(Topic ID: 152841)

The Apple Controversy: What's Your Take?

By beelzeboob

8 years ago


Topic Heartbeat

Topic Stats

  • 38 posts
  • 26 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 8 years ago by spfxted
  • No one calls this topic a favorite

You

Topic poll

“What do you think about Apple not allowing access to a terrorist's phone?”

  • Douchebags! 18 votes
    38%
  • They're trying to keep the rest of us safe. (???) 29 votes
    62%

(47 votes by 0 Pinsiders)

Topic Gallery

View topic image gallery

luggage_(resized).jpg
IMAG0028_(resized).jpg
image_(resized).jpeg

#1 8 years ago

So if you've been watching the news, you know that the FBI is going after Apple to get access to the phone that belongs to the scumbags that shot up that office in California. My personal opinion is that I'm glad I switched to Samsung. But I've added a poll because you might feel differently. Just wondering what the general populace feels about this. Sound off...

#2 8 years ago

I think public safety is more important then the privacy of a cell phone.

#3 8 years ago

I fail to see how unlocking one phone affects the privacy of all phones. And even then, who cares? If it means withholding vital evidence about a mass shooting, then I'd rather not have phone privacy.

#4 8 years ago

99% of the people weighing in on this issue (not here, I mean in general) don't really understand the ramifications of what COULD happen, however, even considering that, I support the cracking of this phone.

I wish Apple was doing it without being forced however....

They pick some weird issues to champion

#5 8 years ago

I largely agree with apple. Many people keep personal information on their phones, including banking information. Creating a backdoor undermines all that security apple has placed into their devices. I don't care if the FBI says it'll be used "just this once" or "we'll keep the means to opening the backdoor a secret." There's no such things as secrets anymore, especially in the government. Just ask Edward Snowden.

#6 8 years ago

It's just posturing by Apple. Of course they can't openly admit that all the information on your phone is not private. You would be naive to think it is.

#7 8 years ago
Quoted from Jgaltr56:

It's just posturing by Apple. Of course they can't openly admit that all the information on your phone is not private. You would be naive to think it is.

I'm willing to bet that there already is a way to get the info off the phone. Apple (and other Cel Phone manufacturers) just isn't going to admit it.

#8 8 years ago

Having a backdoor in a system undermines security. By the FBI publicly acknowledging that they need to force apple's hand to unlock it kind of says that the security on these phones is actually pretty good if the FBI can't crack it on their own.

Additionally, there were other foul-ups along the way with this particular situation.

The lack of mobile device management (MDM) software, which is common to have installed on phones that handle compnay data: http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-apple-fbi-backdoor-spat-could-have-been-avoided/

Indications that the password changed while in the possession of the authorities: http://www.macworld.com/article/3035506/security/apple-says-terrorists-icloud-password-was-changed-remotely-while-iphone-was-in-governments-posessio.html

Lastly, it looks like there may be a way to retrieve the data if the phone accesses a recognized WiFi network and syncs to the associated iCloud account.

#9 8 years ago

Keep in mind that Apple currently cannot unlock the phone.
The judge is not telling them to use a "key" that they already have.
The judge has ordered them to create software to unlock the phone that they don't already have.
Those (to me) are very different things.
Also, who gets control of that software after it is created?

#10 8 years ago

Stop buying iphones sheeple. That said, FBI should be able to get plenty of info on how they blew it without the phone.

#11 8 years ago

If it was really about the information in the iPhone, the FBI would take up the offer made by the creator of McAffee to crack the iPhone for free.

https://www.inverse.com/article/11743-john-mcafee-tells-fbi-he-ll-hack-san-bernardino-iphone-for-free-in-3-weeks

If they don't take him up on his offer, then there are other reasons behind their request for Apple to provide a backdoor.

I support Apple in their stance against the court ruling.

Marcus

#12 8 years ago

I think apple is in the right. I also hate apple but we have the right to privacy.

