Readers may have heard of the recent battle between the FBI and Apple, Inc. over the issue of whether Apple may be compelled to allow law enforcement access to the iPhone of the mass murderers Sayed Rizwan Farook and his Tafsheen Malik. Last December, Farook and Malik gunned down at least 14 people in San Bernadino, California.
An Apple iPhone was recovered at the scene; it was owned by the San Bernadino health department, the employer of the Islamist radical murderer Farook. The FBI, in the course of its investigation, seeks to read the contents of what is in the iPhone device.
Its attorneys have filed a request for a court order that would compel Apple to de-encrypt the phone, and allow its contents to be read. Apple has reacted strenuously, maintaining that the government has no legal basis for what it is trying to do. The stage has thus been set for a protracted legal battle.
Edward Snowden has called the case “the most important tech case in a decade.” Many journalists have characterized the case as yet another abusive attempt at government surveillance overreaching.
Nevertheless, a close look at the relevant facts and law casts the matter in a very different light. I believe that the government is well within its rights to order Apple to open up this iPhone for examination. I realize that this is not a popular stand to take, and will explain my reasoning here.
We must first begin by recalling the terrible slaughter that took place in December by the two Islamist criminals, Farook and Malik. At the crime scene, Farook’s iPhone was recovered. Apple devices are well known to be very secure, with encryption and security features that arguably exceed those of its competitors.
Without help from Apple, law enforcement cannot read what might be inside the iPhone. The government has ordered Apple to write software that permit the phone to be opened up. The reasons and justifications of the government are reasonable, narrowly tailored, and done as part of a legitimate criminal investigation. The request for the courts order convincingly argues the following:
1. Apple is only being asked to aid in the execution of an existing, lawful search warrant in this criminal investigation.
2. It would be very little or no burden to Apple to write some code to permit access to the iOS (the phone’s operating system).
3. The request is narrowly tailored. The government is not seeking to monitor every iPhone, but only the one owned by Farook.
4. The All Writs Act of 1789, which is valid law and has been upheld by numerous judicial decisions, requires individuals and private companies to cooperate with the government in the execution of valid warrants and writs (see pages 9 through 12 of the request for the court order).
The aftermath of the shooting
Apple has posted a grandstanding letter on its website vowing to “resist” the court order compelling it to cooperate with the investigation. The company has sanctimoniously tried to characterize their refusal to cooperate with the investigation as a brave effort to stand up for “privacy rights.”
Their claims, however, ring hollow. As the legal authorities cited by the government make very clear, the government has every right to demand that Apple allow the FBI to look inside the murderer’s phone. Suppose, for example, that Farook were discovered to have previously unknown safe deposit box at a bank somewhere. And suppose that the key to the deposit box had been lost, rendering the box inaccessible.
The government would be perfectly justified in ordering the bank either to make a duplicate key, or to drill the lock out and force entry into the box. Similarly, it is standard procedure in any criminal investigation to comb through a defendant’s personal effects, possessions, and records, in an effort to gain information. There is absolutely nothing improper in this; in fact there would be something seriously wrong if it were not being done.
Against the government’s arguments, all Apple has to offer are hypothetical fears that any de-encryption code it writes for the FBI might “fall into the wrong hands” and be used in ways that were not originally intended. It claims that the government is seeking an unlawful “expansion” of its authority.
These assertions are false. Apple is a corporation that does business in the United States and is bound to obey the laws and court orders that are issued here. Vague fears of possible future “abuse” do not justify refusal to obey court orders. If Apple is worried about a de-encryption code “falling into the wrong hands” or “being abused,” then it has remedies it could pursue.
It could certainly request that the court insert language in its final order making the code a classified security item. It could establish monitoring protocols. It could do any number of things (and seek compensation from the government) to assuage its alleged fears of security breach. I am confident that Apple has the brain-power to come up with creative solutions.
But what it cannot do is refuse to cooperate.
Apple’s position has nothing to do with noble legal principle or some altruistic advocacy of “privacy rights.” It has everything to do, however, with business. Its concern for its market share, its branding, and its image are what it is worried about, not the rights of the public. Frankly, in the opinion of this writer, no company has done more to degrade personal privacy rights than has Apple.
Apple has marketed itself as somehow “special” or “different” from other smart phone manufacturers. It has either stated or implied that its security features were better than those of its competitors. This recent court order now (in Apple’s eyes) seems to show that Apple is a company like any other.
What it really fears is even the hint, or the appearance, that its mythical “security” might somehow be tarnished by its cooperation with the court order. This position is ridiculous, of course, but one that comports with Apple’s arrogant cultivation of its “special” image, whether this image is in fact based on reality.
“Privacy rights” are not unlimited. No company, however powerful, is exempt from obeying the law, especially when it has invoked that same country’s laws to generate colossal profits over many years. A modern cell phone is an intimate tool, and the FBI has every right to want to look inside Farook’s phone.
It is sadly true that, in recent years, there has been overreaching on the part of the government with regard to the virtually unregulated data collection actions it has taken since the advent of the Patriot Act. Such overreaching has done much to alienate the public, and to destroy the sense of confidence that many citizens may have in the sanctity and efficacy of the law. For this crisis of confidence, the American leadership must accept its share of the blame. However, this is a separate issue, and one that is unrelated to the subject of this article.
When horrific crimes have been committed, law enforcement has a right to conduct a reasonable investigation. And when court orders have been issued compelling individuals and businesses to cooperate, they have no right to refuse.
This may be an unpopular line to take. But the law has nothing to do with popularity.
Read More: Should Men Ignore Negativity?
* The company has sanctimoniously tried to characterize their refusal to
cooperate with the investigation as a brave effort to stand up for
“privacy rights.” *
That’s rich coming from Apple, they participated in the NSA’s PRISM spying initiative.
Yes.
Most people actually sign over their 4th amendment rights through various terms and conditions they accept without actually reading it. There’s a pretty good documentary on it and how over the years these companies have changed the wording on what and who they’ll share your user info with including the government so all they have to do is simply ask without a warrant because you’ve pre agreed to share your info in return for using their product. Something most people should be aware of.
Excellent post.
Why I use Linux, heh (although to be fair, I have a Windows 10 and Windows 7 machine, mostly for stupid shit).
I assume anything I use that I do not have complete and direct control over will eventually be shared with people I don’t want it to be shared with. And act accordingly. They can only steal what is available to them.
This is giving me a great idea for an article regarding digital privacy and ensuring it, should we ever need to get to that point.
I think we are already past that point. We can all use all the weapons and armor we can get.
Thinking along the lines of whole drive encryption and how to prepare and send encrypted messages correctly. It’s probably not what you think.
Been thinking about those things as well. My country is not (yet) in a bad enough place to seriously look into it, but there are plenty of people in the world as a whole who could benefit from it.
Not to sound like some paranoid survivalist, but the best time to prepare is before things get bad.
Completely agreed. Doing as much so far as my situation allows.
Yea I need to get better at knowing that stuff, right now I just have an encrypted email account for personal shit and whatnot
Don’t trust it. That’s a layer of protection I call a “false sense of security”. Your swap file/virtual memory records every keystroke for easy analysis later.
“There’s a pretty good documentary on it and how over the years these companies have changed the wording on what and who they’ll share your user info with including the government so all they have to do is simply ask without a warrant because you’ve pre agreed to share your info in return for using their product. Something most people should be aware of.”
Exactly. And if one clicks on “disagree” he doesn’t get to use the software / hardware in question.
Well, heh, not without a bit of cracking anyway.
It’s scary how tight people think the digital world is, when in fact it’s an open oyster. Hence the prevalence of very rich privacy protection companies. When you find real protection, you guard it jealously.
What is the name of the documentary and can it be found on YouTube?
I believe it was called “terms and conditions may apply” and it was on Netflix
I’ve read a lot of bad stuff about Win10. I don’t know how much of it is unfounded paranoia, but the fact that they are giving away the OS makes me really suspicious, and Win7 works great for me, along with some occasional Linux use. Then again, I’m sure there are all kinds of back doors and vulnerabilities built into Win7, but I don’t want every keystroke sent to a database somewhere with Win10, at least any more than it’s already happening.
By the US constitution, any and all rights– including privacy, speech, and right to own a gun– may be removed via due process. Otherwise it would be unconstitutional to put a criminal in jail. This is a big nothing case. As usual, TRUMP WAS RIGHT.
I have to side with the Feds on this one. There is no need for probable cause simply because they know that is Farook’s IPhone.
The very day apple hands over the device with the backdoor to the OS, the fbi will make a ghost copy of the OS to use illegally.
Exactly right. To think that they wouldn’t is to be extremely naive. That thing would be ghosted so fast that it would defy the speed of light.
“Exactly right. To think that they wouldn’t is to be extremely naive. That thing would be ghosted so fast that it would defy the speed of light.”
Unfortunately you are correct.
Didnt that virus software detector developer guy, psycho McCauffrey offer to crack it? There may be hackers outside apple willing to try to crack it.
As a set of base level encryption algorithms, there’s no actual way to crack it that fits within the laws of physics. This has been known for quite a while, and if you’re using the Copylefted version of it you’re pretty much golden since you can examine source code. The few cracks in recent years are from a few exploits that have been cleaned up and a couple of interesting warm boot attempts against RAM and, of course, rubber hose cryptography.
The virus guy I don’t know, he has a vested interested in making the FedGov look bad, they are gunning for him (or were the last I checked). I applaud that generally, but he seems a bit full of himself. He needs to make Costa Rica look like a Borg ship to even approach the ability to start dealing with this level of encryption. Even then, eh, laws of physics and stuff.
I first saw mccaufrey on some news report where he was living in Belize and was accused of murdering his neighbor (who was also an American expat) because said neighbor poisoned mccaufrey’s dogs. Literally it was like garden-variety backwater American white trash antics in a central american country. So bizarre one can’t make this shit up.
He really has no credibility any longer. If he’d come out pro or anti-FBI, nobody would bother to give him credence in the industry.
I agree, yet Mccaufrey wants to run for president.
I’d be tempted to respond “Good luck with that, what, with a murder charge on ya” but then we have, well, Hillary running so I guess anything is possible.
“As a base encryption algorithm, there’s no actual way to crack it that fits within the laws of physics”
Goes to show ya how little I know, but how does the laws of physics come into play with code cracking?
Raw computing power extrapolated across time. There simply isn’t enough time in the universe for enough microchips, whose power also increases exponentially across time, to be made to fulfill this request. Even if you have perfect production, then you have a raw materials issue which requires massive space flight efforts across multiple planets, then solar systems.
It’s a bit of a hard day’s work, is what I’m saying.
Gotcha…. essentially it would take infinity and eternity to crack it.
Yep.
Nothing a little Kratom doping couldn’t help with, man 😀
You can rationalise anything nowadays, can’t you?
“…compelled to allow law enforcement access to the iPhone of the mass murderers Sayed Rizwan Farook and his Tafsheen Malik”
I believe you’ve incorrectly stated the issue; it’s not about having access to a few terrorists iPhones ….it’s about having access to every iPhone – including yours. This is what Apple is fighting.
Try restating your opinion piece with the point of view that the FBI can have access to your iPhone whenever it needs, then I’ll come back and make a proper comment.
If you look at the government’s filed request for the court order, which I linked to, it says right on page 7, line 12 that the search is for the SUBJECT DEVICE only.
It’s true that some people may not believe the government, but they are not asking to get access to “every” iPhone.
Quintus watch this
You’re right about that filed request, sorry. I read the rest of your article too and you have great points. What I suspect though (which is why Apple no longer writes ‘backdoor’ software for iOS 9 unlike it did for previous iOS’s) is that Apple considers this their ‘snowden moment’ of sorts, and if they don’t stand up for Joe User then the Government will simply continue on with their tradition of having their own ‘backdoors’ to the world. I can easily imagine the Government hacking the code Apple might provide and then using it on other SUBJECT DEVICE’s everywhere. I don’t trust the Government. I don’t trust Apple. I enjoy the peace of mind I get from knowing my data is destroyed after X attempts at my PIN code.
In the adult world results are what matter. And the result of what they are asking is that they would get access to every iphone in the world.
If you read the court order, the FBI has asked Apple to produce an application with the following characteristics.
1) It can be loaded onto the phone as part of a firmware or OS update sequence.
2) It will allow a remote device to enter passcodes directly.
3) It will bypass the auto wipe feature.
4) It will bypass the escalating delays on passcode failure.
5) It can run from RAM without modifying iOS.
6) It will only run on the phone targeted in the warrant.
2, 3, and 4 are impossible while complying with 5. The features being requested are controlled by code buried in the OS with no public API for apps.
6 is absolutely impossible in any case. It cannot be done.
Apple is correct. This would require a new build of iOS, and that build would compromise the security of every iOS device currently in existence.
Legally speaking there is no precedent for requiring a company to build something entirely new that compromises the security of all or nearly all devices it has ever shipped. A bank making a new key or drilling a hole into one safety deposit box is a false analogy. No U.S. court has ever compelled a bank or safe manufacturer to provide the government with a key or combination that opens everything. And I doubt higher courts will allow this court to do so now.
Furthermore, Apple absolutely has the right to protest on the basis that the Federal government cannot secure such a tool. Our government has lost: nuclear warhead designs; F-35 blueprints; nearly every single security clearance application at the OPM; God only knows what that was stored on Obamacare websites; and all the email on Hillary’s server. And that’s just what we know about publicly. To suggest they can declare a hackable iOS “classified” and secure it is just plain stupid.
One good thing will come of all of this: the next series of processors for mobile devices will expand upon what Apple did with Secure Enclave. If you simply hard wire the auto wipe feature then the FBI will never be able to decrypt a phone. And no court will be able to compel Apple or anyone else to bypass the feature because you can’t order someone to do the impossible.
I worry far more about computer crime being enabled by the fools, boobs, and idiots who work for the Federal government then I worry about girl jihadis who would have never been allowed to immigrate in the first place if the FBI could competently do its job.
