Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Files Official Motion to Vacate Court Order, Says FBI Seeks 'Dangerous Power'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think too many are brainwashed by the media's stance on this. Whether CNN, MSNBC or FOX NEWS, they're all "simplifying" the argument down to "Apple won't give the FBI the key to unlock the terrorist's phone" without explaining that Apple doesn't have said key. The technical aspects are too complex for the average person to understand the implications of. It just doesn't fit into their 30second sound bites before breaking away to ads.
Despite all the anti-government/anti-establishment trend this election is taking, most people seem to be swayed by the argument that any means are justified to break into this one iPhone. They don't care about what happens to the other 800Million iDevices.
Au contraire... If you look at Article V of the US Constitution, you would see that it is quite easy to change the law on that. Just get 2/3 of each house of Congress and 3/4 of the States to ratify an Amendment, and you'd be home free!
What? Android phones have similar level encryption but Google hasn't pushed it like Apple has done theirs.
CBS article from today on Android encryption and why police find it easier to break into Android phones:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/20...-are-easier-for-police-to-crack-than-iphones/
Oh, it's just *that* easy huh? In this political climate, good luck getting that trifecta! The FBI has better chances to crack that iPhone...
You must have missed the next day's news reports where Bill Gates came out and said the media did not accurately represent his stance and that he did side with what Apple was doing. He also strong feels that it needs to be decided by Congress and the President with new legislation.
Gee how like the main press to try to put out misleading headlines on news stories.
If this GOVTos isn't safe at Apple HQ, then how are the signing keys Apple uses to digitally sign iOS safe then? Those signing keys exist right now.
I did a bit of fun earlier.
I put MSNBC, CNN, and FOX on the same screen and watched them (CC works well).
Same topic - this one - and they were all saying it differently
Entertaining even
It takes media a few days to catch up and digest the material and put out a response to events more than just a gut reaction. I've been watch CNBC a number of mornings and same there. It wasn't until maybe yesterday or today when a number of commentators started to change their thinking and type of questions asked those they were interviewing. Guessing it will take them a day or two to digest Apple's filing.
Nobody is at all concerned about the dead terrorists right to privacy. Read some of the stories here and learn about the issues. This case has nothing at all to do with privacy for the owner of this phone. The owner of this phone wants it unlocked.
Apple rightfully believed they should not write a backdoor to circumvent security featured in iOS and sign it with a key. If you can't see the potential impact of that on every iOS users privacy you are not trying very hard.
Or, it could just be possible that Tim Cook, someone who's privacy has helped keep certain aspects of his life out the spotlight, understands what privacy can enable for people. Physical safety and privacy aren't all that disconnected these days.
The difference here that's important to point out is this isn't so much a case of "we know you have a spare key, use it." It is more akin to the FBI going to a company that produces wall safes, who's just released a new wall safe into the market. One with technology that makes it really rough to pick without it incinerating what is inside. Can the FBI legally compel the manufacturer to develop the toolset required to bypass the mechanism, so their locksmith can gain entry? A toolset that currently doesn't exist. This whole thing is complicated by multiple factors on top of that:
1) Apple currently is the only one that can mount this kind of attack on their own device, so the FBI cannot hire a "locksmith" and expect to have results in a reasonable timeframe.
2) The scale of failure is unlike something physical. The scope of the harm is insane (ever hear of a server breach that only affected a handful of people?), if this happens to go sideways as a result.
3) The scale of exposure someone has with these devices is unlike anything previous generations have seen. It's more akin to issuing a search warrant against the entirety of an individual and their property, rather than a specific location looking for specific things. That alone should make people a little wary.
4) This is a wedge case. Many more are waiting in the wings, and many more governments would be interested in this for political dissidents as much as criminals. This particular axe cuts indiscriminately.
It's not so much that it can be recreated easily (a single engineer could do it, but they need the signing key too), but rather the untenable situation you get yourself into by writing it the first time. Can it only be used for the one phone? Now you get to tweak it for every single case that comes forward from that point on. Each tweak representing some bug that can turn into a bypass and exploited for other purposes, roll the dice and find out. Make it more generic so that you don't have to keep tweaking it every time? Well, now you have to secure the hell out of that thing, because it's signed for retail devices, which will happily accept it. One failure in either case, and those mitigations that help protect your data are useless.
It's a no-win scenario over the long term. At best, you don't lose control of it, but still wind up forced to use it in questionable circumstances (political dissidents, etc). At worst, you flat out lose. There is no scenario where you come out on top in this situation.
If you actually read the filed response you'll get your answer. Apple was pretty clear on all of this and why not.
You can find a copy of it at the bottom of MacWorld's article: http://www.macworld.com/article/303...a-violation-of-its-constitutional-rights.html
Law enforcement getting a warrant for your bank records or access to your safety deposit box doesn't put others' privacy, safety, and security at risk. Building software to bypass iOS security measures does. That's the difference.
You don't put 700+ million users at risk just to search a few phones.
Not to mention they have to go through the proper channels to get warrants for those other things.
I'm glad other people saw right through that terrible analogy.
And the person I was replying to said we had weak gun laws...
***edit***
I re-read the person I responded to, and he didn't state that the gun laws were weak. He said that our government is. My apologies for my mistake.
Last edited:
I believe technically Apple will be in violation of the court order regardless of their filing of the motion. God save the judge.
Man ... watching the Republican debate is irritating when the Apple questions come up. None of them have any freaking idea what they're talking about. The media is really twisting this in the favor of the FBI by giving false information regarding the actual problem at hand.
Apple certainly has its work cut out for it. The attack they launched against Samsung provided them with practice that should help them once in court. Seems that public support is mixed, with those that haven't bought into Apple's ecosystem finding this easy to ignore. Further disgusted and put off in their opinion of the government they're inclined to view this as nothing more than a side note. Not everyone's happiness depends on Apple. It's just another phone.
And the actual problem at hand is? I think that people are ignoring the "actual issue" and this has become all about the "what if" scenario and conspiracy theories.
Heck both sides are talking as they are saving our way of life......whatever the outcome . Lots of BS flying from both sides.
The point being argued is that Apple is refusing to give the FBI the data on the phone ... which they aren't ... because they can't. The issue is what the FBI is asking Apple to do ... which has been explained to death already so I'm not going to bother. Seriously ... read something in here.
Agreed. Every single one of the candidates that spoke about this issue on the debate stage tonight showed no understanding of the enormity of this issue. It was an incredibly disappointing display from the party that is supposed to be generally in favor of limiting government overreach.