• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Should Apple Help the FBI Unlock a Phone with a Court Order

argedion

argedion

The TechnoFrog
Recently there was an event which has spawned the FBI to ask Apple to give them a back door into the IOS system. They want a back door to help them get evidence against someone.

Now Without Getting Political if that is at all possible What is your take?

Should the Government be allowed to tell corporations that security should be hackable by them? While I am no fan of the Apple I do commend them and their stance on the issue. They have told the FBI they will not assist in such behavior. I commend them as they are telling the Government OUR Clients come first.

How do you feel about it with out getting into politics.
 
You can bet that Apple has a backdoor, maybe even just a simple universal password, but they can easily get into a phone somehow. What they can't do, no matter what, is admit that they can. That's why Apple is resisting. They don't give a flying fig about rights. It's about maintaining an illusion of security.

I'm not impressed by Cook and Apple's stance at all. If the phone belonged to an Apple employee suspected of leaking company information, it would be wide open in 10 seconds.

Now, should the government be provided access? They already have been in dozens of cases. The question has aready been answered and the answer has been yes. I'm torn on he issue as i can see strong arguements for both sides. Im still on th fence on this.

Edit Reply Quote
 
Crashdamage said:
You can bet that Apple has a backdoor, maybe even just a simple universal password, but they can easily get into a phone somehow. What they can't do, no matter what, is admit that they can. That's why Apple is resisting. They don't give a flying fig about rights. It's about maintaining an illusion of security.

I'm not impressed by Cook and Apple's stance at all. If the phone belonged to an Apple employee suspected of leaking company information, it would be wide open in 10 seconds.

Now, should the government be provided access? They already have been in dozens of cases. The question has aready been answered and the answer has been yes. I'm torn on he issue as i can see strong arguements for both sides. Im still on th fence on this.

Edit Reply Quote
Click to expand...

I agree. there is always some backdoor for the core programmers.
they are well paid NOT to let anyone now about it.

I can also see both sides of the argument. but feel strongly about my privacy.
Gov can only see what is out in public. They should not force others to release private info... unless they have PROOF of a crime.



also.. I was reading the title of this thread.. waiting for reason why you might loose your job?
 
I tend to believe Apple when they say there is no way for them to gain access. Knowing how encryption works, the main weakness is the password. It's practically impossible to unencrypt data without knowing the key.
And any 'back door' into a system is a weakness. There are some very smart hackers out there, they will find it or figure it out. I don't think Apple would intentionally introduce such a potential risk of their system being hacked, with resulting disastrous impact on sales!

Besides, what they've done is not open up the system, they simply removed the 10 passcode attempt limit, and let the phone be cracked by brute force, and after Tim Cook released the company statement, I think they have covered themselves adequately and successfully portrayed themselves as unwillingly coerced into helping the FBI.
All they care about is that customers don't lose faith in their products.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think privacy is of the utmost concern at this point in human evolution. That said, anything made, can be unmade.

Honestly for me, I have nothing to hide. If "big brother" got into my files, be they mobile, PC or in my file cabinet they'd only need to fear uncontrollable sleep as the amounts of boring would be staggering. I am not so naive as to think that there are not things out there people have that they deserve to be able to keep private, but I do see the need to not protect criminals, or shield evidence that can protect the innocent and powerless. I don't want "the bad guys - whomever they may be" to be able to operate autonomously, above the law, right under our noses. (If we had a Batman I would not mind him digging through peoples trash to find guilt.) And that's probably the heart of the matter. I am sure none of us would mind evidence being used to prove innocence or guilt, I think we mind who's looking, why they are looking, and what they do with OUR information once they are done with it.
 
One of the issues I have is the Government would force a company to give them a back door so they could access your private information but make it illegal for you to do it to the Government.

Guess I haft to have a job to lose it lol

My biggest question though I guess is where do we draw the line. Yes today its help the Government put away terrorist. Tomorrow it could be just putting away someone who used their freedom of speech.

I"m like @shalemail I have nothing to hide. I don't even have a pin on my phone. Not like anyone ever talks to me anyways or send me things so the only thing I have is wallpapers ringtones and other stuff I collect
 
I don't think I have any info that the Infernal Revenue Suckers need to know about, other than what is shown on my 1099 already.

but, at the same time, no one has a right ( or my permission ) to look at my database which contains all of my passwords to my financial accounts.
no one, as in no one period, and that includes the government....

me? I'm staying with encryption.
 
Genuine question here - in case anyone knows. If Apple claims (and can prove it somehow) that they simply can't or don't have the ability to crack their own encryption - by design, does the FBI have a leg to stand on with any repercussions?
 
If Apple could prove it (very doubtful) I don't see how the FBI would have a case. Encryption is legal. I don't think there's a clause that says only crackable encryption is legal.