I don’t agree with your analysis.
You don’t have to, but he’s still right. You’re a respected voice and a fantastic writer with profound insights, but I’m going to disagree with you on this one as a long time digital privacy man.
The EFF, whose privacy advocacy has always been strong and consistent for decades now no matter what party is in office, has the actual information we’ll want to read.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/apple-americans-and-security-vs-fbi
Agree completely, privacy, property, and personhood is important.
We give them up for one exception, we end up giving them up for everything
Note, it has been revealed that the phone’s password was changed after the attack. This could only have been done by someone within the local law enforcement. The purpose would seem to be to increase the password difficulty so that this whole situation would come to pass, which will give the FBI a precedent to use to open anyone’s phone.
Exactly. A total “false flag” type of event.
I only disagree partially: if the court order was for Apple to unlock *that single iPhone, using security vulnerabilities only Apple is aware of, and Apple is not forced to publish those vulnerabilities* this order would be appropriate. Compelling a company to participate in a lawful, criminal, investigation does not violate privacy.
However, attempting to compel Apple to provide a backdoor for *all* iPhones is completely inappropriate. The request for assistance from Apple must be myopically applied within the single case upon which the court order was issued.
Anything else is a fishing expedition.
Actually that’s my entire position, so we’re aligned perfectly.
I would criticize Apple for not making a counter-offer of exactly that: we will use our knowledge of “zero day” security vulnerabilities in iOS to break into that single iPhone in question, and provide you with all the data.
This would put the government in the position of having to accept this extremely reasonable offer that would give them all they need for their investigation, or have to concede they had an agenda to get access to any iPhone.
However, Apple’s grandstanding on the issue leads me to believe they are trying to use the situation to gain points with the liberal “iPhone generation” as opposed to a sincere concern for privacy.
Apple can comply with the order. They’ve done it in the past. Daniel has said that it’s “impossible” for them to comply, but this is not true:
http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/
His analysis is spot on, as far as the tech part goes. Those are simply facts.
And his other arguments are based on facts, evidence and reason. Like it should be.
If you look at the government’s filed request for the court order, which I linked to, it says right on page 7, line 12 that the search is for the SUBJECT DEVICE only.
It’s true that some people may not believe the government, but they are not asking to get access to “every” iPhone.
Then refute his points, point by point. Simply saying “you are wrong” is no argument.
It’s this simple.
I create device you cannot crack.
A criminal uses device.
You ask me create a way to crack the device for you then hand it over.
You reverse engineer the hardware, decompile the OS badda bing and now can crack everything.
To think that they won’t have this ghosted and cloned in a matter of hours, I just don’t understand. This is the same agency that constructs massive data warehouses in Utah to store everything they compile from online, across all social media platforms, without a warrant. So yeah.
Yes, that’s certainly an understandable assumption to make, considering the governmental overreaching in the past when it comes to data collection. But in this specific situation, a person or corporation can’t just refuse to comply with a search warrant over bad things the government “might” do. There are mechanisms that Apple can put in place to make sure that its interests are protected.
I’m interested, what things can they do to ensure that their interests are protected?
Not “might”. They will do it. Humans don’t act randomly.
They can request language be put in the court order which commands the government not to exceed the scope of the investigation. They can apply for compensation to make the government pay for the expense of writing the software. They can change their security features in the future just to stay one step ahead of the curve. They have remedies, man, believe me.
The law only applies to commoners. Us. It does not apply to the state.
Words on paper mean nothing, I think we both know that’s the case now.
To address the relevant points you bring up, Apple stores the hash keys on a hardware chip. Even *they* don’t know what you store now, and can’t. Should they go full monty and figure out a way, that chip is now utterly compromised. Meaning, yes, they put in a new chip for the iZombie 7, but then the FBI comes along tomorrow and says “Oh, yes, that one too, back door it” and we’re back to square one.
The principle of the matter demands a higher level of integrity. I’m no fan of Apple, and they’ve done a lot of stupid shit, but on this they are spot on. A large portion of their business model relies on data integrity and protection. Build a back door once, it’s over.
The main point is that, despite what the FBI says, it’s impossible to create the software ‘solely for one iPhone’. The firmware isn’t based on a sim card or anything unique to one iPhone. Once the new firmware is created, it can be used for any iPhone.
Correct. I have addressed that part in another reply to Daniel Taylor’s post.
In this specific situation Apple can refuse to comply simply because it is impossible to comply. As I pointed out the FBI is asking Apple to avoid modifying iOS on the target phone. Yet they are requesting features that can only be created by modifying iOS. That contradiction alone voids the order.
And whether we’re talking about an app or a new build of iOS, Apple cannot insure it only works on the targeted phone. Note that this requirement was part of the court order.
Even if the court were to give Apple a modified order with which Apple could comply, it is within Apple’s rights to appeal. Apple can fight this all the way to the USSC if the USSC will hear the case.
Great posts Daniel.
We’ve got words on paper that say Hillary Clinton belongs in jail for having classified information sent to her private email server. Not happening. We’ve also got words on paper that dictate jail for perjury before Congress. No one has ever even talked about indicting James Clapper.
As GhostOfJefferson says, words on paper mean nothing now.
If Apple could secure a modified version of iOS so that it could never run on another device, and was tamper resistance at the same confidence level of AES encryption, then this wouldn’t be a big deal. I imagine Apple would have just complied with the order in that case because then it would be exactly like asking a bank to drill a single safe.
But that’s not how this works.
As for compensation: given that creating this tool compromises all existing phones, it would likely have to include both revenue from lost sales and the cost of settling any class action lawsuits brought by existing iPhone users. We’re talking about a market that was north of $150 billion in 2015, and a total number of sold devices in excess of 800 million as of 2014.
Is the FBI willing to pony up? How about if there’s a stipulation that taxpayer money may not be used? I want the salaries and property holdings of every FBI agent on the line for this one. Not my tax rates. Let’s see how important two months worth of data is worth. (Two months because the FBI has the last iCloud backup.) (Correction: Wired is reporting the FBI has data up to one month before the attack.)
Apple may be spinning the narrative for PR purposes but so what? Ultimately a law is nothing but an opinion with a gun. Sure, the recovered iphone was owned by a murdering terrorist who killed a few people. However, the one organization that literally murdered hundreds of millions of people in the 20th century alone were governments not terrorists. Not just war but straight up murder and genocide. It’s citizens had the mentality that because it was sanctioned by the State it must have been justified…much like the mentality you have. Don’t think it can happen here? Don’t be arrogant and believe you can see into the future. All we have as peaceful citizens is the ability to try and prevent the baby steps which can possibly lead to an authoritarian dictatorship of ruling elites…we’re not far from that now.
Quintus, It matters not what they said there. Once it exists, and is turned over to the FBI, it will be used without hesitation.
To believe that.Gov will not use such a tool for its own purposes is like believing that Brer Rabbit did NOT want to be thrown into the briar patch. Ascribing good motives to an agency that passed the buck on Hillary’s repeated violations of classified document security is stretching too far.
Those mechanisms are?
Thank you. I’ve lurked at RoK for a long time now. I never thought my first posts would be attacking an article here. But the privacy issue is a big one for me, and it’s driving me nuts that the right / alt-right is getting it wrong. (I believe this is due in no small part to a misunderstanding of the technology.)
We just watched Roosh go through hell. Now imagine something like that without our rights, restrictions on government power, and technological security. (However thin they may all be right now.)
I am a right winger Tea Partier evil person and even the evil Rush Limbaugh agreed with Apple today on his radio program, as do I. It is the Lefty Progs once again bending over to the Statists and Socialists.
And that is how this issue should be tackled. I see a lot of posts here that mention how Apple are being hypocrites and what not, which is irrelevant in this case.
Some people are letting their personal thoughts and feelings run amok. But in the end we should apply logic and focus on cold hard facts.
In order for you to be able to put into a court order any language that limits the scope and/or actions of the government in any given scenario, you need to first have a government that will actually respect those limitations. This fairy tale world you imagine where Apple can “commmand” the government to limit what it can do with anything Apple creates to access this iPhone does not exist. Period. The government has already proven that it cannot be trusted. The government has already proven that it has no regard whatsoever for any of the supposed “limitations” placed upon it, Constitutionally or otherwise.
I usually take to your articles well, Quintus, as you’re usually spot on the money. But this one should have been better thought out. It seems to me that it’s not much more than a hastily written contrarian piece with the amount of holes so easily blown in it. Someone should let the ROK editors know that it’s OK for mainstream opinion and ROK opinion to align on occasion. No reason to panic…
They’re certainly within their rights to appeal it. But I think they’re facing an uphill battle.
I expect the government to win this battle. I may be proven wrong, but we will have to see.
And I am not as sure as you that it is “impossible” for Apple to comply with the order. Apple is saying that it “will not” comply, not that they can’t comply.
I also disagree with you that one needs to be security technician to have an opinion on this matter. This is a legal issue, not a science issue. It is case law that will decide this question.
Privacy in any society is not absolute. No one wants to hear this, but it is so. In matters of criminal investigations, the government has a right–and a duty–to look at any and all relevant information.
If a crime was committed and an Apple phone was possibly involved, as here, then the FBI has every right to see what’s in the phone. If a crime is committed in my house, the police have a right–and a duty–to cordon off the crime scene and look everywhere for evidence.
I know this is an emotional issue for many of us. Without doubt, the government has betrayed the trust of many by its heavy-handed methods in the past 15 years when it comes to surveillance.
But this must not blind us to the reality of what the law mandates. The law in question here goes back to 1789. Case law since then upholds it.
We will see what the courts do. But I’m confident that the government will prevail.
They don’t have the right to access every iphone in the world over this. Whatever the law might have to say about it.
Of course not…I never said they had the right to access every phone.
Yes you did. That is literally what would happen if they got what they asked for.
“But in this specific situation, a person or corporation can’t just refuse to comply with a search warrant over bad things the government “might” do.”
Oh really? So we’ve now reached a point where the flagrantly incompetent and brutal US gunvernment can ( under the guise of keeping us safe) force a company to bend to their every whim and will – irrespective of financial cost and loss of privacy. If thats the world you want to live in you might as well agitate for the State to take over Apple. Im sure that will really turn out well. Your I -Fag 12 will morph into two tin cans with a string and it will cost 200 billion to build not including the bribes, grift and political payoffs.
J McCaffe did a great interview where he argued essentially the same points you did.
Your insights are very appreciated.
No but essentially that is what they (FBI) are requesting
They ( State Dept/Military/Fed LEO) use Blackberrys ( seriously)
“In order for you to be able to put into a court order any language that limits the scope and/or actions of the government in any given scenario, you need to first have a government that will actually respect those limitations. This fairy tale world you imagine where Apple can “commmand” the government to limit what it can do with anything Apple creates to access this iPhone does not exist. Period. The government has already proven that it cannot be trusted. The government has already proven that it has no regard whatsoever for any of the supposed “limitations” placed upon it, Constitutionally or otherwise.”
I think this would be a stronger argument if the government in the form of the FBI was not applying via a court for the orders it is. If the government was as contemptuous of or outside the limits placed on it as you suggest, they wouldn’t be submitting to the jurisdiction of a court: they would simply demand Apple produce the program on the basis of ‘national security’. Or turn someone working inside Apple.
Bingo.
Here’s the thing though: “if an Apple phone was possibly involved”. If they needed to get into the phone because it has the number to the chief executive of IslamicState, that’s one thing, but it seems they are just on a fishing expedition. (And they already have the phone # to the CEO of IS–it rings to Langley haha)
What this case comes down to in reality though, is whether secure encryption is allowed to exist or not. The government does regulate certain things that it deems too dangerous for the people (ie you can’t own a nuclear weapon (actually I’m not sure if this is illegal, or just really really difficult to make)) so the government could make (and is making) an argument that secure encryption should not exist, but I come down firmly on the other side of this issue.
Are you a gun rights advocate? Should guns be outlawed because guns can and are often used for violent acts? The same applies here with encryption. You have to accept that certain things have a net positive benefit to society but also still facilitate illegal activity. Guns are an amazing tool for bank robbers, thieves, etc. and taking them away would do a whole lot to reduce violent crime. And yet we keep them legal because they serve a net benefit. The same with encryption.
I hate to break the news to you guys, but the NSA can already get inside Apple’s devices. But the government doesn’t want to have to rely on intelligence agencies to serve search warrants. They want to use the legal system. In this case, the FBI is doing things by the book and is requesting a court order.
I’m not even sure Apple can do this. Perhaps in extreme cases someone could disassemble a phone and try to view files stored on its memory card, but I’d like to see the evidence of this. AFAIK they had this ability prior to the latest version of phones and iOS (I think maybe version <7?) but not currently.
There’s also the reality that if the Federal government outlaws secure encryption it will not keep encryption out of the hands of criminals or terrorists. AES is a public algorithm. There are others. Stupid criminals might continue to use compromised systems made in compliance with such a law. But anyone with a brain will use something else.
We are at the point with microcontrollers and FPGA’s that one could reasonably develop their own custom cell phone, radio, or Internet communication’s device. What is the FBI going to do when faced with a device that has a custom instruction set and custom OS, and is designed to blow out the memory contents AND the FPGA if it detects any attempts at tampering or investigation? Even the NSA wouldn’t know where to start.
Overall encryption is in the best interests of law abiding citizens because it helps protect them from criminals. As for the terrorists: keep them out of our country and we won’t need to worry about what’s on their phones.
Their motives are irrelevant. The Federal government has proven time and again that they cannot secure the most important national secrets. We’ve lost nuclear warhead designs for heaven’s sake.
They literally cannot comply with a court order to only use a modified iOS on one phone. They likely anticipated that argument because the order asks Apple to make sure the software would only run on one phone (which they can’t do).
The NSA cannot crack AES.
If they have an opportunity to install spyware on a phone then they can access data through that application. There are four avenues of attack here.
1) Deploy an app for use on phones that are jail broken.
