well.I had assumed that they could break into my iPhone anytime.
Dtroutma about 8 years ago
This may end up a very interesting case before SCOTUS. Apple is right to not want to open a “back door” that anyone can get through, as they noted, but what are the limits on what a warrant can mandate. CREATING a computer program that doesn’t currently exist doesn’t seem the same as just simply searching for evidence in what is not “property”. The phone is one thing, but the programming required to be created to secure the content????
Happy Two Shoes about 8 years ago
How long would it take to break the encryption?
DD Wiz Premium Member about 8 years ago
Yes, but the court that decides this may end up being the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, not the conservative Scalia Supreme Court now that there is no Scalia..Sure, if there is some kind of consensus in which the liberals align with the conservatives, they can make a precedent-binding decisions..Absent that, a Scalia-less four-four tie leaves the lower court ruling in place.
NeedaChuckle Premium Member about 8 years ago
Just because Apple isn’t helping the Govt get info, doesn’t mean that Apple isn’t watching. Especially all the cloud stuff.
Theodore E. Lind Premium Member about 8 years ago
The Apple encryption system is really, really secure if you use it right. Apple can’t decrypt the phone. The government wants Apple to change the design so they can spy on everybody. After Snowden, it is obvious that the rule of law is mostly ignored by the government when they have to opportunity to spy. Think about it, the way they would like to find potential wrong doers is to spy on everybody to find the very few who are plotting. Privacy is important, especially if you live in a repressive county.
woodwork about 8 years ago
haven’t been following the serial killer part of this, but it seems to me that the law has enough evidence already…why do they need more?
Flash Gordon about 8 years ago
The government of the usa already has access to everything on the planet. This entire media circus is just theater to make us think that our devices and communications are secure. They’re not.
guy42 about 8 years ago
they want to find possible co-conspirators.
1941gko about 8 years ago
Where are the Protect America at all costs Howlers giving Apple flak for protecting Known Terrorists? Seems there is a Downside to Paranoia!
Mr. Blawt about 8 years ago
Apple is opposing a judge’s order to help the FBI break into the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino, California, shooters, calling the directive “an overreach by the U.S. government.” Apple CEO Tim Cook says creating a backdoor to the iPhone would be dangerous and undermine decades of security advancements that protect customers. It is an unprecedented step – what ever the decision is, it will affect how data is secured.
dflak about 8 years ago
If you want any security at all, don’t build a back door. This is akin to the government saying that everyone must hand over their house keys and car keys to them.
As far as this case goes, it’s probably moot. The existing phone isn’t built with a back door, so disabling the feature that erases data after 10 attempts is the only way to go.
What concerns me is that Apple is unwilling to give that a try. This gives the Government incentive to try it on their own. My fear is they just might succeed. Anything can be reverse engineered.
I would not give the Government the technology to do it. Let the Government give the phone to Apple and have Apple give them any data they retrieve. In this case, there is probable cause so 4th Amendment is still intact. However, Apple should be compensated for their efforts.
echoraven about 8 years ago
Thank you Apple.
scyphi26 about 8 years ago
Let’s not forget that if Apple relented and permitted it to happen this one time, it would only pave the way for it to happen again and again in the future, because they’ll have effectively stated it’s okay to do that.
Personally, I praise Apple for making the stand and bringing the subject to a head. People have kind of been ignoring it for long enough, maybe now’s the time to work out how this sort of thing’s going to work in the future.
dflak about 8 years ago
What? Nothing on the Chump and the Pope?