Posted on 02/17/2016 8:49:09 AM PST by pgyanke
Asking? They asked. Apple let them know they don't have the ability to access the phone. Asking is done. Now it's a court order to find a way.
Apple made a commitment to protect their customers' privacy. In that effort, they no longer keep encryption keys. They don't have access to any phone. The government is now fishing and wants Apple to come up with a way to do what they currently have no way of doing.
It isn’t fascism when “our” guy does it.
If Apple likes privacy then they should stop sending peoples info to other companies.
Apple most certainly could get the info themselves and give it if they wanted. This is not about privacy, this is about siding with muslim terrorist.
Note to muslim terrorist, buy Apple and you are secured as will keep your terrorist info safe and keep your terrorist pals safe too.
They can’t, they don’t know the password anymore than the government does.
Exactly. It isn't Apple's property and the warrant isn't for them.
The problem is, that Apple appears, according to the Tech Blogs, to have made an unbreakable system.
Bingo. It can't even be broken by Apple. The court has now ordered Apple to find a way. That is fascist. Why? Because Apple has broken no law and is subject of no investigation. Yet the court is enlisting Apple's help in an investigation to find a way to help the investigation... at their own expense (in money, time and lost customer confidence if they succeed).
If you are calling me clueless, please make your case.
“Why doesn’t Cook say that the tool cannot be created?”
The tool isn’t going to magically give access to the phone. All the tool would do is allow the government to bypass some of the ancillary security measures, to make it easier for the government to attempt a brute force decryption, which, in all likelihood, wouldn’t be successful anyway.
“Apple is an international company that can be located anywhere in the world with no real allegiance to this country despite being American owned.”
Yes, and you can be damn sure they will relocate if we try to force this down their throat.
“Imagine a safe in a bank.”
It’s not like a safe in a bank. Apple doesn’t have the combination. The only person that had the combination is dead.
I believe the enclave was introduced with the 5s. Touch ID uses it. Regardless, iOS 8 and above still has pretty solid security. As for installing a modified version of the OS? Don’t know. But I do know that I can’t use Touch ID to authorize a OS update. I must enter the passcode. And then after reboot, I must enter the passcode again before Touch ID will be allowed. Furthermore, at random intervals, the system will ask me to unlock using passcode instead of Touch ID. And I know the 5c doesn’t have Touch ID, but you’ll still need the passcode.
So even if they were able to bypass the passcode and push an update, you’re still gonna need the passcode to boot it up afterwards.
And if they’ve modified the OS enough to bypass that, they could very well trash the data they’re trying to access in the process.
Regardless of whether one supports or opposes Apple’s decision, you are dead wrong when you claim a company is not subject to court dictat.
You don’t know what you’re talking about.
It’s not like a safe in a bank. Apple doesn’t have the combination. The only person that had the combination is dead.
___________________
Fine.
If Apple has the technology to get it open, it can expose the contents of the communication without turning over the algorithm.
Landlords let the police into the criminals houses but don’t have to give up the keys.
If there is a warrant, you cooperate with the police or get jailed for contempt.
Without it, you won’t put people in prison. Imagine that the terrorists were still alive? What would be the argument?
It’s not like a safe in a bank. Apple doesn’t have the combination. The only person that had the combination is dead.
_____________
When you need a safecracker, you call the manufacturer of the safe first.
With all our intelligence capabilities; we don’t have a few thousand people under age 30 who could do this?
What is our tax money going for if not?
They don’t have the technology to do that. The government is asking them to create to new technology that might (but probably won’t) help the government try to force their way in.
However, if Apple complies and creates that technology, it compromises the security measures for all their other devices as well.
Hit a nerve did I?
So you buy Apple from the liberal, homosexual agenda company
They don’t have the technology to do that. The government is asking them to create to new technology that might (but probably won’t) help the government try to force their way in.
However, if Apple complies and creates that technology, it compromises the security measures for all their other devices as well.
_________________
Not according to this article:
The White House says a court ruling asking Apple to help the FBI access data on a phone belonging to the San Bernardino gunman does not mean asking for a “backdoor” to the device.
Spokesman Josh Earnest said the FBI was asking for access to a single device.
Republican frontrunner Donald Trump slammed Apple for contesting the court order, saying “we should open it up”.
Apple chief Tim Cook says circumventing security software on the iPhone risks the security of all its customers.
In a statement, he said the court order was “an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers” that “has implications far beyond the legal case at hand”.
The court had ordered the technology company to alter Farook’s iPhone so that the FBI could make unlimited attempts at the passcode without the risk of erasing the data - Apple has provided default encryption on its devices since 2014, allowing only users with knowledge of the passcode to access its contents.
‘One device’
It also wants Apple to develop a way to help speed up investigators trying different passcode combinations to gain access.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the FBI request for access did not mean they were asking for a “backdoor” - or unauthorised access - into the company’s device or for it to be redesigned.
“They are simply asking for something that would have an impact on this one device,” he told reporters on Wednesday.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35591988
Tim Cook is not making the “we can’t get the information” argument, he’s making the slippery slope argument.
In the end, you can’t give what you don’t have and no court can make them create it.
You would think if there was a way to do it, the state would never have brought it up, and just let everyone think it was unbreakable. But then again maybe by making a big fuss it will make the real bad guys think the phones are super secure and they will use them more? I don’t know, it’s rabbit hole type speculation, ha.
Freegards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.