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

To: Swordmaker

” to assist them in breaking their own encryption, the FBI must first demonstrate that the requested assistance is not “unduly burdensome”.”

What a piece of Apple propaganda!

1. The order specifically referred to ‘non-encryption barriers’! It did NOT request Apple to break the encryption.

2. No undue burden. The government was required to reimburse Apple for their work.


4 posted on 04/03/2016 7:17:16 PM PDT by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: TexasGator
non-encryption barriers

Ok, I can't pass that up. Encryption cannot be broken. If AES256 were broken all hell would break loose.

7 posted on 04/03/2016 7:22:08 PM PDT by palmer (Net "neutrality" = Obama turning the internet over to foreign enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: TexasGator

“Just because Apple is in the business of building encryption software does not mean Apple is in the business of tearing down their encryption software any more than Boeing is in the business of building planes that are specially designed to crash.”

This.

We do not demand safe manufacturers to break into their own safes. The whole point is to make something secure, not something which appears secure but is easily breached with some arcane knowledge. To compel them to is to destroy their whole purpose for existing.


20 posted on 04/03/2016 9:11:11 PM PDT by ctdonath2 ("Get the he11 out of my way!" - John Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | 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