2) Deploy an app under a corporate license/signature (not in the app store).
3) Deploy a seemingly legitimate app via the app store.
4) Get physical access to the phone in an unlocked state. (Note that in the past it has been possible to install software on an iPhone whether it was locked or not. But that exploit was closed which is why the FBI is in trouble here.)
1-3 naturally require some sort of social engineering to target a specific person. Example: NSA orders your boss to deploy a new app to employee phones that appears to be for the corporation but is really designed to gather information.
It doesn’t work that way. I imagine the FBI can copy the flash memory contents and already has. But that data is encrypted using AES.
I’ve seen one estimate that it could take 1 billion billion years to crack AES with one of the fastest supercomputers. (The two billions are not a typo.)
Agreed, with a change to your final line… stay out of terrists countries and there likely won’t be any 😉
Regarding the court battle: it’s anyone’s guess. For our sake I hope Apple prevails.
Regarding the possibility of compliance: Apple has said they would have to modify iOS and by doing so put every iPhone at risk. This is another way of saying:
A) They cannot make an app to do what the FBI wants. This is absolutely true. iOS apps are sandboxed and there are no APIs or privileges whereby an app could do what the FBI wants. This stuff is buried in the core OS and manipulating it requires a new build of the OS. It’s not like Windows 3.1 or Mac OS classic where an application could snoop all over the memory address space, read/write any data, and call any function.
B) They cannot tie this software to one phone. To be sure they can make it difficult to run it on another phone. But not impossible. The FBI, NSA, and any better hackers who got their hands on it could make it run.
I never claimed that one needs to be a security technician to have an opinion on this matter. I would argue that a proper legal opinion cannot be formed in absence of an accurate understanding of how this technology works. But that understanding does not require one to be a technician.
Re: “Privacy in any society is not absolute.”
As a practical matter it can be for some information regardless of the law. The government may not want to hear this, but information can be encrypted such that it is impossible to access at this time or even forever. (Quantum computing will render some of today’s algorithms breakable, but not all.) And the nature of the tools used to do this means that the government has no hope of ever controlling it through law.
They can force Apple to put a backdoor in their products if they wish to sell their products here. But they can’t stop any of countless programmers from just coding encryption tools themselves. Nor can they stop people from downloading and using those tools.
If the U.S. government comes down on the wrong side of this they will only weaken law abiding U.S. citizens and businesses. Those who don’t want to mess with additional tools or find themselves on the wrong side of some law. The government won’t actually stop anyone else. Indeed, with high profile cases like this they are driving the people they want to spy on to more secure systems. I bet there are guys at the NSA who want to beat someone at the FBI senseless right about now.
Re: “If a crime was committed and an Apple phone was possibly involved, as here, then the FBI has every right to see what’s in the phone.”
The physical universe does not care about rights. It’s possible right now, with an iOS device which uses Secure Enclave, to setup an alpha numeric password that would take years to brute force even if Apple gives the FBI the features they want. And it’s possible to buy, download, or create software, for any modern smartphone or computer, that accepts longer keys such that the FBI couldn’t get the information before the heat death of the universe.
This is a physical reality. It is beyond any laws or wishes of the government.
Finally, I think it will be no surprise to you that I disagree with your interpretation of the law. A court can compel a manufacturer to compromise one device. I believe only Congress can decide if all devices should be compromised. We shall see where this goes legally.
While I often find him obnoxious and pretentious, Stefan Molyneux does an excellent job of explaining everything here
Basically, Apple does not have the ability to do what the FBI is asking. It may or may not be able to develop such ability, but is unwilling to try as a matter of principle. Prior to ios 9, certain unencrypted data was able to be retrieved by Apple from a locked phone; this is no longer the case.
This argument doesn’t hold much water either. The government is only submitting to the courts because we haven’t reached that point in the decline of a free society where the government can expect to get away with forcing the issue outside of a court.
The Wall Street Journal has reported that the DOJ is seeking court orders for Apple to help them crack 12 more iPhones (http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-seeks-to-force-apple-to-extract-data-from-about-12-other-iphones-1456202213). On top of the San Bernardino shooter’s phone. This entire situation goes beyond the FBI wanting access to one phone. This is the government attempting to set a precedence that they can then use to force all tech companies to install back doors in their products.
The government should be told to go fuck themselves. I for one am sick to death of losing more and more of my civil liberties so that the incompetents in Washington can better “protect” me from “terrorists”. Because, you know, they’ve done a bang up job of it so far.
Where did your blind faith in the government come from? You trust the government to enforce restrictions on the government? Seems you haven’t quite figured out that when the government wants to do something illegal, they just make it legal. Keep voting Democrat (or hell, the other one. Doesn’t matter, one in the same).
A mere formality given the amount of attention that it’s garnered
I’d like to hear your thoughts on this article:
http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/
http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/
No,it is not impossible for them to comply. Check out this article:
http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/
That article is wrong. And even a non-technical but critical reader could have caught one of the errors.
1) They quote the section of the order that says “The SIF will load and run from Random Access Memory (“RAM”) and will not modify the iOS on the actual phone, the user data partition or system partition on the device’s flash memory.”
Immediately after the quote they say “…in plain English, the FBI wants Apple to create a special version of iOS.”
No, the FBI ordered Apple to create something that implements the features without modifying iOS. That is impossible. For this point alone the order is legally invalid and Apple does not have to comply. (Though they obviously need to explain to the court why.)
2) The article completely ignores that the order requires Apple to design a SIF (software image file; I was saying app earlier but SIF is the language in the order) that “…would only load and execute on the SUBJECT DEVICE.” Once again, it is impossible for Apple to comply. This second point also invalidates the existing order.
3) While this is not related to the order, the article discusses Secure Enclave. Secure Enclave is not part of the iPhone 5c. It is not relevant to the conversation at all.
The technical misinformation on this topic is just staggering.
What the FBI really wants is the ability to brute force the passcode. Tim Cook is correct that this requires a compromised version of iOS that could potentially be used against any phone.
Apple can easily have this order dismissed because meeting all of the requirements is impossible. But the FBI will just draft new requests until the court reaches the same conclusion that the people who created the device reached on day one: the only way to do this is with a new iOS that compromises the security of all existing devices.
And that is unacceptable.
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/returnofkings/apples_refusal_to_cooperate_with_a_valid_court_order_is_wrong/#comment-2533460767
I wish you had posted this reply in one instance, or in another RoK article, rather then repeating it across the comments.
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/returnofkings/apples_refusal_to_cooperate_with_a_valid_court_order_is_wrong/#comment-2533460767
Wanted to add a few other notes:
* That article seems to be using “firmware” and “iOS” interchangeably in several places. They are not the same thing. The authors likely (hopefully) know this, but their writing is not clear.
* This is important because the order asks for a “Software Image File” and not simply an app. This raises the valid question of whether or not a custom firmware update could implement the desired features without modifying iOS?
* The answer remains no. In the past there have been jailbreaking tools which exploited vulnerabilities in DFU mode to load custom firmware. But to do anything useful they then had to modify the OS. The firmware, loaded via a now patched DFU vulnerability, was merely the way to open the door to altering the phone’s OS.
* However you bypass auto wipe and passcode failure delay escalation, there is a limit to the number of passcode attempts per second even on much older phones. A non-escalating delay which appears to be hardwired or a side effect of the time to complete the validation process. On the iPhone 4 (for example) it could take up to 196 years to brute force a 6 character alphanumeric passcode.
Note that this isn’t merely theoretical. There was a forensics suite, based on jailbreaking the iPhone 4 through a DFU vulnerability, which included code to brute force the passcode. Hackers have been down this road and couldn’t bypass or alter the non-escalating delay. It was only useful because most users have a 4 character numeric passcode which only required 18 minutes to crack.
* Even if a mere firmware update could give the FBI what they wanted, Apple could not guarantee that the firmware wouldn’t run on, or be modified to run on, another phone.
The deeper I research this the more it becomes clear that what the FBI wants is impossible. Apple knows exactly where this will go when they tell the court that the current order is impossible. And they don’t want that precedent to be set.
Playing devil’s advocate, let’s assume Apple *could* if they chose to, technically find a way into this phone.
1) Apple, as the manufacturer of a device, has no responsibility for said device after its warranty period has expired. It certainly has no obligation to create, code, test, and install a new version of iOS simply because the government wants it to. There are companies that cater to government / police needs (ie makers of police scanners). If the government wants to appeal to anyone, it would be these third party groups, and obviously they would demand compensation. Just because a company made a product, doesn’t make them responsible for individuals use or misuse of said product. If I hired some company to build a massive concrete and steel box 100 feet deep and put something in it that the government wanted, is that company responsible for drilling and breaking in to that box? Terrible precedent. Indeed Apple says as much in their court answer: “we have even put the data out of our reach because the contents of your phone are none of our business”
2) Wild speculation that the secure enclave can just have new software written to it without first entering the correct passcode. The entire purpose of Apple creating secure enclave was to have a *hardware* security system that could not be affected by hacks. There are always exploits, jailbreaks, etc. but a custom hardware solution makes all these meaningless. I highly suspect he is wrong about this. Indeed, the comments seem to indicate that SE cannot be updated without first entering the correct passcode.
3) In order to break security for one specific phone* (see #4) Apple must first break security for all its phones, and then perform a serial number check to restrict it to only running on one phone. In other words, it must first completely destroy its security for all its phones as part of this process. The government is essentially making secure encryption illegal at this point.
4) Justice department just announced it wants Apple to do the same thing for a dozen other phones (not terism related). I posted the link in another comment here. This is only the start.
5) If secure encryption is illegal, then Apple will either greatly lose market share to overseas competitors who are not prevented from producing encrypted phones, or Apple will simply move overseas where its operations are unfettered by American law (currently the majority of iphones are sold outside the US so this would be the most likely action). Either way, this would likely lead to the end of US dominance in tech and encryption.
6) Apple has stated in court documents that it can retrieve some *unencrypted* data on older phones but it does not have this ability for devices running ios9, which is the case here. Apple is either committing perjury or it truthfully cannot do what the gov’t is asking.
7) The potential harm is far greater than the expected return. If backdoor ios software is in the wrong hands, secure data on any device is compromised. A bad actor would pay millions or billions for this ability. And this is all so that the government can maybe read a text message from someone who surely disappeared months ago? Again, if the phone had the cure to cancer, I would say sure, force Apple to do whatever they can to recover the data, but not for a fishing expedition.
8) Apple’s court response states that it is impossible to restrict this backdoor hack to only one device.
9) Isn’t it possible there are some “bad guys” that work at Apple? Obviously an employee couldn’t openly work on creating ios backdoors today, but this program would give them the cover to do so. If only one employee sells / steals / uses this hack, they have compromised the security of all ios owners.
10) “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Benjamin Franklin
You definitely bring up good points, Dan. It will be very interesting to see how this plays out in court. My guess is that the judge will order some sort of compromise, where Apple hands over the information in the phone, but is permitted to keep silent about how they got the information.
Thank you.
If the FBI can accept it then Apple could take possession of the phone; load a modified iOS; brute force the passcode; load regular iOS; give the phone back to the FBI with the passcode.
That’s a better solution, though I bet Apple would still object. (Precedent; having to do it for every warrant; hackable iOS would still exist and could leak into the wild though the odds are far lower if they have the only copy.)
I would personally find that a more agreeable solution, and it would likely be enforceable legally.
That said, if the terrorist used a long, truly random, alphanumeric passcode then this is all pointless. In that case it would not be brute forced in our lifetimes. Maybe ever if a component fails after years of being on.
Some additional revelations here… I’m wondering if this changes any of your thinking
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-02-24/we-just-found-out-real-reason-fbi-wants-backdoor-iphone
The principle point is that it is impossible to achieve 6 alone, without breaking it and allowing easy gov access for everybody else as well.
You know as much if not more than anyone that letting the fed have a carte blanche is a terribad idea.
And the points made about Apple not being benevolent in action are true, but that doesn’t change that they are still making the right call on this one.
Debunk it then! Show us how he’s wrong .
Spot on analysis.
❝my .friend’s mate Is getting 98$. HOURLY. on the internet.”….two days ago new McLaren. F1 bought after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a days ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn. More right Here!!b847➤➤➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsOnline/GetPaid/98$hourly…. .❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:::::!!b847….
Daniel brings up some great points. I don’t have all the answers, but I do think the court would craft some kind of compromise where Apple is allowed to keep its branding and security pristine, and at the same time, the FBI is allowed to see what is inside the phone. Maybe the court will now allow the FBI to take physical possession of the phone, but only see what is inside it.
I could also see the use of some sort of court “trustee” who serves as a mediator between the parties.
Here’s what Apple can do so what the feds are asking cannot be done with future models of their phones:
=========================
And What Can Apple Do Going Forward?
Guido says Apple could and should make changes to its system so that what the FBI is asking it to do can’t be done in future models. “There are changes that Apple can make to the secure enclave to further secure their phones,” he said. “For instance, they may be able to require some kind of user confirmation, before that firmware gets updated, by entering their PIN code … or they could burn the secure enclave into the chip as read-only memory and lose the ability to update it [entirely].”
These would prevent Apple in the future from having the ability to either upload crippled firmware to the device without the phone owner’s approval or from uploading new firmware to the secure enclave at all.
source: http://www.wired.com/2016/02/apples-fbi-battle-is-complicated-heres-whats-really-going-on/
=========================
Excellent link. Agreed that the way to stop this in the future is to modify the Secure Enclave coprocessor. I would say the best way is to hard wire the auto wipe. That way you can still update the SE’s firmware to fix bugs (if any crop up), but you can’t change the auto wipe via firmware.
Problem is for this to work there could not be an option to turn auto wipe off. Some users may not like that. The limit could be set fairly high for a human trying to remember (i.e. 100 guesses) but still be reasonable against a brute force attack.
Using the time increase algorithm 100 tries would be painful and take years. Which is fine.
