Posted on 02/29/2016 12:16:29 PM PST by Swordmaker
Tomorrow, Apple will make its case before Congress, as General Counsel Bruce Sewell gives testimony to the House Judiciary Committee at 1PM ET. It's Apple's first appearance before Congress since the company received an order to break security measures on a phone linked to the San Bernardino attacks, and Sewell may be facing a skeptical crowd. He'll be joined by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, who has been an outspoken critic of the company's encryption policies, as well as a number of House representatives who have been vocal supporters of the FBI's position in the past. FBI Director James Comey will also appear before the committee, although he will appear on a separate panel.
Sewell submitted his prepared opening statement to the panel earlier today, and it is reproduced in full below:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's my pleasure to appear before you and the Committee today on behalf of Apple. We appreciate your invitation and the opportunity to be part of the discussion on this important issue which centers on the civil liberties at the foundation of our country.
I want to repeat something we have said since the beginning — that the victims and families of the San Bernardino attacks have our deepest sympathies and we strongly agree that justice should be served. Apple has no sympathy for terrorists.
We have the utmost respect for law enforcement and share their goal of creating a safer world. We have a team of dedicated professionals that are on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year to assist law enforcement. When the FBI came to us in the immediate aftermath of the San Bernardino attacks, we gave all the information we had related to their investigation. And we went beyond that by making Apple engineers available to advise them on a number of additional investigative options.
But we now find ourselves at the center of an extraordinary circumstance. The FBI has asked a Court to order us to give them something we don’t have. To create an operating system that does not exist — because it would be too dangerous. They are asking for a backdoor into the iPhone — specifically to build a software tool that can break the encryption system which protects personal information on every iPhone.
As we have told them — and as we have told the American public — building that software tool would not affect just one iPhone. It would weaken the security for all of them. In fact, just last week Director Comey agreed that the FBI would likely use this precedent in other cases involving other phones. District Attorney Vance has also said he would absolutely plan to use this on over 175 phones. We can all agree this is not about access to just one iPhone.
The FBI is asking Apple to weaken the security of our products. Hackers and cyber criminals could use this to wreak havoc on our privacy and personal safety. It would set a dangerous precedent for government intrusion on the privacy and safety of its citizens.
Hundreds of millions of law-abiding people trust Apple’s products with the most intimate details of their daily lives – photos, private conversations, health data, financial accounts, and information about the user's location as well as the location of their friends and families. Some of you might have an iPhone in your pocket right now, and if you think about it, there's probably more information stored on that iPhone than a thief could steal by breaking into your house. The only way we know to protect that data is through strong encryption.
Every day, over a trillion transactions occur safely over the Internet as a result of encrypted communications. These range from online banking and credit card transactions to the exchange of healthcare records, ideas that will change the world for the better, and communications between loved ones. The US government has spent tens of millions of dollars through the Open Technology Fund and other US government programs to fund strong encryption. The Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technology, convened by President Obama, urged the US government to fully support and not in any way subvert, undermine, weaken, or make vulnerable generally available commercial software.
Encryption is a good thing, a necessary thing. We have been using it in our products for over a decade. As attacks on our customers’ data become increasingly sophisticated, the tools we use to defend against them must get stronger too. Weakening encryption will only hurt consumers and other well-meaning users who rely on companies like Apple to protect their personal information.
Today’s hearing is titled Balancing Americans’ Security and Privacy. We believe we can, and we must, have both. Protecting our data with encryption and other methods preserves our privacy and it keeps people safe.
The American people deserve an honest conversation around the important questions stemming from the FBI’s current demand:
Do we want to put a limit on the technology that protects our data, and therefore our privacy and our safety, in the face of increasingly sophisticated cyber attacks? Should the FBI be allowed to stop Apple, or any company, from offering the American people the safest and most secure product it can make?
Should the FBI have the right to compel a company to produce a product it doesn't already make, to the FBI’s exact specifications and for the FBI’s use?
We believe that each of these questions deserves a healthy discussion, and any decision should be made after a thoughtful and honest consideration of the facts.
Most importantly, the decisions should be made by you and your colleagues as representatives of the people, rather than through a warrant request based on a 220 year- old-statute.
At Apple, we are ready to have this conversation. The feedback and support we're hearing indicate to us that the American people are ready, too.
We feel strongly that our customers, their families, their friends and their neighbors will be better protected from thieves and terrorists if we can offer the very best protections for their data. And at the same time, the freedoms and liberties we all cherish will be more secure.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to answering your questions.
Apple says it will take a team of engineers weeks to make these modifications. Bullsh*t. Probably several people who are intimately familiar with their code can make the change in a few minutes and recompile it.
The "number of tries" algorithm is likely a single subroutine. I doubt it has another back up section somewhere else in their code. Just disable the counting mechanism, or disable the instruction that tests for the number "10" and that's it.
Apple could modify this phone, let the monitoring computer "brute force" the password, get the data off it, and then put the operating system back the way it was before they gave it back to the FBI. No threat to anyone else's iPhones.
"The very FBI," McAfee charged, "who says, "we will protect this software and only use it on one phone," that agency was hacked by a 15-year-old boy just last week, who walked off with all the personnel records including, [of] undercover agents.” -- John McAfee, Feb 23, 2016.
“Again, pointing out irony that a Homosexual ran company doesn’t appreciate “back doors”, this is not at all accurate. “
The faggotry insult would only make sense if Fedzilla wasn’t the gayest place in America. I bet several homos are involved in this from the government side. So with offsetting penalties, now we can get back to the factual issues.
But fun of you to try.
Here's Why the FBI Went After Apple When It Did
Apple’s Privacy Fight Tests Relationship With White House
I got hacked mid-air while writing an Apple-FBI story
Obama to Trash Reagan’s Restrictions on Domestic Spying
Nachum: courtesy ping.
“Apple would have complete control over the usage of this modified software”
That’s complete bull$hit! As soon as iPhones containing the government-mandated “back door” were on the market, it would only be a matter of time before hackers and cyber criminals will have figured out what Apple did to allow access.
You have absolutely no clue as to how software works!
This part might take longer than 15 minutes. It could possibly be done quickly, but without having intimate knowledge of how their system handles data from the keyboard, I can't say for sure.
On the other hand, if they were clever, they could write a subroutine to let the operating system do all the work for them without the need for an external computer.
It's not like they have anything better for the processor on the phone to do, right?
“Apple fights this but bends over the Chicoms. Not hard to see which team they are playing for.”
Idiotic. So you claim that a person or company has less freedom in Red China than they do here? You should put that in breaking news.
There isn’t a damn thing wrong with expecting more freedom in America than you would get in Bejing.
It is YOU that is promulgating the LIES, DiogeneesLamp. Apple is less worried about Search Warrants from the US government than it is from the fact it will NOT stay hidden and a secret technique. It cannot. Any use of it in court and the code has to be released to the defense attorneys and their forensic IT specialists to go over. That has NEVER turned out well. Then the media will sue to get their hands on it. . . and the courts WILL release it. It's happened in the past too many times to count.
Once it is obvious the US government has access, every government in the world would use this as a precedent to demand equal treatment and demand access as well. Are you truly this naive?
NO! There are no keys. Apple has not given access to any other country, period, because there are no keys to give.
The problem is that Apple products use ARM chips and how ARM is programmed. If a developer cannot get into a locked ARM chip (not something that exists anyway) they would go through massive amounts of chips in developing products.
There isn’t an ARM chip that is lockable.
Depending on how the code is written, disabling the number of tries function might disable the delay too. If they are using a "Switch and Case" type statement to set the delays, sticking the "number of tries" variable to zero will always take the no delay branch.
Hashes are designed to take time, proof-of-work is the proof of security. They want the alternative interface to enter passcodes. They want to bypass flash and run in RAM. The main problem is the new interface.
The FBI request said they could do it any way they wanted to do it. It is the Judge that said to do it a specific way, and even then left it open to Apple to use a different method so long as it could achieve the objective.
The order is not written in stone. It can be interpreted in such a way that Apple does not have to risk either hardware or software getting into any other hands than their own.
Another problem is that the code in RAM is susceptible to reverse engineering.
Reverse engineering is not a concern since Apple can maintain control over the hardware because it will be at one of their own facilities.
“The FBI would like to use this methodology with every single phone for which they obtain a COURT ORDER.
Apple is deliberately trying to fear stampede the public into believing the government is trying to access *ALL* their phones without warrants, in other words, Apple is promoting an intentional lie. “
Oh really??
The same government has elevated lying and illegal domestic spying to a national sport. Hayden and his NSA did it and lied to Congress about it. Do you believe they are now willing to accept it and live within the rules? If they have it, they will use it illegally. (or with the permission of an utterly un-American secret court!)
How about ATF? It is flat ass illegal for them to compile registration lists and to use NICS check firearm transactions to compile a list of guns and owners. They can only use it briefly for auditing purposes. But they laughed and started doing it.
How about IRS openly launching investigations into groups solely because of their political beliefs? Then saying they have destroyed all records of it. This is pure banana republic stuff.
But you say that the FBI would never never never access phones without a warrant. Naïve at best. In the face of so much evidence its either stupid or treacherous.
No court can order people to perform labor to create something new. A bit about "involuntary servitude".
BUT, once the software is created, ANY court could order Apple to hand it over.
Once the US government has it, then the governments of all the OTHER countries of the world will demand it.
Shortly after that, criminal gangs will have it. And there goes any security for Apple users.
It boils down to the law.
Does the existing law require Apple to work unreimbursed or otherwise to create software to allow the government under a valid warrant to bypass the I phone security?
I do not doubt that they will get right on that effort after this incident.
At that point FBI will have to get a law passed to make the back door mandatory.
I do not believe the FBI will be successful at getting any such legislation passed.
FBI has admitted that is the correct approach, not using a "writ".
This here is the sticking point for me. So long as law enforcement gets a court order to open the phone, I regard the constitutional protections for privacy as having been upheld.
To allow law enforcement to search someone's phone without a warrant is not acceptable.
The FBI will not be given such a key, so what John McAfee says about it is irrelevant.
Apple can maintain full custody of the phone and the software until the data is extracted from the phone, after which time Apple can restore the original operating system before handing it back.
“If that safe maker mentioned up thread responded like Apple did, they could expect a threat of contempt of court thrown at them.”
Dream on. Such warrants aren’t issued. This is a new thing. If the FBI wants into a safe and gets a warrant, they can bring drills, saws, blowtorches, Vinnie “fingers” Lucchesee the safecracker. etc. They can work on it for weeks and months.
But what they have never been able to do is call the safe company and order them, “send your people out here and open it for us”.
It was too funny of a wisecrack for someone not to have said it. :)
“The government cannot compel Apple to make something it does not already have. It’s called involuntary servitude and the Constitution forbids it.”
A WW1 draft case said you can be forced to be a soldier ( at great risk to your life).
If I see a CEO drive over your spouse, then your lawyer can compel me to testify and to make a drawing if where you wife and the CEO’s car were when I first saw them.
A wedding cake case and fine come to mind too.
Ok, as a though experiment. Is there -anything- whatsoever that you think should be beyond the reach of government. (bearing in mind that “government” is nothing more than some schlub who got up that morning, farted on the toilet, ate some eggs, and spilled coffee on their way to work.)
Is your position that government, with the permission of someone else in government (a secret judge) should have no limits on what they may access from a citizen?
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.