Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-25-2016, 08:58 AM   #241
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Following the nice weather
Posts: 6,421
Or, everyone's privacy, and to hell with me. Works both ways.
__________________

__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Will Rogers, or maybe Sam Clemens
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 02-25-2016, 09:00 AM   #242
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,412
Come on, let's keep it friendly.
__________________

__________________
MichaelB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 11:03 AM   #243
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,417
There is supposedly a case involving a woman who was murdered. The cops believe the identity of the murderer is in the victims locked iPhone. So they're in queue to have Apple enable it to be brute forced.

But this is what I meant about the cops seeking the easy way out. Before smart phones, they'd investigate people known to the victim because most murders are committed by people whom the victim knew well, such as spouses or lovers in cases where the victim is a woman.

So are the cops incapable of tracking down the people this victim knew without looking into the iPhone?

Seems like it's more about having the power to intrude on anyone's privacy than simply solving crimes. Presumably, they knew how to investigate crimes 10 years ago, when there weren't encrypted smart phones. Or smart phones at all -- that is the modern multitouch smart phones which we have today.
__________________
explanade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 11:06 AM   #244
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ls99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerntz View Post
Yes, two "ifs" is a ton. Who knew?

And as if apple & you aren't pulling at emotional stings with your clamor of privacy above all.

Don't know why you had to bring your butt into this unless it's highly emotional for you.

But got it, your privacy above all & to hell with anyone else.
Having one's privacy invaded can and often does expose one to likely and often enough to physical harm.

Experience does improve the concern for privacy.

But then again in the instant case, of apple having been served a warrant for opening a phone with needing special tools to be constructed does in fact create a back door, kind of small but in the middle eastern vernacular it is the "camel's nose under the tent"

One can also play devil's advocate and quote or paraphrase one of our former esteemed public servant's earnest exclamation:
But what difference does it make now.

The parties of concern in this case and the one the esteemed former public public servant referred to are no longer with us.

As I noted before I am no fan of apple. Quiet the opposite. I do appreciate their efforts at making a secure communications and data storage device. Yet managed it with an inexplicably huge hole for security.

Namely, even if the user is religious about a complex security code and enabled the wipe feature after ten failed attempts the information and data of the the device still is exploitable. If as often admonished to backup faithfully, also enabled the automatic icloud backup the information is now insecure.

Here is why.

Apple has unfettered access to the iCloud and can without much trouble extract all stored info. Apple has in the past did acces and extract and turn over to three letter and other agencies the full contetns of iCloud backups. Abd will continue to do so.

Finally apple may have actually found a way to get out from the burden of doing the gummint's bidding. And I do hope they succeed. As I hope other device makers succeed as well.

This refusal to access a particular iphone does create a lot of public discussion and is a very effective smokescreen to push into the background their supremely obnoxious software OS upgrade, supposedly bricking iphones with Error 53. Of course we now know that for apple it was an easily fixed problem. As a cynic I'd say it was a thinly veiled attempt at boosting flagging sales of iphones.

BTW if any communications with any accomplices outside of US were done the FBI shopuld have no problem getting that info form the NSA or other acronymed monitoring database.

Cheers, I'll have a cold one for privacy.
__________________
There must be moderation in everything, including moderation.
ls99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 11:10 AM   #245
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ls99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
There is supposedly a case involving a woman who was murdered. The cops believe the identity of the murderer is in the victims locked iPhone. So they're in queue to have Apple enable it to be brute forced.

But this is what I meant about the cops seeking the easy way out. Before smart phones, they'd investigate people known to the victim because most murders are committed by people whom the victim knew well, such as spouses or lovers in cases where the victim is a woman.

So are the cops incapable of tracking down the people this victim knew without looking into the iPhone?

Seems like it's more about having the power to intrude on anyone's privacy than simply solving crimes. Presumably, they knew how to investigate crimes 10 years ago, when there weren't encrypted smart phones. Or smart phones at all -- that is the modern multitouch smart phones which we have today.
From the several LEOs I have known, much of a detective's skill is in social engineering. Most are supremely good at it. They have more ways to BS a BSer than the average Joe realizes.
__________________
There must be moderation in everything, including moderation.
ls99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 11:33 AM   #246
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
...