Exactly! Apple is being ordered to create new software that will purposely make its chief product vulnerable to hacking. Ordering them to create new software that will force the iPhone to update with new firmware, disabling the auto-delete feature. At no time in history has a manufacturer been ordered to create a defective product, or a product that purposely fails in its original purpose.
This conflicts with the FBI is curious. I doubt that the NSA does not have the capacity to hack an iPhone. This looks like an attempt to whitewash the lack of privacy in which we all live. I agree to release such a tool would be disastrous for the criminal implications that would follow.
Absolutely nailed it Daniel. QC is a fine man, but he just doesn’t seem to understand the technology involved. Trump is wrong on this issue too, and clearly does not understand the technical issues either.
Or the politics.
To be objectively fair, QC desires, as do I, a nation run under Rule of Law. With that kind of society, while I’d still oppose this, it would be for different reasons that may be quite subject to debate. We don’t live there any more.
The law, unfortunately, is just an opinion with a gun. I would much prefer a society where objectively positive morals are what we go by.
So would I. Unfortunately the Aristotelian “Should” is not what “Is” right now.
God, how I wish we lived in such a world where men acted as the should.
We did, long ago. Then we invented agriculture.
In all honesty, what we call “morals” are just what we are biologically designed to live by under tribal conditions. It doesn’t apply in current circumstances. But then does that make our biology wrong, or the society we have built?
That is a very fascinating question. Let me think on it a bit.
Same here. But human nature is in the way. Add political power to that and things go from bad to much worse.
Your question is circular. You challenge the concept of morality, and then use the word “wrong” in your question about biology. You have to first define what is moral—right, wrong, and so on—before you can ask yourself if our current evolution is “wrong.” And the age old problem with materialism (a philosophy that automatically discounts all metaphysical theorizing) is its failure to deliver a concept of morality. That’s because morality does not exist in nature, it only exists in metaphysical theories.
Problem is when people dont understand the tech they make conclusions that will fuck us all. If a company can be compelled to actively weaken security then we have lost all semblance of a democracy. After apple they could compel the companies that make SSL certs, encryption, web browsers and operating systems.
Besides it doesn’t even address encrypted files located on the phone. If Apple does not have the key then even if they get access to the phone they cannot decrypt the data even with firmware change.
Best they could do have software on their to capture user input when owner unlocks the file and well that person is dead.
This conflicts with the FBI is curious. I doubt that the NSA does not have the capacity to hack an iPhone. This looks like an attempt to whitewash the lack of privacy in which we all live. I agree to release such a tool would be disastrous for the criminal implications that would follow.
They don’t.
This. QC has got it all wrong here in this piece. However, the case shows the motivation of both parties. Apples wants to rule your electronic life and will grandstand its position of protecting he consumer from guberment, while itself spying on its users. The guberment is showing its hand by demanding Apple (and in the future any provider of data hiding encryption) to provide the guberment the information it wants to go on any fishing expedition it desires, the constitution be damned.
So, it’s all good for those who are paying attention to take notice and decide for themselves if they are willing to take the steps necessary to protect themselves from the prying eyes of both corporate Amerika and the guberment. They must decide if it’s necessary to abandon use of all electronic devices and data networks to truly protect one’s privacy. Or, if they wish to stay connected, they’ll have to hack the Matrix in Morpheus-like fashion, steering clear of agents and sentinels.
This is the world we live in — spy v. spy. I for one have plans to abandon the technology (as I sit her typing this response on insecure Win8 laptop, connected to the insecure Internet, posting on the insecure www). I’m getting too old to devote the time, resources and energy to keep up with all this nonsense. I seek the simple life. And, having to dodge the bullets of intruding parties into my personal information is just getting to be too much for me.
You do what you gotta do. Choose privacy and security over connectivity I suppose. The Russians decided to ditch computers and networks for typewriters and file cabinets to keep their secrets safe.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/11/kremlin-typewriters_n_3579184.html
Completely agree with this, Daniel. This is over-reaching by the government. And yes, as bad as this shooting incidient was, we can’t just give more power to the government that will clearly jeopardize citizens.
I typically agree with Quintus’ articles but this one is a miss. But hey, we are all allowed one.
Its also a distraction. The problem is not the encryption software, the problem is that those folks never should have been allowed to come in.
I was going to post details but Daniel Taylor has nailed it. I will add one thing. Apple is between a rock and a hard spot. If it complies with the Feds, then it will face a firestorm from its customers worldwide. If it doesn’t comply, it will be accused of being unpatriotic. I applaud Apple for choosing not to comply with a American order that will jeopardize its worldwide customer base by proving it cannot be trusted. Question: If the order was coming from a Pakastani court would the American public and the DOJ change positions? I believe they would, which would only validate Apple’s refusal to comply. “A people who trade freedom for security deserve neither.” – James Madison.
Quote is by benjamin franklin, james madison piggy backed off of it.
Note also that building back doors into iOS for government open it up also to criminal hackers.
The 14 people killed in San Bernadino are trivial in number. Trumps solution to the problem is the best.
I didn’t even read the original article, but I read your post. Your post should have been the original article.
No court orders have been issued, only a request for a court order.
Interesting. On TV government agents have no trouble hacking phones, computers and such…
So why doesn’t apple find a way to get the information the government wants without releasing an app? Surely they could keep such a thing for themselves. This issue isn’t black or white, the government is wrong in that it is asking for more than they need as well as impossible, and apple is wrong in so much as they care more about their image to swpls than bringing a terrorist cell to justice.
It has occurred to me that Apple could offer to brute force the iPhone themselves. They would still need to create a custom version of iOS which allows it. But it wouldn’t be in the government’s possession and could even be erased from existence afterwards.
I do not believe this will happen for two reasons:
1) Chain of custody. The FBI will never ask for this or allow it. Basically if it leaves their hands then the information they gather will be useless in prosecuting anyone else, or even in getting warrants.
2) Apple does not want to set a precedent. They do not want every last DA in the country asking a court to order them to crack this phone and that phone. Especially since their newer phones are more secure. It’s a guarantee that if they brute force this phone, some DA will demand they brute force a Secure Enclave phone with a longer, alphanumeric password. When Apple reports that they cannot there’s no guarantee that the judge or DA will understand why as opposed to just slapping them with a contempt charge because “you broke that other phone.”
Not to mention that under the Obama administration, many federal agencies have become highly politicized, including the DOJ. They simply cannot be trusted to not abuse this technology for political purposes.
Thank you for this link. If the author’s legal analysis is correct then the balance required in application of the All Writs Act goes out the window.
If this court or a higher court follows the law and precedent then the FBI’s request is going right out the window as well.
That guy who I linked to is THE guy for iphone forensics, in fact he was thr one who wrote the book!
It was an excellent article and reveals what Apple could open themselves up to by complying. I’m going to read more of his stuff.
Apple certainly can comply. Not only can they comply, but they’re done it in the past. I’d like to hear your response to this article:
http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/
There is a lot of misinformation being thrown about in this case.
It looks like you posted this article link in two replies to comments I made. I’m going to quote my first reply below.
Regarding the claim that Apple has complied in the past: this was before iOS 8 and 9. Those devices did not have anything resembling the security features on the iPhone 5c with iOS 9, much less later devices with Secure Enclave. On those devices Apple could literally unlock one device and hand it back to the FBI, no special software required. Therefore past compliance is not relevant.
On to the article…
That article is wrong. And even a non-technical but critical reader could have caught one of the errors.
1) They quote the section of the order that says “The SIF will load and run from Random Access Memory (“RAM”) and will not modify the iOS on the actual phone, the user data partition or system partition on the device’s flash memory.”
Immediately after the quote they say “…in plain English, the FBI wants Apple to create a special version of iOS.”
No, the FBI ordered Apple to create something that implements the features without modifying iOS. That is impossible. For this point alone the order is legally invalid and Apple does not have to comply. (Though they obviously need to explain to the court why.)
2) The article completely ignores that the order requires Apple to design a SIF (software image file; I was saying app earlier but SIF is the language in the order) that “…would only load and execute on the SUBJECT DEVICE.” Once again, it is impossible for Apple to comply. This second point also invalidates the existing order.
3) While this is not related to the order, the article discusses Secure Enclave. Secure Enclave is not part of the iPhone 5c. It is not relevant to the conversation at all.
The technical misinformation on this topic is just staggering.
What the FBI really wants is the ability to brute force the passcode. Tim Cook is correct that this requires a compromised version of iOS that could potentially be used against any phone.
Apple can easily have this order dismissed because meeting all of the requirements is impossible. But the FBI will just draft new requests until the court reaches the same conclusion that the people who created the device reached on day one: the only way to do this is with a new iOS that compromises the security of all existing devices.
And that is unacceptable.
Nope. I do understand the tech and what the government is asking for shows they have somebody on staff who also does. The whole issue comes down to this: Apple is lying.
The whole security system is built on public key crypto and the idea of Apple retaining effective ownership of all hardware they sell for the life of the device. They can comply with the order. Here is how.
You can put an Apple product into firmware update / rescue mode. From there you can load a signed executable into memory and run it. This is not a security flaw because only Apple has the private key to sign code. The code would look at a unique identifier on the hardware and only run on that one specific handset. One that was verified it would update the firmware in the Trusted Enclave (again only possible because the update would be signed with Apple’s key) to permit unlimited attempts to guess the passcode via a USB serial port it would manifest to the connected PC. Once the unlock code is found you just power cycle the phone and unlock it normally. That phone would still have the insecure Trusted Enclave firmware but who cares? It wouldn’t run on any other handset.
The modified bootloader could be publicly posted on the Internet for all the good it would do anyone else. There would be zero risk to any other iPhone. If the public key crypto is correctly implemented it is perfectly safe and if there is a flaw the iPhone isn’t safe, period.
1) You do not need a signed executable to load firmware. Having an application that checks a hardware UUID and then “allows” you to install firmware is no security at all because you can just take the firmware image and load it on any device without first running the application. An application can neither allow nor prevent you from changing the layers below it.
2) Any unique hardware identifier available to the various software layers (firmware, OS, applications) can be manipulated to get said software to take the desired action on a different device. That’s one reason why when Apple moved to Secure Enclave they bundled encryption functionality and hardware key onto one coprocessor with very limited communication with the outside world. (It can accurately be described as a separate computer in the device.) If it can be read into main memory or a CPU register for a comparison then it can be manipulated first.
3) There is no such thing as “Trusted Enclave.” I believe you mean “Secure Enclave.” Secure Enclave is not available on the iPhone 5c.
4) The firmware does not control passcode entry, delay escalation, or auto wipe. Modifying or bypassing these features requires modifying the OS.
To expand on #4: note that hackers have done exactly what the FBI wants in the past on iPhone’s with DFU vulnerabilities. It required OS modification which starts with modifying the firmware so that the OS can be changed.
The FBI specifically asked that iOS not be touched. It was likely an attempt to preempt legal challenges from Apple. But it illustrates that the FBI does not have anyone on staff who understands what’s going on. (Or their voices were not heard.)
I don’t have the datasheet for the Apple SoC but have read and understood them for several other SoC platforms. As this story has dominated the news I have looked a bit into the differences in the Fruity world.
1. No modern handset will load an unsigned executable at the rescue / firmware load level and by the time the actual OS loads one way gates should have been thrown preventing access to the more interesting bits. Even my old Tegra based LG phone is encrypted with a symmetric AES key, new Tegras use AES+RSA. Apple indeed requires a signed executable. If they didn’t the FBI would still want the help but the NSA and such wouldn’t.
2. No, each SoC has a unique identifier burned in at the factory. If you check for that you can be tied to that one phone. And if someone tries to tamper with the number embedded in the software it changes the hash and needs resigning, something only the vendor can do.
3. Yea, I’m not an Apple owner, I mangled the standardized Trusted Platform from the PC world and the Apple Secure Enclave clone of it. Same concept though, except a TPM wasn’t designed by idiots and thus can’t be reflashed in the field. Apple simply can’t surrender total control.
4. Those are controlled by the firmware in the Secure Enclave (which I’m told is actually emulated on the phone in question since Apple didn’t add the hardware until later but the iOS version needs it. That makes the job both easier and harder. See below. But this is going to be a general issue so I addressed the big picture.)
5. Yes, see my final note that if the crypto isn’t right there isn’t security at all. Crypto is hard to get right, harder when it is done in secret as Apple does it. Cydia’s existence depends on Apple bungling the security and they are in no danger of vanishing apparently. FBI can’t play that game though, they have to be admissible in court.
That brings us to the big reason the FBI doesn’t want any change to the phone’s persistent state beyond the one change to permit cracking the passcode. Law enforcement must avoid contaminating the evidence. That is why they always grab an image with a trusted gadget when they seize a PC and then work from copies of that, keeping the original signed by the device in a safe place to be able prove the chain of custody for the evidence.
1) My reply was specific to the statement you made: “You can put an Apple product into firmware update / rescue mode. From there you can load a signed executable into memory and run it…The code would look at a unique identifier on the hardware and only run on that one specific handset. One that was verified it would update the firmware in the Trusted Enclave…”
This is not how it works. The firmware is what is signed. A separate executable is not loaded into RAM to verify the firmware. The firmware must pass the cryptographic checks performed on every boot. These checks start with the Boot ROM which cannot be changed by software. (SE firmware updates would be verified when the coprocessor started up using its own ROM.)
2) The SoC has a UUID. To perform a comparison at any software level that value has to be loaded into CPU registers along with the value it is being compared against. This is open to manipulation. It is true that you can’t change the value in the stored copy of the software without altering its hash. But it is potentially open to manipulation at later points leading to or performing the comparison. (It’s not easy, but it is certainly possible.)
3) All irrelevant as the iPhone 5c does not use SE.
4) The escalating delay function is enforced by SE on phones that have the SE coprocessor. It is controlled (i.e. on/off) by the OS.
I don’t know for certain if escalating delay could be completely disabled by a SE firmware update on SE phones without modifying the OS. It would depend on whether or not the OS verifies or writes those settings to make sure they match whatever it has stored, and likely encrypted, in flash memory.