I am surprised that the FBI cant crack it, with all the stuff the NSA and others can do already, Illegally by the way.

yeah politics on pinside

#13 8 years ago

This just popped up:

https://www.morningstar.com/news/dow-jones/us-markets/TDJNDN_2016022217036/justice-department-seeks-to-force-apple-to-extract-data-from-about-12-other-iphones.html

So, it looks like the FBI wants to gain access to a bunch of other phones in other cases. What a slippery slope this has turned out to be.

#14 8 years ago

I'm NOT terribly well versed in this, so don't take my thoughts too seriously.

First off, this is a slippery slope, and opens the door for the FBI to use the tool that would be created on other Apple phones. McAfee has offered to hack this particular phone for free to avoid the potential strong negative long-term ramifications of forcing Apple to create this back door, though this could be blow-hard posturing. He's also criticized the FBI's lack of proper hackers, which may be founded; hackers don't get great by following the rules, and it seems like there are only a few high-profile cases of former top notch hackers turning informant. (article here http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-ill-decrypt-san-bernardino-phone-for-free-2016-2

What good would come of this? MAYBE nailing a couple terrorists who MIGHT have not made it onto some government list already? Not worth it, in my potentially ill-informed opinion.

#15 8 years ago
Quoted from ForceFlow:

This just popped up:
https://www.morningstar.com/news/dow-jones/us-markets/TDJNDN_2016022217036/justice-department-seeks-to-force-apple-to-extract-data-from-about-12-other-iphones.html
So, it looks like the FBI wants to gain access to a bunch of other phones in other cases. What a slippery slope this has turned out to be.

EXACTLY! Apple essentially threw away the key to unlock iPhones years ago probably just to avoid being in this mess. As Tim Cook said it feels so wrong to be a company fighting for users privacy and freedom, shouldn't the government be the ones fighting for profit companies to protect that...

#16 8 years ago

This is just a public stunt to make us feel like our phone is currently secure. Does anyone honestly thing the gov doesn't already have the means to unlock/decrypt the phone? Hahah come on. They've had the means for years and bugged the software people use to write the apps... When the device touches the internet I laugh when people think it is actually secure.... Remember where many of the circuits/silicone are made....

#17 8 years ago

The FBI does not need Apple's help to get data off the phone. They can do it, but with the state of the phone the way it is, it's *very* cost and labor intensive.

What the FBI is after is a streamlined way to do it. Their current method doesn't scale beyond a dozen phones a year.

#18 8 years ago
Quoted from lowepg:

I wish Apple was doing it without being forced however....
They pick some weird issues to champion

You really underestimate what not "championing" this issue would do their bottom line. People have passionate views about this and they stand to lose many more customers than the would gain by folding on this.

Quoted from Wickerman2:

Stop buying iphones sheeple. That said, FBI should be able to get plenty of info on how they blew it without the phone.

Your use of the word "sheeple" makes you seem extra punchable.

#19 8 years ago
Quoted from CrazyLevi:

Your use of the word "sheeple" makes you seem extra punchable.

baaa baaa

-1
#20 8 years ago

If corporations are allowed to enjoy the status of being a "person" then they should act like a person and supply sufficient information required for the protection of us all. If any of us were to be subpoenaed and refused to provide testimony, we'd be held in contempt of the court's ruling. It doesn't get any simpler than that. Corporations have to decide which side of the line on which they stand. They can't have it both ways.

Furthermore, I find Apple, as well as Microsoft, as behaving scurrilously in the manner which they apply law via financial superiority. Such action proves we no longer have a justice system that operates on honesty and integrity.

#21 8 years ago
Quoted from PinPall007:

If corporations are allowed to enjoy the status of being a "person" then they should act like a person and supply sufficient information required for the protection of us all. If any of us were to be subpoenaed and refused to provide testimony, we'd be held in contempt of the court's ruling. It doesn't get any simpler than that. Corporations have to decide which side of the line on which they stand. They can't have it both ways.
Furthermore, I find Apple, as well as Microsoft, as behaving scurrilously in the manner which they apply law via financial superiority. Such action proves we no longer have a justice system that operates on honesty and integrity.