Proving a negative, that something can't be done, is pretty tough. Especially when everyone knows you can do it.
 
argedion said:
My biggest question though I guess is where do we draw the line. Yes today its help the Government put away terrorist. Tomorrow it could be just putting away someone who used their freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

The question then is, who do we trust? That anonymous guy on the street corner pleading innocence, or those we elect to represent and protect us? Put another way... do we trust ourselves so little that we fear allowing such an oppressive regime to exist?

My privacy is valuable, but not at the expense of others' security/lives. I've seen too many atrocities in my lifetime already.
 
well.... gov and military want phones that can be protected.
the better and stronger the security.. the better to protect info from spies.

so companies make them.. so they can get the contracts...

now the gov .. wants companies to put backdoors in??? make it crackable??

I am confused.. do you want or don't you want security???
 
Apple is doin' everything they can to stop "jailbreaks" on their OS so the actual security may be a whole issue in itself but I feel the FBI/CIA wanting "in" should strictly be a case by case scenario and not a General backdoor
 
shalemail said:
Genuine question here - in case anyone knows. If Apple claims (and can prove it somehow) that they simply can't or don't have the ability to crack their own encryption - by design, does the FBI have a leg to stand on with any repercussions?
Click to expand...
From what I've read, experts say it would only take Apple an afternoon at most to get into the phone. They're not claiming they CAN'T do it, just that they WON'T.

I have mixed feelings about this. The knee jerk reaction is to say "hell, no, Apple, don't cave in". On the other hand, why should a phone be special? The government can get a warrant to go through and take anything in your house, your computer, phone and internet records, etc. So why not the phone? If this is the one thing that becomes known to be inaccessible by the authorities will the pedophiles just keep all of their kiddie porn on their iPhones? Terrorists will have a safe place to plot their atrocities without using the dark web or encrypted IM apps. Apple will eventually do what the government wants, either voluntarily or otherwise. As much as I value privacy, I just don't see a rational argument why a phone should be excluded from a search warrant.
 
I think the gov / police can get into a private home/computer/phone.. if they can show cause for a particular crime .. and only get info on that crime.
get a warrant

not just look into any place the want.. just because they had a notion to look.
 
shalemail said:
I think privacy is of the utmost concern at this point in human evolution. That said, anything made, can be unmade.

Honestly for me, I have nothing to hide. If "big brother" got into my files, be they mobile, PC or in my file cabinet they'd only need to fear uncontrollable sleep as the amounts of boring would be staggering. I am not so naive as to think that there are not things out there people have that they deserve to be able to keep private, but I do see the need to not protect criminals, or shield evidence that can protect the innocent and powerless. I don't want "the bad guys - whomever they may be" to be able to operate autonomously, above the law, right under our noses. (If we had a Batman I would not mind him digging through peoples trash to find guilt.) And that's probably the heart of the matter. I am sure none of us would mind evidence being used to prove innocence or guilt, I think we mind who's looking, why they are looking, and what they do with OUR information once they are done with it.
Click to expand...
How far is too far?
 
dan330 said:
I think the gov / police can get into a private home/computer/phone.. if they can show cause for a particular crime .. and only get info on that crime.
get a warrant

not just look into any place the want.. just because they had a notion to look.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the FBI has a warrant in this case. Obviously a warrant should always be required, and hopefully with a high bar. However, I'm sure once national security is cited, no judge would deny the warrant.
 
shalemail said:
I think privacy is of the utmost concern at this point in human evolution. That said, anything made, can be unmade.

Honestly for me, I have nothing to hide. If "big brother" got into my files, be they mobile, PC or in my file cabinet they'd only need to fear uncontrollable sleep as the amounts of boring would be staggering. I am not so naive as to think that there are not things out there people have that they deserve to be able to keep private, but I do see the need to not protect criminals, or shield evidence that can protect the innocent and powerless. I don't want "the bad guys - whomever they may be" to be able to operate autonomously, above the law, right under our noses. (If we had a Batman I would not mind him digging through peoples trash to find guilt.) And that's probably the heart of the matter. I am sure none of us would mind evidence being used to prove innocence or guilt, I think we mind who's looking, why they are looking, and what they do with OUR information once they are done with it.
Click to expand...
There is a book called three felonies a day. Apparently everyone commits multiple felonies per day without realizing. Selective enforcement would be an issue. Being naive enough to think law enforcement and prosecutors and such are all there for good reasons and not bad interest is a very dangerous perceptual flaw. Many times selective enforcement is used to punish people that become inconvenient or go against someone's whim, and even criminal activity.
 
norb said:
There is a book called three felonies a day. Apparently everyone commits multiple felonies per day without realizing. Selective enforcement would be an issue. Being naive enough to think law enforcement and prosecutors and such are all there for good reasons and not bad interest is a very dangerous perceptual flaw. Many times selective enforcement is used to punish people that become inconvenient or go against someone's whim, and even criminal activity.
Click to expand...

that is an eye opener....

just like my gun safety seminar was last night.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom