Apple v FBI

[Senator]

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoguy I bet if Apple is forced to comply, the next thing we will see is China doing the same.

What would China do if Apple said "No"? It would not surprise me if Apple had to give it up to do business in China, or they already had a back door.

Aren't these things made in China?

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senator Virtually every DUI stop is a warrant-less search, but we as a society accept it. This is a losing battle for Apple. It is ordered by the Court to comply. That is as good as a warrant.

I could be wrong, but I do not think they can search the whole vehicle with the stop.... they first observe someone that appears to be driving drunk... they pull them over... they then have to make a determination of they still think they are drunk.... and even then I am not sure they can search the whole vehicle without asking...


One time I was pulled over late at night... I got out of my car and talked to the officer... I was not drunk... He could tell I was not drunk... said he pulled me over since I was 'weaving' near the center line (who knows, I might have been).... but, within seconds he told me why he stopped me and said he could tell I was not drunk and let me go.... he did not check my drivers license or even look through the windows of the car (which I think he can do without a warrant)....

[Ronnieboy]

On BLACKLIST this week, the story revolved around a NSA program that allowed them to access webcams on any device. The program got out 'into the wild' and it was being used by nefarious people. Seems that it could parallel this issue.....

[MichaelB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoguy I bet if Apple is forced to comply, the next thing we will see is China doing the same.

Not just China. If there is one thing we excel at in the US, it is taking a precedent and finding a way to use it in another situation for which it was not originally intended. And again, and again..

[ls99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound So, what is the problem?

From a personal point of view, privacy trumps the FBI's poking, let them do the hacking of the phone. If they can't, well tough tooties. Disclaimer: I am no fan of apple. Quiet to the contrary.

As for legal point, since my JD is inscribed on a framed sheet of toilet paper hanging near the throne, I'll let members of the bar in good standing sort it out.That is why they get the big buck$$$.

[ls99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronnieboy On BLACKLIST this week, the story revolved around a NSA program that allowed them to access webcams on any device. The program got out 'into the wild' and it was being used by nefarious people. Seems that it could parallel this issue.....

Hence the "small piece of black electrical tape" over the camera of my pc, and some fire putty over the microphone. Besides having the drivers for the devices deleted from my PC.

Have at it boys.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoguy ... I bet if Apple is forced to comply, the next thing we will see is China doing the same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB Apple has no relationship with the contents of the phone. It would be acting as a skilled agent on behalf of the authorities. If it acknowledges the request is legitimate and it has the capability to do so, it could be compelled to repeat this again, and by other authorities. If the authorities want the contents of the phone, they have the authority to access it to retrieve them. +1@Photoguy. Not just China. Every gov't around the world and across the US.

China would just ban the sales of iPhones. They have domestic smartphone companies now. And they already control their local Internet and all firewalls.

And many countries do not bother to go to this trouble to break into anyone's phone. They just say "How many fingernails and toenails you want to have left when you finally give me the passcode?". No court order is even necessary, like in this case in the US.

Of course, in this case the culprits are already dead, but many countries act preemptively without regard to human rights, let alone privacy like we do here.

[ls99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound China would just ban the sales of iPhones. They have domestic smartphone companies now. And they already control their local Internet and all firewalls. And many countries do not bother to go to this trouble to break into anyone's phone. They just say "How many fingernails and toenails you want to have left when you finally give me the passcode?". No court order is even necessary, like in this case in the US.

Hard to get dead people to object to having nails pulled. As in this case.

It may be annoying at times to have the constitution get in way, I have grown up lived under alternative systems, to me it is not an academic excercise in thought process..

[NW-Bound]

Well, how about them pulling fingernails of the people who refuse assistance?

Yes, we have the Constitution. That's why we require a court order to enter someone's home, or get into his phone.

[ls99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Well, how about them pulling fingernails of the people who refuse assistance? Yes, we have the Constitution. That's why we require a court order to enter someone's home, or get into his phone.

Yes that is effective. Hungary had a supreme leader installed who had all 20 nails extracted.

Ah yes, court oders are good thing, can be appealed, once the supremes rule, then we must abide.

[MichaelB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Well, how about them pulling fingernails of the people who refuse assistance? Yes, we have the Constitution. That's why we require a court order to enter someone's home, or get into his phone.

Yes, the court order allows authorities to access private property. It does not allow the authorities to compel someone else to access that property on their behalf.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB Yes, the court order allows authorities to access private property. It does not allow the authorities to compel someone else to access that property on their behalf.

Hmm... I guess you have a point there.

Now, in war time, the authorities can compel people to do things they don't want to do, and call it the draft. Perhaps we will have to wait until war is declared.

I dunno. I do not know, and to tell you the truth, do not care that much about this subject. I am going back to snoozing now.

[Philliefan33]

I tend to agree with Apple on this one. This, despite DH being retired FBI. In fact, I think he sides with Apple also. We both asked the question posed up thread--did they try using the deceased person's fingerprints to open the phone?

Didn't I see the Apple CEO on tv yesterday claiming that Apple doesn't have the software or other ability to open the phone? If you believe him, does the FBI expect Apple to devote resources to develop the method?