Even if a SE firmware update was sufficient on SE equipped phones to turn off escalating delays, remote passcode entry and auto wipe would involve changing the OS.
5) Doesn’t seem to be relevant. (No one is arguing that crypto is easy.)
If the FBI considers the state of iOS on that phone to be critical evidence then they are done because they can’t get what they want without replacing iOS with a modified copy.
Note: reading up on the exact steps in the boot process revealed a way (to me any way) that Apple could tie a custom iOS to one device. However, I have to think about it for a while before I could render an opinion on whether or not it would be secure. And I would want to think about it a long time before concluding it was given that Apple’s own engineers apparently believe it is not.
Would make more sense to make it illegal for Muslims to use cellphones. But these radio tracking devices compromise your privacy as well as your health unacceptably anyway, so you’d really be giving any enemies a gift.
You’re absolutely right.
If the Federal Government would have just done it’s job we wouldn’t be now dealing with the issue of trying to open up Farook’s iPhone. There are many valid reasons to oppose letting the FBI have the power to compromise iPhones. For one thing, since when has the government followed the law in recent years? All that unconstitutional spying on American citizens, violation of due process, and on and on. The government will use the law to justify anything it does when it can, and when it can’t, it just does what it wants anyways. The only reason anyone should give a damn about a court order is because the feds still have the goons and the guns to enforce them. Their moral authority vanished years ago.
The only reason anyone should give a damn about a court order is because
the feds still have the goons and the guns to enforce them. Their moral
authority vanished years ago.
Sear this into your minds people. We have a globalist government who is filled with nothing but far leftist socialists. Giving even an inch to them now is dangerous. Even if it’s ostensibly against Islamists, whom I generally loathe.
I’d say you’re welcome in canada but then that’ a matter of whether you’re more of a Charybdis or Scylla type of guy.
We’re moving to Wyoming, Montana or Idaho soon (when the daughter graduates or a bit after, which is shortly). We like guns, you see. heh
Oh come on GoJ…come party it up in TN. We like guns too!
Excellent choice. I’ll probably be there in a decade or so.
And it’s a completely different country out there. Literally, it feels like visiting another nation.
“If the Federal Government would have just done it’s job we wouldn’t be now dealing with the issue of trying to open up Farook’s iPhone.”
This is the part that gets me the most. We wouldn’t even be in this situation if Tashfeen Malik had received a proper and full background check before being allowed into the country.
The Federal government’s problem is not lack of data. They are drowning in data. Their problem is getting people to do their job and act on the data in a timely fashion.
Thats probably the real reason its being brought up. This is a political red herring.
So, I’m not a “tech” guy, but what I do know is, when I fuck up my password on my company-issued iPhone (I keep a separate “batphone” for my personal use), the IT dept can re-set the passcode remotely.
Farook’s phone is/was owned by his employer. Cannot the Department of Lazy Fuckups simply reset whatever code they need to reset? And if it’s some iCloud issue, all they have to do is take it to either Farook’s house or his employer’s premises (better bet), and let it hook in to the wifi and back itself up, or whatever?
If I have to choose b/w Big Evil Corporation and Big Evil Government, I’m going to choose the latter, b/c Apple can’t throw me in prison.
Mistral
There’s an app for what you’re talking about, which allows that kind of thing, and remote administration. It is not on iPhones by default.
Ok, but wouldn’t every IT dept have it? It would seem to be massive negligence not to.
Oh hell no. Most IT departments are infamously incompetent. Most hand out phones and simply hope you don’t violate the data limit.
Since the county is the rightful owner of the said phone as the article stated, the county had the right to request access. I don’t understand what is so complicated?
Because it’s about more than one phone. Apple wouldn’t have said squat, or perhaps better put, the privacy community wouldn’t have if it were the FBI talking to Apple saying “do this one only please, here’s the warrant, oh and just hand us the information”.
What the FedGov wants is the ability to bypass all security on *any* phone. They are trying to get OUT of having to go to Apple for a case by case unlocking. Apple is attempting to stop them from mandating an installed hardware/software back door that the FBI could use at will. If this were a one device issue it would be a no brainer.
We are no longer a nation of laws. Read that three times in a row so it sinks in. If we were, I probably wouldn’t worry as much, but we aren’t. We’re a banana republic with a lot of drones and neat tech, but regarding the government, we’re third world.
Had the government agency this scumbag got the phone from installed proper phone controls before handing this to him, this wouldn’t even be an issue.
The FBI can get stuffed.
EFF, a consistent voice for digital privacy for decades, concurs with my opinion.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/apple-americans-and-security-vs-fbi
Damn beat me to it but yeah that backdoor thing was in the alternative news feed a while ago.
I’d rather deal with random Muslims shooting me my wife or children or neighbors than deal with Big Brother being run by Killary Klinton in 2016.
Not just that, but any software that Apple makes, China gets too. So we’ll be turning over a crack of every Apple security feature over to the Chinese.
Why is the FBI requesting this a month after the case? Whoever was linked to that will be long gone and even if they weren’t before this news story they would be now.
After the phone password is tried 10 times, it wipes the memory as a security measure. What the FBI would like is to bypass this feature using the operating system update.
They also want to install a feature that removes the delay between password inputs, which would allow them to unlock the phone by trying all possible passwords in a matter of minutes.
The problem with this backdoor is that once made it could be used on any phone. This would make it potentially worth milliions of dollars to criminals so you would have to rely on everyone with access to the project to not release or sell it and you would have to rely on the FBI not to reuse it.
This could be difficult because once it existed people could be blackmailed or bribed to recreate it or to copy it.
This would be a disaster all round for Cyber Security and it would kill Apple’s stock price.
If the US Government were that concerned about terrorism, maybe they should have checked the fake address the wife gave on her immigration application or looked at her Facebook which is openly shows that she was radicalised.
The law is a collection of criminals. Any action against them is a positive for us.
Funny how i read about the authorities unsuccessfully asking tech companies to provide a backdoor to their devices before San Bernardino occurred. Looks like they really never do let a good crisis go to waste…
The FBI has a history of doing this kind of stuff: they take a crisis and then use it to gain as much leverage as possible. It’s good to know that the legacy of J.Edgar Hoover is still intact.
Just to add to this, the reason why privacy protections are so important we need only look at the events of early february.
http://www.rooshv.com/how-to-securely-communicate-and-meet-with-thought-criminals
Quintus what happened to the RoK podcast? Been looking forward to number four
Well, Quintus, I must say I’m surprised to see you lining up with the sheeple on this.
Sure, Apple would like to retain its market share – which it got by building better products, including new advances in encryption demanded by its users. (Yes, I’m an Apple user, though I don’t have an iPhone or any kind of smartphone.) When did that become a crime – in anybody’s mind but Bernie Sanders’?
“Frankly, in the opinion of this writer, no company has done more to degrade personal privacy rights than has Apple.” A little documentation, please?
What is it with everybody hating Apple? Okay, so you don’t like their style – don’t buy their products. That’s what freedom’s supposed to be all about. I can only ascribe the endless Apple hate parties to envy of some kind – hatred of the successful. I expect it from the libprog media, SJWs, et al., but didn’t expect to see it here. Sure, Apple’s products are overpriced – but the proper response to that complaint is to go out and show the world that the same quality can be produced for less. I’m sure it could, and am mystified why nobody yet seems to be prepared to compete with Apple – but that’s not Apple’s fault.
Apple pisses me off frequently (ever since I got my first Mac in 1988), just like every other large corporation which touches my life. But this time, unlike, say, Google (remember “Don’t Be Evil”?), Microsoft, and others who’ve made it very clear just how much they care for your privacy and security – i.e. not a whit – Apple has got it right. Whatever their motivation, if you care anything for what little freedom we have left, at least you should not be joining the hyena pack attacking them.
Now it’s come out that the reason the FBI wants Apple to open the phone is because the FBI locked it up by messing around with it. Iow, a lot of the reason for all this fuss is to cover up the FBI’s own incompetence – or worse? As John Gruber writes: The only possible explanations for this are incompetence or dishonesty on the part of the FBI. Incompetence, if they didn’t realize that resetting the Apple ID password could prevent the iPhone from backing up to iCloud. Dishonesty, if they directed the county to do this knowing the repercussions, with the goal of setting up this fight to force Apple to create a back door for them in iOS.
Gruber’s blog has ongoing, complete coverage of the issue, with links to all the important articles, if you’re interested in anything beyond simply licking up the government/Stasi line. It’s getting more interesting, and clear, by the day.
When I heard about this, my first thought was, Hmm, maybe San Bernardino was a false flag after all? Such a perfect “opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” (Rahm Emanuel)
Security specialist Rich Mogull: The FBI wants this case to be about a single phone used by a single dead terrorist in San Bernadino to distract us from asking the real question. It will not stop at this one case, that isn’t how the law works. They are also teaming with legislators to make encrypted, secure devices and services illegal. That isn’t conspiracy theory, it is the stated position of the director of the FBI.
Funny how specific issues often don’t line up with the purported stances of the factions. Here, for instance, it’s leftists standing up for individual rights and freedom against ever-encroaching totalitarianism, while I’m already seeing voices on the “Alt-Right” – i.e. the most enthusiastic Trump supporters in the above-average IQ demographic – falling right in line with the government’s cry that the rules should be bent (just this one time, of course!) because terrorists. How quickly they forget – that, for instance, the PATRIOT Act was already written and ready to go before 9-11-01.
“Valid court order,” you insist. What about when there’s a valid court order to divulge, say, the names, addresses and other personal information of everybody who contributes to that sexist, misogynistic, rape-promoting, terrorist website known as “Return of Kings”? Make no mistake, it’s coming. “First they came for Apple, and I cheered, because I don’t like Apple. Then they came for….”
My response to that would be this: I’m taking the unpopular stand, not the popular one.
And I believe I’m basing my opinions on a strict reading of the law.
But I respect your opinion. This is not an easy case.
That is no argument at all. “I am doing something unpopular, I am the underdog, rawr!”.
Please. At least try to make rational arguments.
I’m not trying to be presumptuous or rude, but may I ask your level of tech knowledge, specifically regarding modern encryption and hardware/software security? Generally speaking of course.
Well, it seems to be at least somewhat unpopular here, which is refreshing. Out in the Real World, however, the Mob has been incited against Apple – never hard to do – and they’ve even got Trump to lead it. And you’re following right along. Thus: sheeple.
As for a “strict reading of the law” – I spent years in patriot, constitutionalist groups studying the holy Law, trying to help friends fight tyranny in court. Until I finally realized that in our present, real world, the Law is just a tool the State uses to keep the peasants in line. Be nice if it were what it’s purported to be – but that’s how it is when you take the Red Pill: reality may not be comforting, but at least it’s real.
Please read again my last paragraph.
As for the Law, there is indeed a Law which is true, and was perhaps best expressed by the great Rabbi Hillel 2000 years ago: “What is hateful to you, do not do unto another. That is the whole of the Law; the rest is merely commentary.” (I am not a big fan of the Tribe, but he was one of the real people.)
I live in a state capital city, some three blocks from the Supreme Court Law Library, which I’ve visited on occasion: room after room of books, thousands of books on shelves too high to reach without assistance. At least 99% of it cannot be counted even as “commentary” on the Law; it is simply lies used by the Rulers to keep the ruled in line. Do not confuse the Law with the “law”.
But Hillel is a Jew, and Jews are controlling everything and Jews are evil; therefore Hillel is invalid 😉
/sarcasm
I would guess that it’s popular on the right to attack Apple because they are a very liberal/SJW corporation. I know they frequently do things that anger me.
But in this case they are doing the right thing as you point out.
Apple was better under Jobs, but yeah the userbase of apple does tend to be lefty/ portland/ pot smoking do nothing college types, slacktivising about the faults of capitalism while on their iphones or macbooks.
All of that said, i did write this from my macbook, and i’m as far from that as you can be lol
(switched because i was in no way prepared to get the shit that was windows 8 on a computer)
Those pot smoking college kids are the same people who built your precious Apple.
not really, jobs and woz were silicon valley and california, not portland and do-nothing.
Apple sells about 300 million iPhone EVERY YEAR. It’s kind of hard to pigeonhole their user base.
you seem to be a bit butthurt, do fanboys come out for this all the time?
I’m personally not an iphone user, or even a smartphone user (totally irrelevant to the point I was making), and really don’t care whether fanboys come to ROK or not. A fanboy is someone who has an irrational or emotional attachment to something or someone, a prerequisite of which would be actually owning or using said object. But I could own 10 iphones and the strawman argument would be similarly meaningless. Sigh… is it troll season already?
i don’t know, you tell me?
I’ve been here for years Guy. contributing, discussing, engaging.
the moment i say something throwaway about the general class of people who equate macbooks with new age freedom a handful of people come out of the back alley shitpipe to yak at me on something utterly minor compared to the article at hand (which is about privacy and governmental overreach).
And for what?
to feel big?
Congrats on making yourself feel big.
i’ll pin your garlands for you
The only reason Apple is taking this stand is because the guy is a muslim terrorist. Make him a white guy and they’d have already released IOS NSA version 1.0 with live streams of all your applications in real time direct to government servers.
It doesn’t matter why they are doing it. The thing that matters is that they made the right call.
I agree especially looking at the requirements Daniel Taylor listed. Apple is doing the right thing albeit for the wrong reason. If Apple consented to those it would be a permanent back door. In a way I am glad this guy was a muslim terrorist as if it had been a white neo-nazi Apple would have complied *in secret* with the FBI’s request.
Obama *loves* Muslim terrorists. Your assertion doesn’t make sense, since Apple adores the President, who controls the FBI.
