Slippery slope. too easy to look at this tragedy and forget about apple's should-be right to not give the government a fundamental backdoor.
Have we learned nothing from the iCloud leak?
my grandfather called apple a bunch of communists because they wont unlock the phone, but what a lot of people are forgetting is that if apple does unlock it for the FBI then whats stopping anyone else from requesting encryption be broken for them? it will completely undermine everything cryptographers worked countless years for, along with the privacy of the average person
Emotional manipulation at its finest
[QUOTE=Samiam22;49790497]Have we learned nothing from the iCloud leak?[/QUOTE]
I notice a lot of people think iCloud actually got hacked, as in that they used a exploit or someone from the inside did something which is all false.
iCloud leak was bruteforce and guessing the security answers which were hilariously easy. Still, pretty dumb that iCloud had no bruteforce protection.
They even made a email called "appleprivacysecurity" and asked right away about their questions in which some celebs actually responded.
[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_photos#Procurement_and_distribution[/URL]
victims should not be considered reliable sources of judgement in a case like this
[QUOTE=AJ10017;49790499]my grandfather called apple a bunch of communists because they wont unlock the phone, but what a lot of people are forgetting is that if apple does unlock it for the FBI then whats stopping anyone else from requesting encryption be broken for them? it will completely undermine everything cryptographers worked countless years for, along with the privacy of the average person[/QUOTE]
They haven't denied a request to unlock the iPhone, they have denied a request to develop/give them a tool to brute-force iPhones.
Requests for phone unlocks is what agencies have always done and i am pretty sure apple would have just straight up complied. But you can't just hand out tools that bypass security to 3rd parties.
"Terrorists want to take away our liberty!"
"So what do we do about it?"
"Take away our liberty!"
"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither"
You guys are confusing privacy with freedom/liberty.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;49790901]"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither"[/QUOTE]
This is funny because in this news's context they're sacrificing the security of Apple devices over more freedom to access them.
[QUOTE=Electrocuter;49790928]You guys are confusing privacy with freedom/liberty.
This is funny because in this news's context they're sacrificing the security of Apple devices over more freedom to access them.[/QUOTE]
You don't think privacy is a form of freedom?
[QUOTE=Ricool06;49790935]You don't think privacy is a form of freedom?[/QUOTE]
Just saying that "privacy" fits better than "liberty".
But I guess saying "Terrorists want to take our privacy" just doesn't sound as good.
[QUOTE=Electrocuter;49790947]Just saying that "privacy" fits better than "liberty".
But I guess saying "Terrorists want to take our privacy" just doesn't sound as good.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I am confused by your answer, do you think privacy is a form of freedom?
[QUOTE=Cold;49790767]They haven't denied a request to unlock the iPhone, they have denied a request to develop/give them a tool to brute-force iPhones.
Requests for phone unlocks is what agencies have always done and i am pretty sure apple would have just straight up complied. But you can't just hand out tools that bypass security to 3rd parties.[/QUOTE]
No, Apple actually can't unlock new iPhones with the default settings; they no longer store a copy of the key to do so. The FBI wants to brute force the numeric code, which would in theory work because there aren't that many options (I believe it's 5 digits, so 100,000 possible combinations). Apple though, being smart, has a feature that effectively wipes the data after just a few invalid attempts (which makes even the short and otherwise weak key code very strong), which the FBI wants Apple to disable.
[QUOTE=Ricool06;49791021]Sorry, I am confused by your answer, do you think privacy is a form of freedom?[/QUOTE]
Personal freedom.
I'm surprised no one in the article said "I have nothing to hide" - which is one of my favorite arguments for allowing privacy to be eroded. It's like saying that you don't care about the first amendment, because you don't have anything you want to say. You don't have to use your rights all of the time, but it's nice to have them in certain circumstances.
[QUOTE=DaMastez;49791298]No, Apple actually can't unlock new iPhones with the default settings; they no longer store a copy of the key to do so. The FBI wants to brute force the numeric code, which would in theory work because there aren't that many options (I believe it's 5 digits, so 100,000 possible combinations). Apple though, being smart, has a feature that effectively wipes the data after just a few invalid attempts (which makes even the short and otherwise weak key code very strong), which the FBI wants Apple to disable.[/QUOTE]
If apple was asked to dump/unlock the phone they would do it the same way the FBI wants to do it. The only difference is that they aren't giving the FBI apple signed code that bypasses the lock.
If they would comply and give the FBI the bypass, the FBI can effectively use the same signed code to unlock any phone. And potential share the binary with other (international) government agencies, or lose it and have it end up in the wild.
[QUOTE=Van-man;49797901]Personal freedom.[/QUOTE]
I know it is, I'm asking Electrocuter.
[QUOTE=Cold;49798121]If apple was asked to dump/unlock the phone they would do it the same way the FBI wants to do it. The only difference is that they aren't giving the FBI apple signed code that bypasses the lock.
If they would comply and give the FBI the bypass, the FBI can effectively use the same signed code to unlock any phone. And potential share the binary with other (international) government agencies, or lose it and have it end up in the wild.[/QUOTE]
If Apple would develop software to bypass the phones security it could, and would be used in other cases, and possibly leak into the wild, that is why Apple should not comply with those demands, because it wouldn't be a one time case.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