It comes down to the greater good vs individual rights & privacy. Pursue one, and you harm the other. In this case--the harm to individual rights, privacy, and security would be massive.

It would be like walking downtown on a busy afternoon and shouting, "hey everybody, I'm putting a copy of the key to my front door right here on the sidewalk--I'm trusting each and every one of you not to touch it or use it to go into my house and take anything". And that's just plain foolish.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law#United_States

#22 8 years ago
Quoted from ForceFlow:

This just popped up:
https://www.morningstar.com/news/dow-jones/us-markets/TDJNDN_2016022217036/justice-department-seeks-to-force-apple-to-extract-data-from-about-12-other-iphones.html
So, it looks like the FBI wants to gain access to a bunch of other phones in other cases. What a slippery slope this has turned out to be.

I can see all the local law enforcement just drooling to unlock some 15 year old drug dealers iPhone and nab all those terrorist drug dealers.

-2
#23 8 years ago
Quoted from ForceFlow:

In this case--the harm to individual rights, privacy, and security would be massive.

I don't know if you saw the news tonight, but the conditions the FBI provided to Apple allow Apple control over the process. The FBI wouldn't have possession of the software or the means to duplicate it. Apple's current position is akin to aiding and abetting terrorists. And for anyone who wants to take the position of having their rights violated, consider the alternative. Then comes the rhetoric that Obama's "not doing enough to fight terrorism because we all know he's a Muslim... blah, blah, blah".

Personally, I don't own a cell phone. And if I did, it wouldn't be from Apple. I'm not one of the lemmings who stand in line every six months so I can drop six hundred dollars on the latest phone because it takes better pics than the last one. What a deal!

Furthermore, if you truly believe you have privacy over your cell phone, then I'd have to say, that's just plain foolish. Your phone can be pinged by anyone who has the right equipment and know how. And believe me, there are lots of them out there.

#24 8 years ago

image_(resized).jpegimage_(resized).jpeg

2 weeks later
#26 8 years ago
Quoted from northvibe:

This is just a public stunt to make us feel like our phone is currently secure. Does anyone honestly thing the gov doesn't already have the means to unlock/decrypt the phone? Hahah come on.

they don't. well, not at a fundamental level. modern cryptography algorithms are well-understood and well-documented. they are publicized, scrutinized, and reviewed. they are verifiably secure. the government is not magical. without a specific backdoor built into the specific system in question (or exploitable software bug, or an easily-guessable password), feds are powerless to retrieve data protected by modern encryption.

Hacking cryptography simply doesn't work like like it does in the movies and on TV! It is easy to say "ehh they have supercomputers..." but even supercomputers are subject to the laws of physics. see this page for a simple breakdown of what would be necessary for a supercomputer to brute force a file encrypted with AES256 (which is the encryption standard iPhones use). https://www.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/comments/1x50xl/time_and_energy_required_to_bruteforce_a_aes256/

to summarize, if you had one billion ultra high-end processors (which is itself impossible, but whatever) running 24/7, it would take 6.7e40 times the lifespan of our universe to get halfway done cracking it. you would also, in the process, need to consume more energy than exists in the universe. i'm not sure the Government is that patient. The encryption itself is for all practical purposes secure. Only the key can unlock it, and the key can't be reverse-engineered (in this universe).

So the Feds can't get in unless the specific device or system in question has a serious software bug (which will likely be discovered and patched eventually) or a back door built into it (which makes it inherently vulnerable to more than just the Feds). The latter is what the Feds are asking for.

However, it is ludicrous to think we should make our encryption inherently insecure, for myriad reasons. If you build in a back door, it becomes exploitable by rogue nations and bad guys. i can guarantee it is not just the U.S. Government who would take advantage. Furthermore, are conservatives really so naive that they think our own government would only use this power for noble purposes? c'mon!

building a back door into encryption also makes the government's own encrypted stuff inherently less secure, so even from their own perspective, it's a dumb, short-sighted request.