“2. It would be very little or no burden to Apple to write some code to permit access to the iOS (the phone’s operating system).” This is where the bullshit is. Doing an update that allows the government to access phones creates a backdoor for ANYONE to hack Iphones…
Plus I don’t think it’s going to be “easy” at all for Apple to do this. Do they have the technical ability? Maybe, maybe not. Is it a simple and easy thing for them to create a system to circumvent their security? No, otherwise the North Korean government or mafia or someone else would create the same system. It would require some effort and resources, at least, and it may not be possible.
Also all the IOS updates require that you type in your password to update it, so even if they created an update, they wouldn’t be able to get it on that phone…
That’s how it always starts.
We have parking meters in Columbus, Ohio, that were installed during WW2. The purpose, in law, was to help fund the war effort.
Last check, German tanks are not storming across Montana in 2016. We still have the parking meters.
Heck we were paying a phone excise tax for the Spanish-American war for 108 years after the fact.
BUT….we really socked it to those Spics didn’t we? heh
We should have kept Cuba. 🙂
Indeed. I heard it’s a great vacation spot.
AND we blew up the Maine, too!
Don’t worry, we’re about to ruin Cuba..
And we’re all still paying the special, temporary payroll tax that was levied to help the War effort… these days it’s called the Income Tax.
Maybe the war was the perfect excuse to milk the average Joe of his hard earned money. Who was willing to look like a traitor back then?
It certainly got Americans into “uniforms”. Before then we just weren’t that butch, militarily. You couldn’t cross one of us ever, for any reason or we’d shoot you, but we generally didn’t have a lot of time for “military” outside of a bit of militia stuff.
Wars and other “crises” are the favorite times of governments, because they can get away with so much more. And – I know this will come as a shock to some, but it’s true – they’re not reluctant to create a “crisis” if one is needed.
They don’t even have to create one, just wait for the world to happen, and take advantage. It’s not like we’re some pacifist species, there are “crisis” events daily.
Both the FBI and the “organized crime” it was created to “fight” were responses to Prohibition – among feminism’s first great gifts to America.
Remember how they were never supposed to use our social security numbers to track us, too? Oh, and the time they said the Social Security funds could not be touched by Congress?!
So little mill italy tradition (generals in American civ war were a mix of Europeans and a few Americans) that you did not have any fancy uniforms of marching stuff, reminds me of a movie. There’s a 60s film where Canadians in kilts march into a US military camp
Exactly:
================================
FBI director James Comey and his supporters suggest that making Apple break its iPhone encryption for the San Bernardino shooter case would be a one-off event, and not the start of a slippery slope into unwanted surveillance.
Well, it seems that someone needs to tell the Department of Justice that, because the D.O.J. is reportedly salivating at the thought of being able to hack iPhones for criminal investigations — with court orders being filed for Apple to help extract iPhone data in a further dozen cases around the U.S.
source: http://www.cultofmac.com/413863/no-precedent-eh-justice-department-wants-apple-to-unlock-12-more-iphones/
================================
I’m going to have to disagree with you this time QC. Stefan Molyneux makes very good arguments in his recent video and I won’t try to repeat them here.
Quintus you are wrong.
Unfortunately the U.S. government blew it’s dress up with our lovely dear leader with the whole NSA and Edward Snowden debacle. That left most tech companies appalled at what government can and will do so now tech companies are taking a great F*** you stance against the gov. The encryption that Apple recently create for their mobile products came about because of the NSA scandal. Regardless I’m on the fence. I think it is a better option for John McAfee, who already agreed to decrypt the specific iPhone free of charge, to attempt the one off case. But the government doesn’t want that… They want a way to spy on everyone.
Regardless, it’s a good article and it has made me think a little different form my hard line point of view.
First time I disagreed with a ROK post, but it’s all good. I think after the trillions of dollars we have wasted on the TSA and Homeland Security we either need to shutter them and contract Google and Apple to do their job or the Government needs to actually do it’s job. Seems like the US Government is more interested in going after American Conservatives and Libertarians than IS!
If we followed Immigration laws and had ICE with the least bit of common sense his “wife” would have raised red flags… sorry if we have Sanctuary Cities and Boarder Patrol Agents paid to sit on their thumbs so the left can steal elections until the money runs in I’m with Apple.
American Conservatives and Liberterians are a far bigger threat to the US government than IS. No, really.
Obama never believed the war on terror was real anyway. That phone would have been ripped apart in 24 hours under Bush.
I find it hilarious that such an overtly leftist firm like Apple is now pretending to tow the line for the little man and stand up to big brother. They are big brother, for fucks sake.
There are gay people in the middle east using Apple products to remain anonymous if they surrender those people are dead.
They weren’t going to reproduce anyhow.
De Oppresso Liber… Sorry but I still have morals.
Oh ok, so Tim Cook doesn’t care about the little people unless they’re gay like he is. Makes sense.
iPhags seem happy about backdoor specialist CEO’s statement—“OOOO, I’m so cool, my meaningless chats/data are encrypted!”
Isn’t the NSA monitoring every single digital message already?
Only right wingers and ROK members…
iPhags are worried about having their cache of m2m data discovered.
Apple clearly needs to take the next step (in a future device) and make it impossible to comply with what the FBI is requesting…simply impossible. It is not illegal to build an unpick able lock (which will never exist), or a device that cannot be decrypted. I will buy a device that cannot be decrypted, and I will pay more for such a device.
From my understanding, that’s sort of what they did. Maybe it’s not fully “uncrackable” but Apple can’t see what is on your phone. They are being asked to use their tech skills to try to create a method to do so. I’m not sure whether they have the resources to do that or not. A decently designed encryption system can be made uncrackable because the manufacturer / vendor never has access to your private keys which are used to encrypt the data, and these private keys are vital. The only difference I see is that the length of a phone key is short and easily brute forced, so perhaps Apple could remove the restriction on locking the phone during a brute force attack, but if you used say 1024-bit encryption instead of a 4 digit number, I think the current system is uncrackable.
What I don’t understand is, why doesn’t Apple play the government at their own game? Go over-budget, over-schedule, keep milking for more and more money, then ultimately never deliver. No wonder Apple stock’s been taking a fat shit.
Government should just ask Apple specifically to open the dead terrorists phone for them and give them all information on it without actually letting them bypass it. I bet they’d be willing to share that phone’s specific contents.
Mcafee has offered to crack the specific phone in question. Haven’t looked into it much, but it seems the offer has not been accepted.
That isn’t want they want. Get it?
Exactly.
Perfect example of an uninformed comment/opinion. The whole point is that Apple cannot do that; to “open” this phone they would have to create software (not a small job, btw) which could then be used to break into any iPhone. Do you really believe such software, once created, would be used only once – when those who want it created have shown again and again that they won’t hesitate to kill to get what they want? Naïveté is a prime attribute of prey species.
Perfect example of not understanding the intent my comment. No, I never said I believed such software could only be used once. It is obvious such a software would be abused. I was under the impression Apple could easily open a single phone as they saw fit; when I had an iPhone that broke they easily extracted all data in it to transfer to a new one. I don’t see why they can’t extract the data in this singular incident and send that to the Government in this circumstance.
What iOS version were you running? The current version doesn’t allow this easy extraction of your data without the password. They changed their entire security system with new hardware and software with recent releases.
I’ve never had an iPhone, so haven’t followed the development of iOS closely, but my understanding is that somewhere in the last couple versions Apple made major advances in security, such that Apple itself cannot break into a phone. Anyway, that’s what I recall Apple assuring its customers with the announcement: “You now have complete control over your security; even we can’t break it.”
In other words, no, Apple can no longer do what they did for you when your iPhone broke. That’s the downside of the new security – it’s now the user’s entire responsibility; if you mess up, don’t make a backup, Apple can’t help you – which occasioned a good deal of discussion; but everybody seemed to agree it was worth it. (Except, of course, our benevolent masters, who only want what is best for us.)
Which is the point of this entire brouhaha: If Apple could get into this single phone without having to create a whole new, compromised iOS, I’m sure they would have done so – and avoided having Donald Trump, of all people, defecate on them. I’d say it’s a good bet that with the previous, vulnerable version of iOS, the FBI, NSA and your neighborhood hacker could get into it; but now the FBI can’t, which is why they’re demanding Apple do it for them.
Of course it’s possible that the FBI could get into the phone, but are using the situation as part of their larger plan to establish precedents wherever possible toward the eventual outlawing of all secure systems. But I’ll take them at their word, on this at least: Especially after having (deliberately?) changed the password, they can’t get into the phone.
Apple says the only way to get into this one phone is to create software that could then be used on any iPhone. Even the FBI hasn’t argued this point, merely promised that they’ll be good this time, really we will! But apparently you know better? If you do, you could save everybody a lot of trouble by telling us all what could be done, and exactly how.
Like I said, “uninformed”. This is a somewhat technically complex issue, but you don’t have to be technically skilled to understand the important points, if you just take the trouble to read up on it. Whatever the “intent [your] comment”, it doesn’t add to the discussion if you don’t know what you’re talking about. (Of course, you’re hardly alone here in that.)
I’ll admit I didn’t realize the security settings have changed. My circumstance was years ago when my situation with the iPhone happened.
My initial thought was just that the government wanted access to anyone’s phone whenever they see fit. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is part of a larger plan to access private information. That’s what this whole thing looks like to me.
I was under the impression Apple could still get info if they needed it. My mistake.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this is part of a larger plan to access private information.
Ever since Apple came out with its new encryption, the government (at all levels – see here) has been livid about it. That anybody outside of government should have a code the government cannot break is beyond unconscionable.
Yes, this is not about a single iPhone (or about “terrace” – if it were, they could, say, not let them into the country?), it is an attempt to defeat the concept of private citizens’ security from government intrusion once and for all (see Rich Mogull quote here). The tragedy in San Bernardino is being used for this purpose just as other mass murders are used to push for total citizen disarmament. The classic Ciceronic question “Cui bono?” will nearly always bring you closer to the truth than simply believing what you’re told by the controlled media.
Again, if you’re really interested in what’s going on, John Gruber’s blog has all the relevant links, ongoing.
If you think Apple cares about your privacy rights you are a fool. Just as if you think Gmail is really “free” and every ISP isn’t monitoring your traffic then selling meta-data to giant commercial clearinghouses.
But, Apple isn’t (at least yet) violating a valid court order. It is in the process of appealing it. That is their right and until the appeals process runs its course, unless the courts fail to grant stays, Apple is not violating anything.
The application of the All Wirts act here is far from clear cut. The process needs to play out and there are serious constitutional questions in play.
I don’t have enough white privilege in my bank account to afford an Apple product, but I’m with Apple here. Also, what would the feds do if it were an open source software with no centralized developer group?
Exactly what they have done with bitcoin. Not a damn thing, because there would be nothing to do.
Apple doesn’t want to operate under American law so it can still maintain strength in unfriendly American markets. Fuck Apple.
My Galaxy S6 blows the doors off their phone anyway. Yes, Fuck Apple.
Sometimes, as in this case, the law is wrong.
Law vs. uncovering terrorists? I side with suspending the law on this one. Fuck terrorists.
It’s not about terrorists. It’s about keeping the people safe from the state. Terrorism is a comparative non-issue.
I don’t believe in “terrorist”. There are criminals and enemy combatants. What’s a terrorist? It’s a bit of a political buzzword.
I have a S5 for my personal use, and a S6 work phone that I just got. I actually prefer a few things on the S5 better.
‘We the sheeple’ are pretty happy with their slave status.
http://www.theonion.com/video/cias-facebook-program-dramatically-cut-agencys-cos-19753
Fuck the government and this fucking piece. The govt will lie, cheat, steal and fucking KILL whenever they feel like it. They will use this to force Apple to do their bidding at every turn if they get it just once.
The NSA rapes us and our data every fucking day. Go get what you need from them, you FBI Fucks.
At the expense of allowing terrorists to go free?
Yes.
The freedom of millions of citizens is more important than two muslim terrorists.
Even better, don’t let them in.
Take the tinfoil off your head you fucking moron
He’s not that bad.
Just hang and quarter them in front of a mosque, so the others know what will happen to them if they try to pull a jihad on American soil.
Apple FAQ on the issue. Of course, you may think they’re lying. The FBI and Justice Department, as we know, never lie.
lol.. can you imagine if the government took the time to come up with pro/con FAQ for an issue such as intervening in Syria haha.
This article reeks of cuckservatism. Did John McCain ghost write this?
Could’ve been Mike Cernovich but someone mentioned that if the terrorist were right wingers the phone would be unlocked ASAP.
This.
+ 1000
Denninger has a good article on this. The FBI is lying. What they are after is the ability to snoop into any I Phone. http://www.market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231146
Just read that. Definitely an interesting insight. Especially this sentence:
“Doing what the FBI asks here would destroy the chain of evidence and integrity as it would intentionally and permanently modify the data on said device”
Nice pull QC, this’ll definitely get some views.
Apple is definitely grandstanding here, but I think the NSA probably already has cracked the phone, knows what’s on it, and wants to be able to “use” that info, yet keep the ability they can crack that stuff quiet, hence the push for Apple to “do” it for them.
Haha I had to laugh at “use” and “do”. You’ re probably right. Devious.
I’ve heard stories about military code crackers doing that too. You need a cover story as to how you got the info. Plus here NSA probably obtained the data illegally or it’s inadmissible. Good point.
If a child has been kidnapped and the Iphone is the only place where the child can be located…should Apple open the phone arbitrarily? How about the location of a tactical nuke?
Appeal to Emotion is a beautiful thing…..
So Apple agrees to the motion and the Iphone 5C has nothing on it. They now have written the keys to unlocking their own encryption and even knowing its possible we have lost….for nothing. If one Corporation gives in they all will give in….for nothing.
The power to do something doesn’t mean you should wield it at will.
Indeed. Similar to using the threat of pedophiles to gain leverage in order to justify peeking into internet usage of citizens.
Yes, appeal to emotion is indeed a beautiful thing.
“The government would be perfectly justified in ordering the bank either
to make a duplicate key, or to drill the lock out and force entry into
the box”
Would the government be justified in asking the bank to open the safe in your house?
Or asking the safe manufacturer to come out to your house and open or drill it?
