Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jessduntno
I answered no because a master key would not be consistent with the law.

Apple says it can't make a 'key' for just this one phone. It would necessarily be a master key for all the later i-phones.

Is it your argument that Apple is incorrect on that point?

Suppose Apple is correct in what they say. Do you think the govt can legitimately order them to manufacture such a master key?

194 posted on 02/19/2016 8:09:49 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies ]


To: Ken H

Did you not read my last post? All of this is asked and answered.

I think Apple is just like the locksmith. They are driving this. They can comply the hard way or the easy way. I think they would like to be thought of as the unbreakable phone, which will be untrue in the future, but not in the minds of the public.

I think the 4th amendment is going away. I don’t think “sorry can’t do it” is an acceptable answer. This is time sensitive, too, remember. Apple will settle somehow. They can do this. I don’t now why you are so focused on the master key thing, I answered that 12 ways.


195 posted on 02/19/2016 8:15:43 PM PST by jessduntno (Steady, Reliable, and (for now) Republican - Donald Trump, (D, R, I, D, R, I, R - NY) /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies ]

To: Ken H

The full text of both the court order (it’s short, and fairly plain (tech) English), and Apple’s response, are below, but to us one interesting aspect of the court order is this paragraph:

Apple’s reasonable technical assistance shall accomplish the following three important functions: (1) it will bypass or disable the auto-erase function whether or not it has been enabled; (2) it will enable the FBI to submit passcodes to the SUBJECT DEVICE for testing electronically via the physical device port, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or other protocol available on the SUBJECT DEVICE and (3) it will ensure that when the FBI submits passcodes to the SUBJECT DEVICE, software running on the device will not purposefully introduce any additional delay between passcode attempts beyond what is incurred by Apple hardware.

Nope, no mention of a master Key. Don’t know who is saying that is what they want. As you can see, the court just wants to remove the part that limits passcode attempts, not all of the proram. Pretty clear.


196 posted on 02/19/2016 8:21:56 PM PST by jessduntno (Steady, Reliable, and (for now) Republican - Donald Trump, (D, R, I, D, R, I, R - NY) /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies ]

To: Ken H

It’s also interesting to note that what the FBI asked for, and what the court ordered, isn’t that Apple unlock the phone for the FBI, but that Apple make it possible for the FBI to keep trying to figure out the passcode without the phone reaching the self-destruct point.

We have even put that data out of our own reach, because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business. This, of cure, is true. They do NOT have a right to your information. Can Apple comply with this court order? Is it even possible?

(Note: Clearly the FBI doesn’t read the Internet Patrol, or they would already know how to avoid that time out when trying to figure out a passcode.)

While Cook never says whether or not what the government is asking, and the court is demanding, is something Apple can do, one can certainly infer from his statements that they could do it.


198 posted on 02/19/2016 8:31:02 PM PST by jessduntno (Steady, Reliable, and (for now) Republican - Donald Trump, (D, R, I, D, R, I, R - NY) /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson