Call me a cynic, but I have yet to see a corporation willing to become a freedom martyr “just because.”
There is also a tremendous difference between Apple providing a key it already has, and a court ordering Apple to direct software/hardware engineers to devise special software.
Apple, all the way.
Apple.
-
The FBI already screwed up when they asked the County to reset the original PW. If the FBI had asked Apple first, they would have told the County to plug the phone in to a County computer and let it automatically update to the cloud, at which point Apple could have downloaded everything.
-
the Feds already can do it themselves. Remember the NSA? They have the technology to accomplish this task, but for whatever reason, the Pols don’t want to go there.
The encryption standards used by Apple and Samsung, and Google, and…have been approved by the Feds, almost solely for the purpose that the Feds have the ability to crack it.
The FBI Director testified before Congress that they asked the NSA for help. He didn’t explicitly say it, but there was the implication that the NSA was unable to crack the phone.
^^perhaps that’s how you read it, but I’m not sure that is the correct interpretation bcos he didn’t clearly address the issue. Perhaps, for some reason, the Admin doesn’t want us peeps to know that the NSA can do, or not do, so they demurred.
Senator Chu: Has the FBI pursued these other methods tried to get help from within the federal government, such as from agencies like the NSA?
Director Comey: Yes is the answer. We’ve talked to anybody who will talk with us about it, and I welcome additional suggestions.
**“Yes is the answer” **seems pretty clear to me. I’ll let others draw their own conclusions.
Comey later says, “If we could have done this quietly and privately, we would have done it.”
There’s really no backdoor to something that’s been encrypted other than stealing the key. I think in this case the person with the key is dead, so that’s why the FBI needs help.
If I understood Tim Cook correctly, Apple bent over backwards to help the FBI with access to the terrorist phone but the FBI tried to gain access without assistance from Apple and locked themselves out. It sounded like something as simple as trying too many wrong passwords - I know after 2 wrong tries on any device to stop before lockout - it is really concerning that the FBI didn’t know that - perhaps they should bring in their teenagers, they usually know these things. And then, I may hane gotten it all wrong since I’m traveling and reading bits and pieces from multiple sources.
Apple.
The NSA would have to be able to spoof Apple’s credentials to get the iPhone to accept a firmware update. If they had that ability, they could pretty much crack the entire internet. No, I don’t think they have that technology.
I am not on any side for the lack of information that is available to us. I do not trust media in anything, I cannot rely on media for providing me with the sufficient information to take any side. Besides, why FBI is not pursuing other offers? Others with substantial credibility offered to break thru the phone. Or it is another media bluff? You see, how you can make decision is this type of environment? And nobody could say if the phone even have some valuable info, there is an opinion that it does not, and again, if this one is true or another bluff, nobody knows either…I do not care if somebody wants to break into my iphone, go ahead, have your fun, there is absolutely nothing there, nothing at all…
Apple.
I have to admit that I am not sure if I should be more worried that the FBI/CIA/Federal Government doesn’t already have people on the payroll that are capable of solving this problem without having to go back to the manufacturer.
Agree with labegg, the whole thing smells more like a show that benefit both sides than anything else that would we should be paying a serious attention to. They are all masters at creating artificial shows. I would say, “enjoy the show” and do not think to hard and stress over it!
You don’t need to spell out anything for me and it is you who leapt to conclusions about the basis of my opinion.
I happen to have more than a passing knowledge of constitutional law and know that there is no absolute right to privacy. Probable cause is the safeguard against unreasonable searches and seizures.
@anomander made my point:
I agree that the government might not be able to compel Apple to give them access under current law. But I am not persuaded that society should support the notion of a smart phones being inviolate.
You mean like McAfee? LOL. He thinks he can do it by social engineering. Good luck, buddy.
For anyone who thinks they can crack this, a simple test: have a third party set up an iPhone 5c with the most locked-down configuration possible (multi-character passcode, data erasure after 10 attempts, etc) that matches what Apple and the FBI say is what they’re assuming on the shooter’s phone.
Let’s see what any of these “others with substantial credibility” can do with a test case.
Apple keeps saying that giving them access will give the FBI “too much power”. Well, doesn’t NOT giving the FBI access give Apple too much power?
Why, Apple may lose the criminal market!
Jamcafe, IANAL, but with regard to keeping secrets/privacy, I have a great deal of right guaranteed by the 5th. I recall a case not too long ago where a court ruled, based on the 5th, that a suspect could not be compelled to provide a phone password. In some ways I personally view my phone as an extension of my brain - it keeps up with a large number of details in my life that are no ones business.
Granted, in this case the phones owner is dead and that changes a lot, but the next time maybe not.
The 5th Amendment protects against self-incrimination but if the person claiming the right has no criminal exposure then the 5th won’t help to prevent access. If the prosecutor is motivated to get access to the phone they can grant immunity to the suspect asserting the 5th.
Your personal info kept on your phone is beyond the reach of a warrant if law enforcement can’t show probable cause that there is evidence of a crime on your phone. Even where they have probable cause you can limit the scope of the warrant so that your numbered account, your Grandma’s recipe, your award winning manuscript, or your cure for cancer is not turned to the govt.
“Your personal info kept on your phone is beyond the reach of a warrant if law enforcement can’t show probable cause that there is evidence of a crime on your phone. Even where they have probable cause you can limit the scope of the warrant so that your numbered account, your Grandma’s recipe, your award winning manuscript, or your cure for cancer is not turned to the govt.”
In theory that is correct, but keep in mind that we have had courts, specifically the Supreme Court, that has opened up that window of what is acceptable when executing a search warrant. Terrorism certainly changed that picture, and for example, we have wireless wiretaps in use by the FBI and NSA when it concerns suspected terrorism, we have a situation where the government can pretty much do what they want, and then after the fact, go in front of a FISA judge who is supposed to see if what they did was valid. The concept in some ways was sound in reasoning, if terrorism is immininent there may not be time to get a warrant. Yet from what i have read, wireless wiretaps are being used , not when they think there is imminent terror activity, but rather looking around for signs of terrorist activity when there is no particular threat, and FISA has let them do that. The FISA was involved the the NSA metadata program, that was gathering data on a broad range of activity, cell phone and internet, and was okay apparently with the NSA turning that metadata over to law enforcement officials who were not looking for terrorists. The 5 judges we had on scotus (when Scalia was alive) all have a bent away from protecting individual rights, including privacy, and their court help erode protections in both the 4th and 5th amendment…
And once they have the phone, and crack it, any data on their can be looked at, and potentially abused. Unfortunately, we are a couple of generations away from people who remember the FBI under Hoover, the CIA during the 60’s and early 70’s and the abuses of power that went on, wiretapping political enemies (and blackmail), harassing people for being protestors, I hear people glorify an evil yo yo like Hoover, who wasn’t all that much different than the head of the GRU.
It is also kind of ironic, many of those yelling and screaming about Apple computer not complying, talking about compelling them to act, etc, are the same politicians and such who go around routinely telling people the government is bad, it interferes in our lives too much and so forth…and they then wonder why people are skeptical.