Apple is simply doing what is in its interests in the moment. Should the status quo change, Apple may acquiesce – if that is in its interests.
The OS was designed not be cracked. Apple is being demanded to provide free labor or provide trade secrets or both. None of that is acceptable and Apple has every right to say no.
The NSA has more than enough resources to crack the phone if they really wanted it cracked. In fact everything they want from the phone should be in the NSA databases anyway.
This is about setting the precedent of forcing a company to provide the government with resources.
If the feds are really only interested in getting into that one phone, and aren’t trying to set themselves up for getting into all phones in the future, we will know because they will obviously take Mcafee up on his offer to do it for free.
Of course they won’t, because they are.
Also I don’t know the tech enough, but from my understanding the FBI isn’t ordering Apple to turn over something they already have. It is ordering them to do something they have never done before, essentially creating a new product or service just for the feds for this one particular case.
The feds have the phone. Legally speaking what does Apple even have to do with it. With the bank analogy, the box is at the bank, and a spare key would be something they already have. And also, if they didn’t have a key to it, could the government really force the bank itself to try to break into the deposit box?
nobody is saying the government doesn’t have the right to try to access the phone; but what right do they have to compel somebody else to do it for them, just because they made the phone? Just because they supposedly can? Then wouldn’t they also have the power to compel ANYBODY who can?
Is there case law to support the government making such demands of a company? It seems unprecedented to me.
f!ck Apple and f!ck the US Government.
Why pick sides? Pick the side which will do both parties maximal damage.
Let’s see…the “security” agencies receive BILLION$ each and every year…and they can’t open a single phone? Right, sure…is it, because they’re incompetent?
That is the best post here. If our vaunted security agencies are so inept that they can’t access data on a smartphone, then tough darts.
There is nothing important that can be found on that iphone that warrants such a thing. The government spies more than enough on it’s citizens. It should not let such individuals in the country and let the citizens free rather than bring everyone in and then monitor their every move.
Quintus, this move will turn on you and everyone who read your article.
Tricky case. What confuses things is that the phone is not the property of Apple. Although they are the manufacturer.
Funny how this guys privacy is so important but mine gets raped everyday in Australia were ISPs must, by law, must retain my browsing data and the gov can request at any time without a warrant.
Aussies: once a criminal, always a criminal.
My family was exiled from England to Australia in 1788 for the theft of a book. The record of this has been archived in an Australia museum (no murder etc). Mate, if you said that to my face, it would be like calling Mike Tyson a nigger except much worse for you. I would beat the fuck out of you. So yeah, criminal alright.
Ever hear of intellectual property. The operating system (iOS) belongs to Apple. The design (patent) of the iPhone belongs to Apple. Apple’s goodwill to its customers belongs to Apple. Apple has a legal right not to have any of that compromised, not even by a police agency.
I am really backwards tech speaking. Really can do nothing but get my email and surf the web on a computer. The most complicated thing I ever do is download content from piratebay and someone had to sit with me and show me how.
That said: if the phenomenon known as the fappening where all these celebs had nude selfies and sex pics released onto the web and made public is possible, how is it that the FBI needs Apple to do this. Can’t, like, any Korean under 20 just do this?
Those were files stored “in the cloud” on Apple servers, not the individual users phone. Those servers were hacked. Do you use dropbox? Would you ever consider storing photos of your dick there? That’s essentially what these celebs did. Really stupid. Also, security was increased a good bit since that happened. The phone has gone from a device with a rolodex and answering machine to something storing photos and personal data, and the need for security didn’t really exist at first.
Ha. good explanation. I do use drop box…..an no, but not only there…I wouldn’t really want pictures of my dick existing.
What I don’t understand is — in all the NSA, CIA, FBI and whatever other agencies exist that deal with shit like that, they haven’t figured out how to hack an iPhone? What’s more, somehow apple (who created the device but doesn’t own it and didn’t set the passwords etc) can easily do this if they chose to comply.
I’m not being intentionally obtuse here, I really don’t understand.
It would seem to me that either apple AND the CIA/FBI/NSA/WHATEVER can hack into that phone OR neither of them can. I don’t understand how apple could do it but only them
Asymmetric encryption, invented around the 1970s, doesn’t rely on one simple key or password to unlock data. Instead it relies on a public key, that anyone has access to, and a private key, that only the sender has. Neither Apple nor the government nor the commies nor the Nazis nor S.P.E.C.T.R.E have access to your private key. Therefore Apple can’t “easily” unlock a device that it doesn’t have the private key to (assuming it built a properly secure encryption system).
However, Apple may not be using a “standardized” encryption system like AES, DES, PGP, or other well known systems, but may have designed their own, or modified one of these existing and well established methods.
If you ask me, I am guessing that the government can’t get into the iPhones and wants to know if Apple has the ability to. And Apple is not saying yes or no, because they don’t want to say, and aren’t going to try.
In a property designed encryption system, the manufacturer, government, or any third party, couldn’t simply “defeat” the encryption. The only solution would be to “brute force” or essentially guess every combination until you are right, and modern encryption systems typically use long keys which would take hundreds of years to “guess”, even using a supercomputer.
Imagine that you have a lock that you can “pick” using a set of tools and 5 minutes. If you wanted a really really secure home, you could maybe put 100 locks on the door, so no one would be able to pick it before they were noticed. But it would be costly, difficult for you to operate, and eventually you’d run out of space.
Well, with digital encryption there is no “cost” of adding more locks. They are called “bits” and having a 56-bit encryption system is the equivalent of having 2 ^ 56 locks or 72,000,000,000,000,000 locks that one must break one by one (not exactly but I’m simplyfing with an analogy). If there were hundreds of locks on a door a thief couldn’t open it unless he camped out at your place for days, essentially it is unbreakable even though theoretically there is a way in. Digital encryption adds numbers of locks which are numerically so great only a computer really understands them, and the system would then be essentially unbreakable.
But I do agree with your last point. I think it’s likely no one can break into it, unless Apple built a back door into its system.
Why can’t everyone explain tech shit like this. Thank you.
Ah, thanks, actually I’m amazed at how most people can’t explain shit using common English. I used to give this doctor I dated a lot of shit about using so much jargon and talking about renal this and phlebotomy that. Isn’t it a lot easier to just say you had a patient whose kidneys aren’t working? When you are out in public talking about your day no one know what Renal means, plus it comes off as pretentious and I take it as a sign you likely don’t even understand the underlying problem itself, other than renal means to call a reneologist lol.
Most people can’t even explain their jobs without using jargon or being overly complex. I guess I listened to too much George Carlin growing up and developed a huge BS detector and an affinity for plain speech. Economy of speech is a lost art, I believe GoJ and I have discussed this at length before…
Jargon is the tool of the under informed. As for dating doctors—man I know that scene.
I was dating one once who was giving me some kind of shit and I reminded her my cum was on her face only a few hours earlier.
PS: If they had an android the Gov’t might think twice before asking google. Apple is basically a luxury handbag now. Google has a freaking army of terminators. When Google says no they can back that shit up
I think you are missing the bigger point. Apple cannot “open” this one iPhone without giving the government a back door to all iPhones. With corrupt, politicized federal agencies like the DOJ and the IRS, they simply cannot be trusted to not abuse the back door for political purposes.
I think that Apple should help with this matter. They have a moral obligation to do so. I don’t agree with your reasoning at all:
“Apple is a corporation that does business in the United States and is
bound to obey the laws and court orders that are issued here.”
In order to remain consistent with this flawed logic, you would have to support obedience to anything a US court says on the basis of doing business in/ residing in an area under the power (not authority; there’s a huge difference between power and authority) of the US government. Including, but not limited to:
– Gun grabs by the feds
– Unchecked immigration via open borders
– Homosexual “marriage”
– Affirmative action discrimination against Caucasians/men
– Etc., etc,.
The reasons Apple should be eagerly helping out here are:
“Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin.” (James 4:17 NASB)
“Now if a person sins after he hears a public adjuration to testify when he is a witness, whether he has seen or otherwise known, if he does not tell it, then he will bear his guilt.” (Leviticus 5:1 NASB)
By not helping, Apple is breaking the law. Not the US “law”, because there is only one law. It’s been here long before US “law”, has been guiding men to justice without cease since it was handed down, and will be in existence long after US “law” has completely failed and becomes nothing more than a memory in history books. Every achievement of western civilization is built on the foundation of this law:
“For Yahweh is our judge, Yahweh is our lawgiver, Yahweh is our king; He will save us— ” (Isaiah 33:22 NASB)
All of the issues we face are a matter of law or lawlessness. It’s well past time everyone equip themselves spiritually and mentally with the issues of law. In a fractured nation heading for collapse this issue is paramount.
Every government that is, was, or will ever be is “theocentric”, or “god centered”. The word “god” is simply a word that means “mighty one”. People need to decide who their “mighty one” is. The idea that some people are not religious is false. Everyone holds moral beliefs and the source of those is that person’s mighty one. Many people’s “mighty one” today is some form of failing secular humanism like US law/Constitution/ the founding fathers.
Whatever it may be, studied discussions based on law for the issues we face is where focus should be, and where people can derive the most benefit. Thanks to the author for doing so.
“A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind.” (Proverbs 18:2 NASB)
A return of kings will only be realized with a return to the King of Kings.
Frankly, I don’t think most people (including me) talking about this issue are technically skilled enough in the art to come to a solid conclusion. How difficult is it for Apple to generate the “key”? To what extent can said key be created for only a certain Iphone and not be useful in cracking other Iphones? Without definitive answers to these questions, the legal case is fairly muddy.
On the other hand, the argument that simply creating the key acknowledges that it is possible and reduces security of other Iphones is specious. It does reduce perceived security, which will hurt Apple marketing. But if it’s possible, it’s possible whether or not someone has done it. As long as the key can only be used for that Iphone and keys for other Iphones would require individual court orders, there isn’t a constitutional privacy issue.
It will be interesting to see if this encourages development of security features that physically can’t be bypassed (if existing features can be bypassed).
Apple can’t generate the key. It is being asked to remove the restrictions on guessing the key (which currently wipes the device after 10 tries), and allowing it to allow remote guessing of the password (a computer would digitally guess the password many times per second as opposed to a person physically entering in each possible choice). That’s what the feds are asking it to do.
Essentially a new operating system would be created and loaded onto this one phone. Once the OS is created, it could be loaded on to any phone, so no, it cannot be limited to just one device. All iphones have the same hardware (of same model that is) and are capable of running the hacked software. Also, it’s not even known whether Apple *could* do this, as typically loading a new OS requires entering the old password and there are other security problems involved.
If the phone contained the cure to cancer or something, it’s possible it could be attempted, but the amount of resources needed to accomplish this are not feasible for most reasons, especially just government curiousity.
Very surprised to see this type of article on ROK. The reason the government wants access to private information is not relevant. It simply does not have the right to intrude that far in the personal affairs of its people, which was enshrined in the 4th Amendment (Bill of Rights), a condition of the US Constitution being ratified.
It’s really as simple as that. All the fearmongering about “terism” or bad guys is just a distraction. Kind of like how all the revelations Snowden released were turned into a soap opera about Snowden himself, his stripper girlfriend, and where he is living. Snowden doesn’t matter. What he uncovered matters. If you fall for the argument that “terists are bad” therefore Apple should have to break its own encryption, then all the government has to do any time it wants to break the rules is find a bad or evil scapegoat. You would essentially be condoning false flags!
It’s a balancing act. If we scream “terr’ism!” then they give us radioactive porno scanners at the airport; if we scream “muh liberties!” they find backdoors to track us unofficially.
We must demand a line of sanity; government involvement where government is due, no government involvement on private matters.
Apple’s refusal – if it passes – guarantees that they’ll come up with their own back door in the future, if they haven’t already.
Great comment, Davis. I agree completely.
Of course Apple isn’t been altruistic. Apple is acting in its own best interest. However, I am concerned about whether or not the tool can really be made narrow to just target a single iPhone without allowing others with access to the tool to make it more effective. I also wonder if a court would care enough to balance this concern with the FBI’s legal court order.
The FBI wants a lot more than access to this one phone. They want Apple to build a back door into their software to allow the FBI access to any Apple device they want.
The government can not be trusted with such access.
SHOCKER! Bill Gates backs FBI iPhone hack request.
Note: Gates was never a programmer; his success is due to being a clever and ruthless businessman – and to pure luck, as he happened to offer IBM an OS for their new personal computer at exactly the right moment. Iow, he probably doesn’t understand the technical side of this issue any better than most people – and not so well as a few of the commenters here. He’s also, of course, very good buddies with You Know Who.
Oh, and as for “Just this once!”:
No precedent, eh? Justice Department wants Apple to unlock 12 more iPhones. (Originally reported by the Wall Street Journal, but behind a paywall.)
More detail at Business Insider: REPORT: The US Justice Department is trying to force Apple to hack into a dozen other iPhones.
Strange Bedfellows department:
Mom who lost son in San Bernardino sides with Apple.
“This is what separates us from communism, isn’t it? The fact we have the right to privacy,” she said. [Well, probably not for long, but the sentiment is appreciated.]
Zuckerberg backs Apple in fight against FBI. Facebook joins Twitter in fight for privacy…
Otoh, More Support for Justice Department Than for Apple in Dispute Over Unlocking iPhone – Pew Research poll finds 51% vs 38%. Iow, the article above is not an “unpopular line” – except perhaps in this very atypical, insular community – but could be better described as a safe position, right in the middle of the herd.
Merkel’s own doubleplusgood enforcer is duckspeaking for Apple? That’s food for thought…
Of course Bill Gates backs the FBI. Apple is his mortal enemy. How many people are using Windows phones? Or Surface tablets? I can’t even remember what that abortion of a Microsoft MP3 player was called. Zune?
.