Quoted from northvibe:

They've had the means for years and bugged the software people use to write the apps... When the device touches the internet I laugh when people think it is actually secure.... Remember where many of the circuits/silicone are made....

circuits and silicon are not black boxes. we know precisely what they do and we watch their behavior VERY closely. if they were phoning home we would know about it instantaneously. security exploits are discovered, publicized, and patched every single day (and 99.99% of these security exploits are caused by unintentional programming bugs). you are being naive if you think security personnel at classified facilities (government AND corporate) are not keenly aware of what every incoming and outgoing packet is doing. Any competent network where secrecy is a priority is architected to give total visibility of what's going where at a finely granular level. If some widespread product or app was doing something shady it would be found out and publicized from countless varied sources. it's not like the U.S. Government is the only entity with secure networks.

#27 8 years ago
Quoted from pezpunk:

The encryption itself is for all practical purposes secure. Only the key can unlock it, and the key can't be reverse-engineered (in this universe).

ok so one other thing on this point: brute-forcing the password is for all intents and purposes impossible, but the Government (and anyone else for that matter) typically has a great deal of success simply trying huge lists of common passwords and common password rulesets, or trying to intelligently guess your password through other various vectors. if you want your stuff to stay private keep that in mind when coming up with passwords. on the other hand, if you are cool with authorities secretly rummaging through your stuff, then your kid's birthday or your dog's name works just fine.

however, by far the most common means of "hacking into" someone's system is to trick the victim into giving their password willingly to the attacker. simple social engineering is how most systems are compromised.

#28 8 years ago

Doug Stamper could make Apple open the phone.

IMAG0028_(resized).jpgIMAG0028_(resized).jpg

1 week later
#29 8 years ago

Update: The Justice Department has dropped legal actions against Apple over terrorist iPhone

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/03/28/apple-justice-department-farook/82354040/

They've managed to get into the iPhone some other way.

#31 8 years ago
Quoted from girloveswaffles:

Update: The Justice Department has dropped legal actions against Apple over terrorist iPhone
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/03/28/apple-justice-department-farook/82354040/
They've managed to get into the iPhone some other way.

Probably tried typing "1, 2, 3, 4" as the password and it worked.

#32 8 years ago

well this is basically a huge win for privacy and security. Maybe the government found a flaw In the version of iOS that was on that phone. Maybe they guessed the password. Maybe they realized their case was fundamentally stupid and wanted to get out while saving face. No way to know for sure. But the result seems to be that corporations remain under no obligation to build back doors for Feds into their products. That is a good thing.

I mean, if the government went to Chrysler and said "we need you to build into every car a way to remotely disable the airbags and brakes, just in case we discover a terrorist driving a Chrysler. But don't worry, we are the only ones who would ever use it, and we promise to only use it for really good reasons!" you would think that is crazy, right? Right?

#33 8 years ago

I'm glad the public came out of this one in overwhelming support of Apple, privacy, and encryption, despite the FBI's logical fallacy of today's version of the "think of the children" argument. I bet they were surprised when mention of terrorists didn't sway public opinion their way.

#34 8 years ago
Quoted from MrBally:

Probably tried typing "1, 2, 3, 4" as the password and it worked.

"That's amazing! I have the same combination on my luggage!"

#35 8 years ago
Quoted from girloveswaffles:

"That's amazing! I have the same combination on my luggage!"

I gave you a thumbs up, but you should have included the image

luggage_(resized).jpgluggage_(resized).jpg

#36 8 years ago

Spaceballs!

#37 8 years ago
Quoted from j_m_:

I gave you a thumbs up, but you should have included the image
luggage_(resized).jpg

I would agree, but they got the quote wrong.

#38 8 years ago
Quoted from MrBally:

Probably tried typing "1, 2, 3, 4" as the password and it worked.

Thanks for giving up the code for my front door!

Reply

Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.

Hey there! Welcome to Pinside!

Donate to Pinside

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!


This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/the-apple-controversy-whats-your-take and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.

Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.