Apple Won't Create 'Backdoor' to Help FBI Access San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone

[JettaKnight]

The problem, as I understand, is that Apple doesn't have that ability. Apple doesn't want to create that ability because the potential for abuse is there.

Exactly. They can't do anything on a 'per phone' level without a massive software rollout, IIRC.

The FBI isn't asking for a key per se, but disabling one security feature. To use an analog, they're asking Apple to remove the glass plate relocker in the safe door. Of course, with software, that's possible.

 

[rosejm]

So just to clarify for some folks, Facts:
Apple can't just unlock/decrypt the phone. They don't have the password/key. No one but the phone's owner knows that.
Now, the FBI could try all the possible passwords but there's a security feature built in (much like an electronic safe) where too many (10) failed attempts will wipe the phone clean.

What the FBI is asking Apple to do is to BYPASS/remove that security feature so that the phone won't wipe itself. At that point the FBI can try as many times as they need to until the phone is unlocked/decrypted. The FBI also wants Apple to create a method to bypass the touch screen entry so they don't need to have a person enter 10,000 passwords manually (was reported as a 4 digit code).

Phone records and texts are all on the carrier's systems, but the FBI is looking for data stored only on the phone itself (pictures, videos, recordings, notes, etc...).

/Facts

I see no problem whatsoever in telling the FBI that they need to do their own work. If the owner was still alive, he could be compelled by the court for not turning over that code (don't get me started on that decision). If Apple caves, their business will be seriously impacted by the drop in consumer confidence. This is just smart business on their part.

 

[MPD179]

This will not be a positive response for the boards here but I'll try. Phones are the new evidence so to speak in criminal investigations. I have 4 to 6 phones sitting at our local FBI's office waiting to get dumped and I have search warrants for all of them. Most of them involves a murder and belonged to my victims. The new encryption Apple is using to secure them doesn't work with the programs the Feds use. The information in these phones often lead to suspects or give us a direction as to why the incident happened. It's easy to say that's great news and blah, blah, blah. God forbid, if its your wife, son, daughter, or loved one that is the victim, only then will you understand the importance of this backdoor. Victim's families want answers and so do we when we need to solve a crime. The info these gadgets store in incredible and whatever we think we delete can be retrieved. I've seen cases where phones have eliminated suspects in cases. Looks like .gov is going to have to attract better talent.

 

[bwframe]

If the Gov't wants in to that phone, they need to use the free market to get there. Offer a bounty (large one) for someone to create a way into this data. Someone will do it, maybe even Apple, but we'll never know who or how they did. Apple can then close the door or just say they did or whatever they wish.


This would be an excellent oportunity to bring up the fact that we knowingly let these terrorists in with our failure to vet them.
Stop the heathens from coming in and this is not a problem any more!

 

[Tombs]

If the Gov't wants in they need to use the free market to get there. Offer a bounty (large one) for someone to create a way into this data. Someone will do it, maybe even Apple, but we'll never know who or how they did.

The problem with that is as soon as someone does manage to claim that bounty, apple will probably have a counter bounty of a higher dollar figure so they can patch the issue.

I just find it a bit baffling that apparently an iphone is more secure than the servers top secret and above information is stored on.

 

[AtTheMurph]

Doesn't the NSA have all the info already? If not, the phone company certainly does.

 

[ghuns]

Looks like .gov is going to have to attract better talent.

Yup. Let them hack away.

But can Apple give the FBI a piece of software that allows them to brute force this one phone, and honestly expect them not to use it willy-nilly?

Doesn't the NSA have all the info already? If not, the phone company certainly does.

This isn't call and text data. They have that.


The phone contains a hard drive. The phone company and the NSA do not have access to data stored on it. NOBODY does, including Apple. Only the person who knows the passcode does.

 

[Rookie]

”Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.”

 

[Tombs]

”Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.”

If there's a warrant issued with good reason, I don't see that quote applying.

 

[Rookie]

If there's a warrant issued with good reason, I don't see that quote applying.