Seems like it's more about having the power to intrude on anyone's privacy than simply solving crimes. Presumably, they knew how to investigate crimes 10 years ago, when there weren't encrypted smart phones. Or smart phones at all -- that is the modern multitouch smart phones which we have today.
But isn't that the problem? These technologies didn't exist 10 years ago, so of course the investigators took different paths back then - what the heck else would they do?

But now that they exist, there could be useful data there, and it might be helpful to investigators. To ignore it would be to ignore that the times they are a changin'.

By your logic, wire taps for criminals with a proper warrant should not be allowed either - because what did investigators do before the telephone was invented? Or I guess we can't search the trunk of a car if during a traffic stop, an LEO hears banging from inside, muffled calls for 'help', and blood dripping from the car, because cars and trunks didn't exists when the Constitution was written?

I don't think your point holds water.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 11:42 AM   #247
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
Presumably, they knew how to investigate crimes 10 years ago, when there weren't encrypted smart phones. Or smart phones at all -- that is the modern multitouch smart phones which we have today.
The crooks and bad guys are using smart phone technology, SMS, etc. 10-15 years ago they were using landlines. Law enforcement had access to the landlines (after getting warrants), now they want to have the same access to where the bad guys are communicating today. I don't think it makes sense to cede a whole area of "operations" to the bad guys for free and unfettered use just because it is new.
Again, at least up to this point, our focus should be on the adequacy of the legal process and the authorities it grants. Get that right (i.e. with proper protections for those not suspected of a crime) and we'll have a solution that adequately regulates everything: in-person surveillance, unannounced physical searches, intercept of data in transit and exploitation of data at rest. There's absolutely no reason to give criminals freedom to operate in a "domain" and victimize others just because that domain is new.

Edited to add: Opps--cross-posted with ERD50
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 12:38 PM   #248
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
But isn't that the problem? These technologies didn't exist 10 years ago, so of course the investigators took different paths back then - what the heck else would they do?

But now that they exist, there could be useful data there, and it might be helpful to investigators. To ignore it would be to ignore that the times they are a changin'.

By your logic, wire taps for criminals with a proper warrant should not be allowed either - because what did investigators do before the telephone was invented? Or I guess we can't search the trunk of a car if during a traffic stop, an LEO hears banging from inside, muffled calls for 'help', and blood dripping from the car, because cars and trunks didn't exists when the Constitution was written?

I don't think your point holds water.

-ERD50

Well, if you are going to go that far back, they would tap the phone or look in the car anyhow without a warrant since that is what they did back then (at least that is what the movie and books say)....


I think this is one of those discussions where you are on one side or the other and nothing is going to sway you choice...
__________________
Texas Proud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 12:53 PM   #249
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
...

I think this is one of those discussions where you are on one side or the other and nothing is going to sway you choice...
I think it's more nuanced than that, though as in just about any debate, yes, there are some people locked into one side or the other.

But to those who seem to be saying "privacy trumps all", are there any exceptions? Are you saying search warrants should not be used, ever? No wiretaps, nothing to invade privacy at all, regardless of the level of authorization?

I think the Constitution has it right - privacy is not invaded w/o proper authorization.
[somewhat off-topic from this thread]:Metadata is maybe a gray area - I can think of my phone call to be similar to dropping a letter in a post office mail box. The government has the right (they need to to deliver it) to read the address I'm sending to - maybe that makes it non-private, maybe phone metadata is similar?
-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 03:11 PM   #250
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 19,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
... But to those who seem to be saying "privacy trumps all", are there any exceptions? Are you saying search warrants should not be used, ever? No wiretaps, nothing to invade privacy at all, regardless of the level of authorization?

I think the Constitution has it right - privacy is not invaded w/o proper authorization...
+1

As I wrote earlier, it is not about privacy. Criminals always lose the right to privacy. When we lock somebody up, he has no privacy. Even with suspects, currently the police with the proper warrant can search private properties for evidence. The phone is no different.

So, Apple argues that the software could leak into bad hands, or that the government can use it to break into the phones that it is not supposed to. If this is the real concern, can this be addressed with the proper precautions?

Just because bad guys could in theory break into computer systems, Apple's included, that did not prevent commercial establishments from asking for and storing customers' info such as credit cards, SS ID, phone number, etc... Do they ever guarantee that the info they store cannot be hacked? Why are they suddenly caring so much about privacy and leak of software?

And about the government abusing it, the FBI did not ask for the software, and said that it did not mind Apple keeping the software at the latter's facility.

I think what bothers me more is that Apple is commandeered to write some new software against its will. I am no lawyer, but know that in war time the government can commandeer, such as ordering the draft or taking over private properties, and we are not currently at war. But recently, people are ordered to have health insurance, just because it is "good for them", or "good for society". It would not surprise me that the SC will rule that Apple must do this for the common good.

By the way, Apple now claims that forcing it to write software is violating its rights to free speech. That's a new twist.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky
NW-Bound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 05:57 PM   #251
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Following the nice weather
Posts: 6,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
FWIW, Bill Gates has sided with the government on this issue:
Also fwiw, Microsoft has sided with Apple. Microsoft 'wholeheartedly' supports Apple in FBI encryption case | The Verge
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Will Rogers, or maybe Sam Clemens
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 07:08 PM   #252
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,417
LEO has no problems getting access to phone calls and SMS.

They're looking for more info. that phones contain, such as location data, health data, financial data.

And in this specific case, I don't think they really care about what's in that iPhone so much as this is a well-known case and they could use it as leverage to set a precedent that opens it up for all encrypted devices.
__________________
explanade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 07:43 PM   #253
Full time employment: Posting here.
Jack_Pine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
I agree. Politics and philosophies aside, this is a marketing nightmare more than anything else.

They must know that they will eventually have to cave in.

From a strictly strategic perspective, the longer this goes on the worse it will be. Get it over with and move on.

IMHO
Agreed. I am generally not an Apple fan, not that it matters here. There is a court order. End of story.
__________________
The Constitution. It's not just a good idea...it's the law.
Jack_Pine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 08:46 PM   #254
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Pine View Post
Agreed. I am generally not an Apple fan, not that it matters here. There is a court order. End of story.

Well, not really.... that is why Apple is taking it to court to try and change the court order... IOW, if a court order is wrong, it can be overturned...
__________________
Texas Proud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 08:52 PM   #255
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,764
I'm saddened Apple hasn't offered to do this and I'm saddened the fbi can't do it.

Divided country. It's going to take something more than 9/11 to bring it back together.
__________________
Notmuchlonger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 09:02 PM   #256
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 19,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
Well, not really.... that is why Apple is taking it to court to try and change the court order... IOW, if a court order is wrong, it can be overturned...
+1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Notmuchlonger View Post
I'm saddened Apple hasn't offered to do this and I'm saddened the fbi can't do it.

Divided country. It's going to take something more than 9/11 to bring it back together.
+1

But I do not blame the FBI for not being able to do it. These things can be very complex, and you need the knowledge and tools of someone who initially designed it.

One thing I just thought of. There have been embarrassing leaks from the government, but it is when the sensitive material is in many hands. When the knowledge is limited to only a few that are carefully vetted, there are secret things that the government can keep very well, or has well-designed safeguards so that one rogue player cannot jeopardize the entire nation. Or so I hope. Examples include the mechanism and protocol for launching of nuclear weapons, or even development of new advanced systems.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky
NW-Bound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 11:22 PM   #257
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
target2019's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Notmuchlonger View Post
I'm saddened Apple hasn't offered to do this and I'm saddened the fbi can't do it.



Divided country. It's going to take something more than 9/11 to bring it back together.