Of course we need to do everything we can to combat terrorism. Except trample all over the Constitution to get it done.

[ls99]

Just another perhaps relevant tidbit. Farook and his wife destroyed their personal phones. The ultimate encryption.

This phone owned by his emloyer, is less likely to have any relevant info than the ultimately encrypted personal phones.

Me thinks FBI and DOJ are just attempting to set a precedent under a convenient flag.

BTW where is the all knowing NSA intercept of all this valuable information?

[MichaelB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Hmm... I guess you have a point there. Now, in war time, the authorities can compel people to do things they don't want to do, and call it the draft. Perhaps we will have to wait until war is declared. I dunno. I do not know, and to tell you the truth, do not care that much about this subject. I am going back to snoozing now.

Well, if I had studied law as my father so deeply desired, I'd probably have a clue. No snoozing for me, I have to set the table for dinner.

[photoguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senator What would China do if Apple said "No"?

That's a good question. I have no idea what Apple would do if China forced the issue on their own (provide the keys or get out). Maybe China doesn't either.

It's hard to imagine Apple giving up the chinese market and not capitulating. On the other hand, Google did just that and pulled out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound And many countries do not bother to go to this trouble to break into anyone's phone. They just say "How many fingernails and toenails you want to have left when you finally give me the passcode?". No court order is even necessary, like in this case in the US.

Well a backdoor would allow mass and covert surveillance.

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley Your comment on having nothing the FBI might be interested in is just a specific of the old "I've got nothing to hide" argument. But that's been shown over and over to be nothing other than a lazy intellectual response to an individual case. Here's a good comment I read in a paper about the topic. Quote: By saying "I have nothing to hide," you are saying that it’s OK for the government to infringe on the rights of potentially millions of your fellow Americans, possibly ruining their lives in the process. To me, the "I have nothing to hide" argument basically equates to "I don’t care what happens, so long as it doesn’t happen to me." ...

I'm going to disagree that it is a lazy response. I think you are making too many assumptions to get there.

I'm with the "I've got nothing to hide" camp, because I want protection, and I want the authorities to have the tools they need to provide that protection.

But that does not mean that I don't care about privacy. The authorities need to use due process to get into my stuff, warrants and such. It shouldn't be on a whim. I will un-lazily fight that sort of abuse.

There were some notes of abuse of these protections. Yep, but rather than throw the baby out with the bath water, we need to fight those abuses. Heck, there are some crooked cops, and some firefighters who are arsonists - do we decide we don't want cops and firefighters?

I think we can find ways to fight the bad guys, and get into their privacy when needed, w/o needing to worry too much about it if we are law abiding people. Controls, transparency, checks and balances. No, it's not easy.


BTW, I do think it is possible that Apple cannot get into the phone. If they did not retain certain keys that were used to program the security initially, they could be as locked out as anyone. Yes, I could see where they would decide to do this, maybe to avoid any possibility of the "kidnapping my family" TV-drama scenario. But they should make that known to be effective, so maybe that's not the case (was that in one scene of "Dr Strangelove"?)?

-ERD50

[marko]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senator This is a losing battle for Apple. It is ordered by the Court to comply.

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

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB Well, if I had studied law as my father so deeply desired, I'd probably have a clue. No snoozing for me, I have to set the table for dinner.

It turns out that I could not snooze either, and still thought about this a bit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoguy Well a backdoor would allow mass and covert surveillance.

In this case, as I read in an earlier quoted article, the court order was not about Apple building a backdoor, but to assist the FBI in breaking into this particular phone and this phone only. It does not appear to be that easy to be done routinely on any Joe and Jane Blow whenever the FBI wants to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ls99 Ah yes, court oders are good thing, can be appealed, once the supremes rule, then we must abide.

As MichaelB pointed out, the court order in this case demands assistance from Apple to do something the latter does not want to. And I recalled that it is only in the case of war that the government can demand a citizen to do things he does not want to, and they call it a draft.

But what I thought of while trying to snooze is that the government already mandates many things that a citizen does not want to do. And it has the Supreme Court's agreement. The most recent thing is about requiring an individual to have health insurance.

So, if this case goes before the SC, I think I know how to place my bet, regardless of what I think it should be.

OK, I have to go help my wife with dinner too. No snoozing either for me.

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marko 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

Yes, but there are people with strong feelings on each side of the debate. I think it is lose-lose for Apple in many people's minds. I don't think they can just "get it over with and move on".

Although, if my other possibility holds, and even Apple really has no way to break into this phone, that could leave them off the hook for this case. But then the Feds might insist that backdoor be added, and we are back to square one.

But if that backdoor requires specialized hardware and software, and soldering wires to the phone, the risk to the general public is very small. It's not like someone could snoop on your phone while you go to the bathroom.

This is reminding me of the reason why we hear of car-jackings these days. The security systems have gotten so good, the thieves end up confronting people directly to get the keys while the car is running. Except, you can see that shiny car is valuable, would a bad guy hold a gun to a random person's head and say "Give me access to your phone!"?

-ERD50