People are beginning to wake up to the fact that all this vaunted technology is not as wonderful as everyone thought. Any electronic device–any device giving off electromagnetic radiation–can be “read” in one way or another. This is why some Russian intelligence services have decided to abolish the advanced tech devices and go back to 1970s style technology: typewriters and paper. Typewriters are arguably more secure than their modern counterparts, and each one leaves a unique signature.
Agreed, plus countries like the US are completely losing the ability to do old-tech investigations, laying off on the ground agents in favor of “signals intelligence” (spying on all electronic communications). I doubt they even train agents anymore how to do a stake out or tail someone.
Watch an episode of “Law and Order: London” to see what sort of an effect all of this has on police work. Instead of actual detectives, with a nose for crime – you have analysts, blindly arresting whomever shows up on the security cameras. This isn’t a difference of degree, but a difference in kind.
If the security agencies resort to electronic monitoring, they’ll become very proficient at arresting the nobodies, while completely missing existential conspiracies against the Republic.
Not sure they even had the advanced technology in the first place. Russia still uses vacuum tubes in modern military aircraft! On the bright side, that sort of old tech is said to be less prone to EMPs, so i guess that’s something.
If Apple “wins” this case, I will personally take that as proof that their security has been cracked for a long time already, and this is just a dog-and-pony show to make the public trust an unsecure device. If it *is* cracked, then the government can use the information they gather to know where to look for incriminating evidence, without having to bring the phone into a courtroom at all.
But I suppose if you’re not breaking the law, you have nothing to fear, right?
Using your own analogy, if a bank made a device that can open any of it’s safes anywhere (which is what is happening in this situation because the de-encryption can’t target only that specific phone, it can only be entrusted to the government to not use on others) there would be a huge protest over that, and a very high probability that that device will either slip out somewhere else and / or be abused by the government later.
Kind of like how the TSA outlawed all luggage keys except TSA friendly keys–that’s funny because the TSA is the only person I’m afraid of stealing from my luggage!
The solution is pretty simple. They give Apple the phone. Apple prints out all the info they are asking for off the phone. Apple destroys the phone. Apple gives the FBI a copy [paper – printed] of what was on the phone. Problem solved.
Apple doesn’t currently possess the technology to retrieve this info, and doesn’t want to compromise its own security by trying.
And if Apple does develop this technology (a program), who’s to say it stays in house, and doesn’t fall into the wrong hands (the Feds, hackers)?
Apple is an SJW enterprise run by a gay man who is a self-professed SJW.
Apple is not to be trusted. In fact, most of Silicon Valley should not be trusted these days. How ironic that most of these companies are busy invading our privacy by collecting massive amounts of data about us, while simultaneously fighting legitimate court orders in criminal investigations. The only reason Apple or any other company does this is because they want to keep the data for themselves in order to commercially exploit it. And, when the “leaders” of these companies are SJW’s, as is the case with Tim Cook, they also want that data in order to manipulate us. (Take note of how Twitter is now shadow-banning non-SJW voices.)
Silicon was once a thriving entrepreneurial community of inventive American men. Now it is a cesspool of SJW’s and foreigners abusing the country and selling it out.
Narrow Focus May Aid F.B.I. in Apple Case: New York Times thinks FBI was very clever to insist they wanted to get into one phone only. Well, it’s true you can fool some of the people (which is clearly what NYT is praising the FBI for doing) all of the time. But the article also quotes Apple:
In a note posted to its website on Monday, Apple reiterated that the government’s request seems narrow but really isn’t. “Law enforcement agents around the country have already said they have hundreds of iPhones they want Apple to unlock if the F.B.I. wins this case,” the company said.
To that point, the New York City police commissioner, William J. Bratton, and the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., criticized Apple after it refused to comply with the court order and said that they currently possessed 175 iPhones that they could not unlock.
Charlie Rose recently interviewed Mr. Vance and asked if he would want access to all phones that were part of a criminal proceeding should the government prevail in the San Bernardino case.
Mr. Vance responded: “Absolutely right.”
It’s over, folks. You’ve been pwned. Get used to it.
(Link again from Gruber’s blog.)
Hardly surprising, this is the modus operandi of the powers that be.
Fuck the government. They will get Apple’s code and hack all phones.
On Ribbons and Ribbon Cutters
With most non-technical people struggling to make sense of the battle between FBI and Apple, Bill Gates introduced an excellent analogy to explain cryptography to the average non-geek. Gates used the analogy of encryption as a “ribbon around a hard drive”. Good encryption is more like a chastity belt, but since Farook decided to use a weak passcode, I think it’s fair here to call it a ribbon. In any case, lets go with Gates’ ribbon analogy.
Where Gates is wrong is that FBI is not ordering Apple to simply cut the ribbon. … Instead of cutting the ribbon, which would be a much simpler task, FBI is ordering Apple to invent a ribbon cutter – a forensic tool capable of cutting the ribbon for FBI – and is promising to use it on just this one phone. In reality, there’s already a line beginning to form behind Comey should he get his way. … If FBI’s promise of “just this one phone” were authentic, there would be no need to order Apple to make this ribbon cutter; they’d simply tell them to cut the ribbon. …
So here’s the real question: Why is FBI asking for the invention of a ribbon cutter instead of just asking Apple to cut the ribbon? Well the answer to that comes back to precedent. ….
So, do you still believe that big truck they’re herding us all onto will take us to a new, fresh, beautiful green pasture?
If Snowden should have taught us one thing, it is to view the premise of the government’s stated capabilities on anything to do with electronic snooping with immediate and extreme skepticism. Therefore, this entire matter is more than likely nothing but dirty pool by the FBI.
Fact is, the FBI very likely ***already has this ability*** but they do not want to let the world know that, since if they do, it is in a black budget somewhere or otherwise classified. They would instead rather force Apple into doing their work while feigning ineptitude, letting Apple answer to the teeming masses about why they are cooperating. Meanwhile, Apple doesn’t seem to get that they are more than likely being manipulated and instead makes irrelevant and legally meaningless speeches about privacy, getting them nowhere.
Apple’s counsel must call their bluff and question opposing counsel in front of the magistrate as to whether or not the FBI already has this technology, be it openly known or in any secret-squirrel, for your eyes only “pretend we don’t have it” horse shit program. Under penalty of perjury, opposing counsel must answer.
The FBI will have three possible choices: 1) Fess up and admit that they do have this ability already 2) lie by saying that they do not, and commit perjury or 3) say nothing and drop the case entirely, in the process virtually admitting that yes they could have done this all along. Lawyers, even government ones working for three letter agencies, owe a duty of candor to the tribunal so there will be no excuses – they must answer honestly.
If Apple’s general counsel gets word of this, I advise you to try the above technique because I am pretty certain that
***they are lying to you***
What have you got to lose?
As someone who understands tech there have been several points raised by others that show this is a foot-in-door type of things.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160222/18130933678/doj-reached-out-to-san-bernardino-victims-legal-support-before-going-to-court-against-apple.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160223/07015733683/list-12-other-cases-where-doj-has-demanded-apple-help-it-hack-into-iphones.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160222/17483233675/fbi-insists-not-trying-to-set-precedent-law-enforcement-is-drooling-over-exactly-that-possibility.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160220/22154433660/fbi-told-san-bernardino-to-change-password-which-is-why-fbi-now-cant-access-farooks-iphone-data.shtml
All of this taken together shows that the fbi is not acting in good faith. You are advocating for stronger government overreach.
Consider how many governments were anxious to aid the SJWs in attacking the meetups last month and even to ban some men’s groups, QC should have stop to consider the political ramifications of supporting DOJ.
I understand he’s not a lawyer. I’m not either but I do follow the politics and read history. One thing about many people is that they will do the good in order to do evil later. This is one of those cases where we risk falling into the same mistake as the German women did with the Muslims last year. They acted out of a pathological altruism without considering their own interests. Many Americans are doing the same thing out of desire to do good without thinking ahead, and they have done it many times already that leads to our current situation. One only have to consider our entry into the Great War of 1914 and how that prevented the European powers from making peace sooner and more fairly instead of what we actually have for most of the 20th century.
In the Greek religion, the goddess of wisdom Athena was credited with teaching men how to tame the horses and this is an important symbol. Horses, the sons of wild and macho earth-shaker Posideon, are the symbols of the wild and passionate nature. Athena taught men how to tame their own emotions with foresight and self-control. Passion is vital to provide us the power to project ourselves through life and crisis. But guided passion is vital to securing both victory and civil peace and the Greeks called on her for this benefit.
Dumb Pollack, I AM a lawyer. And I believe that the government’s search warrant is valid and should be respected by Apple.
There’s a difference between legal and moral.
You advocate backdoor, moron.
What a stupid article advocating sniffing your private stuff on electronic devices by government scum.
The guy who penned this thing is a cuckservative. He’s channeling his inner John McCain.
Interesting.
Thanks. And welcome to RoK.
Well, there goes the “we promise to only use it this one time” argument:
http://www.macrumors.com/2016/02/23/doj-vs-apple-12-court-orders/
The govt are scum, but so is Apple Inc. Their “letter” that was posted on their website and subsequently shared across social media platforms have garnered mass support and cheers from mainly – you guessed it – libertards ands blue pill pussies. I bet there’s even a hint of “fight islamphobia” taint in there too because of the case relating to the extremists. Make no mistake, this can very well be a ploy that apple and the govt are both in on. Screw them all.
“Libertards”? Really? I assume you mean libertarians, who are most of the posters on RoK! As for “blue pillers”, you mean there’s a correlation between men who don’t “game” and/or put women on a pedestal, and people who actually care about the Fourth Amendement? Fascinating.
No. I mean libertards.
Blue pill also denotes those who continually buy into the mainstream narrative as gospel truth, not just the true nature of womenfolk. Who *are* you anyway?
I have a different take. To me, the phone itself was owned by the San Bernadino health department, and issued to an employee. It is government property. There should be no individual privacy right attached to a phone given to you by the government as part of your government employment.
Also, go look at Apple’s terms of use. Apple has reserved to itself extensive rights to access, collect, store and distribute just about anything on your iPhone. Apple can access it for its own marketing and business purposes, making this whole “champion of privacy rights angle” totally hypocritical.
This is not the NSA listening in to cellphone conversations of people who hold unpopular opinions without a warrant. This is a court of law, after due process, requesting that Apple aide the government in accessing information on a phone owned by the government.
The government owned phone was also subject to consent-to-monitoring. Do you really think a criminal would put compromising information on a government owned phone that was under a monitoring agreement?
Agreed that the owner of the phone should have to turn it over and agree to cooperate, and it has. Disagree that the manufacturer of an item has ANY responsibility to law enforcement because a criminal was in possession of one of its products. Hell, there’s not even the accusation that the phone was used for anything wrong! It was simply owned by a bad guy… Really weak.
Finally, not to nit pick but this is not “after due process”–Apple received a demand and is attempting to use legal process to contest the demand. At this point it’s simply a demand the same as what any dictator could make–no due process has occurred.
❝my .friend’s mate Is getting 98$. HOURLY. on the internet.”….two days ago new McLaren. F1 bought after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a days ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn. More right Here!!b847➤➤➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsOnline/GetPaid/98$hourly…. .❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:::::!!b847…
Listen the experts,
Apple was never principled, but they must win this
John McAfee weighs in on Apple Vs FBI fight
UPDATE: Apple just presented its arguments in a Motion To Vacate the order to compel them to cooperate. Looks well done.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2722203/Motion-to-Vacate-Brief-and-Supporting-Declarations.pdf
I was right to stop reading RoK about 6 months ago. The practical info on how to get laid or get a job went out the door, and in comes all this hokus pokus bullcrap.
1. Okay, in case you haven’t noticed — San Bernadino is a hoax. It didn’t happen. You are more than welcome to BELIEVE it happend, but you were not there. There are no bodies or blood. And until you see the blood, it didn’t happen.
2. The government ALREADY HAS Apple’s iOS code, period. This is not an “order” to get their code. It is, yet, another drill to bring peoples’ minds down a notch on their liberties. As soon as everyone “agrees” that Apple should cooperate (which is illegal because you can’t make a person write code for something they have nothing to do with, and a Company is considered a person btw). This is about appealing to emotion to PREPARE citizens for the real ass-raping which is — the taking away of liberties. This will of course be backed up by our new Supreme Court, which bases it’s judgements on popular vote, not *gasp* justice.
When Apple “gives in to the order”, then that just gives the government extrordinary power over individuals (like it doesn’t already), for a “terrrrist attack” that didn’t even happen! Make no mistake, they already have this hacking power, and they are using it on more important phones like Snowden’s and others.
I entirely agree, Quintus. I think things have degenerated to a point, where most people cannot think in clear, logical ways, and their preferences for public policy are simply the product of emotion. Because the mass-surveillance of people’s electronic devices and activity is a ubiquitous abuse at present, they react emotionally to the idea of hacking someone’s phone.
But there is a world of difference between spying on innocent people’s routine activity, and assisting in the discovery of relevant evidence in a legitimate criminal prosecution. There is not even any controversy about Farook’s involvement in the affair. To pretend that his phone is part of his “privacy,” in this matter, is exactly the same as saying that the police could not search his home and other properties with a legitimate search warrant because of “privacy.” It is clearly justified to access the phone. If Apple is worried about abuse of the decryption software, they could say that they will comply, but they insist that the government allow Apple to unlock the phone (with government supervision, if necessary), and then they can destroy the software so that it does not fall into anyone’s hands.
Addendum: And, of course, the phone is not his; the owner of the phone has already given permission to access the phone.
There would not even be a debate if they had killed thousands or used WMDs. Apple would have had to help hack the phone or they’d be boycotted so much they be out of business in a year.
The failure to cooperate says more about how mass shooting that only kill a dozen or so have become mundane. Apple’s actual position is that these were second rate terrorists so why let people think their phones are hackable over such a small number of victims.
The whole thing became a pointless exercise from the moment it hit the press weeks ago. Anyone connected with the guy would have disappeared as soon as he heard the feds were trying to get Apple to unlock the phone. It sounds to me like two organizations trying to blame each other in public.