Tend to agree with this. Most are not aware that we are engaged in a new type of war that is not simple to define. The subject phone is probably seen as an outlier by the public. But there will be more incidents of terror to come. The perpetrators' digital life holds many clues that could be used in detecting and thwarting a future event.
__________________
target2019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2016, 01:21 AM   #258
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 583
The FBI cannot do this. Hacking protected software is illegal. Apple retains ownership of the source code.

Apple has a responsibility to their owners and customers to protect their owners and customers interests. I don't like Apple, but own some stock and switched over to their premium priced wares for safety and security reasons. Take that away and Apple's premium value is gone. By extension, it really is a threat to Apple's entire business model.

As a citizen, I see every foothold into a new sacrifice of rights is in short time twisted far beyond it's original scope. My privacy is important to me. If others want to willingly give their privacy away, that is their choice, it isn't mine.

Any advantage gained by backdoor hacks will quickly be lost with third party encryption being used, but those privacy rights given away are gone forever.
__________________
devans0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2016, 02:24 AM   #259
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ls99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,792
Apple filed a motion to vacate. It is 65 pages.

Sit back, read. Lots of factual info on the iphone and legal reasoning. Theodore Olson is one of the attorneys. He is no lightweight. The reading is not light. I have read all 65 pages.

A couple of excerpts below.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...-to-Vacate.pdf
"
Unfortunately, the FBI, without cons
ulting Apple or reviewing its public
guidance regarding iOS, changed the iCl
oud password associated with one of the
attacker’s accounts, foreclosing the possi
bility of the phone initiating an automatic
iCloud back-up of its data to a known Wi-Fi network,
see
Hanna Decl. Ex. X [Apple
Inc.,
iCloud: Back up your iOS device to iCloud
], which could have obviated the need
to unlock the phone and thus for the extr
aordinary order the government now seeks.
21
Had the FBI consulted Apple first, this
litigation may not have been necessary. "

"
III. ARGUMENT
A. The All Writs Act Does Not Provide
A Basis To Conscript Apple To Create
Software Enabling The Government
To Hack Into iPhones.
The All Writs Act (or the “Act”) does not provide the judiciary with the
boundless and unbridled power the
government asks this Court
to exercise. The Act is
intended to enable the federal c
ourts to fill in gaps in the
law so they can exercise the
authority they already possess by virtue of
the express powers granted to them by the
Constitution and Congress; it
does not grant the courts free-wheeling authority to
change the substantive law, resolve policy
disputes, or exercise new powers that
Congress has not afforded them."

"

In the section of CALEA entitled “Design of features and systems
configurations,” 47 U.S.C. 1002(b)(1), the st
atute says that it “does not authorize any
law enforcement agency or officer—
(1) to require any specific design of
equipment, facilities, services,
features, or system configurations to be adopted by any provider of
a wire or electronic communication service, any manufacturer of
telecommunications equipmen
t, or any provider of
telecommunications support services.
(2) to prohibit the adoption of a
ny equipment, facility, service, or
feature by any provider of a wi
re or electronic communication
service, any manufacturer of tel
ecommunications equipment, or any
provider of telecommunications support services."
__________________
There must be moderation in everything, including moderation.
ls99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2016, 05:47 AM   #260
Full time employment: Posting here.
Jack_Pine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by target2019 View Post
Tend to agree with this. Most are not aware that we are engaged in a new type of war that is not simple to define. The subject phone is probably seen as an outlier by the public. But there will be more incidents of terror to come. The perpetrators' digital life holds many clues that could be used in detecting and thwarting a future event.
+1

I know there are strong opinions on both sides and I respect both sides.

One thing, I am in IT and (in my opinion) it is ludicrous for Apple to say they have no way into a phone and they would have to create one. My application folks were laughing about that the other day. It's one thing to argue weather the gov has a right to that access or not but I think it is naive to think they don't already have the capability. Again, JMHO.
__________________

__________________
The Constitution. It's not just a good idea...it's the law.
Jack_Pine is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Way to go FBI Mwsinron Other topics 30 05-10-2007 07:57 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:43 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.