I don't care if there's a warrant issued, the government is asking Apple to create a program to circumvent everyone's security. If you think they wouldn't abuse this, you have more confidence than I do. The quote applies.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The entire situation feels manufactured, probably relates to how evidence is obtained for potential prosecutions. Easier to say "Apple gave it to us publicly" rather than "Apple gave it to us via a backdoor in their software as part of Gov surveillance."

The "We won't help you" PR is just PR. Exploits exist, and no one actually needs Apple for this.

 

[Tombs]

I don't care if there's a warrant issued, the government is asking Apple to create a program to circumvent everyone's security. If you think they wouldn't abuse this, you have more confidence than I do. The quote applies.

I'm 100% against blanket warrants, but if there's a means of legally obtaining the information off one piece of evidence without compromising everyone else's security, I'm wholly in support.

And I do honestly believe that is possible.

 

[halfmileharry]

The entire situation feels manufactured, probably relates to how evidence is obtained for potential prosecutions. Easier to say "Apple gave it to us publicly" rather than "Apple gave it to us via a backdoor in their software as part of Gov surveillance."

The "We won't help you" PR is just PR. Exploits exist, and no one actually needs Apple for this.

I figured it was just a smoke screen to make the bad guys more comfortable and use their phones for more dubious purposes. Then the gov has more info to use against them.

 

[BigMatt]

I'm 100% against blanket warrants, but if there's a means of legally obtaining the information off one piece of evidence without compromising everyone else's security, I'm wholly in support.

And I do honestly believe that is possible.

So how is that Patriot Act working for you? That surveillance was supposed to happen with individual warrants and now there is one big blanket out there. The courts have already told the NSA to stop and they won't. Who is to say this won't happen with this technology?

 

[Trigger Time]

Ha, I'm supposed to believe the most overreaching and criminal govt administration in the history of this nation hasn't already cracked the phone? ha, yeah right
lets make a distraction for the American people and they will be sidetracked; mission accomplished

 

[Rookie]

So how is that Patriot Act working for you? That surveillance was supposed to happen with individual warrants and now there is one big blanket out there. The courts have already told the NSA to stop and they won't. Who is to say this won't happen with this technology?

BINGO!!!

 

[Expat]

My FB feed is full of people calling Apple terrorist sympathizers...

 

[ArcadiaGP]

My FB feed is full of people calling Apple terrorist sympathizers...

Do most of them have Trump avatars?

Edit: I don't do facebook. I assume it has avatars.

 

[Tombs]

So how is that Patriot Act working for you? That surveillance was supposed to happen with individual warrants and now there is one big blanket out there. The courts have already told the NSA to stop and they won't. Who is to say this won't happen with this technology?

So laws are invalid if someone breaks them, okay got it.

The patriot act was a whole mess of things, I disagree with it. We already had the means for obtaining the information needed long before it existed.

The NSA needs closed down and those running it to be thrown in jail for life. Obviously we need a shorter leash on our domestic intelligence gathering agencies, that doesn't mean that when you have a terrorist who has already committed his act, that the information he was in possession of is somehow wrong to obtain.

Before you scream and wave your hands in the air, do you agree with police being able to search through someone's information if they have murdered many people and engaged in a shoot out with police?

 

[Jludo]

This will not be a positive response for the boards here but I'll try. Phones are the new evidence so to speak in criminal investigations. I have 4 to 6 phones sitting at our local FBI's office waiting to get dumped and I have search warrants for all of them. Most of them involves a murder and belonged to my victims. The new encryption Apple is using to secure them doesn't work with the programs the Feds use. The information in these phones often lead to suspects or give us a direction as to why the incident happened. It's easy to say that's great news and blah, blah, blah. God forbid, if its your wife, son, daughter, or loved one that is the victim, only then will you understand the importance of this backdoor. Victim's families want answers and so do we when we need to solve a crime. The info these gadgets store in incredible and whatever we think we delete can be retrieved. I've seen cases where phones have eliminated suspects in cases. Looks like .gov is going to have to attract better talent.

Luckily the standard isn't what you would do if it was your own son. Sober minds have to prevail over emotion in preserving liberty as the end goal. I'd venture to guess I'd be willing to throw out the entire Constitution if one of my loved ones was in danger, does not mean we should.